|
|
Post by John W King on Jun 29, 2009 7:59:07 GMT
Not exactly missing programmes (yet)....ITV is currently axing several long running but still popular programmes e.g. Heartbeat, The Royle etc..
Why doesn't the BBC pick up the rights to produce them? They did a good job with re-kindling Men Behaving Badly.
Just a suggestion.
p.s. I have never watched either Heartbeat or the Royle so I have no personal interest but I know how i felt when my personal favourite (Doctor Who) was axed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2009 8:46:07 GMT
It's just inflicting further wounds to it's own body. Why kill series if they are still popular and working? I've no idea what's popular on there or not though, as I don't generally watch ITV. The channel needs everything it can muster rather than less.
No idea if the BBC will pick anything up. In theory, i'd like to see it take on The Bill (which has lost it's shine) if ITV decided to axe it. However, it'd probably change the style that made it popular, filmise it (as they did with Casualty, which I can't bear to watch now for that reason) effectively making it a different programme in all but name. So maybe NOT a good idea after all...
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter Stirling on Jun 29, 2009 9:00:48 GMT
Dont think they have been axed John?
To recover cash, ITV has put its Yorkshire TV (where these are made) studios into mothballs ,
they apparently have enough episodes in the can for this year,
and are hoping to resume production if/when cash flow conditions are more favourable .
what I heard anyway
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter Bradford on Jun 29, 2009 9:27:31 GMT
They haven't been axed, as far as the viewer's concerned.
ITV has so many 'in the can' of both shows they don't need to make any more - at present. Whether production will start up again the future will obviously depend on future ratings.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dale Rumbold on Jun 29, 2009 11:17:32 GMT
However, it'd probably change the style that made it popular, filmise it (as they did with Casualty, which I can't bear to watch now for that reason) effectively making it a different programme in all but name. So maybe NOT a good idea after all... Glad I'm not the only one unhappy with the BBC's trend to 'pretend' that shows are made on film (a trick the US has used for donkey's years). They did it to Grange Hill several years ago ; tried it with Casualty but changed back after an outcry, then sneaked it back in again later ; Holby City followed. And that's just the few shows that I watch! It seems ironic that technical wizardry like vid-firing is now restoring 60/70s telerecordings to look like their original VT, while the current chumps are deliberately blocking 2 frames together on VT to make it look like film (I assume that is what they do?) |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Doherty on Jun 29, 2009 17:04:10 GMT
However, it'd probably change the style that made it popular, filmise it (as they did with Casualty, which I can't bear to watch now for that reason) effectively making it a different programme in all but name. So maybe NOT a good idea after all... Glad I'm not the only one unhappy with the BBC's trend to 'pretend' that shows are made on film (a trick the US has used for donkey's years). They did it to Grange Hill several years ago ; tried it with Casualty but changed back after an outcry, then sneaked it back in again later ; Holby City followed. And that's just the few shows that I watch! It seems ironic that technical wizardry like vid-firing is now restoring 60/70s telerecordings to look like their original VT, while the current chumps are deliberately blocking 2 frames together on VT to make it look like film (I assume that is what they do?) I agree about 'filmizing'. What a thoroughly worthless concept, and a complete waste of time and money in carrying out this idiotic process for no benefit that is discernable. Yours, |
|
