|
|
Post by William Martin on Nov 4, 2003 14:22:32 GMT
I agree , e-mails are an odd form of communication rather cold and with all the warmth of a final tax demand, whch is why we use smiley faces  , postings are the same, we know how we feel when we are writing them but the reader only has the rather abrupt e-mail style to go on, its easy to accidently offend with an e-mail, i'm sure no offence is intended as for dr who, its special in the field of episode hunting because the early episode hunters were also dr who fans, they were also instramental in stopping the descruction of episodes at the bbc, there is therefore more accumulated info on dr who and related missing epiosdes than anything else. interesting comment on film dealers i have found quite the oposite, that the dealers can't unload TRs because "No one wants them" It must be just the same few who are plagued anyway I have my name down with a reliable dealer and time will tell on a similar subject I caught part of a radio 5 program this morning on tv with someone (I didn't catch who)from kalidascope talking about lost programs did anyone else hear this? |
|
|
|
Post by Andy Henderson on Nov 4, 2003 22:40:49 GMT
The length of some of these replies makes it daunting in trying to reply!
Some of the replies ‘Absolute Rubbish!’ etc are amusing, because I sense the same intensity of overstated reaction to my post as I see in the adoration of the programme itself. Without digging deep into written archives, we may never know the truth about junkings, but it is permissible to mention what is there and realise that the BBC did follow a plan of sorts. The fact that your favourite programme’s tapes were used to record an edition of ‘Wheelbase’ or whatever is unfortunate. If the BBC wanted to keep programmes they usually transcribed to film. These went in the film library. 35mm film was expensive and less likely to be junked and I’d guess that many of the Doctor Who kept from the 60s included those 35mm prints (after all they were no use for overseas), but good examples of the series as they had been recorded that way (high quality) and thus, good archive material. If the (16mm prints) weren’t in the library then they were still being used for overseas sales. I’m sure most of these prints are ones which turn up today. It would be interesting to find out why odd 16mm prints did end up in the film library instead of complete serials.
I;m not so sure that the 'fans' stopped 'Dr Who', junking, but one fan in particular stopped 'Dr Who' being junked. He didn't stop material being taken out of the BBC Film Library, he got commercial sales prints put into the Film Library. If someone in the film libary had been more on their toes and keen, all those commercial prints would have found a new home.
I am aware that people do like ‘Doctor Who’ as a fun show, but I am still puzzled as to how it has generated a seemingly strong and out of proportion importance, particularly with regard to Missing Television. It wasn’t as hard hit as say ‘Dixon of Dock Green’ and that programme doesn’t seem to have a fan base? What was or is so attractive about Doctor Who? Saying it is ‘good’ isn’t an argument, just a preference.
I do agree and respect Ed’s points in particular. My feeling is that just about every recent archive find has been generally measured against the ‘want’ or ‘need’ for missing episodes of Doctor Who. Thus, put up a thread on this site ‘Missing BBC Show recovered’ – a complete episode of ‘Z-Cars’ all 1600ft of it! It has a high click rate because people think it might be ‘Doctor Who’ (or something along those lines). A few people say ‘hey, I like Z-Cars – great news’ etc. Now along comes a tiny clip from ‘Power of the Daleks’ and lots of replies and questions. These questions on some of the other sites extend to wanting to know how many fames etc and other minutiae. It is clear to me that most of the people on this site seem to have ‘Doctor Who’ as their top priority. I think this is a shame and it discourages people who want to find other material. Ed’s conception of two levels of fans makes sense, though I always seem to experience the ones which I don’t want to! For example, one fan wrote to me asking if I happened to know a very recently deceased film collector and if I thought they had any missing episodes. The guy was hardly cold when I got that e-mail!
The replies trod back into the areas of theories about BBC junking. I noticed that the ‘Potter and Mercer’ were mentioned. Whilst it is undeniably true that some of their material is lost, in both cases, it is basically among their earliest work, when they were not so well established. The numbers are not too drastic either. From memory (no doubt I’ll be corrected!) - 3 Potter and 1 Mercer. We also don’t know the contractual rights for these plays and quite a lot of these BBC plays and series had a date they had to be junked by. The Sherlock Homes 1968 series is one fairly well known example (though that seems to have been imprecise!)
