I really hope it wont be a multi Doctor story as they always make me cringe. I'd be happy with a feature length episode (120 mins) with a decent script and budget.
What if the 50th anniversary ISN'T a multiple Doctor story?
2 of 4
Originally Posted by SHAFT:
“I really hope it wont be a multi Doctor story as they always make me cringe. I'd be happy with a feature length episode (120 mins) with a decent script and budget.”
“I really hope it wont be a multi Doctor story as they always make me cringe. I'd be happy with a feature length episode (120 mins) with a decent script and budget.”
Not necessarily, if it is a multiple doctor story, all it would need is good pace. As sometimes, the Doctors just squabble. Although I don't like Moffat as the show runner, I bet he's just as willing to do a multiple doctor story as we are.
Originally Posted by king yrcanos:
“Not necessarily, if it is a multiple doctor story, all it would need is good pace. As sometimes, the Doctors just squabble. Although I don't like Moffat as the show runner, I bet he's just as willing to do a multiple doctor story as we are.”
“Not necessarily, if it is a multiple doctor story, all it would need is good pace. As sometimes, the Doctors just squabble. Although I don't like Moffat as the show runner, I bet he's just as willing to do a multiple doctor story as we are.”
Moffat on Multi-Doctor stories:
Quote:
“"It's slightly difficult to do them all now. I'm not against it but I think as a gimmick it outlives its usefulness quite fast." He said.
Moffat continued, "Doing Time Crash with eight minutes of Peter and David was about right. If you have a really good story that motors on the fact that this is one man experiencing the same adventure at several different points of his life, that would be worth doing. But you can't do a special or an episode as a reunion party. That's not a story, that's a party; nothing wrong with parties but they're not great fun to watch. But with a really good story, yes."”
“"It's slightly difficult to do them all now. I'm not against it but I think as a gimmick it outlives its usefulness quite fast." He said.
Moffat continued, "Doing Time Crash with eight minutes of Peter and David was about right. If you have a really good story that motors on the fact that this is one man experiencing the same adventure at several different points of his life, that would be worth doing. But you can't do a special or an episode as a reunion party. That's not a story, that's a party; nothing wrong with parties but they're not great fun to watch. But with a really good story, yes."”
Originally Posted by Tom Tit:
“.
What about offering each available past Doctor a role in an episode? Not playing the Doctor, but a new character. A different one could guest star each week. I think that would be pretty cool. Maybe they could even tie into an arc whereby all of those characters would appear together in the season finale or a special?
”
“.
What about offering each available past Doctor a role in an episode? Not playing the Doctor, but a new character. A different one could guest star each week. I think that would be pretty cool. Maybe they could even tie into an arc whereby all of those characters would appear together in the season finale or a special?
”
I don't really see the point in doing that. It seems pretty pointless having past Doctors back and not having them play The Doctor. It's like having your family turn up at a big birthday party and pretend to be someone else for the evening. Just doesn't make sense.
The whole point of an anniversary is to celebrate what's gone before. I'd rather have those actors back playing The Doctor or not at all.
Somehow I can't see future anniversaries with Matt Smith turning up playing someone else so why should any of the previous Doctors do it?
Originally Posted by CD93:
“Moffat on Multi-Doctor stories:”
“Moffat on Multi-Doctor stories:”
Oh I see, then um, well I don't know what to say now. I'll go with the idea of offering each doctor a different role. Maybe they could each realise that they are the Doctor in the end. But if not, then I see the anniversary being a huge disappointment.
Originally Posted by king yrcanos:
“Oh I see, then um, well I don't know what to say now. I'll go with the idea of offering each doctor a different role. Maybe they could each realise that they are the Doctor in the end. But if not, then I see the anniversary being a huge disappointment.”
“Oh I see, then um, well I don't know what to say now. I'll go with the idea of offering each doctor a different role. Maybe they could each realise that they are the Doctor in the end. But if not, then I see the anniversary being a huge disappointment.
”
I've always loved the idea that Time Lord bodies have a real-life 'template' somewhere in the universe. So every Doctor was based on a person somewhere . . . there's a made old headmaster who was the template for the 4th Doctor, and a handsome young vet who was the template for the 5th. And maybe an over-the-top fashion designer who was the template for the 6th!
Any explanation they gave for the previous Doctors ageing would make the whole thing a farce. It only just about worked with Davidson. Make a decent retrospective documentary/retrospective with interviews with the previous actors but don't turn the actual story into a bloody sideshow.
Originally Posted by SHAFT:
“Any explanation they gave for the previous Doctors ageing would make the whole thing a farce. It only just about worked with Davidson. Make a decent retrospective documentary/retrospective with interviews with the previous actors but don't turn the actual story into a bloody sideshow.”
