PBS responds
Several Gentle Readers have written to PBS to complain about the editing of the first four films in the series, and have shared the responses with us. They all seem to be a copy and paste (or very close to it) of the information given in this post on the PBS forums.
EDITING OF OUR PROGRAMS
Some of our vigilant viewers noted that MASTERPIECE’s versions of the Austen programs varied from those seen in the UK. As we’ve discussed in various forums, our programs are routinely edited to fit our PBS time slot, which is different from the UK’s. Depending on whether our UK partner is producing for a commercial broadcaster or the BBC (i.e., commercial breaks vs. no commercial breaks), the episodes may vary from between 3-5 minutes to 10 or more. In the case of Persuasion, Northanger Abbey and Mansfield Park, approximately ten minutes were deleted from each film. Almost always, it is the UK producers who determine which scenes should be trimmed from the U.S. broadcast. Our goal is to deliver to you the film that is closest to the original intent of the producers.DVD VERSIONS
The good news is that many MASTERPIECE films are becoming more widely available around the world than ever before thanks to DVD and home video offerings. Because of various formats and contract stipulations in different parts of the world, there may be some differences in content. In some cases, a DVD available in the US or Canada (such as those released by WGBH Boston Video) may only contain the US version, while in others, a DVD may contain the original UK version. This is further complicated by the fact that running times that appear on various websites may be an approximation of the running time, or more frequently the timeslot of the film was intended for (e.g., a 100-minute film may run in a 120 minute timeslot, and that longer timeslot information may end up on websites, DVD packaging, etc., despite the actual shorter running time of the film). While we can’t control the marketplace, we will be happy to post DVD information on the MASTERPIECE website when available that may inform your purchasing decisions.
Imagine our astonishment when tonight’s presentation of Pride and Prejudice–which just about every Janeite we know already owns, sometimes in multiple copies–was two hours long.
Comments are closed.
Excellent observation, Mags. Mmmmm. So what was PBS’s point?
Who knows. I just know that they are doing a crummy job with this. They try to so hard to be a respected institution, but they are turning themselves into a laughingstock.
I know the PBS timeslot was two hours long, but did P&P truly last that long?
P&P didn’t last a full two hours, but that is because the original episodes are 50 minutes each, not an hour. They filled in the last few minutes with previews, and the one for S&S08 was outstanding! I can’t wait! *jumps up and down*
The episode finished about 10:45, and then they had previews of the remaining films and other PBS shows. Since it started around 9:05, that makes 100 minutes, or as Katharine said, two 50-minute episodes. Which means the movie that everyone has seen and owns uncut, was shown uncut, while the movies that we haven’t seen were cut and some are being sold cut on DVD. It’s illogical and illogic makes my right eyelid twitch.
Also, they claim they had to cut X minutes out of the first four because they only get 90 minutes for Masterpiece. And that is clearly not the case; they can get 120 minutes when they want to. So what is it? Really the question is why WGBH agreed to finance the 90-minute versions in the first place. Why didn’t they demand another 10 or 20 minutes out of ITV and make them all two-hour broadcasts? They were paying for it, weren’t they?
I wouldn’t go so far as to say they’re making themselves a laughingstock, as we know from previous experience that real Janeites who read AustenBlog and other sites are a small percentage of their potential audience, but I would say this whole adventure has been rather mismanaged. A shame, because they really are doing a nice job of marketing the series and do seem to want people to like it and want viewers to be happy. Unfortunately that should have started with the actual programs they financed, by getting somebody who knew something about Jane Austen to read the scripts and say “Are you KIDDING me?” All the marketing in the world won’t make up for bad products, at least to the cognoscenti. And then when viewers complain, putting out nonsensical statements doesn’t help the situation.
It is *all* still unacceptable. They could at the very least release all films to DVD uncut in all regions. We the viewers donate so that this broadcast company can continue. I would hope that they take this into consideration. Frankly, my only reason for donating this year so far will be for NA and Regrets.
Segue to article I was reading this morning about the death of rep theatres due to DVDs– would the opportunity to see uncut versions, and in company with like-minded souls bring people to theatres? The demand for film noir at the various festivals has actually caused new prints to be made. The noir festival I attended last month pulled in 1400 people on a Saturday. Might there be enough disgruntled souls out there to support an American theatrical tour for the longer versions?
