Part One: Prison

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

Author	Comment
Unregistered(d)	re:part 1	#41	[-]
Posts: 0 (03/07/04 12:03:33) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Fair comment, my opinion was very diminutive, so I will endeavour to edify you, of the moments that persuaded me to come to the hypothesis, this production is rubbish! 1.The actors sounded like they were reading the scripts and even stumbling across their words. 2.The Story has good concept, but poor writing, and banal lines. 3.The Script was read without meaning or feeling! A little tip, why not get together and try to perform it a few times, with meaning and enthusiasm, even bad scripts can come to life! I know that you boys are taking this personally, DONT, Im not out to insult you, just to open your eyes, because with a little help and edification, you can do better. Hope that you find this coherent.
witold tietze	Re: re:part 1	#42	[-]
Posts: 1023 (03/07/04 15:40:51) BTR Story Editor Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* 1.The actors sounded like they were reading the scripts and even stumbling across their words. 2.The Story has good concept, but poor writing, and banal lines. 3.The Script was read without meaning or feeling! you do know 1 and 3 are essentially the same point, don't you? *Quote:* A little tip, why not get together and try to perform it a few times, with meaning and enthusiasm, even bad scripts can come to life! we do. you know, i begin to wonder if some of our listeners don't latch onto the one non-actor performance in the production and associate that level of quality with everyone else. because i honestly can't see how anyone else sounded particularly bad. of course, that's just me. but i do sometimes get very baffled by these sorts of "reading off the script" comments with certain performances, as i've known cases where we get this comment for a performance where, like it or loathe it, there can surely be no doubt that the person is acting their guts out. oh well. *Quote:* I know that you boys are taking this personally then your knowledge is mistaken. matt confessed to being insulted, i confessed to not being insulted. in matt's case, the insult was on a purely professional level, and perhaps as insult to his intelligence. so who's taking what personally? i mean, you're not calling us all dickheads or anything, so why should we? *Quote:* Im not out to insult you, just to open your eyes, because with a little help and edification, you can do better. well, as we both noted originally, that seems the least likely thing you were achieving in that first post of yours -- although you did open our eyes to how pragmatically useless someone's post could be. as for edification, since that's essentially what we asked for in response to your first post, i suspect you may not in fact have offered any, except to enlighten us to the fact that you have an opinion, you're a blakes 7 fan, and that you grasped a couple of pretty basic facts. again, none of which helps us improve our product. mind you, given that 99% of our actors do prepare themselves thoroughly and are, in our opinions, generally pretty good at what they do (kath was the one exception, but like i say she's a non-actor, and simply stepped in when we could get nobody else), and given that we thought the script was just fine, your continually generic comments are still somewhat unhelpful. the comment regarding the acting is potentially useful as you've explained what it is about the acting that you don't like, but your comment about the writing is still pretty much limited to "i don't like it", since i don't think anyone involved in the production felt the lines were at all banal, so beyond a difference of opinion we have idea to what you're referring, and therefore can't do anything about it. i should note that i appreciate your liking the storyline, as everyone else seems to liken it to space fall and pretty much stop there -- though i concede this may be what you like about it. but is there any chance you could comment further on the production? detailing things like post-production sound work, the use of the music, that sort of thing. the more detail and specifity you provide, the more feedback we have that we can actually respond to in subsequent episodes. *Quote:* Hope that you find this coherent. yes. we also found your last post coherent. but, as i've outlined, neither has been particularly helpful, i'm afraid. but certainly, more feedback -- even if it's negative -- is welcome, so we've got something we can work from. nothing is certain. maybe.
