Cartman
Producer
Posts: 4,026
Online Status:
|
Post by Cartman on Dec 26, 2021 21:48:39 GMT
Did anyone watch this today, with David Tennant? I did and it was terrible. Possibly the worst thing I've seen so far this Christmas. It was sort of turned into a Day of the Jackal type thing, with an assassination attempt, and it just didn't work.
The 1956 film version with David Niven is massively better.
|
|
Nightfly
Screenwriter
Posts: 908
Online Status:
|
Post by Nightfly on Dec 26, 2021 22:17:36 GMT
Did anyone watch this today, with David Tennant? I did and it was terrible. Possibly the worst thing I've seen so far this Christmas. It was sort of turned into a Day of the Jackal type thing, with an assassination attempt, and it just didn't work. The 1956 film version with David Niven is massively better. It was one I had marked down to watch on catch up, but I think I will give it a miss. The odd bit of artistic licence when remaking a classic is sometimes OK, but not if they butcher it. Thanks for the warning.
|
|
Cartman
Producer
Posts: 4,026
Online Status:
|
Post by Cartman on Dec 26, 2021 22:35:32 GMT
It looked like the compliance and diversity department had been working overtime on it too.
|
|
The Saint
Moderator
Swinging London - 1967
Posts: 5,420
Online Status:
|
Post by The Saint on Dec 28, 2021 9:43:03 GMT
I watched the first 2 episodes, wasn’t particularly impressed.
The Saint
|
|
Sparky
Producer
Status? Would that be Credit or in Society?
Posts: 2,784
Online Status:
|
Post by Sparky on Dec 29, 2021 9:57:35 GMT
It looked like the compliance and diversity department had been working overtime on it too. Every BBC script has to go through that particular focus group first.
The late great Trevor Preston ranted about the fact writers aren't given any freedom in TV any longer - a script/story has to fit a particular agenda - and is quite often cast before any script is written. Even ITV seems to be going that way too.
I watched up to about 10 minutes past the opening and then watched Only Fools and Horses on DVD.
|
|
The Saint
Moderator
Swinging London - 1967
Posts: 5,420
Online Status:
|
Post by The Saint on Dec 29, 2021 10:00:27 GMT
I watched up to about 10 minutes past the opening and then watched Only Fools and Horses on DVD. Good choice Sparky, you know it makes sense! The Saint
|
|
Palmer
Cameraman
Posts: 396
Online Status:
|
Post by Palmer on Dec 29, 2021 16:01:47 GMT
I caught a little bit of this and was not overly impressed...
To be fair I am never really impressed by television productions of this day and age!!
It was the over the top, overly dramatic calculations about getting a train over a rickety bridge that killed me inside just a tad...
I do feel that shows today manage to eek 15 minutes of viewing out of 5 minutes of script/direction.
Thank goodness for classic television is all I say!!!
|
|
Sparky
Producer
Status? Would that be Credit or in Society?
Posts: 2,784
Online Status:
|
Post by Sparky on Dec 29, 2021 16:30:14 GMT
I do feel that shows today manage to eek 15 minutes of viewing out of 5 minutes of script/direction. Thank goodness for classic television is all I say!!! They seem to eek way too much out of backstories and have a number of sub plots that have nothing to do with the main storyline - then the whole lot needs to be tied up by the end.
We have a different breed of writers these days;the ones who'll happily write a story/script and sit in a focus group - (or "development meeting" - as the BBC calls them) and make all the changes that the producers would like, keeping them happy.
Decent writers often have something to say in their scripts, and will stand their ground and cause problems if Producers try to muck about with scripts. Many of the new breed would never visit set during shooting - most of the old ones would turn up day after day and socialise with everyone. Jack Rosenthal was notorious for this.
Though, we do have a breed of great writers out there - sadly most of their work either ends up unseen by the masses, as their films tend to get made by independent producers with not a lot of available budget, only seen in a "straight to DVD" vain, some random digital TV channel in an odd ball slot, or at a special screening in an Arts Cinema.
Now and again, you will get some good stuff that does get through. Though would have gone through the usual Focus Group scrutiny.
Modern producers always want to go with a "trend" or "theme" - jump on a band wagon. You'll suddenly end up with a pile of Police/Murder series for instance.
I still think there is a place for stuff like Play For Today, Red Letter Day, Armchair Cinema type shows and they would work just as well as they did years back, providing there wasn't the "interference" from the dicks in suits confined to their conference rooms and power point presentations and never setting foot in the "real world" of film making.
Rant No #54789 over!
|
|
Nightfly
Screenwriter
Posts: 908
Online Status:
|
Post by Nightfly on Dec 29, 2021 18:49:20 GMT
Rant No #54789 over! Spot on ! It should always be the writer's voice that is important, not their background or ability to write something a focus group wants to see. It's all in the words on the page. The ability to tell a good story. Years ago this seemed to apply and many writers didn't seek recognition as they wanted their work to speak for itself. In the late 70s I remember a BBC play written by a chap called Aeaneas McBride. It turned out it was a pen name for Fulton MacKay and he got mightily peeved when a newspaper revealed his secret. It was a serious Scottish historical play and he didn't want people to judge it on it being written by "that funny guy from Porridge".
|
|
Sparky
Producer
Status? Would that be Credit or in Society?
Posts: 2,784
Online Status:
|
Post by Sparky on Dec 29, 2021 19:11:13 GMT
Rant No #54789 over! Spot on ! It should always be the writer's voice that is important, not their background or ability to write something a focus group wants to see. It's all in the words on the page. The ability to tell a good story. Years ago this seemed to apply and many writers didn't seek recognition as they wanted their work to speak for itself. In the late 70s I remember a BBC play written by a chap called Aeaneas McBride. It turned out it was a pen name for Fulton MacKay and he got mightily peeved when a newspaper revealed his secret. It was a serious Scottish historical play and he didn't want people to judge it on it being written by "that funny guy from Porridge". There was a couple of other pen names too..
Gerald Wiley = Ronnie Barker Tony Marsh = Troy Kennedy-Martin
Another annoyance is when a classic story/theme is messed about with to make it more "topical" towards a current agenda/attitude. Then there's the "reboot".....
|
|