Hope! Behind scenes “Daleks Invasion Earth 2150AD"

[Ken Jacowitz]

OK, not a missing Doctor Who episode.

But a missing episode of “A Whole Scene Going”, a BBC Television show last broadcast in the UK on 16.03.66 turned up on an auction site.

And it contains roughly 5 minutes of behind the scenes footage of the filming of Dalek sequences from “Daleks Invasion Earth 2150AD”.

You never know what will turn up next!

Hope is alive!

The show is hosted by Wendy Varnals and Barry Fantoni and features the following (in order):

- A pop video to “Dedicated Follower of Fashion”, presumably sung by The Kinks (they do not appear in it). Comedian Willie Rushton’s cousin Tony dashes around London’s fashion shops trying on clothes. Played for comedy with speeded up clothes changing. (approx. 2 mins)
- A guide to Birmingham nightclubs such as “Club Cedar” ,Le Metro” and “The Heart Beat” ("It’s far friendlier than London”). 2 mins approx.
Judy Collins singing “Hard Lovin Loser” in the studio (3 mins approx.)
- With the introduction, “Down in darkest Shepparton, something’s stirring. A director is at work and his name is Gordon Flemyng”, we go to a film insert. It cuts to the studio back lot where deserted set buildings lead us into a behind the scenes film on the making of the Doctor Who feature film, “Daleks Invasion Earth 2150AD”. We see Flemyng at work above the Dalek control room set, occasionally shouting “cut” and running down onto the set. He is seen talking to cast and crew. Peter Cushing is present, along with Daleks and Robomen. We see the Dalek bomb hanging above the set. A clapperboard marks the shot and the scene is filmed involving fighting Daleks. A stuntman falls into the Dalek mineshaft. After “cut!”, we see him climb out again afterwards. This is interspersed with an interview with the director. Flemyng mentions that he prefers making entertainment pictures and he doesn’t take them seriously and neither should anyone else. (5 mins approx.)
- Back in the studio, there is a debate on training in the British Film Industry, featuring three British Film Directors (Frank Lauder,James Hill and Carol Reiz). They discuss the difficulties of getting a first job and debate the relevance of film schools.(5 mins approx.)
- The next article is introduced .On film,Spencer Davis, Steve and Muff Winwood and Pete York are seen running through a housing estate to their song, “Keep on Running” .They mention how this was turned down and made the B side. We see them in rehearsals, singing ”I socially aware up this morning”. They are also interviewed on how they broke into the pop world. Also, shots of their families and more rehearslas over interviews.
- Cut to studio where the band are asked questions by a group from the audience.
- Finally, the Spencer Davis group performs “Somebody Help Me Now” in the studio (all their input - 10 minutes).
- Credits roll over end of song.
- Fade out. BBC Caption advertising next week’s show. A continuity announcer tells us Michael Caine and David McCallum will be featured in the Hot Spot.
- BBC Clock. Announcer tells us it’s nearly 7 o’clock. First two seconds of following show appears.

[Simeon Carter]

Okay, not a missing episode but still missing material! Hopefully a copy of the sequence could be made and would make a good bonus feature on a possible re-release of the Cushing DVD (or even on Blu-Ray).

[Michael D. Kimpton]

Since hearing about the Special Edition of "Inferno" coming out next year, I've always wondered if stories like "The Dalek Invasion of Earth" might get that treatment. And since "Daleks Invasion Earth 2150AD" is an adaptation of that story, might be worth putting there, I think, as well as a re release of the film itself.

[Richard Develyn]

What do people think of the owner's stipulation that the film print be loaned back to the BBC by the winner?

I take my hat off to him (or her). I wonder whether this might set a precedent or trend.

Richard

[Steven Sigel]

I think you are missing the point -- the reason the seller is making this stipulation rather than loaning the print back himself is because he wants to maximize his profit and not take any risk of lowering the value of the print by allowing a copy to be made... There is absolutely no way for him to enforce his stipulation once the print is sold - the only way to make sure it gets back to the archives would be to return it himself... Once he has sold it, he no longer has any control and we just have to hope that the winning bidder is civic minded enough to let the BBC make a copy.

