|
Post by simonashby on Apr 11, 2014 18:33:37 GMT
Yes he did save loads, But someone has come along willing to get off their arse and go there themselves and do the job properly. That is an unfair argument. Consider the cost. Consider the political sensitivities. Consider safety. Consider that we knew far less than we do now. If you ring/telex a station asking if they have x, and they co-operate and send material back and they say there's no more, what do you say? You're glad to have what is being sent back and move on to the next. You can't be told that there's no more, then go to the expense of going there saying 'I don't believe you'. I don't condone how the man has handled this matter of late, but this idea that Ian Levine did a half arsed job by not going to the archives in person is ludicrous. It is a great disservice and is out of touch with the way things were back then. Why not lump Sue Malden and all the other episode hunters in with Ian?
|
|
|
Post by shellyharman67 on Apr 11, 2014 18:36:43 GMT
Yes he did save loads, But someone has come along willing to get off their arse and go there themselves and do the job properly. That is an unfair argument. Consider the cost. Consider the political sensitivities. Consider safety. Consider that we knew far less than we do now. If you ring/telex a station asking if they have x, and they co-operate and send material back and they say there's no more, what do you say? You're glad to have what is being sent back and move on to the next. You can't be told that there's no more, then go to the expense of going there saying 'I don't believe you'. I don't condone how the man has handled this matter of late, but this idea that Ian Levine did a half arsed job by not going to the archives in person is ludicrous. It is a great disservice and is out of touch with the way things were back then. Why not lump Sue Malden and all the other episode hunters in with Ian? Agree, But someone could of done it a lot earlier ! I guess they all should of done a bit better. Thats a fair comment i think...........
|
|
|
Post by johnforbes on Apr 12, 2014 3:18:33 GMT
That is an unfair argument. Consider the cost. Consider the political sensitivities. Consider safety. Consider that we knew far less than we do now. If you ring/telex a station asking if they have x, and they co-operate and send material back and they say there's no more, what do you say? You're glad to have what is being sent back and move on to the next. You can't be told that there's no more, then go to the expense of going there saying 'I don't believe you'. I don't condone how the man has handled this matter of late, but this idea that Ian Levine did a half arsed job by not going to the archives in person is ludicrous. It is a great disservice and is out of touch with the way things were back then. Why not lump Sue Malden and all the other episode hunters in with Ian? Agree, But someone could of done it a lot earlier ! I guess they all should of done a bit better. Thats a fair comment i think........... Well, there is the BBC to blame in the first instance for throwing stuff away, and then literally everyone involved with recoveries simply accepted "answers" to telexs/phone calls etc at face value when particularly in the case of Sierra Leone (if it was even sent a telex/call at all) those "answers" were far from the truth.
|
|
|
Post by David Robinson on Apr 12, 2014 10:23:02 GMT
I'm fairly ashamed of the times I've climbed on the ridicule-Ian Levine-bandwaggon for the sake of a pun.Ian,in common with the rest of us,has his weak points and his vanities.In his case-given the prominence he's gained in the field of rescuing missing episodes-he too often seems to bring out the sadist in people. Trouble is, he is yesterdays news ! Yes he did save loads, But someone has come along willing to get off their arse and go there themselves and do the job properly. Respect to the man ! The same could be said for Paul Vanezis amongst others, people who had their own methods for hunting for episodes. Never forget the disdain Phil Morris was greeted with on this very forum by some of these very same people when he first floated his idea of actually going to these places. I await your post slagging these people off too!
|
|
Simon Collis
Member
I have started to dream of lost things
Posts: 536
|
Post by Simon Collis on Apr 12, 2014 11:57:53 GMT
Could I also point out that international travel - despite green taxes et all - is a lot cheaper in real terms now than it was in the 70s and 80s. And if the obvious things hadn't been done, people wouldn't be doing the less obvious things that recently yielded EotW and WoF, would they?
Not everybody thinks the same and has the same methods and ideas. That's all to the good. A collection of different approaches from the people with the authority to search on behalf of the BBC and a reasonable attitude is to be respected and applauded, in my opinion.
