Originally Posted by CELT1987:
“Tom started to be difficult to work with after Hinchcliffe left. When Williams took over, Baker wanted more control over scripts. He also didn't like the character of Leela. If he didn't like a script, he would chuck it over the room. When Adams took over as script editor, the increase in humour was more evident in season 17. When JNT took over, he wanted to reign Tom in, to be more serious. He also fell out with Lalla Ward on set after they got married. He was difficult to work with at that time.”
His on-set arguments with Lalla Ward actually happened
before they got married! (although they were in a relationship). Apparently their subsequent announcement that they were getting married stunned everybody who'd seen their on-set behaviour.
There's an interesting section in the Horror of Fang Rock DVD commentary where Louise Jameson highlights a scene which was a turning point in her relationship with Tom. She insisted that a scene be done in the way they had rehearsed it, despite Tom's consistent refusal to do so. Eventually she got her way and their relationship started to take a turn for the better, so much so that by the end of her time in the programme they weren't getting on as badly as before.
If there's anything that can be taken from this story, it would seem to be that, as happens with many people of a controlling (or, some may say, bullying) nature, all it takes is for someone else to stand up to them to knock them down a peg or two. Obviously, by this point Tom's position as the star of the show was so great that there probably weren't so many people who felt they were able to stand up to him so good for Louise for doing so.
Tom's on record as saying he regrets the way he behaved during this period and it should go without saying that using one's position to throw one's weight about and belittle others is reprehensible (and, sadly, something which still occurs in many workplaces today) but to a certain extent much of Tom's behaviour (throwing scripts away, arguing with directors) could be seen as a measure of how responsibly he took the role and how much he cared about the programme. Whether his vision of the programme, were it to have fully been realised (talking cabbages, anyone?), would necessarily have been a good thing is another matter entirely!
Last edited by brouhaha : 27-01-2015 at 17:24