|
|
Post by stantheman on Sept 19, 2010 17:01:22 GMT
Then don't get so "disappointed" by others taking the piss! Perhaps I have been a bit of a dick over this. I just wasn't expecting the flurry of sarcasm the thread recieved. But nor was I expecting apologies or explanations for the gaffs, I hasten to add. I am, however, surprised at how defensive Shane seems to be. |
|
|
|
Post by PatrickCoyle on Sept 19, 2010 17:13:47 GMT
Woody grassed Coyle up at work. But I was only three in 1986, and never even had a job until 2000, so someone dropped a bollock there.
|
|
|
|
Post by RichK on Sept 19, 2010 17:33:37 GMT
But nor was I expecting apologies or explanations for the gaffs, I hasten to add. No worries. My earlier post was less an apology and more an attempt at enlightenment, just to let you know the sort of work that does go on in the name of making it look real. The budget for the series stretches to about ten people working specifically on authenticity. HBO could probably afford fifty people for "Sex and The City '86" but I bet you'd still spot gaffs if you looked hard enough. It's just how it is.  I'd say character and plot still come ahead of authenticity, but authenticity isn't too far behind. |
|
|
|
Post by dude on Sept 19, 2010 17:36:11 GMT
Hell guys it,s clear that Shane did not have full creative control over this as he did with the film he did not even direct the two parts screened then having CH4 screaming at you to hit impossible dead lines. TV does not give you 9 months to edit let's see how Shane's 2 parts go down. I must admit the replies Do not seem to me coming from Shane himself is it possible he has a agent posting on here now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Sept 19, 2010 18:13:16 GMT
I must admit the replies Do not seem to me coming from Shane himself is it possible he has a agent posting on here now. You've missed a meeting. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by jill on Sept 19, 2010 18:21:24 GMT
Then don't get so "disappointed" by others taking the piss! Perhaps I have been a bit of a dick over this. I just wasn't expecting the flurry of sarcasm the thread recieved. But nor was I expecting apologies or explanations for the gaffs, I hasten to add. I am, however, surprised at how defensive Shane seems to be. Personally, I'm disappointed by the lack of stone cladding-Rich could have whipped that on and taken it off again, no bother-lazy sod. Double glazing's fine btw-people did have it back then. Seriously stantheman, this is more banter than sarcasm-you should have been around on this forum 3-4 years back! |
|
|
|
Post by RichK on Sept 19, 2010 18:44:52 GMT
Double glazing? Yep, fine. Fat framed upvc windows? Nope. Much more modern. And they're fuckin' everywhere! Bane of my life. Lovely Sheffield Council have done such a good job of upgrading their housing stock. They deserve the credit, but they make my job right tough I can tell ya.
And speed bumps too. Ahh, didn't really exist back then did they? Also.. road signs with built-in lights. Again imagine trying to email the highways department to tell them you want to place an old steel give way sign over their new lightbox for, like, five minutes at the quietest time of day. And go to all the effort of explaining how you'll approach the risk thereby generated and finally get a "yes" from them after much bartering and reassurance, only to watch Danny Cohen frame out the frickin' give way sign at the last minute, thereby rendering all your efforts redundant anyway. Charming! ;D ;D ;D
Does that really matter? Of course not, because it means I've set a precedent for the next time such a request comes up.
|
|
|
|
Post by dude on Sept 19, 2010 18:50:38 GMT
I must admit the replies Do not seem to me coming from Shane himself is it possible he has a agent posting on here now. You've missed a meeting. ;D[/quote Dave I have been following the posts when Shane rang you to sign back on the forum he could give log in details to a person/persons for any further threads .Maybe it,s just me but the posts do seem odd to say the least .On a new note Checking the BBFC the TIE 86 series are only just showing up days before screening talk about cutting it close sorry about the pun I know they give notice to the distributor 4 days before the BBFC list the cert. |
|
|
|
Post by kelpie on Sept 19, 2010 20:54:55 GMT
That's exactly what did happen on one of the key locations ;D Really? Interesting to know that! That's the thing though, there are budget and timeframe constraints here. If it's a building that is going to be prominent, then yes, but we can surely overlook a few things too? I agree that there are far more important concerns! And I appreciate the efforts. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by shanemeadows on Sept 20, 2010 7:41:43 GMT
Or getting off with the granddaughter of peaches geldoff? What is it they say? Never meet your heroes? Thanks for cementing that theory, Shane. Your films have affected me in ways no other films have ever done (apart from Ken Loach's stuff), but your defensive and sarcastic reaction to what was meant as a fun thread has really disappointed me. Get a grip dude. Most directors don't interact with their fans at all let alone stay around after people insult/tear apart your work with a fine tooth comb. But if its cheesed you off that much, I'll remove my joke for you bro. I hope you can learn to love me again. |
|
|
|
Post by saffy on Sept 20, 2010 7:42:52 GMT
Jesus ... moan, bloody moan, some of you !
|
|
|
|
Post by noveltyisland on Sept 20, 2010 8:20:09 GMT
Gawd, there are some touchy characters on this board aren't there? Don't take all sarcastic and ironic humour as an attack on your very being, sometimes people are just having a giggle.
It can't be 1986, I haven't seen Gordon the Gopher, Jan Molby, the Weetabix skinheads, Alphaville, Filthy, Rich & Catflap, Commodore 64s, my A-team duvet etc, etc, etc....
|
|
peterb
Junior Member
Posts: 14
|
Post by peterb on Sept 20, 2010 9:27:54 GMT
I'm just waiting for someone to comment on the weather being different in 86: quick check of the met reports for that area against the date on Shaun's exam paper .... ha
|
|
|
|
Post by Companero on Sept 20, 2010 9:54:23 GMT
I think the makers of this show are taking the piss out of us. Besides Jo Hartley, Perry Benson and a few others, most of the cast aren't old enough to remember 1986, are they?
That's the biggest gaff, if you ask me.
|
|
|
|
Post by stantheman on Sept 20, 2010 17:31:19 GMT
What is it they say? Never meet your heroes? Thanks for cementing that theory, Shane. Your films have affected me in ways no other films have ever done (apart from Ken Loach's stuff), but your defensive and sarcastic reaction to what was meant as a fun thread has really disappointed me. Get a grip dude. Most directors don't interact with their fans at all let alone stay around after people insult/tear apart your work with a fine tooth comb. But if its cheesed you off that much, I'll remove my joke for you bro. I hope you can learn to love me again. Well, I've already admitted to being a dick on this - I'm honestly not normaly quite so touchy. Time of the month probably. Anyway, I'm sorry you saw my thread/comments as insulting/tearing aprt your work. That was certainly never my intention. Christ, if I had even a trace of your film-making talent, I might just feel justified in doing such, but I don't. Hey-ho. Anyway, that's my last comment in this thread. As others have pointed out, there are far more important and interesting things to be gained rom this series. |
|
