I hope the answer to the "How did you get Tom Baker?" question was edited. It reads like Moffat avoids answering the question which given Tom Baker is on the record as saying the only reason he did the 50th was as a personal favour to "lovely" Caro when everyone else was rude and unprofessional, comes across poorly.
It's possible I'm overthinking and the answer was edited for space. But if I'd had a high profile falling out with an ex-colleague and someone asked how a certain thing that colleague was 100% responsible for came about, I'd make damn sure I name-checked them.
I'm sorry but I do not believe Moffat is being entirely honest. There's a lot of evidence that the 50th was simply a disorganised shambles and the script very late.
David Tennant said they didn't approach him till the very last minute and that he had to deal with being accused of lying, for such a good natured person he sounded relatively peeved. Tom Baker gave an interview that made the production office sound rude and incompetent. Colin Baker said that David Tennant was "furious" at how the production "messed him around." I have heard that Chris was willing to be in the 50th if there was a good script and if the timing worked out. Even Moffat admits that during their first meeting "Chris wanted to do it" and then by the second meeting he'd changed his mind. What happened inbetween to make him change his mind? How much time was between these two meetings?
I think Moffat is dissembling to try to subtly shift the blame away from his own failure to finish a script in time and the production's disorganisation.
Can you image how amazing Season 8 would have been in 2013 - a whole anniversary season? The anniversary special was fine, but quite shocking really that's all we got in terms of Doctor Who episodes - outside of the traditional Christmas episode.
To be honest, I'd have been happy with any sort of full series in that year, related to the anniversary or not, alongside the special. Instead all we got was the special and a few leftover episodes that were only there because they hadn't bothered to show a full series the year before.
It's quite bad when you think out of the last 3 years, the one year we got the least episodes was the one where if anything there should have been more than usual.
Can you image how amazing Season 8 would have been in 2013 - a whole anniversary season? The anniversary special was fine, but quite shocking really that's all we got in terms of Doctor Who episodes - outside of the traditional Christmas episode.
I thought Series 8 was already amazing in 2014 myself. An entire series as well as the 50th Anniversary might have been a little too much for the crew and it's likely both would have suffered for it. The 50th more than made up for the lack of Who episodes in my opinion and it was definitely worth the wait.
I've been very complimentary towards him for years. I was actually one of the biggest fans of the 50th and I still am. Doesn't mean I can't or shouldn't call him out when I believe he's being disingenuous.
Gosh it's like a One Direction tweenybopper fanclub in here these days.
I'm sorry but I do not believe Moffat is being entirely honest.
I think Moffat is dissembling to try to subtly shift the blame away from his own failure to finish a script in time and the production's disorganisation.
Rumour has it Steven Moffat steals candy from babies and says mean things about your nan when you turn your back.
Well, no one has said he's unkind to animals or is cruel to babies or nans. (Though all three categories deserve it imo - but that's just me). We're just saying he's economical with the truth.
Of course you can think every word he utters is gospel, if you like.....personally, if he said the sky was blue I'd have to go and check.
This is not because I "hate" Moffat. I don't. It's based on my experience of reading/hearing his comments and comparing this with what I know happened - eg, more Who than ever in the anniversary year, which he's still peddling, apparently, though we were there and we know different.
This in no way reflects on his quality as a writer, which is a separate question.
(And please, no one say RTD told fibs too - I never said he didn't).
I thought Series 8 was already amazing in 2014 myself. An entire series as well as the 50th Anniversary might have been a little too much for the crew and it's likely both would have suffered for it. The 50th more than made up for the lack of Who episodes in my opinion and it was definitely worth the wait.
They made the best of a bad job. But it was all forced on them due to the series 7 shambles. If it hadn't been for that they could easily perhaps have done a slightly short series (say 9 episodes) in 2012 in order to give the production team time to deliver a full series plus an anniversary episode in 2013. All in a planned way, giving plenty of time to sign up the cast and make sure the script is acceptable to them.
But instead from 2011 on they were playing catch-up. Even their plan to try and get series 8 made hot on the heels of series 7 and the anniversary came to naught. No doubt at some point the BBC just admitted defeat (presumably around the time Caro Skinner unceremoniously left) and told them to rest and don't bother trying to get series 8 to screens until Autumn 2014. Not because they thought it was a brilliant plan to clash it with Strictly and X Factor, but because they wanted to draw a line under 2011-2013.
