«1

Comments

  • HestiaHestia Posts: 380
    Forum Member
    Listentome wrote: »

    I assume they've used that first photo under the headline to emphasis that it's the 'Horror Channel'? ;-)
  • Shawn_LunnShawn_Lunn Posts: 9,353
    Forum Member
    Fantastic news.
  • Michael_EveMichael_Eve Posts: 14,455
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    :D

    I don't dislike the story as much as a lot of fans, indeed I can find it perfectly enjoyable in a camp sort of way if am in the mood. But....

    That ain't a good photo. At least Sylvester stopped tucking his jumper in after this story!

    (Saw this news advertised elsewhere with a moody Five, Peri and Sharaz Jek shot, so yeah, think someone's having a giraffe. :) )
  • chuffnobblerchuffnobbler Posts: 10,771
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    http://www.horrorchannel.co.uk/articles.php?feature=9522

    I wonder why there's only 30 stories?

    Nice to see it back on telly though. :)
  • VerenceVerence Posts: 104,587
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    30 stories is better than none
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 231
    Forum Member
    I don't have the Horror Channel but do have the DVDs and relevant software to insert intrusive logos, graphics, voice overs and adverts every 5 minutes to enhance these classic adventures.
  • TributeTribute Posts: 820
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I don't have the Horror Channel but do have the DVDs and relevant software to insert intrusive logos, graphics, voice overs and adverts every 5 minutes to enhance these classic adventures.

    Cool story bro.
  • saladfingers81saladfingers81 Posts: 11,301
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Tribute wrote: »
    Cool story bro.

    Not really a story though was it. More an amusing, incisive and relevant point about the way alot of TV drama is spoilt when re-shown on satellite/cable channels. As opposed to a rude and dismissive forum/comments thread one liner which was dated and unfunny enough five years ago. What next? tl:dr? Dear oh dear.
  • TributeTribute Posts: 820
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Not really a story though was it. More an amusing, incisive and relevant point about the way alot of TV drama is spoilt when re-shown on satellite/cable channels. As opposed to a rude and dismissive forum/comments thread one liner which was dated and unfunny enough five years ago. What next? tl:dr? Dear oh dear.

    Oooh get you! For future reference, be sure to use a question mark when asking a question.
  • davrosdodebirddavrosdodebird Posts: 8,692
    Forum Member
    Not really a story though was it. More an amusing, incisive and relevant point about the way alot of TV drama is spoilt when re-shown on satellite/cable channels. As opposed to a rude and dismissive forum/comments thread one liner which was dated and unfunny enough five years ago. What next? tl:dr? Dear oh dear.

    Come off it Salad, the fact that outweighs these negatives completely is simply the fact that its being shown on tv at all :p
  • saladfingers81saladfingers81 Posts: 11,301
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Come off it Salad, the fact that outweighs these negatives completely is simply the fact that its being shown on tv at all :p

    Certainly not a bad thing no. But Lord Melbury has a point. Especially with the increasing availability of episodes on legal streaming services (admittedly not enough episodes) the frequent butchering of the show as seen on Watch etc with terrible edits, scenes cut, cheap intrusive graphics is relevant. Not saying it will necessarily be that way on the Horror Channel (though it probably will be).
  • davrosdodebirddavrosdodebird Posts: 8,692
    Forum Member
    Intrusive cuts I can't stand either, but I'm hopeful with the Horror showings, because the 22 minute format lends itself brilliantly to an ad-funded channel like Watch ;)
  • saladfingers81saladfingers81 Posts: 11,301
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Intrusive cuts I can't stand either, but I'm hopeful with the Horror showings, because the 22 minute format lends itself brilliantly to an ad-funded channel like Watch ;)

    I wouldn't be so sure but lets hope so. I am sure it will be good for those people that can afford to pay a monthly subscription for Sky etc but cant afford to buy the DVDs and maybe some casual viewers will get to enjoy some episodes theyve never seen before.

    I just find the treatment of episodes by channels like Watch insulting. The terrible editing, arbitrary advert breaks and intrusive banners announcing a forthcoming 'Keeping Up Appearances' marathon don't exactly enhance the viewing experience. But the worst thing is when they just cut scenes out to fit the running time the channel has. Some moron wielding scissors and saying 'well this bit doesn't matter-lets cut it' is terrible and highly disrespectful. Either show the episode properly or leave it to a channel that can.

