Greetings

Minor nitpick. I could be wrong, but wasn't that Ed's own hair, dyed blonde, in IDENTIFIED?

Jeff

Diorite Gabbro <[hidden email]> wrote:
Here I sit, watching the first episode again. I've
watched in a couple of times closely now. Gee, I'm
even all of the way up to 2004 in the archives, so I
have a fair idea of a lot of what has been discussed.
Let's see if I can come up with anything that hasn't
been mentioned before.

Well, it's a pilot episode. It does what pilot
episodes do. As a teen I was grabbed by the teaser,
then it was "What the heck?" when we suddenly jump to
the studio. I remember it taking me a couple of
minutes to realize we were watching the same guy we
saw thrown out of the car in the wreck.

Rugs. More rugs in this show that in the mansion in
"Dynasty". Of course, there's Straker's platinum
blond wig. And the first instance where the wig
didn't quite cover up the fact of Ed Bishop's much
darker natural hair color. There is Alec's wig, which
is actually pretty good but there is something funky
about the hair line. And then the one I hadn't
noticed until I heard Wanda Ventham on her commentary
- yes, Virginia, you are wearing a hair piece in this
episode to give you the big hair. LOL.

Did anybody else ever notice that the pants legs on
Straker's off-white jump suit are held down by black
elastic straps under the shoes? I don't think they
did that on any of his other costumes, but that one
they did.

Peter Gordeno looked exceptionally fine in those
off-white pants and mesh shirt. Yum.

Ah, the joys of dry ice! It's what makes that lovely
boiling effect in the water after the UFO crashes.

I've seen comments about Straker throwing the cigar
butt on the ground when he first gets out of the car
and the rude blowing of ash off of his desk onto poor
Alec the Letch. I also notice that Straker leaves his
briefcase for Miss Ealand to bring in. Did they ever
give her a first name? I really liked her character.
Anyway, they seem to set off to make Straker as
obnoxious as humanly possible right from the start.

But we also get the first glimpse of the softer side
of Straker. It's at the end when he conveys his
condolences to Capt. Carlin. Then he wanted to spare
him the details of his sister's demise.

And then there is the comment about the aliens coming
from a dying planet, its resources exhausted. Ah,
echoes of the early days of environmentalism.

So, did I find anything new?

Diorite






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jeffrey Nelson wrote:
> Minor nitpick. I could be wrong, but wasn't that Ed's own hair,
> dyed blonde, in IDENTIFIED?

Some of the scenes feature Ed in a wig in IDENTIFIED, but I think
for the most part, that's Ed's own hair, dyed.

Marc

OK. The reason I assumed it was Ed's own hair (completely) was because in at least one interview I can think of (Late Nite Late), Ed claims that they didn't get the wig until after the first 3 or 4 episodes.

Jeff

Marc Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:
Jeffrey Nelson wrote:
> Minor nitpick. I could be wrong, but wasn't that Ed's own hair,
> dyed blonde, in IDENTIFIED?

Some of the scenes feature Ed in a wig in IDENTIFIED, but I think
for the most part, that's Ed's own hair, dyed.

Marc





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jeffrey Nelson wrote:
> OK. The reason I assumed it was Ed's own hair (completely) was because
> in at least one interview I can think of (Late Nite Late), Ed claims
> that they didn't get the wig until after the first 3 or 4 episodes.

After filming and editing IDENTIFIED, they decided later to make some
changes that required additional filming. By that time, Ed had already
switched to a wig. So there's a mix of wig/no-wig scenes.

We had a discussion earlier this year about when the switchover point
was between Ed's real hair and the wig. I can't recall what we decided
(if anything) based on watching the show. I think it might have been
that the switch was made after IDENTIFIED (?).

Also, if there's one thing that I've learned over the years, you
cannot necessarily trust anything that Ed Bishop (or Gerry Anderson) says
about UFO. On many occasions they've made statements that can be shown
to be false, or are contradicted by someone else.

Marc

> I also notice that Straker leaves his
> briefcase for Miss Ealand to bring in. Did they ever
> give her a first name?

Nope, she was always just "Miss Ealand". I guess
they should have written an episode which showed more
about her -- but you could say that about most
of the characters... :-)

> So, did I find anything new?

Well, I don't think anyone has ever commented on the
dry ice before... :-) But really, it's been so long
since we've had anyone discuss the episodes in detail,
it is certainly welcome to see it again!

Marc

Hi all,

I see that Fanderson's "HD21" one-day event is coming up in
2 weeks:

http://www.fanderson.org.uk/hd21.html

I know that we probably have one or two folks here that will be
attending this event. Hopefully you'll be able to report
back here on any UFO related-stuff after its over? Like a
description of the UFO tour, the UFO showing in high-definition,
or anything the guests might reveal about UFO?

Also, photos would be welcome. :-)

Also, if any SHADO subscribers want to meet each other
during the event, they probably should identify themselves
here ahead of time.

