Talk:Danger Man

Untitled

Please consider joining the project! HowardBerry 19:19, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Is that song on the DVD?

I believe there's a soundtrack CD which features both "HighWire" and "Secret Agent Man" together with other musical themes from the series. - Lee M 23:41, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)

All Four Seasons on US DVD? Don't Think So...

All four seasons of the series are now available on DVD in North America, using the original Danger Man credits and theme music, rather than the Secret Agent version.

I just bought the complete series boxset from A&E, and it's only the complete hour-long set... not the previous halfhour series.

... and upon edit, I will correct myself. The A&E "Secret Agent aka Danger Man" boxset only includes th 47 eps of "Secret Agent", what they're calling the hourlong series. Apparently claiming that to be its US release name.

There is a separate 39 episode set of the first season, which they call Danger Man.

Guh. Frickin' A&E.

Yeah, I don't know why they didn't release the 1960 series as a "Set 0" or something like that, but at least they did release it because it's brilliant. (It was not released until nearly a year after the Megabox which is why these episodes aren't included. Incidentally, it is correct to refer to the hour-long episodes by the name Secret Agent because that was their broadcast title on CBS and that is how they've been syndicated over here since the 1960s so they needed to use the American title over top of the UK original. However the first season aired as Danger Man in the US (although according to one reference book I read awhile back, the half-hour episodes were at one point syndicated in America as Secret Agent as well.) However you have brought to my attention the potential for some confusion on the DVD issue so I'll reword it. Thanks. 23skidoo 04:45, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Guess you bought the wrong set. The A&E set I have has all episodes. Shop around next time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.88.255 (talk) 20:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

• Please be a bit more civil and make note that the above comments are nearly 3 years old. About 2 years ago A&E did in fact release a megabox incorporating the 1960-61 episodes. But that was long after the above discussion was conducted. 23skidoo (talk) 18:28, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Danger Man titles/opening sequence in the US

Not true that these were never seen in the US prior to the DVDs. Channel 48 in San Jose, California ran both the US and UK versions in the early 80's as part of an amazing Saturday afternoon package of 60's and 70's reruns they called "Those Fascinating Men." Package included the Lawford "Thin Man" series, the Michael Rennie "The Third Man," "Burke's Law," "The Persuaders" and on and on. Ahh, the good old days of independent TV.

Please feel free to add that to the main article. It's an interesting fact to note. 23skidoo 03:41, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Deleted paragraph

The following paragraph has been deleted because it is unsourced and appears to be completely speculative (and also, what role did Smart's sister play?). The fact a relation of Smart appeared in The Prisoner has nothing to do with the relationship between the two men. If a citation is available, please add it and the paragraph can go back in:

On the other hand,one of the first characters to be seen in 'The Prisoner' is in fact, Ralph Smart's actress sister, Patsy Smart, suggesting relations between the two men were perfectly cordial. Patrick McGoohan evidently considered he was playing two different characters in John Drake and Number Six, but admitted that he used the plaform of a 'secret agent' as a way to introduce his new series to the watching public. That Number Six had been a secret agent is evident from the whole ethos of 'The Prisoner'. The allegory of the fight his secret agent had, to maintain his individuality, to the battle that every man can share in their own everyday life, was equally clear. 23skidoo 14:06, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

This was been added back in, and has now been deleted again. In fact, I've done a major cull of original research and fancruft so that this article reads more like an encyclopedic article and less like a debate or a fan magazine. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 14:57, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Deleted content re: program format

My edit (which was done as an IP as I was logged out without realizing) was removed as being unsourced. In fact, as stated in the edit, the program is the source, and the material I added is as verifable as the rest of the material in the paragraph. Its removal renders the paragraph a factual error as it describes only the 30-minute version of the series as broadcast in 1960-61 and does not reflect the series as broadcast from 1964-66. 23skidoo (talk) 00:58, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Episode counts by running time