Like any human endeavour, we learn as we go along. The delay just reflects the fact that new ideas had to be thought of, new infrastructure worked out, and new ways of searching implemented in order to look in places nobody (including the people who owned those places) had thought to look before.
|
|
|
Post by Richard Tipple on Apr 12, 2014 12:15:53 GMT
But they're OBVIOUSLY "direct sales"
|
|
|
Post by George D on Apr 12, 2014 12:46:53 GMT
At this point there is no proof that they even exist it appears.
|
|
|
Post by shellyharman67 on Apr 12, 2014 17:05:28 GMT
Trouble is, he is yesterdays news ! Yes he did save loads, But someone has come along willing to get off their arse and go there themselves and do the job properly. Respect to the man ! The same could be said for Paul Vanezis amongst others, people who had their own methods for hunting for episodes. Never forget the disdain Phil Morris was greeted with on this very forum by some of these very same people when he first floated his idea of actually going to these places. I await your post slagging these people off too! I refer you to the statement i made earlier
|
|
|
Post by Jaspal Cheema on Apr 12, 2014 21:17:59 GMT
At this point there is no proof that they even exist it appears. DWM ain't half gonna look like a tit if that's the case.They've effectively written a fictitious article on a batch of recovered episodes that never existed! I always that was a bit odd-mouldy old film prints which had no rhyme or reason to exist.Examples of stories in a state that would never have been viewed or enjoyed by anyone, let alone the military.By the shabby nature of this dog's dinner of a story coming apart at the seams, this really is a case of 'made in Taiwan'!
|
|
|
Post by Robert Lia on Apr 12, 2014 21:24:23 GMT
The prints may actually exist. It just that a professionally produced magazine obviously did not do any research or even ask for pictures of the film or the film cans. . . . ?. You would have think DWM would have attempted to get some confirmation before going to press. . . .
|
|
|
Post by John Green on Apr 12, 2014 21:37:03 GMT
I was actually surprised that this was the first time they'd interviewed Ian Levine.
|
|
|
Post by Marty Schultz on Apr 12, 2014 21:54:36 GMT
But they're OBVIOUSLY "direct sales" Indeed. We were told that they were OBVIOUSLY direct sales. Obvious my @#$!. At any time when we were speculating "nonsense" on their origin the OBVIOUS thing would be to say 'well -I haven't actually seen the reels or confirmed anything'.
|
|
|
Post by John Green on Apr 12, 2014 22:02:01 GMT
But they're OBVIOUSLY "direct sales" Indeed. We were told that they were OBVIOUSLY direct sales. Obvious my @#$!. At any time when we were speculating "nonsense" on their origin the OBVIOUS thing would be to say 'well -I haven't actually seen the reels or confirmed anything'. Have you noticed that when people make 'definitive' statements,they're ALWAYS laconic? Nothing of interest there.These are known,No finds.Already dealt with.etc.Drives me mad.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Vanderlinde-Abernathy on Apr 12, 2014 22:05:11 GMT
Been thinking: The time for "what should've been done", "what should've been said", etc. is long past. The question should be where are we now and what do we do next.
The ball is in his court, and the wisest thing to do is leave him alone. If he feels pressured and frustrated then we just lay off. He doesn't need to be constantly scrutinized. If he's legit, then he's legit. If he isn't, then he's not worth our time or emotion.
Things could've been researched more, but I have to say the whole situation looked convincing. So I understand why people would've thought it was something worth getting excited about.
|
|
|
Post by Marty Schultz on Apr 12, 2014 22:11:42 GMT
Indeed. We were told that they were OBVIOUSLY direct sales. Obvious my @#$!. At any time when we were speculating "nonsense" on their origin the OBVIOUS thing would be to say 'well -I haven't actually seen the reels or confirmed anything'. Have you noticed that when people make 'definitive' statements,they're ALWAYS laconic? Nothing of interest there.These are known,No finds.Already dealt with.etc.Drives me mad. Double plus thumbs up! Couldn't agree more.
|
|