|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 30, 2013 22:02:47 GMT
I must stress I wasn't 'arguing' with Paul or getting 'too serious' etc, but it just seemed strange to me the nature of his thread being put up on a 'missing episodes' forum...that's all ! as long as there is no problem with it as far as the mods are concerned then of course that is fine re the show - I suspect Rob Shearman might not have been too impressed with how Davies 're-wrote' the ending of his 'Dalek/Jubilee' story as being the reason he never has returned or been asked back ... it was odd how only the female writer - Helen Raynor - was given a 'shopping list' of weird items (Pig men, dancing girls etc) that HAD to be mandatory included in her tale....unlike any of her male colleagues ! I think Peter Capaldi's short term contract is probably a standard thing now - there is no guarantee BBC will even do ANY show beyond one more series these days...! I'd love to see a deeper more ambitious modern version based on the original Dr.Who show's style...the effects and sets improved but with stronger better constructed storylines worthy of the famous show going beyond just a '40-45 minute' episodic idea which often itself has a fair bit of 'padding' it IS alot to do with the perceived 'American viewer' idea - tho' ALOT of Americans themselves dearly wish for their TV to go back to it's older style of longer deeper better constructed televsion Take for example the show 'Arrest and Trial' which had 90 minute episodes...45 minutes of the story of the crime & events leading up to the arrest and the other half the trial - where as today's version: 'Law & Order' has 45 minute total episodes...and their very stereotypical characters are nowhere near as developed or plotlines as deeply constructed - it's like comparing 'fast food' to a three course dinner L & O creator can boast of twenty seasons as opposed to just the one of 'A & T' but his later show was firmly influenced by the older show and it's a struggle to remember individual episodes or even the ever changing cast(s) of 'L & O'apart from veteran actors such as Sam Waterson & Jerry Orbach (who were from the TV era of 'A & T') I think this is what has occurred generally in TV now & Dr.Who is such a show that has gone down that 'fast food TV' route - sadly losing a fair bit of it's unique appeal & depth along the way... IF the current show had NOT featured 'The Doctor', the 'Tardis' & also The Daleks (as it almost didn't)- but had been a totally NEW show done in the style it had from 2005 about ANOTHER time traveller - say Christopher Eccleston as 'The Wanderer'- a guy who teleports himself & companion about...WOULD the 'new show' doing the same stories (classic show foes renamed & redesigned accordingly) have been such a 'success'... how much of the TV audience are older show fans really just loyally watching it in the hope the thing gets stronger over time...? remember Davies managed to LOSE some Three million viewers in the first week alone in 2005, three million viewers that, barring Xmas day & anniversary audiences, never came back to his new version of the show, or to Moffat's either
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 30, 2013 13:50:49 GMT
Yeah but re Paul's reply, it's still nothing to do with 'missing episodes' is it...?
Your thread idea is all about the future of Doctor Who (which isn't missing) & it's potential direction...thus would be relevent to a general Dr.Who forum...that was my first point which still stands, for all your 'explanation'
Re that future, I am happy to agree the reaction to the two recently 'found' Patrick Troughton stories is very encouraging, and hopefully more have been found & will follow
HOWEVER, bear in mind that the BBC have never been bothered about how "popular" something might be - look at them axing the Dr.Who show in the 80's and they axed the popular 'Paul Temple' series that was very big in Europe, plus 'Z Cars', 'Come Dancing', 'Show Jumping', 'The Good Old Days' etc each of which had a loyal core audience but BBC knew better.....or not !