Thanks!

Marc

--- In [hidden email], Diorite Gabbro <diorite@...> wrote:

> Did anybody else ever notice that the pants legs on
> Straker's off-white jump suit are held down by black
> elastic straps under the shoes? I don't think they
> did that on any of his other costumes, but that one
> they did.




Yes, I did [:)]



Reminds me of 'joddy clips' - elastic with clips on either end attached
to the bottom of jodphurs to stop them "riding up".....

Of course Straker's are less obviously fixed, although the effect is the
same. Only leaves the need to straighten that nehru jacket.......



[;)]



Sarah



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I can now exclusively reveal that those tabs at the bottom of his trousers
were actually attached to carefully secreted string in order to keep his wig
from falling off :-)






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks for clarifying that for me, Marc. I must've somehow missed the discussion earlier this year, or senility is finally setting in. : ) Having none myself, I was never good with hair. Thanks again!

Jeff

Marc Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:
Jeffrey Nelson wrote:
> OK. The reason I assumed it was Ed's own hair (completely) was because
> in at least one interview I can think of (Late Nite Late), Ed claims
> that they didn't get the wig until after the first 3 or 4 episodes.

After filming and editing IDENTIFIED, they decided later to make some
changes that required additional filming. By that time, Ed had already
switched to a wig. So there's a mix of wig/no-wig scenes.

We had a discussion earlier this year about when the switchover point
was between Ed's real hair and the wig. I can't recall what we decided
(if anything) based on watching the show. I think it might have been
that the switch was made after IDENTIFIED (?).

Also, if there's one thing that I've learned over the years, you
cannot necessarily trust anything that Ed Bishop (or Gerry Anderson) says
about UFO. On many occasions they've made statements that can be shown
to be false, or are contradicted by someone else.

Marc





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In [hidden email], Marc Martin <marc@...> wrote: Marc, I will definitely send in a report when we return at the end of
the week. You'll be happy to know we purchased a camera with better
resolution.

If anyone from this group is attending, please introduce yourselves
to us at the event or let us know in advance that you are attending
so we can look for you. We have requested the "UFO" tour.
Lorraine and Charlie Meyer

--- In [hidden email], "montgolfier100" <airtime25@...> wrote:
>
> Marc, I will definitely send in a report when we return at the end of
> the week. You'll be happy to know we purchased a camera with better
> resolution.
>

Hi Lorraine and others joining us in a fortnight.

Just to manage your expectations, as you'll remember from your
confirmation leaflet, cameras (including mobile phones) will not be
allowed on either tour. Although the stages are usually closed and
therefore no filming is expected during the weekend, sometimes it is
necessary, and Pinewood simply won't allow us to do the tour if they
thought their clients' security might be compromised.

However, they have agreed to allow one camera to accompany us on the
tours (mine!) to enable us to take group photos at prescribed locations
(much as we did at Destination Moonbase Alpha). The plan is then to
make these photos available to all delegates via the website and the
club's YahooGroup.

You will, of course, be free to take photos during the evening buffet
which (assuming the weather stays favourable for us) will include the
glorious gardens!

See you in a couple of weeks.

Nick Williams
Fanderson chairman

PS - in case anyone hasn't noticed on the club's website
(www.fanderson.org.uk/news.html), we've received a couple of short-
notice cancellations so if anyone's still unsure whether there's space,
get your form in immediately!

Hi Nick,

thank you for reminding us that cameras will not be
allowed... :-(

Even inside Theater 7?

Can you remind us about the dress code?

Thanks!!

----- Original Message -----
Da : "nick_fanderson" <[hidden email]>
A : [hidden email]
Oggetto : [SHADO] Re: Fanderson HD21 coming up in 2 weeks
Data : Sun, 09 Sep 2007 14:18:00 -0000

--- Marc Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:

Semi-obsessive person that I am, reading this
sentenced me to watching every scene in "Identified"
with Ed Bishop in it multiple times trying to come up
with an answer. (Hey, I'm a scientist, things require
testing. I can compare my conclusions with the
earlier ones when I finish the archives.)

In the review process, I did remember one thing I'd
meant to mention but slipped my mind when I did my
comments. In the Bentley, Straker looks reluctant to
show the Minister the file. And I noticed he was
quick to get it back when it started to look like
something was going on.

Back to the wig/own hair problem. I'm assuming that
everyone is fairly sure that it is Ed Bishop's own
hair when he is in uniform at the front? Experience
tells me someone will let me know if I'm wrong. ;-)

Armed with the idea that for most of the episode, it
was his own hair, I came up with what I think are 3
additional scenes shot with a wig.

1. The most obvious is the scene where Straker chews
out poor Ford so he can explain to us what he was
doing at a movie studio.

