Fed up with BBC 2 and BBC 4 house-style?

[Dave2002]

i assume there is a film and tv school where some of the visual cliches are taught and made sacrosanct - the presenter finishes talking to camera by walking out of shot; the ubiquitous hand gestures; the talking to camera while driving, as though talking to a passenger....

I wish they wouldn't do that. If I'm in a car in the front passenger seat I much prefer the driver to look at the road. It's not always necessary to look at people in order to talk!

[kernelbogey]

Some scripts are at that level , others aren’t. Meades is a master …but a lot of his impact comes from the excellent directors ( and camera teams ) he works with.

I accept that the director has a huge impact on the overall quality of these programmes: and also think some directors are definitely of the second rank. Meades and his - I believe long-term cooperating - director made his talking to camera in an entirely rigid position, and often also wearing dark glases, gripping television.

Meades's scripts were also masterfully dense - not unlike a good Radio 3 talk in the old days.

I watched much of the Devon and Cornwall series, because I am devoted to Cornwall. It suffered from a particularly bone-headed voice-over script, delivered with infant-school teacher intonation.

[gurnemanz]

i assume there is a film and tv school where some of the visual cliches are taught and made sacrosanct - the presenter finishes talking to camera by walking out of shot; the ubiquitous hand gestures; the talking to camera while driving, as though talking to a passenger....

Not to mention scripts written as though aimed at bright seven year olds.

It was why, when I saw Jonathan Meades's programmes for the first time, his visual style was so refreshing.

I once picked up a hitchhiker (those were the days) who turned out to be a student going round the country as part of a film school project. He sat next to me in the front and asked if he could film an interview with me as I drove along. It passed the time as Wilts and Berks whizzed by on the M4. I remember going on about my own hitching experiences amongst other ramblings but don't know if I made the final cut.

I greatly enjoy Meade but he can run the risk of lapsing into self-parody - something I'm all too aware of as a former school teacher. As a profession we can be tempted to play up to our own idiosyncrasies. (As sometimes with the ever entertaining Waldemar Januszczak)

[Serial_Apologist]

I accept that the director has a huge impact on the overall quality of these programmes: and also think some directors are definitely of the second rank. Meades and his - I believe long-term cooperating - director made his talking to camera in an entirely rigid position, and often also wearing dark glases, gripping television.

Meades's scripts were also masterfully dense - not unlike a good Radio 3 talk in the old days.

I watched much of the Devon and Cornwall series, because I am devoted to Cornwall. It suffered from a particularly bone-headed voice-over script, delivered with infant-school teacher intonation.

Adults addressed as children tend to react accordingly, I remember reading, long ago. Can't remember who the author was, but looking and listening around these days, the proof seems to have been efficiently delivered.

[Serial_Apologist]

I once picked up a hitchhiker (those were the days) who turned out to be a student going round the country as part of a film school project. He sat next to me in the front and asked if he could film an interview with me as I drove along. It passed the time as Wilts and Berks whizzed by on the M4. I remember going on about my own hitching experiences amongst other ramblings but don't know if I made the final cut.

I greatly enjoy Meade but he can run the risk of lapsing into self-parody - something I'm all too aware of as a former school teacher. As a profession we can be tempted to play up to our own idiosyncrasies. (As sometimes with the ever entertaining Waldemar Januszczak)

I don't mind the self-parody at all in either instance, as it helps make the ideas more important by diminishing the characters, which is I am sure as they intend as a side swipe at presenterism. I wonder if it's any accident that the most lasting impression on me of Januszczak's programmes is always of the upward views of his baggy trousered posterior that often come at the end as he clumps his way noisily up iconic stairways and mountain paths.

[ardcarp]

I wonder if it's any accident that the most lasting impression on me of Januszczak's programmes is always of the upward views of his baggy trousered posterior that often come at the end as he clumps his way noisily up iconic stairways and mountain paths.

No, it's not an accident. Saclly.

[muzzer]

I was heartened by his Ukrainian Journey prog. I had a place reserved at the Polish Hearth Club to see it ahead of broadcast but couldn’t go in the end.

[Bella Kemp]

I think the problem may be that there is no 'house style.' I occasionally enjoy programmes on BBC 4, but never make it my 'go to' channel because one never knows what to expect. One night there may repeats of pop music programmes, the next an Opera, the next an excellent documentary. BBC 3 eventually survived because it has a target youth audience. BBC 4 sank because it simply did not know who its audience might be.

