Possible first writer of Series 7 identified?

[23skidoo]

If this report is accurate, at least someone outside the core production team knows that's happening in Episode 13. According to a few sites, citing writer John Fay's website, the co-writer of Torchwood: Children of Earth is currently writing an episode of Doctor Who.

http://news.whoviannet.co.uk/2011/06/john-fay-writing-for-series-7-of-doctor-who/

Of course there's nothing saying such an episode will see the light of day (paging Stephen Fry) or if it'll air in Series 7 (paging Neil Gaiman), but the fact a franchise-connected writer is doing an episode (and he wouldn't put it on his CV if it wasn't serious work) is being touted as the first direct indication that, yes, Virginia, there is a Series 7. (There's been some fear and loathing over the fact the BBC has yet to officially commission it, even though the odds of the BBC not renewing Doctor Who are pretty slim. Mind you, John Nathan-Turner had commissioned a full slate of Season 27 stories too, and we know how well that worked out. )

Alex

 

[MacLeod]

They'll be another year of it, it's still pulling inreasonable numbers and the AI index remains high. It's also one of the highest rated drama programmes on TV.

 

[Rarewolf]

They won't cancel it this side of its 50th. They didn't cancel it that side of its 25th either.

I wouldn't be surprised if it changed to specials though at some point.

 

[Newspaper Taxi]

Not to be pedantic, but unless steven Moffat announces he's leaving, isn't Steven Moffat the first writer of Series 7 identified?

Still, cool.

 

[Mitty]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I recall a story a month or so ago stating that Matt Smith had definitely signed for series 7. I think it's a forgone conclusion. Series 8 is a dead cert since it will be the 50th Anniversary. I think you can all but guarantee there will be some special episode broadcast on the actual date. Plans are probably already in motion for it.

 

[MacLeod]

I think the Dear old Auntie Beeb might get a few letters if it cancelled DW for it's 50th Anniversary. So I agree I think it's safe for 2 more years.

 

[Starkers]

It's hard to imagine, at the moment, what circumstances would make the BBC cancel Who again. Ok it's not cheap to make, but the amount of revenue it brings in far outweighs this, and contrary to what the Mail thinks, it isn't losing viewers at anywhere near the level some claim, unless the BBC wanted it to go out on a high, but I can't see that.

In a way it would be preferable, I can see the viewers eventually diminishing and can almost envisage a drip-drip slow decay as fewer viewers leads to less budget which leads to fewer viewers and so on, it'd be preferable for them to go out in a blaze of glory rather than stumbling to its death as it did in the 80s.

I can see there being another gap year eventually, and maybe an actual gap year without even specials, but I doubt that'll happen before the 50th, even if Smith were to leave (heaven forbid) before then.

 

[diankra]

[SNIP]
Mind you, John Nathan-Turner had commissioned a full slate of Season 27 stories too, and we know how well that worked out. )

Alex

Not exactly: there were a couple of season 26 'alternates' that had been officially commissioned, but most of season 27 was 'unofficial discussions' with the writers.
By that point the writers knew how late in the day the Beeb was in commissioning each new run, and that if they waited for the official go-ahead, there'd be no time for proper rewrites on the early scripts (take a look at the difference in the quality of early and late Blake's 7 season 4, where - despite the on-air announcement of a new season in March 1980, the official go-ahead didn't come till the start of the 81/82 financial year in May 1981). So they'd talk ahead, and maybe even start writing 'just in case...' (a technical breach of the writers guild rules, but hey-ho), and then have the scripts ready miraculously fast come May...

 

[MacLeod]

Aren't TV audiances in generally declining, so long as DW matchs the trend or buck the trend and actually losses fewer vieiwers than the trend it'll say on the air. Besides unlike most other TV programmes on the Beeb there is the secondary income to consider.

DVD/Blu-ray sales
and lots and lots of merchandise

 

[Allyn Gibson]

They won't cancel it this side of its 50th. They didn't cancel it that side of its 25th either.

I wouldn't be surprised if it changed to specials though at some point.

There have been rumors that the BBC wants to reconfigure Doctor Who along the lines of Wallander or Sherlock -- as a short series of movie-length specials == and this report doesn't help to dampen down those rumors.

I don't think that Doctor Who would be affordable to the BBC as a specials series. That was the whole reason why RTD fought for a 13-episode season back in 2004 -- a 6-episode series wouldn't have been doable, but a 13-episode series could spread the costs out.

 

[Savage Jaw]

No need to worry too much about the ratings. It is the overnight ratings that get the most coverage in the media, and there is no doubt that those are declining, resulting in bad media coverage. However, they are more than made up for by the final consolidated ratings. People are just changing their viewing habits, as things like PVR, VOD and iPlayer usage continues to rise, especially amongst people who watch Doctor Who, as the figures show that Doctor Who is the most or amongst the most "timeshifted" programme on television in the UK.

Using consolidated viewing figures, if you compare the average viewing figure of Matt Smith's first series as the Doctor with David Tennant's first series, Smith is just ahead. Likewise with the first six episodes of Smith's second series (for which we have final figures) against Tennant's second series, Smith is just ahead.

On AI, I think I am right in saying that, on average, since Moffat took over, the AI has been higher, although I don't think they have reached the high that one Tennant episode got, which was somewhere between 89-91.

 

[MacLeod]

Even if they didn't go to a full series next year they'll do some specials.

 

[VDCNI]

No need to worry too much about the ratings. It is the overnight ratings that get the most coverage in the media, and there is no doubt that those are declining, resulting in bad media coverage. However, they are more than made up for by the final consolidated ratings. People are just changing their viewing habits, as things like PVR, VOD and iPlayer usage continues to rise, especially amongst people who watch Doctor Who, as the figures show that Doctor Who is the most or amongst the most "timeshifted" programme on television in the UK.

Using consolidated viewing figures, if you compare the average viewing figure of Matt Smith's first series as the Doctor with David Tennant's first series, Smith is just ahead. Likewise with the first six episodes of Smith's second series (for which we have final figures) against Tennant's second series, Smith is just ahead.

On AI, I think I am right in saying that, on average, since Moffat took over, the AI has been higher, although I don't think they have reached the high that one Tennant episode got, which was somewhere between 89-91.

The average season 5 AI was down on the average for season 4 but not by much. I don't think season 4 went below 86 while season 5 did a few times.

Stolen Earth & Journey's End both got 91 I think.

 

[Starkers]

They won't cancel it this side of its 50th. They didn't cancel it that side of its 25th either.

I wouldn't be surprised if it changed to specials though at some point.

There have been rumors that the BBC wants to reconfigure Doctor Who along the lines of Wallander or Sherlock -- as a short series of movie-length specials == and this report doesn't help to dampen down those rumors.

I don't think that Doctor Who would be affordable to the BBC as a specials series. That was the whole reason why RTD fought for a 13-episode season back in 2004 -- a 6-episode series wouldn't have been doable, but a 13-episode series could spread the costs out.

Well the article seems to be suggesting that its BBC Wales who wanted to do that, whereas the BBC overall want to keep it as it is.