i think i just threw up in my mouth a little...
David (Harry Potter) Yates to direct Doctor Who The Movie!
- Thread starter StCoop
- Start date
I'd still see it.
And it would be canon.
And it would be canon.
I'd take the wife and kids and go see it. If it sucks, it sucks. Hopefully there'll still be an awesome TV show to enjoy. If it's good, then it might change everything, hopefully in positive ways.
I like the movie poster above. The Disney-fied daleks are cool. The TARDIS that is clearly labeled "TARDIS" would be a concern. Still, it looks good.
I like the movie poster above. The Disney-fied daleks are cool. The TARDIS that is clearly labeled "TARDIS" would be a concern. Still, it looks good.
I'd take the wife and kids and go see it. If it sucks, it sucks. Hopefully there'll still be an awesome TV show to enjoy. If it's good, then it might change everything, hopefully in positive ways.
I like the movie poster above. The Disney-fied daleks are cool. The TARDIS that is clearly labeled "TARDIS" would be a concern. Still, it looks good.
I like the movie poster above. The Disney-fied daleks are cool. The TARDIS that is clearly labeled "TARDIS" would be a concern. Still, it looks good.
Take this for what it's worth, but Zap2It's front page has a story on the IGN poll that had Hugh Laurie and Gary Oldman listed as "fan's top choices" for playing the Doctor in the movie. Ignore that bit and read the comments below the story. They're quite interesting.
Bearing in mind that Zap2It is not like, say, Gallifrey Base or TrekBBS. It's got a more mainstream readership. And as such it's interesting to note that many of the comments are either "keep Matt Smith" or "WTF are they doing a movie for if it's not tied with the TV series?"
http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2011/...top-doctor-who-fan-poll-for-titular-role.html
As I say, it's hardly scientific, but if mainstream audiences don't think it's a good idea, then it's probably not a good idea. (Just for some comparison, and you'll just have to take my word for it - if you want to call me a liar, feel free, I don't care - it's similar to the universally negative responses I've seen away from newsgroups and sci-fi clubs, in the "real world" in other words, to things like 3-D movies, the CGI renovating of Star Trek TOS, and that thing involving DC renumbering Action and Detective Comics that I rant about in my sig. Again, hardly scientific, but still, it says to me that just because a niche group may think something's a good idea, doesn't mean the larger group does. Mind you, I still think those in favor of a non-TV-related movie of Doctor Who at the present time is the minority.)
Alex
Bearing in mind that Zap2It is not like, say, Gallifrey Base or TrekBBS. It's got a more mainstream readership. And as such it's interesting to note that many of the comments are either "keep Matt Smith" or "WTF are they doing a movie for if it's not tied with the TV series?"
http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2011/...top-doctor-who-fan-poll-for-titular-role.html
As I say, it's hardly scientific, but if mainstream audiences don't think it's a good idea, then it's probably not a good idea. (Just for some comparison, and you'll just have to take my word for it - if you want to call me a liar, feel free, I don't care - it's similar to the universally negative responses I've seen away from newsgroups and sci-fi clubs, in the "real world" in other words, to things like 3-D movies, the CGI renovating of Star Trek TOS, and that thing involving DC renumbering Action and Detective Comics that I rant about in my sig. Again, hardly scientific, but still, it says to me that just because a niche group may think something's a good idea, doesn't mean the larger group does. Mind you, I still think those in favor of a non-TV-related movie of Doctor Who at the present time is the minority.)
Alex
A few geeks bitching on Zap2It do not a valid audience sample make.
I'll, grant you Zap2it may not be extreme as TrekBBS or Gallifrey Base, but, I'd hardly call anyone who posts their opinions of a TV show or SciFi project on the internet "Mainstream". Which again, totally discounts the fact that the majority of a Theatrical Movie audience isn't going to be comprised of a TV show's fans, unless you're planning on a very small theatrical audience.
I have to laugh at using as a barometer of 'mainstream opinion' a thread, where the first few people say 'Matt Smith or Christopher Eccleston' or, in one case (and I quote):
'MATT SMITH. Even better, bring in Chris Eccleston and have him regenerate into David Tennant and then have him regenerate into Matt Smith to finish the movie.'
