Episode 2: The Editor with Billy Sneddon

Alex and Tim are back investigating what makes things funny. This week they have the expert editor Billy Sneddon in the studio! They talk Thick of It, Billy Connolly and secret tips for keeping your director happy.

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
Welcome to our podcast. It's funny because it's true. This is Alex McQueen. You may have

(00:06):
known him in various comedy roles over the years. And I'm Tim Clyde. We're going to
basically try to uncover what makes stuff funny. What's the DNA? The secret sauce underneath
what makes people laugh? Why? And we've got some really interesting guests.
The special sauces that we're bringing to the table to taste. One of those sauces.

(00:26):
Billy Steadlund. A fantastic editor-in-chief of all comedy the world has ever seen.
Give some highlights to the last with the Jones back in the 90s. I used to laugh my tits off
of that. It's about the pony, brass eye, eye-malen, partridge. The thick of it. Were you in that?

(00:47):
I'm high to boot. Yeah, the in-between. Were you in that? In the loop. Were you in that?
Oh, hang on. Do you guys still remember? Four Lions. Were you in that? Bloody hell. Absolutely
fabulous. You were. What's the dinner? No, good. And the franchises. And also, you don't
like, I mean, basically you are Mr. Comedy Editor. Aren't you? So we're extremely lucky

(01:10):
to have you on this. Simply on this. Absolutely. Pleasure and an honour. So how did you get
into editing in the first place? Was there a great editing? It was by accident. It's
because, so the quick version is I got a degree in botany out of Glasgow University. What?
Standard. Didn't want to do plants. So I came down to, it was the 80s, so I felt the industry

(01:32):
to be in was advertising loads of money in flash cars. Didn't get any of that. Did you
apply to, did you apply to agencies? Yeah, I came down and did a course in advertising
in Welloffer College. Oh yeah, Welloffer. Then I got a job in advertising, became a
copy artist, was rubbish at it, got a sack. Then I became a runner on shoots because that
looked like more fun because people were actually making stuff rather than, thank you, because

(01:54):
that's what you do as a copy artist and never sees a lot of day, of course, as you know.
And so I started working at Jeff Starts production company. And then I ran into an editor in
a pub and he said, I'm looking for an assistant. Are you interested in editing? I've got an
opening and I said, deep breath, editing is exactly what I've always wanted to do. This

(02:17):
must be fate. I didn't know what everything was. Yeah. Did you mean, when you said this
is, yes, I want to do it, why would you say yes? Because I didn't want to be, I was a
runner and I was 20. You didn't want to do something you would do. Great. Yeah. I thought
anything, the first off the job was the first smelling cast I'm going to tell you. And this

(02:38):
was back in the day where you were literally cutting the film. Yeah, it was starting on
film. Yeah, I had a steamboat flatbed, 16mm and 35mm cutting rim. Yeah. You'd look for
a shot and you couldn't find it and you said, I stuck to the bottom of my shit. It's like,
it's just, I couldn't get to grips with that at all. You just had a snap on the bottom
of the stuff. Yeah, you have the little machine that cuts it and it's just, I can't get to

(03:01):
do that at all. It must have been a nightmare for timing. Are you trying to get, do you
try and get just the right beat? I actually used it to be honest. It was well on the
way out with it. What he had, got more use was a pneumatic tape to tape system. So it
was like a stack of pneumatic recorders. And if you wanted to go back and drop a shot in,

(03:22):
you'd have to copy the whole program down onto another tape and then go back and start
again. It was absolutely mental. But as soon as I got this job, the guy, he wasn't massively
computer literate. Oh, he was, but I was, I was computer savvy completely. And this thing
called an avid arrived, which is computerized editing system, which we still use to this

(03:44):
day. And I just got, I just saw that that was the future and just got stuck into that.
And that was, that was it. So it was ingesting these film rushes into the system, working
out while the time codes were, and then you just cut it. Yeah. I mean, anything has got
vastly more complicated over the years. You think it, things would have got simpler, but

(04:06):
it's gone the opposite way. Whereas like, I used to know everything about editing and
how to work my particular piece of software. It would only be me. I would, I would, if
I was editing a program, it would be just me, no assistance, nothing. And I would do everything
and cleaning output at the end of the job. And I knew everything about everything. Then
I got to the point where I had to have an assistant because there's so much going on. So technically

(04:28):
complicated. It was that type of two of us, but I knew their job. Then I had an assistant,
but I didn't know how to do their job, but they did it. And now I don't even know what
they do. Right.
It's that complicated. Yeah. I've got my own little thing that I can do. I can edit. Someone
else is going to do all the admin. And then, but in drama, I remember there was a scene,

(04:50):
I did a film called the Busby Babes United David Tennant. And there's a scene where he's
crying in a stairwell. And it's just one shot of him and he breaks down and he's having
a cry. And it's like the shot is 50 seconds longer a minute. And I'm trying 50 seconds.
Yeah, that's great. It's sustained. Let's try it 20 seconds. Well, yeah, I mean, you

