Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
So, you were the one who (erroneously) suggested that your view is correct, simply because of who your friends are and where you work: "As someone who works in film and TV ... ", remember?
|
No,I'm not suggesting my view is correct,I'm giving you my opinion. By the way,I was trying to convey that I know what people in the BBC are thinking by saying that I know people who work there.You then came in with you know people too and one has a BAFTA. You started the p-ing match,not me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
I'm delighted you work with so many illustrious people. It still doesn't change the facts.
|
Ok...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
There's not much point repeating myself, is there? We agree that London is a major centre, both in terms of creative industry and also as a city in its own right. You can make a list as long as your arm, it doesn't address the point I'm making, which is where your experience and contacts are letting you down a bit ...
|
Ok....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
... because, as this ^ shows, you clearly don't understand that different kinds of infrastructure have different kinds of restriction on where they can be put.
|
Ok....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
The BBC is there. It is also in Salford, Cardiff, Glasgow, Bristol and who knows where else. Spreading around those things that can be spread around, and keeping Graham Norton in London so the Hollywood A-list, the ones who genuinely can't make the trip north for whatever reason (or won't, and are influential enough to insist), can be interviewed in a cosy studio on the south bank. Though not a studio owned by the BBC, ironically.
|
I know,but just because you can spread em doesn't mean you should.There have been no shows and excuses because of people having to travel up to Salford...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Yes. Exactly what I said.  I'm sorry if the phrase "the traditional centres of film and TV production are separated by almost 2,500 miles and three time zones." wasn't sufficiently clear for someone in the know. There is in fact about 2,500 miles between LA and NYC. And three time zones. I took the trouble to check, rather than just hitting 'reply' and thrashing my keyboard.  |
Yep,misunderstanding on my part,however my point that it's apples and oranges still stands,as per below.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Seriously? And they're not worried that the talent won't travel?  |
No,there is no worry because practically all the a-listers I know and know of have bases in LA and NYC,but I told you this before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
The BBC hasn't moved. Some BBC departments have moved. The BBC obviously believes they can function that way and that sufficient talent can be attracted to Media City to make it viable. I don't think the whingeing from those who would prefer all their employment prospects to be a short walk from any given tube station is a surprise, and I'm confident that in a few years' everyone will be just getting on with it and not moaning. Not quite as much, anyway.
|
Some really good people have quit. I agree people will stop moaning and get on with it though.Still doesn't make it a good choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Um, who's bragging? The BBC's guaranteed income, due to the licence fee, is a fact. Pointing it out is a means of contributing useful facts to a debate. You may be taking this a bit too personally.
|
Nope,the way you brought your point across felt like it was a good thing the BBC could p millions up the wall on some vanity move to Salford,that's all.Maybe I was wrong. I'm passionate about my work,so yeah I take it seriously,not personally.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Have you lost any work as a result of the move of certain departments to Salford?
|
Nope,haven't worked with the BBC for a few years now. Thanks for asking though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Crumbs ... you really are taking this personally, aren't you? What else is in your dossier of "Chris Things Said That Made Me Cross" ... ?
|
Made me Cross? Don't flatter yourself Chris.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
About 100,000 people out of 27 million watched the Olympic opening ceremony in 3D. Sky has about 250,000 3D subscribers, out of a total 10 million connected homes. Meanwhile there are something like 1.3 million 3D-ready TVs already installed around the UK. Based on this, I'm puzzled as to your defintion of "it worked out". My contention is still that 3D will not become mainstream in the UK until a truly major, respected player starts pushing it. Oh, hang on, that's the BBC, isn't it ...
|
3D is mainstream in the UK,and instead of looking at solely the Tv market I'd look at Box office.... I'll repeat myself,it worked out. I know,I make nice wads out of it and so do many others.
By the way,you're once more repeating the same rubbish that you spouted in the other thread.... The bulk of the 3D market is at the cinema and Blu-Ray,not with Sky or the Olympics being shown in 3D and it most certainly doesn't hinge on what the BBC does,unless they now also produce major Blockbusters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Some already have, some haven't. Good luck to them all. Only time will tell exactly how successful the move will turn out to have been, but I'm happy to stand by my prediction that in 10 years everyone will wonder what all the fuss was about.
|
Maybe....
Join CF
You are here: 
