Spoor of the Gibbon: The Hour

Gibbons are nasty furtive creatures and it can be hard to track them. But occasionally one comes across their spoor in a form as fragrant and as delightful as a dog turd in a paddling pool. Such spoor was strong in the closing moments of episode 3 of BBC TV's The Hour.

At the end of this episode an MI6 agents pursues our hero through the corridors of the BBC before violently assaulting him. Our hero drawing upon the potent power of lower middle class rage to turn the tables and demands answers. The spy, who up until then had been terrifyingly professional, blurts out a cryptic state secret before inexplicably throwing himself down the stair well.

It's the inexplicable nature of this swan dive that, like the odour of cheap dog-food, allows us to identify this spoor. Now whatever you think of Abi Morgan as a writer she is professional enough to avoid using inexplicable suicides as a plot device. It's obvious to anyone with craft skills that she was going for a stonking climax where our, almost but not quite working class, hero is forced to kill a man in self defence.

This would fit in with the themes of the story and with the guilt he expresses in Episode 4. It also makes some kind of narrative sense. What I suspect was that a Gibbon intervened, at a very late stage, and said that there was no way they could have the hero kill someone, not even in self defence. We know that this must have been done late because there was obviously no time to do a proper rewrite before shooting.

And so our exciting climax is marred by pointless note which serves only to make life difficult for the writer, the actors, the director and poor bloody editor who has to cut together a scene that makes no sense whatsoever.

Thus do the gibbons rain excrement upon talented craft professionals and ultimately we the audience.

Gibbon Wrangling for Beginners: Part 1

Dealing with the Patronage Delusion

It is an unfortunate fact of life that if you embark upon a career in writing that sooner or later you will find yourself dealing with a gibbon(1), sometimes a whole troop of gibbons. This can be a very disorientating experience so I’d thought I’d offer some advice for budding writers.

Because Gibbons are insanely status conscious they frequently see all professional relationships in terms of patronage. Because in the eyes of a gibbon a writer will always have roughly the same status as the cleaning lady this can lead them to exhibit strange behaviour which may cause alarm to the uninitiated.

Gibbons find it very difficult to deal with the fact that they are dependent on lowly writers for their livelihood. The fact that they must rely on talent to develop, produce and finally sell the product causes them a sort of constant low grade psychic pain. Like many people suffering from chronic pain the constant discomfort can lead to irritability, loss of temper and bouts of irrationality. To compensate gibbons frequently seek to recast straightforward professional arrangements as acts of patronage.

In this scenario they see themselves not as, admittedly high paid, media professionals contracting with a fellow professional but as Medici or Saatchi like patrons who have deigned to scatter their largesse on the mendicant writer who perforce must genuflect and kiss the feet of his betters.

Now - when you think you’ve got an agreement amongst equals and they believe that they’ve allowed the beneficent light of their countenance fall upon your unworthy form – it can lead to certain amount of cognitive dissonance. For example:

A SCRIPT DEVELOPING MEETING

YOU: I’ve knocked up a few sample scenes to test the concept I think it would be useful if you had a look to see if you thought I was on the right track.

GIBBON: No! I must not for it is written that in the beginning there shall be the pitch and the pitch shall beget the summary and from the loins of the summery shall come the outline which shall beget the scene breakdown and only then, when each and every one of these has been discussed yea unto the nth degree shall the script be written. So it is written, so shall it be. So say we all.

YOU: Wouldn’t it just be quicker if…

GIBBON: You dare question the wisdom of the ages, down upon your belly worm and beg forgiveness of the almighty commissioning editor before whom you are but a lowly dung beetle.

I think you’ll agree that such an exchange is not conducive to a good working relationship.

Remedy: unfortunately like most the problems associated with a gibbon infestation there is almost certainly no cure(3) but there are strategies that can help ameliorate the most unpleasant symptoms.

Firstly: don’t be an enabler. It’s always tempting to ‘go with the flow’ in the hope of having a quiet life but this would be a mistake. Enabling this kind of delusional behaviour is counterproductive in the long run and not good for the gibbons themselves.

Secondly: be firm. Always be firm and explain your position in clear measured tones. If you see signs that the gibbon has misinterpreted your position remain calm and restate your position again.

