TV Home Forum

Happy Birthday BBC TWO

BBC Two 40 this Spring/Summer (March 2004)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
AD
Adam
TVArchive posted:
Quote:

I don't see why there was only ONE show though. They could have split it into four hour long shows to be shown throughout the week.


Did you not watch it around the 9.00pm watershed? It was most definetly two sepearte programmes thanks to broadcasting laws and artistic licence.


Channel 4 regularly uses idents when a programme such as '100 Greatest...' passes 9pm. It doesn't mean it's a different programme though.
DA
DAS Founding member
The point that's being made is that an ident was shoved in at 9.00pm so as to separate the programme into two, effectively, to bypass the watershed regulations.
DA
Dan Founding member
Yes that's right Dan. This was a last minute decision*.

*Cock-up.

PS Why isn't anyone wishing a happy 40th birthday to BBC1?
PT
Put The Telly On
because BBC1 isn't 40? BBC 1 is 70 odd isn't it?

Ricky Gervais was hilarious at the end of the prog. Laughing
:-(
A former member
I assume that another advantage of splitting the programme into 2 was to create a handy point in which to change tapes!

oh and.... Happy 40th Birthday BBC1
:-(
A former member
nok32uk posted:
because BBC1 isn't 40? BBC 1 is 70 odd isn't it?


BBC Television is 68 years old, You can work out how old BBC1 is for yourself Wink
DA
DAS Founding member
It did make me laugh when Jane Root said "Newsnight is the most important programme on BBC Two". That would, of course, be the reason it was shunted back half an hour for her to say that!
TV
tvarksouthwest
malcyb from WEBFAX posted:
Very disappointed with the programme. A lot of the short clips could have been shown longer to get the gist of what was going on and many of the longer clips shown were just plain boring. I know this was not just about the presentation of BBC-2 but the whole output of the channel. However, I feel this programme could have been done a lot better.

And surprisingly no-one has mentioned the 16:9 cropping butchery.

Says a lot when TV's Naughtiest Blunders can show 4:3 in a widescreen frame, yet an apparently serious retrospective refuses to bend the rules.
TV
TVArchive Founding member
tvarksouthwest posted:

And surprisingly no-one has mentioned the 16:9 cropping butchery.

Says a lot when TV's Naughtiest Blunders can show 4:3 in a widescreen frame, yet an apparently serious retrospective refuses to bend the rules.

I noticed it wasn't completely butchered, in more significant parts, idents & show titles the age old compromise of 14:9 was used to worse effect. It's just not good enough.

Are there no kind of focus groups for this kind of slaugher?
:-(
A former member
Dan posted:
PS Why isn't anyone wishing a happy 40th birthday to BBC1?

nok32uk posted:
because BBC1 isn't 40? BBC 1 is 70 odd isn't it?


I think that Dan may be being pedantic, because BBC1 would have been called "BBCtv" before BBC2 existed. Rolling Eyes So that would make the name "BBC1" the same age as "BBC2", wouldn't it?

But I'm with nok32uk on this one.
The channel that is now called BBC1 - regardless of any name changes - is far older than BBC2!

Going by Dan's logic, ITV1 won't be celebrating it's golden anniversary next year, as "ITV1" is only a couple of years old! Rolling Eyes
M
M@ Founding member
nok32uk posted:
because BBC1 isn't 40? BBC 1 is 70 odd isn't it?

Ricky Gervais was hilarious at the end of the prog. Laughing


Yeah, he was brilliant. Great double act with Olly the cat.
:-(
A former member
TVArchive posted:
And surprisingly no-one has mentioned the 16:9 cropping butchery.

Says a lot when TV's Naughtiest Blunders can show 4:3 in a widescreen frame, yet an apparently serious retrospective refuses to bend the rules.


TVNBs only uses a full 4:3 frame for a few clips - those with full screen graphics such as news and GMTV..... and sensibly only when those graphics are essential to the joke.

tvarksouthwest posted:
I noticed it wasn't completely butchered, in more significant parts, idents & show titles the age old compromise of 14:9 was used to worse effect. It's just not good enough.


14:9 pillarboxing was used throughout on all 4:3 material, they didn't use any (as far as I'm saw) full frame like TVNBs..... but then there was no need to. But more importantly no 4:3 was blown up to full 16:9

But really, how much did we not see? Not much, there were very no shots whereby the meaning of what was going on was destroyed by having a little bit trimed off the top and bottom. Even the BBC2 opening footage worked OK in 16;9

Some of the idents were a very funny shape though, not entirely sure what had happened to them


Quote:

Are there no kind of focus groups for this kind of slaugher?


Slaughter!?..... think that's a bit over the top

Newer posts