Do we know for sure if they're shooting with 3D cameras or doing it in post? If the latter, then the extra time would only be used to set up the 3D shots that show off the extra dimension. Haven't we already concluded this is a terrible idea? Unless they do some sort of limited theatrical release (which would be great), who the hell is ever going to watch it in 3D? Mark
Yes they are shooting in native 3D. Something the BBC have done a grand total of once before with a drama. (And had to compromise by keeping the shots relatively simple in order to get it done in time.)
And you're still assuming that they cannot begin work months ahead of that 4 to 6 week span. We know that they are shooting the hour episode which is to air on the anniversary itself in 3D. That doesn't in any way negate the possibility of additional anniversary episodes being made in the conventional way to air after the one that airs on the anniversary itself. Likewise, it doesn't negate the possibility that crews are already at work on producing most of the parts of this multi-part anniversary story which don't actually require Matt Smith's presence, so that when he does become available, they can focus exclusively on shooting his scenes, as everything else will already be done. Let us assume, for instance, that this anniversary "arc" story requires a number of lengthy flashbacks to The Doctor's early days on Earth. Such scenes could easily be shot by Gatiss, right now, concurrent to the footage he's already shooting for "An Adventure in Space and Time". Again, I'm talking about footage that would already be shot, and in the can, well before the official start date of the Anniversary shooting schedule, and wouldn't require any more shooting time than what you mention.
^^ Well, I guess it's good to remain optimistic, but that just doesn't seem realistic. My guess is that if there are multiple anniversary episodes it'll be with the ones that we already know about. Say a multi-part the spans from the anniversary to the Christmas special. And/or into season 8. That's *if* they extend the anniversary theme. I'm not saying they will, but if they do, that's the only way I can see it feasibly happening. I certainly don't see them adding additional episodes in between now and season 8. Mr Awe
They could have David Bradley recreate some actual 1st doctor moments instead of David Bradley playing William Hartnell as the 1st doctor. Maybe the 1st doctor thinking of stealing the TARDIS.
Doctor Who production is large-scale and gets noticed, even when the producers would prefer otherwise. There's no way for Gatiss or anyone else to be filming or even preparing to film the show without fans and/or the media finding out about it. At this point, with Moffat still (per the costume designer) working on the script, they're going to be rushing to start by the announced late March/early April date, not looking at secret filming before that. Unless we're to assume that he's finished the secret script, which is being worked on by the secret costume designer, and somehow filming alongside An Adventure in Space and Time without any of the people who are taking pictures of it noticing... I appreciate the desire to imagine ways in which there could be more than ~120 minutes of Doctor Who being made for the second half of 2013. It still baffles me that they couldn't pull together something more than that. But there's no sign of it happening, and given the time-scale on which the show is made, it's already too late. If they were making a second anniversary special to air before Christmas, they'd be doing it before Matt Smith's three-month break, not after. Because there's no way a substantial portion of the anniversary is going to be done without the current Doctor.
Of course people notice, which is specifically why you contrive for Gatiss to shoot a docudrama in the first place, so that one can more easily disguise work on the "secret" project as part of another project that's only tangentially related. Cool deal, because in addition to producing a nice docudrama, you also give yourself a perfect cover for filming flashbacks of the same period the docudrama covers. And costume designers never lie, do they? Also, why would the costume designer have to create any additional costumes? We're talking about simply using the actors from Gatiss' docudrama, in the costumes that have already been made for them. Ya mean other than the fact that the executive producer claims that the notion of a merely 60 minute anniversary episode is poppycock? Unless it's already well in the works. Heck, even if Moffat is still working on the final script, he may have had a general idea in mind since the very beginning, and has shot additional material throughout his time as show-runner, for possible inclusion in this anniversary arc. That said, there may be scenes/sequences of the anniversary story that have been in the can for years. Precisely. And exactly what I've been saying all along. I've repeatedly suggested that they'd shoot Smith whenever he's available, both before and after his break, and during the break, when he's not available, focus on sequences where Matt isn't needed. Why not? There are plenty of scenes in virtually every episode which don't directly feature the Doctor himself. And if it's a multi-doctor story, or a story that plays heavily on his own history, and thus is flashback heavy, why would they need the current Doctor be available for scenes that focus primarily on his earlier incarnations? There were, after all, sequences in The Five Doctors that focused exclusively on longish sequences of the individual incarnations. I seem to recall a rather sizable portion of the story Involving Pertwee and Liz Sladden, which didn't involve Davidson at all, save as a disembodied voice over a walkie talkie. In fact, most of the scenes involved only one incarnation at a time, and the number of scenes where they directly interacted with the then current Doctor were few at best.
Honestly, I'm having trouble believing Moffat on that one. Rule 1: Moffat lies. That is an actual quote from Moffat himself.
In general you want much simpler and steadier camerawork with slow and deliberate editing when you're shooting in 3d. I haven't seen what it is you're referring to but don't mistake such things as (necessarily)trade-offs when they are quite intentional in order to get the most out of the medium.
