DA
Plus Ian hasn't set his TV up right either, and is actually stretching a 4:3. picture to fill his display. Which kind of defeats the whole point of having a widescreen TV in the first place.
The first half of your sentence is right, ish, but the second half - huh? It doesn't defeat the purpose, though it's not my preferred my way of viewing 4:3. You could make that point if he was watching 16:9 footage letterboxed, though. At least they resisted the usual temptation of adding a white box (with rounded corners) and a red flashing "REC"
Anyway that's all being very picky, because it was just a little nostalgic moment that didn't work too badly, I thought. A shame they couldn't find a spot for Jim, but understandable given his condition.
My point was that you probably wouldn't need (or particularly want) to have to make yourself sick if that happened to you. It looked like the actor just automatically mimed, same as anyone would do to give an impression of hurling.
David
Plus Ian hasn't set his TV up right either, and is actually stretching a 4:3. picture to fill his display. Which kind of defeats the whole point of having a widescreen TV in the first place.
The first half of your sentence is right, ish, but the second half - huh? It doesn't defeat the purpose, though it's not my preferred my way of viewing 4:3. You could make that point if he was watching 16:9 footage letterboxed, though. At least they resisted the usual temptation of adding a white box (with rounded corners) and a red flashing "REC"
Anyway that's all being very picky, because it was just a little nostalgic moment that didn't work too badly, I thought. A shame they couldn't find a spot for Jim, but understandable given his condition.
Quote:
If you stick your fingers down your throat you can make yourself physically sick. Especially if you dip said fingers in something revolting beforehand. Don't forget Max just saw his son fall off the roof of the Queen Vic and fall to his death. A sight like that probably would make me want to be sick as well.
My point was that you probably wouldn't need (or particularly want) to have to make yourself sick if that happened to you. It looked like the actor just automatically mimed, same as anyone would do to give an impression of hurling.
David
DA
In the scenes with Stacey and Bradley in the tunnel, you could hear at least one of their clothes brushing against their microphone. Max's voice was at a much lower volume in the opening scenes too.
June Brown said on the BBC Three show that she had gotten mixed up with Dotty's name.
She was talking about when she was practising her lines, making the point that if you practice too much then that's when you go wrong. She was fine in the show as far as I know.
I watched the Eastenders credits and then the promo for the BBC Three show before turning over to BBC Three and George Lamb only then started talking to Charlie Clements so it was at least 30 seconds after the end of Eastenders and Charlie Clements wasn't even in the last scene so he had a little while to raise from the dead before being on BBC Three. Besides, he is now an out of work actor so he was probably grateful for the extra exposure. George Lamb also mentioned that the plan was to be talking to Scott Maslen at the top of the show but he 'did one' before they could speak to him.
Did he really say this? I didn't notice on the first watch and I just half watched the end again and didn't hear it then either.
I watched this episode with subtitles. Most of the subtitles were the pre-typed style that you would normally get on Eastenders although obviously based on the script rather than what the actor said on the night. It was quite interesting to see which actors stuck completely to the script and which ones deviated and by how much. Jack said 'cash' in one scene whereas the subtitles said 'money' and a few lines got swapped around here and there but nothing story affecting.
As I said before, most of the subtitles were the pre-typed style which made me suspicious when the only 7 people named as being in the know on the BBC Three show didn't include the subtitler. I guess it is possible that one of the producers in the know prepared the subtitles or they had someone prepare subtitles for each of the possible endings. It may even be possible that the subtitles were prepared without the person prepairing them knowing who actually delivered the line "It was me, I killed Archie." (which is what the the subtitles said or "I killed Archie, It was me" which is what Lacey Turner said on the night).
Towards the end of the episode in the scene with Ian and Dot watching the video, the subtitles switched to the live style you see on non-scripted live shows and continued in that way for the first couple of lines of dialogue in the next scene too (Peggy, Roxy and Ronnie upstairs in the vic) before reverting back to the pre-typed style subtitles for the rest of the episode including the big reveal.
Was the Ian and Dot scene just a stand-by scene in case something else wasn't ready? It was used to split up the Peggy, Roxy and Ronnie scene but maybe there was meant to be something else there? Maybe a scene in which Lacey Turner had a lot of lines which she couldn't do due to being ill? I am guessing of course.
On a related accessibility note, this episode did not have audio description as Eastenders would do normally, I don't think any live show has ever had AD. It would make an interesting challenge for someone to implement though.
Not bad, not bad. At least two camera 'wobbles', three 'fluffed' lines, misaligned background noise and some background talking. No boom in view, so they were either very good operators or they only used radio microphones.
In the scenes with Stacey and Bradley in the tunnel, you could hear at least one of their clothes brushing against their microphone. Max's voice was at a much lower volume in the opening scenes too.
