KevinLee

MF: You have a background in another kind of reality show—the documentary. What people may not have know about you is that in the late 1990s you worked in public television, at KNME in Albuquerque, where you produced several shows, two of which won Rocky Mountain Emmys. You also worked for the History Channel, where you produced a documentary about the history of vacations in America. Why did you decide to make the transition from public/documentary television to reality television, and is that as a great a leap as it sounds?

KL: When I was working on public television documentaries, I always found myself attracted to stories that were about people living their lives in the present day, as opposed to doing the usual public television documentaries about science and historical figures.

When MTV started broadcasting The Real World, I felt that some of the show’s content was superficial, but I was very impressed by the strong present-tense and character-oriented storytelling. I wanted to participate in that style of storytelling.

It took a couple of years, but I eventually sent a cold letter to Jon Murray and Mary-Ellis Bunim [the creators and producers of The Real World]. To my surprise, they offered me a low-level job on Road Rules. I jumped at the chance and have been working with Bunim-Murray Productions on and off for six years.

As you can imagine, there are huge differences between producing public television documentaries and producing reality TV. But surprisingly, the fundamentals remain the same. In both genres, you try to tell compelling stories about interesting characters. Those goals don’t change.

MF: You’ve worked on some classic reality shows--MTV’s Road Rules and The Real World. How do you balance keeping the show fresh with keeping the traditional elements that keep fans coming back?

KL: Those shows remain fresh and popular year after year because they change their cast members every season. Both Road Rules and The Real World feature very character-driven storylines. If the characters are constantly changing, so to are the storylines. And, that keeps the audience coming back. It really is all about character on those shows.

And to lesser extent, the audience likes to see the location change each season. Usually the shows choose an exotic backdrop so that audience can vicariously “live” in a new location each season.

MF: You seem to have developed a specialty in reality travel shows, Road Rules, Rebel Billionaire, The Simple Life. Using those as examples, I was wondering if you could talk about how a show is actually put together—from scouting locations to casting. Is there a difference in how a show is put together when you work with someone who is already known, such as Paris Hilton, Nicole Ritchie, or Richard Branson as opposed to a show where the characters start off as unknowns but gain fame once the show airs?

KL: I really enjoy traveling reality shows because a foreign location can become an extra element in your storytelling. The location can test or challenge cast members in unexpected ways. It can take them out of their comfort zone and reveal their true characters.

So much goes into planning and putting together a traveling foreign reality show. I could write one hundred pages about it. But on a basic level, you have to choose foreign locations that will give you that extra element of storytelling, but still remain produceable. By produceable, I mean that the locations need to be able to provide the infrastructure to handle your logistics and production needs. Somehow, the producer needs to find that balance of foreignness and logistical viability.

If a traveling show features a big celebrity, then it is important to have sufficient security. For some celebrities, luxury hotels are important, although Branson was happy staying at any dumpy hotel we found. In a strange way, it can be helpful to travel when your show features a celebrity because many times the celebrity is less known in out-of-the-way locations and you have a better chance at getting honest human-to-human interaction between the celebrity and regular people in these sorts of locations. Also, if the show is constantly traveling then often times you can get out-of-town prior to everybody finding out that there is a celebrity in their midst and bringing unwanted attention.

MF: One thing people often say about reality TV is that it’s not real, that it’s manipulated to give a certain impression of people and events. On some level, I suppose that’s true because you do have a plot for the show: You know where people are going to go, some of the things that they will be doing, and some of the people they will meet. At the same time, you can’t control every aspect of human behavior. What are some things that unexpected things that have happened and what do you do when something goes wrong?

KL: The reason reality shows are popular is because real people are unpredictable. Audiences find that unpredictability exciting and entertaining, especially when compared with stale scripted televisions shows. If a reality TV producer tries to control these real people or manipulate specific storylines from them, then that producer is shooting himself in the foot. The producer would be destroying what makes reality TV great. With that said, yes, a reality TV producer does set up a situation and an environment and choose a cast and set some rules, but once that is in place, it is best to stand back and let the unpredictability run its course. It’s usually better than what you could make up on your own.

As far as unexpected things happening, I’ve seen so much happen. From fistfights to hurricanes to Paris Hilton getting bucked off a horse and going to the emergency room, the only thing you can be sure of is that something unexpected will happen. When something like this happens, the course of action that you take depends on what has gone wrong, but one rule of thumb is to keep filming, no matter what happens. You’ve got to find a way to make sure everybody is safe, yet continue to film at the same time. Often you get your most compelling footage when something unexpected is going wrong. It goes along with the whole unpredictable quality of reality TV.

