my mum


my mum was an extra on the episode 'reply to box 666' she is seen quite well walking down the stairs after alexandra bastedo at the cocktail party thing, wearing a pink dress.

go to www.celebrity-babies.com for all your gossip-y needs

reply

[deleted]

I first met Mike Pratt on this show at Elstree and ended up being his stand/in for a year on Randall and Hopkirk...I stayed in the biz for the next 32 years.
Click on below.

Aitch,

http://web.ask.co.uk/web?q=%22Harry+Fielder%22

reply


Don't you just hate it that TV has completely gone down the pan since classic shows like this one?

Ok, I'm no expert, in fact I'm 19, which probably means I'm not even entitled to an opinion on this subject, but I could happily sit and watch any given series from this era in its entirety and enjoy every minute of it. On the other hand, you'd have trouble getting me to sit and watch anything on TV these days for more than a few minutes before I switched it off in disgust (with the exception of Hustle).

But I've always had a soft spot for The Champions in particular, since it was the first one I saw. My uncle had a few VHS tapes that I first watched when I was 7 or so, and then in 2004 I got the entire series on DVD. Basically it's TV at its height. So what if it's all sets and conspicuous back projection? The stories are great and the acting is wonderfully performed by the three leads.

And yet it's incredibly annoying when I ask a friend "Oh, have you seen The Champions?" and they'll say no, and go watch Big Brother or something. Oh well, guess some people will never discover how good this series is and what they're missing out on.

Here ends my long rant...

"Daniel, we're all VERY proud!" :Little Sean, George, Roger, Pierce and Tiny Tim

reply

CommanderBond - what can I say!! - I so agree with you. I am glad that it is not just us very old original viewers that bother to remember and watch old shows, all be it that I was only 5 coming up to 6 years old when I saw this for the first time on it's original showing in the 60s.

Believe me, I try to like modern programmes/films and sometimes I do but on the whole I prefer originals to re-makes especially with films.

And I thought all young people where bland-viewers who live to watch reality programmes and soaps. I am so glad you have changed my opinion of that.

I suffer a bit from being a female 60s/70s kids sci fi/supernatural fan. If I mention Time Tunnel, the Tommorow People, Blake7, Fantastic Journey, Children of the Stones, etc. I can sense their puzzlement as to why I am not watching the latest make over programmes instead or at lease another modern action packed thriller that has a lot of explosions and special effects but the plot could fit onto the back of a cigarette package.

reply

I'm old enough to have watched all those series but come on, there were plot holes galore and even the writers, producers, directors and actors have stated this on the commentaries of the series.

They could foresee videos or DVDs in the 60s anymore than the movie studios could foresee their films being shown on television, before television movie studios made films to show in movie theaters and once they end their circuit run in the theaters which were usually owned by the same movie studios that made the film, they got vaulted or destroyed.

This series clearly had a low budget, they use stock footage for a lot of episodes, in one episode Sharron and Craig's bllod is analyzed and is shown to have some abnormalities.

Then in a later episode Richard and Craig are exposed to a gas and refuse to get a check up by a Nemesis doctor until they see an attractive doctor walk in and they consent to the check up. In order to know if a gas has had any long term effects they would need to take a blood sample.

I also don't think that the continuity was very good on most series until the 90s when they knew that a lot of series and films would start finding their way into people's homes via videos and later DVDs, and again all the parties involved with these productions have stated these things on the DVD commentary.

I have several series from the 60s, 70s and 80s on DVD and plot lines and continuity are a problem on the commendatory on the series "The Prisoner" several people comment on how hard it was to keep continuity and that sometimes some story lines were edited to make them work because they would do all the location shots of The Village for several weeks of episodes and then go back to the studio film interior shots and some exterior shots that were actually sets modeled after the some of the buildings on the location shoot.

There is one episode where they're outside and Number Six gets hit and knocked to the ground where he's seen laying in wet mud and the jacket he's wearing has mud on it, when he gets up in another scene from a different camera angle from the rear his jacket is clean..

The women in the older series are also seen a sexist way, in one episode of the series Sharron is driving the car and hits something cracking the engine and Richard remarks "Female drivers" when it was clearly a plot device to make their get away more difficult. The funny thing about his remark is that Sharron ask him which raod to take because there is a fork in the road and he's the one that tells her to take the road with all the boulders and rocks on the road even though he had apparently scouted the region for a get awy by car earlier in the episode so he should have known which road to take.

