Slashdot Mirror
BBC To Revive Doctor Who Next Year
Jordan writes: "Orange Today is reporting that the BBC has hired a scriptwriter from Buffy the Vampire Slayer to work on a new Doctor Who series, in celebration of the show's 40th anniversary. And Buffy's Anthony Head, who plays Giles, may be up for the role of the doctor." Update: 07/03 12:27 GMT by T : LoadStar writes: "The Beeb has an official denial that a new Who series is in the works with members of the Buffy production team, as reported yesterday on Slashdot. They report 'Whilst the Cult team quite like the idea of Tony Head as the Doctor in a show guided by members of America's finest fantasy production team, the BBC aren't currently making any such plans.'"
Somehow, this has me worried. Dr. Who is cool, but writing all-new episodes just doesn't sit right with me (especially if they're using a script-writer from Buffy). They'll probably make it all state-of-the-art computer graphics and stuff, and end up ruining it. Ah, well, I hope I'm wrong. We'll just have to wait and see.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity.
Search. Locate. Exterminate. Bip. Bip. Search Locate. Exterminate.
I wonder how the dog will look now that we have Battle Bots.... can u say 16" Diamond Chip saw blade ;)....
Gravity!... It's not just a good idea... It's the Law!
How is this revelevant? How come lately slashdot has become a cesspool of garbage posts by the editors? Is this news for nerds. Stuff that Matters. Can we just change the name to TeenBeat and get it over with?
it's a good thing i know this. no. i'm not being sarcastic. i talk in this tone of voice all the time.
What about that other great BBC series, Blakes 7? I'd love to see that revived. Would be very cool with modern special effects.
It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
I moderate therefore I rule!
--
Some real news for nerds. Wannabe's watch Buffy. Real nerds watch Who....
Can't wait to see this, I've been a fan ever since the original! I just hope they include a better explanation for the Weirding modules than the book did.
OK, ok, I'm in the minority of fans, to be sure, but, I actually dug the Fox TV movie version...well, except for that whole Eric Roberts as the Master thing. Ew. I for one would like to see Who with an actual budget, as opposed to 'the endless gravel quarries.'
But I could definitely see Anthony Stewart Head as a Doctor, and if they managed to key into the intelligent Buffy writing rather than the stuff they've been pumping out lately.
Million Sterling-Pound Question: Will there be continuity between old series (and/or TV movie) and new series, or is this a tabula raza/reimagining thing? I would imagine the second would be easier, considering all the frigging episodes and books in existence that are considered BBC-official.
"What's so random about flipping a coin? Ever heard of the I Ching?"
One of the great things about the original series was the cheesy but imaginative special effects.
There is just no way that those could be duplicated today.
Even the Dr.Who movie (which was made, what, over 10 years ago?) didn't look right, because the special effects were too good.
And if they try to make the special effects look cheesy, they will just look bad.
Also, no Dr. Who will be able to match Tom Baker.
Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
.... Very afraid.
Now I'd like to get it out of the way up front: I am a HUGE dr who fan, I love it, even sylvester mccoy's annoying sidekick "ace". Sarah Jane was a babe. Daleks are the <comicguy%gt;coolest. baddies. ever.</comicguy%gt;
But the movie sucked. Like it totally sucked balls. What the hell did they do to the tardis?? It looked like a friggin health spa, not a space ship.
I've wanted nothing more than a new Dr Who, and what's-his-face would make a very good doctor... But I'm afraid they'll buffy-ify it, and try to make it for buffy fans... and buffy fans are not dr who fans... some dr who fans may be buffy fans, but most buffy fans would never sit through anything starring tom baker.
I'm afraid. And you should be too.
Send lawyers, guns, and money!
That American Doctor Who pilot movie some years back was so-so, and had mediocre ratings. I kinda liked it. But as others have noted, the record of American versions of British TV shows is terrible.
Still, we can hope they do a good job. I need a reason to actually USE my TV every once in a while, and for more than my old Babylon 5 tapes.
"Common Sense Ain't" -Unknown
Doctor? We thought you'd been killed by the Daleks! Again! Would you like a cup of tea, Doctor?
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Just been watching some of the old Tom Baker Dr. Who tapes from Hollywood video. Good Stuff. Hopefully Tom Baker will make a cameo in the new ones . Perhaps "The Thirteen Doctors" ( as oposed to the five doctors) or whatever it's upto now. Dag
This was posted by Timothy, Not CmdrTaco? That boggles the mind!
OK, I like Buffy. I think Giles would make a great Who, I just hope the script is OK. Did anyone see the American version of Red Dwarf? My god that was bad.
--- Why are you wearing that stupid bunny suit? | Why are you wearing that stupid man suit?
This is terrific news - just as long as they don't do a musical episode... :)
K-9 singing "We Wish You a Merry Christmas" was bad enough...
He was in the Comic Relief The curse of fatal death and did a wonderful job.
I really think they should give him a shake at it.
I've heard he was originally an engineer. Is that true?
Exec1: Hey, here's an idea... Let's get George Lucas and ILM to remake Plan 9 From Outer Space. We can get M. Night Shyamalan to rework the script and a get a few big name stars in there.
Exec2: No no no, we need to make another movie based on a comic book.
Exec3: Why don't we come up with something original. Y'know, like a new story, new characters...
[blank stares all round]
Exec3: ...or not. Let's get back to that Dr Who concept.
---
Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Sweet movie Un Chien Andalusia.. (Rabid Dog?)... That was a Cow eyeball BTW.... Ahhh... Community College film class... Those were the days.......
Gravity!... It's not just a good idea... It's the Law!
He's not praising our show!
I may be going out on a limb here, but I'll bet you get more of the latter than the former.
Does anyone know how they 'saw'? They used that big toilet plunger thing on the top, but was it a true eye, or a motion detector, or heat sensor....
If I were the doc when I encountered those, I would have jumped on the back of one - they have jiant bumbers around the bottom. Very convenient for the feet. Those big bumps all over the body (dalek zits?) are useful to hold on to. Oh wait, they can sense that someone is on them? Tough, what can they do? spin around in a circle like a dog catching it's tail to spin you off?