MF: In reality TV, it seems that you have to be thinking about storytelling on several levels. There’s the narrative arc of the whole series, the narrative arc of each episode, and the narrative arc of each character. It’s somewhat reminiscent of a serial story—each episode has to be complete in itself, and at the same time, it has to set up the following episode. How does that process unfold over the course of filming a series?

KL: That’s a question that calls for a really long answer, but I’ll give it a shot. The answer really depends on the type of the reality show. If it is a game reality show like Survivor or The Amazing Race,then the structure and rules of the show force a narrative arc on the entire season and the specific episodes. The structure and rules are created by a team of producers prior to filming. The narrative arc of the characters is unpredictable and uncontrollable. The best you can do is cast interesting and dynamic characters and hope for the best.

In a non-game reality show like The Real World, all narrative arcs come from the characters and the decisions they make. During the filming, you keep can keep track of these arcs, but it is important not to try to influence the characters and their decisions. If a producer influences character-driven narrative arcs, then they invariable become predictable and to some extent boring. Real people are more entertaining when left alone.

MF: On one level, you could make a case that reality TV is not a new phenomenon. After all, there were shows in the past such as Candid Camera, This is Your Life, the PBS series An American Family, Michael Apted’s Seven Up. I suppose one could even make a case for game shows such as The Dating Game or The Newlywed Show, both of which had scripted and non-scripted elements. But, the contemporary scene is a little different in that there is such a proliferation of these shows. What is it about America in the twenty-first century that makes these shows popular, and do you think they will continue to be popular?

KL: I think that television viewers in the twenty-first century have seen so many sitcoms and dramas that they’ve become bored with the predicable scripts and plotlines. Reality TV is unpredictable. Even if the situation is contrived, you never know how a reality cast member will react, and that is exciting to audiences.

Also, modern television equipment is more mobile and light sensitive, which allows television producers to leave the studios and sound stages behind, which in turn makes reality TV much more possible.

I’m sure that some form of reality TV will remain popular with audiences. The specific shows will change, and the formats will change, but TV shows about real people will always remain popular.

MF: If you look at cultural critiques of reality TV, one thing some critics suggest is that these shows anaesthetize people to social issues they should be concerned about. For example, some have argued that there is a whole generation growing up who hear the phrase Big Brother, not as code for extreme totalitarianism, but as code for the chance to win a big cash prize. As a result, the real social and political dangers of increased government surveillance don’t get the attention they deserve because on a daily basis, people turn on their televisions and see surveillance, not as a threat, but as entertainment. What is your take on critiques like that?

KL: Wow. That specific critique seems far-fetched to me. If people accept increased government surveillance because they like to watch Big Brother, then I would say we have bigger problems than reality TV.

. MF: You graduated from USC’s School of Film and Television. When you were growing up, what were the shows and films that made you want to go into the entertainment industry?

KL:When I was very young, I watched Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. I asked my mom who made that movie. She answered that it was the director who made it. With that, I decided to become a movie director, but when I realized that it was very, very hard to get a job as a movie director--and I got tired of being a bartender--I switched to television documentaries.

MF: Now, what kind of work inspires you?

KL: Good comedy inspires me – both film comedies and sitcoms. Making people laugh is so important. My ambition is to create comedic reality shows that measure up to the best comedies of film and scripted television.

MF: Reality TV obviously requires that you work co-operatively with other people. But, you also need to be able to come up with ideas for shows, think through how your current show is going, and probably find time to watch other shows to see what trends are developing. Sometimes, that requires that you be alone. When you have the chance to sit down by yourself, what kind of space do you like to work in? Do you have a special notebook or anything like that?

KL: I don’t really have a specific space for this kind of thinking. I do most of my creative thinking while I’m jogging or hiking and rush to write it down on any scrap of paper that I can find.

MF: When people find out that you work in reality TV, do they pitch shows to you?

KL: All the time. Creating a reality show doesn’t require the writing skills a scripted show does, and as a result, there is a very low threshold of entry. Everybody pitches all the time. But as you can guess, most ideas are derivative--or unworkable.

Click here for our other interviews.
Find books, music, and movies mentioned in all our interviews.