Ah, yes, the classic "Just cancel the show because that's better than what I'm not enjoying. Doesn't matter if other people are clearly enjoying it. I could never simply just stop watching it myself."
Never gets old.
Russell T. Davies Returns to Doctor Who as New Showrunner
- Thread starter Allyn Gibson
- Start date
Never gets old.
It's pretty clear he loves Dr. Who, he just likes to have fun with it and doesn't take as seriously as the stuck up fans who has sticks so far up their asses that they choke on them. You can love something, and still have fun with it and not take it totally seriously.
I don't think he's saying their will be no explanation for Mrs. Flood, they just aren't going to address the 4th wall breaking. Which I was honestly kind of expecting, I don't think really there is a way to explain and have it make sense within the reality of the show.You might not like this then
Doctor Who boss says Mrs Flood breaking fourth wall "might never be explained"
"Night-night!"www.radiotimes.com
For those expecting an explanation for Mrs. Flood it might never be explained.
Problem is, with Who, we had a sixteen year cancellation that is old enough to have its own nostalgia attached. (And that has been plumbed for ideas for a chunk of the returned series too. Including the current stated ‘magic is taking over’ thing that is really just fluff.) So it’s not ‘better nothing than this’ so much as ‘it was better when it wasn’t on screen’.
It’s also seen as a return to when the fans were very much the intended audience, rather than the risky uncertainty of chasing after a mythical audience that may or may not be there, and radically changing things as a result.
At this point, it’s very much hanging in the balance, and unclear whether it’s going to grow its audience faster than it loses longer term viewers.
Especially with the change in government… any political satire present in next years scripts are potentially going to seem out of place or wrongly targeted, because it was made under a different landscape.
"It's very much hanging on the balance."
People have been dragging that line out for years (since at least the Capaldi years, if not even earlier) and I think the show has clearly shown that there are still a lot of great stories to tell.
The key point to remember is not everything is going to appeal to everyone. That's great thing about Doctor Who. Don't like the current era? Just stop and come back for the next one. Not that hard to do.
People have been dragging that line out for years (since at least the Capaldi years, if not even earlier) and I think the show has clearly shown that there are still a lot of great stories to tell.
The key point to remember is not everything is going to appeal to everyone. That's great thing about Doctor Who. Don't like the current era? Just stop and come back for the next one. Not that hard to do.
He does - he absolutely loves Who.
That may well be true, at least in part.
I wasn't pleased when he came back - I was enjoying the gradual thawing between Eccleston and the franchise, and entertained hopes which were obviously trashed by the return of Davies, Tranter & Co.
That said, Russell's a great showrunner and the show obviously has so much more verve and zing under him. It's fun !
The flipside is, he's a bloody awful sci-fi writer. Great at characters though.
Russell should showrun the franchise, introduce and look after the spinoffs, liaise with Big Finish (wouldn't that be nice ?) and even write the odd episodes of whatever, but...hand over the main writing duties.
Agreed completely on all of these points, especially overlooking the franchise and liaising with Big Finish. He's great with the overlook, less so the details, except (like you said) with the character building.
Last edited:
The Capaldi era was where some people could see the wobbles. Myself included. It had a familiar feel. It felt like the new Baker The Second. And it’s been wobbling since. I think the fact that this run is being treated as a reboot only supports that.
We’re also on a reduced episode count (sound familiar?) now which makes it feel familiar in a different way. Even the public opinion greeting each new Doctor — spinning up and exaggerating controversies, much as happened with McCoy at first; a sense of it being the silly thing people used to like but only die-hards are watching — are basically very similar to what happened in the late eighties. It’s a toss up over whether Chibnall or RTD are repeats of JNT at times. (BBC does love a repeat)
As to skipping eras?
When do fans of anything *ever* do that.
Casual viewers, sure, but for fans that’s unusual.
It assumes some of us will even come back — that middle group, not casual, but not fans… long term viewers, are already drying up.
