Interesting TV stuff [off topic-ish]
Morgan
on Thursday, in which some TV producers for British TV shows were
talking about their shows - police and medical series.
Whilst much of the talking was the sort of 'look, here's our great
programme and why I brought it to the screen' type jargon, there
was some really interesting points raised about Independant TV
production in this country, versus US tv, and as it has a bearing
on B5, I thought you might be interested in hearing about it.
Most of the producers present were white middle aged men, apart from the two
middle aged women!, and they were talking about the great changes that have
been wrought by the Government, at the BBC, and how this has narrowed their
choices down. they all felt that they either produced high ratings TV for
either ITV, or BBC 1, or they did nothing at all. This really interested me,
as both BBC2 and Channel 4, are there to give viewing time to programmes
that do not bring in huge ratings: to provide an open space for programmes
other than the 'major' pullers. And *none* of these people, who were working
on programmes such as back Up, Dangerfield, The Bill, Peak Practise, Cardiac
Arrest, most in independant production companies, felt that either BBc or
C4 was at all relevant to them. B5 goes out on C4...more of which later...
they all spent a great deal of time going on about how 'real' their TV had to
be, particularly the police procedural stuff. There is a term used about
British 'reality' refferring back to a film tradition here, called "Social
Realism" it deems that not only has the programme to be perfect in mundane
detail, but it has deal with 'gritty' 'northern' issues - lots of
unemployment and badly blocked drains. After they'd talked about how 'real'
their programmes were...i asked if they ever felt this was a burden. The
constant need to apply to the Socialist Realist tradition: did they ever
feel the need to break out of it, throw it away, or were they quite happy to
work with it. The first guy who answered, was so 'in' the tradition, he
couldn't actually see the question asked. He said he liked doing half
hour drama (he worked on The Bill) and so he did 'realism' because half
hour drama was 'realism'. I pointed out he had circled his own argument,
seeing everything in terms of Social Realism, and wondered if there were,
indeed, other ways of doing something. The panel responded well, and lots
of things were then discussed. Interestingly, one of the first things said
by someone was "I have tried to get a science fiction series off the ground
at the Beeb (BBC), but it didn't happen". Of course, i *had* been hoping
to edge round to SF with my question, but to watch others jump to that
immediate point was quite startling. SF, it appears, in the mind of the
British producer, is the antithesis of Reality.
Lots of things opened up at that point. A few producers said they found
the realist tradition a geat burden, and would love to get rid of it, and
some consensus was reached about WHY prime time TV is filled with all these
realist series - police and medical... which was that they drew the ratings,
the audience wanted them, and were very resistant to change. Then it got quite
muddled. people started asking from the audience questions like "what about
E.R. or Chicago Hope, X Files?" And the panelists said with one voice "They're
either on Beeb 2 or Channel 4". And we were back to square one, with saying
that you could only go into production with a ready slot in either BBC 1 or
ITV. Stale mate. If these people wanted to make series, they had to be
going out on either BBC or ITV, which meant they had to be 'traditional',
which meant they couldn't be innovative, or different, therefore we
always got the same thing because that's what we 'the audience' wanted.
As you can imagine, this got quite heated! Somebody asked what about the
innovative 'style' of Americans programmes, and was answered in the same vein.
But then...then it got *really* interesting! One of the panelists, a man
named Tony Garret (I know not who he is) who had worked in TV for A Long
Time...said that only american TV producers could be innovative, because
american TV was so good, and British TV was, basically, shit. Not The
Accepted Idea At All! lots and lots of things said, including a rather
skewed argument that USA TV was so good because it had been in commerical
mode longer than ours (We only got commercial Tv in the late 1950s)..
now, this, was the panel, that had said the relentless 'commercialising' of
British TV was responsible for the staid TV we got...saying that the USA
did it better because they had been commercial longer....
And...Garret, who had worked in USa for over a decade, but left years ago, said
he felt that USA producers were more able to get out and fight for their
series in the USA system. Now, that's what ws *supposed* to happen here with
the breaking down of the BBC structures...but they were all saying it
was even more restrictive....equally, they were not seeing the supposed
freedoms of C4 applied in any way, shape or form to themselves. they needed
the money from the two big companies to fund their productions. schlepping
round and getting the money from other sources, and making the programme first,
wasn't in their mind set. (That's not a criticism, merely an observation).
as you might expect, we did get to B5...or at least we sort of got there.
