David (Harry Potter) Yates to direct Doctor Who The Movie!

[Starkers]

Are the BBC even on board with this? There doesn't seem to be any Beeb involvement which surely they would have to be?

How hard is it to read the story I linked to? It's being made by BBC Worldwide and Jane Tranter (you know, the woman without whom Doctor Who would never have come back to TV in the first place.)

thats what I get for commentating after just reading an earlier story somewhere else that didn't go into details

LOL What a shit idea (and also a bit of a slap in the face to all those hard working individuals on the TV show).

Yeah you do wonder what Moffat, Smith and co (and even RTD) thinks about this. Maybe Moffat has had some involvement, maybe not, but it'll be interesting to see what effect this has on the show, could boost its popularity, could do the reverse.

While nothing's guaranteed until the cameras start rolling (and sometimes not even then!) having Yates on board will be a massive help. Given where he is in his career he could have chosen absolutely anything for his next project and he's not going to devote three years on something he isn't fairly confident in seeing get made.

And yet if you hadn't put what he's famous for in brackets I wouldn't have had a clue who he was. Still could be worse, could be Chris Columbus...

 

[Mitty]

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118046098?categoryid=13&cs=1&cmpid=RSS|News|LatestNews

Fuck me!

Couldn't have put it better myself. This was the last thing I was expecting.

 

[Haggis and tatties]

I up for this, i love the Cushing movies to bits so have no issues with another Who movie separate from the TV show.....long as its colourful with funky music i'm sold. LOL

As for a actor i think Bill Nighy if were going for a Hartnell type Dr, or Micheal sheen for a more younger Dr.

 

[ColeMercury]

I only ask one thing. A good Doctor Who story. A good Doctor Who MOVIE.

That's it.

This.

I find it quite ridiculous how people are going "It's not set in established Doctor Who continuity... THEREFORE IT CANNOT POSSIBLY BE A GOOD FILM!"

 

[Dar70]

This doesnt bother me in the least. If we can have multiple continuities of stories of spiderman, batman, superman etc. with cartoons, comics, movies, tv series I dont see the problem at all. You either are going to like it or not. The tv show will be running regardless.

Look at superman. It had comics, a cartoon, a filmed series and a movie all at the same time and seperate from each other. So I dont see the big deal.

 

[stonester1]

I've seen a debate going on elsewhere where one individual contends that TEH CANON is key. When you mangle your CANON, where he cites Highlander and the Cushing DW movies, you get bad stories.

Of course, this is nonsense. Shitty writing is where you get bad stories. Hey, if you can write in an established canon and thrill fans with good stories in it, where we watch our characters change and grow, great! But there are examples of both following continuity and cont-jumping where good stories were told. And examples of both where bad stories were told.

The current incarnation of DW on TV is great. And it is tied to the original, continuity-wise, though not slavishly so.

The DW movie? No reason why it should adhere to current TV continuity. If you could and wanted to and could get a good MOVIE out of it (different from doing TV), GREAT!

But their first and foremost consideration should be a good DW MOVIE...

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

A movie would have to be accessible to a general audience wider than Who fandom so perhaps a origin story for the Doctor might be a good fit but the Time War would probably not. If it turns out badly, just ignore it and pretend it never existed.

 

[marillion]

I've seen a debate going on elsewhere where one individual contends that TEH CANON is key. When you mangle your CANON, where he cites Highlander and the Cushing DW movies, you get bad stories.

Of course, this is nonsense. Shitty writing is where you get bad stories. Hey, if you can write in an established canon and thrill fans with good stories in it, where we watch our characters change and grow, great! But there are examples of both following continuity and cont-jumping where good stories were told. And examples of both where bad stories were told.

The current incarnation of DW on TV is great. And it is tied to the original, continuity-wise, though not slavishly so.

The DW movie? No reason why it should adhere to current TV continuity. If you could and wanted to and could get a good MOVIE out of it (different from doing TV), GREAT!

