Hi all,

Here is an article on the Fanderson news page
about the UFO movie -- there's nothing new here
except the statement that Gerry Anderson has
seen the press release:

   http://www.fanderson.org.uk/news/ufomovie.html

Marc

And then there is this that was e-mailed to me (not sure of the original site it
came from) - KP

Exclusive: Gerry Anderson on the UFO movie
Martin Anderson



The grand master of British TV sci-fi talks to us about the new movie based on
his 1970 cult TV series…
Published on Jun 5, 2009

I was lucky enough to have a second chat with Gerry Anderson yesterday about the
forthcoming DVD release of Fireball XL5, and - being a huge fan of the original
1970s series UFO - I naturally wanted to know more about the new UFO movie
announced at Cannes a few weeks back.

"I got a call from somebody in America," Anderson told us. "it was very kind
actually - they phoned to say, 'Gerry, listen, there's an announcement going out
now [about the new movie] and we didn't want it to come as a shock to you',
which was a kind move. As a result of that I had a long chat with them. It
wouldn't help me to blow this up bigger than it is, but I have a feeling that I
might end up being a consultant on the movie. It would be marvellous, I
think...over here there's a rather unfortunate history about remakes;
Thunderbirds the film was a disaster, and The Avengers, and so on. But I hope,
and I think I probably believe, that this could be the exception."

The rights to UFO reside, as with many other Gerry Anderson properties, with
Granada, and the legendary TV producer told us in a previous interview (see link
below) of his distaste for Jonathan Frakes' 2004 adaptation of the highly
successful sci-fi puppet show Thunderbirds.

The UFO film announced at Cannes is to be produced by Robert Evans in
association with ITV Global, with a script being written by Ryan Gaudet and
Joseph Kanarek. Paramount have first refusal on the project, with the general
intention being to create a new franchise.

You can find out about the set-up of the original series here. And stayed tuned
for the complete interview, which covers quite a lot of ground.

> And then there is this that was e-mailed to me (not sure of the original
> site it came from) - KP

Thanks!  Here is the website:

  
http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/262437/exclusive_gerry_anderson_on_the_ufo_movie\
.html

There are also (at the bottom of the article) links to an article about UFO
and a Gerry Anderson interview that I've never seen before.

Marc

Cool. I just discovered that site last week, it's pretty good.

Paul


Marc Martin wrote:
>> And then there is this that was e-mailed to me (not sure of the original
>> site it came from) - KP
>
> Thanks!  Here is the website:
>
>  
http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/262437/exclusive_gerry_anderson_on_the_ufo_movie\
.html
>
> There are also (at the bottom of the article) links to an article about UFO
> and a Gerry Anderson interview that I've never seen before.

Thanks, Ken (and Marc for finding the site :)

That's the best news I've heard about this by miles - let's hope
Gerry *is* asked to be a consultant, as we may (at last!)
see an Anderson remake which keeps the original spirit!!!!!!

Best,
--
Rob

________________________________________
From: SHADO@yahoogroups.com [SHADO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Marc Martin
[marc@...]
Sent: 05 June 2009 15:09
To: SHADO@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Re: UFO movie mentioned in Fanderson news page

> And then there is this that was e-mailed to me (not sure of the original
> site it came from) - KP

Thanks!  Here is the website:

  
http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/262437/exclusive_gerry_anderson_on_the_ufo_movie\
.html

There are also (at the bottom of the article) links to an article about UFO
and a Gerry Anderson interview that I've never seen before.

Marc


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links



     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

> That's the best news I've heard about this by miles - let's hope
> Gerry *is* asked to be a consultant, as we may (at last!)
> see an Anderson remake which keeps the original spirit!!!!!!

Hmmm, I wonder how much Gerry Anderson was really involved with
the "original spirit" of UFO?  I mean, a lot of things that
people like about UFO were due to the contributions of people
other than Gerry...

