Watching the excellent Ashes to Ashes on the BBC on Thursday night I noticed in a sad rather geeky anorak way that someone had not done their research properly.
When trying to work out which "Moore" would be killed from the threat in the poison pen letter, Chris suggested "Booby Moore", at which point it was commented on that "Well he was in Escape to Victory", which was a reference to his supposedly bad acting.
The problem was that the film Escape to Victory was not released until 30th July 1981, and the episode of Ashes to Ashes was set in the run up to Charles and Diana's wedding on 29th July 1981 so how could they refer to Bobby Moore using the term "he was in", in the past tense, as opposed to "he is in", in the present tense and also how would they know how bad his acting was as the film was not out yet ?
I know, I know. I am a very sad man.
4 comments:
All-purpose Life in Mars/Ashes to Ashes cop-out: it's all psychological, and these errors reflect her subconscious trying to let her know something's wrong. Of course.
Nich - you really should get out moore!
I was too busy with my futile longing for Alex Drake to pay much attention :)
Though having said that, some of the anachronisms are deliberate, to create a sense of ambiguity about whether this is 1981, or just a figment of DCI Drake's imagination. The same goes for the anachronisms in Life on Mars.
It's a Victory of style over substance.
After all, we're just constructs.
Post a Comment