Would it be proper to put the number of episodes produced at 30 & 60 minutes each (39 & 47, respectively) in the infobox alongside those two running times? As is, there is only the overall episode count given. (Source: Harry Castleman and Walter J. Podrazik, Harry and Wally's Favorite TV Shows, Prentice Hall Press, 1989, p. 452) Ted Watson (talk) 19:19, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

• As long as the number is correct, I don't see a problem, although technically speaking they weren't 30 and 60, but more like 25 and 50 without commercials. My preference, though, would be to divide them either by seasons or by year rather than counting how many episodes of each length. 23skidoo (talk) 23:29, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

You are quite right about the actual running times, and an encyclopedia should be technically accurate. However, since the running times also reflect what are actually two separate programmes I'm not too certain that this is not a good ground for episode count listings. Yes, I know that they share the same:

1. title (Danger Man, at least in the UK)

2. creator/producer (Ralph Smart, albeit executive producer on the 50-minute version)

3. star (Patrick McGoohan)

4. lead character name (John Drake)

5. genre (international espionage)

Despite all this, in the first version, Drake is an American working for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (even though he was sent on assignments in Africa, Latin America, the Far East, and in what is to my knowledge the only episode where NATO was specified internally, northern India/the Himalayas), in the second a British national working for British intelligence. Two different characters, really, and therefore two separate TV shows. Furthermore, I've never found a list of how many episodes a TV series produced in each of its seasons—and nothing else—particularly helpful or informative. So I was really interested in only whether there was some more-or-less arbitrary rule prohibiting episode counts on the running-time lines in an infobox. Ted Watson (talk) 19:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree there's nothing saying it can't be done, so I have no objections if it is done. However I have to disagree with you regarding the opinion (shared by some, but not all -- see for example Dave Rogers book on Danger Man and The Prisoner) that the two series were separate series. They were one show - that's been said by no less than McGoohan himself. The fact the series changed formats is nothing new. To give a recent example, had Veronica Mars been renewed for another season, the plan was for it to jump ahead something like 5 years and basically begin anew as a series about Mars being an FBI agent or something like that. It wouldn't have been a new series, just a reformatting of the old. Similarly, there are those who feel that every era of Doctor Who constitutes a completely separate series, and it does not. The problem with Danger Man is that -- like virtually all the series made on UK and US TV in the 1960s -- there was very little by way of continuity, so you wouldn't have Drake in a 1966 episode referencing something happening in a 1961 episode like you would today. However -- and I need to find the source but I remember reading it -- one thing to also think about was at one point the half-hour episodes were apparently syndicated as Secret Agent episodes, complete with the Johnny Rivers theme. I have no idea how that would have worked -- they must have edited episodes together or something. But if this is true and the source I got it from (a TV shows encyclopedia but I've forgotten the name) is accurate, then that's a pretty strong indicator that it was considered the same series. Also the 60-minute series was never consistent on what nationality Drake was; in one episode he declared that he was Irish (and not in the context of an alias). 23skidoo (talk) 20:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I noticed the statement about Drake saying once that he was Irish in the article—good point specifying that the context did not allow for it being part of a cover identity, though I had assumed as much—along with a cite request. In any event, he was British, and the NATO Drake was definitely an American (the evidence is conclusive, if subtle), and that means McGoohan played two different characters. None of your examples is analogous enough to be relevant (I've never heard of anybody claiming this about Doctor Who, it's indefensible if said in the same sense that we're debating it for Danger Man, and anyone who had said it that way would have been put down by everyone familiar enough with the show to be qualified to venture an opinion). As far as your statement about the half-hours being syndicated as Danger Man, a half-hour Tarzan TV series of the early 1990s had its three seasons of episodes spliced together into one-hour installments and combined into a rerun package with a Tarzan series of the mid-1990s produced at that length in the first place. Like Danger Man, a few years passed between the two runs, and there were some producers in common. However, it would be nothing short of insane to call them the same programme. The two had completely different casts, tones and even time frames (the one in the hour-long format matched the pre-World War I setting of Edgar Rice Burroughs' earliest novels along with his educational level and British title for the apeman, while the other wasn't back-dated at all and the leading man spoke like Johnny Weissmuller and his successors in the old Hollywood B-film series version). So ITV or some distributor having done something similar with the two DM runs proves nothing. If they did it. In the early years of the Fox network here in the States, because they were on a relatively small number of stations and most of them were UHF outlets whose transmissions didn't carry very far, they also had a cable/satellite channel called Fox Net. As the over-air network itself wasn't on for very much of the day, the channel had a great deal of material to fill out the schedule. Nightly at 1 AM Eastern time, they ran Secret Agent. After a few weeks, the schedule changed to indicate Danger Man at 1:00 and 1:30. After a few more weeks, Secret Agent again. They went back and forth several times before dropping them entirely. This might be what you heard about, even though there doesn't appear to have been any alterations to the NATO version. As for McGoohan supposedly saying they were one show, I can put a surprisingly large number of blatantly inaccurate statements into his mouth—note a recent edit of mine in The Prisoner article, where a Canadian TV interview of 1977 has him saying he did "54" episodes of Danger Man, when there is no way to get that number legitimately, no matter how you break them down (I put a "sic" and an explanation there), and mind you the videotape survives and a transcript apparently released, so there's no question he actually said this B.S., and if he didn't remember for sure off the top of his head, he shouldn't have given an exact number—so even that, if you can prove he said it, doesn't have much credibility. The facts are that the NATO Drake was American and the M9 one was British (whether Irish, English, Scot [the actor's surname always sounded Scottish to me, and I'm of Irish ancestry], Welsh or even mixed blood, he was British)—and we're not talking about mere citizenship here—and that means they were two different characters and we're dealing with two separate programmes. Ted Watson (talk) 22:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I would like to see the running times. Even how many commercial breaks were scheduled. Sometimes I'm puzzled by breaks in action: are these dramatic pauses, or peculiar edits, or...? Watching recent shows on DVD, I can tell when a commercial break is implied. But I wasn't watching Danger Man in England in the 1960s, and I could use assistance understanding what's going on.

