O/T but provoked watching A for Andromeda

[Brian Denton]

I'm watching A for Andromeda and notice that it's making use of that bloody 'speed up frames then slow down' effect. I can't stand that device - Horizon uses it all the time, often accompanied by a 'whoosh' sound. Am I the only person to find this 'special' effect actually a major irritant and distraction. It adds NOTHING. I don't know if any of our membership includes or has contact with tv directors, but I would like this, my first Victor Melldrew moment, fed back....

[Deleted]

You're not the only one. I detest this effect. It's an overused device that adds nothing and will date very quickly.

[Brian Denton]

Thanks. I'm glad it's not just me then.....

[Geoff Sear]

Do you mean that "Green Wing"/"Jam" effect? If so, yes, it is becoming a tired cliche, and adds nowt, beyond a realisation that these effects are going to look very dated a few years down the line.I can't say that I noticed it the Andromeda remake, but I might have been asleep by that point, Saturday Night Fever glitterball computer and white-suits notwithstanding.

[Andrew Doherty]

It is an example of a trendy gimmick approach to cater for those who get bored after a few seconds.

It is not needed by those who like good quality programmes.

Yours,

[B Thomas]

And... it's a pain in the arse for those of us who do make films. Personally I'd rather not use it unless the script calls for a dramatic reveal shot.

If you put one in then most audiences go: "Whoa - how cool is that? Well done mate." If you don't put one in they yawn, shout: "Boring...!" and put "The Matrix" back on for the zillionth time...

Still - it's the demands of the audience that infoms our practice - so what can we do...?

[George Weight]

The early part of the plot is very close to the 1954 film 'This Island Earth', plus ideas from quite a few pulp comic story books. I'm surprised it does work. Part of the success of the original was no doubt due to a crush on Julie Christie and not the science fiction.

[Deleted]

bevanwthomas said:

And... it's a pain in the arse for those of us who do make films. Personally I'd rather not use it unless the script calls for a dramatic reveal shot.

If you put one in then most audiences go: "Whoa - how cool is that? Well done mate." If you don't put one in they yawn, shout: "Boring...!" and put "The Matrix" back on for the zillionth time...

Still - it's the demands of the audience that infoms our practice - so what can we do...?

I've worked in production in the past and know how the pressure is there to use trendy devices. I always resisted to a large degree though as it's just pandering to what others want. "X" may be flavour of the month but is it in there because it furthers what you want to achieve as a programme maker. There's always another way to be found of achieving the same result without recourse to overused devices. I think that's the key to making an original and distinctive finished item though, rather than something that will be "cool" but date badly. That's what separates an original programme maker from a run-of-the-mill one. The industry is now full of media types that follow trends rather than make attempts to initiate them (one of the reasons I bailed out when I did).

[H Hartley]

Lawrence talking of effects dating .
The most annoying thing about the recent Strange Report rerun, was the freeze frame on captions, this was another effect that many programmes went through at the time.
Department S got it right as it was much more subtle and sparingly used there.

[WilliamM]

laurencepiper said:

bevanwthomas said:

And... it's a pain in the arse for those of us who do make films. Personally I'd rather not use it unless the script calls for a dramatic reveal shot.

If you put one in then most audiences go: "Whoa - how cool is that? Well done mate." If you don't put one in they yawn, shout: "Boring...!" and put "The Matrix" back on for the zillionth time...

Still - it's the demands of the audience that infoms our practice - so what can we do...?

I've worked in production in the past and know how the pressure is there to use trendy devices. I always resisted to a large degree though as it's just pandering to what others want. "X" may be flavour of the month but is it in there because it furthers what you want to achieve as a programme maker. There's always another way to be found of achieving the same result without recourse to overused devices. I think that's the key to making an original and distinctive finished item though, rather than something that will be "cool" but date badly. That's what separates an original programme maker from a run-of-the-mill one. The industry is now full of media types that follow trends rather than make attempts to initiate them (one of the reasons I bailed out when I did).

in my limited experience of the media those very people who are working in the background contribute far more than they are given credit for, sometimes taking over some of the duties of directors, I can think of one occasion when a new director got completly lost and more or less let the crew take over , but he still got all the credit. It's getting more a case of who you know rather than what you know (even more than it used to be!)

[LanceM]

I got to see a few clips on TV Ark.com . And the series looks really interresting, I can't wait to see the recovered episode. If it will ever be released at this rate.

Lance.

[Dave Andrews]

I don't think Julie Christie was that much of a draw, at least initially, in the original A for Andromeda, she was unknown up to then, and was in a black wig (as Christine) for the first half. It was this that launched her.

I don't think there was any one reason why it was popular; it was a mixture of:

having several up-to-date themes - Jodrell Bank was quite famous at the time; Cold War fear of the Russians in space; computers beginning to enter the public conciousness, as was DNA (just)

being the first serial to have 45 min episodes (always 30 min up to then) and on at prime-time when there were only two channels

(being on the ad-free channel !)

just being a damn good, thought provoking, story

having a poke at the 'Establishment' in the political subplot (99% missing in the remake)

true, Julie Christie (to some extent, latterly, when she became blond as Andromeda)

and being well produced by the standards of the day.

[Dave Andrews]

...Oh, yes, and I forgot ..

the end (Andromeda's death, and the way of it [not like the remake]) was a quite a shock.