|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Oct 24, 2023 22:49:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Oct 20, 2023 12:02:20 GMT
Hi all, Film is Fabulous has just announced the first group of new BBC television discoveries. This material has been found in private film collections in the UK. More detail here: filmisfabulous.org.uk/bbc-tv-treasures-found/I hope to be able to reveal more discoveries next week, in collaboration with Film is Fabulous. Paul
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Oct 14, 2023 14:52:55 GMT
Hi all, We're just two weeks away from the Film is Fabulous event in Leicester, so I thought I'd say a few things about the event here. Some may have missed the post I made in 'Out of the Archive'. Details of the event and how to attend are here: filmisfabulous.org.uk/I'm hoping that the Film is Fabulous initiative will assist film collectors in cataloguing their collections and in doing so, help to preserve rare or unique film. In the coming week there will be a publicity push outlining some of the titles that have come to light thus far. This includes a lost silent film made in 1919 and some 1960's comedy and drama. In addition, we hope to be able to announce other finds with film collectors in the days leading up to the event and on the day of the event itself. If you're a film collector planning to attend, you'll be in good company. There is a dedicated dealer room with 8mm and 16mm films on sale. In the Collections room, film collectors will be offering film and television titles from their own collections on 9.5mm, 16mm and 35mm, as well as projection equipment. There will also be a bring and buy table here, always popular at film events, so if you have anything you wish to sell on, bring it with you. In screen one there will be a series of panel discussions throughout the day on the subject of the hows, whys and wherefores of archiving, the importance of television programmes on film and film making, the transition of film to digital and the resurgence of film as an acquisition format. Elsewhere there will be screenings from super8, 16mm and 35mm, culminating in the first UK theatrical screening of Rob Murphy's film, 'Splice Here'. Paul
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Oct 14, 2023 14:33:19 GMT
In the above linked thread, Paul V writes something I’m struggling to understand - not what he said, but *why* he’d say it ? I’m absolutely sure Paul wouldn’t resent Missing Episode Hunter’s efforts to find missing episodes, but why warn against finding episodes? If it changes the prints’ fate, why is it safer to leave episodes to degrade in the heat of Jos, until they are ALL chucked out as worthless ? Would it have been better for these prints not to be discovered, but EOW3 would’ve still been there, if we could have our time again ? Most importantly, how could anyone have done anything differently based on following Paul’s circumspect advice ? OK, let's get something straight here. I was not proposing that Phil or anyone else should not look for material. But look at the facts; something that has been hidden or in storage undisturbed for many years, be it a roll of film or an archaeological artefact, is usually safe. It's safe until sunlight gets to it, or air, or dirty finger marks or third parties with other ideas about what should happen to it. The consequence of the advice should be to put in place, as far as possible mitigation to ensure the safety of whatever the 'something' is. My comment to Philip was for him to be aware of the consequences and act accordingly to protect material. This he thought he had done, but you can't always account for some random element throwing a spanner in the works. Paul
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Oct 8, 2023 0:44:23 GMT
There are no guarantees of future returns of any missing episodes from collectors who may have them. None at all.
And the idea that film collectors truly understand the significance of any they have is for the fairies. Only twice has a DW film from a genuine film collector been sold for profit, apart from the re-selling on of known collections.
The first was The Lion which, when auctioneers fees were taken into consideration, made a loss. The other was an original print of A Land of Fear. Although that was from a film collectors collection, it was sold on by a dealer.
All collectors who have had Doctor Who films in their collections have returned them so far. David Stead, Gordon Hendry, Bruce Campbell and Terry Burnett either donated or loaned their prints to the BBC Archive for nothing. So, seriously, let's have some level heads here. Berating collectors for curating their collections won't get anyone very far.