mkopelke	Re: re:part 1	#43	[-]
Posts: 1278 (03/07/04 16:38:34) BTR Producer Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* you know, i begin to wonder if some of our listeners don't latch onto the one non-actor performance in the production and associate that level of quality with everyone else. because i honestly can't see how anyone else sounded particularly bad. of course, that's just me. but i do sometimes get very baffled by these sorts of "reading off the script" comments with certain performances, as i've known cases where we get this comment for a performance where, like it or loathe it, there can surely be no doubt that the person is acting their guts out. Agreed. I remember that time Aron Toman commented about Part Three of Rapture The Heavens, and said that he felt Jacob sounded like he was reading off the script when he was screaming his guts out by saying "Haven't you!!??!!" in the sniper scene. At the time, I was bemused by the comment, as it was clear there was no script in shot, and given the passion he delivered the line with, I couldn't at the time work out how anyone could assume he was giving a wooden delivery. Nowadays, I just laugh at the comment. But I was thinking the same thing this morning - that people have obviously taken a memory of Kath's portrayal away from the episode, and then retroactively applied that memory to the entire cast. Oh well - I know we did a good job, and I know you agree, so that's all that matters here. *Quote:* then your knowledge is mistaken. matt confessed to being insulted, i confessed to not being insulted. in matt's case, the insult was on a purely professional level, and perhaps as insult to his intelligence. so who's taking what personally? i mean, you're not calling us all dickheads or anything, so why should we? Agreed. I'm not taking this personally. Never have taken feedback from the general public personally. I just think sometimes people can be insulting on a professional level, because remember over a dozen people worked on this particular episode, and to call it "crap" in a very general fashion is to say everyone's contributions was also crap. That's all I found insulting. Nothing else. *Quote:* yes. we also found your last post coherent. but, as i've outlined, neither has been particularly helpful, i'm afraid. but certainly, more feedback -- even if it's negative -- is welcome, so we've got something we can work from. I just want to second this, in case anyone out there (and I know several people who frequent this forum think we are like this, when in fact we are not) is reading this. We welcome any and all feedback which helps us in some constructive manner - be that negative, or positive, comments. We just want feedback from people about our work, and the more detail people can give us the happier we are. brand new full-cast audio dramas ::: available now
Unregistered(d)	I agree	#44	[-]
Posts: 0 (03/07/04 19:16:10) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	i agree with finchly. it's pants. it sounds as if you had wrote it in the morning, got some m8's together, and recorded it in the afternoon. i did like the sound fx though.
mkopelke	Re: I agree	#45	[-]
Posts: 1278 (03/07/04 20:52:48) BTR Producer Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Thanks for voicing your opinion, although as we've noted elsewhere in this thread such comments are not that helpful, as the scenario you suggest is totally opposite to the reality of the situation. Still, not everyone is going to like the work that we produce. Nice to know not everyone likes it. Just a shame people who don't like it are incapable of telling us why they didn't like it in some detail, because that would definitely be of more help to us. Oh, and thanks for the kind words about my post-production. Nice to know you liked something about it, even if your final assessment of the piece was "it's pants". brand new full-cast audio dramas ::: available now
witold tietze	Re: Part One: Prison	#46	[-]
Posts: 1023 (03/07/04 23:09:33) BTR Story Editor Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	matt said: *Quote:* I couldn't at the time work out how anyone could assume he was giving a wooden delivery. nor i. i could understand if anyone didn't like the performance, but to suggest there wasn't one at all seemed a bit odd. *Quote:* But I was thinking the same thing this morning - that people have obviously taken a memory of Kath's portrayal away from the episode, and then retroactively applied that memory to the entire cast. though istr alison was a little rough around the edges as well, what with that being her first work with btr, but on the whole i think the performances went down well -- especially the whispering scene, which i recall we were all quite impressed by at the time. somedude said: *Quote:* i agree with finchly. it's pants. it sounds as if you had wrote it in the morning, got some m8's together, and recorded it in the afternoon. i did like the sound fx though. well, we can assure you that, despite my speed as a writer, that wasn't the case at all. in case you needed reassuring, that is, otherwise feel free to cheerfully ignore me. however -- and i suspect matt's probably mentioned this as well -- this feedback isn't exactly any more helpful than finchley's, and can therefore serve no purpose other than to allow someone to simply voice their opinion in broad terms in public. which you can do, by all means, if you want, but i guess it seems a little wasteful and purposeless to me. maybe that's just me, though. then matt spake again: *Quote:* Still, not everyone is going to like the work that we produce. Nice to know not everyone likes it. Just a shame people who don't like it are incapable of telling us why they didn't like it in some detail, because that would definitely be of more help to us. especially as people who do like it tend to go into more detail on average, which is a time when we could use less feedback, except in a scenario where it might prevent us from changing something that doesn't in fact have anything wrong with it after all. you know, it's times like this that i do openly and whole-heartedly welcome the thoroughness of trevor's reviews. they may be a little too thorough at times, but at least we can get a better idea of what our audience actually wants to see/hear in these productions other than what's actually in them. please don't faint, trevor, but i thank you from the bottom of my heart. *Quote:* Oh, and thanks for the kind words about my post-production. Nice to know you liked something about it, even if your final assessment of the piece was "it's pants". perhaps somedude's conception of quality post-prod is that it should have a trousery feel...? anyway, enough cheekiness from me. nothing is certain. maybe.