(05:15):
could say that's enough. 30 seconds. Yeah, still, it's David Tennant. It's awesome.
Good. Yeah.
You know, for that you're telling a joke and then waiting 10 seconds for the punchline.
It's just not, it's a completely different.
Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Although there can be little moments where something hysterically funny is happening

(05:38):
and actually almost holding the joke too long can also be very funny. Yeah, there's that
kind of trick where you.
So I'm in an edit suite with doing Alan Partridge, the way that Armando comes in. Do you remember
the episode with Stephen Mangan? Dan, Dan, Dan in the car park. Sorry, microphone. So

(05:59):
I'm editing that scene. And he's done. So it's funny. And then it becomes ridiculous.
And then it becomes funny again, like, because it's so long. And I'm looking at going, okay,
I've got to get the exact number of Dan's absolutely perfect here because I said my
control I can cut to Stephen Mangan shot and I can cut back a bit later and I can get the

(06:20):
exact sweet. What is the sweet spot? The exact number of Dan's. And I'm struggling with
it a bit. Armando comes in six down. He says, how are you getting on with that?
Yeah, I'm just, I'm struggling a bit just to get the exact number of Dan's just perfect.
What do you think? How many do you think it should be? And you look to be like I'm the
world's biggest idiot and said all of them.

(06:41):
Right.
They had already worked it out.
Oh, I see.
You know, they knew what they were doing.
But that's interesting. They hadn't translated that. If that was a key set up joke, they
hadn't translated that or given you any brief when you're editing it. By the way, when you
get to the car park, Alan's going to shout Dan a ridiculous number of times. We're just
going to keep on it till it's uncomfortable. And they keep on it a little bit further.

(07:04):
All you get is a script. And then you get I never have a conversation. But different
directors work different ways. Okay, right? This is the thing. There's no perfect way
of doing it. But I never talked to Armando while he's filming, unless something complicated
has come up and needs a bit of editing knowledge or something. I don't know. I can't even think

(07:26):
of a single time where that even happened. But so you get you get your script supervisor
will write notes on another piece of paper. And you might get a little circle around a
take that they like the best. And it's usually not the best. But is that like a lot of the
time? Yeah, felt like amazing amount of the time they take that they think is the best

(07:50):
take is not the best take. And but that's because when you're when you've put it together
and you're in the room, it's a completely different feeling from when you're actually
shooting it. Yeah. Yeah. And also, it's a there's no like it's very rare that a whole
take is the best take. It's your break in it up into bits and pieces. Or from an actor's

(08:12):
perspective is always Oh, between three takes that Oh, the first tape was good for the first
two minutes. Yeah, I was really rubbish in the law. And then Oh, the second take, I was
good at the I do hope the editor is able to harvest the best of the three rather than
just use take one because it might be technically most sort of the continuity is easier. But

(08:32):
before we come to the actual process, your comedy heroes on the following four categories.
Who is your stand up hero? Very difficult. It's either Billy Connolly or Bill Hicks.
Good. Is it just as they share your name Billy? Yeah, by any chance. That's that basically

(08:57):
who's the funniest other Billy other than me? I think I think I just admire Billy Connolly
so much because I know how he works. And no one else does it the way he does it. His method
is different to everyone else's. Would you say that is he doesn't know what he's going
to say when he walks out in front of it. Really? Absolutely. He wouldn't go out. You know,

(09:17):
they have a lot of notes. No, he will he will have a little sheet of paper, which has got
bullet points written of particular stories that he's got. But he doesn't know what order
he's going to do them in or if he's going to do them at all. Or if he's going to say
one half of one and then go on to something else and then come back to the next one. That's
because he's got ADHD. He just forgets where he is, goes and tells another story and everyone

(09:39):
thinks it's so clever that he comes back to the beginning and tells the end of the story
that he told him the first time. It's just because his mind is racing. It's not a plan.
Absolutely. And it's like, I remember editing and Eddie is art stand up video and they said
we've got two nights, put them together and make one video. The funniest. And yeah, whatever.

(10:01):
So I reeled them up and I'm cutting away and I think second night, it's identical to the
first night. Oh, interesting. So the size just so precise. Yeah. To the point where
at one point he forgot where he was telling a joke, told an emergency joke, really clever
and got back on the horse. I thought that's great. I think it was a mistake, but I'm going
to leave it in. Watch the second night. He did it again. Right. Okay. So he filled me

(10:26):
so early. So the two of us are completely different. Yeah. There's a friend of ours who runs
a theater in Chiswick where a lot of the stand ups to you their little sort of rehearsal
show and we were watching the one one. I won't say who was but the producer sits in the box.
They do five nights that they're doing an hour and a half material to get to 30 minutes
or something. And it's just literally tick cross question mark every night. So as the

