Why We Had to Wait 10 Years for the Wolf Hall Sequel

by

2015 saw Wolf Hall emerge as one of the year’s most remarkable artistic achievements. This BBC-PBS adaptation of Hilary Mantel’s Booker Prize-winning novels not only garnered massive viewership in both Britain and America, but also earned nearly universal critical praise, a Peabody Award, Golden Globe and BAFTA awards for Best Limited Series, and no fewer than eight Emmy nominations. To some, it might seem unexpected that a six-hour historical drama about the political intrigues of Thomas Cromwell and Henry VIII in 16th-century England would become such a massive hit — and pave the way for an equally successful sequel, The Mirror and the Light, premiering this Sunday on Masterpiece. However, for Wolf Hall executive producer (and former HBO Films head) Colin Callender, the show’s success was simply history repeating itself.

1983 saw British-born Callender seated among the crowd at the Pasadena Civic Auditorium for the 35th Emmy Awards, hosted by Joan Rivers and Eddie Murphy. The nomination for his adaptation of Nicholas Nickleby, which had aired in syndication across the U.S., was up against two popular ABC series. As the night wore on, every other nomination seemed to be defeated. So when it came to Best Miniseries, Callender had already resigned himself to the idea that either The Winds of War or The Thorn Birds starring Richard Chamberlain would take the prize. But astonishingly, against all expectations, Nickleby emerged victorious. “When they announced the winner, I was frozen in my seat,” Callender recalls. “My companion jabbed me and said, ‘They’ve just mentioned your name.’ I looked up in disbelief, still not fully realizing that we had won.” It was a surprising turn of events.

As a devoted cinephile, I can’t help but reflect on how Nickleby’s success paved the way for Christopher Callender’s five-decade (and still counting) journey in the entertainment industry. This path was marked by finding triumph in unanticipated locales, embracing evolving business structures, and creating prestige programming that often fell short of being “commercial” enough in the eyes of others.

Fast forward just three years after my memorable evening in Pasadena, I swapped London for New York to take charge of HBO Showcase, a freshly formed East Coast film division that, in 1990, brought HBO its first Emmy wins in the drama category. This was merely the beginning of an extraordinary two-decade tenure where I created movies and miniseries under various HBO banners during the network’s “It’s Not TV — It’s HBO” era.

As a devoted cinephile, I’ve always been in awe of the remarkable work done by Callender during his tenure at the company. His projects, such as “Angels in America”, “Elizabeth I”, “Grey Gardens”, “John Adams”, and “Temple Grandin” to name a few, garnered an astounding 496 Emmy nominations and took home no less than 140 awards. It’s worth noting that before Netflix and Amazon started receiving Oscar nods, HBO under Callender was already producing films for the big screen that not only won accolades but also managed to secure awards (and in some cases, impressive box-office success), including “My Big Fat Greek Wedding”, “Real Women Have Curves”, and even an Oscar winner like “Pan’s Labyrinth”, a result of a joint venture with New Line Cinema.

Following his departure from HBO in late 2008, Callender ventured back to his production origins, founding Playground Entertainment in 2012. With branches in New York and London, the company has been deeply engaged in film development and has made significant strides in theater (notably “Dear Evan Hansen,” “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child”).

Reminiscent of the early stages of Callender’s career, Playground, under the leadership of co-managing directors Scott Huff and David Stern for day-to-day operations, has seen its greatest achievements by partnering U.S. and UK networks for television collaborations. Apart from “Wolf Hall,” Playground is also the producer of the popular PBS–Channel 5 series “All Creatures Great and Small,” which recently wrapped season five and has been renewed for a sixth. In total, the company has produced over 120 hours of television in the past dozen years, including “The White Queen” and modern adaptations of “Little Women,” “King Lear,” and “Dangerous Liaisons.” Future projects include a fresh take on the classic detective series “Maigret” for PBS and Playground’s first venture into more comedic content with Chris O’Dowd’s creation, “Small Town, Big Story.”