Paul
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Sept 29, 2023 13:51:47 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Sept 29, 2023 11:02:57 GMT
Dear all, Just to let you know about a new film initiative that I am involved with which I think is very exciting. I hope that you do to. It's called 'Film is Fabulous' and the main aim is to raise awareness for and of film collectors and their collections. But it's also a celebration of the art of the motion picture, anything that is on film. That can be cinema, commercials, television and home movies. Much of this content, which is in film collections around the country is at risk as film collectors get older. The Film is Fabulous initiative, coupled with the event in October aims to reverse the trend of valuable collections ending up in landfill. If you are a film collector, or know a collector or of a collection at risk, or are merely interested in film and television, this event is for you. Alongside film dealers who will have a mixture of film of various formats to sell will be some private collections, plus projectors and other equipment. In addition, there will be a series of panel discussions throughout the day with guest speakers discussing film and collecting, archiving, television and the transition from celluloid to digital. The location is the Phoenix Arts Cinema in the heart of Leicester. There are good train links and plenty of available parking. We will be announcing the material that has turned up so far due to the initiative. Find out more by following the link here: filmisfabulous.org.uk/Tickets are limited and it's first come first served! Paul
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Sept 25, 2023 7:43:13 GMT
Hadn't realised that these were a baker's-dozen of distinct stories; I'd figured that there were about a group of people united in some way 'against fate'. Pity Network didn't release them. I'm guessing that there was no interdiction against their being re-broadcast (as there was with Maigret? 13 Against Fate was being considered by Network last year.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Sept 21, 2023 22:09:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Aug 7, 2023 9:51:06 GMT
Well, if I had a missing episode (I wish!), I would simply approach Paul V and there would be nothing to worry about. Two more points I would like to make on this: 1) Private film collectors have only done us a favour by saving ME's from destruction if, and only if, they return them to the BBC so that we can all enjoy them. I still can't really understand why they don't. 2) We must presumably separate whoever has WoF3 from the considerations we are giving private film collectors. WoF3 was not, after all, rescued from a skip. I'm going to assume, actually, that whoever has it is not a private film collector, or that private film collectors would not wish to be associated with this person or their activities, as it would give them a bad name. Richard Hello all, and thank you Richard for entrusting me with your future missing episode recoveries ! :-) The statement made by Philip Morris, quoted earlier in this thread is very important. Collectors are generally wary of 'authority' and all recall how Bob Monkhouse was treated, also other collectors at the hands of FACT. The BBC on the other hand has made a creditable effort to get the message out that they would just like to copy a film and the collector can keep their original if they want to. When I discuss this issue with collectors, I always mention the important role that Terry Burnett played in the return of missing episodes. Firstly, knowing the history, he still loaned his Doctor Who films to the BBC. He did eventually sell them near to his death. Other films in his collection, many missing TV shows will be going back to archives. I stress the word archives; the BBC has an archive, but some ITV companies and third party rights holders do not and that puts returned material at risk. Material such as that must be returned to public bodies such as the NFTVA, MACE etc. In answer to those wanting to know why collectors don't return things... I have explained this many times before. Mostly, collectors are very generous with other collectors and will help them with their collections if they can. Few general film collectors are interested in television films (i.e. film recordings of old TV shows). But a collection is a collection and who in their right mind would want to loan material out from a collection? Just ask the current 'possessors' of the Elgin marbles... I mean, they may not get them back. So it's about trust in many cases. Trust; it's an important word. And word gets about amongst film collectors if trust is breached. Let's talk hypothetically. What if I ran a voluntary organisation dedicated to tracking down lost material? I then get cosy with a national archive which imbues credibility in my 'work'. This credibility is enough to persuade some collectors to part with their films or other parts of their collections so that they can be copied for the rights holder. Unfortunately, whilst I take possession of content, I don't always return films or other content in good time. Months, even years may pass before the collector gets his film or content back. This is because despite promising to be diligent, I have no facilities of my own to transfer anything, I have to rely on favours. I also have no funding, so I have to blag cash to pay for all of this or, worse, promise copies of this rare or unique material in return for funding to pay for the transfers. Over time, word gets about amongst collectors about me and my organisation. Collectors question amongst themselves... "Who can we really trust?" They may conclude that they can only trust each other. In the meantime, some who have loaned me material may never get it back because, due to the unique way my organisation is 'organised' I have forgotten who I gave material to to get transferred, or perhaps I have decided that possession is nine tenths of the law and besides, what can this person whose tapes I promised to transfer do if I don't give them back? Or perhaps I can't return material because I have never put in place a system of cataloguing or, worse, haven't paid the bill for the storage facility I have hired and I've been denied access until I can. Of course, this is just an extreme hypothetical example of what could happen that might alienate film collectors and others from returning material to anyone. Trust. Hard earned. Easily lost. I have learned when dealing with collectors or any contributor to programmes I am working on, to never make promises you can't keep, or borrow anything if there is the slightest chance that it may get lost in the process. The television and print industries are actually really awful at keeping safe material on loan from third parties and the items most at risk are things like photographs and home movies, items that need to get sent to an outside facility for transfer, aren't labelled in a TV friendly way and are sometimes, and usually, unique. If lost, gone forever. And that loss could be devastating for a family that has loaned precious and unique material. Film collectors are contributors; they talk to each other and if there is a bad penny borrowing material, word gets about. Then others get tarred with the same brush. Soon, few if any people can be trusted. Not wishing to be rude, but I don't think many of you have any clue at all the effort it takes to garner trust with someone who has lost all trust and importantly has other and more pressing priorities than loaning out their films. Paul
