Chibnall to set up US-style Writers Room?

[StCoop]

Interesting article from the Radio Times, who were spot on about Pearl Mackie's casting before anyone else had ever heard of her, so clearly have a good Inside Person at the moment:

http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2016...ng-us-style-writers-room-under-chris-chibnall

 

[Starkers]

It's an interesting notion and I've just been reading some of James Moran's comments about it on Twitter. He said Chibnall has used it before with success and he doesn't see any downside. I guess it could make Who more consistent/generic which may be a good or a bad thing depending on your point of view.

 

[Christopher]

A writer's-room approach could ameliorate concerns about the showrunner's voice being too dominant, at least among those who didn't care for the showrunner's style. It might bring more variety and breadth to the show, and not so much rehashing the same tropes over and over.

They mentioned the difficulty of physically bringing the writers together to collaborate in one room, but couldn't they use Skype or some other form of teleconferencing? Or, heck, just the kind of group e-mail jam that I've been part of on a couple of collaborative Star Trek book projects.

 

[Blamo]

Yes, I have to say an American style writers room would be a great idea. In fact I'd say series 1 of New Who was the closest it came, with a lot of back and forthing between the writers and the production staff (plus a lot of them knew each other personally), which resulted in a very sharp, consistent and focused thirteen episodes, especially when it came to characterisation. Even the bad stories had something to offer.

For that same reason though, I do wonder if it may not be viable. Even since series 1 (which had a two year production), I got the distinct feeling everyone was rushed off their feet.

Hence why, to me atleast, series 2's production felt amaturish compared to series 1. No one seemed to have a clue what to do with Tennant's Doctor and Rose seemed to be a complete blank of a character compared to what she was like in series 1. Moffat for example didn't realise that when Mickey joined the TARDIS crew, Rose wasn't exactly pleased, instead writing her as being fine with it. Nothing to do with writing, but a lot of the CGI had to be remade from scratch also (hence why the cgi Daleks looked cheap and nasty, vs the ones in series one). Similar problems continued and seemed to get worse with the shift to filming for HD.

Basically everyone is rushed off their feet trying to get Doctor Who out in a year. A writers room may end up fixing the writing issues... Or it could exacerbate the situation.

All in all though, I'm totally for it. It just makes so much more logical sense than what they do now.

 

[kirk55555]

It could be a good idea. If nothing else, its something different, which Doctor Who could use after Moffat's run.

 

[Csalem]

Yes, I have to say an American style writers room would be a great idea. In fact I'd say series 1 of New Who was the closest it came, with a lot of back and forthing between the writers and the production staff (plus a lot of them knew each other personally), which resulted in a very sharp, consistent and focused thirteen episodes, especially when it came to characterisation. Even the bad stories had something to offer.

Was it because of that reason or was it bcause RTD rewrote most of the episodes of Season 1?

I get the impression that Moffat may have not done the same level of rewrites on other people's scripts compared to RTD but that is only speculation and I have no facts to back it up.

It might be interesting to try this new writing set up with a writer's room. It may give the series a bit of a refresh.

 

[TommyR01D]

Moffat for example didn't realise that when Mickey joined the TARDIS crew, Rose wasn't exactly pleased, instead writing her as being fine with it.

I remember him pondering this with Noel Clarke in the commentary:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01x6522.

 

[The Wormhole]

It could be a good idea. If nothing else, its something different, which Doctor Who could use after Moffat's run.

Pretty much my feelings on the matter. A US-style writer's room could be a good thing, or it could be disastrous. But it is a different approach, and with how stagnant things have become under Moffat, I'll take anything.

Hence why, to me atleast, series 2's production felt amaturish compared to series 1. No one seemed to have a clue what to do with Tennant's Doctor and Rose seemed to be a complete blank of a character compared to what she was like in series 1.

