Slashdot Mirror
Doctor Who To Become Hollywood Feature Film
Hugh Pickens writes writes "Variety reports that David Yates, who directed the last four Harry Potter films, is teaming up with the BBC to turn its iconic sci-fi TV series Doctor Who into a Hollywood franchise. 'We're looking at writers now. We're going to spend two to three years to get it right,' says Yates. 'It needs quite a radical transformation to take it into the bigger arena.' But not everyone is enamored with the idea of Doctor Who on the big screen. 'I fear that high production values and the inevitable sexualisation of the lead characters that a Hollywood treatment brings will destroy the show,' writes Andrew M. Brown in the Telegraph. 'The ecosystem of a great television programme is a delicate thing. Please, Hollywood, don't spoil Doctor Who."
Please, Hollywood, don't spoil Doctor Who.
That's like asking the school bully not to beat you up and take your lunch money.
He does it every day, he's going to do it every day, and now it's your turn.
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
But a director of a Harry Potter film getting withing 10 meters of Dr. Who fills me with a cold, evil feeling.
Either that or the breakfast burrito was bad...
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Yes, we wouldn't want to risk sexualizing Amy Pond.
Ita erat quando hic adveni.
DO NOT WANT!
What the hell?? I mean why would anyone...oh yeah...greed. Forgot about that for a moment.
I sincerely hope that this does not get made.
Anybody got any Daleks or Cybermen we can sic on these guys?
"Bah!" - Dogbert
Because the Doctor Who movie that we made with the Canadians was great!
Actually- it wasn't that bad- but it wasn't Doctor Who. It was something else entirely.
Really, it all depends on how they execute it- they can make it good or they can make a real hash of it. I'll probably watch it regardless.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
The last thing Doctor Who needs is the Hollywood treatment. Please tell me this is a bad dream.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
Take a short miniseries and stretch it out to a full series to milk it and make the plot run like molasses. Add in a lot of mindless action with big explosions and helicopter chases, because that's what American shows look like, right?
I'm afraid of what they're going to do to Doctor Who, but if Torchwood was any example, keep Hollywood's dirty hands off it.
No no no, for the love of God, no!!!
A major aspect of the show is the fact that it is small-screen. Its roots are in the campiness that the early shows had, and that occurred because of the tiny budget and fast turnaround. The effect of that can still been seen today.
The campiness and fun will be eliminated in a Hollywood blockbuster treatment, and it will turn into just another sex-and-explosions vehicle.
"Don't blame the log for the fire." --Andrew Ratshin
Dr Who has been around for 50 years. It has survived pretty much anything you could throw at it. It will survive hollywood.
I have to wonder, however, if the folks doing the market research realize just how adverse Dr Who fans will be to a big budget movie. One of the appeals of Dr Who is the low production value of it, and the ability to take risks that goes along with that. It's unconventional, it's interesting. These are two attributes that hollywood has demonstrated a knack for destroying. Further, one of better attributes of Dr Who has always been it's "continuity" ( which is hilarious in and of itself ), of it's long scope story arcs. Again, not a "movie" thing.
A Dr Who movie will need to somehow work in the back story, build an interesting plot and come to a conclusion. All within 2 hours. Unless they plan for a series of movies, which would make more sense. That way they can build the backstory and get the plot rolling, then continue in the second movie and finish up in a third. But that might be too much of an investment for a relatively unknown franchise ( unknown to anyone outside geekdom at any rate ).
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Tom Baker??? Fuck that. The obvious and only choice for a Hollywood version: Arnold Schwarzenegger!
With Tom Baker brought back in full youth and form via the miracle of CGI.
I wish. More likely, some 25-year-old pretty boy who walked straight out of an Abercrombie and Fitch catalog and can't act his way out of a wet paper bag.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
I would only watch it if Hugh Laurie played the Doctor.
The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
I personally am looking forward to a bunch of people stumbling around with a human inventor whom they call "Doctor Who" as they remake one of the more pedestrian and overused storylines. That would be so much better than, say, bringing back Paul McGann (who got robbed in my opinion) and filling in the final time war and destruction of Gallifrey that occurred between Doctor Who (1996) and Rose (2005) but was never filmed.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Dr Who has already been ruined. They may as well sell it for scrap now.
The latest season has been an utter disgrace.
I'm a big fan, I've seen every episode.
(those early black and white ones are pretty campy)
The recent episode about the fat bumbling idiot with the talking baby was the straw that broke the camel's back.