mkopelke	Re: Part One: Prison	#47	[-]
Posts: 1278 (03/08/04 00:34:12) BTR Producer Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* nor i. i could understand if anyone didn't like the performance, but to suggest there wasn't one at all seemed a bit odd. That's exactly right. Like it or lump it, there was a performance in there that wasn't wooden - but that's a totally different kettle of fish to having the opinion that you did not like the way the character was portrayed. It's essentially comparing apples and oranges. *Quote:* though istr alison was a little rough around the edges as well, what with that being her first work with btr, but on the whole i think the performances went down well -- especially the whispering scene, which i recall we were all quite impressed by at the time. It was also Allison's first ever experience in recording anything for radio, which is why I suspect parts of her performance are not perfect - it's just all about a lack of familiarity with the performance medium. And the whispering scene is easily my favourite scene in Part One. *Quote:* well, we can assure you that, despite my speed as a writer, that wasn't the case at all. in case you needed reassuring, that is, otherwise feel free to cheerfully ignore me. however -- and i suspect matt's probably mentioned this as well -- this feedback isn't exactly any more helpful than finchley's, and can therefore serve no purpose other than to allow someone to simply voice their opinion in broad terms in public. which you can do, by all means, if you want, but i guess it seems a little wasteful and purposeless to me. maybe that's just me, though. I think I've worked out why some supposed B7 fans don't like our audio series - it's because there's no Avon or ORAC or any other direct link to the parent series. I suspect this is the main problem people are having with it - which is a shame - but I could possibly be wrong. *Quote:* especially as people who do like it tend to go into more detail on average, which is a time when we could use less feedback, except in a scenario where it might prevent us from changing something that doesn't in fact have anything wrong with it after all. you know, it's times like this that i do openly and whole-heartedly welcome the thoroughness of trevor's reviews. they may be a little too thorough at times, but at least we can get a better idea of what our audience actually wants to see/hear in these productions other than what's actually in them. please don't faint, trevor, but i thank you from the bottom of my heart. Exactly right. All I want in life is detailed and critical feedback of the work we do. Not just voicing opinions. That's not what this forum is about. If we get lots of lovely critical feedback (of both a positive and negative fashion), then we can make future releases better, and I'm happy. brand new full-cast audio dramas ::: available now
Unregistered(d)	pants?	#48	[-]
Posts: 0 (03/08/04 03:43:21) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	If I had seen this performance live, I'd of loved it (mistakes and all) To say that "it's pants" is unfair.... it's like a rough Diamond, just needs polishing. However, if your actors were acting their guts out, then I think a new hobby for them is needed. I think the story is Great, and the post production also. It's just the delivery of the lines that ruins it for me. When I downloaded it, I was excited to listen to it, so I finished what I was doing, turned off the lights, threw my headphones on and shut my eyes. I was in space, until the first lines were read, and I was conscious that this was being read out, and unfortunately it made me aware of this fact! I listened to it all though and I'm not saying it's "pants" or "rubbish" just needs a little tweaking in the actors direction. Well thats my opinion, but who the hell am I?
mkopelke	Re: pants?	#49	[-]
Posts: 1278 (03/08/04 12:57:27) BTR Producer Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* If I had seen this performance live, I'd of loved it (mistakes and all) To say that "it's pants" is unfair.... it's like a rough Diamond, just needs polishing. However, if your actors were acting their guts out, then I think a new hobby for them is needed. Thanks for the feedback, Viscount John. Much appreciated. I wouldn't have said that we were "acting our guts out", but I do admit that we did our best on this particular episode. One thing you've also gotta remember is that we recorded it 18 months ago, and all the actors involved have improved quite a bit since then (basically just by doing more radio acting). I suppose what I'm trying to say is this episode is not really indicative of what BTR is capable of in 2004, because this is very much a 2002 production. *Quote:* I think the story is Great, and the post production also. It's just the delivery of the lines that ruins it for me. Fair enough. That's the sort of feedback we're after. Giving us a blanket overall opinion, and leaving it at that, doesn't help us. Now that we know several people found the acting to be a bit "wooden", we can make a conscious note of this in future recording sessions (but as I stated above, we have improved quite considerably since November 2002, when this was recorded). *Quote:* When I downloaded it, I was excited to listen to it, so I finished what I was doing, turned off the lights, threw my headphones on and shut my eyes. I was in space, until the first lines were read, and I was conscious that this was being read out, and unfortunately it made me aware of this fact! I listened to it all though and I'm not saying it's "pants" or "rubbish" just needs a little tweaking in the actors direction. And that is indeed something we will try to be mindful of in future. Although we could argue we were trying to be faithful to the TV series by acting wooden, but that would be mean-spirited to the TV series. I think people should enjoy the subsequent episodes more - simply because there's more immediate plot, and as such gives our actors more to do - which means we get to act a bit more, which means we hopefully sound a little less wooden. *Quote:* Well thats my opinion, but who the hell am I? Can't answer that question, I'm afraid - but your IP address is alarmingly similar to the other two anon. posters in this thread, so either you're the same person each time, or you all just happen to use the same ISP. brand new full-cast audio dramas ::: available now