Thirdly: never lose your temper. Gibbons are hypersensitive to status and react very negatively to any suggestion that they may have offended or overstepped the bounds. The males in particular are prone to excessive territoriality which can manifest in chest beating, insults and feces hurling. It’s best to just to wait for these episodes to subside and then to continue as if nothing has happened.

Fourthly: do not be afraid to walk away. Ultimately you can do without them but they can’t do without you.

(1) Not real gibbons(2), see previous posts.
(2) Although that would be kind of cool.
(3) Many writers are pushing for a cull(4) but animal rights groups have objected.
(4) Can I reiterate that I’m not talking about real gibbons here.

Spoor of the Gibbon: Biggles

Gibbons are masters of camouflage and unless you're up close they're difficult to spot. This is hardly surprising since they take great care to disguise themselves and, indeed, in many cases may not even realise their own true nature. One thing they cannot disguise are the odoriferous nuggets they leave behind and by this spoor we shall track them, the better to hunt them down like the vermin they are(1). Sometimes the spoor is subtle but sometimes it is such a steaming pile of celluloid that even the most generous must break down and say - 'Truly this was a piece of shit.'

Biggles: Adventures in Time is just such a turd.

A summery of the source material can be found at Wikipedia and a casual glance reveals that it offers the putative adaptor a wide range of options. You can have straight up war films (in both World Wars no less) or Indiana Jones style adventures between the wars or post war detective dramas.

Rumour has it that the original writing team were aiming for Indiana Jones -- a film series that was proving staggeringly successful at the time.

There was just one last question before the film could be made, the same question faced by all films with a British hero -- how to shoehorn an American character into the plot.

Not really a problem in this case: Americans are plausibly all over the place in this historical period and especially prominent in the later stages of both world wars; they can be old friends or the other half a mismatched buddy team thrown together by fate or the War Office, they could be the love interest or they could be a combination of all of these things. They chose none of these options instead they plumped for a time travel story instead.

I've tried to summarising the plot several times now but the pain is too much if you want to know the details then check the wiki page. You can see the appeal it allows them to drop an American 'ordinary Joe' (from the modern day no less) into the Biggles story. There we can contrast his lovable modern American irreverence and 'can do' attitude with the stiffest of stiff upper lips of the Great War. And to be honest with a bit of effort you could make that work, unfortunately Biggles: Adventures with Gibbons doesn't.

But Ben, I here you cry, what does this have to do with gibbon spotting. It's very simple: the single most distinctive characteristic of the gibbon is their inability to understand story or to differentiate good story material from bad story material. They have a 'tin ear'(2) for story.

What makes the bloody awful 'time twins' plot so bloody, bloody awful is that it shows no understanding of how stories work. Unlike it's direct inspiration 'Back to the Future' the time travel aspect of Biggles has no bearing on the plot whatsoever it's merely a macguffin to get our Ordinary Joe back to the Western Front, the time jumps are arbitrary and unrelated to the dastardly German's secret weapon plot which has the result of sucking all the tension out of both plots.

Now I know, from watching the film, that the actual screen writers were not total incompetents and therefore the problem lies with a gibbon -- probably a producer. When you consider the amount of money, effort and talent that goes into even a modestly budgeted film it becomes clear why gibbons are a menace and must be driven out of the industry before it is too late.

Gibbons: just say no.

(1) Can I make it clear that I'm not talking about real gibbons here.

(2) You can learn how to read stories but it takes a lot of practice that's why most writers have alot of embarrassing crap hidden away in their lower drawers. It's like playing a piano -- you have to practice.

Primeval S04E01: Script Report

This blog deals with script problems in the latest episode of Primeval but before I get into it I think I should issue a few caveats.

1) This is just a quick assessment based on one casual viewing.

2) Primeval is no worse than a lot of British TV drama, it's just that its got CGI dinosaurs in it so unlike other programmes I don't fast forward through most of it.

3) Without an exhaustive and frankly pointless analysis of every draft of the script it's impossible to say whether the poor script was the result of writer incompetence or down to gibbon interference -- however, my money's on the gibbons.

4) Primeval is a complex production and many of the poor acting, shooting and editing decisions could well be beyond the control of the production team, lost light, failed sfx etc etc. Therefore I'm going to confine myself to the broad structural problems with the script.

