Next Dumb Harlington-Straker Question.

Has anyone kept track of what sort of films Harlington-Straker produced? Iseem to recall how, in "Reflections In The Water", Straker was reviewing what looked like material slated to be use in either some sort of travelogue, or as stock footage of a fishing village. There's also been occasional shots of people in period costumes wandering about (documentaries? historical dramas?).

It strikes me that, whereas using a film studio for cover is a good idea, having Harlington-Straker produce major "A" list productions would've been risky (too much risk of attracting publicity-magnet big name stars, and associated paparazzi).


Michael

Remember the special effects Foster was trying out, riding a roller coaster?

Bruce
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 6:52 PM
Subject: [SHADO] Next Dumb Harlington-Straker Question.



Has anyone kept track of what sort of films Harlington-Straker produced? I seem to recall how, in "Reflections In The Water", Straker was reviewing what looked like material slated to be use in either some sort of travelogue, or as stock footage of a fishing village. There's also been occasional shots of people in period costumes wandering about (documentaries? historical dramas?).

It strikes me that, whereas using a film studio for cover is a good idea, having Harlington-Straker produce major "A" list productions would've been risky (too much risk of attracting publicity-magnet big name stars, and associated paparazzi).

Michael






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

"Michael" wrote:
Has anyone kept track of what sort of films Harlington-Straker produced? Straker was reviewing what looked like material slated to be use in either some sort of travelogue, or as stock footage of a fishing village.

------------------------

The idea of a studio the size of H-S producing cinema travelogues (as seen in "Reflections In The Water") even by the time that UFO was filmed, let alone set, was unlikely.

There WERE such short cinema travelogues being produced into the 1970s because there was still the idea of a "programme" rather than a single film being shown in cinemas. The programme would comprise of either two features ora feature and a short (plus trailers and ads). Most cinemas didn't have reserved seats and most programmes were continuous, so that, depending on what time you went in, you could see the films in any order, or come in part way through a film and stay until you had seen the bit you had missed.

The short travelogues still being made at that point were almost always made by small specialist companies, usually based in small offices around Wardour Street. Companies like Global-Queensway would keep costs down by swapping free flights for a shot or two of the airlines livery.

Studios of the mid-century variety, where, say, Rank would finance a film and make it at their own studios with their own permanently employed staff (including stars) were already gone. Pinewood would still have some staff (like plasterers) but they and the facilities were simply hired out to independent productions. A decade or so later all the studios were "four wall" where it was basically just the stages, sound facilities and the offices which producers were renting and all the people and equipment would be hired from outside the studio.

H-S was already operating, even by late 1960s standards, in a manner which no longer really existed. Straker was acting like he read scripts and greenlit them, as well as owning the physical studio. No studio in the UK at that time still operated that way.

A studio the size of Harlington-Straker in the UK would have to host largely major feature films, most made with Hollywood money, with a few smaller films and the odd TV series. Think, at the time, Pinewood, ABPC-Elstree, Shepperton and (the special case, having a US Parent) MGM-British. All the others at the time like Twickenham and Bray are and were far smaller than the fictional H-S.


Regards
John

John:

Very informative, and I thank you. Given some of your comments (e.g. "Straker was acting like he read script and greenlit them, as well as owning thephysical studio") made me wonder why the UFO production crew (who one expected would've certainly been grounded in the way an actual studio was run) didn't try to present more of a realistic notion in terms of studio operation. Apparently H-S was expected to produce some sort of cinema output in order to maintain appearances. Was Straker (and the rest of the SHADO crew)simply playing stylized "roles" as film crew, to try and fool the uneducated public? Were the scripts he read simply a slush pile of those already "killed" by those who handled the actual film operation, and supplied for window dressing? Did he receive briefings as to which areas of the studio hecould freely wander about in an attempt to "look" like a real studio executive?


