Talk about biting the hand that feeds. Jed Mercurio, the creator of Cardiac Arrest and Bodies has spoken out against broadcasting commissioners who go for safe, recognisable ‘brand names’ for its dramas, rather than risking original content. Mercurio is the writer of ITV’s new adaptation of the not-at-all-familiar Frankenstein.
I think broadcasters are worried about attracting audiences and if you do something that is very original, broadcasters worry about how they are going to sell it. How are they going to convey to the audiences what the story is about? Most people think the simplest way is to have a brand that people recognise.
Mercurio’s far from the first writer to criticise the commissioning process — in August, Tony Marchant said much the same thing. The blog comments in response make for some interesting reading.
In particular, Laura said:
Creatives within TV - and I’m talking about writers, directors, designers and actors - have had their creative voice completely stifled by ratings watching, focus group obsessed executive producers - who are less interested in quality and completely preoccupied by the latest trend, and the tiny raft of ‘commodity’ actors that are required to be shoe-horned into any part - even to the point of rewriting, if the character is deemed not similar enough to the public’s perception of that particular performer…
…I was involved in the very early stages of a now well established BBC drama - and when it was launched over 20 years ago - we all trouped off to BAFTA for the launch of the BBC’s ‘86/’87 drama season - where within a year the corporation had produced: The Lifes and Loves of a She Devil, The Monocled Mutineer, The Singing Detective, Seasons of Screen One, Screen Two, Screenplay, The Theban plays, Theatre Night, as well as many other well established dramas.
Was there a golden age? Too right.
I can understand the impression that, of all the drama being commissioned, a higher proportion is either costume drama, adapted from other sources (sometimes both) or modern reworkings — such as Frankenstein itself and Steven Moffat’s recent Jekyll.
Personally, I’d add the drive for ever more episodes per week of soap operas to the mix. With EastEnders on four episodes a week (with a fifth rumoured to be in the pipeline), Coronation Street on five and Emmerdale on six — not to mention year-round Holby City, 40-episode seasons of Casualty and the baffingly ever-present Heartbeat/The Royal, slots for original drama are few and far between.
And let’s not even go into whether reality shows bite into the schedules too much. Fan as I am of talent shows where real talent is the key (such as Any Dream Will Do), I have to admit to hating everything the X Factor auditions process stands for. And I have to agree with Mercurio when he says:
A show like The X Factor is just making fun of people with mental health issues.
On the other hand, Jed, they’re judges. I’m sure they can take it.
I want to comment on the way my quotes have been presented by the Stage as "criticism" of commissioners. I was asked a direct question by your reporter, to the effect, "What it is about adaptations that appeals to broadcasters?" I gave a simple, direct answer that I believe to be truthful. Commissioners have no intrinsic prejudice against original work, but they are under pressure to deliver audiences. Adaptations have the power to deliver audiences because they have better brand recognition than an original drama.
I'm not prejudiced against adaptations either. I wouldn't have written one if I was - and have done so because I think it's possible to do highly original work within this kind of format.
The issue of the development and commissioning obstacles in the path of inventive, mould-breaking drama (as commented on by Tony Marchant, Paul Abbot et al) is a different question, and neither the one I was asked nor the one I answered. Just as well, too, because you don't want to get me started ...
Obviously I'm aware that writing this post leaves me even more open to sarcastic jibes from the TV Today team.