I've always wanted to have a hand in Directing the stuff I write. Mainly because I've spent so long with the characters and situation that I couldn't stand a Director getting hold of it and messing it up.
Do you think the best directors are writers?
Do Writers make the best Directors?
I don't think the best directors are writers, but I do think that if you want to get your script on screen in exactly the way you intend it to be, you're best off directing it yourself.
There have been many fine writers who also make good directors. The secret seems to be that once they go into the production, they consciously leave the writer part of them behind and concentrate on directing, ie don't become precious about the words and stage directions in their script. If a writer can let go of a rigid vision of how their work should be performed and let others, escpecially actors, bring positive ideas to the script, then there's no reason they can't direct. Direction in its most basic sense is telling the story the best way possible - both visually and verbally. Ultimately, whatever the director does with a script, there has to be a good story to be told. A good director will respect the importance of the writing, but not let it get in the way of telling the story.
I always look at it like giving birth to a baby then giving it away and letting someone else bring it up. I'd want to bring it up myself as I have a clear vision of how I want it to be.
I don't think writers necessarily make the best directors, but in some cases it works i.e. The Office. They were not going to let anybody touch their baby, they did it themselves and it turned out great.
Then again you look at something like Fawlty Towers which wasn't directed by Cleese or Booth yet still turned out fantastically well. 2nd series was directed better than the 1st in my opinion.
Quote: Griff @ June 3 2009, 3:11 PM BSTThere is no reason a writer can't direct, do the lighting, play the piano or wrangle cobras. It's just likely that someone who has spent their career doing it is likely to make a better job of it than someone who's never done it before.
Where's your play on Griff?
Quote: Jacob Loves Comedy @ June 3 2009, 3:09 PM BSTThen again you look at something like Fawlty Towers which wasn't directed by Cleese or Booth yet still turned out fantastically well. 2nd series was directed better than the 1st in my opinion.
Fawlty Towers was an incredibly intricately-timed farce. It had more camera cuts than any studio comedy before (and possibly since). You had to have directors who really could handle the pace, the accuracy and the technical knowledge of how to achieve the correct shots to complement the comedy. The direction for these shows (with all scenes predominantly filmed live before an audience) is a somewhat overlooked achievement, which certainly was important to the show's success.
Quote: Griff @ June 3 2009, 3:14 PM BSTKing's Head Theatre in Islington. F**k, that was my milestone post.
Ooh, lovely. Is it having a run or is it a one-off?
(You can always delete it. Again.)
Quote: Griff @ June 3 2009, 3:14 PM BSTKing's Head Theatre in Islington. F**k, that was my milestone post.
Congrats and best wishes for it, Griff.
Quote: Jacob Loves Comedy @ June 3 2009, 3:09 PM BSTThen again you look at something like Fawlty Towers which wasn't directed by Cleese or Booth yet still turned out fantastically well. 2nd series was directed better than the 1st in my opinion.
I have just read the book Fawlty Towers by Graham McCann and also just watched the recent G.O.L.D Falwlty Towers special, and both of these showed that John Cleese was heavily involved in the way the shows turned out. He may not have directed, but it was implied that he ruled over the show with an iron rod.
I once directed Richard Griffiths in a short film. I simply pointed the camera at him and told him to start acting when he felt like it. 
That was about it.
Quote: Griff @ June 3 2009, 3:27 PM BSTShowrunning is different. There's no reason a writer can't do that. But surely even very successful writers/showrunners like Russell T. Davies don't turn up on set telling actors to stand to the left a bit?
The rule on set is that if the writer has an issue with how the scene is being shot, then they usually have a word with the producer, who will talk to the director, who will then talk to the actors. The director is king on set (until the producers fire him/her).
Quote: Griff @ June 3 2009, 4:24 PM BSTShort but presumably very wide?
And I know from experience (from theatre, not TV) that if some idiot writer breaks this protocol, all f**king hell breaks loose.
I heard a story (from a very reliable source) of Jonathan Harvey doing this during a read-through for a pilot with Maureen Lipman (amongst other well-known names) in it. He had no sense of tact or status as he was telling consumate actors how to say the lines (bypassing the director). Apparently it was all very embarrassing.
I believe the feeling in the industry is that generally writers do not make the best directors of their own work - unless they have a very good general background in theatre besides writing.
This is now a subject close to my heart, having worked with two different directors. Directing, as Griff has said, is a very particular technical as well as artistic skill (I suppose writing is as well but it's different). I suppose the nearest analogy to a director is the conductor of the orchestra.
And as for the director/writer relationship ... unless the writer has been brought up in theatre, it's not until you're initiated into "the process" you begin to understand exactly what is meant by "collaboration". Theatre is a collaborative craft and everybody has to give and take and to know where to draw the line and where to give way. You can be a brilliant writer but if you can't cope with the process of working with a director and how to conduct yourself if you come into rehearsals you may never be staged.
It's one of the reasons I started RealDeal Theatre and Sitcom Saturday for new writing and brought in directors. I realized how little I knew about the director/writer relationship before having my first play staged and as I am a writer - ahem - of a certain age 
, I realized I needed a quick learning curve. So I'm learning and at the same time we're helping writers get a taster of the process and working with the director and through the director with actors.
Looking forward to coming to see your play at the Kings Head, Griff!
Nothing really to add other than I have no desire to direct my stuff, so I guess that's where the directors come in, who presumably (though not necessarily!) have no real desire to write!
Just wanted to say good luck to Griff. Hope it goes well!
Dan
Griff that was an excellent use of your milestone post. Please post again about it or pm me nearer the time - I'd like to see the show if I can.
re the original question, it depends who the writer and director are. I went into the Sitcom Trials experience not really sure what to expect (and a bit worried that it could end up being someone else's version of it which I wouldn' t like at all).
But it was fantastic having someone else take such care with the script and instinctively knowing how to get the most from it stage/ performance wise. He was in charge but it felt like a really positive collaboration all round and if I had any issues he wasn't at all dismissive of them. I learnt a lot from it all, which I wouldn't if I hadn't let anyone have a say. It wouldn't have been any fun that way either!
It's your vision of course but a good director will enhance your ideas not take away from them. I'd also say from speaking to some of the other Trials' writers, that the ones who were happiest with theirs were the ones with a similar collaborative feel about them.
Jx