Michael

--- In [hidden email], jks@... wrote:

Someone wrote a short bio of Ed Straker at this site:

http://ufo.epguides.info/?Role=4380

This section is interesting:

"In his cover as Managing Director of the Harlington-Straker Organisation,
Straker divides his time between his SHADO duties and those as chief executive
of one of the UK's major motion picture studios, albeit one with a string of
disastrously expensive flops to its name: 'The Rebels Of Santa Dominco' (1978),
the musical 'Tutankhamun!' (1979), 'Lock Up My Wife' (1979), 'Erebus Awakes'
(1980), 'The Road To Nuremberg' (1980) and the 1982 remake of 'Citizen Kane'.
Harlington-Straker is also the home of the long-running action-adventure
television series 'Agent On My Shoulder' starring Howard Byrne."

While I'm quite sure this is non-canon, it is interesting to see that someone
took the time and trouble to think up some productions the studio might have
done.




________________________________
From: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 2:36:16 PM
Subject: [SHADO] Re: Next Dumb Harlington-Straker Question.

"Michael" wrote:
Has anyone kept track of what sort of films Harlington-Straker produced?
Straker was reviewing what looked like material slated to be use in either some
sort of travelogue, or as stock footage of a fishing village.

------------------------

The idea of a studio the size of H-S producing cinema travelogues (as seen in
"Reflections In The Water") even by the time that UFO was filmed, let alone set,
was unlikely....

<snip>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Very interesting.  Although I find the part where a Brit (Craig Collins) was accepted as a NASA astronaut trainee to be equally interesting!
 
Jeff

--- On Wed, 8/11/10, Dave T <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: Dave T <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Re: Next Dumb Harlington-Straker Question.
To: [hidden email]
Date: Wednesday, August 11, 2010, 9:48 AM


 



Someone wrote a short bio of Ed Straker at this site:

http://ufo.epguides.info/?Role=4380

This section is interesting:

"In his cover as Managing Director of the Harlington-Straker Organisation,
Straker divides his time between his SHADO duties and those as chief executive
of one of the UK's major motion picture studios, albeit one with a string of
disastrously expensive flops to its name: 'The Rebels Of Santa Dominco' (1978),
the musical 'Tutankhamun!' (1979), 'Lock Up My Wife' (1979), 'Erebus Awakes'
(1980), 'The Road To Nuremberg' (1980) and the 1982 remake of 'Citizen Kane'.
Harlington-Straker is also the home of the long-running action-adventure
television series 'Agent On My Shoulder' starring Howard Byrne."

While I'm quite sure this is non-canon, it is interesting to see that someone
took the time and trouble to think up some productions the studio might have
done.

________________________________
From: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 2:36:16 PM
Subject: [SHADO] Re: Next Dumb Harlington-Straker Question.

"Michael" wrote:
Has anyone kept track of what sort of films Harlington-Straker produced?
Straker was reviewing what looked like material slated to be use in either some
sort of travelogue, or as stock footage of a fishing village.

------------------------

The idea of a studio the size of H-S producing cinema travelogues (as seen in
"Reflections In The Water") even by the time that UFO was filmed, let aloneset,
was unlikely....

<snip>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reading this made me think of the producers. Who cares about expensive flops? This way he keeps a low profile. Imagine being called onstage at oscars night ? :)

Bruce

----- Reply message -----
From: "Dave T" <[hidden email]>
Date: Wed, Aug 11, 2010 10:48 am
Subject: [SHADO] Re: Next Dumb Harlington-Straker Question.
To: <[hidden email]>

Someone wrote a short bio of Ed Straker at this site:

http://ufo.epguides.info/?Role=4380

This section is interesting:

"In his cover as Managing Director of the Harlington-Straker Organisation,
Straker divides his time between his SHADO duties and those as chief executive
of one of the UK's major motion picture studios, albeit one with a string of
disastrously expensive flops to its name: 'The Rebels Of Santa Dominco' (1978),
the musical 'Tutankhamun!' (1979), 'Lock Up My Wife' (1979), 'Erebus Awakes'
(1980), 'The Road To Nuremberg' (1980) and the 1982 remake of 'Citizen Kane'.
Harlington-Straker is also the home of the long-running action-adventure
television series 'Agent On My Shoulder' starring Howard Byrne."