Marc

Good point, Marc.  Maybe I should re-phrase and simply say that
having Gerry as consultant would not do this project any harm, and
even better if the original writers were involved.  'Spirit' iwas the keyword.

Otherwise, we'll likely have bearded aliens who can now speak (with
German accents, of course), thousands of UFOs being blown to bits,
and the rest will be flashbacks to something unsavoury in Stakers' past
(but it''ll turn out to save the world, of course.)

Best,
--
Rob

________________________________________
From: SHADO@yahoogroups.com [SHADO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Marc Martin
[marc@...]
Sent: 06 June 2009 15:46
To: SHADO@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [SHADO] Re: UFO movie mentioned in Fanderson news page

> That's the best news I've heard about this by miles - let's hope
> Gerry *is* asked to be a consultant, as we may (at last!)
> see an Anderson remake which keeps the original spirit!!!!!!

Hmmm, I wonder how much Gerry Anderson was really involved with
the "original spirit" of UFO?  I mean, a lot of things that
people like about UFO were due to the contributions of people
other than Gerry...

Marc


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links



     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Hi All :)

Recently I was travelling in Italy on business, when the strangest thing
happened early one morning...

...There was I innocently eating my breakfast, half asleep (I'm not a morning
person), gradually evolving into a human being with every sip of my coffee... 
when a distant intangible cool wave of realism began to wash over me...
something seemingly familiar began to stir the sleeping synapses in my brain.

The music... erm... sounds familiar?

Suddenly I was awake! It's the restaurant music from "The Responsibility
Seat!!!...". The couple at the next table looked at me with some surprised
concern on their faces.

I quickly finished up the meal, and dashed over to reception. "Mi scusi. Potete
dirmi che cosa č la riproduzione della musica? ... or roughly, "Excuse me. Can
you tell me what music is playing?"

"Oh, it's just a CD of background musak", enunciated in perfect RP English. "I'm
sorry.It's dreadful isn't it."

"No, no... well, yes, I suppose it is. But, it's really important I know what it
is." I burbled.

She looked at me inscrutably but very politely obviously thinking I was nuts,
then glanced over at the PA. "It's from a stack of unlabelled CD's. Is it
important?

I thought about explaining the context to my question. "No, it's okay. It's just
some music that's important to me for sentimental reasons."

"Your fist love? Ah, that's sweet" ...

"Well something like that. Can I borrow the CD - just for 10 minutes..."

"I'll have to ask the manager when he gets in later this morning."

"But, I'm leaving for the airport within the hour."

"I'm sorry", she shrugged.

...

I never did get a chance to speak with the manager. Some work stuff came up, and
I was at the airport before it dawned on me.

I'll be there again in July. So, I'll keep you posted.

Best to all :)

Griff

> It's the restaurant music from "The Responsibility
> Seat!!!...".

From RESPONSIBILITY SEAT, and not DALOTEK AFFAIR?  Would
that be when Straker was alone, but looking for Jo Fraser?

Marc

Hi Marc,

Yes, it's the background music heard when Commander Straker and Jo Frazer are
sitting at a table at a local (to Harlington-Straker Film Studios/SHADO HQ)
restaurant (the same place that Gay Ellis and Mark Bradley are seen dining at in
Computer Affair, and also seen in a few other episodes).

The music starts about 26 minutes into the episode, and ends at about 27:15.

I should say that I am almost certain that this music is not Barry Gray's work,
but I would love to find out who was the composer. Hopefully, I might have more
information next month, or at least a full version of the music. Wish me luck in
Bologna.

Thanks,

Griff

  --- In SHADO@yahoogroups.com, "Marc Martin" <marc@...> wrote:
>
> > It's the restaurant music from "The Responsibility
> > Seat!!!...".
>
> From RESPONSIBILITY SEAT, and not DALOTEK AFFAIR?  Would
> that be when Straker was alone, but looking for Jo Fraser?
>
> Marc
>

Hi Marc,

I suppose the next question is:

What is the music from to 31:44 to 32.53 as heard in Straker's dining room?