But their first and foremost consideration should be a good DW MOVIE...

While I see your points and almost agree, my biggest problem is the fact that with Trek 2009, there is no current TV show for it to contradict AND, the movie establishes itself into existing Trek canon, even though it changes the future... JJ Trek acknowledges the existing Trek timeline, whereas the proposed Dr. Who movie would completely stand alone.

Stand alone is great in my book, IF there is no current, canon-based incarnation already out there broadcasting.

On the off hand chance that a stand alone movie brings in new fans who have never seen Dr. Who before, they are going to be confused as hell by the existing TV show.

It worked ok with the Cushing movies because at that time, the Doctor's origins had not been well established yet.

 

[Mr Awe]

I'm all for a completely separate movie as long as they don't abandon, reduce, etc. the TV series. If the TV series keeps going, I think this is a cool development. So far, that sounds to be the case!

Mr Awe

 

[Starkers]

I've seen a debate going on elsewhere where one individual contends that TEH CANON is key. When you mangle your CANON, where he cites Highlander and the Cushing DW movies, you get bad stories.

Of course, this is nonsense. Shitty writing is where you get bad stories. Hey, if you can write in an established canon and thrill fans with good stories in it, where we watch our characters change and grow, great! But there are examples of both following continuity and cont-jumping where good stories were told. And examples of both where bad stories were told.

The current incarnation of DW on TV is great. And it is tied to the original, continuity-wise, though not slavishly so.

The DW movie? No reason why it should adhere to current TV continuity. If you could and wanted to and could get a good MOVIE out of it (different from doing TV), GREAT!

But their first and foremost consideration should be a good DW MOVIE...

While I see your points and almost agree, my biggest problem is the fact that with Trek 2009, there is no current TV show for it to contradict AND, the movie establishes itself into existing Trek canon, even though it changes the future... JJ Trek acknowledges the existing Trek timeline, whereas the proposed Dr. Who movie would completely stand alone.

Stand alone is great in my book, IF there is no current, canon-based incarnation already out there broadcasting.

On the off hand chance that a stand alone movie brings in new fans who have never seen Dr. Who before, they are going to be confused as hell by the existing TV show.

It worked ok with the Cushing movies because at that time, the Doctor's origins had not been well established yet.

QFT!

 

[Lonemagpie]

I'm all for a completely separate movie as long as they don't abandon, reduce, etc. the TV series.

that's pretty much my view. As for people worrying about how different it would be, would it contradict stuff, would they do a daft origin story... Well, those are things *best* done in a separate movie, where it can always be considered alternate, not-counting, an Elsworlds, etc...

E.g. if the woman in white in End of Time had been stated to be the Doctor's mum, that'd suck and fuck up the show. If she turns up in a separate movie (say, if EoT had been a movie)... well, those crazy Hollywood types, but at least it was a fun movie!

 

[Psion]

I'm all for a completely separate movie as long as they don't abandon, reduce, etc. the TV series. If the TV series keeps going, I think this is a cool development. So far, that sounds to be the case!

Mr Awe

Thirded.

 

[Captaindemotion]

http://io9.com/5859483/why-david-ya...-to-happen-to-doctor-who-in-ages?popular=true

For a pro-this movie point of view.

And for a 'calm down, dear' approach:

http://www.sfx.co.uk/2011/11/15/pure-golder-the-doctor-who-movie-let%e2%80%99s-get-some-perspective/

Incidentally, as regards the 'can't have a distinct tv and movie incarnation on at the same time' argument, there's also the Terminator tv series, which was being made at the same time as Terminator Salvation.

 

[JRoss]

So very, very glad that this will not follow the series. Never a good idea to have a feature film follow continuity while a series is airing.

I don't want to see an origin story, but I wouldn't mind seeing a young Doctor.

