by Sarah Brownrigg
As Channel Director of both The Biography Channel and The History
Channel in the UK, Richard
Melman is the man to know.
Q: How did you start in
broadcasting?
I started as a runner during my school holidays, talked my way into
the camera department, became a producer then director, then head
of production then a broadcaster. To be honest, it was all a bit of
an accident.
Q: What skills do you need to be a
good commissioning editor?
I'm not sure if it's a skill, but to be a good commissioning editor
I believe you must have a real passion for television and good
programmes.
You should be clear at communicating what you need for your
channel, find good filmmakers and let them get on with it and not
try and direct it yourself. If you really need to do that, you
picked the wrong people in the first place or you're in the wrong
job. It also really helps to have a good understanding of the
production process, what things cost and how crews work etc. You
need to be able to tell if the fantastic proposal you have just
been sent is actually 'doable' or is it wildly optimistic. But
overall, if you understand what makes a good story for TV, how to
tell it, and more importantly how to help others in the telling of
it, you're pretty much there.
Q: How does the commissioning
process work?
We commission throughout the year and a treatment (email preferably
- but please, please without 400 megabytes of photographs!) should
be sent to either myself Richard.Melman@bskyb.com or my deputy
Martin.Morgan@bskyb.com. If we don't like it, need it or have
already done it, we'll give you a fast response. If we do like it,
we'll invite you in to discuss it. Given the limitations of our
budgets, we prefer to co-produce in the majority of cases.
Q: What one piece of advice would
you give to someone wanting to send a proposal in to
you?
Tell me Who, What, Why, Where, When and How you're going to do
it.
Q: As director of both The
History and The Biography Channels in the UK, how much does the
programming cross over, or is it important to keep them
separate?
When I took over The Biography Channel, it was still very new and
there was a lot of cross over with The History Channel. Since then
we've worked hard to change The Biography Channel into much more of
an entertainment/celebrity channel. There are a few exceptions
where programmes cross over, such as in the area of crime, but in
the main they are very different channels (which is one of the
reasons my job is so fascinating).
Q: How important is new talent and
are there specific opportunities available, or more open, to new
filmmakers?
We're always open to new filmmakers, but when you are working on
very tight budget constraints it really helps to have someone
onboard who knows how to drive a project through hell and high
waters. So we often recommend that first time producers seek to
'umbrella' with more experienced production companies, or take on
an executive producer.
Q: What are the most common
mistakes you encounter in new filmmakers proposals?
Not just new filmmakers, but even those who should know better,
share two common faults. Mainly, they haven't bothered to find out
what we actually show on the channels. Even if you don't have cable
or Sky (and shame on you) you can check out our web sites
www.thehistorychannel.co.uk and also www.thebiographychannel.co.uk
- where you can see our weekly schedules, clips from the shows and
general information about the channels. Those proposals that say
"Dear Sir/Madam, would you be interested in a 26-part history of
operatic arias 1720 to 1836" haven't bothered to find out anything
about us and are wasting both their and my time. Secondly, we see a
huge number of proposals that appear to be cut and pasted from an
article found on the web. Simply writing out an interesting fact or
facet of history isn't much use to me. I need to know what the
story is you intend to tell, how you intend to make it and what I
am going to see on screen.
Q: Are there any common mistakes
you see in their finished work?
In probably 70% + of all rough cuts I see, it's the story telling
that's the problem. New filmmakers tend to get so wrapped up in
their project, they often forget their audience is seeing something
for the first time and that you have to give them a very clear
narrative if you want them to stay watching. We often spend more
time working on the first 5 or 10 minutes of a show than the rest
of it combined. Often younger filmmakers get so caught up in the
visuals they let the audio suffer. In fact it's far easier to watch
a programme with poor quality pictures, than it is to watch one
where you can't understand what's being said.
Q: Are co-productions the future
for UK filmmakers and what role can commissioning editors play in
helping to nurture co-pro relationships?
Co-producing is without doubt here to stay. If you don't like the
idea of it, or don't want to do it you are in trouble. I see
helping sort out co-pro deals as an important part of my role as a
commissioning editor and if I really want a show and can't afford
it, then I'll help the producer take it to whom ever I think
suitable with deeper pockets than mine. As a consequence, we do
quite a significant amount of co-production with UK terrestrials
especially FIVE, S4C, the ITV regions, the major distributors such
as RDF and international companies like ZDF. We are also very
fortunate in that The History Channel is in over 60 countries, with
30 international offices similar to the UK and we often seek co-pro
funding from each other which is all coordinated through one
central office so the producer only has to deal with one
person.
Q: Is there any danger that
re-enactments and reality blur, in the telling of recent history in
particular? Are there basic guidelines to follow, or is it
something that you address as and when necessary?
Re-enactments have become a vital tool in history programming and
the audience has already learnt the grammar and techniques so you
don't necessarily need to plaster 'Reconstruction' over everything.
That being said, we never attempt to trick or fool the audience
into thinking a reconstruction is genuine newsreel footage and we
examine on a case by case basis the best way to make sure that the
audience is aware of what we are doing. Make sure you get advice
and research on props, uniforms and settings etc. We have an
eagle-eyed audience who can spot the difference between an MP40
German Machine Pistol and an MP43 at a 100 metres and will have no
hesitation in writing in to tell us how shocked and amazed they
were to find out that such an obvious mistake had been allowed to
ruin the credibility of the programme (the MP43 didn't come in
until late 1943). Remember that if you have actors speaking
essential dialogue, you must have good reference sources to base it
on and try and avoid using it as cheap exposition. It's also worth
remembering the old adage that 'good re-enactments are good, bad
re-enactments are bloody awful.'
Q: Finally, how important is it
that filmmakers propose new ways of telling history?
The audience is always keen on 'new' ways of telling history, but
not at the expense of the script. New technology has revolutionised
our industry and given us photorealistic CGI that has made the
impossible, possible; cameras and edit systems that make the
expensive, affordable, but what ever you are making still needs to
be first and foremost - a good story well told.
Back to Articles