“Any explanation they gave for the previous Doctors ageing would make the whole thing a farce. It only just about worked with Davidson. Make a decent retrospective documentary/retrospective with interviews with the previous actors but don't turn the actual story into a bloody sideshow.”
Why does the ageing explanation suddenly make it a farce? I don't see it myself and Davison worked fine in Timecrash. Though his character was written a bit differently, he still pulled it off.
Originally Posted by SHAFT:
“I really hope it wont be a multi Doctor story as they always make me cringe. .”
“I really hope it wont be a multi Doctor story as they always make me cringe. .”
know what you mean apart from The Three Doctor's just about every other multi Doctor story whether it be tv, book or audio has for me been pretty awful. Having said that I will be dissapointed if we don't get a multi Doctor story next year.I
Originally Posted by Mulett:
“For me, its just a feeling that Moffatt's Who is far more self contained than RTD's was. It's all very clinical and clever, but lacks heart and seems overly obsessed with the Amy/Rory/River story. I guess I am worried he's got something terribly clever lined up but not something that will make me laugh and cry. And I do like a good cry!”
“For me, its just a feeling that Moffatt's Who is far more self contained than RTD's was. It's all very clinical and clever, but lacks heart and seems overly obsessed with the Amy/Rory/River story. I guess I am worried he's got something terribly clever lined up but not something that will make me laugh and cry. And I do like a good cry!”
I must take objection to this. Agreed, I think Moffatt is often trying to be too clever for his own good, and can lose the audience in the process, but how obsessed was RTD with the whole Rose loves the Doctor thing, followed by the whole Martha loves the Doctor thing?
In terms of the multi-doctor thing, I only really remember The Five Doctors, The Two Doctors and Timecrash and honestly could live without any of them.
Though 'two minutes to Belgium' has to be the funniest line ever uttered in Doctor Who
I've got faith in Moffat. I fully agree with what he said - it's far more important to create a brilliant story than trying to weigh it all down with classic references just for the hell of it. It's not just the Doctors - the Daleks, Cybermen and of course the TARDIS have been integral parts of the series since the beginning too. I, personally, would rather see a story focussing on them rather than him trying to cram in as many Doctors as he can if it means that the 50th is memorable for all the right reasons.
This a celebration of 50 years of our favourite programme.
That's 50 years, not the last 7 years.
Let's see ALL of those years represented and celebrated. Bring back as many previous Doctors as can be persuaded. Even Tom's up for it, so lets make it something spectacular !
Please don't let us down Mr Moffatt, we'll never see it again.
That's 50 years, not the last 7 years.
Let's see ALL of those years represented and celebrated. Bring back as many previous Doctors as can be persuaded. Even Tom's up for it, so lets make it something spectacular !
Please don't let us down Mr Moffatt, we'll never see it again.
Originally Posted by Hot Dogg:
“Let's see ALL of those years represented and celebrated.
Bring back as many previous Doctors as can be persuaded.
”
“Let's see ALL of those years represented and celebrated.
Bring back as many previous Doctors as can be persuaded.
”
I'm still not at all convinced that these two statements necessarily belong together!
Originally Posted by alphonsus:
“I must take objection to this. Agreed, I think Moffatt is often trying to be too clever for his own good, and can lose the audience in the process, but how obsessed was RTD with the whole Rose loves the Doctor thing, followed by the whole Martha loves the Doctor thing?”
“I must take objection to this. Agreed, I think Moffatt is often trying to be too clever for his own good, and can lose the audience in the process, but how obsessed was RTD with the whole Rose loves the Doctor thing, followed by the whole Martha loves the Doctor thing?”
I think RTD weaved his story arcs more successfully and never alienated the audience. Moffatt's had a lot of negative feedback - inside and outside the BBC - and has agreed to/decided to restructure his plans for Who over the coming years as a result. That's something RTD never had to do.
I'm hoping the changes will improve the Moffatt-Who experience and make for a better 50th anniversary show.
Originally Posted by RobInnes:
“I've got faith in Moffat. I fully agree with what he said - it's far more important to create a brilliant story than trying to weigh it all down with classic references just for the hell of it. It's not just the Doctors - the Daleks, Cybermen and of course the TARDIS have been integral parts of the series since the beginning too. I, personally, would rather see a story focussing on them rather than him trying to cram in as many Doctors as he can if it means that the 50th is memorable for all the right reasons.”
“I've got faith in Moffat. I fully agree with what he said - it's far more important to create a brilliant story than trying to weigh it all down with classic references just for the hell of it. It's not just the Doctors - the Daleks, Cybermen and of course the TARDIS have been integral parts of the series since the beginning too. I, personally, would rather see a story focussing on them rather than him trying to cram in as many Doctors as he can if it means that the 50th is memorable for all the right reasons.”