Daleks? They're armed, armored, and hate everybody. I sure wouldn't want to meet them, or the Cybermen, for that matter. Also, the Cybermen were forcibly recruiting others into their ranks long before the Borg were.
"Common Sense Ain't" -Unknown
Can you imagine a Beowulf cluster of Daleks?
In a dark room, from a pile of pizza boxes and makeshift rackmounts, hundreds of nodes start croaking through their motherboard speakers: Exterminate!
"Mod, mod, mod...and another troll bites the dust."
someone please tell me that this is a joke. Anyone who writes for "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" would do more damage to the Dr. Who "franchise" (such as it is nowadays) than 100 Phil Segal productions. Any resurection of the the series should be done for the fans, the only people who really understand Doctor Who (apart from all the various script writers and producers, many of whom are dead). If they ever bring back Doctor Who (besides occasional radio episodes), they need to go to motion pictures. A series would probably get old fast. And they would have to focus on originality, wit, costume designs, and dialogue instead of obsessing over special effects and ripping as much as they can from other sci fi shows.
Un Chien Andalu just means "An Andalusian Dog"
Given that the goal of the movie was to be as bizarre as possible, the title had nothing to do with the actual content. In fact, there are no dogs in the film.
Yes, it was a calf eyeball. Still disturbing, if you ask me.
BBC Denial (of course)
I've got that on VHS, and it's hilarious! Rowan was great, Jonathan Pryce was an even better Master, and some others got to the the Doctor for a little while. Hugh Grant, and even Joanna Lumly! They also did a wonderful job of duplicating the old special effects.
"Common Sense Ain't" -Unknown
I was just about to complain about this being "too UK-centric" but PBS saves the day. I know nothing about Dr. Who but I will be sure to check it out when it shows up on PBS.
FoundNews.com - get paid to blog.,
I'm hoping they do a Star Trek TNG thing with it - keep the original premise but update the plotline, characters and effects. Except, you know, no Wesley (though Wil rules).
"Well, put a stake in my heart and drag me into sunlight."
Almost all the Dr. Who villians are greedy capitalists.
Why not some Stalin-like characters or Unibomber or envirnmental extremists or Osama's?
Mix it up. You would think that Stalin was the cheif script editor.
Table-ized A.I.
I am sure I had read somewhere that Anthony Head was going to be staring in a new Buffy spin-off dealing with his pre-watcher days. Was I totally off or was that cancelled, so that he is available for this?
the female version. I believe played by the lady who plays Patsy on AbFab. Absoutely great episode, with Hough Grant, Rowan Atkinson, and many other famous people playing the role of The Doctor.
Cyber-men in the new series will ignore gold dust, you'll need platinum dust to take them out now. And Daleks? Install Windows Me on them. That should completely immobilze them.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
I'm not sure this will be a highly anticipated series with me. Though I'd love to see Dr Who with modern effects, I'm concerned that too much'll be focused on that. I really think that Dr Who's lack of an effects budget forced the writers to keep the eps interesting. Without that limitation today, what incentive will they have?
:)
Okay, Im done being cynical. On the plus side, there are some new story arcs they could look into. For example, what if the Doctor were to get the chameleon circuit working in the Tardis? They could explore that in an interesting way now that they have the effects to do it.
It'd also be interesting to see more areas of the Tardis. I realize that a lot of people didn't like the Dr Who movie that came out on Fox a few years ago, but I think nearly everybody'll agree the art direction taken on the Tardis was pretty damn cool. Even if you didn't agree with the style, it was obvious they really put effort into it.
Okay, I'm a little hyped about it now. Heh.
ooooooooo What if Patrick Stewart played the Doc? Unlikely, I know. He'd still be cool for the job.
I've heard he was originally an engineer. Is that true?
He was trained as an electrical engineer.
Triv
Well, I love Dr. Who.. with Colin Whats his name, the curly haired guiy as the Dr.
I like Mr. Head whoplays Giles... my girlfriend watches that Buffy all the time.
But a new Dr., Who, well who knows. It could go wither way I guess...
Juln
Just a question, I thought they explained the way that Dr Who, changed actors by something to do with when he "dies", he comes back to life in a new body, but he can only "die" a certan amount of times before he actually dies. So any one have any ideas on how many more of these lives he actually has? on a nother note I'm scared a Buffy writer, what are thy thinking. Totaly diferent styles of shows.
One thing that was good about Dr Who was that most of the stories were two or three hours long giving the chance for characters to develop better than the typical 50 minutes long most episodes are now. Of course that didn't happen in all the episodes but the format did allow the program to feel different that most serries
Sig is taking a break!
"The rumors are flying... but as usual, media reports have gotten ahead of the truth. Following the interview in the recent Dreamwatch Magazine with David Fury ("Buffy, The Vampire Slayer"), as we reported a few days ago, several online news sources (such as the usually wildly inaccurate Ananova, plus Peoplenews and other sources) are now reporting that Anthony Stewart Head (Giles in "Buffy" and recently a guest star in the Big Finish Doctor Who "Excelis" trilogy) will be a new Doctor in a new series produced next year. Even the Daily Express paper has picked it up (as an 'exclusive')... But it's not true. Producer Dan Freedman ("Death Comes to Time") did visit the Buffy producers, and there was a bit of talk about procedure... but nothing came of it and Freedman has moved to other projects. A quote by Tony Head in the Dreamwatch interview was taken out of context by these news 'sources'. Meanwhile, we continue to get tons of email this morning about it (it's not true, folks) and the official BBC website BBCi even issued a statement about it this morning: "Whilst the Cult team quite like the idea of Tony Head as the Doctor in a show guided by members of America's finest fantasy production team, the BBC aren't currently making any such plans."
As noted, the BBC web site confirms this is a rumor. Anthony Stewart Head has done some fine work in the Excelis series of Big Finish Doctor Who audio dramas though.
