Well heres a good question - do the old fans who say the new has been dumbed down and therefore dont like it want the new series cancelled forever?
Not in a position to speak for them myself (I'm nicely casual with all things Who), but I'm guessing they want it to carry on, but be ... well.. less dumbed down.
Pull the other one. Do you honestly think it would be on today were it not for the huge pre-existing fanbase which kept the flame alive all these years? You sound like a BBC exec trying to justify its 16 year (McGann excepted) absence.
The existing fanbase is not why the series was recommisioned. If it were the reboots would be very different to what they are.
Where is Blakes 7, Where is Sapphire and Steel? where is The Avengers, big fan base in America as well as here.
You sound like a BBC exec trying to justify its 16 year (McGann excepted) absence
Sorry but that isnt so, it wasnt recomissioned because of it's adult fanbase but because the premise of the show is a great idea and the new direction of the show was thought good enough to make to be a ratings winner.
Z Cars, Blakes 7, Howards Way, Duchess of Duke Street, The Professionals, Sweeney, Tripods and even Juliet Bravo.. all successful shows during their lifespans yet none of them have come back. Why has Doctor Who returned and not those shows? The answer is us, the fans. We kept the idea of the series alive. We brought books, videos, voted for the series in massive numbers for awards shows. Doctor Who videos were best sellers in the mid 90s, constantly topping the video charts. Heck, Doctor Who had been off the air for over 10 years and still won the best British show of all-time award. The BBC knew Doctor Who was a viable property because they made money, a lot of money from the show from us. It wasn't a gamble to bring the series back because if it failed then it would still have given the books and video ranges a much needed shot in the arm (as it turns out, the new series has pretty much killed the book range )
If during the years of 1989-2003 there had been no books, videos and no awards would there be a new series? I'd suggest not. I'm not arguing that there weren't other factors involved (including RTD's involvement, that's documented fact) but to suggest it had absolutely nothing to do with fan support is pretty ludicrous.
If during the years of 1989-2003 there had been no books, videos and no awards would there be a new series? I'd suggest not. I'm not arguing that there weren't other factors involved (including RTD's involvement, that's documented fact) but to suggest it had absolutely nothing to do with fan support is pretty ludicrous.
Got to agree with Rooks. The huge DW adult fanbase included all the writers of the new series (including RTD) and several high up people within the BBC.
The BBC makes a lot of money from DW without even including the new series.
I think series two was dumbed down a little (excluding GITFP of course), but I am actually enjoying this series a lot (apart from them messing around with the Daleks).
Pretty much agree with the original poster. Feel it's much as it ever was, just causes an occasional double take seeing it as an adult and with glossier effects. Most of the new Dalek and Cyber stories have been aimed quite strongly at the kids but then so, I think, were 'Planet of The Daleks' and 'Revenge of The Cybermen'. I'm just jealous I can't suspend my disbelief as easily as back then.
A lot of people expect Dr Who to be an adult show - it's the nostalgia trend - but it was always a show for kids. But as people say, there's a massive adult fan base now and they don't really want a kid's show. I think the Beeb thought that Torchwood might please some of that fanbase but I'm not sure it did really. I've no solutions but I can see the problems.
There was a Hartnell story I saw once (forgotten what it was called) which was set in the TARDIS. The crew had to go through hell and almost went mad as the TARDIS was failing. The resolution? A switch on the TARDIS console was left held down because of a slight spring disfigurement underneath. Simple! I have no problem with that, but if that happened in todays series, how would the fans react? Wasn't 'adult' or complicated enough?
A bit before my time to have seen them as a child, but what I've seen from the o/h's videos looked cool.
But I can't work out what in my post made you ask me that?
my apologies if I misunderstood Histeria but in your post you said you wholeheartedly agreed with what the other FM posted that the first series beats the socks off the Pertwee/Baker era.
I'm not arguing that there weren't other factors involved (including RTD's involvement, that's documented fact) but to suggest it had absolutely nothing to do with fan support is pretty ludicrous.
What I am saying in response to dodrade's post is that it wasnt commissioned BECAUSE of the adult fan base, there are many other factors, fan base being one of them of course but not THE reason, to say it was due only to the adult fan base is incorrect. A new approach for a wider audience would have been higher on the agenda, why bother with the new approach/format if only appealing to an existing adult fanbase?
I think I said adult fanbase enough in that paragraph
A new approach for a wider audience would have been higher on the agenda, why bother with the new approach/format if only appealing to an existing adult fanbase?