It is in a different style to the piece in my earlier email, but it's possible
it is the same composer.

I suppose both pieces of music are 'stock' background music. I know there are
companies that specialise in selling backing/background music/musak to
hotels/shops/restaurants etc. Maybe this was bought in "off the shelf" and
included in the show. I can't think of any of Barry's tracks that would have
been suitable (I think these are fairly intimate and poignant moments) in these
scenes.

Best,

Griff

>  --- In SHADO@yahoogroups.com, "Marc Martin" <marc@> wrote:
> >
> > > It's the restaurant music from "The Responsibility
> > > Seat!!!...".
> >
> > From RESPONSIBILITY SEAT, and not DALOTEK AFFAIR?  Would
> > that be when Straker was alone, but looking for Jo Fraser?
> >
> > Marc
>

> What is the music from to 31:44 to 32.53 as heard in Straker's dining
> room? It is in a different style to the piece in my earlier email, but
> it's possible it is the same composer.

Yes, I don't know what either of those 2 pieces of music are.  Sometimes
Barry Gray did record "radio" music in a different style than we are
used to, but I don't think these are Barry Gray pieces.

Good luck in trying to find out what they are!

Marc

Hi Marc,

Thanks.

Yes, it was a surreal experience hearing that music piped around the restaurant
and hotel reception area, especially as it was in a dining area and seems
appropriate. I half expected Ed Straker and Jo Frazer to walk round a corner any
second!

The music in UFO was just a brief extract, as the music did go on for quite a
time, and did repeat the main theme in variations.

Damn cross with myself now for not "ceasing the moment", but I was a little
groggy.

I'll certainly do a better job next month. I have stayed at this place quite a
few times, certainly enough to have a little leverage.

Regards,

Griff

--- In SHADO@yahoogroups.com, "Marc Martin" <marc@...> wrote:
>
> > It's the restaurant music from "The Responsibility
> > Seat!!!...".
>
> From RESPONSIBILITY SEAT, and not DALOTEK AFFAIR?  Would
> that be when Straker was alone, but looking for Jo Fraser?
>
> Marc

Hi all,

Well, the rumor from a few months ago that Network video (UK) was going
to release THE PRISONER on Blu-Ray appears to have been false.  But now I
see that A&E (US) is planning on releasing it:

   http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=2845

Now if they'll just release UFO...

Marc

Marc, I have both previous sets on DVD already.  I do have a PS3 (Blu-ray
player) and a hi def TV.  I am not even replacing my Laserdisc collection to
DVD, I don't know what would make me want to get the Blu-ray version of UFO??

Concerning my Gerry Anderson on DVD collection, very little would make me want
to upgrade to Blu-ray.

Bruce

P.S.  In case anyone thought... no, I do not have UFO on Laser :)


   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Marc Martin
   To: SHADO@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Sunday, June 07, 2009 9:59 PM
   Subject: [SHADO] A&E to release THE PRISONER on Blu-Ray





   Hi all,

   Well, the rumor from a few months ago that Network video (UK) was going
   to release THE PRISONER on Blu-Ray appears to have been false. But now I
   see that A&E (US) is planning on releasing it:

   http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=2845

   Now if they'll just release UFO...

   Marc




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> I don't know what would make me want to get the Blu-ray version
> of UFO??

Well, if you have a really big screen, then the Blu-rays should
look better than the DVDs.

However, it seems likely that a Blu-ray UFO release will be in
widescreen, meaning the top and the bottom of the original
image will be cut off.  Some may see this as a good thing
(filling the screen of their widescreen HDTV), while others
will see this as a bad thing (missing picture on top and
bottom).

I think for many, the UFO DVDs are "good enough".