(10:51):
jokes go, just measuring the audience is that funny? If you get four out of five ticks,
it's nearly probably will make the show. But if it's five takes out of five takes, it's
in. Yeah. So it's just, it's just a dissemination job of the funniest moments. Yeah. That's
like, you get to a point, but then you then stand out. It's funny because then the craft
isn't so much stand up and work with the night. It's actually extremely well crafted and

(11:15):
kind of people do have some time. Some people have a scientific approach to it. Sasha Baron
Cohen's like that. But not everyone is like that. Well, as you say, Billy Connelly is
yeah, it's squirrels dancing his mind. There's no real hard and fast way of going about it.
Sasha has a like a grid work to where like a joke happens. He'll test screen it and he'll

(11:38):
get a score out of 10, but doesn't get to eight. We've got to recut it and try it again.
On the edit, you know, it's like, what did you edit with him? I worked on the second
borat movie. That's not on here. No, it's I couldn't get an editor credit because I'm
not in the union. Oh, stop it. Yeah. And what about comedy double act? Any favorite?

(12:01):
What's your, who's your favorite comedy double act? Markham and Wise was massive in our house
and probably everyone's house when we were kids. So nothing will ever top that just for
this year. I mean, there might be others that are probably less to might be for you in some
way, but more common in terms of not even as an influence, but just as something that

(12:26):
was a big deal as a child. Can I just drill down on a bit of that briefly? That that's
obviously a, there's a very classic disparity between the straight man and the funny man.
How important do you think that is or or not?
What's a classic comedy trope is the guy trying to get something done surrounded by an idea

(12:51):
or a load of idiots. Right. And that just keeps repeating itself because what's that
formula again to say again? It's the it's the guy in the middle who's the straight man trying
to get a task done surrounded by just stupidity. Great. And he's fighting against it. I mean,
that's what Four Lions is. Yeah. I mean, like probably most things that you could run through

(13:16):
my CV and most of them are probably that that's really which is basically Laurel Hardy. Yeah.
That's basically playing that joke over and over. But a lot of betweeners will is that
guy. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So what might that be in the thick of it?
It's whoever the minister is. Yeah. The minister is surrounded by I mean, they're not competent

(13:38):
either though to think of it. So everyone's well, I suppose Malcolm is competent. Yeah,
I was going to say, isn't it may might be Malcolm trying to get stuff done. It's Malcolm.
Of course it is. What am I talking about? Yeah. Out of that CV there, do you have a
proudest piece of work? It has to be the thick of it. But no, it's not. It's just piece.

(13:59):
Yeah. When I first edited the first three episodes we did together in the thick of it,
I knew immediately you don't always get this feeling, but I knew immediately that this was
going to be massive. Right. And I turned around to Amanda and said, I think this is the best
thing you've ever done. And he'd already done partridge. So that's a big thing to say. And

(14:21):
he said, you might be right. I'd love to. Yeah, let's look at your working process.
Sort of a day in the life of Billy Sneddon in the A suite. I'd be really interested
on a granular level to know what it's like to go and to go into the room at the start
of the day and leave at the end of the day. What happens? What do you do? What's the process?

(14:43):
So what happens is I they should have seen I get all the footage for that scene the next
day. And I will do what we call an assembly edit of that scene. And it's just me in a
room on my Todd working out. And I've got to try and get that as good as it can possibly
be so I can my attitude is then I'll show it to her where it's going to come in and I'll

(15:03):
say, can you beat that? So it's a fine cut, but it's full length. I've not cut anything
out yet. Can I ask what is that footage? Is it everything that's shot in the day or is
it just selected? I know it's absolutely everything. Right. So you get the entire download and I
watch every single but you've you've already chosen which camera angle for each line. So

(15:26):
you've already gone through the process of going. I will go through everything with a
microscope and put together the best possible version that I can think of that scene. So
it could be for a five minute scene. It could actually be a 30 minute cut. No, no, it'll
be a five minute cut. Okay. I will do a finished scene. I want I want I want to choose a whole

(15:47):
bit of select takes. Well, I will initially. So this is the quick working method and how
I get to that point. I go through I go to the let's say there's maybe four or five takes
of each angle. So if it's us talking, there'll be a wide shot shot reverse singles, whatever
it is, and there'll be five of each of those, let's say. So I'm going to go through every

(16:12):
single one of those, but I'm going to go through them backwards because usually the best take
the takes get better. So first thing I'm going to do is go to the last take of every setup
and quickly scroll through it and see what it is visually and think where that visual
shot might be. Usually you start with a wide shot and get tighter. Not always, but the

(16:33):
general kind of most common way of cutting is to find a point where the scene turns or
becomes a different thing or has a turning point or something that you there's a moment
where you can go tight or whatever. So you'll find that moment and then work your way towards
it. So I'll say but then so I'll work through the all the takes backwards and I'll put each