The deliberation about whether Danger Man in 30 and 60 minute versions was two different series puts a somewhat unhistorical spin on the situation. The main intentions were things such as making money, creating art, having a good time, etc. Continuity between series was far down on the list. It's true that now Star Wars, Star Trek, etc. fans and media franchises have come to define works that are "approved", "in-universe", or "canonical", but a) these things were barely considered in the 1960s, and, I'd maintain, b) are even today original research of a rather pernicious kind that seeks to retrofit meaning where none was intended. Wiki user Lady Aleena has invited discussion about a proposed article on Television crossovers [1]. There, many of the "crossovers" she's identified are little more than a studio trying to cash in on a recognized name, or somebody's uncle shoehorning him into a paying job -- there's not necessarily anything dramatically significant. Fansites often speculate that there's meaning behind every nuance -- where not explicit, implied or even subconscious. But dozens of people work on TV episodes, they all have their own agendas which work out differently on each episode. The "continuity" is the continuity of the entire production team -- a situation that is rarely documented in detail, and is often soon dim or forgotten. Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 02:43, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Doctor Who and Star Trek were really the first major franchises of the 1960s that bothered with things like canon and continuity. In the case of Danger Man, it was a show about a secret agent named John Drake, played by the same actor in episodes written by the same people. The fact his background and affiliation changed over time is no different than Star Trek which had Captain Kirk working for an organization called the United Earth Space Probe Agency for most of the first season before someone decided to call it Starfleet. On the question of running times, the only problem is UK running times were not consistent, so to give an overall blanket episode length would be misleading. The Doctor Who article should have lengths removed, too, because it says the episodes were 25 and 45 minutes in length (depending upon the era) when in fact the lengths varied from 22 minutes to 70+ minutes in the case of the recent season finale. 23skidoo (talk) 05:38, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't see that anything either of you have said is relevant here. 23skidoo's Star Trek comparison is completely inapplicable. That was one relatively minor change made during a continuous run. Here, we have two completely isolated runs, separated by several years (please quit ignoring that), the second version having fundamental content differences from the first. The creative team started over and built a new program from scratch (utilizing the same genre, title, star and lead character name, yes) and this is simply not open to rational, reality-based debate. Misrepresent evidence or blow smoke all you want, I will cut through it. As for the running times, here we have one run made to fit a thirty-minute time slot, and another for a sixty-minute time slot, and, again, several years apart with fundamental content differences. They should also remain at Doctor Who despite the facts that specific "naked" running times vary slightly, and that there were significant but isolated exceptions to the regular length (you could have mentioned 90 minutes, for The Five Doctors, as well). --Ted Watson (talk) 20:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Danger Mouse?

