|
|
Post by Lars on Sept 9, 2006 19:35:38 GMT
Series 1 and 2 of the German DVD release had the aspect ratio 4:3 (Fullscreen) without black bars. Today I wrote the reviews for the German DVD releases of Series 2 and 3 and ultimately have to correct myself, after I checked all three box sets: While Series 1 is definitely in standard 4:3 Fullscreen, the German dvd set of Series 2 actually has the aspect ratio 1.56:1 with small black bars on top and bottom of the picture. I don't know, if this is the correct aspect ratio, but at least it isn't Fullscreen. And regarding Floyd's shower scene: If you mean the scene where he is arrested, in the German version Floyd is only humming a song (unknown to me) and not singing any words. Greetings, Lars! |
|
|
|
Post by sorkinfan on Sept 11, 2006 9:20:51 GMT
I'm not sure if the standard music made specifically for each story was changed, I don't think it was. But certain tracks in the originally screened episodes were changed for the repeats. I think these were mainstream songs, a couple of examples Mark listening to an Oasis track in 'Men Should Weep' and they used the song 'Try A Little Tenderness' in 'The Big Crunch' which I don't think ever got put on the repeats. And as sorkinfan says, the song Floyd sings in the shower changes everytime you see it, lol. He might able to shed more light on other tracks though, I can't think of many more specifically (it all comes down to a copyright issue, I imagine). Spot on! (Certainly for the home video releases; were these tracks also changed for repeats? Seems unlikely - not to mention cheap! - given the difference in rights payments between broadcast TV and sales release. But then common sense doesn't seem to be a priority for the treatment of Cracker...) The other major Big Crunch track that changed was 'Rain or Shine', used at the very start of the story as the camera wanders the house while Fitz mumbles to himself in the mirror. I don't know whose performance it was (it's known by Sinatra, and was definitely a male voice; but it sounded more like BB King), but the lyrics begin like this: I'm gonna love you Like nobody's loved you Come rain or come shine High as a mountain and deep as a river Come rain or come shine Well I guess when you met me That it were just one of those things Don't you ever bet me Cause I'm gonna be true if you let me The instrumental that replaced both this and Try a Little Tenderness were well-intentioned, and did roughly match the style, but carried none of the soul...and were mixed into the audio very poorly. Fitz is nearly drowned out at the start of Crunch, where originally he was completely clear. I think the track reappeared at the end of the story as well... |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 11, 2006 11:03:03 GMT
I'm so glad i'm not the only one who remembers all this stuff about all the originally screened episodes!
'Rain or Shine' was definitely used at the end of the 'The Big Crunch' too.
I watched the repeats on ITV3 a few weeks back, and 'Try A Little Tenderness' was definitely not on there. I've never really seen it on any repeats to be honest. I really would love to get hold of the original episodes again though - it was great the way that song was used during the bits with Fitz and Panhandle. I used to own it but got rid of the VHS tape ages ago (the only one I hung onto was 'Brotherly Love' because of the extra scenes).
I don't know about you sorkinfan, but I find it really random that 'The Big Crunch' employed quite a few mainstream songs in it's score. It worked really well, but it's not something that is very prominent in any of the others. The other stories just seem to stick with original scores written primarily for the series.
