Once again. They'd be legally forbidden from doing anything like that.
I knew it!
- Thread starter StCoop
- Start date
Once again. They'd be legally forbidden from doing anything like that.
I wouldn't expect to see this film hit theaters until Smith's first season is finished. Actually, I wouldn't expect it to film until about the time Smith's first season is being aired.
I suppose it's theoretically possible that RTD could be doing what Rick Berman did with Star Trek: The Next Generation and roll straight from filming "All Good Things..." into filming Star Trek: Generations, but I don't see RTD making a move like that.
With the mention of BBC Worldwide as a production partner with BBC Films and with Julie Garder in charge of their scripted output working out of LA and with RTD seen applying for a US work VISA recently it could very well be shot in America. (They'll almost certainly be looking for an American actress to play the companion; unless someone like Kiera Knightley or RTD's old chum Kate Winslet is up for the job.)
why couldn't it be a McGann-starring stand-alone movie?
i would see that TWICE!
i would see that TWICE!
Because they want to make money?
I think this is the animated movie and not live action feature. I read somewhere this will be Tennant's final final thing as the 10th doctor.
Because to most people Doctor Who is currently David Tennant, will soon be Matt Smith, and was for a brief while Christopher Eccleston.
McGann was the Doctor for a largely forgotten one-off TV movie which while a success in the UK, was still quickly swept under the carpet. If they went down the extraordinarily unlikely road of a non-'post 2005' Doctor, they're more likely to use Tom Baker or Peter Davison - the first of whom is generally considered the most popular 'classic' Doctor; the other got brief exposure in Time Crash. Colin Baker, Sylvester McCoy and Paul McGann don't have a hope.
The fans can whine about how 'they would watch Paul McGann', but to get the enthusiasm that the current series has, you need one of their Doctors.
I think that's really unlikely. The BBC doesn't own Grace. Vivendi Universal does.
if they are going to use the 8th Doctor, would t hey not need the support of Vivendi/Universal anyways?
Well, it's a Vox AC30 tube amp so I'll need to warm it up but... any requests?
Heh. My dad had an AC30 back in the early 60's. Said it weighed a ton...
*ahem* Carry on.
Hoover? I don't care who plays him as long as he screams "YOU'LL NEVER TAKE ME ALIVE, DOCTOR!" as his combined Dalek/Cybermen/GreatBigBeastie army attacks with full CGI power as Murray Gold's insane earbleeding music goes into overdrive.
But with subtlety.
Bah! Double post.
No. The Doctor is a BBC-owned character, and there has been enough merchandise in the clear from BBC and its licensees the past thirteen years with McGann's likeness plastered all over it that it's clear that Vivendi/Universal doesn't own the eighth Doctor. (They do own the video rights to the telefilm in North America, which is why it's never been released on video or DVD over here.)
Why not throw in all of the still living Doctors and Matt Smith? They could write in an explanation for the older ones looking so bad -- like the Doctor has been poisoned and is aging backwards. But if there was any occasion that could warrant/handle a multi-Doctor story of those proportions I figure it'd be a movie.
Really not sure about the idea of a movie without the current Doctor in it but recognise the limitations of trying to film a whole movie with the present incumbent while the TV series is effectively filming simultaneously. I particularly don't like the 10.5 and Rose idea that's out there because I feel that is going to detract from Matt Smith's debut series and probably overshadow any impact he'll have at the time when he needs the most attention focussed on him.
I also don't see the need for a movie at the moment. I think the best time would be when the series has been off the air for more than a few years and a movie could then be used as a catalyst for re-energising the franchise. Now, it just acts as a distraction when we should be looking forward to Matt's tenure in the TARDIS.
Having said that, RTD's managed to pull off some pretty crazy ideas in the past and make them work and he could do the same here. So I do reserve the right to do a complete about face and love the film if and when it does hit our big screens in 2010 / 2011. But I just don't believe it will happen.
I also don't see the need for a movie at the moment. I think the best time would be when the series has been off the air for more than a few years and a movie could then be used as a catalyst for re-energising the franchise. Now, it just acts as a distraction when we should be looking forward to Matt's tenure in the TARDIS.
Having said that, RTD's managed to pull off some pretty crazy ideas in the past and make them work and he could do the same here. So I do reserve the right to do a complete about face and love the film if and when it does hit our big screens in 2010 / 2011. But I just don't believe it will happen.