"herp a derp... I'm a fat moron, look, I walked into a wall and knocked over a display-case! hahahah, now my baby is making cutting remarks about me! Oh dear! aliens! oh dear, I've bumbled and stumbled into their grasp, how will I ever escape? Maybe if I really *really* love my baby the power of my love will make them explode! KABOOM! yay! it worked! *happily ever after*"
I haven't been able to watch it again since that day.
I read the article which provided the argument against turning Dr. Who into a movie, and I disagree with most of the points. A few comments:
1. Length. TV episodes are one hour, which requires a tight plot. A movie would add an extra hour, which the writer of the article claims would ruin that. He says he's from the Tom Baker generation (I was too), but he seems to have forgotten that during the Tom Baker era, the show was a bunch of miniseries. Much longer than a movie. Even now, there are plenty of two-part and three-part episodes, and really the only difference between that and a movie is that in TV there's an incentive to add a cliffhanger each hour. Turning it into a movie actually gives them more freedom because there isn't that incentive.
2. Sexualization of the characters. First, this isn't necessary even in a Hollywood film, so it might not happen. Second, he complains about the Doctor getting younger and younger to give him more sex appeal, but that's already happening on the TV show. Hollywood has nothing to do with it. Third, in the latest incarnation there's already sexual chemistry between the Doctor and his companion. Granted, it's all misdirection and misleading the audience into thinking there's more there than there really is, and other than one kiss, Amy has been completely faithful to Rory. But you can't deny that the sexual chemistry between the Doctor and Amy is there. Again, this is all without Hollywood.
3. Cheap sets and props. True, that's been a hallmark of Dr. Who from the beginning, and some of it still remains in the latest series. However, there's plenty of high tech special effects these days in the show. Will the big screen change that ratio in favor of the high tech at the expense of the cheap? No doubt. But nostalgia aside, who really cares?
So all of his concerns are things that are already happening in the show. Could Hollywood blow it? Sure. But if so, it won't be because of any of the things he complains about. The smartest thing for Hollywood to do would be to hire the writers from some of the better episodes of the past few years. Stick with what makes the show great and let the Hollywood format support the story rather than supplant it.
"It needs quite a radical transformation to take it into the bigger arena."
Isn't this a good enough reason not to do it at all?
They've been trying to add romantic interest since the 2005 reboot. Look at Rose. And Amy. And River. And...
One of the things I liked about Dr Who was that he was old enough to be cool and detached. He thinks his way out of a problem, not shoots his way out.
Now it's all "RUN!" and zapping things with his magic wand, err, sonic screwdriver. And sublimated smootchy-face that would embarrass booger and Mrs diPesto.
I've liked the story arcs with Amy, the way they try to enmesh every single goddamned little thing back into the big story. I just remind myself this isn't Dr Who, it's Han Solo with a Time Machine and a British accent.
Oh, and apparently they're trying for some sort of record on how fast they can turn over doctors.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Uh, isn't Doctor Who fairly sexualized already (especially the 10th Doctor)? I mean, they have lesbian characters, guys from the 51st century who will have sex with anything, Amy Pond wanted the Doctor to "sort" her. Or is this simply an American vs British thing?
I figure an American version of Doctor Who would be more like this
No one cares what your captcha was
Houston TX, USA
You had me at "big tits".
Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
Don't forget the gay sex scenes, which are RTD's trademark and get shoehorned into every single thing he's made, irrespective of whether it actually makes sense to the story or whether sex scenes (between people of any orientation) are appropriate thematically. For some strange reason, he's actually proud of this when he's interviewed. Torchwood made it to, what, episode 3 before they had alien lesbians? And then finally admitted it had no plan with the episode 'kiss kiss, bang bank', the only episode of any show I've seen where the title was a complete and accurate summary of the entire episode.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Rowan Atkinson played a great doctor already. If you haven't seen it, you should.
Heck, my wife hates Star Trek but enjoyed that movie
Do you think it is wise to broadcast your motive to the entire net while the police is still investigating her brutal and prolonged death?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059126/
I predict that this will be like Coupon the Movie all over again.
Doctor Who has passed into the realm of Modern Mythology now. Just like Dracula, Superman, and Star Trek has now become part of our "mythology". These characters and stories may take a rest from time to time but there will always be someone to come along and retell/re-imagine/re-work them. Doctor Who is just too fertile a ground for good stories to leave too long. Heck, we are still getting milage from Sinbad, Hercules, and Atlantis! The theatrical Who movies of the '60s didn't kill a much younger series... no worries here.
