Not the nine o clock news end credits

Because it was clean in the first place.
Pretty much all transmission masters where there are credits or text or anything appear clean (without said credits) at the end of the master tapes of the original episode it came from.

Another post says that Kinder Lingers is clean on the original episode, but even if it wasn't, there would be a clean copy on the tape anyway.

I actually remember a trailer for the US TV show Less Than Perfect, which used to air on the now-defunct ABC1, was entirely made up of material that was clean, yet the transmission master used that same sketch for credits.



You can cover them up but this can be done really badly if you're not careful (look at the footage on the copious police chase videos you see on World's Wildest Police Videos, Disorderly Conduct, Most Shocking, etc type programmes to see how badly they cover up the date and time stamps to disguise the fact the footage is years old).

As previously stated, the video was clean in the first place.

With regards to Chris Langham, considering he was convicted of downloading child pornography off the internet, Auntie's possibly decided he has no place on the BBC now, plus the fact, as highlighted by the documentary, that his presence on the first series tended to drag it down.



The 1995 episodes are effectively nothing more than edited "highlights" of the original shows. Effectively the BBC is wrong to trail their showing of what is presented as "NOT 3" on the video/DVD as a "classic episode" because it never went out like that in the first place.

The idea of editing the 1995 episodes in the way they are was to apparently make the show flow faster and be more suitable for modern day audiences used to the style of shows like The Fast Show.

As has been stated, it was indeed at the end of the final episode, but without credits which were run over the preceding sketch - the reason being that until the very last minute the Beeb were agonising over whether they should show it or not, hence it could have been removed without anyone noticing anything amiss. Eventually they said they could show it, as long as they explicity stated that the song was called "Kinda Lingers" and not the rude word it actually is, hence the caption when they first say it.

At the press launch of the VHS release of NTNOCN in 1995, producer John Lloyd was asked why it had taken so long for the release to happen. He replied that one of the biggest reasons was that nobody involved (writers and performers) wanted to release the full original episodes as they didn't think they were good enough, there were too many dud sketches in their opinion.

Hence they wanted to be able to edit out what they didn't like and create new compilations with "only the good stuff", but only the original TX masters existed in the archive. This was a problem because of the way the sketches segued into each other, often with music from one sketch continuing in the next one. This made it very difficult and time-consuming to re-edit them seamlessly, and time is money. Lloyd said that they had deliberately waited until editing technology had evolved far enough to make it more financially viable to re-edit the episodes in the way they wanted. It has to be remembered that NTNOCN was an expensive series to release anyway, because of the number of performers and writers whose work had to be cleared and paid for.

So short answer, no, clean versions of sketches weren't archived.


No, not true at all for 99.9% of archive TV made by the BBC or ITV, especially not if made on VT.

The reasons for Langham's departure from the programme are quite well documented, these weren't new allegations or complaints. Lloyd, Langham, Smith, Atkinson and Stephenson were on a Radio 4 programme a few years ago where it was discussed. I don't think there was anything libellous in the TV programme

It's a shame they didn't mention the original format/line up of NTNOCN - the series was going to be very different but the 1979 election delayed it and in the meantime it was revamped

He did work with Smith and Jones many times after NTNOCN and appeared with Lloyd and as mentioned above has appeared with the rest of the cast talking about the programme so I suspect he wasn't asked.

Considering the relatively minor (no pun intended) nature of what he was convicted of it's a shame his career has effectively been ended

But then probably 99.9% of programmes don't have credits over action! I've certainly seen masters with clean credits tacked on the end

I have seen it, it was PURE car crash telly, it even had something that looked like Spitting imagine

http://web.ukonline.co.uk/sotcaa/sotcaa.html?/sotcaa/hidden/ntnocn_pilot01.html

a good read, I believe there copy of the pilot is on the web if you look.

End credits: just look at them and it was on the skecth before, ( ah still tape of Telly version good enough)

A great many programmes, easily the majority, have credits over some kind of background image (be it still or moving). Even in the 50s and 60s it was common to begin the credit roll over the end of the final shot and then slowly fade the background to black, which has caused plenty of headaches for the Doctor Who Restoration Team when remaking the closing credits of 60s stories.

In about 15 years of accessing master tapes of British TV programmes from the 60s through to the 90s I can't remember ever seeing any archive programming with textless elements at the end. The idea that it's some kind of routine thing that's always been done is wrong. Going back to Doctor Who, the only reason that it's possible to rebuild the opening and closing sequences is that, largely due to luck, the original clean background films were retained - none of the TX masters contain clean opening and closing titles after the main programme.

Even today the TX masters won't contain textless elements after the main programme. If it's a programme intended for overseas sale then they might be on the end of the international distribution master, or possibly supplied on a separate tape.

just going o/t for a moment, I saw Campion this afternoon on BBC2 from 1989 but on the title sequence it has the current BBC Logo. Why have they done this?

It's not about starting the credits over the last shot or over backgrounds it's about sketch shows or similar where there is action under the credits - in those cases the master will have the action sans credits on the end of the tape. I have seen it before

Like I said, the suggestion that that's a routine thing that's always been done, and which applies to archive programming as well as modern stuff, is wrong. For 99.9% of BBC and ITV archive programming, all you've got is the original TX master - no textless elements, nothing to facilitate seamless reversioning with new credits or captions. That applies to sketch shows just as much as any other genre of programming.

Monty Python and The Young Ones would be classic examples of comedy series that frequently ran the credits over action. There are no clean textless versions of either surviving. A case in point: the Young Ones episode "Cash" was edited for its original DVD release to remove the cover version of Subterranean Homesick Blues. The end credits, which were run over action, had to be modified to remove the reference to the band, and because no textless end sequence had been kept, this had to be done by editing the existing credits in a very crude and obvious way.

I hear what you're saying, though with all due respect I don't quite buy it. Dr Who I can understand as it's well documented on the Restoration Team website.
Maybe you can explain this:

Observe this YouTube Video which is marked as being taken from a 1984 Dutch TV transmission of Not The Nine: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8iQBZz0FPk

That same clip without credits appears slap bang in the middle of the first NOT on the Gorilla Kinder Lingers video and the 2003 re-issued DVD. You seem to know what you're talking about so for the benefit of everybody else, please tell, how do you get that clip, on your argument that no clean material exists, into a totally clean state as presented in NOT 1, without making it look like a dog's dinner?