-fh
Geez! Some folks need a new meme! Wherever you sit on the TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY continuum, they're all great shows, different strokes for different folks.
IMO there is plenty of space in "Doctor Who" for some fantastic new stuff. And it doesn't have to be cheezy to be great! I watched Dr Who when I was 8 - 12 and it certainly wasn't cheezy to me, in fact a lot of it was damn scary and thought provoking. I can see a wonderful "New Doctor Who" being all that and more, for an adult audience and more.
Another pet peeve? People who think that talented writers have only one style. Just because they hire a writer from Buffy, DOES NOT MEAN that a "New Doctor Who" would resemble Buffy in the slightest. Writing talent is writing talent. Do you enjoy Bradbury for his science fiction or his gothic horror stories, or the gothic horror science fiction he also writes, to choose one bad example off the top of my head.
The way I see it, the show can only work as long as they don't try to pick it up where it left off. Here are my suggestions for possible plot lines:
1) Skip ahead to the doctor's future. Start on the 9th or 10th doctor. The down side is that he would be one generation closer to becoming the Valiard (12th regeneration). If they do the storyline right, it could make for some good character evolution.
2) Start from the beginning again. Take the old plots and rework them. Start from the beginning and go until it ends. This would personally cheese me off, but it would be nice to see better actors and better dialogue for the same old great plots.
3) The last option I'll offer is to do what Card did with Ender's Game - A parallel series. This way they could leverage the old series and all its great plots, but take them from a different perspective. They could weive a parallel plot to explain this new timelords travels. The best part would be that they could avoid disgruntelling all the loyal Dr. Who fans out there by not doing it right. Just borrowing the Dr. Who universe so to speak.
Anyhow, that's my two cents.
Btw, what ever happened to Fox purchasing the rights to Dr. Who?
"More crap on TV. Like we didn't have enough already."
As the Doctor said: "who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool that follows?"
I always wondered if Time Lords could ever switch genders when regenerating...
I am a science fantasy fan
I disagree that Dr. Who is only fun for laughing at cheesy special effects. You could make Dr. Who with decent effects and it could still be good.
What it needs is a charismatic guy playing the title character. What pulled me in to Dr. Who was watching Tom Baker; he was so much fun.
I haven't seen this new guy so I don't know how he'll do as the Doctor. But I can hope.
The scripts and directing will matter, too. If the plots are too complicated and annoying, or if everything is too serious, that will suck the fun out of the show. What we need are lots of vaguely menacing creatures that never actually do anything really bad, at least onscreen, and light-hearted dialog.
One of my favorite moments from Doctor Who went something like this:
Romana: I've got an idea! How about if we [x, y, z]?
Doctor: Brilliant! Oh, I'm sorry, did you just say something? I didn't hear you because I was thinking... we could [x, y, z].
Romana: [annoyed] Yeah, that would work.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
Uh, that was Oobi Doob Benubi who said that.
Someone mod this AC up. Not that all Buffy fans are wannabes, mind you, but Who is definitely a more nerd-centric series. This should be good, as long as they stay to true to the Dr. Who spirit that made the original series' so popular.
Cedric Balthazar Rotherwood
Sun Certified Programmer for the Java Platform +
System Admin. for Solaris
Your PBS station still carries Doctor Who? The local one here hasn't for the last 10 years. When they took it off, they said they'd love to keep showing it, and there was plenty of local demand, but they couldn't afford it anymore, since the National PBS people weren't paying for it anymore.
"Common Sense Ain't" -Unknown
Sadly, the Beeb deny this here.
When are they going to realise that Dr Who could be a major money spinner and stop being so phobic towards anything science fictional? Sigh.
Doctor Who was the greatest show of all time. It had a very low budget. If you've ever seen many of the shows, they filmed them in four segments of twenty-five minutes each. They were shown one per day, every weekday. Sometimes the background music was so loud that you couldn't hear the actors. Sometimes you could see the zippers in the costumes. By god, the sound of the Tardis dematerializing was a man pulling a damp sponge against a piano string. It sounds, from the article, that they're going to put some money behind it. Most people nowadays could put something better together in a few hours at their local highschool. That's not the point. Tom Baker's scarf was knitted by one of the stagehands, not by some prop shop in Hollywood. K-9 was a rudimentary radio controlled car with a silver spray-painted cardboard box over it. Everyone who followed the shows, even for a little while knows this, it's plain to see. With fundage, they'll wreck the whole thing. The Doctor has only five regenerations left, I hope they get it right before it's too late to change.
Is Terrance Dicks and Terry Nation still going to be involved in this?
"Daleks? They're armed, armored, and hate everybody"
Sadly, this classic dialog never made it into Doctr Who history:
"Quick! Into my bedroom, they can't follow us in there?"
"Why not, Doctor?"
"Because they won't be able to move on shag carpeting!"
You know, I've always thought it's kind of sad that there are people out
there who have nothing else to do with their lives than make posts like
this. Do you see anyone from around here flaming your website discussions? (which
I'm sure includes www..nolife.paint-drying.com and
www.hobby.lint-collecting.com)
I watch Dr. Who because I think it's the best television series ever made.
Period. I don't care what other people think, if I did their criticism
would have stopped me from ever really getting into the show. OK, it's not
ST:TNG or Enterprise, but Dr. Who never needed flashy, pointless (sorry, ST fans)
special effects because the scripts and acting are so good Dr. Who doesn't
need super-special effects.
I think the show is probably just beyond the comprehension of people who
don't like to use their imagainations and would rather have all the
imagining done for them.
no one would be more happier then me if these were true, dr who is easily the greatest science fiction ever.
however, Farscape is a really good show, and is easily catching up to the quality of Dr Who (already surpassing startrek/starwars/everything else)
One: Will there really be a new series?
When Fox did the Dr Who movie a few years back, they said they would see about reviving the series with Paul McGann from the movie as the Doctor. It didn't happen. The books and audio shows continued with McGann as the Doctor, but he was never seen on screen in that role again. There are other times in the past Dr Who has been rumored to be revived but none of them came to fruition.