June Brown said on the BBC Three show that she had gotten mixed up with Dotty's name.
She was talking about when she was practising her lines, making the point that if you practice too much then that's when you go wrong. She was fine in the show as far as I know.
Just quickly switched over to BBC Three, and George Lamb just pushed right in on the actor playing Bradley, not giving him 5 seconds to take in finishing his last scene. Idiot.
I watched the Eastenders credits and then the promo for the BBC Three show before turning over to BBC Three and George Lamb only then started talking to Charlie Clements so it was at least 30 seconds after the end of Eastenders and Charlie Clements wasn't even in the last scene so he had a little while to raise from the dead before being on BBC Three. Besides, he is now an out of work actor so he was probably grateful for the extra exposure. George Lamb also mentioned that the plan was to be talking to Scott Maslen at the top of the show but he 'did one' before they could speak to him.
Doof doof indeed - not bad all round. I liked Jack's bit of in-character prompting: "Let him go! Bradley's on his mark!"
Did he really say this? I didn't notice on the first watch and I just half watched the end again and didn't hear it then either.
I watched this episode with subtitles. Most of the subtitles were the pre-typed style that you would normally get on Eastenders although obviously based on the script rather than what the actor said on the night. It was quite interesting to see which actors stuck completely to the script and which ones deviated and by how much. Jack said 'cash' in one scene whereas the subtitles said 'money' and a few lines got swapped around here and there but nothing story affecting.
As I said before, most of the subtitles were the pre-typed style which made me suspicious when the only 7 people named as being in the know on the BBC Three show didn't include the subtitler. I guess it is possible that one of the producers in the know prepared the subtitles or they had someone prepare subtitles for each of the possible endings. It may even be possible that the subtitles were prepared without the person prepairing them knowing who actually delivered the line "It was me, I killed Archie." (which is what the the subtitles said or "I killed Archie, It was me" which is what Lacey Turner said on the night).
Towards the end of the episode in the scene with Ian and Dot watching the video, the subtitles switched to the live style you see on non-scripted live shows and continued in that way for the first couple of lines of dialogue in the next scene too (Peggy, Roxy and Ronnie upstairs in the vic) before reverting back to the pre-typed style subtitles for the rest of the episode including the big reveal.
Was the Ian and Dot scene just a stand-by scene in case something else wasn't ready? It was used to split up the Peggy, Roxy and Ronnie scene but maybe there was meant to be something else there? Maybe a scene in which Lacey Turner had a lot of lines which she couldn't do due to being ill? I am guessing of course.
On a related accessibility note, this episode did not have audio description as Eastenders would do normally, I don't think any live show has ever had AD. It would make an interesting challenge for someone to implement though.
Last edited by David on 20 February 2010 1:00am - 4 times in total
RD
They missed an obvious trick there - they should have put that fake camera shake effect onto the footage, like they did on that Derren Brown National Lottery show during the split-screen when the numbers were being drawn.
These scenes are always contrived though. You can always tell they've come from professional footage. It never ceases to amaze me in fictional productions that involve audio/video equipment everybody regardless of their background just happens to have or can acquire a dirt-cheap camcorder that can record in widescreen, with professional quality audio and video and very little camera shake. Quite good for 1986 apparently. 
They missed an obvious trick there - they should have put that fake camera shake effect onto the footage, like they did on that Derren Brown National Lottery show during the split-screen when the numbers were being drawn.
NJ
Plus Ian hasn't set his TV up right either, and is actually stretching a 4:3. picture to fill his display. Which kind of defeats the whole point of having a widescreen TV in the first place.
The first half of your sentence is right, ish, but the second half - huh? It doesn't defeat the purpose, though it's not my preferred my way of viewing 4:3. You could make that point if he was watching 16:9 footage letterboxed, though. At least they resisted the usual temptation of adding a white box (with rounded corners) and a red flashing "REC"
The point I was trying to make was it's pointless having a widescreen TV in general if all you're going to do on it is watch archive or non-widescreen footage. You may as well just buy a 4:3 TV from Argos. From a show point of view, yes, Ian would have a widescreen TV, and this is total nitpicking now, but you'd have thought there would be a small education in how to set up widescreen TVs properly for non-widescreen pictures. Lots of people now probably think Ian Beale's face really was as fat as it was pictured 20 years ago.
Neil Jones
Founding member
Plus Ian hasn't set his TV up right either, and is actually stretching a 4:3. picture to fill his display. Which kind of defeats the whole point of having a widescreen TV in the first place.