|
|
|
|
Post by sorkinfan on Sept 11, 2006 13:04:37 GMT
I'm so glad i'm not the only one who remembers all this stuff about all the originally screened episodes! We are, quite clearly, made for each other!  I watched the repeats on ITV3 a few weeks back, and 'Try A Little Tenderness' was definitely not on there. I've never really seen it on any repeats to be honest. That, then, is either really cheap, or really lazy. Using popular music in shows is pretty straightforward, it only gets painfiully expensive later on, when you try to release on video/DVD, because then it's a more directly for-profit use. (TV shows technically make no money on broadcast, it's the ads that bring the channel the cash. Of course the more popular shows have more expensive ad SPACE...but that's a whole other discussion.) Alternatively, it may be like the DVDs - Granada just keep handing out the same tape without thinking about it. I was having this discussion with some colleagues the other day and they pointed out the obvious thing - put out the original edits and you can market the DVD as 'contains ten minutes of never-before-released material'. I really should write them a letter... I really would love to get hold of the original episodes again though - it was great the way that song was used during the bits with Fitz and Panhandle. I used to own it but got rid of the VHS tape ages ago (the only one I hung onto was 'Brotherly Love' because of the extra scenes). Yeah, I did the same thing. (Only I threw out BL as well!) Can't believe I did it now. Just so stupid not to check first - working in the business I should never have trusted the DVDs to be the same. (Though, actually, I bought the first series on VHS first - long before DVD arrived - and they were spot-on.) I don't know about you sorkinfan, but I find it really random that 'The Big Crunch' employed quite a few mainstream songs in it's score. It worked really well, but it's not something that is very prominent in any of the others. The other stories just seem to stick with original scores written primarily for the series. It's odd, isn't it? I assume it's down to Julian Jarrold directing; though the script not being a McGovern already gives it a very different feel. (Whitehead did okay, he was just a bit...bland. Abbott did far better at impersonating Jimmy's style.) The show was always very daring with directors - a new one every time. (Oh, except for Tim Fywell, I think.) Winterbottom set the style early, but they all have a different feel...and Jarrold was just a little more soft, gentle, less gritty. All that said, it did work for the episodes, and it was certainly the kind of music that would be in both Fitz's collection and his head! |
|
|
|
Post by mikesplicer on Sept 11, 2006 13:13:53 GMT
Hi sarah
I have the facility to transfer VHS to DVD if your at all interested.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 11, 2006 14:01:58 GMT
Hi sarah I have the facility to transfer VHS to DVD if your at all interested. Hi Mike - yes, I would definitely be interested - thank you for the offer! Which e-mail address are you currently on? I'll send you a message to discuss it. sorkinfan - you are so right about 'The Big Crunch'. I've always thought it had such a different style direction wise to all of the others. Definitely less-darker and less-gritty - an almost warmer, bright feel to it despite the crime story. I'm not sure if a lot of it was deliberate because of what was going on in Fitz's personal life too, who knows. I didn't mind 'The Big Crunch' personally - it has it's faults, but I think it's the best non-McGovern story next to 'True Romance' IMO. Like you said, as with 'Brotherly Love' maybe it's a case of nobody has ever bothered digging the original tapes out for the repeats. I should never have got rid of my old recorded tapes looking back either, but I think I only did it because I purchased them all properly before the DVD's came out. I'm really curious to know what your own favourite stories are and why?! You certainly sound like you've watched them as many times as me! |
|
|
|
Post by sorkinfan on Sept 11, 2006 15:53:33 GMT
sorkinfan - you are so right about 'The Big Crunch'. I've always thought it had such a different style direction wise to all of the others. Definitely less-darker and less-gritty - an almost warmer, bright feel to it despite the crime story. I'd always blamed a lot of it on the setting. Leafy suburbia isn't Cracker's usual home, and it lends itself to a light, Inspector-Morse visual style - the idea being that when you pull the curtain back on the facade, there's often a dark underbelly. (Please excuse that ghastly mixed metaphor!) I didn't mind 'The Big Crunch' personally - it has it's faults, but I think it's the best non-McGovern story next to 'True Romance' IMO. Well, I have mixed feelings. It's certainly got more depth than any of the