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Jul 11, 2023 23:34:27 GMT
Obviously I’d like more DW MEs returned but I wouldn’t put money on another from this source. MEs from collectors have usually been in pairs, probably how they were “acquired” from Auntie’s destruction pile in the 70s. Ralph Montagu was aware of this which facilitated the return of the second ME from Burnett, he correctly reasoned that if he’d bought one from another collector, he’d probably bought two. There may well be all sorts of goodies to come but I think another DW ME is unlikely. Not wishing to rain on anyone's parade, but it was my observation that films with collectors usually travelled in pairs. Examples? David Stead (Wheel in Space 3, Dominators 5... and another one in Spanish...so that's three) Francis Watson (Masterplan 2, Daleks 5) although strictly speaking he wasn't a collector Gordon Hendry (Evil 2, Faceless Ones 3) Bruce Campbell (Reign of Terror 3&6) Bruce actually sourced these from a private collector Terry Burnett (Galaxy 4, Underwater Menace 2) When Ralph called me to tell me that Galaxy 4 had turned up with a film collector he knew, the first thing I asked him was if Terry had a second print because they often travelled in pairs. I was told no. 8 weeks later, I had a second call from Ralph and he had the Underwater Menace print on the Steenbeck. From his description of the splices during the opening scene, I identified it as the Australian print. I didn't really need to examine it in person. As for speculation that Terry may have another episodes... I'd say not a chance. He knew what he had and he would have certainly said something if he had another Doctor Who. Paul
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Jul 2, 2023 23:08:03 GMT
Is it possible that eps 2 and 3 were edited for another purpose? Like for clips for a edition of Blue Peter or something like that? They didn't have to be cut for foreign sales if I understand this correctly. No Ralph. These were Enterprises prints, not BBC (public service) prints. Paul
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Jul 2, 2023 23:06:16 GMT
There was an episode of 'The Ice Warriors' in it. But we don't think those four films were returns from abroad. We think they are the Enterprises telerecording editors copies. Except they have no cuts to them. My belief is that the missing episodes 2 & 3 weren't there because they had cuts made to them. Paul What would have been cut? The BBC's recorded running times of eps 2 and 3 are 24'10 and 23'58. The running times of those two episodes according to the ABC Australia were 24'10 (the same) and 24'01 (three seconds longer). The film print of ep 2 assessed in NZ was 24'08 (two seconds short). Surely if Enterprises had made cuts to their master film negs, both the Australian and NZ running times would be considerably different? If your durations are correct Jon, those timings wouldn't account for meaningful cuts... except of course you're forgetting what the purpose was for these telerecording edit prints. They were for the editor to review and assess, then make cuts to things such as videotape off-locks on the film recordings. And sometimes those changes would be quite minor, just a few frames. I don't think that any timing changes would be considerably different. Of course, we know that timings made by PA's on stopwatches is often not an accurate measure. An example is the discrepancy in timings between the broadcast version of 'The Escape', episode 3 of The Daleks and the surviving film recording. The 1967 film recording is shorter. However, I believe that the duration of the version screened in either Australia or New Zealand matches the original BBC broadcast. That version would have been from the 1963/4 suppressed field negative. We found that negative in the BFI archive and recently had it scanned and guess what? It matches the 1967 film recording exactly. The shortened section in the cliffhanger has exactly the same cut. Of course, without doing a physical examination of both negatives, we won't know if the cut was present on the original videotape, meaning that the timing of the UK TX is incorrect, or whether the cut is a telerecording cut, meaning that the AUS/NZ TX timing is incorrect. What I have been able to gather though is that the money conscious BBC Enterprises didn't want to have to go to the trouble of making new sound negatives when they re-did the film recordings in 1967. Soundtracks were shared, so the 1967 negatives were cut to match the 1963/4 versions so that the 1963/4 sound negs could be used with the better quality stored field pictures. Paul
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Jul 2, 2023 15:39:10 GMT
The number of cans where the label doesn't match the contents is reducing all the time. Wonder what became of the film from the Fury of the Deep can? And where was this film can from? Singapore? View AttachmentThere was an episode of 'The Ice Warriors' in it. But we don't think those four films were returns from abroad. We think they are the Enterprises telerecording editors copies. Except they have no cuts to them. My belief is that the missing episodes 2 & 3 weren't there because they had cuts made to them. Therefore, the films would have been sent to the negative cutter so that any changes made to the print could be made to the negative. Paul
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Jul 1, 2023 10:25:09 GMT
Is the bit we need from 'The Brink of Disaster' on the suppressed field neg or the incomplete stored field neg? It's on both. But the stored field negative is better overall. I think it is actually a dupe, possibly a dupe from a very good stored field print or even the original neg that eventually got damaged, but it is way better than what we have. Paul
|
|