AN
Andrew
Founding member
What is happening with News at Ten is surely a presentation fan's dream. Reviving an old identity, check, making a big effort with a relaunch, check, creating a different look that stands out from other bulletins, check
Anyone who is doubting all this is being far too pessimistic
Anyone who is doubting all this is being far too pessimistic
BR
I think revivals generally fall into problems.
Firstly, when it's a revival in name only and everything about the original seems to be forgotten (2001-2004 NaT would be a good example)...
And secondly, in this case - when it just seems like they've lifted everything from the original and given little thought about whether it's appropriate for today's audience. I just find the titles and music - and Trevor McDonald - very, very, dated now - as is the idea of the programme itself.
Andrew posted:
What is happening with News at Ten is surely a presentation fan's dream. Reviving an old identity, check, making a big effort with a relaunch, check, creating a different look that stands out from other bulletins, check
Anyone who is doubting all this is being far too pessimistic
Anyone who is doubting all this is being far too pessimistic
I think revivals generally fall into problems.
Firstly, when it's a revival in name only and everything about the original seems to be forgotten (2001-2004 NaT would be a good example)...
And secondly, in this case - when it just seems like they've lifted everything from the original and given little thought about whether it's appropriate for today's audience. I just find the titles and music - and Trevor McDonald - very, very, dated now - as is the idea of the programme itself.
BR
Well they can't please everyone. I think it looks very impressive - modern, clean and sophisticated. The music is long overdue and a welcome return. Those loud bongs on a big news night makes the hairs on your neck stand up.
If they start at 10 on the dot and cut out all the American style captions and mentioning that "Robert Moore has been covering this story since it began" and you actually realise the story is only 2 days old, that sort of crap needs to go.
martinDTanderson posted:
i am feeling rather disapointed now, I am not liking the music.
The studio and graphics seem spot on, but really, the music is poor... And the titles seem a bit too similar to the previous one, especially the fake looking zoom into the clock...
The studio and graphics seem spot on, but really, the music is poor... And the titles seem a bit too similar to the previous one, especially the fake looking zoom into the clock...
Well they can't please everyone. I think it looks very impressive - modern, clean and sophisticated. The music is long overdue and a welcome return. Those loud bongs on a big news night makes the hairs on your neck stand up.
If they start at 10 on the dot and cut out all the American style captions and mentioning that "Robert Moore has been covering this story since it began" and you actually realise the story is only 2 days old, that sort of crap needs to go.
PR
It will launch on Monday, tonight is the final news at 10.30 and tomorrow will just be an itv News bulletin, probably with James Mates.
Thanks.
I wonder how James Mates feels with Mark and Julie taking the Friday slot now
I think he will just be a correspondent now and present when main presenters are on holiday.
LONDON posted:
Primetime TV posted:
Will Mark and Julie present the 11pm news on Friday?
Edit: Or will it all kick off from the Monday?
Edit: Or will it all kick off from the Monday?
It will launch on Monday, tonight is the final news at 10.30 and tomorrow will just be an itv News bulletin, probably with James Mates.
Thanks.
I wonder how James Mates feels with Mark and Julie taking the Friday slot now
JH
You haven't even seen the damn programme yet!
Brekkie Boy posted:
I think revivals generally fall into problems.
Firstly, when it's a revival in name only and everything about the original seems to be forgotten (2001-2004 NaT would be a good example)...
And secondly, in this case - when it just seems like they've lifted everything from the original and given little thought about whether it's appropriate for today's audience. I just find the titles and music - and Trevor McDonald - very, very, dated now - as is the idea of the programme itself.
Firstly, when it's a revival in name only and everything about the original seems to be forgotten (2001-2004 NaT would be a good example)...
And secondly, in this case - when it just seems like they've lifted everything from the original and given little thought about whether it's appropriate for today's audience. I just find the titles and music - and Trevor McDonald - very, very, dated now - as is the idea of the programme itself.