Abbott's, but I think a lot of that is to do with running time. Some of Big Crunch's details are mis-steps. The painted body is 'movie weird' as opposed to realistic; there's never a clear connection made between Hawking and the Bible; and some of the dialogue is too on the nose ("I'll crack him, I know I can"). But for all that, the performances are great, and a lot of psychology and plotting fascinates. But I don't think the dialogue is ever as good as Best Boys or True Romance, which also comes across as far more credible and realistic - just without the screen time to really hit the depths of its characters. By necessity, just like Mad Woman and Lemming, things are kept straightforward. (Both of those McGovern stories, in fact, made their limitations into strengths - the killers are known fleetingly or not at all. So instead of racing-against-time the way Abbott tries to force - with the Best Boys family and Fitz's son in Romance in jeopardy - we instead get the time to JUST focus on one character's brain. If Abbott had done that, he'd have knocked Big Crunch for six!) I'm really curious to know what your own favourite stories are and why?! You certainly sound like you've watched them as many times as me! Now, if I weren't quite so lazy I'd do a big essay on this. Maybe I will sometime and post it on the blog... In fact...yeah, I want to put some time into this one. I'll get back to you. (Short version: Men Should Weep is amazing, White Ghost isn't, and everything else is better than any piece of TV broadcast in the 90s.) :-) |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 11, 2006 18:40:27 GMT
Can't disagree with anything you've said really! My only problem with the Abbott stories (I don't count White Ghost, it's terrible and i've not even watched it enough times to know it inside out like the others), is the motivation of the killers. It was something McGovern did so well - you totally believed the criminals reasons when he did them, you could never condone any of it, but you could pretty much always sympathise and understand why they end up doing what they do. I just never found that with 'Best Boys' and Grady & Nash personally - and I think it veered towards the same lines as 'To Say I Love You' sometimes. I am very fond of 'True Romance' though, for lots of reasons - Janice is a bit OTT (and I find her whole following Fitz for 5 years a tad implausible!) but it just somehow works. All the focus being turned on Fitz and the mess that is his private life does make it a pretty good finale to the 3rd series, even if was left a tad open ended. As for the McGovern stories though, I love them all equally. They are all works of genius, but special mention goes to 'To Be A Somebody', 'Men Should Weep', 'Brotherly Love' and 'One Day A Lemming Will Fly'. The latter especially...everytime I watch that the writing in the final 20 minutes still astonishes me. It's just fantastic, the way everything turns...the bravery of the series to have a mainstream ITV police drama have the lead character and the good guys send an innocent man down, the killer still free, Fitz being shown that he isn't always right. You'd be amazed at how many e-mails i've had in the past by people questioning whether there is another episode to ODALWF - I think some people find it hard to believe it was left the way it was! Just brilliant. Looking forward to reading your 'long version' post! |
|
|
|
Post by sorkinfan on Sept 11, 2006 20:15:14 GMT
Can't disagree with anything you've said really! Like I say - made for each other... My only problem with the Abbott stories (I don't count White Ghost, it's terrible and i've not even watched it enough times to know it inside out like the others), is the motivation of the killers. This is a reasonable point. McGovern's underlying ethos always seemed to be the same - "Anyone who says they could never be a killer just hasn't met the right circumstances yet. And should be glad they haven't." His understanding of psychosis is remarkable. Like, say, three things will happen to someone - an incident in their past, another in the present, and a third confluence of opportunity and circumstance. It's scary - not in the old horror movie, "Who's gonna get it next?" way. It's "There but for the grace of the big sky bully..." You become aware of your own issues...and what might provoke them. And at the same time you're reassured, because people who become aware of their darknesses are far less likely to fall victim to them. ...Where was I? Oh yeah - Abbott. He's cursed by a desire to under-write dialogue. Usually a blessing for a writer (I'm forever churing out twice as much dialogue as a scene actually needs! And it's worked a treat for him on his otehr shows), but Cracker has to climax with articulation - it has to hit a peak with the revelation, with the words, with the 'why'. Abbott's problem - probably, I