(16:59):
shot in where I think it should go. So that's so now I've got a cut which has maybe the
same line four times. Got it. So that's the one that you just were suggesting, which is
my select edit. I'll save that and I'll make another copy and this time I'm just going
to have the scene. So I'm going to choose one of those short and it's going to be in

(17:19):
that moment. So you build it, you take it all down to four, before you select to one.
Yes. And then I boil it down to a fine cut. Your fine. My fine cut. Yes. And then I'll
do a sound pass where I might steal audio from other. Oh, brilliant. Oh, that's good
to hear because as an actor, you could think, I had the right expression. I swear I hit the

(17:41):
right total note in a previous take. That's so annoying. But when genius is like, you
come along. Yeah. Okay. I'll tell you how many times you've seen an actress say a line
on TV and the audio that you hear is from another take. Right. Are you pretty confident
at that point you've got the very best of the best that stuff is there in that exercise?

(18:01):
You always feel pretty good about it because you've, what I've done is like I've run out
of ideas. I'm cutting it until I can't think of anything else that I want to change. So
at that point it's as good as it can be. As far as I'm concerned, until someone tells
me different and they always do. But you know, when someone else will come in and go, how

(18:22):
about this, that, that, or the other? Who's that? Who's the director of A Sure Runner?
Right. They'll come in after you've done your fine cut. So the whole episode or movie, depending
what it is, is available to view a matter of two days after the shoot ends. Right. So a
director or a sure runner will come. Usually if it's American system, they have sure runners.

(18:43):
Yup. UK system director. So in American system, a director, there's a director, but he'll
come in and only have like, if our TV show, they'll only have, if it's half our TV show,
they're supposed to only have like two days. Say I'd like it to be shorter there, longer
there. Could you have that tape? Not that tape. Just whatever they can jam into two
days and terms of ideas that they've had while they were shooting it, that might not be obvious.

(19:04):
Yup. And then a sure runner will come in and spend the majority of the time with me. But
that's not the, the UK system is different. A director will stay all the way through the
whole post-production in the UK system. With that sort of period of time, yeah, having
to, because you're trying to craft something really importantly difficult to get the timing
right. How do you not, how do you combat the kind of duration of just having, you know,

(19:30):
there's almost fatigue that causes it. This is a really good point. The thing about doing,
say you're doing a comedy film, if I tell you a joke, you might find it funny. If I
tell you just one more time, it's, you could probably listen to it. If I try and tell you
that just a hundred times, you're going to go mad. Yeah. Yeah. And this is what I'm doing

(19:52):
for a living. Yeah. Listening to the same joke a hundred times. Yes. So what you have to
do is, obviously there's, if you're doing a film, there's loads of considerations that
aren't just, even if it's a comedy that are just the comedy, but the first thing you attack
is the jokes. Right. So you do that first while you're still feeling fresh about it.

(20:16):
So you try and make each scene as funny as it can be. Do a whole pass of the whole thing,
just thinking about the jokes. So it's, yeah. And then it becomes unfunny quite quickly
after that, but you have to rely on a sort of muscle memory. Wow. Like, it's funny when
I first saw it. So it's still funny. Yes. You'd like to see. There's so many times I've

(20:39):
done jobs where we've all, everyone execs and everything the producers have come in and
watched it at the end of the process. They're all just, watch, don't eat face. And at the
end of the day, it's like chopping stuff out that you shouldn't have done. Yeah. But you
didn't laugh once. Good job. Nothing. But we know it is funny. Yeah. Right. And sometimes

(21:00):
there's one thing that you keep laughing at the right way to the end. It's really weird.
Like just things that are other people don't even think are funny. So you notice little
things. You're saying, so Sasha has this thing where even at the edit point, it'll experiment
with an audience reaction. So there might be that off a beta testing, it might be like,
do I take that joke to 11? Or do I rest it at nine? Or do I add tomato sauce to it?

(21:25):
Yeah. Let's see what he's taking an approach where he's trying to make a science out of
it. Right. It's a scientist's approach. I'm not sure I completely subscribe to it. I think
you've got to, for me personally, I think this is what I've seen before is like, there's
not, there's not a definitely right way of doing things in a wrong way. That works for
him. But it's like, for me, if I was in that position, I'd be, I would want to try and

(21:52):
trust myself to have an instinct and not necessarily rely on testing with an audience. Because
audiences, this is another whole subject as test audiences, don't get me started on that.
But when that, whether if something's new and fresh and are completely original idea,
the chances are they might react negatively to it just because of that because it's unfamiliar.

(22:17):
So it depends what you're doing. If you're trying to make new territory.
Just back in the day, you would, we should really talk about Camel after a bit, because
back in the day, you would, a lot of this stuff would be shot in an, with an audience
present. The real sitcoms, there would be a lot of, it'd be put on screen, that'd be
an audience. So you'd create a genuine audience response that makes something. Because obviously,

(22:40):
you're in a room for the people laughing, like stand up.
Or do you remember?
I'll in partridge the, when he's in the motel.
Yeah.
Right. So, I mean, if I say to you that was filmed in front of an audience, you might
go, yeah, of course, fine. But if you watch it, it's a 360 degree set.
Yeah.

