I asked this in Cafe but no one knew the anwser. So I will ask it here in hopes to finding the right response.
I just watched the show Charmed and noticed that Alyssa Milano and Holly Marie Combs were “Producers” of the show (as well as starring in it.) My question is What is the role of a Producer of a show? Is it financial backing only? Do they direct? What does a Producer do?
The Producer (or Producers) provides the capital necessary to make the show, and is therefore the show’s ultimate boss. He or she is in charge of procuring studio space, sets, equipment, actors, directors and crew, and so on.
I guess the producer would be analogous to the publisher of a magazine. The director would be like the editor, and the production designer and cinematographer would be the art director.
Sometimes it’s a lot more complicated than that. Sometimes not.
IMHO:
Basically, the producer’s role can be whatever it agreed upon- it’s the title that counts. It’s also important to note that it differs from feature films to TV.
The classic role of the producer in movies is that he’s the one who got the project made- optioned the book or screenplay, set up the pitches, developed a relationship with the writer, took it to studios, and moved it along through development. Basically, their career success depends on a project actually getting made, which is rarer than may seem. In return, they’ll get a producer’s fee from the studio and an opportunity at profit participation.
But they may have parntered with a financing company to produce it, or two companies may share the development or attachment processes, or a star might require a producer credit to be in the movie. With the credit comes much more weight as far as script changes, creative control, crew assembly, etc.
The people with "producer’ title, and there are usually between 1 and 4 nowadays, are the ones eligible for the Best Picture Oscar. But there are similar titles. On a feature film, the person who actually runs the set of the film- hires below-the-line crew, oversees scheduling, maintains the budget, etc- is the LINE Producer, and in some cases they may get credit in the opening titles as a Co-Producer (different from a coproducer, which means one is a Producer with other names. It can get confusing.)
The EXECUTIVE PRODUCER may be the money guy, a financier, a banker, a welathy investor, a person who owns the company where the funds are coming from, or the person who owns the rights but didn’t get the film set up. Or sometimes the Executive producer is an independent producer with a lot of experience overseeing a picture on a day-to-day basis- a really really good line producer- that the studio may hire, well after script development, to make sure a film goes smoothly.
The Co-Executive Producer can be another money guy, or maybe an important contact that brought major players together, or a manager or packager who played a major part in FINDING the financing for a film.
The Associate Producer is an increasingly throwaway title. Could be bestowed on someone who worked their ass off but is still making his way up and not really a producer yet- or could be given to the executive producer’s buddy, or the author of the original novel, etc.
On a TV show, the Producers usually have the distinction of being writers or creators of the show. The Executive Producer, who may or may not be one of these people, is the person in charge of getting each episode done- the “showrunner” (like a line producer in film.)
Part of the reason for the huge difference is that a film may be indevelopment for years where the only work done on it is transfers of rights, developing script and attracting money, cast, crew and interest. On a television show, the creators pitch it, the network might like it and order a pilot, and from then on- especially if it actually gets picked up- the bulk of the work may be an indefinite period of writing and shooting new product every week.
Now I’ve throughly confused myself- time for someone to come in and correct me…
I don’t blame you for being confused. I recently saw an old MGM movie with a lot of big stars and obviously expensive production features which involved a lot of MGM’s assets. During the credits there was one line: Producer - Joe Pasternak.
I also say an episode of Matlock and the credits for just the various Producers took 2 minutes to go by. Well, I do exaggerate some, but not much.
I realise that the studio system was different that today’s relatively independent production system, but haven’t things gone to extremes?
Hey Drew 17, I kind of like the way your post looks like a SCREENPLAY. Nice work.
Thanks!
but in retrospect, I didn’t really answer the TV question at all.
Alyssa and Holly’s credits on the show in no way indicate their participation in the show’s creation or writing. They may have only agreed to star if they got this credit and the influence that comes with it, or they may have scored it during renegotiation in exchange for returning to do more episodes. However, perhaps they do have their own production company or companies that helped put the shows together as starring vehicles.
A star often has the power to wrangle whatever credit they want- and often their managers do too. Power managers often get credit as executive producers of their clients’ films. As they’re not regulated by the same employment laws that AGENTS are, they can legally do this- which is why so many agents turn manager after putting their time in and building relationships.
Trivia: the Olsen twins were the youngest to get producer credits (on full house.)
I thought producers were (responsible mind you…I said responsible) for the entire production actually happening: trailers for the stars…studios for the scenes…caterers to feed the people…stars on the door…If they didn’t get the film for the camera, a director couldn’t direct. If the star was booked on the wrong flight…they couldn’t shoot that day. I heard a guy on the radio (a now famous director) say that he only produced one time and would never do it again.
Now, that said, producers hire people\companies to do the actual logistics of everything listed above. But they are responsible and accountable.
Somewhere, there is a really in depth and fascinating article on the relationships between/responsiblity of directors and producers. IIRC there is significant overlap and blurring of roles. Much depends on money and star status. I am sure someone originally linked to it on here; hopefully they will again.