|
Post by Peter Chadwick on Jun 25, 2007 10:11:39 GMT
Does 'The Caves of Steel (1964) still exist in its entirety? The clip shown on BBC4's 'Machine Men' looked interesting. Plus, anything with Peter Cushing is worth a look.
|
|
|
Post by LanceM on Jun 25, 2007 12:20:58 GMT
Unfortunately, this play is absent in its entirety now. There exist varrious clips which still exist, some model promo film effects, and the long assasination sceen at the very start of the story. This is one story I would very much like to see recovered, here's hoping for Missing Belived Wiped or Raiders Of The Lost Archive.
Lance.
|
|
|
Post by Daniel O'Brien on Jun 25, 2007 16:34:44 GMT
There's something fishy about this post from guest 'Peter Chadwick'. The wording is identical to a question I posted on May 13 2006. I was also curious about the recent thread on 'Alice Through the Looking Glass', supposedly started by the highly reputable Richard Bignell, yet signed in as a guest rather than a registered member. Again, the phrasing was very similar to a question I asked last year. I'm not saying this is a big deal, but if someone is impersonating forum members, it should be brought to light.
|
|
|
Post by Robert Manners on Jun 25, 2007 22:19:46 GMT
There's something fishy about this post from guest 'Peter Chadwick'. The wording is identical to a question I posted on May 13 2006. I was also curious about the recent thread on 'Alice Through the Looking Glass', supposedly started by the highly reputable Richard Bignell, yet signed in as a guest rather than a registered member. Again, the phrasing was very similar to a question I asked last year. I'm not saying this is a big deal, but if someone is impersonating forum members, it should be brought to light. Interesting I posted with regards to Richard Bignell asking about the archive status of ''Alice Through the Looking Glass' as I felt this very out of character for someone who should have access to this information first hand. I deleted it as I felt it could be felt to be rude however on reflection again your above comment would make sense and I do recall wondering why he was signed in as a guest. This is also very out of character for this user/member of the forum, who is highly respected for his knowledge and personal contributions! Thanks for re-raising my original feelings!
|
|
|
Post by Daniel O'Brien on Jun 26, 2007 8:19:54 GMT
There's something fishy about this post from guest 'Peter Chadwick'. The wording is identical to a question I posted on May 13 2006. I was also curious about the recent thread on 'Alice Through the Looking Glass', supposedly started by the highly reputable Richard Bignell, yet signed in as a guest rather than a registered member. Again, the phrasing was very similar to a question I asked last year. I'm not saying this is a big deal, but if someone is impersonating forum members, it should be brought to light. Interesting I posted with regards to Richard Bignell asking about the archive status of ''Alice Through the Looking Glass' as I felt this very out of character for someone who should have access to this information first hand. I deleted it as I felt it could be felt to be rude however on reflection again your above comment would make sense and I do recall wondering why he was signed in as a guest. This is also very out of character for this user/member of the forum, who is highly respected for his knowledge and personal contributions! Thanks for re-raising my original feelings! Also note that the surname was spelled as 'Bignall'. I remember reading your post and thinking the same thing - Richard Bignell would either know this already or have direct access to the information.
|
|
|
Post by Robert Manners on Jun 26, 2007 17:42:44 GMT
<I remember reading your post and thinking the same thing - Richard Bignell would either know this already or have direct access to the information. >
Very true ~ its odd if you were going to post about say 'Colour 2" Quad' tape used on classic series 'Doctor Who' on the RTFORUM you would not post as Steve Roberts now would you! So why use Richards name for something he would clearly know the answer too?
|
|
|
Post by Robert Manners on Jun 26, 2007 17:47:43 GMT
The one factor we are missing is that there could be a real 'Richard Bignall' who is not trying to be the real 'Richard Bignell' who we all know and respect!
Just a simple thought that might be the real answer here!
|
|
|
Post by Daniel O'Brien on Jun 26, 2007 20:01:46 GMT
The one factor we are missing is that there could be a real 'Richard Bignall' who is not trying to be the real 'Richard Bignell' who we all know and respect! Just a simple thought that might be the real answer here! Maybe so, but that wouldn't explain the identical wording of the questions. One time might be sheer coincidence - at a stretch - but twice seems unlikely. Perhaps I'm becoming paranoid in my old age.
|
|