(23:00):
So the camera will be pointing this way, that way anyway. And yet it is filmed in front
of an audience.
That's it.
So, it's a closed set. So the audience is there, but they're watching it on a screen.
Oh, I see. Right.
Right.
And before they start filming, Steve would pop out as Alan Partridge and do a little bit

(23:22):
warm up to the audience going, I am really in here.
Oh my God.
And then disappear behind the curtain. And then they would.
And then they're watching the tents.
But then that's fascinating. Yeah. Because you're the same wear-out you get of watching
the same joke four times.
They're doing five takes.
Yeah.
And the audience has already seen the joke.
Well, if it's filmed in front of an audience, they can't really afford to do five takes.

(23:45):
Right.
Yeah, you can say, okay.
It's one and it may be two if you're lucky.
Right.
That's it.
And then I would have to try and sometimes the laughter would be not really there on
the second take, but the performance would.
So you would try and get the audio work to.
But it's not like the last series of Alan Partridge, there was a lot of complaints about

(24:08):
the laugh track was so loud.
I wish they wouldn't have put all that kind of laughter on.
Right.
That's just what happened.
The laughter was so loud that it was intruding on the audio of the performance, but it's
in the mix.
You can't retake it.
There's not a limited amount of what you can do.
I think they did EQ a lot of it out, but there's only so much you can do for the dialogue

(24:34):
start to sound tinny or whatever.
But that's a very interesting question.
You asked about that.
How quickly you become snow blind if you're doing, if you're looking at a piece of comedy
25 times.
So what is your technique for that?
What do you do?
You said muscle memory.
You just have to.
Unavoidable.
You can't do it.
You have to be, when you get towards the end of a job, you have to be very, very careful

(24:55):
because you can end up chopping stuff out that you shouldn't have done.
Because you've lost sight of the fact that it was working.
Very interesting.
So it's a dangerous game.
And the thing about it is that it's easy to cut jokes out.
Because I've said this before to people, it's like one thing that the one thing, Armando

(25:19):
taught me so many things, probably more than any other individual.
But the one thing that stuck with me at the time, because it was like a road to Damascus
kind of moment when he turned around and said it to me was, you know that all jokes are
interruptions.
What?
What do you mean?
Well, interrupted to the narrative.
Every single joke that's ever been told is an interruption.

(25:42):
So you've got the narrative and you've got a joke and they're not the same thing.
You can lose the joke and the narrative will still be there.
And I can't, I was sleeping generalised.
I said, I can't be right.
I was thinking about it.
It is right.
You tell, you're telling a story.
You stop telling the story.

(26:04):
You tell a joke.
Then you start telling the story again.
That's just how it works.
So that's why it's dangerous with comedy.
Because you can cut that joke out and join a backup and you wouldn't know it was ever
there.
If you think about what all the best comedies are, they would work if they weren't comedies.

(26:26):
So their stories are interesting, involving, say, something about the human condition and
they've got hilariously funny jokes in there as well.
Like I mean, if I said Life of Brian is my favourite comedy movie, that probably would
work as a mistaken identity thriller.

(26:46):
I mean, this story is brilliant.
So it's both.
That's what you do when you're editing is you're trying to keep all the balls in the
air at the same time.
You're trying to, it's not just about making hilarious funny moments.

(27:07):
It depends on what kind of film it is.
I suppose if it's something like Airplane, it's just jokes.
But there is a story.
It would be a short film.
There would be a story.
What's the best bit about your job?
What's the favourite part of your existence as an editor?
The favourite really is that I'm sat next to and working with and engaging with people

(27:32):
that I would never have a chance to even get close to.
Otherwise, and pick their brains and just be part of their world.
And just, I mean, it's a joy of my life to have worked with people like Romande Unici
and Chris Morris.
I mean, I could say there's loads more, but I'd forget some of them.

(27:54):
So I should just go.
But what do you think is the one secret source?
Is there one key thing to making it work?
I mean, you talk about the narrative but coming off to take a joke, but underneath it there's
a story.
That's the key thing you've got to have a strong thread.
But I mean, is that or do people just do this in different ways?