On the point of the programme's style I doubt if BBC Wales will give up pandering to the (presumed) 'yoof' market - most BBC shows even their documentaries now are firmly aimed at their idea of 'cool kidz' who forever have one eye on their mophones or tablets with the attention span of a fly....so I really can't see the Dr.Who show any time soon getting more traditional in style of a more logical story narrative in episodic TV with cliff hanger endings etc
I think unless there is a major change at the BBC we will simply get more of the same - as in essence we have between 2005 and 2013 - that is factors such as: 'Hollywooden epics scale CGI sets' apeing current big film ideas with loud bangs and explosive effects, dreadful OTT muzak with stirring choirs, endless pandering to the cult of celebrity, more vast CGI Dalek invasion fleets that all instantly (& conveniently) 'vanish', vast unseen back stories with great importance attached yet zilch real explanation, smug 'know all' females recurring, a 'feisty female' companion who takes centre stage, dopey male regulars, themes that are given great emphasis, then quickly dropped mid tale, plus slow 'talky' moments - supposed to be great drama, 'emo drivel' bits to make the emotionally insecure viewers all 'burst into tears' complete with silly slapstick bits like hanging out of Police boxes in a Harold Lloyd style as they speed along motorways or hang from choppers etc....same old, same old !
....when not having the Tardis tow the Titanic about through space, or moving the planet Earth with a (borrowed from Star Trek) Tractor beam....etc
- but the modern show is also of course a cash cow, readily based upon and forever using (deep rooted in the public mind) sixties creativity, that can be exploited for related product (tho' that has suffered some notable loss of interest over the past few years)
how that OTT approach could ever relate to the far more credible if just as unusual figure of The Doctor character who was a 'wanderer in the fourth dimension'...who 'walked in eternity' etc, the character who existed for three decades before being reduced to a farcical figure in order to be quietly dropped without formal cancellation by the BBC who were then most keen to lose it.. is hard to imagine
I think there will be more interest in 'missing' Hartnell & Troughton era stories, because they appeal to a FAR wider audience than today's modern TV caters for or aims at... I think that ALOT of those who buy the 'lost' stories on DVD, follow the Big Finish Audio adventures etc, ...and maybe even watched that 'Adventures in Space & Time' drama probably have 'given up' on Moffat's current version long ago !
I know Moffat IS attempting to bring the current version BACK into line with the original show (he's not helped by all that Davies earlier did to try to 'distance it' from it's past) but I think there are problems behind the scenes at BBC re the show (it's budget has been notably scaled back over time & we hear rumours of attempts to move the thing away from BBC Cardiff IF it is to continue for long....Peter Capaldi has only a 'one year' contract)
Re Peter Capaldi , I hope he does well...but look how they wasted Paul McGann, and also the likes of Derek Jacobi, John Sim, and Timothy Dalton etc in the current show...being a fine actor means nothing if they make you act like a total manic plonker - yes ?
Much now depends on the story quality of the next series - they need BETTER writers badly - and the modern audience reaction to the idea of having an 'older' Doctor actor who might not be 'cool' - absurd when you consider the show's origin - but that's a problem BBC have created for themselves by making the character ever younger....and a 'Sexy Doctor' etc !
For all the massive sales & orders for the DVDs & downloads of the recently recovered Patrick Troughton stories I wouldn't put too much in that aspect necessarily paving a better future for the current version of the show.
Would, say, the discovery of a previously unknown unissued mid sixties Beatles studio album...duly selling massively...of necessity do anything to boost sales of, say, Paul McCartney's latest effort if it was full of his idea of 'modern music' styles...?? - possibly but it's no guarantee...
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 30, 2013 10:35:12 GMT
Well is this really appropriate for a 'missing episodes' forum....?
why not ponder all this on one of the umpteen Doctor Who forums...?
