The Doctor wrote:
In article <0$XxtkCiH9TlFwDi@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>,
John Hall <john@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
It did mean there was more "light and shade" when everything didn't go
at 100 mph. There was also more chance of being able to follow the
plot when there was time for coherent explanations in the dialogue.
I've also found that as I get older I've had increasing difficult in
following high-speed action sequences in TV shows and films; my brain
no longer seems able to process visual input fast enough to keep up.
Still this is 25 minutes 7 parts.
Do the math!
The story has been abridged Dave... but it's still the same story. The
edited version isn't aimed at you.
It's not like there wasn't quite a lot of padding in those seven episodes anyway, so I'm sure it was easy enough to cut-out some of the dead moments.
In article <0$XxtkCiH9TlFwDi@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>,
John Hall <john@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
It did mean there was more "light and shade" when everything didn't go
at 100 mph. There was also more chance of being able to follow the
plot when there was time for coherent explanations in the dialogue.
I've also found that as I get older I've had increasing difficult in following high-speed action sequences in TV shows and films; my brain
no longer seems able to process visual input fast enough to keep up.
Still this is 25 minutes 7 parts.
Do the math!
The Doctor wrote:
In article <0$XxtkCiH9TlFwDi@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>,
John Hall <john@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
It did mean there was more "light and shade" when everything didn't go
at 100 mph. There was also more chance of being able to follow the
plot when there was time for coherent explanations in the dialogue.
I've also found that as I get older I've had increasing difficult in
following high-speed action sequences in TV shows and films; my brain
no longer seems able to process visual input fast enough to keep up.
Still this is 25 minutes 7 parts.
Do the math!
The story has been abridged Dave... but it's still the same story. The
edited version isn't aimed at you.
It's not like there wasn't quite a lot of padding in those seven episodes >anyway, so I'm sure it was easy enough to cut-out some of the dead moments.
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Still this is 25 minutes 7 parts.
Do the math!
The story has been abridged Dave... but it's still the same story. The edited version isn't aimed at you.
It's not like there wasn't quite a lot of padding in those seven
episodes anyway, so I'm sure it was easy enough to cut-out some of the
dead moments.
We’ll see soon enough. The Cushing movie adaptation/rewrite ran to 83 minutes - and still felt slow in places as well as adding a few comedic touches for Roy Castle - so 75 minutes may be plenty to convey every meaningful moment from the serial.
The Last Doctor wrote:
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Still this is 25 minutes 7 parts.
Do the math!
The story has been abridged Dave... but it's still the same story. The
edited version isn't aimed at you.
It's not like there wasn't quite a lot of padding in those seven
episodes anyway, so I'm sure it was easy enough to cut-out some of the
dead moments.
We’ll see soon enough. The Cushing movie adaptation/rewrite ran to 83
minutes - and still felt slow in places as well as adding a few comedic
touches for Roy Castle - so 75 minutes may be plenty to convey every
meaningful moment from the serial.
I think with the earlier stuff it'll work out okay. They generally were
slow paced stories as that's how TV was back then, plus they had to fill
up the required episodes.
Obviously we'll have to see the abridged version of "The Daleks" to judge, >and maybe knowing the full-length story will help us where there are bits
cut out, but on the face of it 75 minutes is a long enough time to tell a >story.
Regardless, I think it's great idea to try and get new viewers to watch
the 1960's Doctor Who stories. So I'm all for colourised edits of 1960's >Doctor Who.
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <0$XxtkCiH9TlFwDi@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>,
John Hall <john@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
It did mean there was more "light and shade" when everything didn't go >>>> at 100 mph. There was also more chance of being able to follow the
plot when there was time for coherent explanations in the dialogue.
I've also found that as I get older I've had increasing difficult in
following high-speed action sequences in TV shows and films; my brain
no longer seems able to process visual input fast enough to keep up.
Still this is 25 minutes 7 parts.
Do the math!
The story has been abridged Dave... but it's still the same story. The
edited version isn't aimed at you.