witold tietze	Re: pants?	#50	[-]
Posts: 1023 (03/08/04 15:27:23) BTR Story Editor Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	viscount john (how regal!) said: *Quote:* However, if your actors were acting their guts out, then I think a new hobby for them is needed. if they were acting their guts out, then it would've been in no more than one key scene. i think they were all just acting on a fairly calm level. my previous reference to someone acting their guts out was in discussion of a separate production. *Quote:* Well thats my opinion, but who the hell am I? someone who's offered a vaguely constructive criticism. you've detailed fairly explicitly what you thought needed fixing, and in rough terms how you thought it ought to be fixed. you went into specifics. and that we certainly appreciate, whether or not you liked the thing. in short, your begative but detailed critical appraisal of the acting was useful to us. well, except that we've all improved as actors since then (this was recorded yonks ago), but it's good to know we're moving in the right direction. matt said: *Quote:* And that is indeed something we will try to be mindful of in future. Although we could argue we were trying to be faithful to the TV series by acting wooden, but that would be mean-spirited to the TV series. oh yes -- just like blakes 7 enterprises reckon kevin davies has been with his dropped dvd documentary. that they pais for, and clearly decided to have no editorial control over until it was completed... but i digress! *Quote:* I think people should enjoy the subsequent episodes more - simply because there's more immediate plot, and as such gives our actors more to do - which means we get to act a bit more, which means we hopefully sound a little less wooden. having just listened to a pre-music version of part 2 last night, i have to say that although non-fans of the lead actors/characters might find the opening minutes a bit tough to get through, if you stick through the whole episode, i think you'll find it a more rewarding experience. but it's certainly more "original" than episode 1, and the actual serial's story arc begins to kick in a bit. nothing is certain. maybe.
mkopelke	Re: pants?	#51	[-]
Posts: 1278 (03/08/04 20:46:15) BTR Producer Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Witold, *Quote:* oh yes -- just like blakes 7 enterprises reckon kevin davies has been with his dropped dvd documentary. that they pais for, and clearly decided to have no editorial control over until it was completed... Yes, I know - such a shame, isn't it? When I heard about this decision, I could not believe it. I was so looking forward to Kevin Davie's documentary - hope it'll get to see the light someday, perhaps in independant hands perhaps? *Quote:* having just listened to a pre-music version of part 2 last night, i have to say that although non-fans of the lead actors/characters might find the opening minutes a bit tough to get through, if you stick through the whole episode, i think you'll find it a more rewarding experience. but it's certainly more "original" than episode 1, and the actual serial's story arc begins to kick in a bit. Yes, that is true. Part Two really does poo all over Part One in a number of chief areas. Now, that's not to say that Part One wasn't very good - but it's just that Part One suffers from "first episode syndrome", which thankfully doesn't affect Part Two, which just gets on with telling a good story. brand new full-cast audio dramas ::: available now
witold tietze	Re: pants?	#52	[-]
Posts: 1023 (03/08/04 22:33:57) BTR Story Editor Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	well you'd hope a part 2 wouldn't suffer from "part one syndrome" under any circumstances! nothing is certain. maybe.
mkopelke	Re: pants?	#53	[-]
Posts: 1278 (03/17/04 15:46:14) BTR Producer Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* well you'd hope a part 2 wouldn't suffer from "part one syndrome" under any circumstances! Well, that is true. If it did, I'd be worried that perhaps we were producing these episodes in the wrong order! brand new full-cast sci-fi audio dramas ::: available now
witold tietze	Re: pants?	#54	[-]
Posts: 1023 (03/17/04 17:06:01) BTR Story Editor Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* Well, that is true. If it did, I'd be worried that perhaps we were producing these episodes in the wrong order! although, given the way the first two episodes of blakes 7 were produced, it begins to make a strange amount of sense... of course, we got in there as well, recording episode three first as we did. (in case anyone's interested, ep 3 is a heavy character piece for the regulars, so we thought it'd be a good way to get them initiated into their roles.) nothing is certain. maybe.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

Part One: Prison

Quick Reply