While I'm quite sure this is non-canon, it is interesting to see that someone
took the time and trouble to think up some productions the studio might have
done.




________________________________
From: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 2:36:16 PM
Subject: [SHADO] Re: Next Dumb Harlington-Straker Question.

"Michael" wrote:
Has anyone kept track of what sort of films Harlington-Straker produced?
Straker was reviewing what looked like material slated to be use in either some
sort of travelogue, or as stock footage of a fishing village.

------------------------

The idea of a studio the size of H-S producing cinema travelogues (as seen in
"Reflections In The Water") even by the time that UFO was filmed, let alone set,
was unlikely....

<snip>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Interesting. I went and checked, though, and currently there isn't an Academy Award for producers, so Straker can remain pretty much in the clear.

(I also checked, and BAFTA also doesn't honor producers.)

"Accepting the award on behalf of Harlington-Straker . . . Keith Ford."


Michael

--- In [hidden email], "bruce sherman" <brucesherman@...> wrote:
>
> Reading this made me think of the producers. Who cares about expensive flops? This way he keeps a low profile. Imagine being called onstage at oscars night ? :)
>
> Bruce

I'd give a pretty to have seen the casting for that one.


Michael


--- In [hidden email], Dave T <myspeedometer@...> wrote:
>
> Someone wrote a short bio of Ed Straker at this site:
>
> http://ufo.epguides.info/?Role=4380
>
> This section is interesting:
>
> and the 1982 remake of 'Citizen Kane'.

Who accepts for best picture? Doesn't the producer get credit?

----- Reply message -----
From: "Michael" <[hidden email]>
Date: Wed, Aug 11, 2010 2:18 pm
Subject: [SHADO] Re: Next Dumb Harlington-Straker Question.
To: <[hidden email]>

Interesting. I went and checked, though, and currently there isn't an Academy Award for producers, so Straker can remain pretty much in the clear.

(I also checked, and BAFTA also doesn't honor producers.)

"Accepting the award on behalf of Harlington-Straker . . . Keith Ford."


Michael

--- In [hidden email], "bruce sherman" <brucesherman@...> wrote:
>
> Reading this made me think of the producers. Who cares about expensive flops? This way he keeps a low profile. Imagine being called onstage at oscars night ? :)
>
> Bruce





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: Someone wrote a short bio of Ed Straker at this site:

<http://ufo.epguides.info/?Role=4380> http://ufo.epguides.info/?Role=4380

I also notice there's no indication of author or any other provenance for
this.



The 'Rebels' of Santo Domingo' is canon - it was mentioned on the series.
The whole idea that the studio made expensive flops comes from Robert
Miall's novelizations. There's nothing onscreen that would indicate that
Harlington-Straker was not doing reasonably well filming commercials, low
budget movies, and unimaginative series.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> Re: Someone wrote a short bio of Ed Straker at this site:
>
> http://ufo.epguides.info/?Role=4380
>
> I also notice there's no indication of author or any other provenance
> for this.

It may have just been transcribed from something previously published...
the "UFO & Space:1999 Book" perhaps? Or "The Complete Book of
Gerry Anderson's UFO"? The extra features on the Carlton UFO DVDs?
An issue of "Century 21" or "FAB" magazine?

Marc

--- In [hidden email], "bruce sherman" <brucesherman@...> wrote:
>
> Who accepts for best picture? Doesn't the producer get credit?  


The person who actually directed the film accepts for best picture. The producer is the person who initially selects the screenplay, and acts as overseer for the entire project. His/her creative input is practically nil (exceptions being people like Howard Hawks, George Pal and Walt Disney).

In fact, given a producer's track record for making bad judgments, it'd be the rare one who was worth the bullets it'd take to shoot him. If you wentthrough a list of many of the most beloved and creative films of the past century, you'd find that quite a number of them had initially been turned down by producers and studio execs as being "uncommercial".