now intend to do a full re-watch and write it up! - was to breeze past that reveltion impatiently. Or to reveal it badly. That "He did nothin'!" moment in True Romance always feels like a cheat; forcing a character to misunderstand in order to reveal something and move the plot on. McGovern never cheats. Still, I prefer each individual scene - the energy, the dialogue that often still crackles, the dark tone, the brilliant use of anti-language, talking around a topic rather than about it - to the individual scenes of Big Crunch. ...So why is Big Crunch a more satisfying whole? Maybe the time thing I mentioned. Or not. Yep, I definitely need to dig out the DVDs! All the focus being turned on Fitz and the mess that is his private life does make it a pretty good finale to the 3rd series, even if was left a tad open ended. A tad?!?!  It's that frustrating thing about so many series - the guest writer becomes unable to upset the status quo. With Abbott, I imagine ITV told him to leave it that way...but I suspect he would have done so anyway, out of respect to McGovern. To leave the toys as he found them for big brother to play with. Whitehead actually got to mess with things more, by bringing Fitz and Penhaligan together. A predictable story beat - and one he handles, sadly, in a relatively pedestrian way (I'm certain a McGovern's version would have been way more complex and dark) - does, at least, push things on. Abbott...well, he could only really provide extended coda to Brotherly Love - complex grief over Beck, Judith perpetually with one foot out the door, Fitz perpetually unable to sort himself out, and Penhaligan (criminally) left to hang in post-rape misery and over-seriousness. That last is the worst of all, because her character deserved more than vaguely 'seeing someone else', especially another under-developed copper. That's not her rising over her own tragedy, it's "the best we can do in the time". She's left as a victim - in our minds, emotionally, if not technically - and deserved to be front and centre in the series' then-final story. I don't half go on, don't I?! As for the McGovern stories though, I love them all equally. They are all works of genius, but special mention goes to 'To Be A Somebody', 'Men Should Weep', 'Brotherly Love' and 'One Day A Lemming Will Fly'. The latter especially...everytime I watch that the writing in the final 20 minutes still astonishes me. Absolutely. Though I guess what's astounding is just how often his episodes make you feel that. Over and over again. Most TV, you're lucky to get moments that powerful - dialogue and performances that good - once a series, let along once an episode. But there was never a McGovern Cracker that didn't give you at least one moment like that between each and every commercial break! You'd be amazed at how many e-mails i've had in the past by people questioning whether there is another episode to ODALWF - I think some people find it hard to believe it was left the way it was! Just brilliant. There was a small argument about it on the IMDb not long ago. Crazy. There's a part of me that loves that an alternative ending was written - and then ignored. It shows a willfful desire to be both truthful and complex. To admit to life's irritating, open-ended nature. And to confess that good men sometimes do bad things, yet still remain good men. It's breathtaking...and it drives more conventional viewers crazy. Good.  Looking forward to reading your 'long version' post! Oh, and I'll waffle in here in the meantime, if I may. Now I'm going back to re-watch the lot my full rant might be a long time coming! I might do it series by series on my blog and post a link...maybe. In the meantime it's lovely to be chatting to a like-mind. (On this subject, at least!) beforemyeyes.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
|
Post by sorkinfan on Sept 11, 2006 20:21:32 GMT
The other major Big Crunch track that changed was 'Rain or Shine', used at the very start of the story as the camera wanders the house while Fitz mumbles to himself in the mirror. I don't know whose performance it was (it's known by Sinatra, and was definitely a male voice; but it sounded more like BB King), but the lyrics begin like this: Ha - found it! It was by Ray Charles. Now I hear it, I wonder how I thought that could be anone else! It's available in iTunes...and it's absolutely, tragically wonderful.  |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 11, 2006 20:43:21 GMT
