Valentine Birkby
@gwr.bsky.social
Existential dread, plus crisps. Pointless bollocks I make on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@ill-conceivedproductions7056
I just can't avoid hearing the Two Ronnies version, Something's Wrong, Me Parrot's Died.
November 26, 2025 at 3:11 PM
I just can't avoid hearing the Two Ronnies version, Something's Wrong, Me Parrot's Died.
...was the final on the 13th. Unless the highlights show featured the entire break, the first time the TV audience got to see it in full was on Sun 28th Feb at 10pm, when it was shown in a special programme called "147 Break".
So who got the first *live* TV 147?
So who got the first *live* TV 147?
November 6, 2025 at 3:18 AM
...was the final on the 13th. Unless the highlights show featured the entire break, the first time the TV audience got to see it in full was on Sun 28th Feb at 10pm, when it was shown in a special programme called "147 Break".
So who got the first *live* TV 147?
So who got the first *live* TV 147?
It seems completely forgotten now, but the Lada Classic was on ITV and the 147 wasn't shown live. The break happened on Mon 11 Jan, and ITV had no snooker coverage at all that day (I suspect clips made the news, though). They had 45min of highlights on the 12th, and the only live coverage...
November 6, 2025 at 3:18 AM
It seems completely forgotten now, but the Lada Classic was on ITV and the 147 wasn't shown live. The break happened on Mon 11 Jan, and ITV had no snooker coverage at all that day (I suspect clips made the news, though). They had 45min of highlights on the 12th, and the only live coverage...
I hope at least one of the Mounties had a pleasant, open face.
October 27, 2025 at 2:39 AM
I hope at least one of the Mounties had a pleasant, open face.
And still no 50fps support.
October 23, 2025 at 12:14 AM
And still no 50fps support.
Will listen later - do you go into Rust's use of "heaven on wheels"? Never quite understood the reference there.
October 16, 2025 at 11:41 PM
Will listen later - do you go into Rust's use of "heaven on wheels"? Never quite understood the reference there.
I've only just noticed that Ravensbourne has added scans of Bob Cosford's storyboard for his original concept, which is quite different, possibly bleaker and involves two animated crows that sing along to the chorus of the sig tune.
October 16, 2025 at 11:30 PM
I've only just noticed that Ravensbourne has added scans of Bob Cosford's storyboard for his original concept, which is quite different, possibly bleaker and involves two animated crows that sing along to the chorus of the sig tune.
I suspect that was done to obscure any connection with the UEA skyline, which I believe had a similar tower at that time. UEA had been approached for location filming and declined. www.ravensbourne.ac.uk/bbc-motion-g...
A Very Peculiar Practice (1988)
www.ravensbourne.ac.uk
October 16, 2025 at 11:20 PM
I suspect that was done to obscure any connection with the UEA skyline, which I believe had a similar tower at that time. UEA had been approached for location filming and declined. www.ravensbourne.ac.uk/bbc-motion-g...
An interesting AVPP curio is the original version of the title sequence at the Ravensbourne archive. The musical intro is two bars longer and the university skyline features a tower that's been painted out of the broadcast version.
October 16, 2025 at 11:20 PM
An interesting AVPP curio is the original version of the title sequence at the Ravensbourne archive. The musical intro is two bars longer and the university skyline features a tower that's been painted out of the broadcast version.
Unsure what "falling into the intentional fallacy" is supposed to mean, but it's unarguable that the style of TV production you champion grew up not for carefully-considered artistic reasons, but because it was the only viable way to make the required quantities of TV quickly and cheaply enough.
October 15, 2025 at 12:58 PM
Unsure what "falling into the intentional fallacy" is supposed to mean, but it's unarguable that the style of TV production you champion grew up not for carefully-considered artistic reasons, but because it was the only viable way to make the required quantities of TV quickly and cheaply enough.
...because time and money dictated it *had* to look like that, whether the director wanted it to or not. Nowt wrong with liking that look, but also no point pretending TV drama was somehow artistically *intended* to look like that. It was done that way solely due to money, time & existing tech.