[George D]

I think its an interesting experiment yet I wouldnt take that chance if it was a Tenth Planet 4
It appears he has spoken with bidders to enforce that understanding, yet a last minute bidder could turn things a different direction.

Im wondering if there are other compriises to ensure that both the BBC and the bidder get the print.

[dennywilson]

May 25, 2012 20:15:27 GMT Steven Sigel said:

I think you are missing the point -- the reason the seller is making this stipulation rather than loaning the print back himself is because he wants to maximize his profit and not take any risk of lowering the value of the print by allowing a copy to be made... There is absolutely no way for him to enforce his stipulation once the print is sold - the only way to make sure it gets back to the archives would be to return it himself... Once he has sold it, he no longer has any control and we just have to hope that the winning bidder is civic minded enough to let the BBC make a copy.

Are you going to bid on this?

[Deleted]

Steve, unlike yourself, selling film is not my living.
I think it most unfair that you are taking a pot shot at me. You haven't mentioned that before it went to that auction site, you were offered it for far less than the current price, as was the BBC. I would have offered it to Kal if recommendations had been given.
I have been vetting all bidders and blocked one already. I don't have to do this! I do genuinely care! I have also put about a quarter of the show online, so everyone gets to see some footage for free. I really didn't have to do that at all. But I said I would and I did!
So, let's be civil please!

[Richard Develyn]

At the end of the day you're not guaranteeing uniqueness of content with the sale (had a long discussion about this before on another thread). In fact, you've stated you have a video copy, and if the winner didn't do as promised you could always loan the BBC a high-quality video copy instead (which you could make just before handing it over).

Richard

[Steven Sigel]

I stand by what I said -- if you truly wanted it returned you would do it yourself before selling it. Rather than basically telling the buyer - "you take the risk that the value could drop after it is returned to the BBC, not me". You can vet buyers all you want, but how can you prove they wont lie to you? There's absolutely nothing you can do about it once the film leaves your hands.

Compare that with people like Terry Burnett who let the BBC borrow the two missing Dr. Who episodes he had for nothing.

[George D]

I think its a shame that we all care about Dr Who and we're fighting among each other.

My personal thoughts is that Steve has done some great things sharing his collection with the BBC and we also have great gratitude for his help.

Also, I think the auctioneer, in his heart, had the best intent and like anyone else assumed people will do things they may not actually do.. I think offering first opportunity to sell the print at less than the going rate to steve and the BBC was very generous. When no one came up with any options to him, doing things the only way he knew we cant fault him. I believe it was our fault for not working together on this.. not his.

I dont think anyone meant for this to escalate, I think that all are on the same team.. just bad communcation occurred.

Options he may wish to consider is putting in the auction listing that the print will be sent to the winner via the BBC. Another solution could be to make a HQ backup of the print before shipping in case the winner renegs on his agreement.

But what I read from his post, he really did care about having this print in good hands when no other options came up, he had to go via ebay as he had a financial investment. Perhaps we let ourselves down by not working more together to get the print in safe hands where we are as much as fault for not coordinating better together?

[Steven Sigel]

@george - seriously?

Let me get this straight - it's o.k for him to sell it without returning it to make sure he maximizes his profit (note I say profit, because I'm sure that he doesn't have that much of an investment in it), but someone else should pony up well over £1000 and return it to the BBC and potentially take a substantial loss on the print if they ever want to resell it?

It's his right to sell the print and try to maximize his profit, but don't start attributing altruistic motives to someone who is basically trying to force someone else to do something against their own interests. He's playing on the fact that there are people out there who WILL take a loss to make sure that the film is returned, and hoping that they bid the price way up...

As for a video copy - the clips on youtube are from using a digital camera shot off a screen with the sound of the projector in the background... Useless to the BBC. They need a professionally done telecine transfer ...