    If you had to pay to borrow a book from a library you wouldn't tolerate them tearing a couple of chapters out to ensure the book fits on the shelf.
  • VerenceVerence Posts: 104,587
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    Intrusive cuts I can't stand either, but I'm hopeful with the Horror showings, because the 22 minute format lends itself brilliantly to an ad-funded channel like Watch ;)

    Don't a lot of the early stories have a deliberate fade to black halfway through each episode so
    as to provide a convenient time for foreign channels who bought the show to insert an ad break??
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 231
    Forum Member
    Verence wrote: »
    Don't a lot of the early stories have a deliberate fade to black halfway through each episode so
    as to provide a convenient time for foreign channels who bought the show to insert an ad break??

    I believe this was only done on some black and white eps. Sadly alot of channels never put the ads in the correct place the director intended.
  • Tom TitTom Tit Posts: 2,554
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    This should please all of those people who for some strange reason will only watch a TV programme when it's shown on TV... relics, I think they're called ;)
  • chuffnobblerchuffnobbler Posts: 10,771
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I might well watch the Horror TV reruns, even though I have the whole lot on DVD. It felt like an event, to watch An Unearthly Child on BBC4 recently, and I like the idea of watching old Who on the telly. It will be interesting to see what happens with ad breaks, idents, coming soon, etc, and I am keen to know what any new viewers might make of it. :)
  • chuffnobblerchuffnobbler Posts: 10,771
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Tom Tit wrote: »
    This should please all of those people who for some strange reason will only watch a TV programme when it's shown on TV... relics, I think they're called ;)

    Charmed, I'm sure.
  • doctor blue boxdoctor blue box Posts: 7,327
    Forum Member
    I don't have the Horror Channel but do have the DVDs and relevant software to insert intrusive logos, graphics, voice overs and adverts every 5 minutes to enhance these classic adventures.
    For those who don't have access to streaming or the money/inclination to buy an episode without first seeing then it's great to have them on tv at all. Someone for whom tv was the only way they could watch would probably be overjoyed at this news.

    I personally have access to netflix, but would happily sit and watch an episode on the horror channel, despite breaks /logo's etc. There's something that gives a more atmospheric, authentic feel about watching something on tv. Anyone who is 20+ should be used to breaks/logo's as it wasn't all that long ago that tv was the only option. Just personal preference I suppose.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 231
    Forum Member
    For those who don't have access to streaming or the money/inclination to buy an episode without first seeing then it's great to have them on tv at all. Someone for whom tv was the only way they could watch would probably be overjoyed at this news.

    I personally have access to netflix, but would happily sit and watch an episode on the horror channel, despite breaks /logo's etc. There's something that gives a more atmospheric, authentic feel about watching something on tv. Anyone who is 20+ should be used to breaks/logo's as it wasn't all that long ago that tv was the only option.

    It is great classic DW is on Telly, UKGold in the 90's contributed to my fanaticism and had it been ruined like modern times, it probably wouldn't have spoilt my enjoyment on the first viewing.
  • Zeppelyn56Zeppelyn56 Posts: 455
    Forum Member
    Horror Channel? Don't get that, Sci Fi or Drama yea but Who classed as horror! Shouldn't these channel just call themselves Anything 1, 2, 3 etc, every time I look at the listings for Drama channel there seems to be hours of comedy on there.
  • Westy2Westy2 Posts: 14,493
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Have they forked out for the remastered versions?
  • CELT1987CELT1987 Posts: 12,355
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Westy2 wrote: »
    Have they forked out for the remastered versions?
    Doubt it. Probably the old master tapes.
  • be more pacificbe more pacific Posts: 19,061
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    CELT1987 wrote: »
    Doubt it. Probably the old master tapes.
    Once a channel acquires the rights to specific episodes, is there any stipulation that they must use certain sources? Surely even the remastered DVDs would be a better source than the old master tapes?

    The copies of Star Trek and Wonder Woman used by Horror Channel have been modern remastered versions, though. Plus Watch recently showed Spearhead from Space in HD. So, hopefully, BBC Worldwide would provide remastered versions as standard these days.
Sign In or Register to comment.