I've been very complimentary towards him for years. I was actually one of the biggest fans of the 50th and I still am. Doesn't mean I can't or shouldn't call him out when I believe he's being disingenuous.
Gosh it's like a One Direction tweenybopper fanclub in here these days.
I'm more of a Little Mix fan actually.
I just dont know why you are still thinking about it. You dont know the truth. Moffat is a human being ergo he will project the version of events which casts him in a favourable light. You will never really know what happens. It sounds like you have been thinking about it too much. Is Moffat being disingenuous? Yes. But then so are you being if you think the patchwork of rumour, half-truth and quotations of dubious origin you presented above is anything like a representation of what happened. Colin Baker? That bitter old fool didn't have any insider information on the production of the anniversary special and was just shooting his mouth off in anger (as he has a habit of doing) because he was bitter they decided they didnt need his portly frame waddling into the episode. Also the bit about CE being ready to do the episode is complete and utter fabrication based on speculation from fans who again know nothing. The only evidence there is suggests CE had zero interest in returning whatever happened and met with the producers out of professional courtesy. To claim he changed his mind and dropped out based on lateness and a poor script is just total rubbish. Not to say Moffat doesnt speak a lot of nonsense. He does. But that doesnt give everyone a free pass to do the same about him.
a) I've had more than one conversation with Chris Eccleston personally.
b) Moffat himself says in the interview "Chris wanted to do it" during their first meeting, then had decided by the second not to do it.
c) Colin Baker is friends with David Tennant's father-in-law and they shot the Five-ish Doctors together right after all this "being messed around" happened. Tennant was obviously peeved at the disorganisation and being asked so late, that much is clear from his TV interviews on the subject. Presumably he and his father-in-law would have had conversations about it.
Why do you think it's so unlikely that Davison and Baker could have discussed what was going on with the 50th while they were shooting together, given the entire webisode is based on their rejection from it?? Davison talks about Tennant all the time in interviews and at cons. You don't think it's possible he said "oh yes, not only did they reject us, but my son-in-law said they really messed him around by not contacting him till the last minute!"
d) Since when are direct quotes from the actors "dubious half truths"? I notice you completely ignored Tom Baker's interview where he spells out exactly how and why he came to be in the 50th.
Can you image how amazing Season 8 would have been in 2013 - a whole anniversary season? The anniversary special was fine, but quite shocking really that's all we got in terms of Doctor Who episodes - outside of the traditional Christmas episode.
To me there's no excuse for failing to produce a series in the anniversary year, they dropped the ball big time there. But worse was what we did get. A single episode dedicated to the glorious history of the show that started in.. 2005. If it were a celebration of New Who then it worked really well but as a celebration of 50 years? In my opinion it totally failed. Sure the older Doctors often don't look as they did but the show is more than just the Doctor. It's about places, monsters, enemies and companions too. Would it really have been difficult to get William Russell in a scene, especially as Clara worked at Coal Hill School? If there was ever a time to look backwards, that was the time. Companions age and we could have seen Jamie, or Tegan, or Jo.. Such a wasted chance.
I also think the War Doctor was a bad move. Nothing against John Hurt but the very ideal of a Doctor fighting a war just fits McGanns Doctor so much better. A Doctor who hates violence fighting a war and ultimately regenerating out of guilt strikes me as a better story.
Count the minutes? Around about 2 hrs 40 minutes I believe. That's how much Doctor Who they managed in the anniversary year. To me that's the biggest DW disappointment since the show was cancelled.
That article reads to me as if Moffat is saying he didn't know whether Tennant would be willing to do the 50th or not, but I'm sure I've read that DT was waiting for the call with bated breath and not sure whether he'd actually be called until the last minute.......perhaps Moffat should just have asked him earlier.
Because what you get told in the publicity material is the whole truth... come on Granny, wise up. You don't know anything about what really goes on with the production of the show, with contracts. What they tell us is 'moonshine', as you put it. You'll only really hear the whole truth of any behind the scenes matters when the people involved with the show no longer have a vested interest in it (ie they're not employed by or hoping for employment by the BBC) and decide to talk.
You don't expect that what you hear at conventions or publicity interviews is what the various people honestly think do you?
