• The new B5TV.COM is here. We've replaced our 16 year old software with flashy new XenForo install. Registration is open again. Password resets will work again. More info here.

Any other Blake’s 7 fans here?

Okay so thankfully the Season has dramatically improved for me. I've watch PRESSURE POINT 2.5 and TRIAL 2.6 over the weekend. I loved both episodes, but TRIAL was fantastic. I've often said that a problem shows often have is trying to shove too much material into one episode. BLAKE'S 7 has fallen victim to this on more than one occasion, but TRIAL did it perfectly. PRESSURE POINT was really good, but had a little let down for me due to some serious filming oversight toward the end of the episode when they are searching the facility. If you know the episode you know what I mean. This part of the plot seemed VERY rushed and under utilized - a point where they tried to shove more material into a time constraint than they should have. I still really loved the episode. Just fell short of perfect. HORIZON 2.4 was also a pretty high note episode for me.

Anyway so now what are we going to do?! You people got me into this BLAKE'S 7 mess and I just keep going deeper. You've got me looking at things on eBay and today I learned there are trading cards. HOW DARE YOU GET ME INVOLVED WITH A SERIES THAT HAS TRADING CARDS!!!!! You know I have a problem and you deliberately flaunt things in front of me. . . . . . . 🤪 🤪 🤪 🤪 🤪 🤪
 
Yes I have received my first BLAKE'S 7 items from the U.K. :rolleyes:;)

Watched episode 2.11, GAMBIT, last night. I want to try to stretch them out, but I am enjoying them too much and I keep giving in about every other night. Another winner, especially the AVON, VILA, SERVALAN stuff. And Deep Roy made an appearance. Did not see that coming.

So I have been avoiding looking into the cast because I didn't want to know, but I gave into the temptation today and learned how many of them have passed beyond the Rim. VERY SAD. It is always tough learning there is no chance you'll ever be able tell someone how much you enjoyed something they created. SOOOOO glad I met so many Babylon 5 cast members before their time to move on arrived.
 
B7 is a very compelling show, despite the fact that the BBC massively hampered the effects work.
The models made out of hairdryers and the like were filmed with cameramen with no SFX experience and it really brought down the standard and spoiled the work that went into designing the liberator's interior and exterior.
It's a good show but I remember watching it about a year ago and it was just too depressing for the state of mind that I was in at the time.
I got into season 4, but the one interesting cast member that was left toward the end wasn't enough to carry it along.
 
Yes it seems most of the exterior ship effects have not only been very weak, but also very inconsistent. I've tried to overlook it since I've enjoyed the stories so much and I have liked the interior designs very much.

On the flipside, SPACE 1999 has had excellent miniatures effects. AND I've actually seen some really good stories, but not nearly as many strong stories as BLAKE'S 7. I have enjoyed SPACE 1999, but there have been some stinkers. I REALLY respect what they did with that show. It seems like a truly all around strong effort. Just hasn't always worked for me. So far VOYAGER'S RETURN, 1.6, was definitely the most unique and intriguing episode of SPACE 1999 for me.
 
I fully agree with that. The show itself is very good.
It boils down to Orwell's 1984 in space, which is one theme that Bab5 draws on a good bit too with regard to the Clarke administration.

Ron Thornton of Bab5 fame worked on Blakes 7 as well and I think it was him that was critical, in one interview that I read, of the BBC not wanting to expend any effort or resources on the special effects work, since they viewed sci-fi as being fodder for the lower classes.
I can imagine that being quite a widespread view in the BBC in the 70s and 80s, and ultimately, when you see the calibre of the Dr Who series that they crank out to this day, it seems to persist even now.

He was ultimately told not to put in as much effort as he was wanting to make, which I think goes a good way to explaining the remarkably low standard of some of the miniature and effects shot work on B7.


I've not seen Space 1999 in a little while. For me, it's one of my least favourite Gerry Anderson productions.
Like Terrahawks, I felt that it suffered a lot from many changes that were foisted on Anderson by weirdo Hollywood executives and other outside backers.
I remember watching a good documentary by the Anderson estate that documented how Space 1999 was painfully extruded and broken off from the attempt to make a second series of UFO, which in my view was a much better and more interesting series.
This is not the same documentary but from the comments, it seems to tell a similar story:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

I have a feeling that the one that I saw a while back might've been this one:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

The first series of Space 1999, to me, was like watching a strange, drawn out, Stanley Kubrick Space Odyssey-type thing. It was just weird.
I mean, even the basic premise of the moon being blown out of orbit and propelled at such a speed that it could travel past other planets, without itself being destroyed outright, is just so difficult to take seriously.
In season 2, the Hollywood backers wrestled even more control from Anderson and turned it into a dumbed-down action show, which did not seem to go down well with fans of the first series.
From my angle, it at least made it a bit more exciting.