Michael

Remember this bit of dialogue. Henderson walks in on Straker doing some studio business, he signing off on a project to be made. The director (?) says he will make him a film he would be proud of, and he likes how Straker operates, doesn't interfere with any projects.

Bruce
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 6:04 PM
Subject: [SHADO] Re: Next Dumb Harlington-Straker Question.



--- In [hidden email], "bruce sherman" <brucesherman@...> wrote:
>
> Who accepts for best picture? Doesn't the producer get credit?

The person who actually directed the film accepts for best picture. The producer is the person who initially selects the screenplay, and acts as overseer for the entire project. His/her creative input is practically nil (exceptions being people like Howard Hawks, George Pal and Walt Disney).

In fact, given a producer's track record for making bad judgments, it'd be the rare one who was worth the bullets it'd take to shoot him. If you went through a list of many of the most beloved and creative films of the past century, you'd find that quite a number of them had initially been turned down by producers and studio execs as being "uncommercial".

Michael






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I've produced three movies and executive produced two...and have been  
hands-on with just about every aspect of my productions...they are  
very much my pictures as well as the person(s) who directed them (and  
in one case that is also me).

And it is the tradition that the Producer accepts the oscar for best  
picture. Not that I ever expect to have that honor...

John Ellis

On Aug 11, 2010, at 3:04 PM, Michael wrote:



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Michael wrote:
> The person who actually directed the film accepts for best picture.


That's not true. It's the producer.

-------

Michael wrote:
"[The Producer's] creative input is practically nil (exceptions being people like Howard Hawks, George Pal and Walt Disney)."


There are many more producers who have had a crucial influence on the filmsthey make - they just aren't always given the credit. Not least because too many directors are all too willing to take all the credit and the lazier members of the press and critical fraternity unthinkingly parrot the "auteur theory".

------------

Michael wrote:
"If you went through a list of many of the most beloved and creative films of the past century, you'd find that quite a number of them had initially been turned down by producers and studio execs as being "uncommercial"."


Many of the "beloved and creative films" WERE uncommercial especially at the time of release - in which case the studio executive was doing their job.They are not administering artistic grants where the sole criteria may be aesthetic.

Many "beloved and creative films" have been turned down by directors, actors and many other people usually given more slack than producers.

There is a big difference between a "studio exec" who may have the power to"greenlight" a number of films from existing funds and a producer, who almost certainly has no pre-existing finance but who - if they take on a project - may have to spend years trying to put together a house-of-cards of financing from several corners of the world, all the while financing this development out of their own pocket.
A producer may turn down a picture for a number of reasons, not least because it isn't just a case of deciding whether or not to devote a couple of hours to watching a film, it's a matter of whether or not they want to devotemuch of their lives, and their own money, to making a film.
That is a decision no-one makes lightly. It doesn't necessarily mean that they see no potential in a given script but it may not be to their taste, orthey don't feel that they will be able to raise the finance to make that particular project.

Regarding the bad press which producers often receive: It is a major part of the producer's role to make a given film for the amount available to makeit - not necessarily what would be spent on the film in an ideal world. This often entails saying "No" to excesses. This is rarely popular but often makes the difference between the film being completed or not.
It's also worth remembering that anyone with a grievance on a film, and anyone who is looking for someone else to blame for their own shortcomings or the shortcomings of the film, blames the producer and journalists lap it up.

Incidentally, I am not a producer but I have worked with a number of both good and not so good ones.

Regards
John

It may have just been transcribed from something previously published...
the "UFO & Space:1999 Book" perhaps? Or "The Complete Book of
Gerry Anderson's UFO"? The extra features on the Carlton UFO DVDs?
An issue of "Century 21" or "FAB" magazine?



SOME of the info came from Chris Bentley's The Complete Book of Gerry
Anderson's UFO - The list of films and part of Straker's career history.
The part about Straker's family history appears to be fanfiction - unless it
came from Fanderson. I don't have the UFO/Space 1999 book, so I can't check
there.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]