(28:15):
So is there different, like Chris Morris is an extraordinary individual, but is he vastly
different to a Billy Connolly or to a These Are Sellers or to a These Are?
So like it's, there's a number of different things at play here.
One is working method, just physical working method.
There is your attitude towards things, what is funny and comedy is a very personal thing

(28:42):
to a lot of people.
Like there's lots of members of my family think Mrs. Brown's Boys is the funniest thing
ever made.
I'm not in that camp.
But I mean, you can't argue with the numbers because people watch that.
And a lot of people absolutely love it as one of the most successful things out there.
So I don't know.
But in terms of working methods, they're all that it's difficult to, there isn't a, the

(29:05):
key thing to take away is there isn't a general way of doing it.
Like with Chris Morris, we're not in the same room together.
Like hardly ever.
We will screen it together and sit and watch it together and then talk.
But we don't really do any editing in the room together.
Right.
So he can work an avid.
So he's in his office looking at a scene, maybe throwing down a few shots, writing

(29:27):
a couple of notes on things, I'm working on a different scene.
And then when he's finished with that, he'll send it to me and I'll look at what he's
done and I'll go, oh yeah, I get what he's, where he's trying to go here.
And I'll put my sauce into it as well.
A few ideas.
And I'll create another version.
But while I'm doing that, he's off on a different scene doing something else.
So whereas.

(29:49):
Oh, I'll know.
Armando will, okay, Armando's working method is to give notes.
So he'll come in, watch it and he'll reel off a load of thoughts that he's got and I'm
going to write them all down.
I'm not editing.
I'm just writing everything down that he's feeling and thinking.
And I'm chipping in with a few thoughts on my own as well and I create a list of task

(30:11):
list of things that need attention.
Then he disappears.
And when I've got through the list, I'll give him a shout and he comes back in again
and we look at it and go through that process again.
So neither of them in that instance.
It's a bit different.
Sit beside you in the room and say, no, no, I want to touch them.
Cut there.
Cut there.
That's actually not that.

(30:32):
It's more common for them not to be in the room.
It's because, well, there's a number of advantages that way.
So they get the best out of me because I've got the little bit more air and freedom to
actually put my own ideas into the mixer.
And also they get to remain quite reasonably fresh.
So yeah, their subjectivity remains, doesn't lose.

(30:56):
That's really interesting.
Not everyone does that though.
I've got directors who will come in and just sit there and just sit together and say, OK,
we're in this trench together.
Let's just go.
And so, you know, and that's valid too.
And how do you find yourself resolving conflicts between you and the showrunner or the director
in terms of, are you always ultimately the servant of the director or showrunner or not?

(31:22):
Kind of, but it never gets to the point where there's a standoff.
I don't like getting into conflict with people.
So if what I'm saying isn't received well, there's a strong chance it's not a good idea.
So I've got to accept that as well.
Not everything you come up with is going to work.

(31:43):
That's just what editing is about.
Try things out and some of the works on them don't.
You've got to be able to recognize what doesn't, doesn't.
But there's only one arbiter of good taste and that is the director or showrunner.
And that needs to be a singular vision that I can relate to and understand and help them
get there.
It's not the other way around really.
So I'm not going to get into my catchphrases.

(32:05):
I'll take the horse to water and just leave it there.
So I'll give you the idea.
If you don't like it, that's not my problem.
We're just not going to do it.
There's a lovely process.
You were a copywriter to begin with in Amtos.
There's a lovely process in Advertiser where we have two of an art director and a couple
of other workers, a team.
For a while I couldn't do much.

(32:25):
It's kind of obvious and simple.
You've got pictures and words.
But there's another very important thing that plays in that the ego of one has to get past
the ego of the other for it to be a good enough idea to leave the room.
And I suspect when you're in your box editing and you go, I said, blinder, I can see this
shot.
That's where the comedy is landing the tree or have I have.

(32:48):
And actually someone else comes in and goes, yeah, that's brilliant.
Or didn't work for me.
It does actually that.
That's a moment.
Is there having that arbitrage?
The directors have big egos.
I mean, it goes with the territory, obviously.
So you've got a, there's a number of psychological tricks and things which you play to, you

(33:08):
have to try and nudge them into where you, it's a tricky process because I don't want
to overplay it and try and dominate the room because I'm trying to help that person get
what they want.
And my job is to facilitate.
I'm a king maker in a way because they're the one who are going to be standing up there
with the Oscar, not me.

(33:29):
So I'm trying to, oh my mazes.
Yeah.
Okay.
I don't think there should be.
That's another story.
I'll just give you one example of a thing that I sometimes do and hope no director I
work with is going to watch this.
If you want to give someone an idea, what you're trying to do is make them think that

(33:50):
it was their idea.
So you give them half the idea.
So you just, you throw out a thought and go, I wonder if, I would never mind anyway,
what were we talking about?
So you've set, you've got it.
You've said it and it's gone out there.
And then you've just moved on.
And then sure as apples are apples, four days later, they'll go, should we do da, da, da,

(34:14):
da, da, da, da.
You go, that's a great time.
Gold's your all here.
I like it.
Yeah.
And also, but within the craft, you, whilst a lot of people in the everyday world won't
know you and what you do.
Your CV is a glittering close.
The Steve Cougans and everyone else will know if you're looking at it and you're making
it funny.
He's built respect for you.
And so you've got an equity in saying, no, I've looked at that edit.