2. The second I noticed is when Straker gets out of
the car and throws down the cigar, enters the
building, and then walks across the lobby. But I
think when he walks up to Miss Ealand, it's a scene
with Bishop's own hair.

3. The last is when Straker talks to Peter Carlin
about what happened to his sister near the end.

Diorite

> Armed with the idea that for most of the episode, it
> was his own hair, I came up with what I think are 3
> additional scenes shot with a wig.
>
> 1. The most obvious is the scene where Straker chews
> out poor Ford so he can explain to us what he was
> doing at a movie studio.

Yes, I knew that this was a reshot scene -- I guess
they wanted to make it clearer to the audience what
exactly was going on.

> 2. The second I noticed is when Straker gets out of
> the car and throws down the cigar, enters the
> building, and then walks across the lobby.
>
> 3. The last is when Straker talks to Peter Carlin
> about what happened to his sister near the end.

Thanks for taking a closer look at this! Now, the
next episode filmed was COMPUTER AFFAIR, but I
can't recall if he was wearing a wig through most
of this or not...

Marc

On Thu, 6 Sep 2007 17:44:00 -0700 (PDT)


> Ed wants to tell Mary enough to help her understand
> why is he working such ridiculous hours. Alec's
> response? Don't tell her anything. That's a help?
> He doomed his friend's marriage on that advice.
>

He was bound to give that advice, in every sense. Divulging military
secrets really is a very serious offence. When I worked for a defence
contractor, as a signatory to the Official Secrets Act, it was made
clear to me in no uncertain terms that I was not to divulge secrets to
family members under any circumstances, and that the penalties for
doing so would be in the 'custodial sentence' category. The essential
secret to which Straker is privy is considerably more sensitive and
critical than any of the relatively low grade stuff to which I was
exposed.

Straker's wife is an emotional woman and a terrible security risk.

Straker would never have considered it if he were not under serious
stress.

Finally, as Freeman points out, it's for her own good. He would have
been putting her (and himself, presumably) at serious risk of Expedient
Demise.

James

--- James Gibbon <[hidden email]> wrote:

In the part of my post you chopped off, you'll note I
wasn't advocating that Straker tell her anything
classified, just something a little more reassuring
than, "You know I can't tell you." Alec as his friend
and less emotionally involved could have come up with
something that might have helped the obviously
distraught Ed to stear a course between violating his
oath and destroying his marriage.

Diorite

In a message dated 9/10/2007 7:45:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[hidden email] writes:

In the part of my post you chopped off, you'll note I
wasn't advocating that Straker tell her anything
classified, just something a little more reassuring
than, "You know I can't tell you." Alec as his friend
and less emotionally involved could have come up with
something that might have helped the obviously
distraught Ed to stear a course between violating his
oath and destroying his marriage.

Diorite




I think you are more than a bit obsessed about this topic and cannot take
the opinions of others. You disagree with everyone who answers your posts, and
at one point resorted to name calling, which I am shocked that Marc allowed,
and you did not even have the decency to apologize. I have never seen this
type of behavior on a TV show list, and I hope I never do again. Please
re-evaluate your behavior,as you are taking a friendly list about a good FICTIONAL
TV SHOW and making it as bad as the debate on the Iraq war.

Wendy



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In [hidden email], wenrose222@... wrote: cannot take  
> the opinions of others. You disagree with everyone who answers
your posts, and  
> at one point resorted to name calling, which I am shocked that
Marc allowed,  
> and you did not even have the decency to apologize. I have never
seen this  
> type of behavior on a TV show list, and I hope I never do again.
Please  
> re-evaluate your behavior,as you are taking a friendly list about
a good FICTIONAL
> TV SHOW and making it as bad as the debate on the Iraq war.
>  
> Wendy



Not taking sides here, merely stating my opinion. I think a little
healthy debate/disagreement makes for an interesting discussion, as
long as it is done respectfully. Certainly far more interesting
than the constant 'gee, aren't his eyes dreamy' comments I see in
other groups (which ARE ok, but in moderation). I must say that a
few of the newer members (particularly the ladies) have engaged in
some very insightful and stimulating dialog regarding what happens
to be MY favorite TV series. I am both pleased and amazed at how
articulate they are in communicating their ideas (I wish I was that
fortunate).

Just one question. Why is it that guys can have
FRIENDLY 'disagreements' in discussions, but women seem to take
things so personally?

Jeff

--- In [hidden email], wenrose222@... wrote:

> ...at one point resorted to name calling, which I am shocked that
Marc allowed,  
> and you did not even have the decency to apologize...

Wow. I musta missed that (I'm a little slow).

Jeff

--- In [hidden email], Diorite Gabbro <diorite@...> wrote:

<SNIP>

> Peter Gordeno looked exceptionally fine in those
> off-white pants and mesh shirt. Yum.

<SNIP>

> Alec the Letch.

<SNIP>
---------------

Bit of a double standard, don't ya think, LOL??? ; )

Jeff