Callender’s deep-seated enthusiasm for producing distinctive British dramas, rooted in the U.K., continues to be his primary focus. This passion is even more intense now as the U.K. television industry faces mounting challenges due to streaming platforms favoring globally appealing content over traditional British stories like those nurtured by the BBC and Channel 4. Callender attributes his success with “Nickleby” over 40 years ago to its authentic British feel, in contrast to Americanized adaptations of U.K. society or global-oriented British series such as “The Crown.” He explained that a nine-hour Dickens show triumphing against big-budget, mainstream miniseries demonstrated the unique role British programming plays in the U.S.: it complements rather than competes with mainstream content, offering viewers something distinct from the norm. During our recent extensive, hour-long conversation, Callender emphasized this point.

As a movie reviewer looking forward to the upcoming release of “Wolf Hall: The Mirror and the Light,” I’m eager to discuss both the past success and the long wait for this sequel. Initially, it took a decade for this follow-up due to several factors. Firstly, coordinating schedules was crucial as we aimed to reunite as many cast members as possible, which proved challenging given everyone’s busy schedules.

Secondly, the pandemic and the time it took author Hilary Mantel to write the book also played significant roles in the delay. Once the book was released in 2020, adapting it for screen took additional time.

The most formidable hurdle, however, was the escalating production costs in the U.K., which increased exponentially over the past ten years. Unfortunately, the fees that BBC and other British broadcasters pay haven’t risen at the same pace, making it a tough financial challenge to produce this highly anticipated sequel.

We were incredibly fortunate to have the BBC and Masterpiece on board with our project. In both instances, they significantly increased their support to help us bring it to fruition. However, the process was demanding. In essence, Wolf Hall represents the hurdles that British producers encounter today when producing premium drama primarily intended for a UK audience. The costs have escalated, yet the license fees paid by broadcasters haven’t followed suit. Moreover, finding U.S. co-production partners for specific types of English dramas is tough.

As a movie enthusiast, let me share my perspective on the challenges we faced when organizing the production schedule. Instead of traditional studio sets, we were filming entirely on location – authentic Tudor structures that are part of the National Trust. However, these sites are popular tourist attractions, which meant scheduling was limited to off-peak seasons to minimize disruptions. This constraint narrowed our options significantly, as we could only shoot during specific times like spring, late fall, and early winter when fewer people were visiting.

The unfortunate passing of Hilary Mantel before filming began added a significant level of responsibility to our project, as we aimed to create a show worthy of her work and something she would have appreciated. Peter Kosminsky, the director, and Peter Straughan, the writer, had spent considerable time with Hilary discussing the book and her storytelling approach while she was still alive. Additionally, they had extensive email correspondence with her. Therefore, when she passed away, both Peters felt that they had a clear understanding of what Hilary intended for the book, which made our task even more poignant.

One advantage of filming Wolf Hall ten years later is that modern digital cameras now capture images much more effectively in low light conditions, which was an issue for some viewers with the original series due to its use of natural lighting. For The Mirror and the Light, care has been taken to ensure that crucial details are always visible on screen, while still utilizing light and darkness as part of the visual style. I believe viewers will find the show visually appealing this time around without encountering the problems some had with the first installment.

In the last ten years since “Wolf Hall” premiered, streaming services have significantly increased the availability of British content in the U.S., either through platforms like Acorn TV, BritBox, or original content on giants such as Netflix and Amazon Prime Video. However, for quite some time now, concerns have been raised that streaming poses a risk to U.K. production companies. You recently expressed this concern to the U.K. Parliament by stating that streamers “seek to utilize British talent in creating American programming,” which makes it challenging to finance shows intended primarily for British audiences. Similar apprehensions have been shared by other producers. Could you elaborate further on your reasons for worry?