Is DangerMouse a parody/homage of Danger Man? If so, is this fact worthy of a mention in this article? Applejuicefool (talk) 19:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

• While it's probable that the title is a play on the Danger Man title, as far as I know it's just a general Bond parody. Beyond the title there don't seem to be any elements suggestive of Danger Man, and for it to be a parody there needs to be similarities of some sort. 23skidoo (talk) 19:50, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

They're both about British secret agents... Applejuicefool (talk) 18:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Peter Yates?

Why does this page have a 'Peter Yates' navbox at the bottom? That name doesn't appear anywhere else in the article. --Masamage ♫ 03:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

• Good question. I'll remove it. 23skidoo (talk) 12:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Actually I've decided to put it back. Upon further investigation, Yates directed six episodes of the series and went on to direct a number of noted movies including Bullitt. What needs to be added is a reference to this in the article. If he'd only been a guest star, or only directed a single episode, I might have taken it off, but his involvement was a bit more substantial. 23skidoo (talk) 12:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Cool. You're right, the thing to do is add a mention of him. Thanks for looking into that. --Masamage ♫ 15:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Wandering questions about production

I'm no great fan of abstract musing on Wikipedia, but I've just been watching the complete series from A&E, and noticed two unexplained shifts in production. Perhaps there is some interesting story behind them? Or I'm misreading? 1) Watching the end of the 30 minute episodes, then the start of the 60 minute episodes, there's a sudden drop in intensity in McGoohan's performance -- there was even an atypical small acting error (some word fumbled, I think). After a few of the 60 minute episodes the usual intensity resumes. One would have thought McGoohan was thrilled to have the show picked up and turned into an hour format. If so, he doesn't demonstrate it. 2) I enjoy the series sets and locales (if only Dr. Who had the same during those years): Again I may be misreading, but it seems that the last handful of shows were ever more experimental, and often expensive. It doesn't appear that the producers or directors were losing interest in the show -- it wasn't a cash cow they were running into the ground -- rather the contrary. Isn't that an odd moment for McGoohan to quit? The Prisoner couldn't have waited a year? (In this, I'm not accepting McGoohan's statement that the show was "repeating itself" as a sufficient explanation. That would be more true for the early episodes ?)

Oh, also...I promise I'm not developing a habit of wandering questions...why do modern British series have a half dozen episodes in a "season"...and all the while complaining about the pressure of production schedules (E.g., Red Dwarf, Faulty Towers), yet Danger Man had a significantly higher rate of production (and certainly not worse production values). What's the difference between the production situations? Piano non troppo (talk) 01:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I wondered the same thing myself; at the moment, I'm enjoying the half-hour Danger Man episodes from Netflix. Perhaps it's the difference between the non-commercial BBC "season" and the commercial ATV/ITV "season." Wi2g 16:36, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

