|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 17, 2009 16:21:20 GMT 12
Polar Blast - Is that when those big white beers in Alaska get hold of guns?
|
|
|
Post by ZacYates on Jun 17, 2009 16:51:26 GMT 12
So have you guys had much luck passing on your views to the networks regards the apparent downward trend in the "news" broadcasts?
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 17, 2009 18:33:36 GMT 12
I have very little faith in that idea Zac. I once made a complaint to TVNZ back when they used to cut BBC programmes down so they could cram adverts into them and keep to a half-hour time slot. I was particularly pee-oe'd when a programme that I knew to be 27 minutes in length in its complete form haf nine whole minutes trimmed by their editing department. So I made a complaint.
Over six months later I finally heard back, with a letter that was full of blatant lies. They claimed they never made any trims to the particular episode, and that it was aired as supplied. Considering I knew the writer of the show as a personal friend, and also some contacts in the BBC, I knew they were totally lying to cover their own arses. This was in about 1995 back when the network was considered to be responsible and the nation's network. Considering what I think of that network these days I doubt any complaints would make a jot of difference.
|
|
|
Post by ZacYates on Jun 17, 2009 19:32:35 GMT 12
Fair. I'm happy to watch the news to get a rough idea of what's been going on around the place. Not much else to really do after work
|
|
|
Post by stu on Jun 17, 2009 21:49:01 GMT 12
So have you guys had much luck passing on your views to the networks regards the apparent downward trend in the "news" broadcasts? A sharpened length of wood applying propulsion to brown smelly and pliable stuff up an incline would result in a more positive personal result I'm afraid.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 17, 2009 22:03:32 GMT 12
Stu, you paint such vivid mental pictures mate, YOU should read the news! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Jun 17, 2009 22:58:33 GMT 12
leading headlines on tonights TV1 news... Startling revelations on the Mark Lundy case exposed (in the previous Programme on the same channel!)
Barack Obama sucessfully swats fly.
Quality journalism at its best....
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on Jun 18, 2009 10:44:59 GMT 12
Dave, maybe they did get those shows (I presume you refer to Dad's Army and It Aint Half Hot Mum) in a format from the BBC which was already changed to allow for ads? It is annoying though, I agree.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 18, 2009 11:07:58 GMT 12
Hi Joe, yes the nine minute cut was Dad's Army. I assure you I made enquiries and no, the BBC did not edit any of its material before sending it off. Remember that the BBC used to sell their stuff in packages overseas that would circulte. So a reel film would come to NZ, and several networks in Australia, and Hong Kong, and Singapore, etc doing the rounds, before it returned home to London or was destroyed by order at the last point of call. That's how many lost shows have been recovered over the years where the last point of call forgot to destroy them and they were in their vaults. That's another story. But no the BBC definately didn't do the trimming, they wouldn't because they don't know the lenght of each network's adbreaks, and it's morally wrong. At the same time TVNZ was also cutting ITV stuff like The Bill, etc and it was only because a huge campaign was started by the old grannies who watch Coro Street which they were slashing by ten minutes per epside (rememebr ITV actually allows already for adbreaks, TVNZ was adding more) that this was all exposed eventually and a stop was put to it. TVNZ thought the world would end if shows didn't end on the hour or half hour. They didn't realise viewers wanted to see the entire programme. Dickheads. Money-grubbing lying dickheads.
I spoke with Jimmy Perry about these cuts and he was mortified. I mean their work is art, and it's like some numbnuts cutting a third off the bottom of the Mona Lisa so they can put an sponsor's advertising banner across the bottom of the frame.
Australia was doing the same thing for a while, for what it's worth. The BBC lost two episodes of It Ain't Half Hot Mum, and I ran a campaign to track them down. I eventually found them, a nice chap in Australia had recorded them off TV in Australia. Sadly the episodes had both been trimmed by their broadcaster by about two-three minutes to squeeze in adverts, and some vital bits of the dialogue were lost (I have the scripts thanks to co-writer David Croft who made copies for me). If you buy the Series One DVD now, the episodes that I recovered and returned to the BBC are on there as extras. I wish that more complete copies in better condition would turn up, they're vitally important to the whole series as one deals directly with Parky's parentage and sets it all up for how things went for the rest of the series, and the other has vital storyline too, where he joins the concert party.
