Jump to content

Official Doctor Who New Series Discussion (spoilers)


Recommended Posts

I remmeber the Fox thing-- it failed here, but they love dit in the UK, and he is considered canonically the 8th Doctor!

 

And yeah I saw the Americna Red Dwarf and it blew.

 

I'm just saying it's a possibility whether you like it or not. TONMS of American shows are remakes from UK TV.

 

I agree that Dr. Who is inherently Britishy, if America did it, it would be a very different format. The TV movie Fox did was trying to tie into the existing Franchise with Americaan sensibilities and it was a bad mix.. plus it was just a lame story. I'm talking about a ground-up remake, like BSG. Not ties to the original series beyond basic concept.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

That, and pretty much this:

The 'new chick' had already been set up.   Lot's of pretty spot on fan theories regarding how Clara is a meta-textual analogy for the show itself. She's born on Nov 23, the show's original air date. S

That reads like HuffPo had an embargoed interview they ran early. Somebody's getting fired.

Posted Images

What is this Fox thing? Paul McGann is officially the 8th doctor, because of his work in BBC Radio with Doctor Who.

 

You can listen to episodes over the internet on BBC 7 The latest one has just finished and I missed the end! Have to wait till tomorrow to listen again now!!!

 

(All times GMT to avoid any confusion)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 'Fox thing' was the 1996 TV movie..

 

As I recall it was a joint venture between the BBC, Universal, and Fox [who also broadcast the movie]. Fox made the unfortunate mistake of running the TV movie directly against the show Roseanne [ion ABC] which was airing the big sweeps episode about Dan's heart attack.

 

It was a no-win situation for Doctor Who, the vast majority of America either had never heard of Doctor Who or hadn't seen anything about the show in well over 10 years. Roseanne was riding high on the popularity wave for years by that point, so the 'big' episode sucked away most all of the potential audience. [in case you're wondering I was a Who fan by that time and had tuned into Doctor Who instead, plus I never liked Roseanne]

 

It didn't help that the TV movie left fans with mixed feelings. It was great seeing new Doctor Who on air and there was certainly alot to appreciate in the movie. But I'm sure most fans could've done without the shoehorned 'romance' sub-plot that never went anywhere [not to mention out of character for the Doctor], the handful of gaping plot holes, and the whole 'half-human' thing.

 

It's not a terrible movie though, on a scale of 1 to 10 I'd give it a 6.5 [good, middle of the road ], I've seen much worse done on vastly larger budgets by Hollywood. I find it fun to watch from time to time - warts and all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be noted too, that Paul McGann, the Dr. UKLK is touting, is in fact the same one from the TV movie, and that was his debut. 7th Doctor Synlester McCoy even cameoed in the beginning for a death/regeneration sequence.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Shadow:

The 'Fox thing' was the 1996 TV movie..  

 

As I recall it was a joint venture between the BBC, Universal, and Fox [who also broadcast the movie].  Fox made the unfortunate mistake of running the TV movie directly against the show Roseanne [ion ABC] which was airing the big sweeps episode about Dan's heart attack.

 

It was a no-win situation for Doctor Who, the vast majority of America either had never heard of Doctor Who or hadn't seen anything about the show in well over 10 years.  Roseanne was riding high on the popularity wave for years by that point, so the 'big' episode sucked away most all of the potential audience.  [in case you're wondering I was a Who fan by that time and had tuned into Doctor Who instead, plus I never liked Roseanne]

 

It didn't help that the TV movie left fans with mixed feelings.  It was great seeing new Doctor Who on air and there was certainly alot to appreciate in the movie.  But I'm sure most fans could've done without the shoehorned 'romance' sub-plot that never went anywhere [not to mention out of character for the Doctor], the handful of gaping plot holes, and the whole 'half-human' thing.

 

It's not a terrible movie though, on a scale of 1 to 10 I'd give it a 6.5 [good, middle of the road ], I've seen much worse done on vastly larger budgets by Hollywood.  I find it fun to watch from time to time - warts and all.

Also, it was run against the NHL playoffs or one of the Stanley Cup games, I forget which, back when people actually cared about the NHL.

 

Still, it pulled in 6 million. I believe it pulled in 9-10 million in the UK.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I got that now.

