|
Post by Laurence Piper on Nov 24, 2005 11:26:33 GMT
Are there only six of the ATV Hancocks doing the rounds? Wonder why it stopped there if so? Some (not all) of them are actually very good; not in the same class as his BBC shows but very enjoyable nonetheless. He was still basically functioning OK when he made these. It's only really later on (e.g. ABC Hancocks and the Australian series) that he totally lost his comedic abilities.
The 1956 series is more light entertainment / sketch show though, rather than a complete story in each episode. I saw one of them a few years ago and it was OK (and deserving of exposure, along with the neglected ATV series). It's crazy that stuff like these series by such a well-known comedian still survive but just sit in the vaults and absolutely nothing is done with them. What a waste of such a valuable resource!
|
|
|
Post by Ted Rogers on Nov 24, 2005 14:25:42 GMT
Are there only six of the ATV Hancocks doing the rounds? Wonder why it stopped there if so? Some (not all) of them are actually very good; not in the same class as his BBC shows but very enjoyable nonetheless. He was still basically functioning OK when he made these. It's only really later on (e.g. ABC Hancocks and the Australian series) that he totally lost his comedic abilities. The 1956 series is more light entertainment / sketch show though, rather than a complete story in each episode. I saw one of them a few years ago and it was OK (and deserving of exposure, along with the neglected ATV series). It's crazy that stuff like these series by such a well-known comedian still survive but just sit in the vaults and absolutely nothing is done with them. What a waste of such a valuable resource! Ditto - is all I have to say that that! That's hope that someone in the Hancock household, come to their senses, on day...
|
|
|
Post by Ted Rogers on Nov 24, 2005 14:36:58 GMT
I thought the THAS had permission from the Hancock estate to put these in the video library? Roger (almost certainly) only found out about the shows available through the THAS, after they'd been made available to members, through the THAS library. He certainly never sanctioned it! Probably of the opinion, that as most are dedicated fans, it doesn't matter that much… He's probably more worried about the casual view seeing them, and the Hancock genius (most have heard about) being lost, after the viewing of this particular series of shows, should they ever be repeated or released on to DVD...
|
|
|
Post by Tim S on Nov 24, 2005 15:14:46 GMT
Thanks for the info Ted. In some ways it's a pity Roger Hancock is so protective, but I guess it's understandable too. Shame the general viewing audience is missing out on three or four of Hancock's last decent performances, particularly when the poor Australian shows have been commercially released.
|
|
|
Post by Matthew K Sharp on Nov 25, 2005 1:02:48 GMT
It's only really later on (e.g. ABC Hancocks and the Australian series) that he totally lost his comedic abilities. Actually, the small surviving snippet of "Hancock's" (from show 2) looks quite promising. Judging by the account in Wilmut, Hancock was only drinking really heavily for the last few shows of that series too. The 1966 Royal Festival Hall show isn't disasterous by any means, either - although Hancock's variety act isn't a patch on his sitcom work, and you can see where Galton & Simpson got the idea of Hancock the character being an exceedingly tatty music-hall comic.
|
|
|
Post by Laurence Piper on Nov 25, 2005 14:48:35 GMT
Must admit, I thought that clip from Hancock's seemed very weak and unfunny in the extreme. He obviously doesn't work well in that show-bizzy type of variety format (which is what the ABC show tries to be - an unsuccessful attempt to combine character comedy with the earlier light entertainment style with guest singers etc of his '50s series). That cringe-worthy moment where he is supposed to have fallen out into the street and staggered back in, complete with sound effect and ruffled hair! Pure unsubtle comic-strip "comedy" more suitable for the likes of Benny Hill at his corniest. Add to this the fact that Hancock's delivery by this time had completely left him. He was best exploring the depths of his personality via G & S's writing ability. But of course, that was no longer "good" enough for him. How sad...
|
|
|
Post by Ted Rogers on Nov 25, 2005 22:21:10 GMT
I'm actually dying to see the remaining 7 shows from this series, that are still to make it in to the public domain.... and rather ironically, will probably be dead, before it ever happens...
|
|
|
Post by Jonathan Tennet on Mar 26, 2006 16:24:30 GMT
I've hunted all over the place (obviously not in the right places!) for the ATV episodes "in public domain" - can some kind soul point me in the right direction?
Cheers!!
|
|
|
Post by Ian Griggs on Mar 26, 2006 18:28:25 GMT
If only the BBC hadn't been so careless and junked the earlier BBC shows. Junking these comedy treasures can never be justified. They are part of 20th century cultural heritage. I will never see Flight of the Red Shadow and the BBC has made my life slightly less complete because of their thrift in saving a couple of hundred pounds in the fifties. Oh how I wish we could go back in time and thrash the merciless bureaucrats who doomed all these films to a Wagnerian hell. If only we could bring them back. Can't someone do something. I worry about these films. I know that they are out there somewhere, it's just a matter of having a ray of hope.
|
|
|
Post by Colin Watson on Mar 26, 2006 23:23:38 GMT
How can you junk something that was never recorded in the first place?
|
|
|
Post by Ian Griggs on Mar 26, 2006 23:56:26 GMT
For example Flight of the Red Shadow was recorded - get your facts right.
|
|
|
Post by Peter Chadwick on Mar 27, 2006 6:12:14 GMT
If only the BBC hadn't been so careless and junked the earlier BBC shows. Junking these comedy treasures can never be justified. They are part of 20th century cultural heritage. I will never see Flight of the Red Shadow and the BBC has made my life slightly less complete because of their thrift in saving a couple of hundred pounds in the fifties. Oh how I wish we could go back in time and thrash the merciless bureaucrats who doomed all these films to a Wagnerian hell. If only we could bring them back. Can't someone do something. I worry about these films. I know that they are out there somewhere, it's just a matter of having a ray of hope. But they weren't being careless, it was a conscious decision not to record or keep certain shows/programmes. I'm as annoyed as anyone that certain things don't exist anymore, but hindsight is a wonderful thing. It's an argument that if a series is very popular at the time, then it should be archived, but - again- it comes back to hindsight; I'm sure there are many shows that were massively popular in their day but no one remembers or cares about now. This is what annoys me about Doctor Who fans who spend every waking moment going on about people searching every tv archive on the planet in the hope of finding a lost episode; I understand their argument, but so much of the show DOES exist. Their glass always seems to be half empty. There are plenty of shows that have been (literally) wiped out of history, never to be seen again.
|
|
|
Post by Ian Griggs on Mar 27, 2006 12:49:32 GMT
I don't buy your simplistic arguments. Though none of us here today will realize it, Doctor Who will one day be taught in schools as Shakespeare is at present. The program is spread further in the public consciousness than Shakespeare ever was. Even London taxi drivers can regularly quote lines from Doctor Who. It is only a matter of time before true genius is publicly recognized. Whole generations will condemn the BBC for destroying priceless recordings. The other films are unimportant as Doctor Who is truly the most important and influential drama ever produced by the BBC. Those who do not agree are in denial.
|
|
|
Post by URA Burke on Mar 27, 2006 13:40:36 GMT
I don't buy your simplistic arguments. ...... ..... Those who do not agree are in denial. And that final statement isn't simplisitic in the extreme at all is it? (Apart from being cobblers and extremely funny in equal measure). Ah the joys of unrestricted postings on forums that don't require membership.
|
|
|
Post by Colin Watson on Mar 27, 2006 14:56:11 GMT
Which was series 4. I was of course referring to the earlier series.
|
|