|
Post by Ed Brown on Feb 22, 2017 14:01:32 GMT
The logical inference is that BBC Enterprises were in possession of those serials which they considered to be saleable. The fact that the complete serials they were holding were mainly Hartnell serials seems to support the idea that Hartnell serials had proved to be more marketable than the Troughton serials, due to audience resistance to the recasting of the lead actor. That resistance in overseas markets must, logically, have been formidable indeed, as even the Troughton Dalek serials were not being purchased by overseas stations. You might have thought that the Daleks' popularity was so great that those serials would have sold on their own merits. But, as Dalek creator Terry Nation found, the overseas market would not accept the Daleks on their own. Nation tried - but failed - to sell a Dalek tv series in America, which is additional evidence that supports the idea that, taken out of context, the Daleks were not marketable. If we look at the Dalek feature films made in 1965 and 1966, but made without William Hartnell, these did well enough in the domestic UK market - the first film did at least well enough to justify Subotsky financing the 1966 sequel. But the films made little impact overseas. The films had Daleks, had Terry Nation's scripts (i.e. the actual tv stories), and had much better special effects than the tv serials, and even had colour. But the one thing they didn't have was Hartnell. This further supports the idea that Hartnell was perceived to be the most important element of 'Doctor Who'. I once read an article which talked jokingly about Doctor Who without the Daleks being unthinkable. In my opinion, the Daleks without the Doctor - i.e. without the *real* Doctor (Hartnell) - was a main cause of the problem. I knew fans who had never watched any Troughton serials, because of their attachment to Hartnell. There was thus no shortage of people trying to recreate 'Who' without Hartnell in the Sixties, but their efforts had only limited success. The missing episodes problem largely stems from a view in BBC circles - widely held, not just within Enterprises - that serials made without Hartnell were not proper 'Dr Who', were not as popular with audiences, were not a marketable asset, and thus there was no need to retain them. If we approach the problem of the missing episodes in this light, i.e. try to look at the problem from the point-of-view of BBC staff at the time, we can gain a clearer insight into the problem. Enterprises didn't hold onto serials they couldn't sell. This fact supplements the BBC's surviving written sales records, for example, by giving us an insight into which serials remained marketable the longest, and into which serials the BBC had entirely given up on trying to sell. The fact that prints were donated from Enterprises' holdings to outside organisations, such as the BFI (who received, for instance, 'The War Games'), can also give us an insight into which serials were no longer being offered for sale. We need to give greater weight to the undoubted fact that, because the BBC had no film or tv archive in the Sixties, ALL telerecordings were the property of Enterprises. They were created solely at the behest of Enterprises, for the sole use of Enterprises. They, clearly, were not for archiving: there was no archive. They were not for repeating: only 1 serial was repeated in the entire 1960s! The telerecording of videotaped episodes was for sales purposes only. It might be fruitful to talk to people who worked on 'Who': actors, directors, technicians. They might have been interested in acquiring a film print of an episode they had worked on, for professional purposes or as a souvenir. But, perhaps more fruitfully, it might be important to talk to people who worked at Enterprises: clerks, managers, accountants. If Enterprises held stock to be disposed of, these are the people who would be the first to know about it. Might indeed be the only people to know about it. We know, because Barry Letts told us, that even the show's current Producer was not consulted or informed before Engineering wiped videotaped episodes. So probably no one at all ever knew about the methods of stock control employed by Enterprises, other than the people who worked there. It occurs to me to mention that there is an existing online forum for ex-BBC staff, who might be able to assist with regards to some of the points I've raised. The forum is at - www.ex-bbc.net
|
|
|
Post by Ed Brown on Feb 22, 2017 15:58:56 GMT