Earlier, Tony Garret had been talking about the four basic 'cop' genres
in Police Drama, and how they were merging...when once you got a series
that did action really well, (sqealing tyres was how he termed them) and others
who did the Private Eye, or the European Art House Cop (crossword cops he
called them...Morse etc...where the tiny piecing together or details was the
pain action) and the Proceedural series (Such as The Bill)..now you got
programmes like Cracker, who do all of these things in one. That a new
type of Police genre was rising. Yet, in British TV, no new
genre programmes were emerging, and although the individual strands were
reworked, we weren't into 'new' territory. So, I steamed in,
and hoiked the realist talk back to this, and asked if all that had been
discussed in relation to 'Realism' was why we wern't getting the 'new' genre
shows arising, the way they were in The States with prgrammes such X Files
and Babylon 5. Shows which contain different genre details, and cannot be
pinned down to one exact genre, and who were breaking the moulds. Yes, was
the answer.
But.
somebody also said that there were two new science fiction shows being
seeded at the BBC as he spoke, that 'other' shows (other than Social
Realism) have their peaks and troughs in Brit TV, and if looked as
if SF was due to come back. There was an implication that this was because of
the success of shows such as X Files and B5. That in bringing in new
blood to the fringes (BBC 2 & C4) the majors wre going to try and
get into the main stream with their own types of follow ons. Which
can only be good news for us all.
Like I said, I just thought you all might find this interesting, in relation
to B5, and jms, I reckon. I know nowt about USA TV, its production
systems etc, but I know enough from this list to recognise that jms
fought out some territory for B5 on his own. and watching a panel
of independant producers here, not seeing that as an option, was
very interesting. Makes me want to go and find out more, that witty,
intelligent and gifted people can feel that dead ended about something.
Also, the big thing for me...was the feeling that the audience made the
final decision. That we get the Tv we want, and how maybe we feel too
complacent about this 'cause we watch B5 and X files on the
'fringes' without realising we do so! All the horror stories from the
Americans about B5 being cancelled, or on a 2am. here, it plays in the
same time spot, in the same place, all the time...and it's the same time
slot as Star Trek. I guess we might see it as much more 'certain' in Brtian
as it might feel in the States, and how shaky that certainty really is.
Yikes! don't I go on! sorry!
But not confused enough to let go. so...
--
Morgan
"Nunc demum intellego" dixit Winnie ille Pu. "Stultus et delusus fui,"
dixit, "et ursus sine ullo cerebro sum."
Morgan
> But not confused enough to let go. so...
Ignore that! It shouldn't have been there!!!!
De Castellvi Jaime M
: Morgan <Mor...@sidhen.demon.co.uk> wrote:
: <Very informative post snipped>
: >Yikes! don't I go on! sorry!
: Thanks Morgan. Wish I'd been there. That was all very interesting.
Indeed. But since most people in this group didn't make it, Morgan's post
is the next best thing (she'd make one hell of a reporter).
Thank you. That must have taken a fair bit of your time.
Jaime
Ian H Spedding
>I was at a TV production panel thingy at the Birmingham Film Festival
>on Thursday, in which some TV producers for British TV shows were
>talking about their shows - police and medical series.
<VERY INTERESTING BITS CUT>
>Yikes! don't I go on! sorry!
Don't be sorry, it was fascinating. I worked for the Beeb for many
years, although not in production, and I can remember back to when the
Corporation had a reputation for being really innovative.
Unfortunately, I think that period faded out in the mid-seventies and
'Auntie' has been coasting along on her reputation ever since. When I
left, Birt was tightening his malign grip and there was a growing
sense of anxiety, even fear, that had people diving into the trenches
and in that sort of climate you don't get people taking risks on
something new and untried.
Having said that, as we are all only too well aware, British TV has
ignored serious SF for many years but, on the principle that
everything comes around again in due course, I've felt for a little
while that we could expect to see some new productions appearing soon;
and it wouldn't surprise me if there was a detectable B5 influence on
them.
Ian (\___/)
O O
Did some one say =( 0 )=
Ian H Spedding Narn Cat Squad? ^
====================================================== m === m ====
Simon Gray
into the aether:
~ : <Very informative post snipped>
~ : >Yikes! don't I go on! sorry!
~ : Thanks Morgan. Wish I'd been there. That was all very interesting.
~ Indeed. But since most people in this group didn't make it, Morgan's post
~ is the next best thing (she'd make one hell of a reporter).
I wish I'd known about it - I'd have gone myself ! (I stopped looking at
the F&TFestival schedules years ago cos it used to be quite tedious)
~ Thank you.
Indeed.
--
Simon Gray, Musician, in Birmingham, England, UK, European Union.
<a href="http://metro.turnpike.net/M/mahayana/index.htm">W3 Page</a>,
Last updated 14 June 1995. <*>
Maturity is realising the volume knob also turns anticlockwise...