If you’re in the UK you might have noticed a major row kicking off this week between a group of actors and just about every writer in the country.
It started when the Radio Times (still Britain’s most august TV listing and features magazine) published an interview with the lead actors in a TV show called New Tricks.
If you get chance to read the interview in the Radio Times it’s worth a look. But here’s a summary.
In the course of the meeting, the actors crossed a line. In an armoured car.
Actors Pronounce
Amanda Redman said the show was ‘more bland now’ and that the characters were no longer as ‘anarchic’ as they used to be.
Dennis Waterman added: ‘We’re always talking about history and some writers – not all of them – can go on and on about that. You have to remind yourself that people aren’t as stupid as writers think, but that is the way things are going in the industry.’
Alun Armstrong also claimed that the cast re-wrote the series’ scripts if they didn’t feel that stories were as good as they could be.
The response has been, predictably, robust.
One of the writers on the show expressed themselves in no uncertain terms
https://twitter.com/JulianSimpson1/status/237876970615095296
https://twitter.com/JulianSimpson1/status/237920587828322304
(Here is the non-swearing version.)
Writers Guild Response
The Writers Guild got involved. I think the term used was ‘lambasted’.
Maurice Gran wrote a response in The Daily Telegraph:
Why Did This Touch So Many Nerves?
A couple of reasons.
The first thing to say is that I don’t know a single writer, ever, who has pushed to make a show more bland and less anarchic. Writers also don’t think the audience is thick. That’s simply not what writers do. If that’s happening, then I suggest that particular finger gets pointed elsewhere.
The fact that the writers are getting attacked for it is a prime example of the big problem of the writer.
The Writer’s Lot, as it were.
Because we work mainly alone, because when a script is good it reads easily and seems very simple, no-one really knows how damn HARD it is to actually write like that.
Writers Lead For Many Months
Let’s look at the process that leads to a script getting to a production slot on a TV show.
I don’t know the detailed ins and outs of the current New Tricks process, but I can imagine it’s not going to be too different to the usual script development system, wherein each script is the result of many months’ hard, often painful, labour by the writer.
First of all they have had to have put in the hard work to have the original idea for the episode. And, as we all know, that’s not *quite* as easy as it looks.
Then it’s quite possible they will have had to bend, and shape, and generally morph the idea into the refined version of that idea that matches the tone of the show, the characteristics of the actors, and the particular set of audience expectations of that show, with that history, in that transmisson slot.
Then they will have had to pitch the idea, and impress the script editor, the series producer, plus any execs who are floating around (all of whom will have had their input, and asked for changes).
The writer will have had to regroup after one or two meetings like that, sort out the new version of the idea, and then write a prose document detailing exactly what happens in that episode. More or less scene by scene, probably around 10 pages of pretty dense story telling.
This document will have gone through many, many versions, as the script team on the show continue the process of working with the writer to shape what can have started off as quite a raw idea into an idea that fits the New Tricks slot. (In today’s TV world, where having a homogenous product is super-important it can be very, very tricky to match your own voice as a writer to the voice of a well established show. Just tiny variations in story tone or lapses in characterisation can be major disasters.)
Finally Go To Script
If the writer and the idea survive this process without being ‘cut off’ (ie sacked) (and to be honest, especially on New Tricks, a great many don’t survive this stage) then they will take that document and turn it into a full script.
Which again will have gone through many, many drafts, over perhaps 2 to 6 months.
Take it from me, you need a fair bit of resilience, persistence, creativity – not to mention political skill – to get to the point where your script is deemed ready for production. Over those months you will have cared greatly. Massively.
Really, I sometimes think the writers actually care, (with their heart, you know), more than anyone else on the show.
You will have poured your hopes, dreams, a slice of your own life, and a great deal of your private emotion into it.
Over the course of those months you will have fallen in and out of love with the story, with your ability as a writer, with your actual vocation.
You will have taken what seem like great punches in the stomach on every draft, as you hear that the script team isn’t keen on what you have done, and they “have a few thoughts for you.”
And, In The End
But in the end, you will have got there. You will have survived this ordeal by fire, and you will, most of the time anyway, have something you are pretty damn proud of.
Something that reads fast, and light, and which bounces along, but still evokes a complex range of emotion – and which tells a pretty neat story in the process.