The first half of your sentence is right, ish, but the second half - huh? It doesn't defeat the purpose, though it's not my preferred my way of viewing 4:3. You could make that point if he was watching 16:9 footage letterboxed, though. At least they resisted the usual temptation of adding a white box (with rounded corners) and a red flashing "REC"
The point I was trying to make was it's pointless having a widescreen TV in general if all you're going to do on it is watch archive or non-widescreen footage. You may as well just buy a 4:3 TV from Argos. From a show point of view, yes, Ian would have a widescreen TV, and this is total nitpicking now, but you'd have thought there would be a small education in how to set up widescreen TVs properly for non-widescreen pictures. Lots of people now probably think Ian Beale's face really was as fat as it was pictured 20 years ago.
ST
Was the Ian and Dot scene just a stand-by scene in case something else wasn't ready? It was used to split up the Peggy, Roxy and Ronnie scene but maybe there was meant to be something else there? Maybe a scene in which Lacey Turner had a lot of lines which she couldn't do due to being ill? I am guessing of course.
I think it was, they did a simlar scene filler in the Bill live episode, the scenes in the police reception.
away from the live episode I've noticed a set error in relation to the Max's house, it's a three story house with a cellar and the front door is up a flight of steps, yet on the inside set there is clearly a back door in the kitchen, when the lounge and kitchen are on the first floor. they even did a scene where Phil is looking for Bradley or something and Max says he's in the garden, lets him out the back kitchen door then locks him out.
Was the Ian and Dot scene just a stand-by scene in case something else wasn't ready? It was used to split up the Peggy, Roxy and Ronnie scene but maybe there was meant to be something else there? Maybe a scene in which Lacey Turner had a lot of lines which she couldn't do due to being ill? I am guessing of course.
I think it was, they did a simlar scene filler in the Bill live episode, the scenes in the police reception.
away from the live episode I've noticed a set error in relation to the Max's house, it's a three story house with a cellar and the front door is up a flight of steps, yet on the inside set there is clearly a back door in the kitchen, when the lounge and kitchen are on the first floor. they even did a scene where Phil is looking for Bradley or something and Max says he's in the garden, lets him out the back kitchen door then locks him out.
NJ
away from the live episode I've noticed a set error in relation to the Max's house, it's a three story house with a cellar and the front door is up a flight of steps, yet on the inside set there is clearly a back door in the kitchen, when the lounge and kitchen are on the first floor. they even did a scene where Phil is looking for Bradley or something and Max says he's in the garden, lets him out the back kitchen door then locks him out.
Not necessarily an error because I live in a similar sort of setup.
To get to my front door you walk up a steepish drive, it's the same length as a Rover car and rises to a height of about six foot over that distance. The back door you come out level with the rest of the house and the garden's level too.
I don't believe the back of Max's house has been seen on screen but I'd argue there's some way back down even if it's just down an alleyway at the side of the house.
Neil Jones
Founding member
away from the live episode I've noticed a set error in relation to the Max's house, it's a three story house with a cellar and the front door is up a flight of steps, yet on the inside set there is clearly a back door in the kitchen, when the lounge and kitchen are on the first floor. they even did a scene where Phil is looking for Bradley or something and Max says he's in the garden, lets him out the back kitchen door then locks him out.
Not necessarily an error because I live in a similar sort of setup.
To get to my front door you walk up a steepish drive, it's the same length as a Rover car and rises to a height of about six foot over that distance. The back door you come out level with the rest of the house and the garden's level too.
I don't believe the back of Max's house has been seen on screen but I'd argue there's some way back down even if it's just down an alleyway at the side of the house.
GE
I know that, during the live tx, pres had a tape running in parallel of the dress rehearsal, so they could cut to it in case the lines from Elstree went down. I'd imagine the ending would have matched the version which actually made it to air, but I don't know if perhaps there were various versions of the tape, and only the correct one was sent to them. Or the whole 'only 7 people know the ending' thing was rubbish.
Crikey. Getting the fades in the right place would be one thing - but then you also have to contend with the fact that it's done differently on DSat and DTT: one sends a premixed AD track, the other sends instructions and fade instructions. Doing that live is surely asking for trouble!
thegeek
Founding member
As I said before, most of the subtitles were the pre-typed style which made me suspicious when the only 7 people named as being in the know on the BBC Three show didn't include the subtitler.
I know that, during the live tx, pres had a tape running in parallel of the dress rehearsal, so they could cut to it in case the lines from Elstree went down. I'd imagine the ending would have matched the version which actually made it to air, but I don't know if perhaps there were various versions of the tape, and only the correct one was sent to them. Or the whole 'only 7 people know the ending' thing was rubbish.
Quote:
On a related accessibility note, this episode did not have audio description as Eastenders would do normally, I don't think any live show has ever had AD. It would make an interesting challenge for someone to implement though.