Two: What style will Dr Who be?
Admittedly, each Doctor has his own style. I'm afraid they will try too hard to return to the glory days of Baker style. I'm too young to have seen Baker when it was fresh, and I find it dated and campy. It's entertaining, but stuck in the 70's. I liked the McCoy years, which seemed ahead of their time. I only hope the Doctor stays true to its British stylings but moves into the modern era. I think it's a good sign that the writer is trying "to take Doctor Who into a new universe."
Three: Death Comes to Time
Did anybody else watch Internet episode of Dr Who? It's still available on the BBC website for another month. It had Anthony Stewart Head in a brief appearance as a Timelord, but that's not a problem. The problem is it might be setting the pattern for the new direction of Dr Who. It seemed to throw too much of what made the Doctor the Doctor out the window. I appreciate that the writers were trying keep up with the times, but you still have to respect the limits imposed by the previous twenty-six years of the series. It can be a dangerous thing "to take Doctor Who into a new universe."
It will be tough to strike the balance between points two and three. If they do it right, they'll have old fans crying about how everybody after Baker sucked, newbs who find the Doctor a bit strange and tough to watch, and a lot of satisfied viewers.
On a side note, I understand Head was considered when they cast the seventh Doctor. I think he'll make a fine eighth Doctor, but I'm glad we got to see McCoy in the role.
Maybe K9 will be one of them Sony Dogs...
oh god, this could be so terrible!
* * Always question "the National Interest" - 9 times out of 10 it is a cover for evil
No, no, the last thing we need is a slick US-scripted version of Dr Who. We need to carry on the tradition of props that are made from old cardboard packing cartons and hammy actors who fumble their lines -- that's what made the series so great!
I've got a whole heap of Dr Who episodes, right episode #1 of series #1 with Hartnel as the Dr. Right now I'm burning them to VCD because I'm worried that my VHS tapes will start to degrade.
I was going to use Divx but there are still too many uncertainties as to the future and backwards compatibility that don't justify the limited improvement in picture quality that Divx offers over MPEG1 (remember this is old grainy black and white video shot in the 1960's).
Once they're in digital form I can at least copy them to whatever new media comes along without any loss of quality.
I'd like them to keep the Dr "pure" B-grade and hokey in presentation. Half the fun was trying to catch a glimpse of feet beneath the Daleks as they traversed rocky ground -- or watching the walls of a set shake and rock when someone brushed against them.
Please, please don't change the production standards so as to make it "just another slick sci-fi series filled with special effects"
Anthony Head was in all of those wierd Taster's Choice commercials a few years back. You remember the ones where he's courting a woman and they have this whole soap opera storyline.
Yeah, Doctor's a short timer if this happens.
That's like ... Like...
Holy crap!! Pleasure overload!
- http://pakman.sytes.net/
Even though the Master was completely ruthless, he would still temporarily ally himself with the Doctor when a common foe threatened them both. He was a multi-faceted character, with a supreme intellect, who was the perfect antithesis of the Doctor. The Doctor was the only one who could match wits with him.
If there is to be a new show, I hope they bring back the Master with all his attributes. The show wouldn't be the same without him.
"The unicode stuff in the latest version is working fabulously well. My russian mafia friends are ecstatic."
Will we be seeing any musical Dr Who episodes?
/~
"Once more (infinitely recurring inside a timeloop) with feeling"
(sung to the tune of "going through the motions")
~/ Every moment is the same arrangement, I go back and forth in time. Still I always feel I'm missing something : nothing here is real (we bought it on a dime). I've been trading blows with salt-shaker foes, just hoping no one knows, that there's no money in the budget - spent it all on booze. A phone box versus Enterprise will lose!
BBC should also concentrate on returning Paul Darrow to the screen at the same time so they can screen a "Shakey Set Saturday" double feature.
(As an aside, they plan on releasing all four seasons of B7 in one large DVD set at the end of the year - hopefully they'll do the same for what episodes of Dr Who they have left, rather then their current policy of theme-DVD's which seem messy)
I learned a dozen different British accents watching Dr. Who as a kid. I grew up on it. Loved everything about it -- particularly loved the Tom Baker episodes. I must have watched it faithfully for a decade, catching up on the really old episodes when I could. I caught my first exposure to Buffy a month ago. I don't watch TV anymore, unless someone makes me. Someone made me, and it was good. Really. I liked it. I got online, read the plot summeries, got myself caught up, and just think it's great. Clever, self-aware, unafraid of new things, unconcerned about critics ...
Everything that was Dr. Who. Except a good budget and nice (though somewhat pointy) teeth.
--Mike
The current (I think) head of BBC1 appeared on Room 101 a while back and put Doctor Who into Room 101. He said that he hates Doctor Who and the first thing he did when he took over was get rid of it and has absolutely no intention of reviving it.
He ridiculed the fans of the series who keep attempting to get it revived as well.
So unless he's gone now I doubt if there's much of a chance of it happening (unfortunately).
I've been watching Doctor Who since Tom Baker still had the role. To see new episodes after a fifteen-year hiatus honestly makes me apprehensive. Sure I'd like to see new stories, but it would be so easy for them to lose the charm of the show under the weight of stuffy production values.
See, I've always seen Doctor Who as a "fragile" show, one that doesn't survive much tampering. Everyone likes to poke fun at the incredibly cheap sets and effects, but that cheapness, IMHO, is what made Dr. Who a good show. Because the writers/directors/producers couldn't fall back on lavish production values, they had to focus on quality of stories and development of characters to hold the audience's attention. You looked forward to the next show, not because you wanted to see new effects and 3D-rendered alien worlds, but because you wanted to see how the Doctor and Zoe and Jamie and Liz Shaw and Jo Grant and Sarah-Jane Smith and Harry Sullivan and Romana and Nyssa and Peri and (God help us) Mel coped with it, and how it affected them. (As for Brigadier Alistair Gordon Lethbridge-Stewart, we always knew how he would react. He started shooting, blindly faithful that, perhaps this time, the bullets would actually have an effect.)