Shouldn’t we be going after the distributors and not PBS? I mean, from a practical standpoint. PBS and Masterpiece have made it abundantly clear they do not get directly involved in productions.
Jen K, PBS/Masterpiece is the distruibutor of the cut versions in DVD of both NA2 and MP3, WGBH Video is their video branch, that is why we are complaning to them, and also since they are co-producers of the films (they put the money to make them). Their excuses seem lame to say the least.
Yes–from comments I’ve heard from the producers of Hornblower (we’ve been agitating for more of those for YEARS) and I think even Andrew Davies might have mentioned it at some point, these sort of films don’t get made without the money from the American networks. That’s why we’ve had a dearth since A&E became the No Art and Little Entertainment network (A&E’s money made P&P95 and the Emma we will see in a few weeks possible back in the day). And it’s important to remember that WGBH was involved BEFORE THE MOVIES GOT MADE. Because they would NOT have gotten made if WGBH had not promised financial support.
I suspect–I stress I have absolutely no proof of this, but it’s logical–that WGBH said, “Oh! Jane Austen! Andrew Davies! Yes, here’s buckets of money!” and never bothered to read the ITV scripts, or at least not critically, or just didn’t think it through thoroughly. I think it’s very possible if they had it to do over, things might have been different (but who knows, maybe not). I keep imagining some suit from ITV like Otter in Animal House, saying, “Face it, you ****ed up! You trusted us!”
Also keep in mind this whole Complete Jane Austen thing happened pretty late in the process. They weren’t intending to make such a big push. Again, if they had to do it over, who knows? But they had to know that any JA adaptation would get very close attention from the Janeites, at least.
Hopefully, with this much viewer response, PBS will do the Austen airings again next year and perhaps devote enough time to it to play the movies in full.
Where else would I get to read about Austen and Animal House in the same thread. I love it!
do you mean the entire 1995 pride and prejudice movie, aka the 5-hour one, was cut down to 2 hours? or do you mean that they decided to only show two of them last night?
i’m not really sure what you mean. it would be slightly long to put all 5 hours in one night for some people, so i don’t think it would be too bad if only 2 episodes were shown in one night, but if they cut 3 hours out…
*grrrrrrr*lion roar*tear at flesh*
it’s my favourite adaptation so far! stupid cutters of wonderful adaptations. *hmpf*
I believe P&P is going to be shown in its entirety (I didn’t get to watch last night… too busy rearranging my room). If it was 100 minutes last night and P&P is going to be shown for three weeks straight… then that’s 3 100 min episodes which is equal to the 300 min version that all Janeites probably have (in duplicate form for some of us).
I’m more ticked that while they are (presumably) showing P&P in its entirety the others are shown as condensced (sp?) versions. Makes me sad as to how they are planning to show S&S08 and Emma95 down the road…
If they cut the duel from S&S08 then I’ll really be mad =P Too bad Colonel Brandon didn’t at least injure Willoughby further, just as well. Much better for Willoughby to realize he could have died than to actually go through with it. =) Alas I digress.
Did anyone else have this problem? P&P95 last night was herky-jerky and grainy. It looked as if someone ran out to the video rental store, and got the discs on the “pre-viewed for sale” aisle. I too have this on vhs and dvd…and didn’t need to watch it on TV, but flipping through the channels, the poor quality really made me stop and stare. We get two PBS affiliates where we live…and the other didn’t seem to have as much of a problem…but it was still there. Is it me? The grand ball sequence was nearly unwatchable.
Again: WGBH does not get involved with the productions themselves. Yes, it is possible, and yes, perhaps they should, but no, as it stands, they in fact do not. If it’s any consolation, I got the impression from Rebecca Eaton (though I may be projecting) that they do regret taking whatever was on offer, just because it had the JA brand slapped on the project. Especially if it comes from ITV. She seemed quite disappointed at some of the subcontracting work.
I believe how it went down was that Masterpiece knew about the ITV films and was discussing if/when to show them and a staffer who is a JASNA member piped up and said, “well, ya know, there only were six!” And they all said, “oh, well, great! Let’s do it then!” I don’t know if this was before or after they had heard about the BBC S&S. But in terms of who had the evil money plot, that blame lies squarely on the shoulders of ITV.