• ITV in the fifties to be commercial, a pressure the BBC was not under, made film series and followed the American format of 39 30minute episodes usually following as today what is popular in the cinema hence all the swashbucklers and historic series. The Invisible man broke this mould being modern followed by Danger Man which was originaly to bring James Bond to TV. Film series gave greater scope for dubbing into foreign languages, as B features in overseas cinemas. These first half hour series were not dependent on sales to America except when a second series was required.ie Robin Hood. Nearly all these series completed filming before the first episode broadcast. The 30 min Danger Man fall more into the adventure spy stories whereas the 60 min stories were much more cynical and downbeat. The reason for them being made in the first place was the success of The Saint which MacGoohan had turned down and the control he was able to exercise in the production of Danger Man. The BBC did make one foray into film tv with The Third Man with Michael Rennie and maybe Maigret.REVUpminster (talk) 18:33, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Pilot?

Although we have Brian Clemens quoted as referring to "View from the Villa" as a "pilot" episode, I can find no indication that the series produced a separate episode which was then used to sell the series, and then production began in full later ... which is the definition of pilot. As far as I know production just began. (A similar error is made when referring to An Unearthly Child, the first serial of Doctor Who as a pilot; it was just the start of production for an already-sold series. Unless there's objection I'll change the wording to say "first episode". There are a couple of books around about Danger Man. if "Villa" was in fact filmed in advance of regular production, I'm willing to stand corrected. 23skidoo (talk) 19:37, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

You're wrong about Doctor Who and "An Unearthly Child". That is the title of the programme's pilot episode. The script was slightly rewritten (Susan originally said she was from a specific far-future century instead of "...another time, another place," and the Doctor did not have his "...wanderers in the fourth dimension..." speech), the characterization of the Doctor somewhat reworked, and a second version was recorded for the series itself. This pilot was released on VHS twice, first on The Hartnell Years and then on Edge of Destruction and the Original Pilot. I don't know for sure, but it is probably in the DVD collection of odd episodes and incomplete stories from the 1960s era. I've never encountered anyone referring to the transmitted version as the pilot. As for your actual issue here, I think the quote from Clemens means that until and unless documentation to the contrary is found, "Villa" should remain considered a pilot. --Ted Watson (talk) 23:03, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the so-called pilot was never filmed as a pilot (this per the "The Beginning" DVD release. Due to technical issues encountered during production the BBC rejected it for broadcast and asked Verity Lambert to remount it; in the weeks between this decision and production resuming, changes were made. The unbroadcast version only ever came to be referred to as the pilot when it was first shown to the public in the early 90s, and only to differentiate it from the broadcast version. And I have seen "An Unearthly Child" in general referred to as the pilot episode. If you look at television pilot you'll see there are other examples where the term has been incorrectly applied. Clemens comment is evidence, but Clemens was only a writer on the show. If someone can provide a quote from Ralph Smart or McGoohan regarding this issue, I would consider it stronger evidence. Also, as noted, there are several books on the history of the series which also would indicate the correct way to refer to "Villa". I do know per Fairclough's Prisoner Companion and Jaffer Ali's book on the Prisoner that it is definitely incorrect to refer to The Prisoner's "Arrival" episode as a pilot, but once again this has been done after-the-fact to refer to the unbroadcast version of Arrival, so to differeniate it from the version aired. But The Prisoner was not sold based upon Arrival and Doctor Who was not sold based upon either version of An Unearthly Child, so that goes against the definition of pilot. 23skidoo (talk) 23:51, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