Fans tend to have eras they aren’t as fond of (see the original Baker The Second response, or the unpopularity of the Pertwee era — called the Tory Doctor! — in the nineties) and are critical of, and then those they love (see Tom Baker for Decades, casting a loooong shadow. Or Tennant.) but expecting people who are dyed in the wool fans to not offer criticism — in a show that will literally sell you books of criticism, volumes of them, and on the production of the show, to the point it is intrinsic to the fandom — is… unrealistic to say the least.
But because they are fans they *want* to keep coming back. It *should* be hard to alienate them. But sometimes it seems there is a contingent both within fandom and in the production that are trying really hard to do that.
Which is… not a good thing, I suspect. A whole new form of gatekeeping, same as the old.
I think RTD loves Doctor Who and is ashamed of that love at the same time. (Moffat has come to terms with the dichotomy long ago I think.)
Well, yeah, when the show's not on the air and the franchise's output is only being done in tie-in media like novels, audios, comics and whatever, it makes sense to target the fans as they're the only ones who care enough to buy the content in that medium. But once the show is back on the air? The fandom of any franchise only consists of 1% of the audience, it makes far more sense to have the show appeal to new audience members to expand and grow.
I find regardless of who is in power, there are some elements of political satire which transcend party affiliation. Different politicians often make the same mistakes regardless if they're on the right or the left, so I wouldn't worry about any political satire which maybe in next season coming off as dated or representing a "different landscape."
Of course, I'm pretty sure this is just an extension of your previously stated belief that filming the season in advanced is somehow Evil and Wrong, and it's becoming increasingly evident you won't be convinced otherwise.
Although there were other British shows with thirteen episodes at the time, those with less than ten episodes weren't unheard of in 2005. The main reason Doctor Who had thirteen episodes when it returned in 2005 was because RTD wanted the show to have international appeal and believed thirteen episodes were the minimum required for the show to have a shot in America. Even then, it's been documented in The Writer's Tale that four consecutive years of thirteen episodes was having a negative impact on RTD's health, and we later saw that Moffat and Chibnall definitely couldn't keep up with that much output.
Nowadays, thanks to streaming, seasons with as little as six episodes are quite common even in the US, so Doctor Who with eight episodes is basically making it fit right in amongst many of the other popular current shows. And having another season ready to go next year is actually giving it a leg up compared to other streaming shows of today, where it's becoming increasingly common for them to have two year gaps (or more) between seasons. Granted, that could be a reflection of various issues that have been plaguing the entertainment industry in recent years such as the pandemic or the strikes in the American writers and actors unions last year.
Last edited:
Agreed on all points. Logic over fan desire. Crazy!
Sigh.
Feel free to look for ‘evil and wrong’ in my assessment or critique of the show *anywhere* at all.
As to how well things can land when taken out of the context of when they were made?
The Happiness Patrol could land *very* differently now to how it did then, by virtue of aesthetics and the nature of political argument being in a radically different place to when it was when it was made. The Peladon serials with their commentary on what was then joining the EC would land differently possibly too. Who used to deal in a lot more nuance, some of which would be alien to parts of modern audiences. The tragedy of Mike in Remembrance would possibly be missed, because he would all too easily be seen *only* as a racist, with the background understanding gone — because audiences don’t get the shorthand anymore. People find bits of Ghost Light and Battlefield cringeworthy or problematic, because they just don’t get the context anymore.
And nothing has dated harder than series one of NuWho, with bits now fully regarded as homophobic (though they always were, it’s just attitudes were different then… especially in how a thing could be regarded as harmless dialect choices or in-jokes) and basically all of those TV Shows in the finale now rendered basically historical.
Eight episodes has been commented on as feeling too short in *multiple* discussions, and I don’t really give a fig about what’s normal for American TV or international distribution et al. Especially as here I am specifically referring to it as an echo of the later years of the classic show, rather than expressing an opinion on whether it’s a good or bad thing. (Though often, less is in fact, not more.)