Or the ones calling for it to be set during the Great Time War.
Yes, not at all fannish there.
'MATT SMITH. Even better, bring in Chris Eccleston and have him regenerate into David Tennant and then have him regenerate into Matt Smith to finish the movie.'
Or the ones calling for it to be set during the Great Time War.
Yes, not at all fannish there.
The funny thing is, I'll bet many of the fans saying "Matt Smith" "Keep it in continuity" are the same folks who complain about "DVD Double Dipping". I just don't understand how anyone thinks it's appropriate, for an existing TV Series" on free TV, to require fans to pay for an in continuity Installment? I would think that would outrage people.
It's perfectly understandable, if you've been canceled and unable to finish your story arc, and you have an opportunity to finish it up with a Theatrical Movie (Ala Firefly/Serenity) or a Direct to DVD Finale (ala Stargate SG-1), but, an ongoing series, makes no sense whatsoever to me.
If they did use an existing Doctor actor for a Theatrical release, it would have to be, IMHO, a throwaway story that didn't matter to overall continuity for the TV show. A story that didn't need to be seen in order to follow the TV Series.
It's perfectly understandable, if you've been canceled and unable to finish your story arc, and you have an opportunity to finish it up with a Theatrical Movie (Ala Firefly/Serenity) or a Direct to DVD Finale (ala Stargate SG-1), but, an ongoing series, makes no sense whatsoever to me.
If they did use an existing Doctor actor for a Theatrical release, it would have to be, IMHO, a throwaway story that didn't matter to overall continuity for the TV show. A story that didn't need to be seen in order to follow the TV Series.
Doctor Who is filled with standalone stories the show's continuity isn't that important. That being said it's possible that Matt Smith won't be the Doctor by that point nor could he make a movie and be on the TV series at the same time, it'd just be too much work.
Paul McGann or Tennant in one of his many solo periods.
^ I just can't see either of them in it in a zillion years.
i can't see it HAPPENING in a zillion years.
Why would anyone call you a liar? After all, your opinion is backed up by the facts that 1) no one watches 3D movies 2) the CGI TOS update bombed horribly and 3) no one's buying the renumbered DC comics.
David Yates talks about the film:
http://herocomplex.latimes.com/2011...or-david-yates-looks-to-doctor-who-future/#/0
And speaks about it on camera:
http://splashpage.mtv.com/2011/12/01/david-yates-talks-doctor-who-movie/
Poor old Tom Spilsbury looks like a right knob now with his cries of, "It's only old rumours. Nothing to see here." Can wait to see how DWM cover the film two or three years from now...
http://herocomplex.latimes.com/2011...or-david-yates-looks-to-doctor-who-future/#/0
And speaks about it on camera:
http://splashpage.mtv.com/2011/12/01/david-yates-talks-doctor-who-movie/
Poor old Tom Spilsbury looks like a right knob now with his cries of, "It's only old rumours. Nothing to see here." Can wait to see how DWM cover the film two or three years from now...
Sure, but, if he's still talking about it being on his plate, it definitely means it's more than rumor, and is currently a plan. And really, these days, 3 years is about typical for starting up a "Franchise"
There is the possibility that they won't. Or rather, that insofar as a Hollywood studio is concerned, that DWM is nothing special and doesn't need/deserve special access.
If Worldwide teams with WB (which is the studio I think would be mostly likely, seeing as they need a new franchise to fill the Harry Potter void), then I think WB would work the media for Doctor Who the same way they worked with media outlets for Potter and Lord of the Rings. In short, they would do set tours and media availability for outlets that give them the biggest bang with the audience they want to target, an audience of which the DWM readership will be a very small part. I don't think DWM will be ignored, but I'm confident that they won't be at the bleeding edge of coverage where the movie is concerned.
And I suspect that will drive certain people in Tunbridge Wells slightly bugfuck.
Three years is pretty normal for developing what will be intended to be a major Summer film.
Obviously more films fail to get made then get made but (as I probably said before) having Yates on board gives it a hefty nudge into the "Made" column.
Steven Moffatt on Twitter, a few minutes ago.