In order to maintain a diverse and vibrant television landscape, it’s crucial that various broadcasters, platforms, and cable companies coexist and complement one another. To ensure the health and prosperity of the British television industry, it is essential that public-service broadcasters are well-funded and free to produce the shows they deem fit. While I admire the contributions streamers have made by funding numerous British productions, their focus on American content could potentially jeopardize the financing of shows tailored for British audiences.

The remarkable skills displayed in British TV shows – from writing and directing to acting – have been honed within the unique environment of the British television industry, a blend of public service broadcasting funded by a license fee and commercial advertising. As the global media landscape evolves, it’s crucial to devise a funding model that ensures the longevity of the BBC and Channel 4 in this competitive market. These broadcasters produce content that isn’t typically found on streaming platforms, catering predominantly to British audiences. If these shows were absent, I believe the TV landscape, not just in the UK but also in the U.S., would be impoverished.

Netflix seems to prioritize making its top British shows appealing globally as well as for the UK audience. A show like Baby Reindeer, though British-made, has universal themes, but it appears you’re suggesting there should be more British productions that aren’t explicitly engineered for global appeal, even if they eventually achieve it.

What you’re emphasizing is that many successful British dramas in America have been primarily created for the British audience first and foremost, being very specific to their time and place within the UK. This isn’t limited to dramas; comedies and music genres like Monty Python, The Beatles, Benny Hill, Upstairs Downstairs, Downton Abbey, and even my Nicholas Nickleby have all been quintessentially British works that have done exceptionally well in the US and beyond, yet they were not specifically made for these markets.

In essence, you believe in the model of creating content for a specific audience (in this case, British) and then having it succeed globally rather than designing content specifically for an international market. This is what we’ve aimed to do with Playground: discover opportunities and deliver programming that may not be commissioned otherwise.

Is it likely that the original “Wolf Hall” would receive funding for production by BBC and PBS in 2025? Could they afford to invest the necessary resources into it? This could be rephrased as: Given today’s costs, would “Wolf Hall” be produced in 2025, considering the fact that when it was first made, Mark Rylance, who was a renowned theater actor at the time but not yet established in Hollywood, was cast? If a lesser-known actor were the lead today and we tried to finance it, it would be quite challenging.

Peter Kosminsky, your director on Wolf Hall, has proposed a 5% levy on U.K. subscriptions to American streaming services, with the intention of using this money to help the BBC and other broadcasters continue producing the same amount of high-end UK dramas they have in the past. Do you support this idea?

This kind of financial arrangement is common throughout Europe, with around 15 or 16 countries (I’m not sure of the exact number) having something similar set up. It is true that there are numerous dramas the BBC wishes to produce but cannot fund. If this levy could assist in funding these shows without negatively impacting the streaming services, I believe it would be a positive move.

It appears as though your company, Playground, has recently expanded the scope of its productions beyond traditional period dramas like “Wolf Hall” and “All Creatures.” This shift seems intentional, aimed at diversifying the portfolio. For instance, “The Undeclared War” for Channel 4 and Peacock is contemporary, as is your adaptation of “Maigret,” the series version of “Inspector Lynley,” and “Small Town, Big Story.” In fact, the latter even ventures into comedy territory, being classified as a comedy drama. So, yes, there was indeed a conscious effort to broaden the types of projects we’ve been working on… Despite the challenges that exist, we have also sought out opportunities, believing that they can be found and utilized.

Reflecting on my long-standing career in television production, I’ve come to realize that adaptability has been key to my success. In 1978, our venture, Primetime, marked a significant shift in the U.K.’s TV landscape. This was Channel 4’s very first independent drama, as prior to this, all productions were either owned by the BBC or ITV and made in-house.

Our innovative approach involved acquiring books, developing them into series, selling them to various international territories beforehand, and then negotiating with the BBC and ITV for production rights elsewhere in the world. In essence, we financed and owned the shows globally, while they handled the production. With Nicholas Nickleby, this strategy proved fruitful as we were able to secure pre-sales in the U.S. and Germany before approaching Channel 4. This unique approach not only reduced their financial risk but also revolutionized the British television industry at large.