Beyond asking that, on the general point of the 'Doctor Who' programme & looking at the style of the 50th anniversary episode I doubt if the current show will be able to alter much if at all without losing it's core 'yoof' audience which Russell T. Davies & then Steven Moffat have firmly aimed it at since it came back in 2005
If you try to make it a deeper more older style show presumably those with brief attention spans who want/expect a 'cool' Doc will lose interest - a fair chunk of Tennant lovers who found The Doctor 'sexy' gave up when he left, and as a character there is little overall besides a change of costume to tell between the trio they have had since 2005
- he might be less 'lairy' and more 'talky' but his proactive role and stance in the show has remained identical, with the same old over focus on the central character of the obligatory 'feisty young female' companion etc
....with The Doctor character almost a sidekick, any male companions made clueless clods, plus a number of either panto or zoo based foes, older foes reduced in credibility & menace (lumbering Cybermen, Fatleks, inept vast CGI Dalek invasion forces that all suddenly vanish etc)...plus loads of 'Timey Whimey' claptrap forever re-setting the past or undoing a silly convaluted plotline in order to get the same old crowd of writers out of the corners they find they have written themselves into....once again
You would need a total break, then to start with a fresh canvas to properly rebuild the show aiming it at a more discerning viewer with larger attention span, and unless BBC allow that - which with all the related memorabilia associated with the show seems doubtful given how they have allowed the character & show to become - I really can't see anything beyond "more of the same old", and if/when the viewing figures eventually drop off, with the show running out of steam, it being 'rested' again...note how it's actual time 'on air' has been steadily reducing over the past few years
If the main bunch of current show fans don't take to the (for them) concept of an 'older Doctor' then I would think BBC won't stick with it for too long as a section withing the upper reaches of the BBC have never liked the programme (now or then). and we hear various rumours of problems behind the scenes re Moffat & BBC Cardiff, while a number of production staff including a Exec Producer have departed the show in recent years amid some controversy it appears.
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 25, 2013 11:44:23 GMT
They were already location filming in the Hartnell days, and even more so with Troughton, costs rose generally but the Earth exile was purely for financial reasons, hence only the three Daleks in 'Day of...' and that was why The Brigadier - promoted from Colonel - and UNIT were re/introduced in 'The Invasion' towards the end of Troughton's era to prepare for the exile, the alternative to which was the show being axed which it nearly was, until the powers that be relented.
A number of long running iconic sixties shows ended in 1969, including ITV's 'The Saint' and 'The Avengers' despite still being popular as the decade drew to a close...
Ron Moody was initially envisaged as the Third Doctor before Pertwee was chosen.
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 25, 2013 11:30:24 GMT
I take Laurence point re the earth exile and it's to Barry Letts credit he MADE it work so well - plus Jon Pertwee held the thing together superbly...
BUT remember it was done purely for financial reasons (as Spike Milligan lampooned with his 'BBC Economy sketches' in his 'Q' show at the time) - basically they turned Dr.Who into 'Quatermass' then adding a 'Moriaty' figure in 'The Master' & hoped it now being in colour would be an additional big asset (it certainly helped)
so I can understand Terrance Dicks opinion - the Time & Space travelling angle, the show's very core, was (temporarily it transpired) abandoned....
but Barry Letts & co got the very best out of a limiting situation - The Brigadier & UNIT were already known from the Troughton stories - even hinted at earlier in 'The War Machines' as far back as 1966, so they had a good base to work from, and having The Doctor continually trying to repair the Tardis (slipping sideways into a parallel dimension in 'Inferno') and keeping the ongoing attempt to thwart his Exile as a key recurring aspect (a Timelord controlled Tardis journey in 'Colony in Space' added soon after) which meant we never lost sight of The Doctor's deep desire to repair the Tardis and resume his space/time travelling
David Whitaker's 'The Ambassadors of Death' from Troughton's era was reutilised with it's space travel theme too, plus several invasions were attempted (Autons/Nestenes, etc) while the Silurians/Sea Devils posed a threat from Earth's own past (keeping a sense of time travel aspect) and it even delved into black magic 'Dennis Wheatley' territory in 'The Daemons'...tho' kept a underlying scientific base to it - being 'Daemons from the planet Daemos'
so while essentially set on Earth & Earth based Barry Letts & co did as much as they could to keep it totally 'Dr.Who' and when first The Daleks, then even the previous Two Doctors turned up by the end of the Earth exile in 1973 Letts had done a splendid job in covering so well the 'non time/space travelling period' of the show as the savage BBC economy cuts eased...
under a lesser producer than Barry Letts & not having such a 'shining light bulb' of a Doctor as Jon Pertwee (who played it straight with just touches of humour, and wisely retained the character's core strengths & attitudes as previously established by his predecessors in the role, while duly adding his own more action orientated style) I think that Earth exile period probably would have killed the show...