Oh, and I'll waffle in here in the meantime, if I may. Now I'm going back to re-watch the lot my full rant might be a long time coming! I might do it series by series on my blog and post a link...maybe. In the meantime it's lovely to be chatting to a like-mind. (On this subject, at least!) beforemyeyes.blogspot.com/Yes that's fine to waffle in here!! It's fab to talk to somebody who clearly knows the series as well as me. I just never get bored talking about it! Whitehead actually got to mess with things more, by bringing Fitz and Penhaligan together. A predictable story beat - and one he handles, sadly, in a relatively pedestrian way (I'm certain a McGovern's version would have been way more complex and dark) - does, at least, push things on. Yeah Ted Whitehead got to do a bit more with it, and of course they have to be brought together for any impact in 'Men Should Weep'. It certainly pushes things along. I quite liked the way he worked that storyline it in 'The Big Crunch' though - it's the one bit I don't think needed to be dark or particulary complex. As well, it's strange - the only bit of a dialogue in that whole story that sounded naturally like the Fitz of the McGovern stories was the little speech he gives her in the kitchen. Anyway, yes, you a right 'True Romance' was more than a "tad" open ended!. And what you said about Penhaligon, spot on. She sort of drifted into the background a bit in the final series after 'Brotherly Love' and it was criminal. The whole Fitz/Panhandle dynamic went flat - understandable given the circumstances that the series had led the characters to but frustrating all the same! Again maybe down the time element too as the final two stories were just two parters, I don't know. I think that's why i'm still a bit disappointed she's not in 'Nine Eleven' - it would have been great to have seen her 10 years on, seeing what had happened to her and how maybe she'd changed, as well as Fitz. It's my only my let down about the new episode...I know the series is about Fitz and without him it's nothing, but I think sometimes it gets underestimated just how important the rest of the original cast were to fans of the series - particulary the coppers - to why the series worked so brilliantly. I cared about Penhaligon, Bilborough, DCI Wise etc, as characters as much as I did Fitz. There were a lot of little storylines going on in 'True Romance' which just weren't developed enough because of the time - Penhaligon/Temple, and I always thought the whole thing of Judith & Danny was thrown in there as well - no real conclusion or anything. I know Judith slept with Graham, but at no point did I ever really believe she would consider cheating on Fitz again with his brother! Anyway, despite the open endedness, the only conclusion I ever drew from 'True Romance' was that Fitz/Judith's marriage was definitely over - but even that I now have to read differently as they are still married in the new special! Hey something I didn't know - an alternative ending was written for ODALWF?! I'm so glad they stuck with the one they did though. I remember in the set of questions Jimmy McGovern answered for me he said that ODALWF was the most difficult to write and yet it only took him a week to do! Unbelieveable when you consider how great it was. He wasn't even meant to write it I don't think - he took over after the original screenwriter did, well, not a very good job! |
|
|
|
Post by sorkinfan on Sept 12, 2006 23:25:37 GMT
Yeah Ted Whitehead got to do a bit more with it, and of course they have to be brought together for any impact in 'Men Should Weep'. It certainly pushes things along. I quite liked the way he worked that storyline it in 'The Big Crunch' though - it's the one bit I don't think needed to be dark or particulary complex. As well, it's strange - the only bit of a dialogue in that whole story that sounded naturally like the Fitz of the McGovern stories was the little speech he gives her in the kitchen. That's a very good point - that scene. I'd forgotten. That said, I hate the sit-com-like obviousness of the two of them on the sofa, pouncing on one-another... I think that's why i'm still a bit disappointed she's not in 'Nine Eleven' - it would have been great to have seen her 10 years on, seeing what had happened to her and how maybe she'd changed, as well as Fitz. It's my only my let down about the new episode...I know the series is about Fitz and without him it's nothing, but I think sometimes it gets underestimated just how important the rest of the original cast were to fans of the series - particulary the coppers - to why the series worked so brilliantly. I cared about Penhaligon, Bilborough, DCI Wise etc, as characters as much as I did Fitz. I have to conflicting feelings about this aspect of Nine Eleven. One the one hand, yeah, Cracker was a family of characters. One that started to fall apart when Billborough died, just as Fitz's own family crumbled. And the parallels there matter a lot. Plus, Fitz isn't the show, he's the lynchpin, but not the entire works. On the other hand, there's no way a two-hour story can cram in Penhaligan and Wise catch-ups alongside a decade of Fitz/Judith backstory. Not and also create a fully rounded, motivated killer AND a dramatic climax. And unlike Mad Woman or Lemming, it doesn't have the chance to fit into a larger series. So it has to deliver on the tension in the way Abbott did in series three. (Where, ironically, he DID have a half-series to play with...and ended up skipping over Penhaligan and creating a mundane near-romance for Judith. The new coppers are likely to be pretty no-descript, no matter what actors they've got. There's no time for anything else. Mad Woman sparked, but still didn't get to the hearts of the police characters right away. It took time over the series to bring them out. I know Judith slept with Graham, but at no point did I ever really believe she would consider cheating on Fitz again with his brother! See, I believed it could happen - he is, after all, the version of Fitz she would simetimes ahve wanted - I just didn't CARE very much. She cheated, he cheated, the marriage goes on. It's just recycling old story beats, no matter who the guy is. Having her fall pregnant again would have been just as bad - we already know how it ends. It needed a bold new step. The death of a child or something... Oh, I'm working overtime now. Say True Romance was the middle-pair of episodes, and then say that Mark was killed at the end. What happens next? Judith blames Fitz, and Fitz WANTS her to blame him. He hides in the work - another two-parter, even if it be a version of Best Boys - and she hates him for that, too. It's because of that job, after all, that she's lost her son. Meanwhile Fitz is going too far. He gets Wise's back up in a way he'd never done before, he even turns on Penhaligan...who, of course, is also the one who can get through to him. Which brings them close (not romantically, not now, it's too late; but a more...post-graduate version of their old relationship. She's not just the pupil now, and the sex is long since out of the way.). Meanwhile Fitz's salvation, at the Best Boys climax, is in the saving of ANOTHER FAMILY'S CHILD. Wow - that's not bad off the top of my head. No wonder they pay me to write! (Occasionally...) Anyway, despite the open endedness, the only conclusion I ever drew from 'True Romance' was that Fitz/Judith's marriage was definitely over - but even that I now have to read differently as they are still married in the new special! Interesting, because I took the exact opposite reading. (Hey - not unlike the Lemming conclusion, it's better in your head!) I went away feeling that they were 'doomed' to a marriage that would hurt them both constantly, and yet endure. Judith's resentment of his job - actually very well articulated by Abbott - has finally been forced to come full-circle, as it's the only way to save their son. Put it the way Fitz would: How could you leave the man who just saved your child's life? What kind of pregnant dog would that make you? (Her thought process, of course; not his.) Hey something I didn't know - an alternative ending was written for ODALWF?! I believe so. Billborough was going to be swayed by Fitz and, at the last moment, call a halt to the press conference. It's the kind of ending ITV probably requested they try on paper...and it's no loss that it was never used! I'm so glad they stuck with the one they did though. I remember in the set of questions Jimmy McGovern answered for me he said that ODALWF was the most difficult to write and yet it only took him a week to do! Unbelieveable when you consider how great it was. He wasn't even meant to write it I don't think - he took over after the original screenwriter did, well, not a very good job! That's a great interview, BTW. And that detail, particularly, is one I'D never heard before. (So, erm, score of one-all?) It's odd, given how much of Lemming is clearly McGovern - just the very basics of it, things like the schoolteacher suspect. It's SO in tune with McGovern's Channel 4 series Hearts and Minds it's bizarre to imagine anyone else might have been involved. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 13, 2006 11:17:03 GMT
re Nine Eleven, I went back and changed my original post, as I think I was just disappointed that Jane wasn't in it, rather than annoyed. I'm not that at all. I love the original series so much that I think half my problem is my expectations were just way too high given the 10 years of waiting for a new episode, and the fact one of the my favourite aspects of the series was her relationship with Fitz. I can understand Wise not being in it completely - he'd have probably maybe retired by now. And I can understand the time element. But Fitz and his family are back, so i'm more than happy with that, and most importantly Jimmy McGovern has written it. What more could you ask for? A few years ago i'd never of imagined we'd be getting a new one, so it's great that we have. It's just got some very high standards to live up to! Your're making me read the end of 'True Romance' differently now! I think it's the dialogue in that last scene between Fitz and Judith that did it for me, the whole "I don't believe you love me anymore than...." stuff, the way she walks off at the end. Seemed very final to me. The novelisations don't help either if you've read them as they go into things in much more detail. You're kind of going by what you read, as well as what you've seen. 