Trouble is that'd be expensive
Trouble is that'd be expensive
The official Doctor Who Twitter feed tweeted this morning that when asked at the DW convention "Will there be a new TARDIS when the series returns", Moffat's answer was "We built a new wall!" Their next tweet was "So the rumours of a new TARDIS set are debunked!"
Pity. I guess I'm the only one whos hated all the NuWho console rooms.
Just never been a fan of the 'built from random bits we found in a scrap pile' look.
Or maybe because its just a constant reminder that I need to declutter my room.![]()
If one bad episode was enough to doom a writer, surely "Love & Monsters" should have done so for RTD, or anything after "Flesh and Stone" for Moffat?Now Moffat's just taking the piss. According to the new DWM Chris Chibnall has written both Episode 2 (the theory about Mark Williams is confirmed BTW) and Episode 4 as well.
So for those of you keeping count at home, in the Moffat era that's Paul Cornell/Rob Shearman/Howard Overman/101 Other Good Writers: Zero Episodes.
The man who wrote Cyberwoman: Four episodes.
He was the "lead writer", for lack of a better term ("showrunner" doesn't fit, I don't think - my understanding is that he was only involved on the creative end, not the production end) on the first two seasons of Torchwood... I know I'd be interested in seeing what he would bring to the table.I'm starting to get horrible nightmare visions of the words "Executive Producer - Chris Chibnall" appearing on our screens in 2014...
If one bad episode was enough to doom a writer, surely "Love & Monsters" should have done so for RTD, or anything after "Flesh and Stone" for Moffat?
Eh...I've never understood the Silurian 2 Parter bashing, I enjoyed it, and I thought Countrycide was great, it was a nice change of pace.If one bad episode was enough to doom a writer, surely "Love & Monsters" should have done so for RTD, or anything after "Flesh and Stone" for Moffat?
Leaving aside that L&M is a work of genius let down in its last few minutes by a child-designed monster, we also have the Silurian abominations, 'Countrycide' and all of Camelot waiting to testify.
And the paving stone. And pretty much every scene before the monster showed up too. (ELO concerts & sight gags aren't why I watch the show.Leaving aside that L&M is a work of genius let down in its last few minutes by a child-designed monster...
Haven't seen Camelot, I liked "Countrycide", and - at least from my have-only-seen-two-pre-2005-stories perspective ("The Five Doctors" and the TV movie) - "The Hungry Earth"/"Cold Blood" was pretty good....we also have the Silurian abominations, 'Countrycide' and all of Camelot waiting to testify.
I think Gareth Roberts is probably more likely, given his experience on SJA and comments that RTD made in The Writer's Tale.As for Moffats eventual replacement, I do worry about the possibility of Mark Gatiss getting the job. While he does a good job acting in the show, I think the only DW story of his I've liked was The Unquiet Dead.
I would like to think that, when it comes time to replace Moffat, the BBC would cast their net wider than people who have written for Doctor Who.As for Moffats eventual replacement, I do worry about the possibility of Mark Gatiss getting the job. While he does a good job acting in the show, I think the only DW story of his I've liked was The Unquiet Dead.
I can see wanting to cast the net wider than the writers who have been writing a script a year since 2005. But at the same time, I can't imagine the BBC being willing to turn the show over to someone who hasn't written at least one episode, to show they know the format and aren't going to destroy the brand they're making $$$ from.I would like to think that, when it comes time to replace Moffat, the BBC would cast their net wider than people who have written for Doctor Who.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.