Imagine if some of those single BBC odd episodes are there because the BBC kept a couple despite having agreements to destroy? Of course, as we all know, that wasn’t always the case, but when you think of the preservation of most of the recorded episodes of Hancock, all of Maigret, the Forsyte Saga and so on, there is a good representation of programmes important as examples of British cultural history. All the major BBC event programmes ‘The World Our Stage, First Night, We Are Your Servants’ plus a complete set of BBC Television Newsreel, pre-war demonstration films, Tonight films, most documentaries.
In other cases, for example ‘The Beatles’, I’m told that they either appeared live or much later only appeared on TOTP in pre-shot promos. Technically a ‘live’ programme, never recorded is not strictly missing in the sense that a recording was thrown away. That might seem obvious, but it does explain some of the large 1950s and 1960s gaps. The examples of missing programmes which are most often listed are of course important programmes, but again, we also don’t know the BBC rights surrounding their appearances. Despite that, they are still preserved at their early prime on 405 line VT by the BBC ‘It’s the Beatles’ and on ITV by the NME Poll Winner’s Party.
I think the BBC fell down with ‘Doctor Who’ in not selecting particularly good examples (or complete ones) of that series. Perhaps this was down to someone’s personal choice rather than bureaucracy. Can anyone confirm if ‘Doctor Who’ was stamped as ‘A’ archive status (except for special serials).
At the end of the day I will repeat my assertion that I never said I didn’t like the programme, though I am puzzled by the fan base and the reactions generated by it.
It leads me to speculate if the fans did destroy their object of love. Truly organised fans started appearing about the same time that the programme started to get tied into knots of continuity and self reference. In earlier days, a fan had to wait patiently until the next story and knew little. Seems to me, that by the mid 1980s that thirst for more and more information had grown and the great need to view these ‘missing episodes’ arose. Fans began to tell stories about how wonderful the still rarely seen b/w editions were.
Unfortunately I still feel that it would be difficult to generate a public response to match the fan enthusiasm. Screening ‘The Lion’ at prime time on BBC this Saturday would be ratings suicide. The fans may think differently. Even the colour editions present repeat problems, which leads me back to the feeling that the fans have over emphasised the importance of the programme. When the programme was re-run on BBC-2 in a repeat run, it was quickly pulled, despite opening on a well regarded serial.
Of course my mention of a hypothetical trade was tongue in cheek.
My attitude to Missing Television was (and is), if it was missing, it was worth recovering. Even if that included Doctor Who, I would make no distinction. When I was however offered a b/w episode, I did turn it down because of the cost and the owner was unspecific about the episode number. At any rate, the programme should be treated equally as far as qualifying for return, but also it would be good to see people being genuinely enthusiastic about other returns too. That doesn’t appear to be happening much and I doubt it will change in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alan Hayes on Nov 4, 2003 23:54:11 GMT
I'm not even going to try to respond in depth on this one. A fascinating thread, but I really have to get some sleep!
But...
It occurs to me that the main difference is that people are watching "Doctor Who" and similar programmes in their formative years - a time when interests tend to take a deeper root. "Dixon of Dock Green" would have been "boring" to the average teenager (it certainly was to me) and something discovered later when those interests are less all-consuming.
Besides, certain programmes attract fanbases, others don't. "EastEnders", for instance, is a massive ratings success, but the viewers are far less likely to buy merchandise or DVDs of old episodes than "Doctor Who" fans, a programme which never achieved similar popular success.
I'm a fan of the series, a regular attender of general TV events and MBW at the NFT, but I'm there out of an interest in and love for the medium as a whole, not simply because I'm a "Doctor Who" fan. I'll be at this month's MBW and would be just as excited at the prospect of watching a previously missing "Adam Adamant Lives" if Patrick Troughton wasn't in it. In fact, his participation in the episode is completely immaterial to me. I just wish the recovered section of "The Avengers: Hot Snow" was in the line up...
Yes, I'd love more "Doctor Who" to be recovered, but I'm just as interested at news of other recoveries, even if it's not something I'm "rabidly" in to... I honestly think that the stereotypical "Doctor Who" fan with "Who Tunnel Vision" is not representative of the great majority of those who attend MBW and are from a "Doctor Who" background.
Best,
Alan
|
|
|
|
Post by Alan Hayes on Nov 5, 2003 0:04:31 GMT
Well, there's a simple reason for this. MBW aside, what are the chances of any of us actually *seeing* a returned "Z-Cars", or a "Boyd QC"? What are the chances of getting to see even 'always existing' episodes of, say, "The Newcomers"? There are episodes of "Z-Cars" that are in the archives, but which are not likely to be shown on TV or released on DVD, due to a perceived lack of public interest.