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 24, 2013 11:34:14 GMT
No that was Hartnell's clash with producer John Wiles (he got on fine with later producer Innes Lloyd & female director Paddy Russell)
always having a personality clash with Wiles, William Hartnell got so irate with John Wiles he went over his head right up to BBC supremo (Sir) Huw Weldon - who amazingly backed Hartnell & made John Wiles position untenable, hence he soon departed (imagine that happening today ??)
Mark Gatiss obviously could only 'hint' at what happened hence just the one brief recreated scene of acrimony...
Wiles was replaced by Innes Lloyd (such an important figure in Dr.Who history who gets almost totally 'airbrushed out' now !) and it was Innes Lloyd not Sydney Newman (who was long departed from any real involvement in the show by 1966) who later very tactfully suggested to William Hartnell that he really needed to step down from the role for his health's sake and let a younger actor take over the burden of carrying the show (then 48 weeks a year) which Lloyd said would be getting evermore action orientated and demanding...to which Hartnell readily agreed knowing it was getting too much for him (Lloyd had already approached Michael Hornden re taking it on playing it the same style as 'Grandfather',however Lloyd then then decided to 'regenerate' The Doctor character into a totally new type of personality & style completely). - Lloyd then cast Patrick Troughton (duly putting to to Hartnell for his 'approval' which Hartnell happily gave - tho' Lloyd in truth had already decided....)
Innes Lloyd also got in Dr. Kit Pedler & Gerry Davis who created The Cybermen as scientific advisors to the programme , and switched the show firmly to a Sci Fi orientated approach.
Lloyd knew how to handle Hartnell always asking Billy's advice first as 'he knew The Doctor best' (even if then completely ignoring it !), where as John Wiles was apparently just a more straightforward producer unconcerned about what controls operated the Tardis doors or scanner etc - which Hartnell KNEW the children would immediately spot...!
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 22, 2013 18:05:33 GMT
Bob was a Radio version of Bond if I remember correctly
...while Barry Nelson played 'Jimmy Bond' in the original 1954 TV movie version of 'Casino Royale' too
The two Peter Cushing films were based upon the BBC TV series, but both stories & some characters are different in some aspects
In terms of popularising Dr.Who I would include Peter Cushing's version as a key part of it - the cinema queue of eager youngsters stretched along from the cinema up the road & around the corner back in 1965....just as it did for The Beatles & 'The Man From UNCLE' films too !
so while a different idiom and not part of the BBC TV show, the two films with bigger colour Daleks were an important part of the 'Doctor Who' thing in the sixties, giving the TV show a boost as well so I'd include Peter Cushing (who portrayed a curious 'mix' of the first Three Doctors in many ways as it later turned out) - the Cushing films also importantly gave us our first taste of another actor playing 'The Doctor' duly paving the way for acceptance of change and the Hartnell/ Troughton transformation that occurred on TV soon after...
It could equally be argued that the BBC 2005 onwards show has no 'at the time' series continuity back to both the 1996 TV Movie & classic show no matter what "bits" they may now film with Paul McGann to try to 'plug gaps' & restore some sense of continuation...
Michael Grade recently stated he felt the two shows were different (only praising the current version of course) and alot of people - fans of either version - just don't accept either the former or latter versions ...
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 22, 2013 14:12:06 GMT
It was a very well made production and both William Hartnell & Verity Lambert were portrayed superbly !
Maybe one or two key figures were 'forgotten' and credit for their work transposed over onto Sydney Newman & Waris Hussien in places (maybe to appeal to the international market ?), and there was a liitle bit of history 're-writing' and side stepping the odd issue tho' I'm sure for purposes of good drama, and credit must be given to Mark Gatiss for focusing so well on William Hartnell's position as both an actor and individual in 1963 and how he came to give the performance of his life as 'The Doctor'
I'm no fan of the current version of the programme but it was good to see Matt Smith do a cameo quietly acknowledging the debt the current & classic show owes to the original Doctor actor, as opposed to the often insulting attitude so many latter era 'fans' appear to have towards the early era of the programme.
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 19, 2013 15:26:00 GMT
Yes
Is anybody arguing otherwise ?
we all know that is a: 'FACT' - you appear to be stating the obvious here
but what do you then mean by 'That's it !' exactly ?