Marc

On Sun, 07 Jun 2009 19:40:31 -0700
"Marc Martin" <marc@...> wrote:

>
> I think for many, the UFO DVDs are "good enough".
>

I think UFO could look spectacular on BluRay provided the original
source is still in good enough condition for that treatment, but
then again UFO was only a TV programme, and I'm sure the DVDs
provide a better picture on decent equipment than anyone saw on
their early '70s colour telly when it was first broadcast.

James

You see, that's it.  When it was filmed, was it done in a hi def format? I have
heard bad things about old movies being upgraded to hi def, and coming out
completely different (color wise) then the original.

Bruce
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: James Gibbon
   To: SHADO@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 4:32 AM
   Subject: [SHADO] Re: A&E to release THE PRISONER on Blu-Ray





   On Sun, 07 Jun 2009 19:40:31 -0700
   "Marc Martin" <marc@...> wrote:

   >
   > I think for many, the UFO DVDs are "good enough".
   >

   I think UFO could look spectacular on BluRay provided the original
   source is still in good enough condition for that treatment, but
   then again UFO was only a TV programme, and I'm sure the DVDs
   provide a better picture on decent equipment than anyone saw on
   their early '70s colour telly when it was first broadcast.

   James




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Mon, 8 Jun 2009 07:39:52 -0400
"Bruce Sherman" <brucesherman@...> wrote:

> You see, that's it.  When it was filmed, was it done in a hi def format?

Yes! It was filmed on photographic film (8mm?), not videotape - so
although it was intended for TV, the format is in principle (not
necessarily in practice) good enough to transfer to a high definition
digital medium.

James

It was shot on 35mm film which is a far higher resolution than modern HD
formats.  However, being a TV production from 1969-70 it was shot and composed
for the 1.37:1 screen ratio used by older TVs.  The copyright holders have
reframed the show for the HD era by creating a 1.77:1 detail taken from the full
frame image by cropping off the top and bottom of the frame.  Picture
information has been lost; this is just as bad as the old panning-and-scanning
process to crop a widescreen film for the 1.37:1/full-frame/standard ratio TVs
and is purely for the philistines who must have their TV screen filled, like a
pitcher of squash (Cool-Aid).

Rick

--- On Mon, 8/6/09, Bruce Sherman <brucesherman@...> wrote:

From: Bruce Sherman <brucesherman@...>
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Re: A&E to release THE PRISONER on Blu-Ray
To: SHADO@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, 8 June, 2009, 12:39 PM

















       You see, that's it.  When it was filmed, was it done in a hi def format? I
have heard bad things about old movies being upgraded to hi def, and coming out
completely different (color wise) then the original.



Bruce

   ----- Original Message -----

   From: James Gibbon

   To: SHADO@yahoogroups. com

   Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 4:32 AM

   Subject: [SHADO] Re: A&E to release THE PRISONER on Blu-Ray



On Sun, 07 Jun 2009 19:40:31 -0700

   "Marc Martin" <marc@ufoseries. com> wrote:



>

   > I think for many, the UFO DVDs are "good enough".

   >



I think UFO could look spectacular on BluRay provided the original

   source is still in good enough condition for that treatment, but

   then again UFO was only a TV programme, and I'm sure the DVDs

   provide a better picture on decent equipment than anyone saw on

   their early '70s colour telly when it was first broadcast.



James



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

More likely 35mm - transferred to 16mm for broadcast



From: SHADO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SHADO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
James Gibbon
Sent: 08 June 2009 22:09
To: SHADO@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [SHADO] Re: A&E to release THE PRISONER on Blu-Ray








On Mon, 8 Jun 2009 07:39:52 -0400
"Bruce Sherman" <brucesherman@...
<mailto:brucesherman%40sprintmail.com> > wrote:

> You see, that's it. When it was filmed, was it done in a hi def format?

Yes! It was filmed on photographic film (8mm?), not videotape - so
although it was intended for TV, the format is in principle (not
necessarily in practice) good enough to transfer to a high definition
digital medium.

