INews on Ghostwatch: the BBC mockumentary still haunting viewers after 25 years

[froodle]

Ghostwatch director Lesley Manning and screenwriter Stephen Volk recall how they created the cult show, and how it has gone on to inspire a new generation of fans and filmmakers

“It felt like we were in the middle of a car crash. I didn’t expect it at all.”

Director Lesley Manning is talking about the reaction to Ghostwatch, the infamous BBC Halloween special hosted by Sir Michael Parkinson, and broadcast in 1992.

It terrified a generation and caused controversy in the tabloid press. Twenty-five years on, the impact of the ground-breaking fake documentary still lingers.

‘It wasn’t conceived as a prank’

Broadcast at 9.25pm, right after Noel’s House Party, The Generation Game and Casualty, 11 million people tuned in to watch Ghostwatch on 31st October, 1992.

Presented as a live paranormal investigation by BBC personalities including Parkinson, Craig Charles and Sarah Greene, and featuring phone-ins from viewers, the show billed itself as a live transmission from an apparently ordinary house in Northolt.

A house troubled by a malevolent, ghostly presence known as Pipes.

It was, of course, entirely fictional.

Ghostwatch was screened seven years before 1999’s The Blair Witch Project

But that didn’t stop Ghostwatch causing panicked phone calls from BBC viewers, who believed the on-screen events were really happening. There were subsequent claims of post-traumatic stress.

Despite viewers being taken in by the apparent authenticity of the show, it was always intended by its creators to be a drama rather than a prank.

“Ghostwatch began as a conventional drama about a ghost hunter at a modern haunted house,” says screenwriter Stephen Volk.

“It involved a bit of pulling the wool over the eyes. But it wasn’t about pulling a fast one.”

Neither the writer nor director anticipated the intensity of the audience response.

“I thought people might be taken in for about 10 minutes,” admits Volk. “But there was a really wide range of reactions. Some people didn’t believe any of it, and some people believed the whole lot right to the end.”

“I think it would have turned out very differently if in any way I thought we were having a laugh,” notes Manning. “It was all about authenticity.”

Breaking new ground

The show used a variety of techniques that came a decade before constructed reality TV series such as Most Haunted.

It was also screened seven years before 1999’s The Blair Witch Project.

Having a recognisable presenter in the studio to guide viewers through the action was important to Volk, though he didn’t always envisage it would be Parkinson.

“We always wanted real presenters. One version [of the script] had David Dimbleby, and Selena Scott as the person in the house. Or Nick Ross from Crimewatch, and Anneka Rice. Just to be playful and keep the writer and director amused while they were reading it.”

Manning worked with casting director Michelle Guish to entice the final stars on board.

“Sarah Greene was completely willing and really got it. But I do remember the lunch with Michael Parkinson where we had to discuss it. It was nerve-wracking for me at the time, as a young director. But he got the conceit as well.”

As well as using well-known and trusted presenters, the team employed various other techniques to heighten the realism.

“When we were making it we were breaking new ground all the time,” says Manning.

“The infrared camera had just been used in the first Gulf War, so we asked the news department if we could borrow it. And I got terribly excited about a vox pop who didn’t want to be seen, and we’d just got pixelation so we pixelated his face. We were exploring all the time.

“All those devices that we now know from television language, that’s what gives the film its strength,” adds Volk.

Taking the safety net away

Handheld cameras and canny editing contributed to a burgeoning sense of dread. It fooled even those who were aware it was scripted.

“I mentioned to a friend that this thing I had written was on next Saturday night,” recalls Volk. “After it had gone out she said, ‘I thought it was real’.

“I said, ‘what do you mean? I told you I’d written it’. And she said ‘yes, but when I saw Michael Parkinson I thought you must’ve got it wrong’.”

Modern audiences can still find themselves affected by what they see.

“When we show it now on a big screen with an audience that knows what to expect… they begin by tittering and feeling quite smug,” says Volk.

“But after a while they start to go quiet.

“We had a very ordinary council house with ordinary furnishings in a street that everyone can recognise.”

“The foundation of the story is basic horror. Everything you think is your safety net is taken away. The safety of family, of science, of religion, everything is taken away – even the safety of the announcer in the studio.

“The audience are complicit in the drama, because on Halloween night they want to see something happen. So even though they’re watching kids being traumatised and hysterical, there’s part of them that thinks ‘I’d like to see a ghost tonight’.

“All that is going on underneath and sucking you in. But on the surface is that everyday authenticity of early evening TV that is very benign.”

Lingering long shots

Manning drew influences from thrillers and the horror genre when directing Ghostwatch.

“There were two elements I remember really respecting about horror,” she says. “One was that the more ordinary, the better. In terms of location, we had a very ordinary council house with ordinary furnishings in a street that everyone can recognise.

“And the other aspect was that I loved a good horror until I saw the ghost. Then I would marvel at the make-up and story, but I was no longer scared. So for me it had to be ever present but never really seen.”

Relying on fleeting glimpses, so that the audience were unsure if they had seen something or not, built up an unsettling and eerie atmosphere which lingered long after the show had finished.

“A lot of horror relies on swift editing these days,” points out Volk. “But swift editing can take you out of a really creepy moment.

“Long shots that linger can be more unnerving than quick cutting. You start to look for things in the frame and feel a bit edgy.”

A tabloid storm and a lasting legacy

“We never thought we’d be talking about Ghostwatch 25 years later,” admits Volk. “It wasn’t a series, and it didn’t get high-profile publicity. It was just a 90-minute show.”

But it swiftly gained notoriety soon after broadcast, thanks to an alleged 30,000 calls to the BBC from worried viewers.

And then there was the tabloid backlash.

“After it came out the reaction was extraordinary,” says Manning.

“We got a flurry of attacks in the tabloid press,” recalls Volk. “Cages were rattled, unfortunately. People were shaking their fists and saying heads must roll. And then the BBC kind of battened down the hatches and refused to show it or mention it or discuss it.

“It was only when the DVD came 10 years later out that we could do the commentary and explain our motives. That it was supposed to be a genuine drama, a ghost story, and that it was also about the way the media tackled things, and about trust.”

Though the show has never been broadcast again on the BBC, the subsequent DVD release and big-screen showings have brought the show to a new audience, as well as reminding original fans what they were so scared of.

“Even though people often said they were terrified and couldn’t sleep for a week, they still say they think it’s one of the best things they’ve seen on the BBC and it’s made them want to make horror films of their own,” says Volk.

“The fact that it’s made people want to get into the genre and make their own films is the best praise you can have.”

No joke, my brother and I legit thought Sarah Greene had died for like, years afterwards.