I somewhat agree with you on this (a first I know, feel free to lie down a while ). I realise that the mandate was not to write a show for the existing fanbase and I agree the show would have died a quick death in that instance. But 15 years of letter-writing, video, audio and book buying had kept the series alive in the minds of the BBC. When Doctor Who returned it didn't come back from the dead, not like Randall and Hopkirk anyway, there was an active property there that was making the BBC money. People are quick to dismiss this and give all the credit to a few people such as RTD. Of course he had a hand to play in matters but had those 15 years been totally Doctor Who-less then we wouldn't be talking (or in my case arguing ) about the new series because it simply wouldn't have happened.
What I am saying in response to dodrade's post is that it wasnt commissioned BECAUSE of the adult fan base, there are many other factors, fan base being one of them of course but not THE reason, to say it was due only to the adult fan base is incorrect. A new approach for a wider audience would have been higher on the agenda, why bother with the new approach/format if only appealing to an existing adult fanbase?
I think I said adult fanbase enough in that paragraph
my understanding of the situation is the BBC had decided to bring back Doctor Who before even RTD was in the frame for the job. the BBC had undertaken various feasability studies as to how that could be achieved given todays audience, their expectations not just of stories but effects. various submissions were made by several people to take on that task and the job went eventually to RTD.
the BBC realised there was still an audience for Who and that they still made money from the brand so if handled well they would continue to. look at how the series has been marketed in terms of the toys etc....
sure the BBC wanted to create a new fanbase with this generation of viewers but without the loyalty of the old, who do make up a significant proportion of the audience, their job of selling the brand would have been more difficult.
my apologies if I misunderstood Histeria but in your post you said you wholeheartedly agreed with what the other FM posted that the first series beats the socks off the Pertwee/Baker era.
Ahh... I was agreeing with the "massively better first season" element.
All I'm trying to say is, when you think that the writing's poor or they've made a change you don't like, try looking at the episode from a young fan's point-of-view, and maybe, just maybe, you'll see where they're coming from...
Well, I suppose I'm prepared to accept stupid writing if they say up front it's aimed at kids.
The existing fanbase is not why the series was recommisioned. If it were the reboots would be very different to what they are.
Where is Blakes 7, Where is Sapphire and Steel? where is The Avengers, big fan base in America as well as here.
RTD has openly admitted he can and does take the diehards for granted, grateful as they are for Dr Who's return even if it seemed more like the Rose show.
Unfortunately he's right. The adult fanbase provides a bedrock of support but the show did need to appeal to a new generation to be a mainstream hit. He's succeeded, although I believe he could still have gone it and been a bit more respectful to the old guard. As it is his episodes in this series haven't been too bad, the Doctor is the star of the show again and David Tennant is probably the most popular doctor since Tom Baker.
As for the other shows you mentioned, Blake's 7 and sapphire and steel never came close to the longevity or popularity of Dr Who, and of course the Avengers film was a complete disaster, which while not a reflection on the original show/s has probably killed off any chance of a further revival for along time to come.
RTD has openly admitted he can and does take the diehards for granted, grateful as they are for Dr Who's return even if it seemed more like the Rose show.
Unfortunately he's right. The adult fanbase provides a bedrock of support but the show did need to appeal to a new generation to be a mainstream hit. He's succeeded, although I believe he could still have gone it and been a bit more respectful to the old guard.
I like to use Enterprise as an example of Doctor Who's possible future. The Star Trek franchise took it's fanbase for granted, so much so that they didn't even think they needed to call the show "Star Trek: Enterprise" when it was first launched. The writers were lazy, rehashing plots from previous Treks because they thought the fans would watch anything Trek related. They didn't. The long term fans abandoned the show and the rest of the audience followed suit soon after. By the time the series started getting quite good (and it really did), the majority of the audience were gone.
You need more than the fans to keep a show on the air, absolutely, no doubt about that but the fans are the bedrock of a show. Casual viewers come and go but a happy fan will watch every single week providing steady, if not spectacular ratings. When a show is going through a tough patch its the fans that promote it and keep it ticking over. There's going to be a time when the series is sinking, I wonder if RTD will show the same level of contempt for the fanbase then? Will the diehards already have left by that point? I know quite a few long term supporters of the show that have already abandoned the show, including myself. Insignificant at the moment.. but things will not always be this rosey.
Star Trek fans have had four separate series and six films since 1987, they haven't suffered the drought Dr who fans had and can afford to be choosy.
I have been critical of RTD in the past but I believe he's getting better and showing more respect for the show's history than previously. He also wisely ruled out a female doctor, which would send ratings plummeting faster than keri russell's haircut.
Star Trek fans have had four separate series and six films since 1987, they haven't suffered the drought Dr who fans had and can afford to be choosy.