I agree that the full versions should be available to us in some form or fashion and that the whole process has not been fabulously managed thusfar … however, given my general satisfaction level with Persuasion and Northanger Abby, I’m not entirely sure I actually WANT to see longer versions of them. Not just 10 minutes longer, at any rate. Maybe two hours longer so there can actually be some character development and meaningful reveal of story elements, but … hmmm …
It was so nice last night to feel like there was enough time to get to know a character a bit before the plot went galloping on ahead … although that may have been due to, er, excessive familiarity with the piece on my part …
Again: WGBH does not get involved with the productions themselves. Yes, it is possible, and yes, perhaps they should, but no, as it stands, they in fact do not.
So we’re back to Flounder and Otter then, with WGBH/PBS being Flounder. I can’t see them as blameless, though of course I don’t see them as completely to blame either. They didn’t do their due diligence, which was my point; and further that if they had planned this big splashy Complete Jane Austen from the get-go, they might have done a more thorough vetting before getting involved with the ITV things. Or maybe not. I’m not going to waste a lot of energy on it, because it can’t be changed, but perhaps they will remember the howls of Janeite discontent and learn for another time.
I think they would have saved at least half the grief they’ve received over these if all the Region 1 DVDs were uncut. There still would have been complaints about the films themselves, and probably about the broadcast cuts, but at least they could say, “You can see the whole thing on DVD.” But they can’t even say that.
Jen K, while I do appreciate your defense for PBS, I think it is making them look worse. In their place, if my company would be giving the money I would like to supervise what my associate is doing with it, not only sit and wait to have the final product delivered. IMNSHO, PBS should have to change that attitude and I do really hope Ms. Eaton do something about it (It remains also the A Room with a View disaster).
Fine-eyed Elizabeth, I think we all would have wanted longer versions (120 for NA and P at least since they are shorter and a mini for MP since it is a longer novel), but what I at least I am claming about the DVD’s now is that not only the adaptations were to short in themselves, but that they were even a shortened and we would want those missing 10 minutes. Those of us who have seen the complete versions know that some details are missing. They might not improve significantly but only the fact that we know they exist and add some (Da Man would chide me for the improper use of the word) nice touches, some of them which even come from the novels. It is not a claim on what would have been, but a claim because something is and was not provided.
Carol G. – the station I watched also had a bad quality of P&P. It was really dark and grainy and didn’t improve when I messed with the tv settings. The copy I procured via the internet fairy is better quality, tbh.
The poor quality of P&P is due to the age of the “print,” as it were. It needs to be digitally remastered, which would sharpen the image quality significantly. And if you have an HD TV is was probably even worse-looking. Changing technologies.
Cinthia, I do of course understand your point and agree with you that the full versions, regardless of ultimate quality, should be available to us at the very least on DVD; and I think that it’s unfortunate and silly that the full versions could not/would not be shown to US viewers for whatever reasons. I do think this gives the impression–the perception–of cheating us out of something, and that doesn’t reflect well on PBS, whether it is their fault or not.
However, I am still certain that another 10 minutes of most any of the already-aired programs would not have improved their lot with me. I don’t make that claim for anyone else.
Elaina, Cathy, and Carol G., you all are making me grateful for the pathetic quality of my bedroom television set at this point. I didn’t see any quality problems, but on the other hand, I’m happy surprised when only one copy of the image appears on the screen. (It’s 23 years old. It can’t help itself.)
I think they would have saved at least half the grief they’ve received over these if all the Region 1 DVDs were uncut. There still would have been complaints about the films themselves, and probably about the broadcast cuts, but at least they could say, “You can see the whole thing on DVD.” But they can’t even say that.
Mags, remember, they weren’t even honest enough in the first place to admit that the programs had been cut. When I opened my big mouth and told the audience that my friends and I had seen the British version of Persuasion, the question was then repeated for the audience and the person repeating it said that I had seen it “in Britain.” This isn’t the case. I had seen it in the comfort of my own living room in New York. And I wasn’t alone. Other people I talked to that night (not including my companions) said they’d seen it too and were also figuring out which scenes had been cut.
PBS is being completely disingenuous and are treating us like morons. They are also being naive if they think they can continue to cut scenes without anybody noticing and calling them on it. I really think they’re surprised at the reaction.
