![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
charameiI've just finished watching the first season episode You Can Always Find A Fall Guy, in which a dodgy nun frames Jeff because, I dunno, 'Randall and Hopkirk' is the first agency listed in the criminal phonebook of gullible idiots? That would explain the Mafia last episode as well.
Anyway. A pacing comparison:
In the first four minutes of Doctor Who: The War Games (transmitted 1969): The TARDIS lands. The Doctor, Jamie and Zoe admire their latest quarry. They discover that they're in World War I. There's an artillery barrage. A mysterious Englishwoman turns up and asks how they got into No Man's Land, and admits she's a bit lost herself. They get ambushed by Germans, who then get ambushed by British soldiers.
In the first four minutes of Randall and Hopkirk (deceased): You Can Always Find A Fall Guy: Jeff comes in, having obviously been out all night, and there's a nun in his flat. She hires him. We find out that she is dodgy.
Strictly speaking, yes, these are both setup and they both fulfil the function of the first four minutes of a TV show. But look how much more happens in Doctor Who. Then bear in mind the pacing inside those few minutes. It takes at most five seconds for the TARDIS to land: it takes thirty to pan around Jeff's flat and show he's not there.
The War Games is a three-hour story stretched to fill four and a half hours, and it is faster-paced than YCAFAFG. If anything, its first four minutes need slowing down a tad, because people keep appearing from thin air.
So, I'm just going to say it outright. Yes, TV forty years ago was slower-paced. Yes, it was often a bit stilted and the dialogue sounds funny nowadays. But even by comparison with its own contemporaries, Randall and Hopkirk (deceased) is badly paced. They just never seem to have enough plot. Everyone leaves massive gaps between dialogue lines, basic things go on for far too long (case in point: the dogs that run Jeff down are barking for ages between catching him and anything happening) and we're treated to long shots of Jeff in his cell doing basically nothing.
Some of that is the fault of the seventies, but some of it must be the writing and direction; they're trying to stretch not very much out for far too long, and you can feel it.
But, hey! Marty's backseat driving has shown up. Whoever had the idea to make the ghost a backseat driver is a genius, I tell you, an absolute genius. Also, Jean did something and there was an evil nun. I can live with bad pacing for evil nuns.
Anyway. A pacing comparison:
In the first four minutes of Doctor Who: The War Games (transmitted 1969): The TARDIS lands. The Doctor, Jamie and Zoe admire their latest quarry. They discover that they're in World War I. There's an artillery barrage. A mysterious Englishwoman turns up and asks how they got into No Man's Land, and admits she's a bit lost herself. They get ambushed by Germans, who then get ambushed by British soldiers.
In the first four minutes of Randall and Hopkirk (deceased): You Can Always Find A Fall Guy: Jeff comes in, having obviously been out all night, and there's a nun in his flat. She hires him. We find out that she is dodgy.
Strictly speaking, yes, these are both setup and they both fulfil the function of the first four minutes of a TV show. But look how much more happens in Doctor Who. Then bear in mind the pacing inside those few minutes. It takes at most five seconds for the TARDIS to land: it takes thirty to pan around Jeff's flat and show he's not there.
The War Games is a three-hour story stretched to fill four and a half hours, and it is faster-paced than YCAFAFG. If anything, its first four minutes need slowing down a tad, because people keep appearing from thin air.
So, I'm just going to say it outright. Yes, TV forty years ago was slower-paced. Yes, it was often a bit stilted and the dialogue sounds funny nowadays. But even by comparison with its own contemporaries, Randall and Hopkirk (deceased) is badly paced. They just never seem to have enough plot. Everyone leaves massive gaps between dialogue lines, basic things go on for far too long (case in point: the dogs that run Jeff down are barking for ages between catching him and anything happening) and we're treated to long shots of Jeff in his cell doing basically nothing.
Some of that is the fault of the seventies, but some of it must be the writing and direction; they're trying to stretch not very much out for far too long, and you can feel it.
But, hey! Marty's backseat driving has shown up. Whoever had the idea to make the ghost a backseat driver is a genius, I tell you, an absolute genius. Also, Jean did something and there was an evil nun. I can live with bad pacing for evil nuns.
no subject
Date: 2011-02-03 08:01 am (UTC)But I do love "You Can Always Find a Fall Guy" for the way Marty complains about Jeff's driving. And speaking of Doctor Who, have you seen "The Ghost Who Saved the Bank at Monte Carlo" yet?
no subject
Date: 2011-02-03 02:48 pm (UTC)The backseat driving is... I think I could get myself into Pseud's Corner with it. It's a perfect allegory for how utterly powerless Marty really is, expressed through the medium of funny scenes where a ghost whines about his car.
No. But I'll get there XD
no subject
Date: 2011-02-04 04:06 am (UTC)Excellent point. The format might make a difference -- Doctor Who was broadcast in 25-minute installments back then, so it might've been easier for the writer to know if it was running short. But yes, obviously someone was doing a better job of fixing problems at the writing stage in Doctor Who, probably either the writer or the story editor.
Marty is powerless, but somehow he always manages to get Jeff to do what he wants! I love how you get the impression that their relationship has always been that way, and Marty's death didn't change a thing.
Looking forward to your reaction to "Monte Carlo"! You'll definitely spot some familiar faces. :D