I have been critical of RTD in the past but I believe he's getting better and showing more respect for the show's history than previously. He also wisely ruled out a female doctor, which would send ratings plummeting faster than keri russell's haircut.
Who is Keri Russell?
You are right of course, Trek had a longer run. But I feel, rightly or wrongly, that everyone, fans included are 'customers' of the show and deserve a bit of respect. I'm not expecting him to build a show to my specification, but he shouldn't disrespect me (or anyone) for not liking the show he's producing.
I do find some aspects of the new Doctor Who very dumbed down, but most of the time I can let it pass without spoiling my enjoyment. I certainly don't let it ruin the the experience for me...generally, I think the current version of DW is wonderful.
Hmm.. compared to the likes of "Fear Her" those two stories are practically masterpieces Remember the resources available to the new Who team are significantly greater than afforded to the old Who team, especially in the late 80s. Back in 1989 the team really had to stay on Earth due to budget issues, rather than the fear that off-world stories would scare the audience away.
Timelash or "Time and the Rani" are indefensable though, so I won't even try.
I am a fan of both old and new and will criticize or praise both. The Happines Patrol, Paradise Towers, Time and the Rani and Fear Her were among the worst of Doctor Who ever made. Really dire.
I am a fan of both old and new and will criticize or praise both. The Happines Patrol, Paradise Towers, Time and the Rani and Fear Her were among the worst of Doctor Who ever made. Really dire.
I can't defend Paradise Towers or Time and the Rani or Fear Her.. truely low points in Doctor Who history. Happiness Patrol has merit though.. you just need to look really really hard
I can't defend Paradise Towers or Time and the Rani or Fear Her.. truely low points in Doctor Who history. Happiness Patrol has merit though.. you just need to look really really hard
Hi Rooks. I have seen Happiness Patrol twice and each time it made me shudder. I know you're a fan but I can't agree with you on this one. Sorry.
Hi Rooks. I have seen Happiness Patrol twice and each time it made me shudder. I know you're a fan but I can't agree with you on this one. Sorry.
Don't worry, I'll convince you yet. At some point, maybe not today, maybe not tommorrow but soon.. and for the rest of your life you'll be evangelizing the Sly McCoy era.. honest
The key to understanding how 'childish' or 'dumbed down' Dr Who is, is NOT to conside the timeslot.
Eastenders & Corrie are usually on at about the time Dr Who is on - these soaps are anything but childish featuring VERY mature and adult themes. They get away with it REAGRDLESS of the time broadcasted.
Just becuase a TV show is on at 7pm doesnt mean it has to be childish like so much of modern Dr Who is. The timing SHOULDNT constrain the writing.
It is obvious that it is deliberately dumbed down to get even younger viweres (6, 7 , 8 year olds) to watch.
Comments
Maybe I'm being too literal here.
The existing fanbase is not why the series was recommisioned. If it were the reboots would be very different to what they are.
Where is Blakes 7, Where is Sapphire and Steel? where is The Avengers, big fan base in America as well as here.
Yes, very good. :rolleyes:
Z Cars, Blakes 7, Howards Way, Duchess of Duke Street, The Professionals, Sweeney, Tripods and even Juliet Bravo.. all successful shows during their lifespans yet none of them have come back. Why has Doctor Who returned and not those shows? The answer is us, the fans. We kept the idea of the series alive. We brought books, videos, voted for the series in massive numbers for awards shows. Doctor Who videos were best sellers in the mid 90s, constantly topping the video charts. Heck, Doctor Who had been off the air for over 10 years and still won the best British show of all-time award. The BBC knew Doctor Who was a viable property because they made money, a lot of money from the show from us. It wasn't a gamble to bring the series back because if it failed then it would still have given the books and video ranges a much needed shot in the arm (as it turns out, the new series has pretty much killed the book range
If during the years of 1989-2003 there had been no books, videos and no awards would there be a new series? I'd suggest not. I'm not arguing that there weren't other factors involved (including RTD's involvement, that's documented fact) but to suggest it had absolutely nothing to do with fan support is pretty ludicrous.
Got to agree with Rooks. The huge DW adult fanbase included all the writers of the new series (including RTD) and several high up people within the BBC.
The BBC makes a lot of money from DW without even including the new series.
I think series two was dumbed down a little (excluding GITFP of course), but I am actually enjoying this series a lot (apart from them messing around with the Daleks).
There was a Hartnell story I saw once (forgotten what it was called) which was set in the TARDIS. The crew had to go through hell and almost went mad as the TARDIS was failing. The resolution? A switch on the TARDIS console was left held down because of a slight spring disfigurement underneath. Simple! I have no problem with that, but if that happened in todays series, how would the fans react? Wasn't 'adult' or complicated enough?
my apologies if I misunderstood Histeria but in your post you said you wholeheartedly agreed with what the other FM posted that the first series beats the socks off the Pertwee/Baker era.
