|
Post by jrichard88 on Sept 22, 2011 3:01:52 GMT -5
Some newer members may not be aware of this, but we have a celebrity in our midst. Terry Kinane, who directed 18 episodes of Goodnight Sweetheart between 1996 and 1999, posted regularly at the old GS board on Forumsland. He is now registered with us on our new forum, and I figured now would be a great time for members new and old to post any questions they may have for Terry. To make things easier for everyone involved, and to prevent clutter, I've created this thread. So don't be shy, and ask away!
|
|
|
Post by brainwobbler on Sept 22, 2011 15:04:17 GMT -5
Thanks jrichard, much appreciated, I suppose this question could be asked of all the people involved in the making of GS but I would like to ask Terry if he ever watched the 1970's show Timeslip?, the reason I ask is because number one I'm a huge fan of that show too, I saw it as a very young boy back when it was first broadcast in 1970 and have the DVD collection now of course ;D and number two, the time travel mechanism is very similar to that of the one in GS, ie, Gary walks through an invisible portal/barrier, 'Simon' and 'Liz' the two main characters of Timeslip played by Spencer Banks and Cheryl Burfield used to crawl through an invisible opening in the same kind of way and whats more they too went back to 1940, so I was wondering if Terry or any of the others who made GS may had been possibly inspired by Timeslip or if it was just purely coincidence??, many thanks
|
|
karl
Junior Member
In every generation,there is a chosen one.
Posts: 64
|
Post by karl on Sept 23, 2011 1:08:44 GMT -5
I'd like to ask Terry if he would like to see Goodnight sweetheart return to our screens? Also would he know if the Writers would be interested in doing it again?
|
|
|
Post by Terry Kinane on Sept 23, 2011 5:33:03 GMT -5
Thanks jrichard, much appreciated, I suppose this question could be asked of all the people involved in the making of GS but I would like to ask Terry if he ever watched the 1970's show Timeslip?, the reason I ask is because number one I'm a huge fan of that show too, I saw it as a very young boy back when it was first broadcast in 1970 and have the DVD collection now of course ;D and number two, the time travel mechanism is very similar to that of the one in GS, ie, Gary walks through an invisible portal/barrier, 'Simon' and 'Liz' the two main characters of Timeslip played by Spencer Banks and Cheryl Burfield used to crawl through an invisible opening in the same kind of way and whats more they too went back to 1940, so I was wondering if Terry or any of the others who made GS may had been possibly inspired by Timeslip or if it was just purely coincidence??, many thanks Nope. I never saw that series. As for the time portal in GS, we just wanted the simplest device possible to get Gary from one time period to the other.
|
|
|
Post by Terry Kinane on Sept 23, 2011 5:38:32 GMT -5
I'd like to ask Terry if he would like to see Goodnight sweetheart return to our screens? Also would he know if the Writers would be interested in doing it again? Honestly, I think it's important that television continues to evolve. GS was a great series in its day, and I hope it inspires new writers to create new shows with a science fiction component, but I'm not a fan of remaking successful shows from years gone by. I've yet to see that succeed.
|
|
|
Post by jobsta on Sept 23, 2011 15:20:10 GMT -5
Hi Terry,
When it came to the period clothing did the costume department hit the charity shops or did the BBC budget stretch to tailor made stuff? Either way, it must have been fun putting it all together!
|
|
|
Post by Terry Kinane on Sept 23, 2011 17:06:55 GMT -5
Hi Terry, When it came to the period clothing did the costume department hit the charity shops or did the BBC budget stretch to tailor made stuff? Either way, it must have been fun putting it all together! Both, Jobsta. They used specialty costumiers used by film and television productions, as well as buying some garments in specialty stores, and having some garments made.
|
|
|
Post by nostradamus on Sept 25, 2011 16:22:32 GMT -5
I'd like to ask Terry if he would like to see Goodnight sweetheart return to our screens? Also would he know if the Writers would be interested in doing it again? Honestly, I think it's important that television continues to evolve. GS was a great series in its day, and I hope it inspires new writers to create new shows with a science fiction component, but I'm not a fan of remaking successful shows from years gone by. I've yet to see that succeed. Would Doctor Who be the exception? * coming from a Chris Ecclestone fan * :-)
|
|
|
Post by jobsta on Sept 25, 2011 21:50:07 GMT -5
Honestly, I think it's important that television continues to evolve. GS was a great series in its day, and I hope it inspires new writers to create new shows with a science fiction component, but I'm not a fan of remaking successful shows from years gone by. I've yet to see that succeed. Would Doctor Who be the exception? * coming from a Chris Ecclestone fan * :-) Good point nostradamus! Dr Who does have the advantage of having regeneration built into it though! However I still give it the points as it has spawned a successful spin off also!
|
|
|
Post by Terry Kinane on Sept 26, 2011 5:20:00 GMT -5
Honestly, I think it's important that television continues to evolve. GS was a great series in its day, and I hope it inspires new writers to create new shows with a science fiction component, but I'm not a fan of remaking successful shows from years gone by. I've yet to see that succeed. Would Doctor Who be the exception? * coming from a Chris Ecclestone fan * :-) Dr Who would be the obvious exception. The show was constructed back in '63 with longevity in mind. Personally, I stopped watching it after the Tom Baker era.