[Dave2002]

No there is nothing like that . The reason presenters walk out of shot is to provide a cutting or edit point.
Driving ptcs are a complete pain in the proverbial to do - sorry you don’t like them - try directing them.

An interesting observation. Another technique - such as going through a very black door. Somewhere - around a couple of years ago [actually probably sometime in the last 9 years - now I recall ... I remember talking to others about this and that was years ago ....] - I filed away some splendid videos showing many cutting techniques, and mentioning terminology - such as J cut, L cut etc. Mostly of course mere viewers are completely unaware of the various methods used. I have only a slightly casual interest, but there's a lot more to film and TV production than many of us are aware of. Most of my understanding is as a mere viewer.

[Ein Heldenleben]

I don't mind the self-parody at all in either instance, as it helps make the ideas more important by diminishing the characters, which is I am sure as they intend as a side swipe at presenterism. I wonder if it's any accident that the most lasting impression on me of Januszczak's programmes is always of the upward views of his baggy trousered posterior that often come at the end as he clumps his way noisily up iconic stairways and mountain paths.

He usually directs his own films - one of the very few presenters who does that.

[Ein Heldenleben]

An interesting observation. Another technique - such as going through a very black door. Somewhere - around a couple of years ago [actually probably sometime in the last 9 years - now I recall ... I remember talking to others about this and that was years ago ....] - I filed away some splendid videos showing many cutting techniques, and mentioning terminology - such as J cut, L cut etc. Mostly of course mere viewers are completely unaware of the various methods used. I have only a slightly casual interest, but there's a lot more to film and TV production than many of us are aware of. Most of my understanding is as a mere viewer.

Yes there is a great deal more to it but in some ways the best direction and editing is that which does not draw attention to itself. In a factual programme if people notice the direction or the edits before the content then arguably it has failed. It’s different in drama perhaps. When people see what goes into it all they are very often surprised about how long it takes and how painstaking it is. When you start explaining a simple sequence to people in terms of shots they pretty soon glaze over because to be honest it’s essentially not that fascinating. The key thing is what is happening in front of the camera and the real art of the director is getting that right.

[alywin]

I think the problem may be that there is no 'house style.' I occasionally enjoy programmes on BBC 4, but never make it my 'go to' channel because one never knows what to expect. One night there may repeats of pop music programmes, the next an Opera, the next an excellent documentary. BBC 3 eventually survived because it has a target youth audience. BBC 4 sank because it simply did not know who its audience might be.

And in my opinion its target audience often didn't know that it showed things they might be interested in. Let's ghettoise it all on BBC4 and then not bother advertising it on the other channels ...

[french frank]

And in my opinion its target audience often didn't know that it showed things they might be interested in. Let's ghettoise it all on BBC4 and then not bother advertising it on the other channels ...

I read somewhere a couple of years ago (a critic whose name I forget) that in terms of arts output the BBC was 'targeting an audience that wasn't interested and not targeting the audience that was'.

[Ein Heldenleben]

I read somewhere a couple of years ago (a critic whose name I forget) that in terms of arts output the BBC was 'targeting an audience that wasn't interested and not targeting the audience that was'.

I think the channels are just following social trends really . There’s an interesting article with Joseph Calleja , the tenor , in the Telegraph. The tenor thinks opera audiences are dying off. He’s right - they are. West End audiences for serious plays are shrinking - though that could be because the plays aren’t that good. There’s no one around of Pinter or even Osborne standard. Just from the evidence of this forum it’s clear that most people prefer recordings to live music performance and the cost of living crisis isn’t helping,

On the positive side - at one point on Thursday every single one of the main 9 TV channels was showing factual programming - documentary - of varying levels of intellectual complexity admittedly . There is no other nation on earth that consumes so much factual television output per head . We are also the biggest consumers of journalism per Head and the last figures I saw showed that we published more books that any other nation save Iran (largely religious pamphlets)
The reality is that people in this country do want serious content . If the Arts aren’t getting their fair share is that possibly because what they are offering just doesn’t appeal to many people? The only section of the arts booming is visual culture from Bansky through to blockbuster Cezanne exhibitions. Dance is also doing reasonably well.
( One other point : the performance and copyright fees also put programme makers off.)

[Serial_Apologist]

I read somewhere a couple of years ago (a critic whose name I forget) that in terms of arts output the BBC was 'targeting an audience that wasn't interested and not targeting the audience that was'.

Whoever said that couldn't have put it better. But in the end it all comes down to HOW potential audiences are to be targetted - or at any rate encouraged. .