The cuts that these films endured at the hands of PBS shouldn’t be of any real shock. That is, seeing that they found the title of this long running series, MASTERPIECE
Theatre, way to wordy.Mags, I have been reading your blog for several years now, and it is better than ever. Thank you for creating such a wonderful platform for intelligent, and frequently hilarious, Jane Austen intercourse.
Julie, frankly I can’t imagine any scenario where PBS would say, “Hey, come and watch our incomplete Complete Jane Austen!” Know what I mean? Maybe I’ve worked in marketing too long, but I can forgive them for not mentioning it until others noticed. They may or may not have known that anyone would. People not in fandom are often astonished at how organized the Fangirl Underground is, in its anarchic and squabbling way.
Certainly I understand your unhappiness with it, though.
Of course showing the cut films would have engendered complaints, but even if you go back to the first couple of posts about it, when we were first learning what was going on, there was some grumbling but a sense of “Well, I’ll just buy the DVDs.” It was when it was discovered that some of the DVDs were incomplete that the real howls of dismay began. (And of course after seeing the films that were not well-received.)
Forgive my fascination with all this, it’s the frustrated sociologist in me coming out.
And Meghan: Thanks for the kind words.
Glad you’re enjoying the blog!
“The poor quality of P&P is due to the age of the “print,” as it were. It needs to be digitally remastered, which would sharpen the image quality significantly. And if you have an HD TV is was probably even worse-looking. Changing technologies.”
Hmmm. I get 2 PBS stations and both showed this Sunday night – exact same broadcasts except that one was about 5 seconds behind the other. I immediately noticed that while the broadcast version seemed to be the exact same one I have on tapes and DVD, it was very sharp and clear and 3-D effect. I don’t have an HD-TV but that’s what it looked like! While the colors were muted like in my DVD’s (the entire Netherfield ball scene looked to be cloaked in a greenish fog), the people stood out sharply against the background. I was highly pleased! (Well, OK, Mr. Darcy may be given some credit for the good vibrations.) Isn’t Masterpiece Theater broadcast from one central location, so that we all see the same thing?
The PBS broadcasts of all the Complete Jane Austen airings have been of horrible quality in my area – grainy, dark and look like they were originally filmed in the 1970s. I get Sacramento KVIE 6. I have fortunately gotten DVD and HD quality versions from other places and the difference is monumental. They are beautiful. I also managed to acquire the complete version of the new SandS in HD and I am quite enamoured with it. I am told it aired in the UK in January? How it will look on PBS when it is aired is anyone’s guess.
Interesting thread. Since US audiences got the snipped versions of the 3 new adaptations previously aired in full in the UK, and we got the first airing of the new biopic Miss Austen Regrets which was edited from the press screener, it will really be a slap to the US if UK audiences get the full version of MAR when it airs there. I am happy about new adapations, but totally perplexed by the choice to edit them down for US audiences. Will the new Sense & Sensibility be edited also? I hope not.
Laurel Ann: if the screener I received is any indication, about 15 minutes have been cut. It’s three hours long, they’re showing it in two 90-minute slots, we know they edit down 90 minute slots to 80-some, so there you go. On the bright side, it’s very likely that the DVDs will be uncut for S&S and MAR.
Mags — It’s not so much that PBS didn’t want to tell us about the cuts, it’s that they were cut in the first place and that PBS is complicit by saying to ITV and the Beeb “Sure! We’ll take cut movies. Nobody’ll notice. Nobody in North America has access to your programming so we’re safe from criticism.”
THAT’S my point.
I just arrived home from a quick trip to the USA where I picked up my DVD “Persuasion” 2008 (the complete “Persuasion”, not the shortened, confusing version that I saw on Mexican tv).
What a difference those missing ten minutes make! We (all seven of us- my husband, my two teenaged sons and teenage daughter as well as our friends in California) enjoyed this version very much. I take back all my criticisms of the Mexican tv version. Even the music was quite nice when it flows and is not chopped up!
All that running at the end is still a little silly ….but I did not like the Italian circus at the end of Persuasion 1995, either.
I don’t think anyone would be sorry if Masterpiece Whatever cut out Gillian Anderson’s underwhelming and “spoilerish” commentary.