Missing episode discovery rumours

14849515354273

Comments

  • Dr jake youngDr jake young Posts: 652
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Lol. A statement confirming an announcement confirming a TV program that will confirm weather the rumors are true or not. Hmm, sounds familiar...
  • radcliffe95radcliffe95 Posts: 4,086
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Finally....
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 983
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Lol. A statement confirming an announcement confirming a TV program that will confirm weather the rumors are true or not. Hmm, sounds familiar...

    Yeah, pretty much :D

    If they say there will be a statement, then that means something is true (followed by days of wild speculation, before someone finally announces they have a few feet of film or if we're really luck a story or two).

    If someone issues a statement saying "As far as I'm aware nothing has been recovered", that is of course a coded message. What they are really saying is "For God sake, it's a Sunday, will you stop calling me about this on my mobile and sod off!"
  • VopiscusVopiscus Posts: 1,559
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    cylob49 wrote: »
    "there will be more Doctor Who in 2013 than ever before." - Steven Moffat

    Well, he's not wrong, is he? Every time a new episode is made there's more Doctor Who than ever before.

    I can't see that this has any bearing on rumours of the recovery of missing episodes.
  • be more pacificbe more pacific Posts: 19,061
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    TEDR wrote: »
    You know what? I still don't believe the story. People that should know better are stuck inside an echo chamber.
    Bizarrely, Ian Levine is probably the one person most responsible for these rumours exploding in June. Yet he gets so excited when news outlets feed back the same old rumours with a few slight tweaks.

    We haven't had any proper news since the "3 tons of evidence" which Phillip Morris denied contained any Doctor Who. Everything else has been "My mate says..." from people who instantly break confidences, yet keep getting new information which conveniently fits around the persistent non-announcement of returned episodes.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 120
    Forum Member
    Vopiscus wrote: »
    i can't see that this has any bearing on rumours of the recovery of missing episodes.

    Well hello Mr Fancy Pants!
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 177
    Forum Member
    DiscoP wrote: »
    Delicate negotiations apparently. VERY delicate negotiations... So which ever way you look at it reporting all this stuff is pretty dumb actually.

    They should just send the SAS in and waste them if you ask me.
  • be more pacificbe more pacific Posts: 19,061
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    They should just send the SAS in and waste them if you ask me.
    In the movie they eventually make of this saga, Jason Statham can storm into the Ethiopian Radio and Television Agency, snapping the necks of anyone who tries to stop him repatriating Billy and Pat's lost episodes.
  • be more pacificbe more pacific Posts: 19,061
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    That has more hedges than Hampton Court Maze. Can't any of these Orwellian gits construct an unequivocal sentence?
  • KapellmeisterKapellmeister Posts: 41,322
    Forum Member
    I do hate to say I told you so but... :D
  • adams66adams66 Posts: 3,945
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Bizarrely, Ian Levine is probably the one person most responsible for these rumours exploding in June. Yet he gets so excited when news outlets feed back the same old rumours with a few slight tweaks.

    We haven't had any proper news since the "3 tons of evidence" which Phillip Morris denied contained any Doctor Who. Everything else has been "My mate says..." from people who instantly break confidences, yet keep getting new information which conveniently fits around the persistent non-announcement of returned episodes.

    This story goes round and round and round rehashing the same non-information. Somebody says it's true, and then with no proof whatsoever, other people report it as fact - and when questioned they say, it's all true because someone else said it was true!! That's their proof!!

    What kind of madness is this??
  • PrimalIcePrimalIce Posts: 2,897
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    If they have found complete stories i'm baffled as to why they are going to sell two individual episodes from two different stories. Also the fact they are selling them online does this bypass the need for classification?

    I have to admit this is all very interesting but I wont be convinced until its an official announcement (I note the RT offers no sources and says WW refuse to confirm it) or of course it becomes available on Wednesday
  • saladfingers81saladfingers81 Posts: 11,301
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    So could it be that the two episodes released are like a taster and treat of what's to come? Then they will announce a mass hoard and set about releasing them next year? Who knows.
  • RooksRooks Posts: 9,079
    Forum Member
    PrimalIce wrote: »
    If they have found complete stories i'm baffled as to why they are going to sell two individual episodes from two different stories. Also the fact they are selling them online does this bypass the need for classification?