May I mention here that Gerald Campion, the actor who starred as Billy Bunter, wandered off with a film print of one episode of the BBC-tv series 'Billy Bunter of Greyfriars School' that he starred in, on leaving the show in 1961 - simply because he wanted a memento of the production. In the Sixties, if you were in it you could get hold of an episode even if you were walking away with the only existing recording of it! ...I heard a different version, namely that ''at some later date he was presented with several 16mm prints on a special occasion''. One of them was "Double Bunter" which from then on was no longer in the BBC archive (a bootleg copy was later returned)... Firstly, on a technical point, I wish to explain that, in 1961, the BBC had no archive. The BBC film and tv archive was founded in 1978. It did not exist before then. In the 1950s, 1960s, and for most of the 1970s, BBC television programmes were held by BBC Engineering on videotape, or held by BBC Enterprises as film negatives and/or as film positives (the latter are often termed "film prints"), or held in the BBC film library as film positives. All of these separate departments had their own policies regarding how long and for what purpose an individual item would be held. They did not liase with each other, and they did not have an instruction to permanently retain any items. Each department went its own way, within the limitations of its budget, and none of them had unlimited storage facilities. Secondly, on the specific point about Gerald Campion, I am not aware of any source for your suggestion that Campion was given "several" editions of the show. As you will be aware, some film spools only run 15 minutes, so more than one reel of film can be involved in storing a single 30 minute programme. Hence you may possibly have read some interview, or news item, and misunderstood it. Nor am I aware of any source for your claim that a "bootleg" copy of the episode 'Double Bunter' was returned to the BBC. Campion was legitimately in possession of the film, with BBC knowledge and consent, so it is difficult to see how his family's loan of it to BBC Archives amounts to bootlegging it.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Tinkler on Feb 22, 2017 20:28:18 GMT
I worked on a show with Gerry Campion in the 1980s - lovely chap! I was able to send him a couple of Billy Bunter eps on VHS which were copies of ones I had from the BBC archives to take clips from. Somewhere I have his note still but I'm sure he said in it that he was very grateful because he didn't have any other copies... Not to say he might have had a film copy somewhere, but he didn't mention it.
Just saying...
|
|
|
Post by John Wall on Feb 22, 2017 21:46:38 GMT
I think it's unlikely that there are any prints of missing episodes held by members of the production staff, cast or crew.
This is for several reasons, mainly that Dr Who was just another job for them - fandom didn't really start until the mid/late 70s with the formation of things like DWAS and the launch of the weekly - and they'd quickly move onto something else. I first attended conventions more than 35 years ago in the early 80s and we'd regularly see things like the two 2 part Hartnells which DWAS had purchased 16mm prints of from the BBC. A lot of people from the early days were not only still around but often still working in TV and I can well remember seeing the likes of John Wiles, et al. Over the years virtually everybody involved with Dr Who, possibly even including the tea boy !, has been tracked down and interviewed.
However, if you wanted something to remember a TV programme you'd been involved with in the 60s you'd go to John Cura and order telesnaps.
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,864
|
Post by RWels on Feb 22, 2017 21:55:37 GMT
Firstly, on a technical point, I wish to explain that, in 1961, the BBC had no archive. The BBC film and tv archive was founded in 1978. It did not exist before then. In the 1950s, 1960s, and for most of the 1970s, BBC television programmes were held by BBC Engineering on videotape, or held by BBC Enterprises as film negatives and/or as film positives (the latter are often termed "film prints"), or held in the BBC film library as film positives. All of these separate departments had their own policies regarding how long and for what purpose an individual item would be held. They did not liase with each other, and they did not have an instruction to permanently retain any items. Each department went its own way, within the limitations of its budget, and none of them had unlimited storage facilities. Secondly, on the specific point about Gerald Campion, I am not aware of any source for your suggestion that Campion was given "several" editions of the show. As you will be aware, some film spools only run 15 minutes, so more than one reel of film can be involved in storing a single 30 minute programme. Hence you may possibly have read some interview, or news item, and misunderstood it. Nor am I aware of any source for your claim that a "bootleg" copy of the episode 'Double Bunter' was returned to the BBC. Campion was legitimately in possession of the film, with BBC knowledge and consent, so it is difficult to see how his family's loan of it to BBC Archives amounts to bootlegging it. Still haven't heard a source for your story though. It's a bit like the one where the BBC wiped their last three Benny Hill shows purely out of spite when he went to ATV. It all sounds entertaining enough, but I wouldn't bet money on it. I spoke to a BBC archivist when compiling the list on the main site, and I spoke to someone who said he had helped the Campions transfer their 5 episodes from 16mm to video. You?