This is why I get so cross with Moffat - we lost an entire season of episodes in 2013. It was the anniversary year and no season 8.
All we got was the anniversary special and the second half of season 7 carried over from 2012.
And two years later he's still coming out with nonsense like "nobody really noticed how much telly we made during it. Two weeks during which there was a Doctor Who show on every night. It was like a little mini-season that November. Some were saying, “Where are all the extra episodes?” There! Count the minutes."
Does he genuinely think we're idiots?
It was worse than that. The Power of Three was a rush job, as they realised too late that the 2012 series was too short
Why Moffat thought the previous series' leftovers for the 50th anniversary was acceptable, we'll never know. You wouldn't forgive it from an outsider, but for a fan to do so?
As good a writer he is, Moffat has proved time and again he is a piss poor showrunner
Because what you get told in the publicity material is the whole truth... come on Granny, wise up. You don't know anything about what really goes on with the production of the show, with contracts. What they tell us is 'moonshine', as you put it. You'll only really hear the whole truth of any behind the scenes matters when the people involved with the show no longer have a vested interest in it (ie they're not employed by or hoping for employment by the BBC) and decide to talk.
You don't expect that what you hear at conventions or publicity interviews is what the various people honestly think do you?
Good advice - believe nowt.
Perhaps you should tell that to the posters who think that Moffat never told a fib in his life, and we did indeed have more DW in 2013 than ever before or since.
Seeing as that's one statement that we absolutely know to be false as we were there.
I also think the War Doctor was a bad move. Nothing against John Hurt but the very ideal of a Doctor fighting a war just fits McGanns Doctor so much better. A Doctor who hates violence fighting a war and ultimately regenerating out of guilt strikes me as a better story.
Yeah that would have made much more sense,the whole War Doctor thing didn't really fit with Ecclestones 1st season for me and only seems to make sense from a "we've got John Hurt we must wedge him in" aspect.
Yeah that would have made much more sense,the whole War Doctor thing didn't really fit with Ecclestones 1st season for me and only seems to make sense from a "we've got John Hurt we must wedge him in" aspect.
Not only did it feel awkward and blatantly wedged in, but from a technical view point there were many times from the doctor psychically giving craig his memories, to the data stamp in the next doctor, to the data presented by the big eye thing in the eleventh hour, where official line up's of every incarnation of the doctor was shown and obviously Hurt was not there.
Just to balance things up a bit, I didn't think it "felt awkward and blatantly wedged in". It was a surprising revelation, worthy of a major event such as a 50th anniversary, and worked well in context. It exploited a gap in the Doctor's known history. The narrative worked hard enough to give the War Doctor character plausibility to aid the "willing suspension of disbelief" and, for me, succeeded.
I have to wonder whether those who feel the War Doctor concept was awkward and wedged in do so only because they were hoping CE would return (as I did at the time and still wish he had) but can't get past that disappointment. Nothing else SM could have done would have met their expectations after that disappointment.
Given that CE didn't want to or was unable to return, the idea to create a previously unknown Doctor and use the Time War as the backdrop and explanation for him to exist, for me, was an excellent "Plan B" and a stroke of genius.
Just to balance things up a bit, I didn't think it "felt awkward and blatantly wedged in". It was a surprising revelation, worthy of a major event such as a 50th anniversary, and worked well in context. It exploited a gap in the Doctor's known history. The narrative worked hard enough to give the War Doctor character plausibility to aid the "willing suspension of disbelief" and, for me, succeeded.
I have to wonder whether those who feel the War Doctor concept was awkward and wedged in do so only because they were hoping CE would return (as I did at the time and still wish he had) but can't get past that disappointment. Nothing else SM could have done would have met their expectations after that disappointment.
Given that CE didn't want to or was unable to return, the idea to create a previously unknown Doctor and use the Time War as the backdrop and explanation for him to exist, for me, was an excellent "Plan B" and a stroke of genius.
I don't like CE so was glad he wasn't there. Tennant and Matt were there so I was happy.
I enjoyed the 50th, but definitely felt the introduction of a previously unknown "War Doctor" was a strange step for Moffat to take.
It just got me thinking that Moffat had introduced another Doctor so that he would be the writer/showrunner who would deal with the "last regeneration" story as well as the 50th. More kudos for him (except the Trenzalore thing was dreadful).