They key to success is absolutely growing your audience, but real longevity and cultural impact comes from how many then transition into some form of fandom.
The science fiction comedy TV series Red Dwarf premiered 36 years ago. Its episodes are usually around 25 minutes long. Here's what we Red Dwarf fans have had in these 36 years:
Red Dwarf
Series 1 1988: 6 episodes
Series 2 1988: 6 episodes
Series 3 1989: 6 episodes
Series 4 1991: 6 episodes
Series 5 1992: 6 episodes
Series 6 1993: 6 episodes
Series 7 1997: 8 episodes
Series 8 1999: 8 episodes
Series 9 (Back to Earth) 2009: 3 episodes
Series 10 2012 6 episodes
Series 11 2016 6 episodes
Series 12 2017 6 episodes
The Promised Land (feature-length special): 1
In the UK, at least, Red Dwarf is not just a weird cult show, but something popular enough to have generated several novels, several nonfiction books, and a monthly magazine that ran for two years. I don't know about the US, but it was popular enough in Canada in the '90s that you could easily find the show on video, the books in chain bookstores, and even the magazine occasionally showed up over here.
Red Dwarf
Series 1 1988: 6 episodes
Series 2 1988: 6 episodes
Series 3 1989: 6 episodes
Series 4 1991: 6 episodes
Series 5 1992: 6 episodes
Series 6 1993: 6 episodes
Series 7 1997: 8 episodes
Series 8 1999: 8 episodes
Series 9 (Back to Earth) 2009: 3 episodes
Series 10 2012 6 episodes
Series 11 2016 6 episodes
Series 12 2017 6 episodes
The Promised Land (feature-length special): 1
In the UK, at least, Red Dwarf is not just a weird cult show, but something popular enough to have generated several novels, several nonfiction books, and a monthly magazine that ran for two years. I don't know about the US, but it was popular enough in Canada in the '90s that you could easily find the show on video, the books in chain bookstores, and even the magazine occasionally showed up over here.
Red Dwarf is its own special case in lots of ways lol.
In terms of episode count, it’s not like it started high and then went down — and like I said, I was making historical comparisons. (Who had its episode count slashed in the late eighties, funded accordingly, and some clever production from JNT meant he managed to squeeze an extra few out than was expected — by using the OB filming to do a serial fully ‘on location’ and then one serial fully ‘in studio’ he could turn the budget for a four parter into two three parters or thereabouts.) It’s not that short series are bad — it’s that it’s not a good sign when they consistently become shorter. Red Dwarf runs like most Brit TV, especially comedies, too — where it’s not every year. Who *was* every year until 85. Again, it’s the change that *might* signify problems for the show, not the pure numbers itself.
I kind of love that Red Dwarf has fairly quietly been doing its own thing. I started watching with the last episode of III, finding it by accident on my twenty year old black and white tv set — with a coat hanger for an aerial — whilst eating a prawn sandwich on a cabin bed in my families council flat. Literally perfect conditions for it, I reckon. It’s been ‘diverse’ since day one, and is almost certainly the longest running SF show with the same cast. Even allowing for the rather long break. I think it’s heydays were the late nineties mind you, back when you could buy the Smegazine in newsies. I didn’t enjoy VIII much mind you. Was glad it didn’t end there ultimately. (Though I want Chloe and Hattie back, so I am a minority.)
Yes, "evil and wrong" was hyperbole and exaggeration, but my point was that you have always been complaining about the fact that RTD is filming the show far in advance, specifically the coming second season having already been filmed before the first even aired as though it's The Worst Thing that could possibly have happened. I mean what did you even expect, after all the complaining done over the years about how long it took Moffat and Chibnall to produce seasons, combined with RTD's promise to bring the show back to an annual release schedule?