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,864
|
Post by RWels on Feb 22, 2017 21:57:29 GMT
I worked on a show with Gerry Campion in the 1980s - lovely chap! I was able to send him a couple of Billy Bunter eps on VHS which were copies of ones I had from the BBC archives to take clips from. Somewhere I have his note still but I'm sure he said in it that he was very grateful because he didn't have any other copies... Not to say he might have had a film copy somewhere, but he didn't mention it. Just saying... Well, I could have been lied to, but it's also possible he was given some copies after that.
|
|
|
Post by George D on Feb 23, 2017 15:14:36 GMT
and foreign stations didn't buy Troughton serials, because their audiences prefered Hartnell. Here's another reason why Hartnell serials sold strongly even after 1966, while sales were weak for Troughton serials. This gives added impetus to the chances of the Hartnell episodes surviving: they continued to sell, because overseas stations were free to reject the new Doctor and re-contract for Hartnell serials instead. Nobody commented on this so i figured i'd have to add a correction. I know of no evidence that Troughton was rejected over Hartnell by syndicators. My belief is the reason so few exist from series 4 and 5 of Troughton is the same reason that so few exist from season 3 of Hartnell. Stations like to start from the beginning and many eventually lose interest. Also its more practical for the BBC to use the same early episodes at the beginning. and a lot of what we have from season 1 and 2 exists because the BBC kept the original negatives from many early ones. There are a couple things that might have caused countries to skip Troughton and that is the release of color and/or terry nation pulling the dalek story which lead to his introduction being removed. However, if we notice, most of the recoveries from foreign stations from the last 20 years have been Troughton compared to Hartnell's series 3.
|
|
|
Post by andrewfrostick on Feb 23, 2017 16:37:19 GMT
I'd always thought Troughton stories may have been passed over as they were sending out prints 2-3 years after transmission. By the time the Hartnell prints had all been shown Doctor Who was in colour and Pertwee had taken over. So why show old BW stuff - unless it was sold cheap - when new Who could be offered? I believe they were perhaps shown out of order too jumping between different doctors and stories. I've never had the impression Troughton didn't sell as well as Hartnell.
|
|
|
Post by scotttelfer on Feb 23, 2017 16:53:51 GMT
The logical inference is that BBC Enterprises were in possession of those serials which they considered to be saleable. The fact that the complete serials they were holding were mainly Hartnell serials seems to support the idea that Hartnell serials had proved to be more marketable than the Troughton serials, due to audience resistance to the recasting of the lead actor. That resistance in overseas markets must, logically, have been formidable indeed, as even the Troughton Dalek serials were not being purchased by overseas stations. You might have thought that the Daleks' popularity was so great that those serials would have sold on their own merits. But, as Dalek creator Terry Nation found, the overseas market would not accept the Daleks on their own. Nation tried - but failed - to sell a Dalek tv series in America, which is additional evidence that supports the idea that, taken out of context, the Daleks were not marketable. If we look at the Dalek feature films made in 1965 and 1966, but made without William Hartnell, these did well enough in the domestic UK market - the first film did at least well enough to justify Subotsky financing the 1966 sequel. But the films made little impact overseas. The films had Daleks, had Terry Nation's scripts (i.e. the actual tv stories), and had much better special effects than the tv serials, and even had colour. But the one thing they didn't have was Hartnell. This further supports the idea that Hartnell was perceived to be the most important element of 'Doctor Who'. I once read an article which talked jokingly about Doctor Who without the Daleks being unthinkable. In my opinion, the Daleks without the Doctor - i.e. without the *real* Doctor (Hartnell) - was a main cause of the problem. I knew fans who had never watched any Troughton serials, because of their attachment to Hartnell. There was thus no shortage of people trying to recreate 'Who' without Hartnell in the Sixties, but their efforts had only limited success. The missing episodes problem largely stems from a view in BBC circles - widely held, not just within Enterprises - that serials made without Hartnell were not proper 'Dr Who', were not as popular with audiences, were not a marketable asset, and thus there was no need to retain them. If we approach the problem of the missing episodes in this light, i.e. try to look at the problem from the point-of-view of BBC staff at the time, we can gain a clearer insight into the problem. Enterprises didn't hold onto serials they couldn't sell. This fact supplements the BBC's surviving written sales records, for example, by giving us an insight into which serials remained marketable the longest, and into which serials the BBC had entirely given up on trying to sell. The fact that prints were donated from Enterprises' holdings to outside