Let's see, hope they can this director and replace him with someone known for more serious work. My dream cast and crew:

Director: Bryan Singer, Christopher Nolan
Producer: Steven Spielberg, as he is a true Whovian
Music: Danny Elfman, Bear McCreary
Writer: Richard Curtis

The Doctor: Michael Sheen, Bill Nighy, Ioan Gruffudd, Jamie Bamber, James Callis (yea Jewish Doctor!), Benedict Cumberbatch
Companions: Mia Wasikowska, Ruth Wilson (or as a villain), Liv Tyler (you know that there is going to be an American somewhere), Martin Freeman
Villains: Erich Avari, Alan Rickman (natch), Michael Fassbender, Michael Palin, Nathaniel Parker, Hugo Weaving

Nightmare Cast and Crew
Director: Tim Burton, Michael Bay (I actually respect Bay as a person, though)
Producer: Harvey Weinstein
Music: Murray Gold
Writer: Anyone recently working on the series, with the exception of Curtis

The Doctor: Johnny Depp, any woman, Stephen Fry
Companions: Anyone from the series
Villains: Dunno.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

http://io9.com/5859483/why-david-ya...-to-happen-to-doctor-who-in-ages?popular=true

For a pro-this movie point of view.

Pretty much nodding in agreement with Charlie Jane Anders here. One thing that I think Anders misses, though, is this -- a Doctor Who movie can't just be a two-hour long Doctor Who episode. That didn't work for the Star Trek: The Next Generation films, that's not going to work here. No one's going to pay money to see something that's basically the same thing they get for free on BBC1. So I think a Doctor Who movie will need to do something that television hasn't done and very probably can't do, and that's "The Doctor Begins." So long as Yates and Tranter's writers avoid the missteps of the Leekley Bible, I think this could be quite brilliant.

And if that causes even more consternation with Moffat, the press flacks, and the propaganda pushers on Twitter, so much the better.

 

[RoJoHen]

I honestly think a Doctor origin story could be fantastic, but it would very tricky. I'd love it to be a young Doctor, long before his first regeneration. The original first Doctor was an old man when we met him. He has a whole life before that we don't know much about. Maybe his companion could be The Master before he turned evil!

 

[Silent_Bob]

Incidentally, as regards the 'can't have a distinct tv and movie incarnation on at the same time' argument, there's also the Terminator tv series, which was being made at the same time as Terminator Salvation.

Not the best example to bring up to reassure people, since the Sarah Connor Chronicles was cancelled just before Salvations release, to ensure audiences wouldnt get "confused" by two versions of the same franchise being available. Because as you know its real hard to understand how the big talky screen can tell a different story to the magic talky box thats in my living room.

If they get a decent actor, a decent director and a decent script then i've no problem with a Doctor Who movie being seperate, as long as the show continues. I'd only object if they cast some useless fethwit as The Doctor and have a terrible non-sensical plot with a lousy director, ala nuTrek

As for those suggesting Benedict Cumberbatch, no! We have to save him for the twelfth Doctor, if he gets cast in this movie there'll be no chance.

 

[Skellington]

^ Cumberbatch has said that he wouldn't consider playing the Doctor, if I recall. Maybe the movie project would persuade him otherwise. I would expect them to cast someone older, though.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ I imagine also that Cumberbatch is probably ou,t as a result of his Sherlock being too similar to The Doctor. And if he did play the Doctor, he'd be more likely to appear in the tv series. He's not yet a big enough name to headline a Hollywood release. But he'd be a great Doctor, no doubt.

Other names I've seen suggested - and I'm trying to keep it to Brits who are recognisable in the US - are Eddie Izzard, Hugh Laurie (I can just imagine the 'Wow, he does a really good English accent!' comments now), Gary Oldman and Colin Firth.

 

[Butters]

Real or otherwise, I like it.

So long as there is a mad man with a blue box fighting Daleks or Cybermen or whatever, whats not to like?

I'd prefer an in-continuity movie, but I'd embrace a standalone.

Dr Who the early years. Is it canon, is it not. You decide!