You’re proud, and so you should be – you’ve worked hard enough on it.
After all that, to then hear that the actors think they have “sorted out the script for you” by every now and then coming up with a few lines of dialogue, (or even by coming up with a few story points for heaven’s sakes) can you imagine how that feels?
That’s like saying changing the hubcaps and adding go-faster stripes is building a car.
It’s An Old Problem
As Maurice Gran puts it:
“…So we were somewhat peeved when, during the making of series two, one cast member casually observed how they loved the way that our scripts just gave them a general steer, allowing them to flesh out the characters and do all the colouring in. It was all the producer could do to stop us presenting the cast at the next
read-through with a hundred blank pages apiece, and inviting them to get on with it.”
You need a tough skin to be a professional writer, which most of us do have after a few years in the business, so it’s actually quite funny to hear a group of actors say that.
Funny – and yet somehow not very funny at all.
I’ll not bang on any further. The last word can go to the wonderful Bernie Corbett, General Secretary of the Writers Guild:
Bernie Corbett
In the Radio Times interview, Dennis Waterman also commented on the quality of foreign television dramas such as Danish series The Killing.
‘Basically, we all want to move to Copenhagen to get to do some really extraordinary television,’ he said.
In response, Bernie said: ‘Waterman and his co-stars have had decades of success on the back of UK scriptwriters. We regret their imminent departure, but we wish them every success in the state of Denmark, and hope that if they find anything rotten they’ll acknowledge their own responsibility for it.’
That’s all for this week. I need to go and cool down somewhere.
To working with respectful people!
Wow thIs has incensed me too.
When I write stuff I always think that depending on the actor and his interpretation then changing some of the lines to fit with their way of presentation is fine But it is in no way a rewrite and no credit should ever be due because they said the line with the same meaning but in a way that suited them better. In order to rewrite the script they’d have to redo the storyboards and change the story Cutting bits out or changing lines does not give them a writers credit at all. I stressed a little about this when I wrote a short and directed and actors wanted to change lines that what they were really trying to do is take credit for the writing in some way. So change a sentence and your the co writer. I mean how stupid is that.
Actors often take all the glory after everyone else has made it for them IE Tom Cruises latest film and then an interview with him giving him credit for the lot Like he wrote directed crewed and yet any actor is a small cog in a much greater whole.
The New Tricks cast would be over the hill actors but thanks to some cleverly worked writers they are on the box. Bit much when they try to shoot the golden goose.
The main problem with actors ‘writing’ is that actors have learned to deal with ‘one’ character and how it respond in a certain situation and reacts to other characters – they have learned to build up ‘a’ scene but they have not learned what it means to create a story line where more then just one character lives and react on events and other characters. They deal with how to make this scene a great one and then move to the other scene – trying to make it even as good. And not understand that great scenes are part of a larger story line – that is not thier job that is the job of the writer — who works on story lines for ages till he or she gets it right. Scene however great are culled when they no longer fit into the story line – that is what actors won’t do. As they ‘love’ the scene and feel its should a great performance of them and thier fellow actors they can image it has to go — and just move on — and as all good writer know will get lost in a mess of great scenes who don’t move to story forward and have no impact on the viewer as they no longer get what is going on — making a movie or TV series is a collective effort from writer to producer to director and actors supported by a team of costume designers, camera operators etc. if it all fits together nicely then we will get a product that will be worthy to be seen — not by family, friends a few others on You Tube but on our TV screens and movie theatres by thousands!
‘Basically, we all want to move to Copenhagen to get to do some really extraordinary television,’ he said.