John Nathan-Turner, Dr. Who's final series producer, is a controversial figure among fans. Many believe -- me included -- that he sacrificed story quality in favor of production values. Compare, for example, Frontier in Space (Jon Pertwee era, produced by Barry Letts) with Vengeance on Varos (Colin Baker era, produced by John Nathan-Turner). While both stories utilized elements of violence, Vengeance on Varos seemed to revel in it. In Frontier in Space, the violence is almost completely confined to simple exchange of blood-free gunfire. The plot was advanced by intrigue and the Doctor's endless battle with slow-witted bureaucracy. In Vengeance on Varos, however, we are offered much more graphic violence: A man falling into pool of acid (and then struggling vainly to get out); slow exposure to lethal radiation; death by poison sting; and near encounters with hanging by the neck and falling in lava. Further, the villain, Sil, is physically repulsive. In previous years, the writers would have been content to make the audience despise the villain via his behavior and personality, and did so very successfully. Given that, it's unclear why they went to the extra trouble to give Sil a stomach-turning appearance, other than, "Because we could."
Advance a few more years to the Sylvester McCoy seasons, and things start to turn downright depressing. Delta and the Bannermen has almost no redeeming value whatsoever, being one long almost-continuous gunfight. There's the bizarre and disturbing The Greatest Show in the Galaxy , whose only saving grace is McCoy doing a series of vaudeville-style acts. And the final serial episode, Survival , has you shaking your head going, "What was the point?"
To his credit, Nathan-Turner did turn out some winners. Of note are The Caves of Androzani , Peter Davison's last, and arguably best, episode; and also featuring Morgus, one of the most deliciously despicable villains ever to appear on the show. Also good was Battlefield , where Arthurian legend and two generations of UNIT Brigadiers intersect with a small country village. Watching the new Brigadier kick the crap out of Ancelyn is by itself worth the trouble of watching.
If you're in the San Francisco Bay Area, the good Doctor can still be seen every Sunday night (barring pledge drives) on PBS station KTEH in San Jose, CA. They've broadcast every Doctor Who episode available over the years at least twice, and are currently running through the Jon Pertwee era.
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
... it just won't seem the same.
As much as I'd love to see one of my favorite shows of all time revived, It isn't true. The BBC has denied it already.
Personally, I'd like to see something bringing back the old "Behind the Sofa" feeling; more suspense along the lines of "The Sixth Sense." Somehow the old monsters just aren't scary anymore . . .
Just my $0.02.
It's on hold until Joss has time to work with it. He's got a lot on his plate right now.
The BBC? 22 Episodes a year?? Come of it. It doesnt matter how good the series, how wildly succesful, the BBC only EVER makes 6 of anything at a time.
Its annoying but true. They just finished showing a series called "Spooks" - MI5 espionage drama. It was fantastic. They made 6.
Bah.
<fnord>OBEY</fnord>
the story was rumoued in uk newspaper 'the daily express' but was much eleborated by uk online gossip site popbitch(.com) until someone actually sontacted the bbc an got a denial that ammount to no chance, no way, not happening. the site is down atm an the messagesappear to have drop of the bottomof the board. it opens 10am gmt, you might be able to persuade someone to post the message from the bbc again.
Stephen Fry would be the perfect Dr Who. Think about it; he's tall, erudite and if you ever heard his Professer Trefusis on Radio 4 you'd know what I mean.
And I'd suggest Anna Friel as his assistant
Here here. Stop slagging off the British!
If they ever bring Dr. Who back, they should have good special effects, a good cast, and just as importantly, good writing by someone who knows what they're doing.
For example, Russell Davies (who wrote Queer As Folk) is a Dr. Who fan (there was the great scene in QAF where one of the main characters - who was a Dr. Who fan in the series - had gone back to this guys flat, and mid snog, exclaims "Oh my god, you've got The Caves of Androzani!"), AND a respected screenwriter with a hit series under his belt. And he's the only well known screenwriter I can think of who has that understanding of Dr. Who and its fandom.
and, as revealed in Trial of a Time Lord, has last regeneration is already spoken for and he becomes the evil Valyard (spelling unknown).
Best look after those lives, Doctor. Perhaps he gets an extra life if he scores above 100,000...?
Cheers,
Ian
Well, they have continued to support Red Dwarf.
Now there is a show that has gone from no budget, dogy sets to increasing budget and more sophisticated plots. Not everyone agrees with the last series.
Being the longest running Sit-com on BBC, it probably could have died years ago. I just take what comes and apreciate it.
Why the BBC decided to drop Doctor Who is a mystery to me though...
From my Autobiography - "Lifestyles of the Sad and Desperate"...
Red Dwarf went from episodes about time travel where the characters meet themselves and give them warnings from the future, and monsters that can change shape into the shape of the characters, to, uh, episodes about time travel where the characters meet themselves and give them warnings from the future, and monsters that can change shape into the shape of the characters. Theres no point in watching more than 3 episodes.
If you are going to troll then for goodness sake try harder than this pathetic effort. There's little doubt that the best comedy on the air (with the exception perhaps of The Simpsons) is found in imported UK series such as Monty Python, Ab Fab, Red Dwarf. If you can't appreciate it, well, that's your problem.
But I'm not sure that anyone to do with Buffy could create true Dr Who episodes! What we want is lots of gravel pits - are there any left in England?
An entire series in the same styela s the movie would go down nicely.
Joking, right? Last of the Summer Wine must hold that record, by about 15 years longer than Red Dwarf :-)
Tim
>Anyone remember seeing Romana #1 earlier in the series as another character?
Ah, no, but apparently she (Mary Tamm) did play an adversary of the doctor
in an earlier season?... Unfortunately I can not find information on what the
role or episode was that she first appeared in.
Your question threw me for a second, because I do remember Romana #2 (Lalla
Ward) earlier in the series as another character. So I guess both actresses
share that distinction as well in their Whovian careers.
