Billie Piper not involved in 50th anniversary

[Emh]

A Captain Jack/River Song spin-off would be awesome. Get rid off Torchwood and focus on this.

Lonemagpie wrote:

---

TBH, you need *one* companion return in the 50th- William Russell as Ian.

Maybe two if you want to give Carole Ann Ford a cameo.

That's it- first to go with the current one... Bookends. And that's what I'd do.

Absolutely yes, a thousand yeses. I've said this before and I'll said it until I'm blue in the face, William Russell has to be in the anniversary special. I would love to see the contrasting ages of the actors and Ian's awe in seeing The Doctor looking so young when he's so old.

[chardman]

Thanx Omaha. You're right. I'd forgotten that. (Though I now recall that I always thought/hoped that Dorian swiped it from Cap'n John, rather than Cap'n Jack.)

Either way, both Jack and River are time travelers, utilize the same time travel technology, and have very similar personality types. Pairing the two together seems a no brainer, and would seem to have a lot more potential than a single adventure would do justice. I say giving them a series is the way to go. Either reboot "Torchwood" and bring in River to replace one of the characters from the original run who got killed off, or give "Torchwood" up for dead, and simply give Jack and River their own spin-off.

[ITL]

It would have to be Happy Go Lucky Jack and not Moody Jack. Barrowman excels at the goofy but has very limited dramatic chops.

[Allyn Gibson]

chardman wrote:

---

Er... has the "50th Anniversary Special" even been written yet?

Last I heard, Moffat mentioned "having a few ideas", but nothing much more concrete than that.

Yet.

Matt Smith has said he expects to see the script in February.

I suspect that, if the script involves past Doctors, that Moffat has a draft because he'd need something to show the actors to sell them on it. A multi-Doctor story is going to involve a lot more negotiation with actors than most any other episode -- past Doctor actors aren't simply regular guest stars, they have expectations and demands. That's why there's a version of "The Five Doctors" script that features Tom Baker heavily, because it was an inducement to get Baker to sign. That's why Peter Davison and Colin Baker weren't thrilled with Adrian Rigelsford's script for "The Dark Dimension" because it didn't give them anything to do. There are a lot more moving parts, critical parts for a multi-Doctor story that need to get lined up. So Moffat's usual "write it at/after the deadline" approach isn't going to work. He'd have to write this one ahead of time.

Assuming, of course, that that's what Steven Moffat has planned for the anniversary.

chardman wrote:

---

Screw that... Captain Jack and River Song need a whole SERIES together.

Alex Kingston has said she wants to do exactly that.

[lurok]

Absolutely.

Jack/River screwball comedy. Bring it on.

(are the DW producers idiots? Why haven't they paired them up yet? madness)

[chardman]

Perhaps they plan to do so, but have legal considerations to deal with first? Last I heard, the premium channel Starz still holds a major interest in "Torchwood" and its characters. It may not be possible for the BBC to develop another project with the Captain Jack character, until after the deal with Starz has expired.

[Emh]

Allyn Gibson wrote:

---

Alex Kingston has said she wants to do exactly that.

Then what are they waiting for?!

Stop being so damn busy, John Barrowman!

[Nick Ryder]

Well since G4 won't need him to co-host Attack of the Show anymore... his schedule should be free...

[Sindatur]

Nick Ryder wrote:

---

Well since G4 won't need him to co-host Attack of the Show anymore... his schedule should be free...

I'm recording Arrow, haven't watched it yet, so, don't know if his part on there is limited, or ongoing, but, I know he's in some Arrow episodes.

[Nick Ryder]

Y'know what amuses the heck out of me - how BBC can make a 14 episode "series" take two years to tell and yet you can have a modern American tv 'season' of maybe 22-23 episodes and have do the same in less than a year. I'm thinking of a show like Sons of Anarchy which has quite a bit of stunt work, sfx, and a very large cast of regular characters.

And it takes them ages to do even a two part episode - or do they just shoot all of it at once like we do - but milk it for all its worth over there?

[Relayer1]

Nick Ryder wrote:

---

Y'know what amuses the heck out of me - how BBC can make a 14 episode "series" take two years to tell and yet you can have a modern American tv 'season' of maybe 22-23 episodes and have do the same in less than a year. I'm thinking of a show like Sons of Anarchy which has quite a bit of stunt work, sfx, and a very large cast of regular characters.

And it takes them ages to do even a two part episode - or do they just shoot all of it at once like we do - but milk it for all its worth over there?

I heard a story that the BBC were interested in a UK 'Giles' spinoff from Buffy some years ago. They were asked by Whedon and co. to provide scripts for approval. Months later they had only partially completed three and the deal died. At the time, Whedon was writing most of the years twenty plus Buffy episodes, some Angels, producing, directing, show running etc.

In defence of the BBC though, they have produced three episodes of Sherlock per year, and that's worth twenty episodes of anything else...

[Sindatur]

Yea, Network TV in the US does pump out more episodes per year, then British TV (Though US Cable, many shows are only 10-13 episodes per year).

I wonder if that's dow to the budget? Is it maybe because a bigger US budget allows for a larger crew, and so things can be done quicker, because there are more people to do them?

[Relayer1]

Sindatur wrote:

---

Yea, Network TV in the US does pump out more episodes per year, then British TV (Though US Cable, many shows are only 10-13 episodes per year).

I wonder if that's dow to the budget? Is it maybe because a bigger US budget allows for a larger crew, and so things can be done quicker, because there are more people to do them?

In the UK we traditionally produce shorter seasons and don't have the large writing teams common in the U.S. - we can do more though. We have a couple of primetime medical dramas that run all year round, 50 plus one hour episodes.

[Allyn Gibson]

Nick Ryder wrote:

---

how BBC can make a 14 episode "series" take two years to tell and yet you can have a modern American tv 'season' of maybe 22-23 episodes and have do the same in less than a year. I'm thinking of a show like Sons of Anarchy which has quite a bit of stunt work, sfx, and a very large cast of regular characters.

Hollywood tolerates (and pays for) a lot more overtime than British productions will. As a side-effect, Hollywood has more money to throw around, which also means more crew. Matt Smith doesn't work a lot of 16 hour days. On House, Hugh Laurie routinely worked 16 hour days. Different cultures.

[Nick Ryder]

I suppose - but it's still interesting - since it seems like Matt Smith and Karen Gillen have plenty of time to do all kinds of stuff off camera - but really don't. Is it just that UK stars balance their work load - when you can see American actors doing not only a weekly TV show, but V/O work, a handful of movies and interviews, appearences and the like.

Although I would totally love to see Karen Gillen in more stuff - she's damn cute - and I think I recall hearing she recently moved to LA - so maybe we'll see more of her in other things.

But y'know that brings up a point - since the UK filming schedule and writing schedule is a bit more.. I wouldn't say lax, but less intense - it could be possible that the 50th Anniversary thing wouldn't even air until next year - they'll just tease the hell out of it for 5-6 months after the end of 'Series 7b' and then we'll get it sometime in 2014