'White Ghost' never really answered anything either....there's something about Fitz sorting money out to send back to Judith, but never any confirmation that they're still together. But my memory of White Ghost is quite vague! In 10 years, i've probably watched it about twice! Definitely pleased they went with the ending of Lemming that they did, I can't imagine it any other way. It's what makes it so great. re those questions with McGovern, in hindsight i'd wish i'd thought about them a bit more. I was so "oh my god i'm in contact with Jimmy McGovern" i think I rushed into a bit! I wish i'd taken more time with them and thought of a few better ones. But he was great and so helpful, he really didn't have to take the time to do that but he did. I'm really thankful for it, and I think it gave an element of validity to my site, if that makes sense (or maybe i've used the wrong word there!). |
|
|
|
Post by sorkinfan on Sept 13, 2006 17:59:43 GMT
re Nine Eleven, I went back and changed my original post, as I think I was just disappointed that Jane wasn't in it, rather than annoyed. It's a fan's lot, though, to be thrilled and excited, and yet irked at the same time. Love is an irksome thing... But Fitz and his family are back, so i'm more than happy with that, and most importantly Jimmy McGovern has written it. What more could you ask for? A few years ago i'd never of imagined we'd be getting a new one, so it's great that we have. It's just got some very high standards to live up to! I couldn't have said it better. Though I could have said it with far more waffle... Your're making me read the end of 'True Romance' differently now! I think it's the dialogue in that last scene between Fitz and Judith that did it for me, the whole "I don't believe you love me anymore than...." stuff, the way she walks off at the end. Seemed very final to me. It's a totally valid interpretation. McGovern and Abbott are more than happy to write interpetive drama, thankfully. But...well, I don't think either of them is especially worried about series climaxes. Cliffhangers, sure, but rarely full resolutions. (Fitz opts to stay with his family in Lemming, but I don't think any of us throught that was the end of the story even then.) Which is to say, if that line had happened in the FIRST story of a season, it wouldn't carry the weight of 'ending'. Just it's own meaning, complete with characters who say what they feel, rather than what is definitely true. If Mad Woman had gone out as a finale...well, people would have taken that relationship ending the same way. But hey, it's all conjecture. McGoverns clearly never thought that relationship would end, cos here we are a decade on. Abbott may have been less sure - but not sure enough to leave it on a definite close. Put another way - if Abbott were writing Nine Eleven, I suspect he'd have had Fitz single for years following that last story. And if that's true...well, you're assessment is spot-on for what WAS in the scipt. And mine's spot-on based on what McGovern created. And neither of us is 'right'. Which I love - more telly should be this way. The novelisations don't help either if you've read them as they go into things in much more detail. You're kind of going by what you read, as well as what you've seen. I avoid spin-off novels as a rule - film is just 'my medium', and also the writers of the books don't always get the tone right, or indeed the full depth of what the actual screenwriter meant my a line, or a gesture. But there's always the chance that original script material will slip through. It used to happen in James Bond adaptations all the time. It's why I love DVD. It brings you those cut-off bits. Shows you how the actors and director would have done it. The biggest spin-off novel problem is that you can never be sure that what's in there IS intended by the screenwriter, or even a cut scene. Maybe it's actually new dialogue that the book's author wanted to do. And then you take that back to the TV version unconsciously...even if it's not meant to be there. re those questions with McGovern, in hindsight i'd wish i'd thought about them a bit more. I was so "oh my god i'm in contact with Jimmy McGovern" i think I rushed into a bit! I wish i'd taken more time with them and thought of a few better ones. But he was great and so helpful, he really didn't have to take the time to do that but he did. I'm really thankful for it, and I think it gave an element of validity to my site, if that makes sense (or maybe i've used the wrong word there!). It's the right word, and totally the right sentiment. And I agree. I think you did fine with it. It's better than the generic interviews that have to be done 'So, where did the idea come from?' Um - no, you go away and do some research. Yours gets to the heart of some questions no magazine would have asked. It's very worthwhile. (Oh, and the nerves thing? Again, don't worry. I've done over a hundred interviews, often with people I'm a little in awe of, and you should only ever feel bad if that feeling goes away!) By the way - "pregnant dog"? That's not the word I had in my post! Those auto-censors have some interesting ways, huh? |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 13, 2006 20:24:26 GMT
