David (Harry Potter) Yates to direct Doctor Who The Movie!
- Thread starter StCoop
- Start date
At the places I've worked? Yes.
But we're assuming that Moffat would want to leave the show in order to do the movie. Maybe he's happy where he is.
That does seem to be a management standard, doesn't it?
Honestly, though, I'm arguing for the sake of arguing. Actually, I welcome different visions of the Doctor. If I like them, I'll collect them and watch over and over, and if I don't, there's always the old stuff that I do like.
My only worry would be if Yates came along and made a blockbuster with a completely different take on the character and format I didn't like, and BBC Wales decided to drop their current production to make something based on the movie.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
It was just another rumor.
Star Trek 09 appealed to a lot more people than the previous few movies. Which means we'll get a sequel and more Star Trek. In my mind, that beats no Star Trek. And it managed to appeal to ST fans too.
So in answer to your first question, no.
Also, in relation to the 'lets throw it all out the window' bit, how do you know what they'll do with the film? There's no script, no plot, no nothing.
Is it likely to be any more radical than wiping out the rest of the Time Lords, making the Doctor a lippy Mancunian, giving him a TARDIS that he actually can navigate, making him fall in love with a human or any of the other departures which Davies and Moffatt made from the older show?
No they don't. Spilsbury isn't the BBC and makes a fool of himself (again) by trying to deny a story in a respected journal with direct quotes. And nothing Russell says disagrees with the Variety story, which clearly talked about the film being years away.
If that happened, I bet they would end up putting more effort into a movie franchsie rather than try to incorporate it into the show. Hell, they might even cancel the show in order to draw more attention to the movies.
Writing and directing are very different jobs
And, of course, if you take a chance on quitting your post to try a completely different one, and fuck it up, or for whatever reason the new one doesn't get the success, you're out of both of them!
Saying a movie is years off, or "someday but not today" isn't a denial of the original story, which refers to just beginning a development process, which (as I said earlier in the thread) means it'll spend years in development hell, and I'll believe it'll happen when I see it.
But the Variety report can be (and almost certainly is) true, without a movie actually coming of it!
The BBC reported it (the film) on BBC Breakfast this morning. You can't get much more offishul than that. Including naming David Yates.
Very true. But Stephen Moffat's a bit more than just a writer these days, isn't he?
We aren't talking about quitting your post, we're talking about a promotion to a different department ... at least I think that's how the analogy is going at this point. But you're right, any advancement is a risk. The point is, that after you've done a successful job with a certain product, it'd be nice to at least be consulted on the next step up.
Who knows if Moffat's pride was wounded with Yates' announcement? But this looks like a big project if it actually (ever) materializes, and snubbing your nose at the series and crew that have made the franchise a phenomenon seems a bit ... thoughtless.
I don't believe for a second that Moffat and the people at Upper Boat didn't know about this long ago...
Producing and directing are also different jobs...
Truth be told, if you have the opportunity to conitnue doing a TV show on TV, I believe it's incredibly rude to make a part of that continuity into a paid theatrical movie. If the show ended, and it's an "extra", fine no problem, or if it was cancelled before it could wrap things up (Firefly) also fine, but, if you're still going strong, it's wrong make someone pay for a part of the story they've been watching for free for years (well, not exactly free, I'm paying the cable bill, but, you know what I mean)
Star Trek 2009 appealed to many, otherwise, it wouldn't be getting a sequel. I truly enjoyed it, sorry you didn't.
It would be called Dr. Who, because, you know, he's a madman travelling in a blue box through time and space, and will probably have companions for the Doctor to explain things to the audience through.
you can't do a Big Budget movie to appeal just to the Core fan base, it won't make money, and movie makers are in the business to make money
Exactly. Moffat is the creative producer, not the nuts-and-bolts money producer. That's what Beth Willis and Piers Wenger were for Moffat, what Julie Gardner and Phil Collinson were for RTD -- they took care of the money and the locations and what-not, letting the "showrunner" (Moffat now, RTD before) focus on the storytelling. Moffat is like the reverse of Rick Berman on the Star Trek series -- he was the producer, but he wasn't the story guy; that was left to Michael Piller (on TNG and early DS9), Ira Steven Behr (DS9), Jeri Taylor (Voyager), Brannon Braga (Voyager and Enterprise), Ken Biller (Voyager), and Manny Coto (Enterprise). Moffat's role in Doctor Who is like that gang of names.
That'd be RTD and Eccleston/Piper/Tennant...
Moffat has just about managed to keep it at the same level of success as they built it up to from nothing, as well as jumping on the coat-tails of BBC America's push to make the show bigger in the States.
Wonder who they get to play the doctor,be a amercian playin hin with a fake english accent i reckon.
Variety said Yates was aiming to keep the "British Flavor", the only Americanism he pointed out, was that he would consider someone like Steve Cloves who proved he could keep the British Flavor in Harry Potter. He said he wouldn't eliminate all American writers straight off. No indication of any other part of this being Americanized as of yet.
I suspect, there's a good possibility of an American Companion to lure us Americans in, but, I can't imagine anyone would try and do a Non UK/British Doctor, unless it was a straight-up American version(though it wouldn't have to be bad)
I'm not going to wade into the argument here, but honestly I can understand how Moffat feels about all this. Professional, but hes never seemed the type to hold back his opinions.
Not sure if I buy the "It'll bring more viewers to the tv show." discussion. I have to wonder how many people who aren't already fans of the show are going to have any interest in the first place. At best, we'll wind up with a bunch of people who're pissed because the tv show is nothing like the big-budget movie they just saw.
Not sure if I buy the "It'll bring more viewers to the tv show." discussion. I have to wonder how many people who aren't already fans of the show are going to have any interest in the first place. At best, we'll wind up with a bunch of people who're pissed because the tv show is nothing like the big-budget movie they just saw.
Series 7 is being broadcast in late 2012 (first half) and early 2013 (second half). The reason they're doing it is (presumably) so they can concentrate an entire series' budget into the Super Special Awesome 50th Anniversary Event, due to be broadcast in late 2013.