organisations, such as the BFI (who received, for instance, 'The War Games'), can also give us an insight into which serials were no longer being offered for sale. We need to give greater weight to the undoubted fact that, because the BBC had no film or tv archive in the Sixties, ALL telerecordings were the property of Enterprises. They were created solely at the behest of Enterprises, for the sole use of Enterprises. They, clearly, were not for archiving: there was no archive. They were not for repeating: only 1 serial was repeated in the entire 1960s! The telerecording of videotaped episodes was for sales purposes only. It might be fruitful to talk to people who worked on 'Who': actors, directors, technicians. They might have been interested in acquiring a film print of an episode they had worked on, for professional purposes or as a souvenir. But, perhaps more fruitfully, it might be important to talk to people who worked at Enterprises: clerks, managers, accountants. If Enterprises held stock to be disposed of, these are the people who would be the first to know about it. Might indeed be the only people to know about it. We know, because Barry Letts told us, that even the show's current Producer was not consulted or informed before Engineering wiped videotaped episodes. So probably no one at all ever knew about the methods of stock control employed by Enterprises, other than the people who worked there. It occurs to me to mention that there is an existing online forum for ex-BBC staff, who might be able to assist with regards to some of the points I've raised. The forum is at - www.ex-bbc.netNation blocked the Dalek story sales because he was trying to push his Dalek series and didn't want competition. Rather crucially losing The Power of the Daleks destroyed the storyline introducing Troughton so it was a lot harder to sell his stories unless they happened to be one of the countries that got to Power before Nation blocked the sales.
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,864
|
Post by RWels on Feb 24, 2017 11:23:08 GMT
I worked on a show with Gerry Campion in the 1980s - lovely chap! I was able to send him a couple of Billy Bunter eps on VHS which were copies of ones I had from the BBC archives to take clips from. Somewhere I have his note still but I'm sure he said in it that he was very grateful because he didn't have any other copies... Not to say he might have had a film copy somewhere, but he didn't mention it. Just saying... Perhaps he had just forgotten about the film because he had no way of viewing it (especially if it was 35mm as some say). Because it does appear that he was given one episode (Double Bunter) when the show ended, but that's probably rather exceptional. Eventually a DVD transfer of that found its way back to the BBC archive. Not sure where the circulating Won't Go copy comes from.
|
|
|
Post by bevanthomas on Feb 25, 2017 6:23:42 GMT
As I understand it, the reason for Seasons 1, 2 & 6 being largely complete is that Seasons 1-2 had had their rights renegotiated as they were still selling to B&W broadcasters, whilst Season 6 had not yet run out (this must have been around 1972/1973). Seasons 3-5 had run out, or were running out, but their rights were not renegotiated as it was felt that there was little point as many broadcasters had already made the change, or were about to make the change, to colour transmissions (therefore not interested in buying B&W programmes).
So, having current rights, Seasons 1, 2 and 6 were still "sale-able" and (mostly) kept on hand. Seasons 3-5 had no current rights, could not be sold and were, therefore, considered useless - hence the junking.
Season 6 was still being junked or had episodes donated to BFI and the like. Seasons 1 & 2 had recently returned late in the day and, had Sue Malden not issued a retain order, would have been destroyed as per the usual practice (in fact, "The Daleks" was famously in line for such a fate).
|
|
|
Post by Jon Preddle on Feb 25, 2017 17:10:59 GMT
As I understand it, the reason for Seasons 1, 2 & 6 being largely complete is that Seasons 1-2 had had their rights renegotiated as they were still selling to B&W broadcasters, whilst Season 6 had not yet run out (this must have been around 1972/1973). Seasons 3-5 had run out, or were running out, but their rights were not renegotiated as it was felt that there was little point as many broadcasters had already made the change, or were about to make the change, to colour transmissions (therefore not interested in buying B&W programmes). So, having current rights, Seasons 1, 2 and 6 were still "sale-able" and (mostly) kept on hand. Seasons 3-5 had no current rights, could not be sold and were, therefore, considered useless - hence the junking. Season 6 was still being junked or had episodes donated to BFI and the like. Seasons 1 & 2 had recently returned late in the day and, had Sue Malden not issued a retain order, would have been destroyed as per the usual practice (in fact, "The Daleks" was famously in line for such a fate). That's pretty much how I see it, too. S1 and 2 were also the only two seasons which had stories with Spanish and Arabic soundtracks which made them even more sellable in those markets yet to convert to colour. (The hartnells in spanish were still screening in Mexico in the early 1970s) Those seasons weren't "recently returned" - the BBC always had the negatives.