I don't watch series from the past and expect them to be like series are now, anymore than when I watch a period or historical piece and expect people to behave the way they do now. I don't think they're any better because even I can see some of the plots are far fetched in pats and current series.

The current series are scrutinized more because people record them and watch them more than once, and can then go on line and point out plot holes, I think the creator and writer of the series "Supernatural" addresses this in an episode of the season 5 season finale using the fictional writer named Chuck to tell Sam and Dean's story. You can't please all the fans.

Minds that have withered into psychosis are far more terrifying than any character of fiction.

reply

CommanderBond 007 - I hope you wind up running a Hollywood studio or a television network when you get older. Maybe we'll get back to some good quality movies or shows then.

reply

Thanks for the support a-carlton and Cromer52-Rosebud12! It's good to know that younger fans are still appreciated. I'd love to end up doing something in TV or movies that would allow me to pitch ideas like the Champions to people (but keeping a very close eye on where it they went with it of course).

Hang on, here's an idea that probably seems utterly pointless and crazy, however, I'll continue:

What would you think if one day, some guys at BBC sat down and decided to make more episodes of the Champions? Now I didn't say REMAKE, I said make MORE episodes. Let me explain - Basically what I mean is that they continue the series as if nothing has changed since the final episode, so if this was done, the first new episode would simply be set (TV schedule-wise) 1 week after the last episode of the classic series (as if there has been the usual weekly gap).

What they would do, is recast the lead roles (well, all the roles infact), choose some regular supporting cast members to play heros and villians (just like the old series) and then basically set to work creating the whole feel of a 60's TV show (the sets, the wardrobe, the general atmosphere). Nothing needs to be updated at all (it's still set in the late 1960's). As an added touch, they could make the BBC logo resemble the ITC logo at the start of each episode and other little things like that.

The problem is there are people who haven't seen the original series and won't understand why the characters have powers, so perhaps some kind of flashback could help.

Anyway, it's only an idea, what do you think?

"Daniel, we're all VERY proud!" :Little Sean, George, Roger, Pierce and Tiny Tim

reply

Commander Bond, I think your idea is outstanding - a far better one than that which seems to be happening: a movie, probably to be set in modern day.

With all the recent 70's nostalgia brought about by the exceptional Life on Mars, and now a similar response with its spin-off/sequel Ashes to Ashes, I believe a continuation of The Champions albeit with a (hopefully very carefully chosen) new cast could be very well received.

It's wonderful to be able to view the episodes again (on ITV4) and realise that some people will actually be watching them for the first time. I only hope they enjoy them as much as I do. I was around when they were new - I remember watching them with my grandparents when I was about ten (such memories!)

I have mixed feelings about any remake. I know it will have loads of money spent on it, but that is not necessarily a good thing, and I do wonder how it can possibly match the series, which I love dearly. I shall try to keep an open mind, however.

I wonder if the film will indeed be set in modern day? I do hope not, if for no other reason than modern technology, particularly mobile phones rendering telepathy far less important than it was in the series.

One other thing about the film, on the plus side is that it might inspire a lot of people to hunt out the series, and possibly other ITC series' too. Who knows, it might even lead to something like your idea, or your actual idea! Now that would be something!

Finally, I'd love to see more Champions episodes, as long as they were done with care and attention to the original series. I always thought it was a great pity that it should end with Autokill - to me the very best episode of them all.

reply

That's a very good point you've made about Life on Mars, marioncrane!

And yes, I agree with you, the cast would have to be chosen VERY carefully.
There's no point in hiring 3 actors just to have them mimic the originals, they've got to bring a little something of themselves to the role.

Of course they'd have to be recognisable as the same characters, but nobody likes complete immitation. Case in point: In Roger Moore's first couple of James Bond films, Moore was trying to act like Connery a lot of the time, and despite him being a great actor, it didn't suit the character, because Moore's acting style was very different to Connery's. When he used his own style, he put his mark on the character and made the films much more enjoyable to watch.

I've just read a few snippets about the film, and I also hope it's not set in the modern day. You're absolutely right of course, why bother with telepathy when you've got a mobile phone?

I've been watching the series again this week, which is why I'm back here, and it's brought up one more point (though it's one that's often made here): Isn't it rather annoying how infrequently these boards are used compared to others?

"Daniel, we're all VERY proud!" :Little Sean, George, Roger, Pierce and Tiny Tim

reply