|
Post by Vaughan Stanger on Feb 21, 2021 11:22:24 GMT
I don't for one second believe the guy didn't know what he was listing. As I understand it, the person selling the film was a younger relative of a deceased collector, so it's totally plausible they knew nothing much about the film. Presumably lacking a projector and concerned not to damage the film, they chose to un-spool it only a few feet. With hindsight, it needed un-spooling a good deal more. But one doesn't need hindsight to realise that the bidders were taking quite a gamble given the limited amount of information available to them.
|
|
|
Post by stevegerald on Feb 21, 2021 13:43:34 GMT
I don't for one second believe the guy didn't know what he was listing. As I understand it, the person selling the film was a younger relative of a deceased collector, so it's totally plausible they knew nothing much about the film. Presumably lacking a projector and concerned not to damage the film, they chose to un-spool it only a few feet. With hindsight, it needed un-spooling a good deal more. But one doesn't need hindsight to realise that the bidders were taking quite a gamble given the limited amount of information available to them. Hopefully something else comes out of that collection.
|
|
|
Post by Vaughan Stanger on Feb 21, 2021 15:37:19 GMT
As I understand it, the person selling the film was a younger relative of a deceased collector, so it's totally plausible they knew nothing much about the film. Presumably lacking a projector and concerned not to damage the film, they chose to un-spool it only a few feet. With hindsight, it needed un-spooling a good deal more. But one doesn't need hindsight to realise that the bidders were taking quite a gamble given the limited amount of information available to them. Hopefully something else comes out of that collection. Yes, let's hope so.
|
|
|
Post by John Green on Feb 21, 2021 17:37:47 GMT
This would seem to rule out anything else, worse luck.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Wilson on Feb 21, 2021 23:18:41 GMT
The point I was making was on the back of the understanding, apparently that he has nothing else of interest in the collection. So.....the only thing he (first time no less) listed would seem to be the only thing that could, obtusely, be listed "in a certain way" to potentially be mistaken for a missing episode. I feel he knew what he was doing.....
|
|
|
Post by Vaughan Stanger on Feb 22, 2021 8:57:28 GMT
The point I was making was on the back of the understanding, apparently that he has nothing else of interest in the collection. So.....the only thing he (first time no less) listed would seem to be the only thing that could, obtusely, be listed "in a certain way" to potentially be mistaken for a missing episode. I feel he knew what he was doing..... I think it's plausible that the deceased collector's relatives are in their 50s. If so, they may well have listed the M&W episode first because it was something they'd heard of, hence a useful calibration point. If they received only a small amount for it, they might not bother auctioning the rest. I doubt they even know what a "missing episode" is. Most people don't. But it's all guesswork at this stage.
|
|
|
Post by stevegerald on Feb 22, 2021 16:04:27 GMT
This would seem to rule out anything else, worse luck. Unless they haven't checked the collection yet.
|
|
|
Post by brianfretwell on Feb 27, 2021 11:16:44 GMT
It could be a better copy of the episode (if it's only held on film) though. I am trying to look on the bright side.
|
|
|
Post by PAUL WOOD on Feb 27, 2021 12:14:16 GMT
It could be a better copy of the episode (if it's only held on film) though. I am trying to look on the bright side. Alas, I think it's already been mentined upthread that the episode exists in full colour on 2" PAL 625 video tape...in other words, pristine broadcast quality. However, nothing ventured, nothing gained. You have to go out on a limb sometimes because occasionally it pays dividends!
|
|
|
Post by andrew shutt on Jul 16, 2021 12:10:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Gary Wilson on Jul 16, 2021 20:16:45 GMT
If ITV are only showing clips hopefully a BBC Christmas repeat of the whole episode is on the cards!
|
|
|
Post by John Wall on Jul 16, 2021 20:21:27 GMT
ITV have a half hour show in an hour slot which means <50 minutes, maybe 46-48, plus commercials.
I’m mystified as to how something like this is being shown on ITV, don’t the BBC hold the copyright?
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,861
|
Post by RWels on Jul 16, 2021 20:25:32 GMT
OK, but just to keep it all clear, that is NOT the print from ebay that the first three pages of this thread refer to. Apparently THIS film was in the family's possession and not properly labelled.
|
|
|
Post by John Green on Jul 16, 2021 21:45:03 GMT
Didn't the families find a stash of photos, scripts, etc. yonks ago, possibly leading to a TV prog? The shed that keeps on giving!
|
|
|
Post by mattg on Jul 17, 2021 7:15:32 GMT
I honestly didn’t believe anything could discourage me from watching classic Morecambe and Wise, much less a ‘lost’ episode, but ITV have sadly proven themselves equal to the task, from the posted ITV link: “Celebrity Morecambe and Wise fans taking part in this film include its narrator Toby Jones, plus Jonathan Ross, Ben Miller and Eddie Izzard”. Naturally a substantial find of priceless comedic gold has to be spoiled.
Now I’m sure I echo the majority in preference for the full, unabridged episode rather than dissected snippets interspersed with obsequious, valueless monologues from the usual gaggle of conceited bores (Ben Miller’s ok though I suppose)!
Oh well, hopefully the show in its full untainted glory (sans aforementioned bores obviously) will be released at some point…
|
|