|
|
|
Post by bevanthomas on Feb 26, 2017 1:19:26 GMT
CHur, Jon. Thanks for the erratum.
|
|
|
Post by Ed Brown on Mar 8, 2017 20:09:48 GMT
I worked on a show with Gerry Campion in the 1980s - lovely chap! I was able to send him a couple of Billy Bunter eps on VHS which were copies of ones I had from the BBC archives to take clips from. Somewhere I have his note still but I'm sure he said in it that he was very grateful because he didn't have any other copies... Not to say he might have had a film copy somewhere, but he didn't mention it. We might be straying from the point somewhat. My original point was simply that in the 1960s, because there was no BBC archive, and because tv programmes were considered to have no value once 2 years had elapsed since their first transmission (after which, Trade Union restrictions meant no further repeats in the UK were allowed), the BBC was happy to give away film prints which the Corporation had no further use for. So BBC Enterprises would retain - temporarily - any film prints for which it had an overseas market. I mentioned, purely as an example, the circumstances involving Gerald Campion, an actor whose career I am somewhat familiar with from Greyfriars/Bunter fandom. In those circles, Campion is a well known figure whose tv career is part of the general knowledge of the fanbase, due to his having starred in the Billy Bunter tv show for 9 years (1952-61). I never met him. Never even exchanged Christmas cards with him. But I do have possession of a collection of recordings: not just tv shows he was in, but including radio interviews he gave over the years. So I probably know as much as one can about his career. MarkT reports providing Campion with VHS copies of some episodes sourced from the BBC archives. Clearly, there is no reason to suppose the BBC would want back those VHS copies of shows it already holds on 16mm, so it's difficult to imagine Campion telling anyone, I've got these episodes on VHS and I've got to give BBC Archives copies. But it clears the matter up: Campion did indeed possess "several" episodes, but all except one of them are VHS copies sourced from the 9 surviving episodes of his tv series that are held at the BBC. This clarifies why a rumour exists that he possessed "several" episodes, yet the BBC had only given him one 16mm print (of one episode which was a particular favourite of his). The BBC Genome reports that there were no repeats of Campion's tv show after 1962: the final repeats were in '62, which was within 2 years of the first transmission of the episodes involved. After 1962, contractual agreements with the broadcasting unions, including the actors union Equity, prevented further domestic repeats. So from then on, the BBC had no use for the remaining film prints (of a series for which it had no overseas markets). So it gave away the 16mm film reels, to anyone who bothered to ask. I've long been suspicious of the term 'skipped'. The very notion is a modern one, that has no counterpart in the 1960s. A film might have been incinerated back then; but landfill is another modern concept that just didn't exist in the Sixties. The only way of ascertaining what Enterprises actually did with stock for disposal is to talk to ex-BBC staff who worked for Enterprises. Clearly, a lot of individual episodes of 'Who' have turned up in the UK over the years which originated from Enterprises giving them away. David Stead, who posts on this forum, found several episodes on film in the UK, and friends of his found others. Nearly all the single-episode finds down the years have been in the UK. It's blindingly obvious that Enterprises gave reels away, most likely to their own staff. They may have incinerated reels as well; but it obviously made no difference to them what happened to films which the BBC had no further use for.