|
|
|
Post by nostradamus on Sept 26, 2011 16:08:27 GMT -5
Would Doctor Who be the exception? * coming from a Chris Ecclestone fan * :-) Dr Who would be the obvious exception. The show was constructed back in '63 with longevity in mind. Personally, I stopped watching it after the Tom Baker era. I grew up with Tom Baker as The Doctor! The 80's dawned for me and the show was somehow fragmented and weakened in my view. I dismissed the following half-decade as non-eventful and only became interested once more in the show once ' Rose ', was screened. That series remains the best for me in terms of the newer material. I know that what followed far exceeded the original revamped specifications, but maybe that first series just pressed all the right buttons for me and that was all I was looking for at the time..
|
|
|
Post by Terry Kinane on Sept 27, 2011 5:10:18 GMT -5
Dr Who would be the obvious exception. The show was constructed back in '63 with longevity in mind. Personally, I stopped watching it after the Tom Baker era. I grew up with Tom Baker as The Doctor! The 80's dawned for me and the show was somehow fragmented and weakened in my view. I dismissed the following half-decade as non-eventful and only became interested once more in the show once ' Rose ', was screened. That series remains the best for me in terms of the newer material. I know that what followed far exceeded the original revamped specifications, but maybe that first series just pressed all the right buttons for me and that was all I was looking for at the time.. For me, the early Dr Who series were constructed as edgy drama with a sci fi back drop. I loved those shows. As it evolved, it softened and became less interesting to me.
|
|
|
Post by brainwobbler on Sept 29, 2011 3:55:02 GMT -5
I have a question regarding the moving...or should I say the modification of the time portal location (because of course it was supposed to be in the same place that had been built over), I don't know about anyone else but personally I always thought the original walk down Ducketts Passage method of time travel was more fun because it's such an everyday common thing, I mean most people will never own a shop but everyone is able to and will often find themselves walking down a passage way, and it's still free as far as I know ;D, so this made the whole show something that everyone could let their sense of fun and imagination go on, you know like, what if one day you walked down a strange passage and found yourself in a different time sort of thing??, so I was just wondering what was the reason behind the change??, was it a budgeting matter, ie, it was cheaper to film in studio/shop location maybe?? or was it just simply easier to film in that type of setting than location?? .
|
|
|
Post by Terry Kinane on Sept 29, 2011 5:35:03 GMT -5
If we had left it at the passage location, we would have to have shot all of the transitions on location prior to the studio shoots. That would have meant dressing Nick in what he would have been wearing in every episode, and then filming the transition.
This would have been expensive and time consuming. Also, on location, you don't have control of the elements. The sun goes in and out, it rains etc. The technical components of the transition would have been far more challenging.
The decision was therefore made to make the transition possible as part of the studio set build.
|
|
|
Post by ibindere on Sept 29, 2011 7:53:55 GMT -5
Terry Kinane wrote: I spoke with Vic over the weekend...he had just got the cat wormed and he was getting some school clothes for his kid. Exciting life being an actor!
This quote from Terry on a different thread has got me thinking.....
Hey Terry, I know Chris wasn't interested in coming to a Royal Oak meet, but do you think Vic might be up for it? If he does personal appearances maybe he'd consider it? If you get a chance to speak with him again maybe you could suggest it and perhaps find out what his appearance fee is??
|
|
|
Post by Terry Kinane on Sept 29, 2011 8:05:11 GMT -5
Terry Kinane wrote: I spoke with Vic over the weekend...he had just got the cat wormed and he was getting some school clothes for his kid. Exciting life being an actor! This quote from Terry on a different thread has got me thinking..... Hey Terry, I know Chris wasn't interested in coming to a Royal Oak meet, but do you think Vic might be up for it? If he does personal appearances maybe he'd consider it? If you get a chance to speak with him again maybe you could suggest it and perhaps find out what his appearance fee is?? It's really not up his street, ibindere. I'll mention it though.
|
|
|
Post by jobsta on Sept 29, 2011 9:40:49 GMT -5
I totally understand that it may not be up his street! It seems only Star Trek actors that get roped into that kind of thing! hehe!
Glad to hear that he is doing well though!
Terry, how much do actors get from residuals? Obviously the actual amount will vary from actor to actor, and Nick is going to be getting a lot more than say Chris (not to mention what he's getting for Only Fools also). But as a ballpark amount? If a show is a hit, is it enough to live on should they not have another hit, or is it just a small amount?
|
|
|
Post by Terry Kinane on Sept 29, 2011 11:25:07 GMT -5
I totally understand that it may not be up his street! It seems only Star Trek actors that get roped into that kind of thing! hehe! Glad to hear that he is doing well though! Terry, how much do actors get from residuals? Obviously the actual amount will vary from actor to actor, and Nick is going to be getting a lot more than say Chris (not to mention what he's getting for Only Fools also). But as a ballpark amount? If a show is a hit, is it enough to live on should they not have another hit, or is it just a small amount? It has changed over the years. It used to be that they would get a percentage of the per episode fee for the first Network repeat, and then the percentage would drop significantly for further repeats. This was very lucrative for actors associated with successful shows. Enough to retire on...no way, but certainly nice money for a vacation or a new car, or money for a rainy day. I think now, because of the number of channels out there, a 'buy out' deal is done that covers all future transmissions.
|
|
|
Post by jobsta on Sept 29, 2011 11:59:19 GMT -5
Thanks Terry. Very interesting.
I guess DVD sales, iTunes and ,yes, piracy has probably made an impact on residuals and repeats in general. People are less likely to watch a repeat on TV when they can see something whenever they want, legally or otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by Terry Kinane on Sept 29, 2011 12:05:41 GMT -5
There are so many sources out there for video now, that it's not possible to control it. Might as well do a buy out deal.
|
|