"Doctor Who" sells, even if only in small numbers (as has been said in this thread) - but in numbers that are sufficient for the BBC to break into profit fairly effortlessly with each release. Therefore, if something of "Doctor Who" is recovered, it will see release at some point in the not too distant future.
It's easier to get excited about something which will be made available to the public than about something that will sit in an archive gathering dust. A returned "Z-Cars" episode manifests itself in most archive TV fans' lives as a hastily scrawled tick next to its entry in a Kaleidoscope Guide. And it's difficult to get excited about a tick...
Best,
Alan
|
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Nov 5, 2003 3:06:46 GMT
A few points about The Beatles: they appeared on several TOTP editions in pre-recorded inserts (1964 /5) and one famous live edition (1966). The 16/6/66 show was however telerecorded from the transmission as clips of the performance were repeated several times afterwards, including in the Xmas show that year. Therefore the show was recorded; at the time it was considered a great coup to get The Beatles to appear "live" on the show and it does seem short-sighted that this edition at very least was not preserved.
The Potter / Mercer thing: more than just one Mercer is missing as well. Although these were early works, other of their plays from the same period survive. Very random. There are lots of other examples of bad / lack of archiving policy that can be listed too.
Regardless of working practices at the time, if certain things were saved as being worthy at the time then there were as many others that should also have been saved. Very obvious examples as well. It goes deeper than sour grapes due to our own personal faves not being kept. Sure, a few things that could be called prestige were being kept but it was so random and certainly a lot of what is around still now is more through luck than design. They certainly didn't pay much attention to what SHOULD have been saved, even though the BFI etc were lobbying them to do so...
|
|
|
|
Post by Ed Stradling on Nov 5, 2003 10:46:22 GMT
Andy,
I entirely sympathise with your remarks.
Speaking for myself, there are many series which I consider superior to Dr Who, but to which I will never devote the same sort of time and care.
The reason for this is because Dr Who was a kids' programme, so my love for it was "burned in" at a young enough age to stay with me into adulthood.
A year or so ago for the first time, I watched a few "Out of the Unknown" episodes and enjoyed them very much, but I doubt I will ever get round to watching the rest of the episodes that exist, let alone worry about those which don't. I first watched the series when I was 30 as opposed to when I was 9 - it wasn't a kids' show -so like many series it will remain a casual interest rather than a "burned in" part of my life.
As someone to whom that doesn't apply, I can see that it is frustrating for you, and the behaviour of some socially maladjusted Dr Who fans (i.e. the majority) will indeed lead to tarnish us all - but we have long been used to that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Nov 5, 2003 10:58:39 GMT
You might think that the "Beano" and Dandy" are lightweight fluff as well, but, by jingo they were far-thining enough to keep a full archive of comicsI think you'll find that the rights issues pertaining to comic art and scripts are somewhat different to those that pertained to television programmes in the 50s, 60s and 70s, and hence you're comparing apples and oranges. Plus of course it's far cheaper to keep a cabinet full of bound comics on one side of the office than it is to store racks of film reels and VT spools in carefully climate-controlled warehouses... |
|
|
|
Post by Ian Woodhouse on Nov 5, 2003 12:43:46 GMT
The reason for this is because Dr Who was a kids' programme, so my love for it was "burned in" at a young enough age to stay with me into adulthood. Absolutely and I think that for most thirty-something fans it's exactly this reason that has kept our love for the show ongoing. I don't think there are many fans who would hand-on-heart say that Dr Who is the greatest programme that has ever been broadcast but for a large number (and I count myself amongst them) it is their favourite. Most people yearn for the time when they were young, warm, safe and completely without any of life's later responsibilities and smells, sounds and television programmes bring that feeling back. Dr Who has the greatest effect on me but I've only got to hear the music for something like Duchess of Duke Street or The Two Ronnies or see the opening titles for The Onedin Line and I am instantly transported back to my formative years when television was simply for pure entertainment, not analysis or nostalgia. Personally, my viewing habits for old programmes and films are dictated by not only cosiness and nostalgia but by laziness. On the occasions when I have a couple of hours to spare (when I won't get my wife raising her eyebrows and muttering phrases including the word "sad") I inevitably end up watching something I am familiar with rather than being challenged. This will probably sound rather strange to a lot of people but, for example, whilst I've got a number of Dennis Potter plays/series on tape I would much rather sit down and watch Bride of Frankenstein or Talons of Weng-Chiang for the umpteenth time simply because of my laziness As for Ed's comment about Out of the Unknown, I agree with him. I feel exactly the same way about The Avengers. I never saw it on first broadcast and only started watching third generation videos in the 80s. A lot of it left me cold but The New Avengers is different - this was a programme I watched when I was young and, like DODS and TTR above, I've only got to hear the music and I'm one happy bunny. Oh and I'm happy to vouch for the fact that Ed is normal by the way. Or at least relatively normal anyway... |