    Best guess? Maybe the others aren't ready for a release? Or maybe the BBC are trying to maximise profits on this since it's bound to have cost them a pretty penny :)

    Either way the story is finally coming to a head after all these months.
  • VopiscusVopiscus Posts: 1,559
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Could someone call an ambulance, i am hyperventilating....

    I was reduced to saying "What? What?" like an apoplectic Tennant. Explains why BBFC didn't hold any info, though.
  • Michael_EveMichael_Eve Posts: 14,424
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I do hate to say I told you so but... :D

    Well there's no need to be smug. :mad:

    Joking. This is very exciting. :D

    (Does rubbish Jacklin-esque dance around room.)
  • adams66adams66 Posts: 3,945
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The Radio Times story is very interesting - but still no actual proof. And I still don't get why a BBC spokesperson would deny the story if it really was true. I simply can't see what could be gained by an outright denial if something really had been found.

    Asked by RadioTimes.com if there were around 90 missing episodes from the 1960s a BBC statement said: “There are always rumours and speculation about Doctor Who missing episodes being discovered – however we cannot confirm any new finds.”

    A spokeswoman added: “We can’t confirm because it’s not true, as far as I’m aware."


    Why is the RT running the same quote that we heard from the BBC some months ago? Has RT asked for details from the BBC today? If not, why not?

    My brain hurts...
  • be more pacificbe more pacific Posts: 19,061
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    So could it be that the two episodes released are like a taster and treat of what's to come? Then they will announce a mass hoard and set about releasing them next year? Who knows.
    In which case, it would make most sense to release first episodes. A couple of random mid-serial episodes would only make sense to those who already own the audio versions of the complete stories.
  • GARETH197901GARETH197901 Posts: 22,291
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    adams66 wrote: »
    The Radio Times story is very interesting - but still no actual proof. And I still don't get why a BBC spokesperson would deny the story if it really was true. I simply can't see what could be gained by an outright denial if something really had been found.

    Asked by RadioTimes.com if there were around 90 missing episodes from the 1960s a BBC statement said: “There are always rumours and speculation about Doctor Who missing episodes being discovered – however we cannot confirm any new finds.”

    A spokeswoman added: “We can’t confirm because it’s not true, as far as I’m aware."


    And anyway, isn't this the same denial, the very same quote that we heard some weeks ago? So has RT really asked for details from the BBC today? If so, why did they get the very same denial that the BBC had issued weeks ago?

    My brain hurts...

    that is because it is the quote they gave in june being repeated as part of the story
  • saladfingers81saladfingers81 Posts: 11,301
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    In which case, it would make most sense to release first episodes. A couple of random mid-serial episodes would only make sense to those who already own the audio versions of the complete stories.

    Agreed. Sounds odd. Sure all will become clear...ish.
  • PrimalIcePrimalIce Posts: 2,897
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    adams66 wrote: »
    The Radio Times story is very interesting - but still no actual proof. And I still don't get why a BBC spokesperson would deny the story if it really was true. I simply can't see what could be gained by an outright denial if something really had been found.

    Asked by RadioTimes.com if there were around 90 missing episodes from the 1960s a BBC statement said: “There are always rumours and speculation about Doctor Who missing episodes being discovered – however we cannot confirm any new finds.”

    A spokeswoman added: “We can’t confirm because it’s not true, as far as I’m aware."


    And anyway, isn't this the same denial, the very same quote that we heard some weeks ago? So has RT really asked for details from the BBC today? If so, why did they get the very same denial that the BBC had issued weeks ago?

    My brain hurts...

    That was from june. But i agree to still be cautious. I was at 1% but im about 60% belief now. Either way this finishes Wednesday!
  • Captain StableCaptain Stable Posts: 2,242
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    PrimalIce wrote: »
    If they have found complete stories i'm baffled as to why they are going to sell two individual episodes from two different stories.

    Maybe only 1 episode from 2 different stories have been found among the haul (ie: all the other episodes complete stories, but there are 2 Orphan episodes still, and rather than releasing a new Lost In Time, they're selling them on their own?)
Sign In or Register to comment.