I don't like CE so was glad he wasn't there. Tennant and Matt were there so I was happy. I enjoyed the 50th, but definitely felt the introduction of a previously unknown "War Doctor" was a strange step for Moffat to take. It just got me thinking that Moffat had introduced another Doctor so that he would be the writer/showrunner who would deal with the "last regeneration" story as well as the 50th. More kudos for him (except the Trenzalore thing was dreadful).
I just don't understand why it wasn't simply McGann. It would have made perfect sense in terms of continuity, particularly with the 9th Doctor's comments about his face and ears in Rose. And it's not as if Paul is a poor actor, not up to today's standards. He's superb.
I don't like CE so was glad he wasn't there. Tennant and Matt were there so I was happy.
I enjoyed the 50th, but definitely felt the introduction of a previously unknown "War Doctor" was a strange step for Moffat to take.
It just got me thinking that Moffat had introduced another Doctor so that he would be the writer/showrunner who would deal with the "last regeneration" story as well as the 50th. More kudos for him (except the Trenzalore thing was dreadful).
That has to be a possibility, because, in the absence of CE, McGann's Doctor would have been the logical choice for the Doctor who uses the Moment to destroy Gallifrey and the Daleks.
Wanting to be in charge when the Doctor reaches his last regeneration might have been his motivation. He also might have worried that the return of McGann in a central role (which would have been the only way to avoid changing the story premise completely) would not be a big enough attraction to the modern audience, many of whom would only be familiar with new DW. SM often talks about wanting to make DW "event" or "appointment" television. McGann as central (to replace the War Doctor in the absence of CE) would surely have been great fan-service, but much less recognised by the general audience than Eccleston. So, in the event, he went looking for another way to get great publicity - a brand new Doctor, and got lucky with the availability, apparently at short notice, of John Hurt. Maybe McGann was always "Plan C".
I suspect if he'd not been able to get an actor of that stature, we might well have seen McGann's Doctor about to press the Moment.
I'm with GDK on this one. However much I admire Paul as an actor and a person, ie a lot, the 50th was targeting everyone, not just fans, and Paul had been on screen for an hour and a bit in 1996. Hurt's casting was great (John flipping Hurt! If you'd told me *that* back in the day...), and although I would love to see Paul onscreen in a 'Two Doctors' type scenario, personally thought it worked. We had Billie, we had Tom, we had every Doctor referenced, Zygons, UNIT, David and Matt riffing off each other,The Time Lords, Daleks...and a certain pair of eyebrows. It was impossible that it was going to please all fans, with their favourite Doctors, eras, etc....and what they personally considered desirable for such a big anniversary.
In these circumstances, I thought the boy Moffat done good. Really good.
(no idea why I've gone all 'football pundit' there!)
I just don't understand why it wasn't simply McGann. It would have made perfect sense in terms of continuity, particularly with the 9th Doctor's comments about his face and ears in Rose. And it's not as if Paul is a poor actor, not up to today's standards. He's superb.
Maybe McGann is too risky a proposition for some because of his association with the TVM that didn't do particularly well (especially in the USA) and wasn't picked up for a series?
Having him briefly reprise his role in the Night of the Doctor was tantalising though and I would certainly be up for him returning again to team up with Capaldi for an episode next series (it would give series 10 a bit of a welcome boost too).
Maybe McGann is too risky a proposition for some because of his association with the TVM that didn't do particularly well (especially in the USA) and wasn't picked up for a series?
That's a bit of a myth as it did great here with over 9 million viewers. It wasn't commissioned because it required both the BBC and Fox to sign it off and it didn't do well in the US (though that's a lot to do with scheduling imo).
Comments
It's possible I'm overthinking and the answer was edited for space. But if I'd had a high profile falling out with an ex-colleague and someone asked how a certain thing that colleague was 100% responsible for came about, I'd make damn sure I name-checked them.
Did Steven Moffat run over your cat?
It's quite bad when you think out of the last 3 years, the one year we got the least episodes was the one where if anything there should have been more than usual.
I thought Series 8 was already amazing in 2014 myself. An entire series as well as the 50th Anniversary might have been a little too much for the crew and it's likely both would have suffered for it. The 50th more than made up for the lack of Who episodes in my opinion and it was definitely worth the wait.