James





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Definately a bad thing; Casablanca is pillar boxed on DVD so it has black bars
on either side of the image when viewed on a 16x9 monitor.  This is butchery, no
matter how carefully the images have been reframed, and to accept it is
ridiculous.

Rick

--- On Mon, 8/6/09, Marc Martin <marc@...> wrote:

From: Marc Martin <marc@...>
Subject: Re: [SHADO] A&E to release THE PRISONER on Blu-Ray
To: SHADO@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, 8 June, 2009, 3:40 AM

















       > I don't know what would make me want to get the Blu-ray version

> of UFO??



Well, if you have a really big screen, then the Blu-rays should

look better than the DVDs.



However, it seems likely that a Blu-ray UFO release will be in

widescreen, meaning the top and the bottom of the original

image will be cut off.  Some may see this as a good thing

(filling the screen of their widescreen HDTV), while others

will see this as a bad thing (missing picture on top and

bottom).



I think for many, the UFO DVDs are "good enough".



Marc





























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

What I meant to say here was that creating 16x9 images that fill the widescreen
TV at the expense of cropping the top and bottom off is bad; the way Casablanca
is presented is correct.

Rick

--- On Mon, 8/6/09, richard curzon <hammeramicus2002@...> wrote:

From: richard curzon <hammeramicus2002@...>
Subject: Re: [SHADO] A&E to release THE PRISONER on Blu-Ray
To: SHADO@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, 8 June, 2009, 11:21 AM

















       Definately a bad thing; Casablanca is pillar boxed on DVD so it has black
bars on either side of the image when viewed on a 16x9 monitor.  This is
butchery, no matter how carefully the images have been reframed, and to accept
it is ridiculous.



Rick



--- On Mon, 8/6/09, Marc Martin <marc@ufoseries. com> wrote:



From: Marc Martin <marc@ufoseries. com>

Subject: Re: [SHADO] A&E to release THE PRISONER on Blu-Ray

To: SHADO@yahoogroups. com

Date: Monday, 8 June, 2009, 3:40 AM



> I don't know what would make me want to get the Blu-ray version



> of UFO??



Well, if you have a really big screen, then the Blu-rays should



look better than the DVDs.



However, it seems likely that a Blu-ray UFO release will be in



widescreen, meaning the top and the bottom of the original



image will be cut off.  Some may see this as a good thing



(filling the screen of their widescreen HDTV), while others



will see this as a bad thing (missing picture on top and



bottom).



I think for many, the UFO DVDs are "good enough".



Marc























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> I have heard bad things about old movies being upgraded to hi def, and
> coming out completely different (color wise) then the original.

Well, one could say that the color on the UFO DVDs is completely
different than the original broadcasts (speculation on my part -- I
don't have a photographic memory).

I've seen many of the UFO episodes in HDTV.  For the most part, the
source material has plenty of resolution, especially since the original
35mm camera negatives were used as source material. There are however
some parts which don't look as good -- scenes with optical effects (fade
ins/fade outs), scenes with stock footage (Interceptors coming out of
silos, etc.), and some of the special effects shots are grainy (perhaps
due to a different kind of film used for the effects).  Also scenes
where they are driving around in cars -- I had assumed that they used
back projection for filming these scenes, but due to the degradation in
quality on these scenes, perhaps the backgrounds are optical effects (?)

The HDTV transfers are also not as consistent as the DVDs were, as if
more than one person was working on the series, and they didn't
adjust the color/contrast in the same way.  The DVDs are better than
the HDTV versions in this respect, as all of the episodes have the
same "look" to them.

Marc

UFO, like most of the Gerry Anderson and other ITC shows of the 1960s (and the
non-ITC Avengers) was shot on 35mm film (the same format as most feature films,
then and now). They were shot in film studios by crews who had also worked on
features. The only difference was the smaller budgets and shorter shooting
schedules. The shows were completed on film and distributed to TV stations
worldwide, where they were telecined locally - often live. This solved the
problem of the various different TV standards around the world; this way
everyone got the best possible image on their system.

