Did anybody else see all the London Underground stuff in Spooks last
night?

That train they walked through looked very old and reminded me of my
childhood!

wrote in message

Did anybody else see all the London Underground stuff in Spooks last
night?

That train they walked through looked very old and reminded me of my
childhood!

I'm assuming it was a 1972, parked in the Aldwych tunnel at Holborn? If
so, there are many older trains still in service on LU.

We also saw the usual escape into the disused Jubilee platforms at
Charing Cross (not far from Aldwych, but I don't think there's an
underground route between them).

I was wondering where all the other twisty foot passages were? They
looked clean and unused, rather than disused.

In message , Recliner
writes
wrote in message

Did anybody else see all the London Underground stuff in Spooks last
night?

That train they walked through looked very old and reminded me of my
childhood!

I'm assuming it was a 1972, parked in the Aldwych tunnel at Holborn? If
so, there are many older trains still in service on LU.

We also saw the usual escape into the disused Jubilee platforms at
Charing Cross (not far from Aldwych, but I don't think there's an
underground route between them).

But bizarrely they had gone underground at Liverpool street and were
using "disused tunnels" to get to London Bridge. Now I'm willing to
suspend belief for fiction purposes that they were using a tunnel that
doesn't exist. But they least they could have done then was to cover
up the roundels saying that they were at Charing Cross, which rather
made a mockery of the whole thing. Even "King William Street" would have
done! :-)

I was wondering where all the other twisty foot passages were? They
looked clean and unused, rather than disused.
I assumed that hey were all part of the Charing Cross complex but could
of course be wrong. The 72 stock *was* in Aldwych, I presume?
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

wrote:
Did anybody else see all the London Underground stuff in Spooks last
night?

That train they walked through looked very old and reminded me of my
childhood!
It was done on a bit of LUL that is redundant. Have a look at
Subterranea Britannica, explained there. Very interesting site by the way.


Rob.

"Ian Jelf" wrote in message

....

But bizarrely they had gone underground at Liverpool street and were
using "disused tunnels" to get to London Bridge. Now I'm willing to
suspend belief for fiction purposes that they were using a tunnel that
doesn't exist. But they least they could have done then was to cover
up the roundels saying that they were at Charing Cross, which rather
made a mockery of the whole thing. Even "King William Street" would
have done! :-)

Actually, that would have been rather clever, but assumes a knowledge
about LU's history that companies like Kudos are unlikely to have. I've
been down the old King William Street tunnels, and it would have been
great if they could have re-created that seedy (and dark ) WWII look.
Wouldn't it be nice if disused tunnels were all so clean, dry and
brightly lit as in Spooks (not a rat or stalagmite to be seen)?

Obviously, if we're being picky, I doubt that you could get a nuclear
bomb into a briefcase either. But then, Spooks isn't about accuracy, and
they do tell their tales rather well.

In message , Recliner
writes
"Ian Jelf" wrote in message

...

But bizarrely they had gone underground at Liverpool street and were
using "disused tunnels" to get to London Bridge. Now I'm willing to
suspend belief for fiction purposes that they were using a tunnel that
doesn't exist. But they least they could have done then was to cover
up the roundels saying that they were at Charing Cross, which rather
made a mockery of the whole thing. Even "King William Street" would
have done! :-)

Actually, that would have been rather clever,

Blush

Oh, really, it's nothing. You're too kind! :-))


but assumes a knowledge
about LU's history that companies like Kudos are unlikely to have.

They have only to ask.......


I've
been down the old King William Street tunnels, and it would have been
great if they could have re-created that seedy (and dark ) WWII look.
Wouldn't it be nice if disused tunnels were all so clean, dry and
brightly lit as in Spooks (not a rat or stalagmite to be seen)?

Brightly lit in unlikely circumstances is a particular failing of
television and film production generally. The problem is, if you
recreated total darkness, it's not terribly good from a story-telling
point of view.

Obviously, if we're being picky,

Me?! :-)


I doubt that you could get a nuclear
bomb into a briefcase either.

If indeed inaccurate, I for one am mightily relieved.


But then, Spooks isn't about accuracy, and
they do tell their tales rather well.

This is only the second one I've seen. I saw one in an hotel last week
and tuned in again this week because I'd enjoyed it so much.
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

On Dec 9, 2:52 pm, Ian Jelf wrote:
I assumed that hey were all part of the Charing Cross complex but could
of course be wrong. The 72 stock *was* in Aldwych, I presume?

Somehow one of the ticket office staff had found her way onto the
train and were having a snooze when the spooks rudely awoke her. But
its good to see her customer training came to the fore.

B2003

On Dec 9, 4:01 pm, Ian Jelf wrote:
I doubt that you could get a nuclear
bomb into a briefcase either.

If indeed inaccurate, I for one am mightily relieved.

Unfortunately not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special...ition_Munition

B2003

In message , at 16:01:24 on Tue,
9 Dec 2008, Ian Jelf remarked:
Brightly lit in unlikely circumstances is a particular failing of
television and film production generally. The problem is, if you
recreated total darkness, it's not terribly good from a story-telling
point of view.

Nor is it very good for the overtime bills, people falling over one
another and so on. I'm told that most "night" scenes are actually shot
in daylight with filters on the camera.
--
Roland Perry

In message , Roland Perry
writes
In message , at 16:01:24 on
Tue, 9 Dec 2008, Ian Jelf remarked:
Brightly lit in unlikely circumstances is a particular failing of
television and film production generally. The problem is, if you
recreated total darkness, it's not terribly good from a story-telling
point of view.

Nor is it very good for the overtime bills, people falling over one
another and so on. I'm told that most "night" scenes are actually shot
in daylight with filters on the camera.

That was a technique called "la nuit americaine" and is less used
nowadays, I think.

Graeme Wall will no doubt shortly be along to confirm or deny this!

--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk