I called this group as I am interested in the relationships between real characters and stories that we dramatise.
Hannah (a documentary producer) said she had listened to a discussion hosted by Fiona Bruce on LBC in which Fiona seemed to believe that the film makers didn't meet the aims they had set for the film about trying to prevent this happening again. The film is half an hour long and uses transcripts from the boys.
Pam suggests that we don't have the same problem in the theatre world with verbatim theatre for example and didn't believe there were any similar cases.. There is more interaction with the public at theatre productions and the show can be changed from one night to the next whereas a film is released after 6months or more - the filmmakers will have moved on to their next project. There is a difference between theatre and film.Theatre makers do it for love and rarely get paid much (if anything) and there is not the same 'greed' factor.

There is a greater sense of ownership and responsibility from theatre makers. With film there is often the ‘American’ spin with lawyers, camera, editing, execs etc…
A theatre piece moves the opportunity to discuss in the community.
Theatre is a living organism and can adapt night to night. With film it is ‘fixed in stone’ long before its release. Hannah is working on a documentary “Ill Actually” for BBC 4 (March) with ethical/moral issues but the character is anonymised (because the contributor is vulnerable) and they are avoiding harm to that person. They also have to follow BBC guidelines and policies.

Pam thought that theatre (sometimes/often not funded) doesn’t have morality problem in the same way. Theatre groups wanted to put on performances linked with Grenfell but were not part of the community (shows made elsewhere) and were turned down for the Dare Festival. So they weren’t felt to ‘add value’.

Theatre has a voice wheras executives in film industry are often aloof and feel they can do anything. The filmmakers are using it to further their careers (not serving the community or helping anyone). Boosting the directors profile. Distance and time are different for film.

Research led true stories are fascinating. If the film helped to prevent the crime happening again it would be valuable.

A production called “Mary’s Babies” was about Mary B who set up a fertility clinic which created huge ethical issues. It was found in later years that many of the babies born were from her husband’s sperm and many of the children met and were not aware that they were hal brothers and sisters. In 2007 one of the boys contacted the production team immediately and offered to be DNA tested for others to find out if they were sibling related and part of the “Brood” . In the production the names of the children were made fictional and the Theatre group had mixed repsonses from the actual offspring who were invited to discuss the project. One of those interviewed was against the production and din’t want them to use their life and story but others helped the producers. Because it was fictionalised it was less ‘potent’ ethically. Could any of these people take the production teams to court? Because of ‘emotional damage’. Perhaps not. What do you think?