It's not like there wasn't quite a lot of padding in those seven episodes
anyway, so I'm sure it was easy enough to cut-out some of the dead moments. >>
We’ll see soon enough. The Cushing movie adaptation/rewrite ran to 83 >minutes - and still felt slow in places as well as adding a few comedic >touches for Roy Castle - so 75 minutes may be plenty to convey every >meaningful moment from the serial.
--
"I'm not going to unwrite my good friend Chris Chibnall's work on 'The >Timeless Children'. I'm not going to deny what he wrote. I'm going with it. >It's absolutely fine." — Russell T. Davies
In article <nnd$169e7b75$64d9e080@380c9df32d761a72>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Still this is 25 minutes 7 parts.
Do the math!
The story has been abridged Dave... but it's still the same story. The edited version isn't aimed at you.
It's not like there wasn't quite a lot of padding in those seven
episodes anyway, so I'm sure it was easy enough to cut-out some of the
dead moments.
Hence why onlie that say I love the 7 parter in tact !
The Doctor wrote:
In article<nnd$169e7b75$64d9e080@380c9df32d761a72>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Still this is 25 minutes 7 parts.
Do the math!
The story has been abridged Dave... but it's still the same story. The edited version isn't aimed at you.
It's not like there wasn't quite a lot of padding in those seven
episodes anyway, so I'm sure it was easy enough to cut-out some of the dead moments.
Hence why onlie that say I love the 7 parter in tact !
Nobody is stopping you loving the seven part story, intact. The 75 minute edit of "The Daleks" is aimed at a new audience. If you don't like the
idea of it as it's not intact, and/or don't want to watch it, fine, stop going on about it. It was not done for you.
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 06:03:21 -0800, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Hence why onlie that say I love the 7 parter in tact !
Nobody is stopping you loving the seven part story, intact. The 75
minute edit of "The Daleks" is aimed at a new audience. If you don't
like the idea of it as it's not intact, and/or don't want to watch it, fine, stop going on about it. It was not done for you.
TV executives "aiming at a new audience" by refusing to
show the classic black and white Doctor Who are like
the executives who refuse to show 1.33 shows without
butchering the picture. It is a problem caused by
management not by viewers.
Younger viewers may be attracted to old programming
*because it is different*, not because it's the same
as modern TV.
all of the Doctor Who
episodes since 1963 are available to stream free on the BBC iPlayer.
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 21:31:48 +0000, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
all of the Doctor Who
episodes since 1963 are available to stream free on the BBC iPlayer.
They've found all the missing episodes, e.g. the entire Marco Polo
story arc, and most of the Patrick Troughton era.
I think you left "extent" out of your above comment.--
--
Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.
Tim Merrigan
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 06:03:21 -0800, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article<nnd$169e7b75$64d9e080@380c9df32d761a72>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Still this is 25 minutes 7 parts.
Do the math!
The story has been abridged Dave... but it's still the same story. The >> > > edited version isn't aimed at you.
It's not like there wasn't quite a lot of padding in those seven
episodes anyway, so I'm sure it was easy enough to cut-out some of the >> > > dead moments.
Hence why onlie that say I love the 7 parter in tact !
Nobody is stopping you loving the seven part story, intact. The 75 minute
edit of "The Daleks" is aimed at a new audience. If you don't like the
idea of it as it's not intact, and/or don't want to watch it, fine, stop
going on about it. It was not done for you.
TV executives "aiming at a new audience" by refusing to
show the classic black and white Doctor Who are like
the executives who refuse to show 1.33 shows without
butchering the picture. It is a problem caused by
management not by viewers.
Colorization is goldbrick engineering, as in intended
to waste time and money. It involves extreme processing
of the film with resultant lowering of the fidelity.
A standard trick of colorizers since 1985 is to do a
false comparison of a "before and after" by taking the
finished project and then turning the color off and
then proclaiming how better the colorization is to
black and white. An honest comparison is avoided
because it shows the re-engineering to be a weakening
of the picture compared to the original.
Younger viewers may be attracted to old programming
*because it is different*, not because it's the same
as modern TV.
Pluted Pup wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 06:03:21 -0800, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Hence why onlie that say I love the 7 parter in tact !