And also...didn't you already say that you decided to stop watching? Why keep complaining? Or rather why should we keep responding?
I said I felt it would hinder the shows ability to respond to audience reactions, and in terms of how relevant things like satire would be, it would negatively affect that too. Given RTDs tendency towards trends and tying the show extremely closely to the contemporary real world, it will affect those elements too. (Characters Mentioned Bridgerton what? half a dozen times? Didn’t mention Austen once. I’d put money on which one won’t need explaining to an audience in ten or twenty years time)
So yes, I think it could well end up being a mistake. And have stated so.
Worst thing?
I think there’s worse things already happened to and in the last series.
The dangers of loading too much up front, and the daft approach to lead costuming are the things that made me worry in advance.
They haven’t exactly been dispelled, so much as lost in the pile.
Moffat had external factors (including working two jobs…) and Chibnall was… well. Chibnall. Can understand the Covid years, the rest not so much. There are choices made, it isn’t actually impossible to produce a series a year if that is your actual goal. It isn’t their actual goal. For a start, a fair part has to do with keeping the lead sweet — as happened with Tennant.
Which along with modern production explains how it can take so long, but not why it apparently must.
And of course, if Ncuti Gatwa says or does something daft between now and next year, we just have to hope Bonnie and an exercise bike is handy for the last time the actual head honchos decided the lead was going.
He's got 99 bitches to make and not a one worth hearing.
Their goal was not to make one series a year. They achieved that. (They made two — but it took more than a year I think - which is good going even if I do not think it is wise, or that eight episodes is where they should be aiming)
Going forward it is not their goal to make series of the old length. Whether that then translates into eventually having gaps, or basically doing the 7A/7B thing (which is essentially what they did this time out) at some point remains to be seen.
It’s almost a semantic difference when it comes down to it — they made what would have been one series worth of episodes, but they will be put out over two years.
I was initially impressed by them gearing up and getting production going far enough in advance that they could have decent breaks for staff, post production, etc — but even the specials lost a bit of buzz from being so far in advance. Before we saw a moment of 14 actually on screen, we had already seen his replacement filming. Between that and the lack of anything really anniversary-like in the episodes, it was a real… mood killer. The most unspecial specials. Even Tennants last lot were at least transmitted on holidays.
Now we’ve had two Doctor-lite episodes, a full quarter of what is now considered a series, and there’s a possibility Ncuti isn’t currently even under contract (he’s appearing at a con without it being show promo, that wasn’t usually a thing for actors still on the show prior to now — so either the approach and contracts are changed, or he’s currently between contracts to the show) and whilst ‘season 3’ is being written, it means *most* of the production isn’t ongoing. So any headway is being lost, assuming the show is going forwards.
Even in the seventies and eighties, it was common for there to be a few scripts banked, or production staff working on things essentially just-in-case. Sometimes that was borderline hobby-approach-to-work (like Mike Tucker designing stuff that was never used — modern cybermats) but even in the modern era Moff and Chibnall had balls in the air just-in-case.
At the moment, it does look like the show won’t likely be in full production annually, however they show it, and that lead-actor availability is giving headaches again — which I am not sure should be a problem. It’s not some zero-hour delivery job, even accepting that an actor will want to do other projects between shoots to keep from typecasting or to keep their hand in. But it shouldn’t affect the production. And it is.
As to RTD closing the gaps… well, he’s not so much closing them as papering over them by spreading things a bit thinner in some ways. Again, I’m not sure that’s going to work, even with Moffat basically being holiday cover and doing Christmas — exactly as he did when Chibnall wasn’t ready to go at the start of his era. (Moff is writer and exec producer on the upcoming Xmas special. Like a mini return era-within-an-era from a certain perspective)
It’s very… chaotic. I am not sure that this time it is for the best, and all the stuff that’s come out about Ecclestone’s run and what went on with that makes me question whats going on. Chaos wasn’t good for people then, either.
Similar threads