I see a lot of comments in this threat that Doctor Who has already jumped the shark. I concur, and I haven't even seen anything later than David Tennant. When in your opinion did Doctor Who go irrevocably off track?
In my opinion it was way back with Sylvester McCoy when the seventh Doctor blew up Skaro's sun with something-or-other of Omega. I just can't handle the idea of The Doctor committing genocide -- and smirking while he does it. Contrast with the fourth Doctor's moral dilemma in the Genesis of the Daleks, and you can see the quality of the writing had already sunk very from from its peak.
At this point I would rather let it die and remember it fondly, the way it was.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
I think the radio version of Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy is much better than the old BBC TV version.
Wait, that's way too obvious, even for the USA market. Let's make the password "SIDRAT".
And the enemy will be a giant spider.
It needs quite a radical regeneration
There, is that better?
Bring back Christopher Eccleston and it might have a shot.
Anyone remember the side kick, Peri? In 1984 they cast Nicola Bryant, as Perpugilliam Brown, and she lasted through 2 Doctors. Towards the end, they even let her wear entire sets of clothing.
- and Hollywood could pull something off and make it work in such a way that it appeals to both "Hollywood" audience and the Dr. Who faithfull.
The trick would be letting the glamour and the hollywoodization fall on the companions. Let the companions develop the love interests etc, and be the eye candy- just don't make that the main part of the story.
I think America can enjoy a quirky excentric professor type Dr. Who, like the original doctors portrayed.
I think they could remake the original Dr. Who episode "an unearthly child" into the film- just make the girl older- high school age and let her be the "coming of age" character that Hollywood so loves.
They just have to balance it right- so as to not make the "Hollywood side" of things the main part of the story.
Good special effects needn't ruin the story if encorporated correctly. What the '96 movie did wrong was turn Dr. Who into an action hero. He never should be.
It's OK to have a companion that gets into a little bit of action- as long as that is not over emphasised. Think Perry Mason's P.I. that would get into a few action roles- but it was never about him- it was about Perry Mason.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Craig Ferguson as the doctor!
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
This is going to be a disaster. Look there is a vast difference in styles between British and American shows that just don't cross over very well. Im not saying American TV is bad (reality TV is very bad but thats a worldwide problem) but whenever the Americans try to adopt another countries show it loses what made it appealing in the first place.
I remember the horrible mess that was the US version of The Office, as well as the Australian show Kath & Kim.
I remember Hollywood wanted to mess with Red Dwarf, replace The Cat with a female, which alone would have ruined it. What?
Please America, you do you're own thing well and other countries do their thing well. When you try to "Americanize" an overseas franchise you kill the charm that made it good in the first place.
Make SELinux enforcing again!
1. Daleks. Use the color-coded Daleks but use their funny appearance more deceivingly and realistically lethal. I mean, much of their bodies are supposed to be highly sophisticated tech not people hidden inside. Use it. (Turn all those half-balls on the side into hunter-seeker spider-like drones?)
2. The Tardis is big. Really, really big. Except lately we never see much of what's in it. (One exception was when the Tardis computer was extracted) Earlier series often showed the swimming pool, personal rooms, walk in closets, the warning room, etc. If Hollywood's doing it at least take advantage to show off the greatness that is the Tardis. Explore the concept. The Doctor is a scientist and time/space traveller and he doesn't have a personal lab or nic-nac room inside?
3. The Time Lords. I was a little annoyed that the Time Lords all become Evil and Had To Be Banished. Maybe it's because I liked Romana and the times the Doctor visited but, again, have Gallefry live again.
4. The Master. I loved the look of the old Masters. The new one seems to have lost much to the Time Wars. Make him intelligent Evil Overlord who pays attention to the Things I Will Not Do When I Am an Evil Overlord. Heck, have him READING it during the movie-now that would be funny!
5. Companions. Have a more useful seeming Companion mixed in with one or two that needs to be rescued. Not too much so but Spock and McCoy were not captain of the ship and they rocked.
6. K-9. Classic reborn but no real dogs please. Or perhaps mix him with the T-2000 and make him a K-9 with monomolecular teeth. Woof!
Wait, that's way too obvious, even for the USA market. Let's make the password "SIDRAT".
But... everyone knows the password is Crimson Eleven Delight Petrichor.