(34:37):
It's funny if you don't come through the door.
And I've seen that.
I saw you, I saw the edit you did on In the Loop.
I play the ambassador and I arrange very carefully for something to occur and then I'm told,
no, no, no, I want the opposite.
And all I do is go into the room and I do have a scene beyond that, but you've cut it
and the door just opens and the people laugh immediately because they know, oh God, he's

(34:59):
had to go back in and do the very opposite of what he wanted it to do.
That is, that's creating the script in post.
You made the bullets.
I just fired the gun.
Oh, God!
Sussages.
We should move on a little.
Yes, you should.
Let's tell you a bit.
In the Loop is the first, that was my first movie and it was a baptism of fire.

(35:23):
The first cut of In the Loop was four and a half hours long.
It could have made about six different movies out of that movie.
That's what that's.
It's absolutely so hard to get that down to 90-something minutes.
I can't tell you.
But now I wanted to ask you about this because in the craft of making comedy in particular,
there's other things as well, but there's two very different approaches.

(35:45):
One is it's carefully possibly tested and scripted to a point where someone's vision
is absolutely on a piece of paper.
This is word for word about what people are going to say.
They might improvise a bit.
And there's another which is just shove people in a scene, create attention, go and improvise
and then we'll just film it all.
And some of the greatest funniest films have just been done that way, haven't they?

(36:05):
You've had to presumably cut both.
Yes, but I think improvisation is a little bit overrated in that.
I think it's probably not as common.
No, not overrated.
I mean, sorry, overrated is the wrong word.
Not as commonly done as you might think.
Because the whole everything that we do is to make the heavily prepared look spontaneous.

(36:31):
So you will watch something and think that looks like it's been improvised, but it hasn't.
And I think the thick of it is an example where it was very there was a lot of improvisation
in the thick of it, but it was done in rehearsal mostly.
So you would write a script, rehearse it, a load of stuff would come out of rehearsal
and then that would go into the script.

(36:52):
The time we get to film it, it would be we used to do an improvised take, didn't we?
So we do like three or four takes, nail that, then go, Ryokul, let's do a Lucy Juicy one
and just see what happens.
But interestingly, very often what the the the loose take would be the one that had the

(37:13):
energy, the feel, the performance, the vibe, it was good, but they maybe it just needed
all the improvisation.
So many times I would take that take and just cut out all the improvisation and go back
to the script.
That's really important.
Oh, but from the improvised.
From the improvised take.
That's fucking, that was the take that had the energy.
I think you're in a really unique position because you get to see, you get to see the

(37:38):
absolute warts and all.
And then you are really, you're really pulling this into the thing that then becomes funny
or not funny.
And it's a really powerful position to be in.
And I think one thing we've been we've been chasing quite a bit about is at the root of
what makes stuff funny.
Is it what's what's do you think is the balance between the tension scenario script story

(38:00):
narrative for what's been created that could create a really funny story and the performance
the people.
Yes.
So the skeleton versus the flesh, if you look how much of it is.
I mean, if you take a really funny actor, can you give them bad scripts and it's still
going to be funny?
Yeah.
Or, or could you take a really funny narrative and get to a terrible actor or somebody's
not as funny and that's so very funny.
So how much?
I think it's more the other way around.

(38:21):
Right.
But yeah, it's a very difficult thing to generalize about.
Sure.
But I think the one of the tricky things about comedy is that I used to say, like, if you
wanted to really boil it down, what is comedy would be the truth exaggerated.
So there has to be all that means really is that it has to be it has to feel real and

(38:47):
some level it has to feel genuine.
Is there an example of that?
Not forced.
Do you have a little vignette of that?
Well, so, okay, so if you're, if you're performing in a comedy, one of the things it's tempting

(39:07):
to do is to go quite big to reach for the laugh.
And it's the worst thing you can do because if you look like you're trying to be funny,
if it looks like an actor trying to be funny, you're stuffed.
It has to look like not an actor has to look like that character in a real situation.
So you have to attack it with probably the same degree of authenticity as you would with

(39:32):
a dramatic role and allow the material to be funny.
Yeah, I had a note from a writer, a writer director saying, please don't play the drama
or the comedy that's in the writing, just play the truth.
Yes.
It's funny or dramatic.
It's a really useful note.
It's like, don't, yeah.
But it's not as simple as the tricky thing about comedy is that what you're doing is

(39:54):
maybe a heightened scene scenario, which is maybe a bit ridiculous or the character is
a bit ridiculous.
Or, so I've got this thing where I've got a thing called the line, which is you're trying
to push it to a certain point where it becomes funny, but you can't go over a certain line,
an invisible line.
There's a line there if you go just slightly above it.

(40:16):
Now what is it?
It becomes like bad sitcom.
Right.
But that line is different in every situation for every actor and for every moment and for
every show.
It's not as simple as saying, go line, go big.
Because if I said to you, what is the funniest sitcom of all time, you might say faulty towers.
Yeah.
And that performance is like massive.
Right, high up, isn't it?