This introduces a problem now of deciding what the original "look" of UFO should
have been in that most early prints would have been struck on a special low
contrast stock especially for TV use - that was because the telecine process at
the time boosted contrast and therefore couldn't handle a normal contrast print.
So the average print of the time would look horribly washed out to the eye or if
projected. Unless an original normal contrast "answer print" can be found, which
would be approved by the production team before the low contrast prints were
struck, then it might take some guesswork to tell what was originally intended.
Even then, such a print might have faded over time.

Contemporary 35mm generally has a definition/colour space etc which equals or
exceeds the various HD formats and and certainly exceeds Blu-ray. Of course,
1960's 35mm doesn't have the definition of today's stocks but still far exceeds
the quality of any video of the period and an original negative (or clean
Interneg or Interpos) is more than adequate for blue-ray.

Regards
John

John, what you say makes sense, but what about the FX??  Going to use two
examples.  In the orginal Star Trek series, when they showed the shuttlecraft
flying out in space, you can see the area of space around the shuttlecraft
brighter then the rest.  My guess it was how they matted the ship onto the
background of space.  I dont think people would stand for that nowadays.  But
this was the mid 60's.  I know they are redoing the FX scenes, but could you
imagine how horrible that would look in hi def??

War of the Worlds.  When I watched this on Laser, you can see the strings
holding the spacecraft up, again, I dont think people would enjoy watching this
in hi def.

How would the FX scenes in UFO come out?  We are not used to seeing strings. 
Would they spend the money to clean up or enhance the FX scenes?  Its possible,
but also $$$$.

Terminator 2 was such a breakthrough in FX.  There was one scene when the
arhnold character drives a motorcycle off a bridge into a sewer open cut.  This
was done with the stunt double being connected to a rope and chain, but they so
totally cleaned up the shot, you dont see it at all.

Bruce

-----Original Message-----
>From: john_nhojuk <jks@...>
>Sent: Jun 8, 2009 2:27 PM
>To: SHADO@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [SHADO] Re: A&E to release THE PRISONER on Blu-Ray
>
>UFO, like most of the Gerry Anderson and other ITC shows of the 1960s (and the
non-ITC Avengers) was shot on 35mm film (the same format as most feature films,
then and now). They were shot in film studios by crews who had also worked on
features. The only difference was the smaller budgets and shorter shooting
schedules. The shows were completed on film and distributed to TV stations
worldwide, where they were telecined locally - often live. This solved the
problem of the various different TV standards around the world; this way
everyone got the best possible image on their system.
>
>This introduces a problem now of deciding what the original "look" of UFO
should have been in that most early prints would have been struck on a special
low contrast stock especially for TV use - that was because the telecine process
at the time boosted contrast and therefore couldn't handle a normal contrast
print. So the average print of the time would look horribly washed out to the
eye or if projected. Unless an original normal contrast "answer print" can be
found, which would be approved by the production team before the low contrast
prints were struck, then it might take some guesswork to tell what was
originally intended. Even then, such a print might have faded over time.
>
>Contemporary 35mm generally has a definition/colour space etc which equals or
exceeds the various HD formats and and certainly exceeds Blu-ray. Of course,
1960's 35mm doesn't have the definition of today's stocks but still far exceeds
the quality of any video of the period and an original negative (or clean
Interneg or Interpos) is more than adequate for blue-ray.
>
>Regards
>John
>

> How would the FX scenes in UFO come out?  We are not used to seeing
> strings.  Would they spend the money to clean up or enhance the FX
> scenes?  Its possible, but also $$$$.

I was not bothered by the strings on the HDTV versions of UFO, but then
again, I don't have a 6+ foot screen!  The filmmakers did go out of
their way to hide the strings, spray-painting them to the be the same
color as the background.

The main issues with UFO in HDTV are those few scenes that don't use the
original camera negatives (optical effects, stock footage).  On the
DVDs, this problem was lessened by replacing stock footage with the
original footage.  They don't do this on the HDTV versions, so the stock
footage looks worse than the scenes around it.