BR
That's a first as in the real world most people have their widescreen TV's set up incorrectly anyway (not that stretching 4:3 is incorrect, just an option if you don't want the black bars or cropped.)
Plus Ian hasn't set his TV up right either, and is actually stretching a 4:3. picture to fill his display. Which kind of defeats the whole point of having a widescreen TV in the first place.
That's a first as in the real world most people have their widescreen TV's set up incorrectly anyway (not that stretching 4:3 is incorrect, just an option if you don't want the black bars or cropped.)
IS
As I said before, most of the subtitles were the pre-typed style which made me suspicious when the only 7 people named as being in the know on the BBC Three show didn't include the subtitler. I guess it is possible that one of the producers in the know prepared the subtitles or they had someone prepare subtitles for each of the possible endings. It may even be possible that the subtitles were prepared without the person prepairing them knowing who actually delivered the line "It was me, I killed Archie." (which is what the the subtitles said or "I killed Archie, It was me" which is what Lacey Turner said on the night).
Yes, the subtitles were ambiguous as to who said it to who, it would almost certainly have been the same line no matter who said it
As I said before, most of the subtitles were the pre-typed style which made me suspicious when the only 7 people named as being in the know on the BBC Three show didn't include the subtitler. I guess it is possible that one of the producers in the know prepared the subtitles or they had someone prepare subtitles for each of the possible endings. It may even be possible that the subtitles were prepared without the person prepairing them knowing who actually delivered the line "It was me, I killed Archie." (which is what the the subtitles said or "I killed Archie, It was me" which is what Lacey Turner said on the night).
Yes, the subtitles were ambiguous as to who said it to who, it would almost certainly have been the same line no matter who said it
DA
Did he really say this? I didn't notice on the first watch and I just half watched the end again and didn't hear it then either.
Sorry, no he didn't, but it did sound a bit like Jack was giving the cop a cue.
Then that's a very odd point! I don't remember the scene where Ian Beale went to the shop and had a discussion with the bloke about how he only wanted a telly for showing his old videos. It think it's safe to assume he can at least get Freeview.
And can you really still get 4:3 TVs in Argos?
David
Doof doof indeed - not bad all round. I liked Jack's bit of in-character prompting: "Let him go! Bradley's on his mark!"
Did he really say this? I didn't notice on the first watch and I just half watched the end again and didn't hear it then either.
Sorry, no he didn't, but it did sound a bit like Jack was giving the cop a cue.
Quote:
The point I was trying to make was it's pointless having a widescreen TV in general if all you're going to do on it is watch archive or non-widescreen footage.
Then that's a very odd point! I don't remember the scene where Ian Beale went to the shop and had a discussion with the bloke about how he only wanted a telly for showing his old videos. It think it's safe to assume he can at least get Freeview.
And can you really still get 4:3 TVs in Argos?
David
TV
As I said before, most of the subtitles were the pre-typed style which made me suspicious when the only 7 people named as being in the know on the BBC Three show didn't include the subtitler. I guess it is possible that one of the producers in the know prepared the subtitles or they had someone prepare subtitles for each of the possible endings. It may even be possible that the subtitles were prepared without the person prepairing them knowing who actually delivered the line "It was me, I killed Archie." (which is what the the subtitles said or "I killed Archie, It was me" which is what Lacey Turner said on the night).
Yes, the subtitles were ambiguous as to who said it to who, it would almost certainly have been the same line no matter who said it
They shown some of the alternative endings on BBC3- the other endings were almost scripted exactly the same but with different characters. It could also be that subtitlers were aware of the different endings and they were told alongside the cast.
In other news, Eastenders attracted 15.64m between 8pm and 8.30pm, most watched scripted show since 2003, whilst Eastenders Aftermath on BBC3 got 4.3m, highest multichannel rating ever.
In all, it was a massive success.
As I said before, most of the subtitles were the pre-typed style which made me suspicious when the only 7 people named as being in the know on the BBC Three show didn't include the subtitler. I guess it is possible that one of the producers in the know prepared the subtitles or they had someone prepare subtitles for each of the possible endings. It may even be possible that the subtitles were prepared without the person prepairing them knowing who actually delivered the line "It was me, I killed Archie." (which is what the the subtitles said or "I killed Archie, It was me" which is what Lacey Turner said on the night).
Yes, the subtitles were ambiguous as to who said it to who, it would almost certainly have been the same line no matter who said it
They shown some of the alternative endings on BBC3- the other endings were almost scripted exactly the same but with different characters. It could also be that subtitlers were aware of the different endings and they were told alongside the cast.
In other news, Eastenders attracted 15.64m between 8pm and 8.30pm, most watched scripted show since 2003, whilst Eastenders Aftermath on BBC3 got 4.3m, highest multichannel rating ever.
In all, it was a massive success.