|
|
|
Post by William Martin on Nov 5, 2003 16:58:40 GMT
yes I also agree about the age thing, I have noticed that the best age to get hooked on a program is between 8 and 14 years, although you can get hooked at any age, these ages seem to be very important, most of the people I know who are fans of something got interested during these years and since Dr Who apealed to these age groups it has lasted although if you look at the forum the dr who % is not particularly high it tends to come all at once and for a few days there are more postings on this than anything else    |
|
|
|
Post by Ian on Nov 5, 2003 17:47:52 GMT
Plus of course it's far cheaper to keep a cabinet full of bound comics on one side of the office than it is to store racks of film reels and VT spools in carefully climate-controlled warehouses... Not much archive material was ever lept in absolute optimum conditions though. Much of the stuff that has managed to survive to this day has had periods in it's life when it was not well looked after, languishing in damp warehouses etc etc. It still managed to survive despite neglect however, which only proves that material is more durable than legend has traditionally stated. Only the BFI seems to have kept stuff in anything like an ideal way in the past. I'm not sure what the situation is these days though. A cabinet full of archived comics has it's own unique preserbation problems, I know. However, athough just about any comic from the last 50 years or more will have been preserved for posterity, TV hasn't been cared for even half as well despite being at least as important sociologically. |
|
|
|
Post by William Martin on Nov 6, 2003 14:45:41 GMT
also dr who is a series of serials so that you have to get
6 episodes or so to complete a story, with most other programs 1 episode and you have the whole story so finding 1 dr who just gets people exited about the other episodes of that story it isn't the end of the hunt its usualy the start or a continuation and having part of a story just makes people more interested more rumours more myth etc etc
|
|
|
|
Post by Davros on Nov 6, 2003 14:46:27 GMT
Andy- I don't see where you get the 'clearly' about it not being great drama : this is your view only. I'd also recommend noting the difference between their (possessive) and there (as in 'over there').
|
|
|
|
Post by Ian Woodhouse on Nov 6, 2003 15:16:18 GMT
I'd also recommend noting the difference between their (possessive) and there (as in 'over there'). At the risk of starting a bun fight I don't really think this sort of comment is particularly constructive. Anyone can make a slip whilst typing. I also don't think signing on as 'Davros' does much to promote the view that not all fans are scarf wearing w*nkers. |
|
|
|
Post by Alan Hayes on Nov 6, 2003 15:47:25 GMT
With a posting handle like "Davros", it's clear where you stand. I'm a "Doctor Who" fan - have been for nearly thirty years - and I'd never have the nerve to call very much of it "great drama". Entertaining, diverting, amusing and fun, yes. Great drama? Pull the other one. And pointing out spelling and grammatical errors is not only unnecessary and rude, it also says more about *you* than about the person you are correcting... ...particularly when you make mistakes of your own. A space before a colon? How could you???  |
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Nov 6, 2003 17:30:58 GMT
I think the whole "is it great drama or not?" debate is totally irrelevant to what we're discussing here anyway 9as is the subject of archive purgings). By great drama, we are maybe talking Shakespearean qualities. Well, no it isn't that but it certainly is GOOD drama. Good drama that is the product of talented production teams and actors.
A lot of real talent has been involved with Doctor Who over the years and if it wasn't at least engaging and convincing (in a performance and execution sense, if not in terms of special FX) then no one would believe in the characters, the stories or the general mythology of the show. There have been many poor efforts during the run too but at it's best it can rightly be called good drama. Too many people make defensive remarks before stating they like Doctor Who. I don't. That would be to do down the hard work of all those people's efforts. It's not in the top drawer of drama bracket but it's still part of the "solid, dependasble" category (or at least it was in it's heyday).
|
|
, postings are the same, we know how we feel when we are writing them but the reader only has the rather abrupt e-mail style to go on, its easy to accidently offend with an e-mail, i'm sure no offence is intended