Rumour has it Steven Moffat steals candy from babies and says mean things about your nan when you turn your back.
I've been very complimentary towards him for years. I was actually one of the biggest fans of the 50th and I still am. Doesn't mean I can't or shouldn't call him out when I believe he's being disingenuous.
Gosh it's like a One Direction tweenybopper fanclub in here these days.
I think you're right!
Well, no one has said he's unkind to animals or is cruel to babies or nans. (Though all three categories deserve it imo - but that's just me). We're just saying he's economical with the truth.
Of course you can think every word he utters is gospel, if you like.....personally, if he said the sky was blue I'd have to go and check.
This is not because I "hate" Moffat. I don't. It's based on my experience of reading/hearing his comments and comparing this with what I know happened - eg, more Who than ever in the anniversary year, which he's still peddling, apparently, though we were there and we know different.
This in no way reflects on his quality as a writer, which is a separate question.
(And please, no one say RTD told fibs too - I never said he didn't).
They made the best of a bad job. But it was all forced on them due to the series 7 shambles. If it hadn't been for that they could easily perhaps have done a slightly short series (say 9 episodes) in 2012 in order to give the production team time to deliver a full series plus an anniversary episode in 2013. All in a planned way, giving plenty of time to sign up the cast and make sure the script is acceptable to them.
But instead from 2011 on they were playing catch-up. Even their plan to try and get series 8 made hot on the heels of series 7 and the anniversary came to naught. No doubt at some point the BBC just admitted defeat (presumably around the time Caro Skinner unceremoniously left) and told them to rest and don't bother trying to get series 8 to screens until Autumn 2014. Not because they thought it was a brilliant plan to clash it with Strictly and X Factor, but because they wanted to draw a line under 2011-2013.
I'm more of a Little Mix fan actually.
I just dont know why you are still thinking about it. You dont know the truth. Moffat is a human being ergo he will project the version of events which casts him in a favourable light. You will never really know what happens. It sounds like you have been thinking about it too much. Is Moffat being disingenuous? Yes. But then so are you being if you think the patchwork of rumour, half-truth and quotations of dubious origin you presented above is anything like a representation of what happened. Colin Baker? That bitter old fool didn't have any insider information on the production of the anniversary special and was just shooting his mouth off in anger (as he has a habit of doing) because he was bitter they decided they didnt need his portly frame waddling into the episode. Also the bit about CE being ready to do the episode is complete and utter fabrication based on speculation from fans who again know nothing. The only evidence there is suggests CE had zero interest in returning whatever happened and met with the producers out of professional courtesy. To claim he changed his mind and dropped out based on lateness and a poor script is just total rubbish. Not to say Moffat doesnt speak a lot of nonsense. He does. But that doesnt give everyone a free pass to do the same about him.
b) Moffat himself says in the interview "Chris wanted to do it" during their first meeting, then had decided by the second not to do it.
c) Colin Baker is friends with David Tennant's father-in-law and they shot the Five-ish Doctors together right after all this "being messed around" happened. Tennant was obviously peeved at the disorganisation and being asked so late, that much is clear from his TV interviews on the subject. Presumably he and his father-in-law would have had conversations about it.
Why do you think it's so unlikely that Davison and Baker could have discussed what was going on with the 50th while they were shooting together, given the entire webisode is based on their rejection from it?? Davison talks about Tennant all the time in interviews and at cons. You don't think it's possible he said "oh yes, not only did they reject us, but my son-in-law said they really messed him around by not contacting him till the last minute!"
d) Since when are direct quotes from the actors "dubious half truths"? I notice you completely ignored Tom Baker's interview where he spells out exactly how and why he came to be in the 50th.
To me there's no excuse for failing to produce a series in the anniversary year, they dropped the ball big time there. But worse was what we did get. A single episode dedicated to the glorious history of the show that started in.. 2005. If it were a celebration of New Who then it worked really well but as a celebration of 50 years? In my opinion it totally failed. Sure the older Doctors often don't look as they did but the show is more than just the Doctor. It's about places, monsters, enemies and companions too. Would it really have been difficult to get William Russell in a scene, especially as Clara worked at Coal Hill School? If there was ever a time to look backwards, that was the time. Companions age and we could have seen Jamie, or Tegan, or Jo.. Such a wasted chance.