- do you know something nobody else does on here....for a FACT ? (i.e. that only two stories have been found and nothing else at all)
I feel we can't ever talk in strident 'absolutes' (complete with obligatory exclamation marks to emphasise !) when in truth we just don't 100% know the entire picture or for a fact that ONLY these two stories have been discovered, and people are perfectly entitled of course to express their opinions or discuss possibilities, nothing wrong in that is there ? and surely discussion is the very point of these forums ?
I certainly wouldn't ever go dismissing as 'Rubbish' out of hand any rumours circulating about any possible other recoveries however, as, bear in mind, there WAS a time when talk about the potential recovery of 'The Web of Fear' was EQUALLY being stridently dismissed as nothing but: 'Rubbish !' too by a number of apparently knowledgable and 'respected' figures within fandom...
and it clearly was not 'Rubbish' at all....was it ?
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 17, 2013 10:29:17 GMT
back up on my soapbox...
first re Richard's point re 'The Sky at Night' - as with 'Crimewatch' etc, when an established presenter either retires, gets booted by an 'ageist' TV company, or simply passes away a much younger person(s) is always brought it...there is nothing wrong there neccessarily, but then the style gets a complete 'makeover' to 'modernise it' and to suit PURELY a perceived 'younger audience' and THAT is the big problem....
While as Laurence states above 'some media studies graduate' (in other words a jumped up 'know all' twit who actually knows nothing... !) dictates that which thou shall see MUST be all 'trendified' (good new word) into a 'zappy' modern style...
I have noticed that IF you have the audacity to make longer postings on some forums no matter how much info you may have, some folks will get 'miffed' about it ! - presumably they have limited attention spans but I think it's a part of the same culture as the 'zapping up' of Television presentation these days ....indeed it's a clear sign of 'dumbing down' of the mass audience (predominately tho' unfairly aimed at impressionable and inexperienced of anything stronger 'yoof' to quote how the likes of 'yoof mogol' Janet Street Porter - herself NOT young or ever that er 'trendy' in truth... would term them !)
As an example re changing TV styles, I enjoy programmes that explore the paranormal - I'm quite open minded being neither 'head in the sand' diehard stubbon sceptic or gullible open mouthed 'believer' and documentaries such as; 'Ghosts on The Underground' compellingly narrated by Paul McGann were excellent & very well produced with atmospheric but not OTT music kept subliminal, good camera work of the stations and interesting witness reports & summings up by scientific investigators & paranormal investigators leaving the viewer a show to thoughtfully ponder over (with decent 're-watch' value)
- I recall ex-'Tomorrow's World' reporter William Woollard made an 80's series named; 'Ghost Hunters' (not the very 'dodgy' American plumbers show of same name !) that took a similer intelligent approach re accounts, witness statements then evaluation by scientific & paranormal 'experts' - a fine show in the field that took no 'sides' just presented information to the viewer in an easy to follow logical manner....
BUT with the avent of 'car crash TV' style shows such as the inane; 'Most Haunted', plus some abyssmally silly USA shows such as 'Ghost Adventures' or whatever (and I pity the poor ghost that ever encounters that nausiating loud mouthed American pillock Zac Bagens !!!) ...we now get this loud 'in ya face' piffle with 'speeded up' bits, OTT Muzak (often sounding like tin buckets being clattered together !) plus absurdly silly camera work as if trying to turn everything into an LSD trip - 'Acid TV' ?
plus those ghastly 'quick edits' where one camera shot MUST be instantly replaced by another (remember the terrible 'fast cut' edit style of that second Daniel Craig Bond film 'Quantum of Sickbag' ?)
also you can't have a 'normal' camera shot of a person while talking...we must 'look sideways', then have a shot of them saying nothing just presumably trying to 'look cool' (while their dialogue continues) then back to them speaking, cutting from shot to shot etc....Jeez !!!
what are these programme makers on for God's sake...?
it's TV for either junkies or the mentally deranged - and the entire point of the show is lost, let alone any sense of atmosphere
more and more these programme makers seem to feel they must turn everything into a silly 'pop video' it seems - and the ART of good Television making is being very quickly lost...
rant over (sorry for the length !!)
