The Liar Project

Friday, July 18th, 2025

The Liar — Investor Brief

Genre: Satirical Drama / Dark Comedy Format: Feature Film Estimated Runtime: 115 minutes Setting: Cambridge University, present day with stylized flashbacks

Logline

A gifted fabulist navigates the absurd pageantry of elite academia, forging identities and truths with ease—until his greatest invention threatens to unravel everything.

Vision

Inspired by Stephen Fry’s audacious debut novel, The Liar is a razor-sharp exploration of deception, identity, and institutional theatre. Through visually rich tableaux and blistering dialogue, the film exposes the surreal similarities between public schools, prisons, and performance art. It celebrates the art of the lie—not as villainy, but as survival, satire, and self-definition.

Posted by admin |

How Relevant is the Past?

Sunday, May 20th, 2012

“Think only of the past for its remembrance gives you pleasure.”

Jane Austen wrote this almost 200 years ago, via her strong-willed protagonist, Elizabeth Bennett. For many modern audiences, the past, rose-tinted with nostalgia, continues to be a source of pleasure…and not just through remakes of ‘Pride and Prejudice’!

The last few years have seen a resurgence in Period Dramas on TV (For more on this, see TheirTV blog.) Much of this may have been spawned by ‘Mad Men’, but since Don Draper hit our screens, we have had Boardwalk Empire (HBO), The Borgias (Showtime), Hell on Wheels (AMC), Spartacus (Starz), as well as Life on Mars (ABC), Swingtown (CBS), Pan Am (ABC) and Playboy (NBC). You’ll notice a common trend, even with the ones I mentioned. When they’re on broadcast networks, period dramas tend to fail. That’s because they generally have narrow appeal. That appeal may well be loyal and highly engaged, which is why cable often proves a better home.

But even on cable, dramas set in the past can often struggle when compared to their present-day counterparts. Let’s compare ‘Mad Men’ to ‘The Walking Dead’, as both shows air on the same network, and both are perceived as big cultural hits.

 

 

 

Posted by admin |

Same Language, Different Humour: Translating American and British Sitcoms

Thursday, February 2nd, 2012

On Friday it was announced that the most successful British comedy of all time, Only Fools & Horses, is to be adapted into an American sitcom by ABC. This classic BBC series began its life back in 1983. Its Christmas specials topped the annual audience ratings charts in 1996 and again in 2001 – the latter garnered a phenomenal 21.3m viewers on BBC1 which represented a staggering 74% audience share. That’s Royal Wedding territory!

Earlier that year, a much smaller sitcom premiered on BBC airwaves – The Office hovered around 2m viewers in its first season, and around 3.5m viewers in its second season, while at its height it managed 6.5m total viewers for the Christmas special in 2003. Given that The Office has been adapted successfully into a long-running sitcom for NBC, based on significantly lower ratings in the UK, how could a network go wrong with Only Fools & Horses? In fact, it seems remarkable that no US network has tried it in all these years. Well – that is, if one were to simply judge by the numbers.

Comedies unfortunately do not translate so literally.

The BBC series Coupling, which initially performed similarly to The Office, and aired on the same UK channel (BBC2) was a notorious failure when adapted for the same US channel (NBC). The Worst Week of My Life (BBC1) reduced down to Worst Week for CBS was a huge disappointment for the top-rated US network. Meanwhile some UK comedies have struggled so much with being adapted that the network in question has decided to drop them at the pilot stage. Fox reportedly tried shooting Absolutely Fabulous on two occasions while Peep Show went to pilot stage both with cable net Spike as well as with Fox.

It’s not just one-way traffic, either. Successful US comedies do not always work in the UK. The most famous example of this was Seinfeld, though many argue that poor scheduling in the UK led to a major lack of awareness. The same cannot, however, be said of current darling, New Girl, which Channel 4 has given plenty of promotion and a solid Friday night slot. I wrote in an earlier blog about how well the show opened for Fox in the US, consistently outperforming Glee and The X Factor in Adults 18-49. The show continues to hold up.

