Producing Pair Beams Over Emmy Bids

“It is one of those wonderful, rare relationships when people are really capable of being soul mates for each other,” mused Tony Thomas. “It’s not something you usually see on television.”

When he made that comment in a recent interview, Thomas was talking about “Beauty and the Beast,” the CBS fantasy-drama on which he serves as executive producer with his partner, Paul Junger Witt. Thomas referred to the show’s offbeat romance between Catherine, an idealistic young attorney, and her unusual boyfriend--a hairy but noble-hearted beast named Vincent who lives underground in the New York sewer system.

But Thomas and Witt also have a rare relationship that is not something you usually see in television. Along with producing the drama “Beauty and the Beast,” they are executive producers of the popular NBC comedy “The Golden Girls.” And each of those shows received a whopping 12 nominations in this year’s Emmy Award competition, to be televised by Fox Broadcasting on Sunday night.

For the second year in a row, NBC’s “L.A. Law,” the story of a sleek ensemble of Los Angeles attorneys in a prosperous legal firm, garnered the most nighttime Emmy Award nominations (19) of any show in the competition. But “Beauty and the Beast” and “Golden Girls” tied for second place with 12 each--and with the total of 24, Witt and Thomas netted the most nominations of any producing entity this year.

Production credits get a little confusing: For the record, “Golden Girls,” created by Susan Harris, Witt’s wife, is a Witt/Thomas/Harris Production. “Beauty and the Beast,” created by the show’s producer, Ron Koslow, is produced by Ron Koslow Films and Witt/Thomas Productions in association with Republic Pictures.

Any way you write the credits, however, Witt and Thomas are two guys with 24 Emmy nominations. Although “Golden Girls” has already won numerous Emmys--including the outstanding comedy series award in 1986 and 1987--the team has high hopes that a few Emmys for “Beauty and the Beast” might draw needed attention to this first-year show, which consistently wins its 8 p.m. Friday time slot in the Nielsen ratings but has never managed to break into the top 20 among prime-time shows.

“ ‘Beauty and the Beast’ can use the recognition,” Witt acknowledged in a conversation at Witt/Thomas’ Hollywood headquarters. “Getting the nominations has been a great deal of recognition anyway, but if we can cop a couple of Emmys, I think it would be good for the show.”

Emmys have helped create hits out of shows with marginal ratings, Thomas added.

“It was a big shot in the arm for ‘All in the Family,’ it was a big shot in the arm for ‘Hill Street Blues,’ ” he said. “It’s nice when they promote a show as ‘The Emmy-Award-winning so-and-so.’ ”

Witt and Thomas believe that “Beauty and the Beast” has suffered because of its time slot. “I think our (target) audience is not home on Friday nights at 8,” Witt lamented. “Enough of them are willing to stay home and watch that we took the time slot last year, but Friday nights traditionally pull low numbers.”

Regardless of time slots and ratings, Witt and Thomas, who have collaborated on various TV projects since 1972, say the key to their success in both comedy and drama has been to nurture good shows that break the mold--regardless of the odds against success for one show about four women over 55 and another about unrequited love in a Manhattan sewer.

“There’s timing, there’s luck and there’s a desire to try to do good shows,” Witt said. “If there is a particular secret to our success, it would be aiming for high quality and developing shows in small numbers so we can really pay attention to the development of the shows as they get on the air--rather than developing a whole slew of ideas and hoping that some of them go through, like salmon swimming upstream.” Thomas, the son of Danny Thomas, said he followed his father into television “because there’s no business like it. It’s terrific to be able to entertain on that level, to be able to appeal to that many people on that level.

“We were watching a (Friday) taping of ‘Golden Girls,’ and something that was particularly funny got a major laugh. And we thought, ‘This is why we do this: to create something on Monday--and on Friday, to get the laugh.’ ”

The team, who also produced “Soap,” “Benson” and the short-lived “Hail to the Chief” and “It Takes Two,” has one syndicated series, “It’s a Living,” currently on the air, and a new NBC series, “Empty Nest,” set to debut Oct. 8.

Projects in development include an untitled action-adventure hour which will probably be filmed abroad for fall of 1989. “I think it will be real explosive, and a big hit if it makes it,” Witt said mysteriously.

Like “The Golden Girls,” which examines the problems facing middle-aged and older women rather than those of the yuppie crowd, Witt and Thomas expect “Empty Nest,” the story of a widower (Richard Mulligan) with grown children, to help change the image of older people.

“Parents (of adults) in sitcoms have become comedy conventions: They become the children of their children,” Witt said. “People don’t age that quickly--people are young and vital and sexual, and that’s what the series is all about.

“It’s about redefining relationships between parents and adult children. You still have the responsibility, but none of the authority.”

Witt and Thomas do not mind that this year’s Emmy competition will be stiffer because cable shows are included, or that “The Golden Girls” competition in the comedy category has expanded to embrace shows such as CBS’ “Frank’s Place,” which blend comedy and drama without benefit of a laugh track to tell audiences when or whether to laugh.

“I think it’s more interesting this year,” Witt said. “Cable is television; to exclude it is ludicrous. All television should be judged as television, no matter what the venue.

“I also think it pushes everyone to work harder. If cable can, by the nature of the beast, stretch the boundaries of television and still get popular approval, it makes it easier for us to get (innovative) material on network television. Ironically, the inability of the networks to dominate anymore is stretching their creativity.

“There are the megahits, the ‘Cosbys,’ and I suppose there always will be,” Witt continued. “But there is a recognition that you can reach a smaller segment of the audience and still stay on television, and I think that creates better television. A lot of creative doors are opening.”