...if they revived 'The Tripods'. I never liked 'Doctor Who' anyway and 'The Tripods' (although short and never finished) was one of the best series in the eighties. Lately, lots of people have been trying to get the BBC (or the other stations that aired the series back then, like germany's ZDF ) to re-air it but they won't due to some legal conflict. God, I hate lawyers =P At least Season 1 got released on DVD. Season two seems to be stuck because of another legal issue...one will has to ask the Donkey. Still, there's a petition (in german) to get it back on the screen. I doubt it'll help much but if you liked the series GO SIGN IT.
doctor who?
Lets see if they make some more 'realistic' robots instead of the trashcan's with dryer ventilation hoses for arms and lets.
Wonder if they'll modernize the intro music too.
--Huck
"Just Smile and Nod." --Huck
I agree with many of your comments. I think later episodes were driven by the view that it was a kids show and didn't really need a consistant story or character development if it had fast editing, flashy costumes and something fantastic in the plot.
For me the hayday of Dr Who was with Jon Pertwee stuck on Earth with UNIT.
Meanwhile, in case you didn't know, John Nathan Turner died recently.
Now I've got to move over to the UK. Just as I was getting used to driving on the right side of the road...
alias uptime="echo '5:33pm up 22342352324 days, 6:28, 2124315623 users, load average: 2432.40, 12312.31, 123123.19'"
The concept of an eccentric alien travelling on an extradimensional spacetimeship that can morph to blend with its surroundings is a good one for a sci-fi, but to be taken seriously, it has to stop taking on the form of an outdated English police box all the time.
There's probably a whole generation of young people who's never seen a blue police box their entire lives, not to mention the rest of the world, to whom it just makes the TARDIS and the whole show just look silly.
Dr. Who was(is) great because of the fact that the stories had plot. I just got finished watching "Genisis of the Daleks" and it is great. The story develops at a nice pace, the villian (Davaros) you grow to hate, but in the end you feel sorry for him because you actually get to understand him (albet in odd ways). These elements always make for a good story. It can only get better if they add better effects.
Oh yeah, if you want proof you can have good effects and good plot, watch Star Trek:Enterprise. The eps are quality (usually, or maybe Voyager just set my standards low).
Anyway just my $.02
Secondusn
There is nothing wrong with being gay. It's getting caught where the trouble lies.
That guy rulez! A bit of trivia: his brother Murray Head plays Judas on the original recording of "Jesus Christ Superstar" and was an 80s one-hit wonder with "One Night in Bangkok" (from the musical "Chess")
The article quotes the Daily Express! Next you'll be reporting that Elvis is alive and well and living on mars.
Would you rather be:
A) The Doctor
B) A Doctor Who bad guy (Like the Master)
C) A Doctor Who gribbly monster. (Cyberman, Dalek)
D) A Doctor Who assistant.
E) Cowboy Neal sitting on the sofa watching the above episode.
There is only one Dr. Who. No other Who will do.
The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
Yeah, I those three too, and the other 7 series.
Well, I never...
Are you sure Last of the Summer Wine qualifies as a Sit-com? It's about as funny as bowel surgery.
From my Autobiography - "Lifestyles of the Sad and Desperate"...
And for a very simple reason. The BBC used to be able to make programming on merit. Now it's full of spineless plonkers in expensive suits dribbling on about mindshare and demographics and return on investment.
In an era where there were only three (or four or five) channels available in the UK, Dr Who was tolerated because chances are, there wouldn't be anything better on elsewhere. But now it would have to fight for audiences among many quality mainstream and SF channels, worldwide.
And that means going toe to toe with the likes of Stargate, the Trek franchise, with Farscape, and with the all powerful Buffyverse.
To do that, you need the Buffy formula of good writing (which it always had) but also good acting (leads and support), costume, lighting, sound, editing, and FX, which, let's be honest, Dr Who was never overburdened with.
And all that costs, and that means risk, and that means it won't happen. It doesn't have the luxury of Red Dwarf, of coming from nowhere, starting out with zero budget and building up. It'd have to come back with a vengeance and go toe to toe with the big guns. And frankly, I don't think the BBC could do it. Not any more. It simple wouldn't have the courage to commit the necessary resource, and if it did try it, it would cut corners, produce something that was too safe to be cult and too sucky to be mainstream, which would just further reenforce the BBC notion that SF is expensive and risky.
There is actually a third option. Between expensive and good, and cheap and crap you can do cheap and good, if you have the vision and the courage. Look at the stunning Ultraviolet, done by the UK's Channel 4. Dark and gritty, completely believable, driven by story, drama and characters, dealing credibly with seriously adult issues like cancer, abortion and child abuse in six perfect, breathtaking, deeply moving episodes. It just happened to have vampires in it.
But that was Channel 4, not the BBC. C4 is now breaking the ground in the UK, with the BBC following on, assimilating the safer ideas. The BBC couldn't do a credible big budget Dr Who, and it hasn't got the talent or the courage to create a new vision for it. Channel 4 could, but they don't have the license. And think what Joss Whedon or Chris Carter could do with it, given half a chance.
So consider my name on the huge petition to get the BBC to stop clinging to past glories. Either use the license, or pass it on. But don't sit on it for fifteen years, exploiting the memory and teasing us with the possibility of a return, while the audience ages and we simply stop caring. Use it or lose it!
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Why do I feel like i'm in a state of chronic historisis? Dr Who is going to be revived...no its not...it's coming back...not its not...Fox has optioned a series....no its not...
John Maynard Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
O.T., but for all you Dr. Who fans, there's a website, www.drwho.org out there dedicated to Dr. Who fans with discussion forums, announcements, etc.
:-) I'd love to see the look on his face if/when it happens.
Y'all out to try and see if you can slashdot poor Mike Wilson's machine to hell and back
If the BBC had a clue, then they would realize that there's money to be made in this. The fact that a rumour like this has gotten this far and this out-of-hand should tell them something: "Hey, maybe they're onto something. Maybe there's, like, and actual following for that sci-fi show we cancelled for no good reason in 1989." But no, they're content to leave their heads firmly lodged up their asses.