But on Channel 4, the opening episode was without doubt a disappointment, and the second episode dropped over 25% from the series premiere. The most recent transmission (28th Jan) underperformed the channel’s timeslot average in both male and particularly female viewers.

New Girl Audience Share on Channel 4 (UK) 28th Jan, 2012

 

Source: Attentional/BARB (Live + VOSDAL)

Part of the equation here is obviously the difference in the audience profile of Fox compared to Channel 4. Fox is mainstream Adult, whereas Channel 4 is Young Adult and slightly more niche. Many Channel 4 viewers most likely found the show cheesy and unrealistic, while the more mainstream audience on Fox probably found something touching and charming about how the roommates help Jess get over her ex.

So why do the ratings in one market for a comedy not necessarily correlate in the other market, given that both markets speak the same language? Clearly, comedy is a more cultural genre than drama, playing on familiar stereotypes and often reversing our expectations of them. For that to work successfully, the audience has to have a level of familiarity with the culture. Problems emerge when things get too locally specific (e.g. “Two Pints of Lager and a Packet of Crisps” is an embedded part of British pub culture, but the show of the same name would struggle to gain any familiarity within an American audience).

In many ways it’s no surprise that both audiences find different things funny. They are different cultures after all. So what about when the adaptation does work?

Many, many elements go into making an effective adaptation. From a lot of the content analysis we’ve done, I would say the three most important strands that emerge are:

  1. Ensure the premise is universally identifiable.

In the case of Only Fools & Horses, the idea of two blue collar brothers trying to get rich quick is undoubtedly universal.

  1. Localize the characters even if it means changing them.

Finding local versions of Del Boy and Rodney seems like it will be a challenge. What is the U.S. equivalent of cockney working class Londoners? A good example of this element being applied effectively is Michael Scott vs. David Brent in The Office. Once Michael Scott departed from being as unsympathetic as David Brent, and reflected the slightly more upbeat and positive nature of an American boss desperate for popularity, US viewers were able to have more empathy with him. In the UK version, we have empathy with Tim, whose eyes we see David Brent through.

  1. It is generally better when the source of the humour comes from relationships between the characters, rather than snappy/witty dialogue.

When the comedy is reliant upon just the dialogue, there is a greater risk that it will be lost in translation. It is easier to replicate relationships than jokes. For instance, Del Boy and Rodney in Only Fools and Horses are constantly tired of Uncle Albert harping on about the War. This dynamic can be translated easily to the US, with the war being the Vietnam War rather than WW2.

Only Fools &Horses has an amazing archive of comedy scripts for the writing team to take advantage of, and seems a smart move for ABC. Now they just have to find the American equivalent of Del Boy bottling up tap water and calling it “Peckham Spring”!

 

Posted by admin |

‘A Little Place Off The Edgware Road’ Wrapped

Thursday, August 4th, 2011

16/03/2012

How brief that was. Directing is addictive. With only a four-day shoot, wonderful actors included, you feel as if you’ve only just warmed up before it’s over. When I dabbled in acting, a television director told me that he would much rather direct TV than film as with the latter he would only make one film every two years or so, at best. Experiencing the buzz of directing (with only two films under my belt) I wouldn’t have it any other way.

Perhaps that’s why it’s such a buzz for me, as the writing, the planning, and the assembling of cast and crew are all parts of the process. The act of directing is the rather large, succulent cherry on top. And you enjoy it all the more. Then perhaps (for Clint at least) comes the most enjoyable of all – the editing. Ok, I don’t agree with Clint. Directing is the most enjoyable for me as watching take after take is a little like listening to a stuck record, but as the piece comes together there is naturally  yet another buzz, or after-buzz if you will – an echo of the set.

Working with Paul McGann was like watching a master craftsman. Above everything else, he somehow made my protagonist more mysterious, conflicted and generally more ‘interesting’ than I had envisaged from the written word. This is the sort of thing great actors can do when they lift it off the page. I’ve worked with actors before, as an actor – and therefore I haven’t really witnessed the preparation and deliberation from the beginning to end. What’s so impressive with Paul is how easy it looks. He’s my favourite type of actor in the sense that he doesn’t ‘do’ anything.

