Re: Yet another PT fuck up re. "The Three Doctors" DVD

On 3 Dec 2003 04:49:27 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Selaboc) wrote:

>ZC TGS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
>> >> But the fact is they didn't. They showed the van on TV. 
>> >
>> >But they didn't intend to. London is supposed to be empty of traffic
>> >(other than the Daleks in their space ships).
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Then they should have refilmed.
>
>On Doctor Who's budget? you have GOT to be joking.


In which care they should have been extra careful. 











>> >> Doctor Who is full these sorts of things. So do you remove the famous
>> >> hand in The Pyramids of Mars?
>> >
>> >If it were up to me, yes. But the RT has already said it stays because
>> >it's so famous.
>> 
>> 
>> I think you'll find that most fans don't want it removed.
>
>I think you'll find most fans are emarrassed by it.


None of the fans I I've talked to about it find it emarrassing. Most
of them actually like it, even find it amusing.







>> >> Do you find ways to make it appear that
>> >> the sets aren't shaking? 
>> >
>> >What sets are shaking (that aren't supposed to be that is)?
>
>Couldn't give any examples huh?


You know perfectly well that many sets shake in Doctor Who.  Sets in
Tomb of the Cybermen shake.






>> >> >Just out of curiosity -- do you give precedence to the production
>> >> >team's vision whereever possible?
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> I tend to give precedence to what was shown on screen where possible.
>> >> Not what may have been.
>> >
>> >So if there was a five minute "this station is expericening Technical
>> >difficulties" during the episode transmission, that too should be
>> >included on the DVD? If there was a scratch on the film on origional
>> >transmission, that too should be included on the DVD?
>> 
>> 
>> A transmission problem as nothing to do with what is actually filmed
>> and edited and made ready for transmission.
>
>Doesn't matter that's how it was transmitted. What about the scratch
>on the film? that's how it was transmitted. If they didn't want the
>scratch there they should have refilmed, right?


Don't be pedentic. You know perfectly well that a transmission fault
is a technical fault, not what was filmed and edited for showing. You
mentioned a five minute "this station is experiencing technical
problems". Usually faults like that only affect some areas during
transmission and not others. 





>> >> In the case of DIOE, the removal of the van should be a optional extra
>> >> for the viewer to select. Not a forced one. The consumer should have
>> >> the choice to watch what version they want. Is it a optional extra?
>> >
>> >Why should it be? who cares that a 2 pixel van that shouldn't be there
>> >to beging with is missing? who even notices it that hasn't been told
>> >about it?
>> 
>> 
>> Then why remove it then if no one cases? 
>
>If no one cares (and only the anally retentive do) that why keep it?


Because many fans what their DW uncut, as do fans of most shows.

Why bother keeping the titles and recaps between episodes? They don't
have to be there, only fans care about them. Non fans don't give a
toss it's movie format. The fact is that most fans want DW to be uncut
and unedited.



>> Whats the point of preserving Doctor Who, cleaning it up, etc and then
>> doing silly things like removing something that was recorded in the
>> first place.
>
>Because the van is insignificant and wasn't supposed to be there. Just
>like scratches and other technical flaws were not supposed to be
>there.


Once again scratches and technical flaws are not the same as what is
filmed and prepared for transmission.





>> Why do special versions of The Ark in Space and leave the orginal
>> intact? 
>
>because changing the model effects to CGI ones is more significant a
>change than removing a 2-pixel van that wasn't supposed to be in shot
>anyway.

It's still an unwelcome change that many fans don't approve of or
enjoy.




>> Why not do the same for Dalek Invasion of Earth with regard to the van
>> scene? After all they did other optional 'replacement' affects for it.
>
>That was what the person who removed the van thought was going to
>happen. It didn't and most viewer would never have noticed if the RT
>hadn't of said anything.


And yet it worked ok for the other changes. They had options for the
other changes, why not this, hardly a load of extra work.




>> >> I view this in the same way as I view the DVD situation of the Star
>> >> Wars films (original and special editions).
>> >
>> >the existance or not of a 2-second, 2-pixel van isn't anything
>> >comparable expect in the eyes of anal retentive fanboys, IMHO.
>> 
>> 
>> If they want to do special versions then do so, but keep them as
>> extras and the original intact. I remember a posting by Steve Roberts
>> in reply to my own quite some time ago where he said thats how all new
>> special effects and changes should be done, as optional extras.
>
>And as a rule that *IS* how they do things. but making a big deal over
>a 2-pixel van that should not have been there in the first place and
>that 99% of viewer never even noticed is the definition of anally
>retentive.


I your opinion.

As I said many fans want their Doctor Who to be uncut and as filmed.





>> As Shannon said this is a very slippery slope and its
>> counterproductive to change elements of the story, no matter how
>> seemingly minor, especially when the people behind it are supposed to
>> be helping to clean it up and preserve it to the way it looked on
>> transmission.
>
>that's hogwash, IMHO.


AS you say, only in your opinion.

I and other have different views.



>
>> The so called errors are part and parcel of the charm of Doctor Who.
>
>Bullshit. The charm of Doctor Who is in the stories themselves not the
>budgetary limitations.


The charm of Doctor Who consist of different things for different
people.



>> There's no point in doing a 'George Lucas' since that just pisses fans
>> off.
>
>only the anally retentive ones who get pissed off no matter what you
>do, so who cares if they get pissed off.


Complete bull. 
If fans want things uncut, that does not make them retentive. Ask any
fan of any show that gets released on DVD and most will want it uncut,
and usually with extras.



>> All they have done is made me more determined to download SVCDs of the
>> non special edition' of Dalek Invasion of Earth.
>
>Seems to me this is just the excuse you were looking for to do what
>you wanted to do anyway.


Oh, how so. Get your facts straight.

FACT: I already have it on DVD. It was pre-orded. Whether I download
it or not now, it makes no difference since I have the DVD.