Bitter? Who, me?
The BBC deny it. For those that can't get to the link, their actual words are:
"Well, this all sounds nice, but honestly, we've been dry-humping the corpse of Doctor Who for over ten years now, doing everything we can to make a buck off of it short of actually producing the bloody TV show. Why go through the trouble of making a show when instead we can just as easily sit back, license the thing to anyone who wants it, and let THEM produce an endless stream of merchandise while we reap the cash rewards? No thanks. We're fine the way things are, despite how excited so many people get when a rumor such as this comes out. Oh and by the way, no one likes science fiction anyway."
Y'know, there are many legitimate complaints to throw at the final seasons of "Doctor Who." The producer, John Nathan-Turner, was saddled with a show he had repeatedly stated his wish to leave, and the BBC started taking a blunderingly hands-on approach to filling the cast and production crew (hence the firing of Colin Baker, the sixth actor to play the Doctor).
But I don't think it can be said that the "later episodes were driven by the view that it was a kids show." The ostensible reason for the firing of Colin Baker was that the stories had taken a positively morbid turn: season twenty-two was driven by at times blisteringly dark comedy and body horror. "Attack of the Cybermen" goes into excrutiating detail, describing the process of converting humans into robotic Cybermen. "Vengeance on Varos" was an often bitter satirical attack on television production, with rather graphic torture sequences. "The Two Doctors" deals with cannibalism, and "Revelation of the Daleks," like "Varos," was extremely violent, and a partial homage to "Soylent Green."
Even after Baker's firing, though, the show kept its dark edge. The series's final script editor, Andrew Cartmel, oversaw a serious attempt to darken the Doctor himself. Some of the stories *did* take on seemingly goofy premises, but almost always in service of serious social commentary. The twenty sixth and final season also saw "Ghost Light," a twisted mystery set in a Victorian manor house, and the classic "Curse of Fenric," dealing with WWII era politics, Norse mythology, and environmentalism.
It's also important to note that, throughout these years, there was a decided return to the sort of character-, as opposed to situation-, driven stories of the very earliest years of the show. Both the aforementioned "Ghost Light" and "Curse of Fenric" were part of a mini-story arc comprising most of season 26 concerning the past of the Doctor's then-companion, Ace.
Though a lot of people dislike these years, they really weren't "kiddie" by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. Personally, I feel the show was experiencing something of a renaissance in its final years, only to be finally destroyed by poor promotion and scheduling by the BBC, placing it against Britain's number one soap opera, "Coronation Street," and providing absolutely no advertising for the final season.
Truth be told, the BBC doesn't seem interested in bringing back the series. The 1996 Fox co-produced TV movie was a hit in Britain, and spawned a renewed interest in DW merchandise. But it was a failure in the United States, and Fox wasn't interested in pursuing a full series. The BBC probably wouldn't mind seeing the series again, they just don't want to foot the bill....
Like the original "Star Trek," though, its almost certain to return at some point. Merchandise actually increased after the cancellation, and the series now lays claim to the largest series of original novels to have derived from a TV show (being published twice monthly for almost a decade), and original CD-based audio drama series, a long-running magazine, and numerous other products. It's got a large fanbase that doesn't seem to have shrunk substantially since 1989, when the show was cancelled.
Sean Daugherty "I have walked in Eternity -- and Eternity weeps."
Good point.
:-)
:-)
<rant>
I think the "must wrap up everything in 50 minutes" emphasis in many shows is a real shame. Extra time would not only allow for more character development, it's just more plain old storytelling time. This is especially important in shows that sometimes explore complex themes and ideas. Take Star Trek:TNG as an example. I loved that show as much as the next geek, but sometimes they would establish a great premise, add interesting twists and complications and then magically wrap everything up in the few minutes after the last commercial break. (The solutions nearly always involved tachyons, IIRC
TNG also suffered from another common characteristic of episodic television: each episode is pretty much a clean slate, where the events of previous episodes are conveniently forgotten. You'd think characters who were taken to other dimensions or lived an entire lifetime on another planet would have some ongoing issues, no? Not to mention more pragmatic matters: how many times did you ask yourself "why didn't they use that technology they discovered in that other episode?"
I know I'm being picky. It's probably unreasonable to expect a long running series to be completely internally consistent when you're using many different writers and directors and doing different things all the time (which is a Good Thing). You also have to keep the series accessible to casual and new viewers. So I'm prepared to suspend my disbelief, but is it too much to ask for some longer stories? Everyone seems to love those TNG double episodes: I for one wished at the climax of a few other episodes that I would soon see those magic words: To Be Continued. Alas, it was not to be.
</rant>
Full credit goes to the newer generation of US cable shows (Sopranos et al) which seem to suffer less from these problems.
P.S. I used TNG as a specific example, but the complaint applies to many shows. Regarding TNG specifically, I've never really seen Babylon 5, and will get around it eventually; so don't hassle me
gold is deadly to CMOS, which is why the cybermen-gold thing is cool and funny.
Yeah, I think it's pretty funny. Mind you, the first few times I saw it I thought "What on Earth is this?", but catching the tail end several times before "As Time Goes By", soon got me hooked.
It's more of a "chuckle" show rather than a "laugh out loud so milk spurts out your nose" show.
Gordon.
He that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom.
-- J.R.R. Tolkien
I just hope to god it's nothing like that lame-ass fox movie. I can't think of anything that was NOT Dr.Who more than that godawful piece of crap.
--What, you ain't know about them country fried sessions?
You may have some difficulty with that. The last I heard, there are only something like eleven PBS stations that currently run episodes. It's a far cry from the eighties, when hundreds of stations were buying the rights to transmit, despite the high cost. Even some of the larger PBS stations have dropped it, including the behemoth WGBH in Boston. Apparently there wasn't enough interest for them.
In case you happen to live in New England, WENH channel 11 in Durham, New Hampshire still shows them. It's an awful time slot (I recall it's at about midnight on Thursday, two episodes back-to-back, then rerun at midnight on Saturday), but at least it's there.