You're dead right though, the design of the Eagle, the Alpha moonbase etc is excellent.
I have a big Eagle model on my shelf and a lunar tank, which you'll see a fair few of later in the show.
I love the design but the show that it fits into holds almost no fascination for me compared to Stingray or Thunderbirds.
I find that sad because Gerry Anderson saw directing puppets as a means to an end, so that he could eventually produce live action shows with real actors, but because of all the financial strings that the backers attached to him a bit later in his career, the live action shows are often a lot less well remembered.
That's despite 1999 being the most expensive show ever made for British TV at the time.
 
I just finished episode 12 of season 2, THE KEEPER. I see that I am about to finish Season 2 so I think I am going to try to stretch it out and not watch for a few days.... it is quite difficult to resist.

With SPACE 1999 I just watched Episode 10, BLACK SUN (Didn't care for it at all) and Episode 11, GUARDIAN OF PIRI (It was okay). I think the thing that most surprises me about the visuals is that we're talking 1975 - Post 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (1968) and Pre STAR WARS (1977) - and those are movies! Here is a TV Series that clearly put the effort in.

I watched part of the first doc above, but I stopped when they started talking about Season 2 so I didn't see any spoilers. That was pretty funny about Landau's tan and Bain's pale skin.
 
Last edited:
In a lot of cases, these were the same people that had done the special effects for all the Supermarionation shows, going all the way from Supercar, through Stingray, Thunderbirds, Captain Scarlet and then UFO.
The effects work in UFO which was about 1970, I think, was pretty incredible. It had a really hard sci-fi edge that made it easy-to-believe.
Some went on to do the miniature work in some of the Roger Moore era Bond movies like Moonraker.

So, when they kicked off 1999 which was originally going to be the second series of UFO, the whole well-oiled engine of special effects just started up again, only with a turbocharger added in the form of all the hollyweird money.

So, you would expect the effects work on '99 to be pretty good.

Perhaps, because they expected to be doing more UFO, which essentially has an infinite number of possible stories that you can draw on and adapt from military history, with it being about a covert war with extra-terrestrials, they didn't have many ideas for stories that they could apply to '99.

One episode I dislike is the beta cloud one, which to me kind of epitomises the slightly disturbing, gruesome and brutal quality that the show has.
 
OMG I did it! I finished Series 2. WOW that came out of left field. SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO tough to resist starting Season 3 immediately.... DON'T TELL ME ANYTHING!

Loved STAR ONE episode. Only one detractor and that would be the plot around Travis. Not quite sure what could have been going on there... BUT DON'T TELL ME! I'm hoping there will be more exposition.

Oh I so wish there was a re-mastered version of this with updated CGI. Don't get me wrong some of the space shots are pretty decent and work for me, but on the whole it is pretty bad. I try to put effects into the context and budget. It seems like they spent a lot on some sets, but not much on effects. But going back to what Crash said about the times, SciFi will always have a stigma around it - even still when there is a ton of it out there making billions of dollars. :rolleyes: Sad thing is it would take very little expenditure to update those space shots. Even cheap CGI by today standards would be a vast improvement to the majority of the space shots.
 
Just noticed that Blake's 7 is streaming for "free" on the Prime Video Channel "BBC SCI-FI". Episode currently showing is 2-04 (Horizon), and next up is 2-05 (Pressure Point). Would assume "free" if one has a Prime Membership.
 
I sometimes wonder whether an AI upscale, like I saw done on Star Fleet (X-Bomber) recently might help polish the grimy appearance of some of the shots in Blakes 7.

Have you noticed how the bleary film that they use for all those BBC shows of the era (B7, Dr Who, Hitch-Hikers Guide, Red Dwarf) leaves a horrible streak whenever there's an incandescent light on the screen and the camera moves or whatever?
I find that really distracting when watching them.
 
Those are likely the scenes that used video recording. Those shows used film and video. The streaking was just a product of the quality of video at the time.

I say forget A.I. Re-Do all of the effects with new CGI models. I mean I'm pretty much a purest, but I think both versions should exist. ;)
 
This is very true and it worked well for Star Trek the original series.
Unfortunately, the BBC is just a propaganda outlet nowadays.

About half-a-million households in the UK have not renewed their TV licenses in the last year and this is the BBC's primary source of revenue.
uk.news.yahoo.com

UK households have BBC TV License bill slashed to £0 after 500,000 people cancel

Viewers have been told to check whether they qualify for a free TV Licence after a whopping 500,000 households cancelled theirs last year.
uk.news.yahoo.com uk.news.yahoo.com

Doing anything for old shows beyond just releasing them 'as-is' is not on their radar: only chasing after an intangible 'modern audience'.
 
Crash said:
This is very true and it worked well for Star Trek the original series.
Unfortunately, the BBC is just a propaganda outlet nowadays.

About half-a-million households in the UK have not renewed their TV licenses in the last year and this is the BBC's primary source of revenue.
uk.news.yahoo.com

UK households have BBC TV License bill slashed to £0 after 500,000 people cancel

Viewers have been told to check whether they qualify for a free TV Licence after a whopping 500,000 households cancelled theirs last year.
uk.news.yahoo.com uk.news.yahoo.com

Doing anything for old shows beyond just releasing them 'as-is' is not on their radar: only chasing after an intangible 'modern audience'.
Click to expand...
YIKES! That does surprise me, but streaming is everywhere. I wonder what the numbers show? Are they all going to big name streaming? I assume The BBC has a major streaming branch?
 