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on Jun 18, 2009 11:19:57 GMT 12
I have those DVD's and I have seen the missing episodes you speak of. Well done to you on locating those.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 18, 2009 12:01:50 GMT 12
No worries. It was great to find them. Sadly not in great condition, missing scenes and also poorly recorded, but a hell of a lot better than not at all. I know that Jimmy and David were really pleased that they were found. We have no idea how those two got wiped in the first place, they were not meant to have been. Someone in the archive must have made an error.
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on Jun 19, 2009 10:41:27 GMT 12
The mini doco on the Dad's Army DVD Series One was very interesting dealing with those lost episodes and how they clean up the old footage.
Anyway, the news. I just watched the rocket lifting off to go and map the moon, the first NASA lunar mission this century. It apparently will map the moon and look for suitable landing places for a manned lunar mission scheduled for around 2020. Very intersting, but what was wrong with the landing sites used during the Apollo missions I wonder?
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Jun 19, 2009 11:02:35 GMT 12
Very intersting, but what was wrong with the landing sites used during the Apollo missions I wonder? They've all been swallowed up by urban developers or closed by NIMBY neighbours... you know how it is with landing sites these days!
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on Jun 19, 2009 11:10:47 GMT 12
Those complaining Lunarites again! I wonder, would they have a Grey political party?
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 19, 2009 12:11:11 GMT 12
Joe, my guess is the original lunar landing sites would be no good because when the capsules lifted off the surface they left the base behind, so each site will have a hazard to clear in the form of 1960's and 1970's litter. One of them will be even more hazardous as the rocket motors may injest a gold ball that Alan Shepherd was hitting around. ;D
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Jun 19, 2009 12:18:41 GMT 12
The other aspect perhaps is the fact that they are historic sites (especially Tranquility Base) so you wouldn't want to have people walking all over Neil Armstrong's and Buzz Aldrin's footprints......mind you it'll be good to have some mapping of the sites to show the doubters that the Apollo guys did land there, although even then the nutjobs would still deny it as it's a NASA flight after all....
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Jun 19, 2009 13:04:15 GMT 12
Joe, my guess is the original lunar landing sites would be no good because when the capsules lifted off the surface they left the base behind, so each site will have a hazard to clear in the form of 1960's and 1970's litter. One of them will be even more hazardous as the rocket motors may injest a gold ball that Alan Shepherd was hitting around. ;D From memory, at least one of the old landing sites is in a area that is somewhat worse for landing on than the surveys of the time indicated. And if your rocket motor has the potential to injest anything, something has gone horribly wrong! :-) They may be aiming for the poles where there is more chance of water ice being accessible - very handy for a base.
|
|
|
Post by fletcherfu24 on Jun 19, 2009 19:12:34 GMT 12
Don't you see the lunar landing site set when you tour Paramount Studios?.....
|
|
|
Post by lumpy on Jun 19, 2009 20:01:35 GMT 12
My thought would be , that if you have already landed somewhere , and there wasnt too much interesting there - then try landing somewhere else .( a bit like visiting night clubs at 2 am )
|
|
|
Post by alanw on Jun 19, 2009 21:33:52 GMT 12
I guess landing on historic sites, coupled with debris from previous landings would disqualify previous areas, but there is only a small area of the Moon that we can actually land on, and that is the dividing zone between the hot (light)/cold (dark) areas of the moon. The narrow strip is neither too hot or too cold, (some what like where the earth sits in it's distance from the sun, Venus too hot, Mars too cold). I guess if they want to build a base type area, high meteor impact areas would need to be avoided (obviously ) Not to mention the cheesy areas, the current lunarite habitations, the Man in the Moon's home, the cow who tried to jump over the moon, all no go areas ;D ;D
|
|