I also think the War Doctor was a bad move. Nothing against John Hurt but the very ideal of a Doctor fighting a war just fits McGanns Doctor so much better. A Doctor who hates violence fighting a war and ultimately regenerating out of guilt strikes me as a better story.
Count the minutes? Around about 2 hrs 40 minutes I believe. That's how much Doctor Who they managed in the anniversary year. To me that's the biggest DW disappointment since the show was cancelled.
Because what you get told in the publicity material is the whole truth... come on Granny, wise up. You don't know anything about what really goes on with the production of the show, with contracts. What they tell us is 'moonshine', as you put it. You'll only really hear the whole truth of any behind the scenes matters when the people involved with the show no longer have a vested interest in it (ie they're not employed by or hoping for employment by the BBC) and decide to talk.
You don't expect that what you hear at conventions or publicity interviews is what the various people honestly think do you?
It was worse than that. The Power of Three was a rush job, as they realised too late that the 2012 series was too short
Why Moffat thought the previous series' leftovers for the 50th anniversary was acceptable, we'll never know. You wouldn't forgive it from an outsider, but for a fan to do so?
As good a writer he is, Moffat has proved time and again he is a piss poor showrunner
Good advice - believe nowt.
Perhaps you should tell that to the posters who think that Moffat never told a fib in his life, and we did indeed have more DW in 2013 than ever before or since.
Seeing as that's one statement that we absolutely know to be false as we were there.
Yeah that would have made much more sense,the whole War Doctor thing didn't really fit with Ecclestones 1st season for me and only seems to make sense from a "we've got John Hurt we must wedge him in" aspect.
I have to wonder whether those who feel the War Doctor concept was awkward and wedged in do so only because they were hoping CE would return (as I did at the time and still wish he had) but can't get past that disappointment. Nothing else SM could have done would have met their expectations after that disappointment.
Given that CE didn't want to or was unable to return, the idea to create a previously unknown Doctor and use the Time War as the backdrop and explanation for him to exist, for me, was an excellent "Plan B" and a stroke of genius.
I don't like CE so was glad he wasn't there. Tennant and Matt were there so I was happy.
I enjoyed the 50th, but definitely felt the introduction of a previously unknown "War Doctor" was a strange step for Moffat to take.
It just got me thinking that Moffat had introduced another Doctor so that he would be the writer/showrunner who would deal with the "last regeneration" story as well as the 50th. More kudos for him (except the Trenzalore thing was dreadful).
I just don't understand why it wasn't simply McGann. It would have made perfect sense in terms of continuity, particularly with the 9th Doctor's comments about his face and ears in Rose. And it's not as if Paul is a poor actor, not up to today's standards. He's superb.
That has to be a possibility, because, in the absence of CE, McGann's Doctor would have been the logical choice for the Doctor who uses the Moment to destroy Gallifrey and the Daleks.
Wanting to be in charge when the Doctor reaches his last regeneration might have been his motivation. He also might have worried that the return of McGann in a central role (which would have been the only way to avoid changing the story premise completely) would not be a big enough attraction to the modern audience, many of whom would only be familiar with new DW. SM often talks about wanting to make DW "event" or "appointment" television. McGann as central (to replace the War Doctor in the absence of CE) would surely have been great fan-service, but much less recognised by the general audience than Eccleston. So, in the event, he went looking for another way to get great publicity - a brand new Doctor, and got lucky with the availability, apparently at short notice, of John Hurt. Maybe McGann was always "Plan C".
I suspect if he'd not been able to get an actor of that stature, we might well have seen McGann's Doctor about to press the Moment.
In these circumstances, I thought the boy Moffat done good. Really good.
(no idea why I've gone all 'football pundit' there!)
Maybe McGann is too risky a proposition for some because of his association with the TVM that didn't do particularly well (especially in the USA) and wasn't picked up for a series?
Having him briefly reprise his role in the Night of the Doctor was tantalising though and I would certainly be up for him returning again to team up with Capaldi for an episode next series (it would give series 10 a bit of a welcome boost too).
That's a bit of a myth as it did great here with over 9 million viewers. It wasn't commissioned because it required both the BBC and Fox to sign it off and it didn't do well in the US (though that's a lot to do with scheduling imo).