![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Untitled
editCorrected a small bit of spelling
by Punch and Judy puppet maker Fred Tickner for husband-and-wife puppeteers
"puppet" was originally "pupper." 63.88.67.230 22:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
some things
editthe origanal muffin the mule series wasn't made by the bbc, but by an amarican company called "parthian". i understand they were made in england
in 1950, "the five smith brothers" reliesed an extended verson on the theme song, titled "we want muffin" on parlophone. i don't know if this was the only verson of the theme recrded for record, i'd like ot thing that annette herself made one at some point
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnurmkX03Ug
the starting credits always ran something along the lines of
[title of show] with annette mills (who sings the songs) and anne hogarth (who pulls the strings) directed by jan bussell
durin which what sounds like a music box plays, the theme song comes in at the start of each episode
the eposodes end with a reprise of the song to fade out. the words "the end" fade in, followed closely by a logo that looks like a model of a horsebound archer, shooting behind him. this is usualy silent, but sometimes in accompanied by quiet piano music
i personaly find the almost childlike opening credits to be one of the more adoreable features of the series, while the point tarwards the company that actualy made teh blasted things. the name of this company is never relealed within the actual films
teh films seem to have been shot at least mostly in one continouse take, or at least on a very tight schedual. blunders are usualy kept in as part of the story, as annette will fix the problem while still interating with the charictors. for example, muffins strings become tangled, she will say "oh look now, you all tangled, come here, there you go" as she untangles him. again, i think this helps give these films their unique warmth
dispite the age of these films and other obvouse limitations such as budget ad time constrants, i get the feeling that young children were supposed to know that this was a puppet show, as apposed to shows today. i cannot site this
the shows were obvously shot on film and as far as i know would have been accompanied by RCA's optical sound system of the time, as "rca sound systems" are often credited on the first title card
these are mainly just my observations. i have seen the entry on the 100 greatest kids tv shows, and probebly have evry surviving episode on dvd, of which this is one;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spQY2FbCUtM&feature=related
i also found this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXhlegZQGOs that has sooty on the show, aparently ^^ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiwiai (talk • contribs) 01:52, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
parthian
editparthian is the company that made the films, as sited from teh british film institute website ^^ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiwiai (talk • contribs) 01:59, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
External links modified (February 2018)
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Muffin the Mule. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061010162657/http://www.bbc.co.uk/cbeebies/characterpages/muffinthemule/ to http://www.bbc.co.uk/cbeebies/characterpages/muffinthemule/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:15, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Article scope
editSomeone should decide whether this article is primarily about the character or about the TV series, because as current written it appears to start as being about the character, then flip over to being about the series. Each would be discussed to an extent in the article about the other, but knowing which is the primary subject would affect how it is written and what secondary details are appropriate to include. --RL0919 (talk) 11:46, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
- Imo it should cover both, and only a little rewriting is needed to do this clearly. Johnbod (talk) 14:27, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
- It should have a single primary subject. If that is the series, then the lead should be rewritten (e.g., "Muffin the Mule is a British television programme for children...") and the discussion of other presentations of the character reorganized accordingly. Or if the primary subject is the character, then the discussion of the 2005 remake should focus on that character and the descriptions of other characters greatly reduced. BTW, nothing precludes having two separate articles, one on the series and one on the character, as long as both are notable. --RL0919 (talk) 17:38, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
- I disagee - there is not enough material for two articles, & really no benefit to the reader. Johnbod (talk) 17:59, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
- It should have a single primary subject. If that is the series, then the lead should be rewritten (e.g., "Muffin the Mule is a British television programme for children...") and the discussion of other presentations of the character reorganized accordingly. Or if the primary subject is the character, then the discussion of the 2005 remake should focus on that character and the descriptions of other characters greatly reduced. BTW, nothing precludes having two separate articles, one on the series and one on the character, as long as both are notable. --RL0919 (talk) 17:38, 2 June 2019 (UTC)