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 15, 2013 13:12:34 GMT
Thanks for clarifying the position guys and setting out the situation re episodes held Ian !
Hopefully Germany might hold something, tho' as with 'Paul Temple' they can sometimes not be that forthcoming re what they hold in their archives.
As 'Freewheelers' was 'action/adventure' as opposed to 'Sci Fi' themed it's a 'kids show' that never gets the kind of acclaim or fanbase devotion that the likes of say; 'Dr.Who', 'The Tomorrow People' etc all enjoy
but with more interest now being shown in general 'missing TV shows' hopefully some of the currently 'lost' Freewheelers may yet come to light...
I assumed only BBC had the mass junkings attitude, sad to see some ITV stuff was similarly lost....tho' Southern TV despite making some excellent shows was never accorded the same kind of 'kudos' that the ITV regions such as Granada, Yorkshire, etc were afforded, which in retrospect seems a great shame.
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 14, 2013 11:01:38 GMT
The big problem re The Beatles and alot of other classic sixties groups & artists, of course, is that the songs footage is held by differing concerns...all with vested interests !
Dave Clark has 'Ready Steady Go !' on which they mimed to 'Twist & Shout', I'll Get You', 'She Loves You' and later 'It Won't Be Long', 'Can't Buy Me Love', 'You Can't Do That', 'I Feel Fine', 'She's A Woman', 'Baby's in Black' & 'Kansas City' at least...
the b/w promo film of 'Love Me Do' survives featuring John on harmonica and a surprisingly shorter haired very young Beatles look !
Granada did a show in the 80's (I think) called; 'The Early Beatles' that had them doing a number of songs ('I Want To Hold Your Hand' & 'This Boy' I think, in b/w John and George on 12 string guitars with them in front of a set of Pentax cameras etc) and an early 'Twist & Shout' with John wearing a polo neck sweater, & circa 1965 besides the 'live' Blackpool Night out' show where Paul sang 'Yesterday' solo, John forgot the lyrics HE wrote to 'Help !' (as he did on 'Ed Sullivan Show' too) and they did 'Ticket To Ride' plus there was a 'stars sing Lennon & McCartney' type show with Cilla Black (who sang 'It's For You'), Billy J. Kramer with The Dakotas (doing 'Bad To Me' - featuring Mick Green on lead guitar ) etc...on which The Beatles themselves mimed to 'Day Tripper' & 'We Can Work it Out'
The Anthology included the rare very early Cavern club performance of 'Some other Guy' plus alot of USA song performances ('Please Please Me', 'From Me To You', 'This Boy', 'All My Loving', 'I Want To Hold Your Hand', 'She Loves You', 'Twist & Shout', etc)...plus live in Washington 'I Saw Her Standing There', 'From Me To You' and Ringo singing 'I Wanna Be Your Man'....plus European (Swedish or German TV) live performances of 'She Loves You/I Want To Hold Your Hand' (medley) & George singing 'Roll Over Beethoven', the Prince of Wales theatre performance of Paul singing 'Till There Was You', the b/w mimed performance of 'Ticket To Ride' with them all sitting (BBC included that in their TOTP2 Beatles special, BBC also have an early live b/w 'She Loves You' in the collarless suits included in 'Sounds of The Sixties'), and there is the colour live performance of 'She Loves You' in front of a hysterical screaming audience
adding all the film performances of songs from the two films; 'A Hard Day's Night' & 'Help !' plus the Morecambe & Wise Show songs...the colour Shea Stadium concert songs ('I'm Down' etc), the complete colour Budokhan performances of 'Paperback Writer', 'If I Needed Someone' ("talked over" & interrupted in the 'Anthology' !) and the colour promo films ('Paperback Writer', 'Rain' 'Penny Lane', 'Strawberry Fields Forever',) plus the world TV 'All You Need is Love', 'I Am The Walrus' (from MMT), the colour promo of 'Hello Goodbye', the film of them recording 'Hey Bulldog', the 'David Frost Show' colour performance of 'Hey Jude', the colour film of them doing 'Revolution', the promo films for 'Something' & 'The Ballad of John & Yoko'...plus the rooftop concert ('Get Back', 'Don't Let Me Down', etc) at Apple office Saville Row, and the 'Let it Be' songs ('Let it Be', 'The Long And Winding Road' etc)...and the videos for 'Free As A Bird' & 'Real Love'
Theoretically it COULD be possible to assmble a pretty comprehensive Beatles song performances (if often mimed performances) collection in chronological order, from their entire career with only a few key songs possibly missing (are there any actual performances of 'A Hard Day's Night', 'Lady Madonna', 'Come Together' etc ?) - which when you consider after 1966 they no longer toured or did any TV show performances bar maybe 'The David Frost Show' is remarkable
IF Apple, BBC, ITV, Dave Clark, etc all put their respective footage together a superb and important DVD could be put together....
but that's all in a 'perfect world' of course...
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 13, 2013 22:15:53 GMT
So am I right in thinking that season one (b/w) survives intact, plus the colour seasons six (out on DVD), seven & eight and only 2 episodes of season five ?
hopefully then seasons one, seven, & eight might one day also get a DVD release too....?
is everything else (episode wise) 'missing'...?
it's not a show you hear that much about unlike say 'Doctor Who' , 'The Tomorrow People' etc presumably as it was action/adventure rather than Sci Fi....
inspired by this thread I've ordered the DVD of season six & can't wait to see 'Freewheelers' again after all these years...
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 13, 2013 17:18:51 GMT
sadly it's sign of the times and if you object you are likely to be dismissed as 'old fashioned' and 'set in your ways' etc....
similarly as a person who enjoys football I CAN'T STAND the mess BBC now make of 'Match of The Day' - it's a ghastly 'chat show' full of smug plonkers posing as self proclaimed 'experts' who waffle away about all sorts of issues ...plus we get umpteen interviews with some very charmless figures working in the game who say virtually nothing !
long gone are the days when simply the watching of highlights of the playing of football had anything to do with the programme - it's almost an afterthought now slotted in here and there...
and of course we get the now obligatory 'musak' thrown at us left, right, and centre too creating a 'musak show' feel to it all - presumably to show how 'finger on the pulse' BBC Sport all are....
a TV audience of 18-20 million has dwindled to about 3 million - yes partly as we have multi channels now - but BBC's naff presentation requiring about FOUR people discussing things now has reduced 'Match of The Day' to a joke of a programme now
and similarly other styles of shows, as you mention above, are likewise going downhill too....
that's my Rant over !
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 10, 2013 10:39:38 GMT
I agree Phil Morris is the best person to look into this...
while of course it's very likely the NZ film cans were 'junked' as stated and are thus long lost, there is always a chance something has survived... remember 'likely junked' DOESN'T 100% confirm 'junked' does it...? while 'no documentation' is open ended....
we must never fall into the trap of 'blanket assumption' - Phil Morris has proved this in quite spectacular style...!
re the point about the 'Marco Polo' film cans contents NOT matching the contents in the NZ archive....
I have been 'record hunting' in shops in the past and more than once I have discovered the WRONG record inside a sleeve....then duly found the right record in the 'other' sleeve (!) - not always of course but a few times it's been the case...
Is it feasible that somewhere in the present NZ archive 'Marco Polo' (or whatever other TV shows, not just 'Dr.Who') might exist having long ago been similarly 'mis-filed' ? (EMI records have in recent years discovered long lost master tapes of famous artists mis-filed...'missing' stereo versions of tracks have thus come to light !)
in my old job we once had a guy who was working in the storeroom who (we found out) had a handicap which affected his filing....loads of items were later found to have been unintentionally 'mis-filed' by the poor chap (it happens)
so while when they searched they only found film cans, maybe a more thorough search could be instigated - IF of course permission could be obtained - just in case of 'mis-filing' ?(as EMI once did looking to properly sort out their archive, notably re Beatles masters)
I realise this might not be practical, it would be time consuming & quite possibly just NOT feasible, but you never know what might also be in a 'wrong can' do you ??
|
|