|
|
|
Post by Ed Brown on Mar 8, 2017 21:10:38 GMT
a lot of what we have from season 1 and 2 exists because the BBC kept the original negatives I'm really glad you've made this point, because I meant to make it. BBC Enterprises didn't have a pile of 16mm film prints on a shelf. What it actually had was a carefully preserved vault containing master negatives. When a BBC quad videotape was telerecorded onto film, the process produced a negative: not a film print, a negative. Just like taking a photo on holiday, with a 35mm SLR camera, when you take the film into the Chemist they process the negative and from it they print your photos. Not much done nowadays, but we're old enough to remember. If a foreign station ordered a tv programme from BBC Enterprises, a little man at Enterprises got out the film negative and printed off a positive (sometimes called a viewing print). This print then got mailed to the overseas buyer. But the master negative never left the BBC. 'Cycling' involved one foreign station being telexed, and told which other foreign station to post the film to next, instead of sending it back to London. If the print never got back to London, no one cared: the master negative was still in the BBC vaults at Enterprises, and a new print could be made from it (it was only an issue of cost - the expense of making a new print). 'Cycling' NEVER meant that the only surviving print was running around the world. Unless the master negative was lost, which never left London, the programme still existed. Conversely, no light-fingered staff at Enterprises were likely to walk off with a valuable film, because a negative was essentially useless: it could not be put in a projector and watched, because it was a negative, not a viewable print. If Enterprises wanted to dispose of a truck-load of negatives, no one would ever take one home to watch later, because they were not viewable. Hence, no negatives have ever turned up in private hands. Enterprises thus held a mutable stock of film prints, in the sense that a mere print had really no value at all: even if given away, lost, or burned it made no odds: the master negative still remained, safe in the vault. This made it really quite unimportant what happened to the pile of film prints sitting on the shelf, because if a print was lost or damaged or given away, it could be replaced from the master negative. So if an actor wanted a print, that was fine: it could be replaced from the master negative if necessary. This increased the liklihood of prints going missing at Enterprises, as they were all replaceable. This helps explain, too, the cavalier attitude towards 'cycling': one could telex NZ with a 'destroy' instruction, in the full knowledge that the master negative was safe in the vault at Enterprises, so was not thereby destroyed: only a mere print - a copy - was lost. There are a couple things that might have caused countries to skip Troughton, and that is the release of color and/or terry nation pulling the dalek story, which lead to his introduction being removed. However, if we notice, most of the recoveries from foreign stations from the last 20 years have been Troughton... You can't do what you have done: you can't say (in effect), "here is a list of reasons why overseas stations skipped the Troughton era; oh, and by the way, they can't really have skipped the Troughton era, because the recoveries in recent years have nearly all been Troughton episodes". I think you must decide which argument you are advancing: you can't argue both, because they are self-contradictory. More substantively, the change-over to colour: you say foreign stations rejected Troughton episodes because those episodes were b/w, but the overseas stations had gone over to colour. Well, that's simply wrong. In the period 1963-69, none of the markets to which BBC Enterprises sold 'Who' changed to colour. The most important such market, Australia/NZ, didn't make that change until 1975. Even the UK did not convert to colour until Christmas 1969 (i.e. after the Troughton era). My point is that foreign stations were resistant, in 1966, to the change from Hartnell to Troughton. At that time the change to colour was still years away, in all the affected markets. So conversion to colour could not have been a factor. Secondly, Terry Nation: you say foreign stations rejected Troughton episodes because Terry Nation blocked the overseas sale of 'Power of the Daleks', the story which introduces Troughton as the new Doctor. On this point, you agree with me - this would be a logical reason why an overseas broadcaster might resist buying Troughton episodes, because the most important 6 episodes were not included in the package. It's a powerful argument for not buying Season 4. But it does have one snag: it's not true. Scriptwriters didn't have that degree of control over the actions of the BBC. Anyone who worked at the BBC, whether on the BBC staff (such as a producer or story editor) or as a freelance (such as a scriptwriter) had to sign a contract, provided by the BBC legal department. These survive, in the BBC's written archives. BBC TV had a standard contract which producers issued to freelance writers, which did not give the writer power to control the broadcasting of the programme: the contract sets out what payment the writer will get, per showing, in the domestic UK market and in overseas markets. The amount was always different: you always got less for a repeat than for a first showing, and less still for repeat showings outside the UK. The scriptwriter never had a right to control sales or repeats (and were invariably glad of all the repeat fees they could get). So, it makes a great anecdote; but no, in actuality the BBC didn't give freelancers control over what the Corporation could do with its programmes.
|
|