I also don't think he can legally send it to the BBC once it's been paid for -- it's no longer his property and no longer his decision.

Finally - several of us had long conversations with him to try to get him to return it -- so I completely reject your statement that "When no one came up with any options to him, doing things the only way he knew we cant fault him. I believe it was our fault for not working together on this" .

[Ash Stewart]

May 26, 2012 13:32:00 GMT Steven Sigel said:

I stand by what I said -- if you truly wanted it returned you would do it yourself before selling it. Rather than basically telling the buyer - "you take the risk that the value could drop after it is returned to the BBC, not me". You can vet buyers all you want, but how can you prove they wont lie to you? There's absolutely nothing you can do about it once the film leaves your hands.

Compare that with people like Terry Burnett who let the BBC borrow the two missing Dr. Who episodes he had for nothing.

For what it's worth; I agree entirely with the above.

[Richard Develyn]

May 26, 2012 16:35:55 GMT Steven Sigel said:

@george - seriously?

Let me get this straight - it's o.k for him to sell it without returning it to make sure he maximizes his profit (note I say profit, because I'm sure that he doesn't have that much of an investment in it), but someone else should pony up well over £1000 and return it to the BBC and potentially take a substantial loss on the print if they ever want to resell it?

Yes of course it's ok.

Don't you like to maximise your profit whenever you sell your house or your car or something, regardless of how much of an investment you had in it?

As for other people "ponying up" - that's entirely up to them. No one is forced to buy the film print, regardless of whether the stipulation is enforceable or not.

May 26, 2012 16:35:55 GMT Steven Sigel said:

It's his right to sell the print and try to maximize his profit, but don't start attributing altruistic motives to someone who is basically trying to force someone else to do something against their own interests. He's playing on the fact that there are people out there who WILL take a loss to make sure that the film is returned, and hoping that they bid the price way up...

The fact that he's trying to force people to take some course of action or playing on whatever facts he wants is more than reasonable behaviour in a business environment. You just cant criticise that sort of thing - it's what happens in marketplaces around the world all the time.

The question is has he taken some action which will result in him making less money from his sale in order to help the Doctor Who / film collector community? If you think he could have made more money by doing things differently, then he has been altruistic.

May 26, 2012 16:35:55 GMT Steven Sigel said:

As for a video copy - the clips on youtube are from using a digital camera shot off a screen with the sound of the projector in the background... Useless to the BBC. They need a professionally done telecine transfer ...

I also don't think he can legally send it to the BBC once it's been paid for -- it's no longer his property and no longer his decision.

I don't know what you mean by that last sentence. Are you saying that after he's sold his film print he's not legally allowed to send a high-quality video transfer to the BBC? That surprises me - I would have thought he was not only entitled to do that but also entitled to sell umpteen copies on Ebay if he wants to.

May 26, 2012 16:35:55 GMT Steven Sigel said:

Finally - several of us had long conversations with him to try to get him to return it -- so I completely reject your statement that "When no one came up with any options to him, doing things the only way he knew we cant fault him. I believe it was our fault for not working together on this" .

Well, all I can say is that I would take exception to anyone who was trying to persuade me to take some course of action which resulted in me losing out financially.

I don't know what you said to him, of course, but if he thought that was the case then I fully defend his right to do what he's doing.

It would be extremely hypocritical of me not to because 99.999% of the time I vigorously defend my right to maximise my profits in any business transaction I embark in.

And the 0.001% of the time when I don't comes down to my altruism. I do have some, but since I'm not Ghandi or Mother Theresa it actually accounts for a very tiny proportion of the money that flows through my fingers.

Richard

[Rob Moss]

I think Steve's point is that the seller is selling something with the stipulation that they immediately devalue it by lending to the BBC. If the seller felt so strongly about the BBC having a copy, he should have provided one himself, rather than expecting someone else to do it.

A comparable example would be selling a house with an original Rembrandt fixed to the wall in one room, and making it a stipulation of the sale that the buyer must remove said painting from the wall and donate it to the Tate.