The first version of "An Unearthly Child" was shot as a pilot, according to Doctor Who Magazine and many other learned sources. The only "technical issues encountered during production" were resolved with a retake of the last ten minutes or so right then and there, and this can be seen in both VHS releases I cited. The Hartnell Years also shows the creative alterations I described. I did not mean to suggest that there have not been instances of series being sold without a pilot or that the term had never been inappropriately applied; I know all too well to the contrary. While I agree that it is not all that likely that "Villa" was a pilot, the specific statement from Clemens that it was and none to the contrary mean that the statement should remain in the article; Wiki regs have been thusly arbitrarily applied to a number of my edits, as well taken but as unsupported as yours. Being an administrator does not mean that the regs don't apply to you or your work. --Ted Watson (talk) 22:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I shall throw a spanner in!! "The Key" was the first episode made and included in the title reference to NATO. "View from the villa" was second and the titles did not include the NATO reference, 3 "Find and Return", no NATO, 4 "Time to Kill" include NATO, 5"Under the Lake" ,no NATO, 6 "The journey ends halfway", no NATO. John Schlesinger was 2nd unit on 2,4,5,6 and 2,5 ,6 had exteriors filmed at Portmerion.REVUpminster (talk) 17:53, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

That "Villa" wasn't the first episode filmed/pilot makes sense, as there are three episodes credited as having been shot at Portmeirion, and they probably got all those scenes in one trip. There would, of course, be no such thing done when filming a pilot. --Ted Watson (talk) 22:07, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

ITC series did not have pilots to sell series. Most were completed before sold such as Department S and Randall & Hopkirk. In the 50s Robin Hood, Invisible Man etc were all sold after completion. Selling to America was a bonus. The only series pre bought I can think of was "The Protectors" when Lew Grade was commisioned for a half hour series and he passed it to Gerry Anderson. ITC sold their series to commonwealth countries first and other countries where TV was not so advanced as B features in cinemas.REVUpminster (talk) 09:57, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Streaming

I took out the speculative reference that the show "may" at some point be made available on Hulu and uncited speculation re:HDTV. All that violates WP:CRYSTAL. Let's wait till announcements are made. 68.146.62.92 (talk) 03:44, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Trivia?

I thought, and I'm hoping someone can verify this, that the building Drake walks out of (and then gets into his car) in the titles of the 30 minute series is the Royal Festival Hall. Does anyone know if this is the case? Howie ☎ 12:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Episode list (Test/practice section before transfer)

Season three (1965-1966)

Some books list episodes 3-1 to 3-10 as part of series 2.

The airdate again is for ATV Midlands. —Preceding unsigned comment added by REVUpminster (talk • contribs) 17:12, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

All the date listed for season 3 are per Andrew Pixleys book. 'You are not in any trouble' replaced 'English Lady takes lodgers' which was moved to Nov 25. He seems to be the major authority23:51, 12 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by REVUpminster (talk • contribs)

As fill-in for Prisoner

There is a statement, at two different places, that late in the original UK run of The Prisoner, the two filmed-in-colour episodes of this programme were used as fill-ins when that show was not going to make its scheduled airdates. However, every Prisoner episode guide that I've found with original UK airdates (admittedly, that's not very many) leaves no such gap. I remember getting into an online discussion somewhere (the IMDb maybe) with somebody who indeed asserted that it never happened. How do the January '68 dates given here jibe with that schedule (for instance, is it indeed the same day of the week that Prisoner actually aired on)? It is undoubtedly relevant to point out that on neither instance here ("Later history and transition to The Prisoner" and "Episodes: Season 4") is the fill-in claim sourced. Any ideas on how to handle this? --Tbrittreid (talk) 22:04, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

This is a problem with ITV and it's regional variations. I looked at the book again and London saw them a year before the Midlands. ATV then ran the midlands Mon-Fri (Sat&Sun being ABC I think). London had Associated Redifusion Mon-Fri and ATV at weekends. I have now made a note about the different London times. I had the same problem over when did series two end and series three begin. Dave Rogers two books say there were 32 episodes in series 2 and 13 in series 3. His reasoning seems to be the change of studio between series 2 & 3, but with the dates on Epguides and Imdb and in Pixley's book it seems more correct in the order I done. I'll have to go through the London dates but from a quick glance sometimes they were ahead of Midlands and sometimes behind. Possibly then as now current events in the news caused episodes to be cancelled.REVUpminster (talk) 23:35, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