 

Wasn't the film actually Canadian though?? Trying to take more credit where it isn't due eh Fox? :p

 

*CoughFamilyGuyCough*

 

Tom Baker is who everyone associates Doctor Who with now, which is good, and bad in lots of ways becasue the other Doctors also brought something else to the character.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest The Wicked God Thanos

...which is why the '96 fox movie had Paul Mcgann, who was kind of a nod to Tom Baker. Tom Baker was the first Doctor Who I watched in PBS reruns, which is why he was my favorite of the bunch. Not that I am a huge fan or anything...Doctor Who was okay, but I always thought the fx were at times just, well, silly. But some of the stories were good, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was shame about the movie. They put the effort in, but I feel they tried to cram in far too much. If you are trying to get new fans interested in the series, you can't start off with a regeneration.

 

Look at the last series. That was really popular over here with every one talking about it no matter what their age. Shame it was only 1 series for the 9th doctor, but Tennant was good in the xmas special.

 

For those who never saw it, it basically covered the 10th Doctor's recovery from his regeneration, and also featured Harriet Jones from the Slitheen episodes as the new Prime Minister. Surprised they haven't shown it over in the US yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tank:

Why did Eccelson leave so soon? I really like him!

He is a pretty big star over there and was thusly expensive to cast, but the BBC felt they needed that name for the show's return. I believe part of the deal from the outset was for him to only do the one season, bring it back with a bang. On the plus side, Tennant's paycheck is less than CE's so that should free up money for other aspects of the production this season.
Link to post
Share on other sites
UK Legend Killa:

No no, they wanted him to stay and keep on doing it. He's much biggger now than he was. He didn't want to be typecast, but he ahd such a succesful return its sad to see him go.

OK. Then how come when CE announced he was leaving the show, Ep 13 was already shot and in the can? I think the show was in it's 6th or 7th week when CE said he was leaving. I know they did not go back and reshoot Parting of the Ways AFTER he made the announcement. The season was written for him to leave at the end. But I could be wrong...

 

Edit - In fact, I thought I read that the BBC was a bit perturbed that he let the cat out of the bag as his "dying" in Parting of the Ways would have been a huge shock that no one would have seen coming.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I recall, Eccleston was perturbed at the BBC for letting it slip that he wouldn't be returning [apparently they were supposed to keep mum about it].

 

I think the whole "I don't want to be typecast" line CE put out after it was revealed he wouldn't be returning wasn't the entire truth.

 

This was the Doctor he was playing, and at the time CE knew full well that the show initially ran a continous 26 seasons. If this new season was a success it might very run for another straight 26 seasons. He should've expected that he might play the Doctor for the typical 3 seasons and then be on his way. Three seasons [especially at a meager 13 episodes a season in the new format] meant Eccelston would have plenty of opportunity to pursue other acting opportunities during the shows 'off-time'.

 

I find the fear of being 'type-cast' a bit unreasonable. Look at Peter Davison, he's known for being in All Creatures Great and Small just as much his time as the Doctor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TV Shows on DVD is reporting that the Canadian release of the new Doctor Who series has been given a minor delay.

 

According to the pre-order listing at www.Amazon.ca the series will now be out on March 7th. US resident's eager to have the new series ASAP can purchase the Canadian release since it is Region 1.

 

http://www.tvshowsondvd.com/newsitem.cfm?NewsID=4930

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was finally able to see the Christmas episode in its entirety tonight, and I have to admit that Tenant is a VERY positive surprise.

 

I enjoyed his goofiness and sudden "dark" mood swings, as well as the nice balancing act between being warm, fuzzy, and caring, yet somewhat aloof. Those were some of my favorite aspects of Tom Baker's portrayal, so I was glad he didn't end up going with that scarf while in the wardrobe...

 

Only one episode, obviously, and he wasn't even in it for a good portion, but from what I've seen so far, I am really liking him.

 

Nothing against Eccleston, either -- despite his short run and certain annoying tendencies, I place him on par with Pertwee and Davidson (though below Troughton and Baker).

 

In fact, the only things I have to complain about now are the fact that it's so hard to see the show in the U.S., and the fact that nobody has told me the new Cyberman design isn't a joke...

Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...