The insurance cost of having the actors climb around rocks for 10 minutes each episode is astounding.
OddManIn: A Game of guns and game theory.
It's interesting that you called it a kid's show. Originally, that's exactly what it was: for the first five years or so, the time travel premise was used as a way to teach history for schoolchildren. Without the TARDIS, the best they could realistically do was to either have a typical documentary format, or be stuck in one time period with the characters. Many of the Hartnell episodes reflect this, with adventures involving the Crusades, the Roman Empire, the Mongols, the Wild West, you name it.
Of course, with early successes like the Daleks, they realized that the sci-fi storylines were keeping kids interested in the show as well, so they kept producing them. Eventually, new topics in world history that they hadn't covered became more scarce, so more science fiction crept in, and with it came older viewers as well. The Pertwee era shows the focus change well, with plenty of UNIT gunfights and the like in nearly every story. I'd cover later evolution in this thread, but I think previous posters covered it better than I would.
And so ends the Doctor Who history lesson for the day.
AAAIIIIGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!
No more bad lighting, sets that fall over, stupid aliens who can't figure out how to climb stairs, idiotically long scarves that will get you killed in any amusement ride.
Please stop the horror.
Head has a lot of gravitas -- sometimes I think too much. That was his main contribution to Buffy -- calm, patient, tweedy Giles counterweighting all those impulsive teenagers. (Come to think of it, that relationship was completely missing from Season 6 of Buffy, even the episodes that Head was in. Helps explain a lot that went wrong.) He's a decent actor, but I just can't see him doing a wonky Time Lord, even if they knit him a scarf a light-year long.
I think you're on drugs. The whole point of the doctor is that he needs to be a likeable avuncular or grandfatherly figure, but one where you always just about wonder why there's always a young girl in toe all the time... ;-)
Roan Atkinson is primarily comedic; and whilst he might stretch the part, you're talking serious risk that the audience wouldn't buy it.That's probably why some of the doctors have been more successful than others btw. Sure as a one-off joke, but as a non comedic situation? Nah.
The actor that plays Giles would be absolutely perfect for the part. IMO.
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"I believe the point was those WERE the other 7 series!
Bring back Dr. Who and do the FX with Amigas
Even if shag carpeting would slow them down(and I've seen Daleks climbs stairs on later seasons), it would have to be a pretty big bedroom to get out of weapon range!
"Common Sense Ain't" -Unknown
Maybe instead of the Buffy team, we could have Chris Carter direct, and David Duchovny could star as the Doctor, and Gillian Andersen could be the sidekick, maybe named Leela or Romanadvoratrelundar or something like that. Mitch Pileggi could be the Brigadier-General. William Davis could be the Master. They could wander the universe in the TARDIS and encounter strange, alien life forms and situations and save the earth from invasion and stuff.
Actually, maybe William Davis could be the Doctor. Or whoever played Jose Chung.
Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.
Cardboard, Glue and Imagination that is...
I've seen the script. Here's an excerpt:
Abbot: I'm here to see my doctor.
Costello: Who is your doctor?
Abbot: Yes.
Costello: What?
Abbot: No, not what, Who!
Costello: I asked you first!
Abbot: IAskedYouFirst is my chiropractor. I'm here to see Dr. Who.
Costello: Didn't he used to play for the...
Abbot: No, that was his brother.
etc.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
How bout Clinton as the doctor.
Monica as a sidekick.
Carville as Davros.
Maybe it's the RIAA as the Daleks. Evil and powerful, but otherwise a mindless hurd.
you gotta be kidding me, you people watch that childish dungheap?
Oh yeah, right, I can just see Rowan Atkinson as Dr. Who.
"No, Baldrick, it can't possibly be a Viking helmet, it's obviously part of a spacesuit made for a cow. Here, take it home, I think it will fit your mother quite nicely."
(Yes, I know, the first part actually is more or less a quote from "The Time Meddler," but imagine Atkinson saying it in his best Blackadder the Third voice.)
Someone you trust is one of us.
Dr Who was cool, I grew up with it here in Australia. Buffy is just 90210 with vampires.
be vigilant, be pure, behave
Called "The Watcher" Mr. Head is starring in his on series. A spin-off of "Buffy" and it will be on the BBC.
You didn't see him doing it, have you.
I think that he can do more than be funny.
(given, what he did was funny...)
"...and buffy fans are not dr who fans..." Oh yes they are, i'm one. I like both for different reasons. I like Dr. Who because i grew up with it and it was the first SF series i remember watching(I can still remember sitting on the table in our old house watching Dr. Who, I was about 5yo), I like Bufy because it makes my laugh (and Cry). It's basicly the same standpoint, Buffy and the doctor have been thrown into a situation where they are expected to know everything and to defend the innocent. That thay have both been given a chance of changing the fate of the world (or in the Dr.'s case the universe)I think that the buffy writers should come on board, and i think that they should "pick another Doctor" expand the universe a little, then you could have it different but the same....Also another thing, I thought that Anthony Head was doing Ripper with the BBC? Anyways here ends my rant......
This is not a test, it is just a distraction.
Now there would be a good series to return, and please don't screem at me but i was just thinking that J. Michael Strasinsky...(qzxvytkp....how ever it's spelt) (of Babalon5 fame....btw dose anyone know if B5 is going to be relaced on DVD?) should write it. I always felt that it should have had more of a story arc.....
This is not a test, it is just a distraction.
Bah... you may like them both, but you're kidding yourself if you think dr who is anywhere near one tenth as popular as buffy... hence, most buffy fans, are not dr who fans. This holds true moreso in women. Tens of thousands of women watch buffy who would sooner die than watch an episode of Dr Who (or star trek for that matter).
Send lawyers, guns, and money!
Bring back Romana and K9, they really made the show! Fix the chameleon curcuit. Have The Master steal a new body. Bring back Darvos and the Daleks. Send in the Cybermen. But most importantly, regenerate The Doctor, into another actor.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.