Crash said:
This is very true and it worked well for Star Trek the original series.
Unfortunately, the BBC is just a propaganda outlet nowadays.

About half-a-million households in the UK have not renewed their TV licenses in the last year and this is the BBC's primary source of revenue.

Doing anything for old shows beyond just releasing them 'as-is' is not on their radar: only chasing after an intangible 'modern audience'.
Click to expand...
I'd think a 'modern audience' wouldn't want to pay licensing fees, so if the paying customers are leaving and the target audience isn't interested in paying...
 
Crash said:
Doing anything for old shows beyond just releasing them 'as-is' is not on their radar: only chasing after an intangible 'modern audience'.
Click to expand...
If this were to be done, this would be handled by the BBC's commercial arm, which recently reported revenues of around £2 billion.

I'd think a 'modern audience' wouldn't want to pay licensing fees, so if the paying customers are leaving and the target audience isn't interested in paying...
Click to expand...

By law if you have a TV set in the UK you must pay the TV licence, unless you can somehow prove it's not set up to receive the BBC. So we are not customers in that sense and technically people not renewing are breaking the law as I bet they still have their TV. I suspect they can't afford it rather than taking any kind of stance against the BBC.
 
You can have a TV without a TV license. They have to somehow prove that you're using it to watch/record live television: either over antenna, cable or live streaming.

We only use the TV for non-live streaming, torrents and blu-rays.
All the antennas have been taken off the house, since it's a period house and they spoiled the look of it.
So they'll have fun trying anything with us.

The license fee makes up 65% of their operating revenue.
The commercial arm isn't mainly funded by customers, but through partnerships with companies like Disney+.
 
Crash said:
You can have a TV without a TV license. They have to somehow prove that you're using it to watch/record live television: either over antenna, cable or live streaming.
Click to expand...
Yes, I think I said that :) I was more just pointing out for our friends in the US that paying the license fee isn't like subscribing to Netflix, it's basically a tax.

I'm no particular fan of the BBC. There's very little that they produce that I want to watch or listen to – Match of the Day and I'm a sucker for Escape to the Country, that's about it when it comes to TV. Plus there's the football commentary on 5Live and local radio (the latter being an undervalued resource funded by the license fee), and I use the BBC website. Other than that, nope, nothing, and I agree the constant pandering to London and 'modern audiences' is thoroughly irritating (especially on the radio – Radio 1 and 2 are practically unlistenable now). But I also see value in the principle of having the BBC. But we're talking here about re-doing special effects on old shows from the 1970s, to my knowledge the only show that has ever gotten new fx is Star Trek, it's not like it's this standard thing that the BBC aren't doing. And to be honest, I'm not sure license fee money should go on that kind of thing either (nor should it go on Gary Lineker's immense wages, but that's another story). However the commercial arm is funded, that could be paying for updating and preserving old shows, but for the same reason Paramount won't do anything with DS9 or Voyager, I suspect they see little profit in doing so, unfortunately. I'm still amazed we got the B5 remaster.
 
I was absolutely shocked when I saw that the blu-ray for B5 was available: especially that it wasn't just an upscale like the Andromeda blu-rays, which in the early seasons look worse than DVD.
I think that part of the reason that we got it was that it was remastered for a streaming service already, I think I read from somewhere (?) that it was essentially that remaster that was slapped on the blu-rays.

I think, part of the decision not to remaster DS9 or VOY rests on the fact that they would have to re-do the CGI, which would be very difficult: just the same problem as you have with B5.
I think they've decided that, if they produce an inferior blu-ray to TNG with the SFX not re-done, then they will get killed by the rabid fans and it will turn into a big loss-maker.

That leaves us with a very unsatisfactory situation because the DVD quality of season 1 of DS9, especially, is extremely poor - it almost looks like a bootleg VHS transfer, which is made even worse by the fact that this contains the only portrayal of what actually takes place during the battle of Wolf 359.

You've probably seen the fan reconstruction of Wolf 359 on YouTube. It's really good but also extremely morbid and depressing to watch.

I think that, if they'd co-ordinated a full-quality remaster of DS9 with an excellent merchandising and marketing campaign, it would have broken even and made money, but sadly the time for that has passed; even Eaglemoss has folded, and Paramount is now in big trouble, so we hear.

The most remarkable thing about TV licensing is that, unlike any other tax, you risk criminal conviction for non-payment.
You can end up in jail for repeated non-payment of council tax but it still remains a civil matter (which is also a remarkable situation).
 
Is the Licensing requirement only for watching live over-the-air transmissions? Assuming one could get a signal without something as obvious as a mounted antenna, wouldn't it be difficult to catch someone using a capture card or usb receiver? 🤑 Do they go house-to-house looking for televisions, and fondly remember the good old days of giant CRTs.

Have seen a few 90s video games with extremely low res FMV that fans have upscaled to HD, so perhaps just outsource it?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 38 (members: 1, guests: 37)

Share this page

Back
Top