Well being from Belgium and able to watch most European TV channels (The Killing was a co-production of the Danish TV and the German TV channel – ZDF and it was on our TV in 2007!) and read magazines & newsletters I can attest to the fact that in ‘European’ countries actors and writers respect each other. Work together – and most actors overhere don’t feel its there job to boss everyone around – while writers do like to work with actors. The main difference between the UK and Europe is that most us are not that focussed on the USA and their set rules how to write. We create stories that fit the mood and feeling of our times, country and we don’t care what they say in Hollywood where a turning point of act two should be – that on page 25 we should have this or that – we write the story – and if it isn’t right we do another draft without having one eye into a book of yet another American how to write book. Our TV channels want good material and don’t ask – will we be able to sell it to America? If the Americans don’t like it – so what? We enjoyed it isn’t that what it should do? We don’t have actors who constantly are saying that the things they like on TV are US made — they talk about European made stuff (including UK!) We are not constantly looking over our shoulder tocheck ‘how do the Americans do this or that?’ and this makes a huge difference — that is why The Killing and co stand apart and feel so different and fresh. We have great writing talents in this part of the world – from the UK to Danmark – now lets find the producers, commisonners who are brave enough to recognise it and let this talent do it’s thing — while great actors bring those characters alive on screen and stage! The killing made a killing because of that… and not because they have better writers & actors in Danmark they are perhaps a bit more bolder in doing their own stuff in co-operation with other bold European producers!
If an actor changes a line for whatever reason the story is the same. It’s galling to think an actor can change a line to the same meaning and make a claim as writing it.
When I write a script, dialogue is often put in as a placeholder initially and then refined as the character solidifies in your head. How I might see that character and an actors approach his way with words and thought processes will obviously differ. If you know the actor who would be playing the part you can approximate their already defined character but not everything and they still need headroom in order to make the performance real and live in the moment. I am happy with that and is all part of the film making process. An actor has his job and a writer his. On the edges a little blurring but the edges are inches compared to the mile wide effort of writing a script and for that matter the mile wide skills of a high calibre actor.
So let writers take the credit for their writing and Actors for theirs. Just because the media and public often percieve the actor as the one who says the lines and therefore are the creators of it as every good actor knows they would be nothing without good writers who create their world define their character and write their futures.
Big Named actors can still fail badly at the box office with a script not suited to them and unknown actors can become overnight sensations with well written scripts IE Starwars or even the latest Star trek movie. The trend has been of late to cast unknown actors to save on their inflated fees. Anyway the point is Actors should actually be very thankful and apreciative of the writers who put them where they are. Also the crew who get pushed out of the limelight who make them look as amazing as they do. I wonder how long Arnie would last if his crew was some guy of the street with an I phone and he had to make a story up himself.
Great respect though to Sylvestor Stallone. Someone so under rated and yet absolutely brilliant in giving the public what they want and as an amazing film maker.
Great post, Anne-Marie. As I get older I find I enjoy European film more and more (and Hollywood film less and less). As for these ubiquitous (and instantly forgettable) ‘comedy’ films that actors like Jennifer Aniston appear in time and time again, I just don’t ‘get’ them. European film/television does seem to be produced with an adult audience in mind rather than a teenage one. I just hope that the UK success of programmes like The Killing will encourage UK production companies to take more of a risk and produce some edgier television/film that stays with the viewer long afterwards.
I agree with Amanda, the stories HAVE become bland- and I’m a writer!! It is the same with a lot of British program content these days & don’t get me wrong I still love watching the shows!
However if that is the process our scripts go thru it’s no wonder they end up bland and easy to work out endings!
Sherlock has been one of the few CHALLENGING recent crime I have watched that left me hungering for MORE! Same with LUTHER – everyone I spoke to locally (at UNI ATT) couldn’t wait for the next episode!! Moses Jones also had more episodes to go but was killed off after only one series!
I think a move away from Cop show settings while still keeping the crime element ( such as the one I’m scripting now!) engages more with the audience who r always looking for something new!!
Unlike the EXECS DRIFTING AROUND audiences are all Educated to a reasonable Usually TERTIARY standard these days- they demand a challenge in their viewing – 2 make them THINK – tell them something they dont know? o’wise Cheap REALITY PROGRAMS r just a flick away?
Mayb less FIDDLING WITH OUR SCRIPTS TO FIT A CERTAIN FORMULAXWOULD RESULT IN AUDIENCE AND WRITER SATISFACTION??
What about writers acting ….
Lets allow writers to act …. that would upset the acting unions wouldn’t it – so why should actors be able to attack writers and change scripts?
If they don’t like Shakespeare’s words do they ad lib those – then call it Shakespeare’s work?
Unless they are acting on a Woody Allen set – then they should stick to acting to the script really – don’t you think?
If they don’t like the script – then refuse the job and obtain Job Seekers Allowance