Nobody is stopping you loving the seven part story, intact. The 75
minute edit of "The Daleks" is aimed at a new audience. If you don't
like the idea of it as it's not intact, and/or don't want to watch it,
fine, stop going on about it. It was not done for you.
TV executives "aiming at a new audience" by refusing to
show the classic black and white Doctor Who are like
the executives who refuse to show 1.33 shows without
butchering the picture. It is a problem caused by
management not by viewers.
They are not refusing to show classic Doctor Who... all of the Doctor Who >episodes since 1963 are available to stream free on the BBC iPlayer. (Bar
the first story, because of the recent fuss.) This forthcoming colourised
75 minute edit of "The Daleks" is in addition to the proper seven part >version already available online.
https://www.bbc.com/articles/c4nlwr5pxw1o
Like everything with Doctor Who these days it's just people moaning for
the sake of moaning... as nobody has lost out on anything. Want to watch
the "The Daleks" in black and white, all seven episodes of it, from 1963?
Go and watch it then! (On the BBC iPlayer, or BritBox if you are outside
of the UK.)
Younger viewers may be attracted to old programming
*because it is different*, not because it's the same
as modern TV.
They might. But if I was a betting man I'd say the iPlayer viewership
figures of black and white Doctor Who stories will only be a small
fraction of the figures for the colour Doctor Who stories.
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 21:31:48 +0000, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
all of the Doctor Who
episodes since 1963 are available to stream free on the BBC iPlayer.
They've found all the missing episodes, e.g. the entire Marco Polo
story arc, and most of the Patrick Troughton era.
I think you left "extent" out of your above comment.
--
Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.
Tim Merrigan
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. >www.avg.com
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 21:31:48 +0000, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
all of the Doctor Who
episodes since 1963 are available to stream free on the BBC iPlayer.
They've found all the missing episodes, e.g. the entire Marco Polo
story arc, and most of the Patrick Troughton era.
I think you left "extent" out of your above comment.
In article <nnd$2eb49444$0696d987@fe13f44fab772ff7>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Pluted Pup wrote:
Younger viewers may be attracted to old programming
*because it is different*, not because it's the same
as modern TV.
They might. But if I was a betting man I'd say the iPlayer viewership figures of black and white Doctor Who stories will only be a small
fraction of the figures for the colour Doctor Who stories.
The pup is spot on correct!
Pluted Pup <plutedpup@outlook.com> wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 06:03:21 -0800, Blueshirt wrote:
Nobody is stopping you loving the seven part story, intact. The 75
minute edit of "The Daleks" is aimed at a new audience. If you don't
like the idea of it as it's not intact, and/or don't want to watch
it, fine, stop going on about it. It was not done for you.
TV executives "aiming at a new audience" by refusing to
show the classic black and white Doctor Who are like
the executives who refuse to show 1.33 shows without
butchering the picture. It is a problem caused by
management not by viewers.
And if the BBC weren’t going to continue to have the original seven part monochrome serial available IN ADDITION to this new version, that would
be an excellent point.
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 06:03:21 -0800, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article<nnd$169e7b75$64d9e080@380c9df32d761a72>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Still this is 25 minutes 7 parts.
Do the math!
The story has been abridged Dave... but it's still the same story. The >>>> edited version isn't aimed at you.
It's not like there wasn't quite a lot of padding in those seven
episodes anyway, so I'm sure it was easy enough to cut-out some of the >>>> dead moments.
Hence why onlie that say I love the 7 parter in tact !
Nobody is stopping you loving the seven part story, intact. The 75 minute
edit of "The Daleks" is aimed at a new audience. If you don't like the
idea of it as it's not intact, and/or don't want to watch it, fine, stop
going on about it. It was not done for you.
TV executives "aiming at a new audience" by refusing to
show the classic black and white Doctor Who are like
the executives who refuse to show 1.33 shows without
butchering the picture. It is a problem caused by
management not by viewers.
Colorization is goldbrick engineering, as in intended
to waste time and money. It involves extreme processing
of the film with resultant lowering of the fidelity.