By the way - "pregnant dog"? That's not the word I had in my post! Those auto-censors have some interesting ways, huh? ;D I must confess when I first read your post i was like "huh?" and it didn't clock...but now it has! I've never bothered with the censored words thing on here, but I've now seen what you actually typed! I'll have to scrap all that, i'm not bothered by the odd swear word on here or anything. Interpretation is a great thing. It can be a frustrating thing sometimes, especially if you want some clarified...but in Cracker it's a good thing, and there is so much of it! Certain things happen and Fitz says lines sometimes where you really can interpret it in a few different ways. Everything is just so complex. I think it was McGovern who said good TV writing is about narrative simplicity and emotional complexity....it's so true. I'll give the Cracker novels their due - to me they seem very much written from the original scripts, the extra scenes/dialogue in say 'Men Should Weep' or 'Brotherly Love' is very McGovern, and the scenes sit well in that I think if they then stuck them in the TV version they would work fine. With the exception of certain things like Mrs Malcolm dying at the end of MSW novel. I think, if I remember correctly in Fitz's house - when Floyd is there with Judith etc the same as the TV version. I remember reading that and thinking I can perhaps see why that was scrapped. It just seemed a bit too much what with the Beck/Penhaligon thing going on too, but there might have been another reason for it - who knows. (I can't believe this is something the author would have just randomly chose to chuck in there though). Certain scenes were different too - in the novel of 'Brotherly Love' the bit where Judith & Penhaligon talk is TOTALLY different dialogue wise...it's not face to face, and no sign of Judith's infamous "poetic justice" line. So it all got changed for whatever reason, but it's stuff like that that the novels show up. In that way, they are quite an interesting read. Someone we haven't really mentioned - Jimmy Beck!! He was probably my favourite character next to Fitz and Penhaligon. I hated what he did, but I still could never bring myself to fully hate him, and again that was down to McGovern's writing, and the fact I think deep he just wanted to be a good copper. I think this was also highlighted by his thing with Bilborough, I'm sure half of it was that Bilborough just represented everything he wanted to be. His envy of Fitz too. Sorely missed when he went out of the series, Lorcan Cranitch did an immense job. I loved some of his lines with Fitz...I think my favourite Fitz line in the whole series is still his "You need a theasurus" jibe at Beck's continous use of the word 'bollocks'. It's just the way Coltrane caputures the line too ;D I'm going to stop there now because, I just sound, quite frankly, obsessed! EDIT: I've just found this interview with Nicola Shindler who was the script editor for the original series! Proof there was extra stuff we will probably never see: When I worked with Jimmy McGovern as a script editor on Cracker I learnt the art of cutting a script in the edit. Jimmy’s scripts always ended up 10 minutes longer than they were meant to be which is a cardinal sin for a script editor because it means the crew has spent days filming too much material. And so when it came to the edit we used to cut great big swathes of brilliant drama and almost always start the episode later than it started in the script. And I think every episode benefited from the ruthless cutting.
The faster the better
The cutting meant that the audience was allowed to catch up with the action rather than being given big, long “moments” where everything was explained. Jimmy hated losing good material. But much as he hated it he once said to me that he’d prefer an audience to be confused for 10 minutes than bored for even 10 seconds. I think that’s a brilliant rule to use when editing a script. Audiences can deal with fast storytelling so long as they’re never bored. And audiences really enjoyed Cracker. www.rts.org.uk/pfdetails407.asp?id=2152&url=%2Flectures_det.asp |
|
