I suppose the rot really started to set in from Twin Dilemma onwards. It was a mistake to make Colin Baker's Doctor so volatile and the Costume was a mistake. That particular season became to gritty and violent, which was another thing that may have turned off some viewers. Then the show died a slow death from Trial onwards.
As a fan, I think Trial is great, but I doubt if the casual viewer did. Then came McCoy, whose first season was pretty dire. I reckon, by then the powers that be had decided there wasn't much of a future in the show. They probably kept it going until they had something to replace it in the schedules.
So it was a combination of Saward being too violent (and then apathetic), JNT running out of steam and making wrong decisions re C Baker's character and casting Sylv (nice bloke, not a great actor), Grade, Powell and probably Mary Whitehouse,
I did vote, but to be fair it was probably a combination of factors.
JNT - wasn't really a drama producer at all. And every other producer without exception either had previous experience OR went on to produce other successful series... Others have mentioned the budget, but to be frank it never had a great budget, but the other 8 producers seemed to manage.
BBC top floor - at no point did they look at the crew and bring in new blood. Even JNT and Saward said they were astonished that during the hiatus there wasn't a change of command. Powell claims there wasn't anyone around who wanted to take it on, but more like they couldn't be bothered to look.
Levine etc - pleasing the fans alienated the general public. Even some of the suggestions I've read on other threads (such as what FMs would like to see in the 50th) still have that sense. Fans make up a tiny minority of the viewing public, and because they're fans and not creative professionals/insiders they can only ever base their likes and ideas on the past.
Joe Public - tastes change. Plus long running shows tended to get taken for granted in those days. They just assumed it would always be there, and somebody else was watching.
The 'perceived' format - as RTD showed in 2005, it needed to be treated as a proper drama, with emotional resonance and characters that you could identify with. If there's no emotional hook, the plot comes in for greater scrutiny. And it didn't need "hanky panky in the Tardis" - just characters with more than 2 dimensions.
Still, it's history now. As my old Ma used to say, a scab will get worse if you keep picking at it... :cool:
Every Who fan has an era they like and dislike. And to me McCoy's period was a decent stretch. Remembrance, Greatest Show, Ghost Light and Fenric are some of my favourite stories. I even like Delta and Paradise Towers but I wouldnt like to watch them with non who fans haha.
That's the big problem - aside from the fact that I do not think any of the McCoy stories were very good, they just do not seem to have been aimed at casual viewers.
And there's a big difference between McCoy's dark mysterious doctor to Collin's brutaly violent Doctor in his first three stories.
They made a lot of mistakes with Colin Baker, including the costume and the violence, but firing him was the worst. I far prefer anything he did to the dark mysterious stuff with that horrible backstory they concocted, although I know they didn't refer to that much onscreen. If I'd been the controller of BBC1 in 1985 and I hadn't been doing whatever I was doing with Liza Goddard, I would have fired everyone else except Colin Baker and Nicola Bryant. If you don't like a TV show's writing, ideas and production values, it's stupid, petty and vindictive to blame the lead actor.
That's the big problem - aside from the fact that I do not think any of the McCoy stories were very good, they just do not seem to have been aimed at casual viewers.
"Delta and the Bannerman"? Light-hearted continuity-free
romp.
"Remembrance of the Daleks?" You don't need to know
anything beyond the fact the Daleks and Davros are
the bad guys.
"The Happiness Patrol?" Over-the-top
political satire.
"Greatest Show in the Galaxy"? Creepy
circus story with some of McCoy's highest ratings.
"Survival"? Centers around weird goings on in a housing
estate similar to the ones the viewers lived in.
Someone who didn't know much about "Doctor Who" could
tune in and watch any of these stories easily.
Comments
As a fan, I think Trial is great, but I doubt if the casual viewer did. Then came McCoy, whose first season was pretty dire. I reckon, by then the powers that be had decided there wasn't much of a future in the show. They probably kept it going until they had something to replace it in the schedules.
So it was a combination of Saward being too violent (and then apathetic), JNT running out of steam and making wrong decisions re C Baker's character and casting Sylv (nice bloke, not a great actor), Grade, Powell and probably Mary Whitehouse,
JNT - wasn't really a drama producer at all. And every other producer without exception either had previous experience OR went on to produce other successful series... Others have mentioned the budget, but to be frank it never had a great budget, but the other 8 producers seemed to manage.
BBC top floor - at no point did they look at the crew and bring in new blood. Even JNT and Saward said they were astonished that during the hiatus there wasn't a change of command. Powell claims there wasn't anyone around who wanted to take it on, but more like they couldn't be bothered to look.
Levine etc - pleasing the fans alienated the general public. Even some of the suggestions I've read on other threads (such as what FMs would like to see in the 50th) still have that sense. Fans make up a tiny minority of the viewing public, and because they're fans and not creative professionals/insiders they can only ever base their likes and ideas on the past.
Joe Public - tastes change. Plus long running shows tended to get taken for granted in those days. They just assumed it would always be there, and somebody else was watching.
The 'perceived' format - as RTD showed in 2005, it needed to be treated as a proper drama, with emotional resonance and characters that you could identify with. If there's no emotional hook, the plot comes in for greater scrutiny. And it didn't need "hanky panky in the Tardis" - just characters with more than 2 dimensions.
Still, it's history now. As my old Ma used to say, a scab will get worse if you keep picking at it... :cool:
That's the big problem - aside from the fact that I do not think any of the McCoy stories were very good, they just do not seem to have been aimed at casual viewers.
They made a lot of mistakes with Colin Baker, including the costume and the violence, but firing him was the worst. I far prefer anything he did to the dark mysterious stuff with that horrible backstory they concocted, although I know they didn't refer to that much onscreen. If I'd been the controller of BBC1 in 1985 and I hadn't been doing whatever I was doing with Liza Goddard, I would have fired everyone else except Colin Baker and Nicola Bryant. If you don't like a TV show's writing, ideas and production values, it's stupid, petty and vindictive to blame the lead actor.
"Delta and the Bannerman"? Light-hearted continuity-free
romp.
"Remembrance of the Daleks?" You don't need to know
anything beyond the fact the Daleks and Davros are
the bad guys.
"The Happiness Patrol?" Over-the-top
political satire.
"Greatest Show in the Galaxy"? Creepy
circus story with some of McCoy's highest ratings.
"Survival"? Centers around weird goings on in a housing
estate similar to the ones the viewers lived in.
Someone who didn't know much about "Doctor Who" could
tune in and watch any of these stories easily.
So you like the idea of never being able to drive, then?