A standard trick of colorizers since 1985 is to do a
false comparison of a "before and after" by taking the
finished project and then turning the color off and
then proclaiming how better the colorization is to
black and white. An honest comparison is avoided
because it shows the re-engineering to be a weakening
of the picture compared to the original.
Younger viewers may be attracted to old programming
*because it is different*, not because it's the same
as modern TV.
The Last Doctor wrote:
Pluted Pup <plutedpup@outlook.com> wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 06:03:21 -0800, Blueshirt wrote:
Nobody is stopping you loving the seven part story, intact. The 75
minute edit of "The Daleks" is aimed at a new audience. If you don't
like the idea of it as it's not intact, and/or don't want to watch
it, fine, stop going on about it. It was not done for you.
TV executives "aiming at a new audience" by refusing to
show the classic black and white Doctor Who are like
the executives who refuse to show 1.33 shows without
butchering the picture. It is a problem caused by
management not by viewers.
And if the BBC weren’t going to continue to have the original seven part >> monochrome serial available IN ADDITION to this new version, that would
be an excellent point.
I wouldn't be too precious about the padded out storylines being cut. I
think a good editing job is required on a lot of the older Doctor Who >stories... 1960's stories like "The Daleks" are way too long. You wouldn't
be able to cut them all down to 75 minutes though, but some could
definitely do with a good trim.
I'll have to wait and see what the colourisation looks like, it might be a >bit weird seeing William Hartnell & Co. in colour and it may seem
unnatural even as we are so used to the original b/w versions.
Pluted Pup <plutedpup@outlook.com> wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 06:03:21 -0800, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article<nnd$169e7b75$64d9e080@380c9df32d761a72>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Still this is 25 minutes 7 parts.
Do the math!
The story has been abridged Dave... but it's still the same story. The >>>>> edited version isn't aimed at you.
It's not like there wasn't quite a lot of padding in those seven
episodes anyway, so I'm sure it was easy enough to cut-out some of the >>>>> dead moments.
Hence why onlie that say I love the 7 parter in tact !
Nobody is stopping you loving the seven part story, intact. The 75 minute >>> edit of "The Daleks" is aimed at a new audience. If you don't like the
idea of it as it's not intact, and/or don't want to watch it, fine, stop >>> going on about it. It was not done for you.
TV executives "aiming at a new audience" by refusing to
show the classic black and white Doctor Who are like
the executives who refuse to show 1.33 shows without
butchering the picture. It is a problem caused by
management not by viewers.
And if the BBC weren’t going to continue to have the original seven part >monochrome serial available IN ADDITION to this new version, that would be
an excellent point.
But they are, so it’s moot.
Colorization is goldbrick engineering, as in intended
to waste time and money. It involves extreme processing
of the film with resultant lowering of the fidelity.
A standard trick of colorizers since 1985 is to do a
false comparison of a "before and after" by taking the
finished project and then turning the color off and
then proclaiming how better the colorization is to
black and white. An honest comparison is avoided
because it shows the re-engineering to be a weakening
of the picture compared to the original.
Younger viewers may be attracted to old programming
*because it is different*, not because it's the same
as modern TV.
And they’ll have to option to truly compare and contrast, in this case.
--
"I'm not going to unwrite my good friend Chris Chibnall's work on 'The >Timeless Children'. I'm not going to deny what he wrote. I'm going with it. >It's absolutely fine." — Russell T. Davies
In article <nnd$7079a9c8$548c5fb0@1f396ba739215e90>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
I wouldn't be too precious about the padded out storylines being cut. I think a good editing job is required on a lot of the older Doctor Who stories... 1960's stories like "The Daleks" are way too long. You
wouldn't be able to cut them all down to 75 minutes though, but some
could definitely do with a good trim.
I'll have to wait and see what the colourisation looks like, it might
be a bit weird seeing William Hartnell & Co. in colour and it may seem unnatural even as we are so used to the original b/w versions.
I prefer originals!
On the contrary, we now know that the already announced colourisation of the >show's second ever story, The Daleks, will air at 7:30pm on 23rd November
on BBC Four.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 381 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 54:53:06 |
| Calls: | 8,146 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 13,098 |
| Messages: | 5,858,967 |