5) I'd have done the story differently but for the purpose of this blog I'm going to assume that the basic story elements were dictated by the producers.

6) The Idiot Ball was passed around with such speed that at times I thought I was watching the rugby - far too many instances to go into in this blog.

The script's principal sin is its failure to support its own turning points, particularly the revelation at the end that Abby and Connor lack the military background to do front line field work.

The ARC is not portrayed as militarised in any way, leaving aside the costuming and prop failures, just throwing in a few ranks or some military slang would have helped.

The turning point into the final act is really confused, Abby and Connor arrive back through the anomaly (the script misses the chance to ramp up the tension by having them do it in the nick of time before it's sealed) hug interchangeable action guy, then Connor manages to unseal the anomaly by accident letting in a dinosaur, then there is running around, then the dinosaur eats the anomaly device thingy and vanishes. And then we go back to the ARC to introduce Dr Bashir (Alexander Saddig) and the mini-skirt nerdette and the revelation that they're going to be confined to back room duty.

Connor says that the only thing that was keeping him going in the Cretaceous was the thought of coming back and doing the work but there's no hint of that when we see him in the Cretaceous (he's desperate for frothy coffee instead). Again the turning point is not supported by the rest of the script and so Connor's protestations, despite the best efforts of the actor, lack any resonance.

It's not like it wouldn't have been hard to fix:

Tense action sequence split between Abby and Connor trying to escape through the anomaly and the ARC responding with military efficiency.

Culminating in:

Connor and Abby make it back through the anomaly meet anodyne action guy, hugs, anomaly is plugged (or whatever the spiky gun thing did). Back to...

The ARC: things seem different. Meet Dr Bashir who is (sinisterly) interested in future tech device. Revelation that the woman from the last series has died off screen(1). We have other little character options here, Anderson (the replacement maverick character) could have been unimpressed by Connor (still recovering) or funny little moments as Abby and Connor get used to the 21st Century again.

Then we ramp up the tension. Anomaly begins to unseal (or whatever), battle stations as the ARC scrambles again but Connor and Abby are left behind. Connor wants to seal the anomaly with the future tecbno thingy but Dr Bashir resists (he wants it for his multinational of evil) .

So Connor and Abby steal the device, confrontation in the arena, S-club 7, etc.

Back to the ARC to find that they are still demoted to back room jobs (particularly since they lost the future time device thingy).

The End.

That's a better structure which I knocked up in ten minutes, it's not the only solution -- any half competent screen writer could have come up with their own in a similar period of time. Since I know that the producers have access to, and the wherewithal to pay for, competent screen writers one has to ask...

Why was this script so poor?

(1) Instead of that terrible 'as you know bob' scene in the corridor. I swear that even George Lucas couldn't have written any thing that bad.

Gibbon Spotting

If you love a good generalisation you can divide the people that work in the Film and Television Industry (1) into 4 main types: talent, deal-makers, gibbons and and hamsters.

Talent is just what it sounds like, these are writers, cinematographers, editors, actors, scene designers all those that make creative input(2) into the project. The level of talent is, of course, variable but what they contribute is self-evident.

Deal-Makers are people whose principle skill is making deals and this is vital to any production of anything. The best deal-makers are masters of organisation and while often not talented themselves are capable of recognising it in others. To put it in script writing terms when a deal-maker reads a script he/she can tell you whether its any good and how it might get made. What they contribute is the project itself.

Gibbons(3) are usually executives who are neither talented or able to spot talent. They might actually be quite good at making deals but since they can't tell the difference between shit and sugar their product will only be any good by accident. Furthermore their principle concern is with their own status and thus they are perfectly happy to stay in the development spin cycle forever. Just so long as they can eat lunches, do meetings and work through their dominance issues.

Hamsters are essentially passive agressive gibbons who usually rise up through the ranks of a media company tucked away in a handy bodily cavity of a gibbon or a deal-maker with low self esteem.

In the next post we shall discuss the all important gibbon ratio.

(1) I suspect you can do this in most industries but I don't have experience of them.
(2) And I don't include giving your opinion at a meeting here.
(3) With apologies to the Hylobatidae family here.