This could be because no one knew while writing the episodes which Doctor to write for, Eccleston or a new one. Some (like Moffat) went ahead anyway and wrote for Eccleston, which is why there seems to be so much Eccleston-channeling that season. And while it's often said the writers just write the Doctor and it's the actors who put their own spin in the dialogue, there is still some aspects unique how each Doctor is written, and it is clear in some season 2 episodes they were writing for Eccleston. EG, in Girl in the Fireplace the Doctor says "Fantastic" despite the fact that RTD was adamant that would remain Eccleston's catchphrase and not be used by Tennant. And before anyone starts that Tennant said it in The Christmas Invasion, it was intended to lead into a rant about how he can't use the word anymore, new body and all.

Was it because of that reason or was it bcause RTD rewrote most of the episodes of Season 1?

RTD re-wrote a large majority of the episodes in all his seasons. In fact, Moffat's episodes, Fear Her, and 42 were the only ones he never did any re-writes on.

I get the impression that Moffat may have not done the same level of rewrites on other people's scripts compared to RTD but that is only speculation and I have no facts to back it up.

Moffat very likely does just as much re-writes to the episodes. At the very least, we know about how extensively he worked with Mark Gatiss on Victory of the Daleks and Neil Gaiman on The Doctor's Wife. Some episodes we know he made uncredited additions to (like River's scene in Closing Time) and others he's not credited for just ooze of his tropes, like Clara keeping the raven away by monologue in Face the Raven. If anything, I'm under the impression the reason we've seen Moffat credited as a co-writer on so many episodes in seasons 8 and 9 is because the writers of those episodes disagree with his re-writes and don't want to take responsibility for something he put into the script.

 

[Blamo]

Was it because of that reason or was it bcause RTD rewrote most of the episodes of Season 1?

Both I feel.

I get the impression that Moffat may have not done the same level of rewrites on other people's scripts compared to RTD but that is only speculation and I have no facts to back it up.

From what I remember being said, RTD was more hands on, but Moffat would still rewrite the more terrible parts and insert lines of dialogue, either to support the arc or to simply to make the Doctor a bit more consistent with the rest of the show. Not all the time though. It sounds like he lost patience with a few scripts.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

^Like, which episodes did Moffat lose patience with?

This could be because no one knew while writing the episodes which Doctor to write for, Eccleston or a new one. Some (like Moffat) went ahead anyway and wrote for Eccleston, which is why there seems to be so much Eccleston-channeling that season. And while it's often said the writers just write the Doctor and it's the actors who put their own spin in the dialogue, there is still some aspects unique how each Doctor is written, and it is clear in some season 2 episodes they were writing for Eccleston. EG, in Girl in the Fireplace the Doctor says "Fantastic" despite the fact that RTD was adamant that would remain Eccleston's catchphrase and not be used by Tennant.

IMO, "School Reunion" is the Tennant episode that feels the most like Eccleston, particularly the way that he gives Mickey such a hard time in the school. And when he talks to Sarah Jane and kinda tries to play it cool and then breaks out into a huge grin, "My Sarah Jane!" that's Eccleston's Doctor in a nutshell; tries to keep it low key but then can't contain his exuberance.

The rumor I've heard on Ejiofor is that he and the BBC couldn't come to a deal. He would only commit to a single season, while the BBC wanted a longer contract. (Matt Smith, remember, signed a three series contract.)

Not the first time that's happened. Back in the 1970s when Jon Pertwee left, they offered it to some famous actor but he would only commit to a single season, not the 3-year deal that the producers & the BBC insisted upon.

An American-style writers room might make sense. As an American, I sometimes get frustrated with how the show will sometimes just take a year off because they can't find anyone willing to produce it. No ongoing American show would ever get away with that. If the show is profitable and its main actors want to keep doing it, the show keeps going. In fact, sometimes American networks will keep a show going while firing its creator (Community Season 4) or keep a show going against the express wishes of its creator (Supernatural Season 6).

Now, I don't know if these problems are ones that would be solved by adopting an American-style writers room but I would be hugely grateful if they could figure out a way to keep the show's production a bit more consistent.