What I am saying in response to dodrade's post is that it wasnt commissioned BECAUSE of the adult fan base, there are many other factors, fan base being one of them of course but not THE reason, to say it was due only to the adult fan base is incorrect. A new approach for a wider audience would have been higher on the agenda, why bother with the new approach/format if only appealing to an existing adult fanbase?
I think I said adult fanbase enough in that paragraph
I somewhat agree with you on this (a first I know, feel free to lie down a while
my understanding of the situation is the BBC had decided to bring back Doctor Who before even RTD was in the frame for the job. the BBC had undertaken various feasability studies as to how that could be achieved given todays audience, their expectations not just of stories but effects. various submissions were made by several people to take on that task and the job went eventually to RTD.
the BBC realised there was still an audience for Who and that they still made money from the brand so if handled well they would continue to. look at how the series has been marketed in terms of the toys etc....
sure the BBC wanted to create a new fanbase with this generation of viewers but without the loyalty of the old, who do make up a significant proportion of the audience, their job of selling the brand would have been more difficult.
okey dokey! apologies if I misunderstood the meaning of your post Histeria.
Well, I suppose I'm prepared to accept stupid writing if they say up front it's aimed at kids.
RTD has openly admitted he can and does take the diehards for granted, grateful as they are for Dr Who's return even if it seemed more like the Rose show.
Unfortunately he's right. The adult fanbase provides a bedrock of support but the show did need to appeal to a new generation to be a mainstream hit. He's succeeded, although I believe he could still have gone it and been a bit more respectful to the old guard. As it is his episodes in this series haven't been too bad, the Doctor is the star of the show again and David Tennant is probably the most popular doctor since Tom Baker.
As for the other shows you mentioned, Blake's 7 and sapphire and steel never came close to the longevity or popularity of Dr Who, and of course the Avengers film was a complete disaster, which while not a reflection on the original show/s has probably killed off any chance of a further revival for along time to come.
I like to use Enterprise as an example of Doctor Who's possible future. The Star Trek franchise took it's fanbase for granted, so much so that they didn't even think they needed to call the show "Star Trek: Enterprise" when it was first launched. The writers were lazy, rehashing plots from previous Treks because they thought the fans would watch anything Trek related. They didn't. The long term fans abandoned the show and the rest of the audience followed suit soon after. By the time the series started getting quite good (and it really did), the majority of the audience were gone.
You need more than the fans to keep a show on the air, absolutely, no doubt about that but the fans are the bedrock of a show. Casual viewers come and go but a happy fan will watch every single week providing steady, if not spectacular ratings. When a show is going through a tough patch its the fans that promote it and keep it ticking over. There's going to be a time when the series is sinking, I wonder if RTD will show the same level of contempt for the fanbase then? Will the diehards already have left by that point? I know quite a few long term supporters of the show that have already abandoned the show, including myself. Insignificant at the moment.. but things will not always be this rosey.
I have been critical of RTD in the past but I believe he's getting better and showing more respect for the show's history than previously. He also wisely ruled out a female doctor, which would send ratings plummeting faster than keri russell's haircut.
Who is Keri Russell?
You are right of course, Trek had a longer run. But I feel, rightly or wrongly, that everyone, fans included are 'customers' of the show and deserve a bit of respect. I'm not expecting him to build a show to my specification, but he shouldn't disrespect me (or anyone) for not liking the show he's producing.
I am a fan of both old and new and will criticize or praise both. The Happines Patrol, Paradise Towers, Time and the Rani and Fear Her were among the worst of Doctor Who ever made. Really dire.
I can't defend Paradise Towers or Time and the Rani or Fear Her.. truely low points in Doctor Who history. Happiness Patrol has merit though.. you just need to look really really hard
Hi Rooks. I have seen Happiness Patrol twice and each time it made me shudder. I know you're a fan but I can't agree with you on this one. Sorry.
Don't worry, I'll convince you yet. At some point, maybe not today, maybe not tommorrow but soon.. and for the rest of your life you'll be evangelizing the Sly McCoy era.. honest
Eastenders & Corrie are usually on at about the time Dr Who is on - these soaps are anything but childish featuring VERY mature and adult themes. They get away with it REAGRDLESS of the time broadcasted.
Just becuase a TV show is on at 7pm doesnt mean it has to be childish like so much of modern Dr Who is. The timing SHOULDNT constrain the writing.
It is obvious that it is deliberately dumbed down to get even younger viweres (6, 7 , 8 year olds) to watch.