|
|
IN THE SPOTLIGHT: VIN DI BONA
Caucus Chair
Vin Di Bona, the Caucus’s recently elected Chairman, has been active in the entertainment industry for 30-plus years and a member of the Caucus since 1990. An eight-time Emmy Award nominee, Vin has won four Emmys as a producer: three for the documentaries Down at the Dunbar (for which he also won a Peabody Award), Zoot Suit: The Play and the Promise and Streets of Anger, Streets of Hope; and another for the series Project Parenting. Vin is recognized as one of TV’s pioneers in comedy reality programming. Through his Vin Di Bona Productions, he has also produced scripted series, game shows and Movies for Television.
QUESTION: What first brought you to Caucus?
VIN DI BONA: A personal call from David Levy first interested me in joining the Caucus. The list of working producers, writers & directors was staggering and I felt quite honored to be a part of the new group of reality producers even though only three programs-Unsolved Mysteries, Home Videos & Rescue 911-made up the entire reality program landscape.
Q: Under the heading “Everything old is new again,” we’re seeing a resurgence of early television themes, particularly with reality programming. Your background in early TV reality gives you a unique perspective on TV’s current love affair with non-scripted reality shows. Where do you see this trend going? Was Paddy Chayefsky correct? Should the audience be “mad as hell and not take it anymore?”
DI BONA: If Paddy Chayefsky was correct in being “mad as hell” in the 80’s, reality programs of the new millennium might possibly cause him to start using other four letter words; however, there is a lot to be examined here: Why do audiences watch? Is it because shock and humiliation have become the new plot lines? Do real people placed in pressurized situations have more fascination than some of the re-hashed, formatted series of late? Are we tired of seeing scripted cops, doctors and lawyers, but enchanted with real truck drivers, mountain climbers or gay exhibitionists? Perhaps for a while, yes! Looking to the future, reality programs which suffer from rigid formats and only change cast and location for the next go-round will not have staying power and have already proven no repeatability. Fresh ideas (24 & Arrested Development) and great casting & writing (Alias & CSI) are essentials for television’s future.
Q: In a similar vein, advertisers are taking a greater role in programming, reminiscent of their roles in TV in the 50s. Branding is more apparent, and more and more advertisers are stepping in as production partners and owners of programming. Is this a good thing for the creative community?
DI BONA: I don’t think advertisers will wield the same program decision-making power they had in the 50’s. I believe the networks will be somewhat attracted to the additional revenue stream advertisers can supply toward the end product; however, competition for the eyeballs is too important to place in the hands of non-programmers.
Q: Would you say that advertisers are encroaching on what we Caucus members like to think of as our creative “turf?”
DI BONA: Again, I don’t believe advertisers will be given that much script control…and if they did, I would rather pass on the project…life is too short.
Q: How has the Caucus’s mission evolved with these changing times?
DI BONA: The good news is that, yes, we have evolved with the times. Fighting consolidation and the potential extinction of the independent producer as an artist and entrepreneur is the single most important issue facing our group yet. Bringing that message to all of the Guilds, the American public, our politicians and especially the network boardrooms is our mission for this decade. We must approach this issue with great zeal, with commitment and with realistic goals. This issue and how we deal with it are directly related to the lifeblood of our members and our organization for many years to come.
Q: Most Caucus members would describe themselves as entrepreneurs. In the face of consolidation, vertical integration and advertiser competition, is there still a place in television for the entrepreneur?
DI BONA: The words “entrepreneur” and “showman” should be interchangeable. The need for both is essential: fresh ideas and special people who can bring their ideas to fruition.
Q: Any thoughts on what I’ll call the “Super Bowl Effect?” John Wells was forced to makes changes in an episode of ER. Live TV’s 5 second delay was extended to 5 minutes for the Grammys. How has Janet Jackson changed the future of broadcasting?
DI BONA: I come from local broadcasting, working for ten years as a producer/director of information specials and documentaries for both Group W and KCBS. I understand, keenly, the public’s ownership of the airwaves and what that means to a broadcaster both in terms of responsibility and license renewal. Janet Jackson was wrong. She interfered with a trust families have placed in their broadcaster. She used a world-wide sporting event as a place to rejuvenate her sagging career and that’s just way too selfish a motive for me. Censorship, no! Clear cut guidelines as related to family time periods, yes! Television must have freedom to create and spotlight important social and emotional issues of our day. Time slot sensitivity rather than content should be the primary consideration.
Q: Any final thoughts for those up and coming creative types who are just starting out?
DI BONA: Warning for the young creators: learn more about business. Mistakes are costly and might affect how your company is looked at in the future. Read. Become as familiar with what’s going on in top boardrooms as with the weekly ratings. Good news: a great idea will always put you in the driver’s seat. Only when buyers have to have your project, can you really negotiate to your benefit.
|
|
|