During your tenure at HBO in the mid-80s, you played a significant role in revolutionizing the industry. Upon joining the company, it was on the brink of transforming television as we knew it. By 2003, with productions like “Angels in America” featuring Al Pacino, Meryl Streep, and Emma Thompson, directed by Mike Nichols, and Gus Van Sant’s Palme d’Or-winning film “Elephant,” HBO had firmly established itself as a major player. We were instrumental in attracting movie stars and directors such as John Frankenheimer, Norman Jewison, and Sidney Lumet to work with us when the studios had retreated from producing big dramas. Essentially, we took on the responsibility of creating high-quality films that rivaled those released in theaters through HBO Films.

Some people argue that movies from streaming platforms aren’t as good as those released in theaters. However, I believe that if a film has a strong script and talented actors, it shouldn’t matter where it’s shown. But, for the audience to watch it, the movie needs to be marketed effectively so they know it exists. In the past, HBO films like Elephant were first released in theaters, but now, with so much content available, streamers seem to rely on viewers discovering shows by themselves.

Indeed, quality matters, much like how HBO used to air movies on Saturdays or Sundays with occasional original releases every four to six weeks. The build-up around these special broadcasts was immense, and we, the audience, knew they were something significant. That’s the distinction, isn’t it?

It seems that you’re suggesting that spending large amounts of money doesn’t necessarily lead to the creation of high-quality television. Shows like “All Creatures Great and Small” have gained immense popularity with minimal budget compared to other big streaming series. Furthermore, shows such as “Baby Reindeer” and even “Fleabag” didn’t rely on their budgets for their success. Therefore, I don’t believe there’s any direct link between the amount of money invested in a show and its overall success.

As a creator and producer, I firmly believe that the cornerstone of exceptional television lies in meticulous development. In my past experience at HBO, our success was largely due to our proficiency in nurturing shows with imaginative minds. Similarly, at Playground, I take pride in our ability to tap into the distinct characteristics of the original content and translate them vividly onto the screen. Our dramas are not only enriched by these unique qualities but also deeply rooted in the intriguing ideas that initially drew us to the IP.

We’ve approached each production, including “All Creatures,” “Wolf Hall,” “Maigret,” and notably “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child” on stage, with great care and attention to detail. While they are quite distinct, they all share a common thread – meticulous development. There’s a wealth of quality programming on television today, but I firmly believe that this careful approach is at the heart of truly exceptional television.

To wrap up, let me pose a question about “All Creatures Great and Small.” Isn’t it fascinating how deeply this series resonates with U.S. viewers? Given its older British origins, one wouldn’t usually expect such a large fanbase among the under-35 demographic in America for PBS shows. However, I believe the show captivates audiences due to the authenticity and relatability of its characters and stories.

The main characters are young professionals or individuals starting out in life, grappling with everyday challenges just like many of us. The series is deeply honest, human, and it focuses on the small, everyday moments that we can all relate to. These aspects likely contribute to its enduring appeal across different age groups.

In the first season’s Christmas special, Mrs. Hall, who had attended church on Christmas Eve, feels the absence of her son deeply and starts crying. Later, Siegfried enters the church and sits next to her, noticing her tears. He gently places his hand on hers. This small, heartfelt gesture held immense depth – a testament to empathy, fellowship, and kindness towards others. I believe that the series is filled with such moments, which resonate with us all due to their deep human connection. It’s this profound humanity that I think touches people deeply.

As a film enthusiast, I can’t predict an exact end date for this series. To be honest, as long as we can consistently produce high-quality episodes that delve deeper into the characters and their stories, I see it running for quite some time. Each season has built upon its predecessor, exploring new depths of our characters’ struggles and challenges. So far, we haven’t reached a point where we’re repeating ourselves, which gives me hope that there’s still a lot more to reveal.

Read More

2025-03-21 15:56