October 14, 2025 at 4:34 AM
...because time and money dictated it *had* to look like that, whether the director wanted it to or not. Nowt wrong with liking that look, but also no point pretending TV drama was somehow artistically *intended* to look like that. It was done that way solely due to money, time & existing tech.
Are you not really just saying that you want your television to look like a specific *type* of television from a perceived Golden Age when you were young? I'm sure you're aware that TV looked like that not for carefully-considered artistic reasons, but...
October 14, 2025 at 4:34 AM
Are you not really just saying that you want your television to look like a specific *type* of television from a perceived Golden Age when you were young? I'm sure you're aware that TV looked like that not for carefully-considered artistic reasons, but...
...from multiple different angles. When shooting on film, the stock and processing costs obviously rack up significantly, but you end up with lots of different takes of the complete scene. The idea that single-camera is shot line by line is a bit daft.
October 14, 2025 at 4:17 AM
...from multiple different angles. When shooting on film, the stock and processing costs obviously rack up significantly, but you end up with lots of different takes of the complete scene. The idea that single-camera is shot line by line is a bit daft.
But it wouldn't have been "chopped up into little filmed bits" because that's not how film is shot. It would have been shot in full takes. One of the reasons single-camera takes so much longer and (in the days of film) was so much more expensive was that you do numerous full takes...
October 14, 2025 at 4:17 AM
But it wouldn't have been "chopped up into little filmed bits" because that's not how film is shot. It would have been shot in full takes. One of the reasons single-camera takes so much longer and (in the days of film) was so much more expensive was that you do numerous full takes...
The 1986 Xmas Day EastEnders was seen by approx 53% of the country. The all-time biggest audience for anything ever is the 1966 World Cup Final, which got approx 68% - 32 million viewers out of a population of about 47 million.
October 7, 2025 at 1:38 AM
The 1986 Xmas Day EastEnders was seen by approx 53% of the country. The all-time biggest audience for anything ever is the 1966 World Cup Final, which got approx 68% - 32 million viewers out of a population of about 47 million.
That's exactly what my parents said when I asked them about it at the time.
October 7, 2025 at 1:16 AM
That's exactly what my parents said when I asked them about it at the time.
Oh right, for some reason I was under the impression it was made in 1981.
August 21, 2025 at 12:31 PM
Oh right, for some reason I was under the impression it was made in 1981.
Are you going to go into why it sat on the shelf for a couple of years before TX?
August 20, 2025 at 8:26 PM
Are you going to go into why it sat on the shelf for a couple of years before TX?
Who's the bloke in the middle?
August 14, 2025 at 3:37 AM
Who's the bloke in the middle?
I had been looking at the posters on the Tube for weeks before I actually read one and realised that they were parodies and *not* adverts for an actual phone.
August 14, 2025 at 3:16 AM
I had been looking at the posters on the Tube for weeks before I actually read one and realised that they were parodies and *not* adverts for an actual phone.
Genuine question - is there a realistic scenario in which Russia attacks a NATO country and the war somehow ends *without* nuclear holocaust?
August 12, 2025 at 11:29 PM
Genuine question - is there a realistic scenario in which Russia attacks a NATO country and the war somehow ends *without* nuclear holocaust?
I still think of it as 5432Q.
August 8, 2025 at 2:49 AM
I still think of it as 5432Q.
A lot of *what* crap? Judges actually applying the law? The thread explains what "dangerous" means in the strict legal sense in which the judge is required to interpret it. Presumably you didn't bother reading that far?
August 6, 2025 at 7:27 PM
A lot of *what* crap? Judges actually applying the law? The thread explains what "dangerous" means in the strict legal sense in which the judge is required to interpret it. Presumably you didn't bother reading that far?
Wasn't that the Broken Biscuit Club? www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOJ2...
Broken Biscuit Club
YouTube video by Paddy Kingsland - Topic
www.youtube.com
July 30, 2025 at 6:24 PM
Wasn't that the Broken Biscuit Club? www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOJ2...