Anything is theoreticaly possible but that doesn't make it probable. The series has fallen further and further behind in production since Moffat took over to the extent that they'll only have shot one episode in eight months. The idea that they've somehow found the time and money to do all this secret shooting is wishful thinking.
Well, only one episode that you know of. Which says nothing of material that may have been shot in secret during that period that you know nothing about. It's not like there are other project compromising Moffat's (or Gatiss') availability to do that. After all, "Sherlock' is on prolonged hiatus due to "NuTrek 2" and "The Hobbit". Time, as per above, hasn't really been an issue. The money angle? Well, thus far the BBC sure hasn't been stingy about this anniversary, what with acquiring the not at all cheap tech to use the anniversary-date ep as the kick-off of their new 3D broadcast division, and all the costs that entails, and springing a sizable chunk of change for Gatiss' docudrama full of of easily double-duty (thus cost saving) props, costumes, etc. It seems pretty damn obvious that the BBC isn't skimping on this anniversary celebration a/k/a "Global PR Stunt" connected with their most popular and profitable export. As far as I'm concerned, the notion that time and/or money has been a stumbling block in this matter is far more unduly pessimistic, than the inverse is "wishful thinking".
Star Trek wrapped in July. The second phase of The Hobbit filming wrapped in September. (The first phase was pre-Sherlock II filming. The third phase, the reshoots to fashion the third film, commence in May.) Sherlock was to film in January (at which point Freeman would have been finished with Hobbit publicity). Filming has been pushed to March (which is the latest it can film to fit before Freeman is due back in New Zealand). Last month Cumberbatch was filming a Julian Assange biopic; he either took that role because Sherlock's filming dates had moved or Sherlock's filming dates were moved because he took that role. Personally, I think the former possibility is more likely; Cumberbatch doesn't strike me as a diva who would throw an entire production off by two months because he took other work, plus we know that as of the beginning of the month the Gatiss and Moffat scripts for Sherlock weren't finished. In short, the oft-cited reason for Sherlock's filming delay -- Star Trek and The Hobbit -- has no basis in reality.
Then by all means, feel free to replace "Star Trek 2" and "The Hobitt" in my posts to read "other projects". But, as you say, they apparently weren't ready to begin production on the new series of "Sherlock" even after Trek and Hobitt wrapped, and even imply that Cumberbatch (and presumably Freeman) likely weren't to blame, so the cause of the delay must lie elsewhere. With Moffat and Gatiss perhaps? I wonder what they could have possibly been doing instead that would have caused them to fall behind so? Perhaps a secret project of some kind?
I think if you're claiming that there's been other shooting going on (it wouldn't have involved Matt Smith as he was preping then directing a film BTW) you need to show some tiny sliver of evidence that would make it more than the product of your imagination. 1) This isn't their first 3D drama production, it's their second,so the equipment was already purchased. This is just a way of amortising the cost. 2) AAIS&T's costs come from a completely different budget for a different channel.
Duh. I've said "scenes that don't actually require Matt's presence, such as flashbacks and the like" in the vast majority of my posts on this subject. I've stated this repeatedly. Even wrote a post talking about how many of the scenes in "The Five Doctors" focused solely on other characters, and older incarnations of the Doctor, rather than the then current Doctor. Funny, because BBC has repeatedly mentioned how they're using the Who anniversary to unveil the technology to viewers. And as per the placard at the toy fair, the BBC would never say anything deceptive, misleading, or other than the whole truth, now would they? And the various divisions and channels of the BBC never share assets with one another, even when it makes sense to do so, and to do otherwise would involve two divisions/channels unnecessarily doubling overall expenses by duplicating one another's work? I think not.
Yes, but none of this exists anywhere other than your imagination, unless you can show differently. Feel free to show me where they've claimed it's their first 3D production. Actually show me multiple examples since they've "repeatedly" done so. http://www.bbc.co.uk/ariel/20718866 http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/proginfo/2012/52/mr-stink.html
I'd assumed we all understood this was speculation. I will concede this point for now, as I'm not willing to take the time to track down links. Also, because I acknowledge that the BBC has broadcast in 3D before, (Heck, Doctor Who has aired in 3D before; back in the early 90s for the 30th anniversary) but to the best of my knowledge, all previous BBC 3d programs have used a totally different technology from what will supposedly be used for the 50th Anniversary episode. But if, as you say, they have used this very same 3D tech before, a link supporting this notion could easily prove me wrong.
I wouldn't be opposed to him staying or leaving for a fourth series, but I'd want him to move on after that. Although to me, it feels like he's only just got here. I've never really gelled with Smith the way I did Tennant, and plus with all this stupid splitting up series thing, it's just drawing it out longer, but seeing only one of his series has been in a big chunk, I never got to gel with him much, plus series 6 was terrible, and there's only been six series 7 episodes so far. I say stop this god awfull splitting series up thing, and sack Moffat.