But there is so much going on underneath, as if a volcano could quite possibly erupt with no warning. There was a lot of pacing once on the set and his focus was remarkable, as if he were the only one in the room and it pervaded the set with an intensity that surely wasn’t there without him, at least with me jumping around like a kid in a sweet shop. Talking things through with him both before and during the shoot demonstrated, to me at least, the sort of relationship I would hope to have with a leading actor on every film. Mind you, it was only four days (the other thing about such a brief shoot – only being able to hear the abridged Withnail stories, the Alien 3 stories, the Paper Mask stories, even the RADA stories. Maybe more during ADR!). Imagine my excitement when it came to the two dialogue-heavy days, one with Paul and Ronald Pickup, the other with Paul and Owen Brenman (during the latter, I had planned on one section to cut into a close-up of Paul, but his presence during the initial master shot was so electrifying it was already as if he WERE in close-up so I slashed the idea).

My next film (a feature) has a similar leading character. Hmmmm…

Tim Hewitt – writer/ director

Posted by admin |

Golden film 2012

Monday, July 18th, 2011

Who will win?

Posted by admin |

Protected: Investor Area

Monday, July 18th, 2011

This content is password-protected. To view it, please enter the password below.

Posted by admin |

Desperately seeking Spielberg

Thursday, July 14th, 2011

5 guys. 2 weeks. 1 goal – to track down an interview with the man they admire most: the elusive Mr. Spielberg. In LA… With no connections and armed only with a Variety ‘who’s who’ this is a fascinating, ‘six degrees of separation’ styled comic romp through the inner workings of Hollywood.

Written and Directed by Tony Hagger & John Marsala

Posted by admin |

Half Term

Thursday, July 14th, 2011

‘HALF TERM’ – 35mm anamorphic, 25mins. Half Term tells the story of Mark, a student whose entire future seems to implode on one week’s nightmare holiday visit to his absent father in remote coastal Cornwall.

Winner of 8 International Awards including First Place at the Rhode Island International Film Festival.

Steven Geller as Mark, Elizabeth Healey as Taren, Sam Plumb as Henry, Jodie Reynolds as Cassie.

Written and Directed by Tony Hagger.

 

Posted by admin |

Pineappleworld/ PDS

Thursday, July 14th, 2011

We originated and created the entertainment documentary ‘Pineapple Dance Studios’ for Sky1 (which we took to them) born out of 3 years of finding the interesting and exceptional characters for the show (including 3 years spent with Louie).

The series followed the lives of teachers, pupils and most importantly the staff (‘Artistic Director’ Louie, Owner Debbie, Laura, Giles, Mark Battershall and the resident celebrated choreographer Paulette Minott, as well as the casting for their own dance troupe) at the famous studios as they attended auditions, rehearsals and performances – it focussed heavily on Louie and blurred the lines between documentary and comedy. It became the hit of 2010.

 

Posted by admin |

Stephen Fry to star in adaption of The Liar

Thursday, May 21st, 2009

By 

Stephen Fry is to take a leading role in the film adaptation of his novel, The Liar, with newcomer Tony Hagger producing and directing.

Sir Ian McKellen and rising young British talent Nicholas Hoult (About a Boy and UK TV series Skins) are also being lined up to appear in the British comedy.

Hoult will play Adrian Healey, a hapless young man who goes to stay with his uncle (Fry) in Salzburg becoming embroiled in murder and mystery.

Hagger, speaking to ScreenDaily in Cannes this week said that the film, with a budget expected between $5.4m – $7.7m (£3.5m-£5m) was looking to go into production next year with filming in the UK, largely around Cambridge and in Austria.

There are several interested parties and talks are taking place with potential partners to secure funding and distribution. Fry will be executive producer on the film of his 1991 novel.

The screenplay is being written by Tony and Zak Shaikh, who has worked on US comedies including Headcase.

Hagger is a graduate of the London Film School, and won awards at several international shorts festivals for his 2006 film Half Term.

Posted by admin |