(40:37):
Yeah.
But you don't watch faulty towers and go, that's John Cleese being funny, that's Basil
faulty.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Exceptional.
All the way.
Yeah.
It's a real character that you're watching.
You're not watching John Cleese.
And that's the, he was, he was so brilliant at doing that character that he could take
it to such a level and still keep everything together in terms of it being coming all the

(41:02):
way.
I don't think if it was John Cleese, where you do think if it was John Cleese and other
things, but definitely in Basil faulty, he's inhabited that.
The script is the script.
So the performance is, as I'm looking at it, the script might not change from one take
to another, but the performance will.
So that's the thing.
The number one thing that I'm looking at that overrides everything.

(41:22):
I'd rather put a bad edit in, and have the exact take that I want to go to next to the
next shot.
I'd rather put a dodgy edit and do a bump than actually not use the best take performance.
That overrides everything else.
All other considerations.
What are the three top three scripts?
Casting, editing.

(41:44):
Yeah.
If you've got the script right and you've got the right people to play those parts,
you've won half the battle already.
That brings me to a side wheel, which is why wouldn't you be a director?
And have you been a director?
You have.
Yeah.
Do you not, yeah, well, since you're so good at this.

(42:04):
Well, I wouldn't make me a good director.
In your hierarchy, you're putting the editor slightly ahead of the director in terms of
potentially their impact.
When I became an editor, I thought that was a staging post on my writ to inevitable world
domination.
As a director.
Whatever.
Showing on or whatever.
But what happens is, if you become good at something, you get into a position of comfort

(42:29):
with that.
And people want you to do more of the same.
And before I know it, 30 years went by.
So I did actually have ambitions to write my own stuff and be a director.
But then as soon as I finish a job, the phone will go and it's someone amazing on the other
end of the line going, something want to come and do this.
Of course I do.

(42:51):
So that's what happened really.
But I did a director episode of the thick of it.
I wonder what's lucky.
I was lucky enough to.
Did such a way since I let me do it.
It wasn't someone ill.
It wasn't someone who was it genuinely.
You ever go at this?
He said, well, it was he on the last series, he wanted to concentrate more on the scripts
because there was a lot of outlines that he wanted to sit and work with.

(43:15):
Even while we were filming, the writers are all behind the camera going like this while
we're filming still going, oh, what?
Try this or that.
So he was more wanted to go involved in that.
So lots of us, they were being behind the scenes, got an opportunity to direct an episode.
Did you edit your episode?
No, you didn't.
So that almost deliberately so you knew because you'd be telling yourself your own joke.

(43:39):
Well, we don't have time because as I say, it's being edited the next day.
I really loved you.
A while ago we went to the thing about truth and actually what you're doing is just saying
that you're exaggerating truth and that's what makes things really funny where the audience
is just going, oh, that's a Macintyre stand up is almost entirely.

(44:01):
A lot of Peter K's is a lot really just founded on.
I'm just going to tell you a lot of truths and you're going to laugh because you know,
that's so that's exactly like I can't imagine.
But there is obviously another comedy which is jokes and there is obviously Tim Vine and
there's a load of stuff which actually it's not really truth at all.
It's just wordplay.
Ronnie Barker.
Yeah, just gag.

(44:21):
Just gag, gag, gag.
Yeah.
Where do you think, where do we lie?
In making the very best comedy, is it truths or jokes?
Well, you see, the thing is that it's the set up gag, set up gag thing is like pure
sitcom and that's not really to me now.

(44:43):
I think it's like Chris Morris has said a thing which is you have to have a message.
There has to be something that you're trying to say.
Otherwise, you're just being the court tester.
I'm not sure exactly.
I think comedy is such a difficult thing to do in such a pure art form that I think just

(45:04):
being funny by itself is justification.
It's okay.
But if you can, I suppose as we go back to this is satire now, if you've got something
where you can recognize the real world in it as well, that just gives it so much more.
If you recognize, you've satirized something to a point where it's become funny, but you

(45:26):
can still recognize the real world in it, then surely that's the best of everything
because you've got a message, you've got something to say and you're relating to people's real
lives that they can recognize as well and you're hilariously funny on top.
So why not have the jam and the cake and everything?
Yeah.

(45:46):
And that's something that your favorite form, the life of Brian, is actually packed even
there.
It's in a completely different world, supposedly at a completely different time and sort of
based on something that no one can really relate to, it's absolutely clustered with little
treats, isn't it?
Whether it's the ludicrousness of the collision.
Have you seen this as something about the human condition?
Exactly, yeah.
It's just what so, and it's lovely then painted it in a different picture and it allows you

(46:09):
to laugh at it.
So, the truth is the center of comedy in your mind.
It's a truth.
Always.
Well, thank you very much indeed for joining us.
A massive thank you to Billy Stedden, a colossal thank you to Timothy Clyde.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Follow, do like, do share, all those things and we'll see you next time.