And some of the stock/reused footage is not what you'd expect -- for
example, I was watching THE RESPONSIBILITY SEAT the other day, and
noticed that the scene of Freeman walking up to the radar screen to look
at the incoming UFOs was footage reused from A QUESTION OF PRIORITIES.

Marc

Bruce Sherman
>
> John, what you say makes sense, but what about the FX??


That's part of a much bigger question about the limits on restoration and
beyond.

There's a continuum. At one end is the repairing, digitally or otherwise, of a
damaged, scratched original. At the other far end are things like "colorizing" a
film or programme which was originally b/w. Somewhere, near the "colorizing" end
is applying modern effects to make seamless FX which were not originally
seamless.

I don't think many people would think that repairing damage which was done after
the film was struck is a problem, as long as it is done in a way which
unarguably replicates how the film looked originally. The debate probably starts
pretty close to that point.

For what it's worth, I would prefer that restoration generally aims to replicate
the film/programme as it originally appeared, warts and all.
Admittedly this is slightly more of a problem with a TV show in that it was only
intended to be watched on a lowish definition 16" TV screen but UFO was made to
a higher standard than most anyway. And where do you stop? A painted backdrop
out of a window - do you tart that up? A wig line? A TV arial in the far
background of a period show? A set which wobbles?
Many such defects are apparent on DVD on a large screen TV anyway.

You can't pretend that UFO was a series made today and anyone watching it will
have to accept that anyway. A kid watching UFO is going to have to see it from
the perspective of a series made four decades ago regardless, with or without
the odd wire showing.
Trying to tinker round the edges isn't going to make much difference  and merely
falsifies history.

Personally, I want to see the film that it's makers made, with the technology
available, not airbrushed - usually by other hands - with hindsight.

Regards
John

Hi All,

I am so very very sad to hear that Bob Bell has passed away.

Bob Bell's inspirational and daring (for the time) use of vivid colour (he was
very criticised at the time - what did 'they' know in retrospect!) is one of the
magical ingredients that make Gerry Anderson's productions what they were... a
pure slice of genius that we won't alas see the like of again.

I am especially in awe of his use of colour and set design in UFO, as I think it
stands the test of time, and the DVD's show just how "right" he was.

Bob's vision, flair, colour usage, spacial understanding and just pure theatre
especially in Thunderbirds, Captain Scarlet, Joe 90, UFO, Doppelganger,
Thunderbirds films, The Protectors, and others, and then into other TV such as
The New Avengers, and films such as The Wild Geese, show a really well honed and
rounded skill set, especially poignant since his early start with Fireball XL5.

You're one of the greats, Bob ... thank you!

Best to all,

Griff

--- In SHADO@yahoogroups.com, "Griff Wason" <griff@...> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I am so very very sad to hear that Bob Bell has passed away.
>
> Bob Bell's inspirational and daring (for the time) use of vivid colour (he was
very criticised at the time - what did 'they' know in retrospect!) is one of the
magical ingredients that make Gerry Anderson's productions what they were... a
pure slice of genius that we won't alas see the like of again.
>
> I am especially in awe of his use of colour and set design in UFO, as I think
it stands the test of time, and the DVD's show just how "right" he was.
>
> Bob's vision, flair, colour usage, spacial understanding and just pure theatre
especially in Thunderbirds, Captain Scarlet, Joe 90, UFO, Doppelganger,
Thunderbirds films, The Protectors, and others, and then into other TV such as
The New Avengers, and films such as The Wild Geese, show a really well honed and
rounded skill set, especially poignant since his early start with Fireball XL5.
>
> You're one of the greats, Bob ... thank you!
>
> Best to all,
>
> Griff

Griff,

Thanks for posting this and for the background detail. I'm completely ignorant
about such technical matters so it's interesting to learn how much Bob
influenced the striking visual style of UFO.

David