PS It is in Pixley's book that they were slotted into the Prisoner run when production caught up with transmission,REVUpminster (talk) 00:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

• For the ATV Midlands run of The Prisoner the two colour Danger Man episodes were shown between Living in Harmony (TX:Friday 29th December 1967) and The Girl Who Was Death (TX:Friday 19th January 1968), looking at the ATV London dates given by the REVUpminster, these two colour Danger Man episodes were first shown seven months before the Prisoner series had it first episode screened on Friday 29th September 1967 by ATV Midlands and Grampian TV, so shouldn't these ATV London dates for Sundays in February 1967 be the ones given for first TX of the colour Danger Man episodes? (Also Westward, Southern and Channel who were running the Prisoner on Sundays at 7.25pm replaced The Prisoner run with the colour Danger Man eps in the Prisoner slot when they switched The Prisoner transmission times to Sundays at 10.05pm, without a break in the weekly run, fom 7 Jan 1968 tx of Do Not Forsake Me etc.. ATV London's (Sundays from 1st Oct 1967 as Westward, Southern, Channel) only missed one week for Christmas eve 1967 when no episode was shown and did not change transmission time. other regions may have screened the colour Danger Man eps around the same time without interupting the Prisoner run) perhaps with a note of their later use as fill-in eps during Prisoner transmissions?81.111.124.190 (talk) 16:15, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
  • It was done to keep a consistancy with the Prisoner episode guide with the caveat that it was shown earlier in London. If you change the dates to airdate for London add a caveat that it was shown in ATV midlands between the Prisoner episodes when production of The Prisoner began to catch up with transmission as per the Pixley bookREVUpminster (talk) 19:49, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

• Oh I see, thats fine but looking at the Prisoner episode guide at the moment, and I don't know if its a problem or not, as you'll know it isn't a single ITV region set of airdates, its a split between ATV Midlands 1-14 and Scottish 15-17, anyway I'll have a go at changeing the airdates for London re-Danger Man and putting in a caveat sometime today.81.111.124.190 (talk) 07:58, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Episode list—separate article?

Maybe we should have a separate article, List of Danger Man episodes, similar to List of The Green Hornet episodes, List of Airwolf episodes, and List of It Takes a Thief (1968 TV series) episodes (to name three I know of off the top of my head). DM 's 86 episodes out-number The Green Hornet 's 26 and It Takes a Thief 's 66, and probably other shows with such List of...episodes articles. Then perhaps we'd have room to add notable guest stars, such as Ronald Howard, son of Leslie Howard, who appeared in an episode of the first, NATO-oriented season, and again in "Koroshi", the first of the only two colour segments, which are more often seen recut into a movie of that title. Burt Kwouk, best known as Inspector Clouseau's valet/practice assailant Cato in The Pink Panther film series, appeared several times as well. --Tbrittreid (talk) 21:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

• • Probably a good idea as the current article is too long and wikipedians do not like to scroll the page. I did 88 episodes of Zorro (1990 TV series) as a separate article. This gave room for a notable guest section and throws up a few surprises ie Daniel Craig Adam West.Take a look!! A notable guest section would be quite large in Danger Man. REVUpminster (talk) 00:18, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
    • Thinking about it overnight. The Guest star(s) could be added to the plot summary of each episode. I have done this on some episode lists already ie. William Tell (TV series) REVUpminster (talk) 09:06, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
• It is done. REVUpminster (talk) 16:37, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

First season aired in the US

I deleted a factual error in the Early History section. The first season of Danger Man aired on CBS in 1961. I've added a source for verification. 68.146.81.123 (talk) 18:24, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Brian Clemens

I see that Brian Clemens is listed as the "co-creator" of The Avengers, but that is not the case. He wrote the second episode as a jobbing writer and later became the co-producer. I'm going to change that line about him here unless someone has an objection. Justinkrivers (talk) 14:05, 25 December 2022 (UTC)