So if we he have a 50th anniversary concentrating on the Daleks, The Cybermen and the TARDIS, it won't be weighing the story down with stuff from the Doctor's past then?
Originally Posted by Hot Dogg:
“This a celebration of 50 years of our favourite programme.
That's 50 years, not the last 7 years.
Let's see ALL of those years represented and celebrated. Bring back as many previous Doctors as can be persuaded. Even Tom's up for it, so lets make it something spectacular !
Please don't let us down Mr Moffatt, we'll never see it again.
”
“This a celebration of 50 years of our favourite programme.
That's 50 years, not the last 7 years.
Let's see ALL of those years represented and celebrated. Bring back as many previous Doctors as can be persuaded. Even Tom's up for it, so lets make it something spectacular !
Please don't let us down Mr Moffatt, we'll never see it again.
”
Totally agree!
You have written a post I've posted myself many times before. Unfortunately there are still a minority of people out there who seem to think the 50th anniversary should be just another adventure with Matt Smith and the new Companion or just the New Series. May as well not bother if that's case.........
Originally Posted by Mulett:
“I think RTD weaved his story arcs more successfully and never alienated the audience.”
“I think RTD weaved his story arcs more successfully and never alienated the audience.”
Never? I think you're mistaken in that regard. RTD's style appealed to some and turned off others. That's going to apply to any past, current, or future showrunner. You're never going to keep everyone happy. Some people are turned off by Moffat's more sci-fi approach, some people are switching on that weren't interested before.
Originally Posted by Mulett:
“Moffatt's had a lot of negative feedback - inside and outside the BBC - and has agreed to/decided to restructure his plans for Who over the coming years as a result. That's something RTD never had to do.”
“Moffatt's had a lot of negative feedback - inside and outside the BBC - and has agreed to/decided to restructure his plans for Who over the coming years as a result. That's something RTD never had to do.”
This is news to me. What sort of things have you heard about?
Originally Posted by johnnysaucepn:
“Never? I think you're mistaken in that regard. RTD's style appealed to some and turned off others. That's going to apply to any past, current, or future showrunner. You're never going to keep everyone happy. Some people are turned off by Moffat's more sci-fi approach, some people are switching on that weren't interested before.
This is news to me. What sort of things have you heard about?”
“Never? I think you're mistaken in that regard. RTD's style appealed to some and turned off others. That's going to apply to any past, current, or future showrunner. You're never going to keep everyone happy. Some people are turned off by Moffat's more sci-fi approach, some people are switching on that weren't interested before.
This is news to me. What sort of things have you heard about?”
If only that existed.
Originally Posted by johnnysaucepn:
“Never? I think you're mistaken in that regard. RTD's style appealed to some and turned off others. That's going to apply to any past, current, or future showrunner. You're never going to keep everyone happy. Some people are turned off by Moffat's more sci-fi approach, some people are switching on that weren't interested before.
This is news to me. What sort of things have you heard about?”
“Never? I think you're mistaken in that regard. RTD's style appealed to some and turned off others. That's going to apply to any past, current, or future showrunner. You're never going to keep everyone happy. Some people are turned off by Moffat's more sci-fi approach, some people are switching on that weren't interested before.
This is news to me. What sort of things have you heard about?”
Less sci-fi approach you mean, surely?
Originally Posted by Mulett:
“I think RTD weaved his story arcs more successfully and never alienated the audience. Moffatt's had a lot of negative feedback - inside and outside the BBC - and has agreed to/decided to restructure his plans for Who over the coming years as a result. That's something RTD never had to do.
I'm hoping the changes will improve the Moffatt-Who experience and make for a better 50th anniversary show.”
“I think RTD weaved his story arcs more successfully and never alienated the audience. Moffatt's had a lot of negative feedback - inside and outside the BBC - and has agreed to/decided to restructure his plans for Who over the coming years as a result. That's something RTD never had to do.
I'm hoping the changes will improve the Moffatt-Who experience and make for a better 50th anniversary show.”
He has decided to completely get rid of two-part episodes, so that may upset a few people.
Anyway, whatever the 50th anniversary is, the one thing you can be sure of is that a flood of people will come on here after the episode airs to complain about every conceivable thing.
Originally Posted by Kapellmeister:
“If only that existed.”
“If only that existed.”
I was about to say this. The laws of science seem to be recreated each time it's convenient (and I'm not saying RTD didn't do it), but the whole power of memories, love, etc, just isn't sci-fi...
Originally Posted by daveyboy7472:
“I don't really see the point in doing that. It seems pretty pointless having past Doctors back and not having them play The Doctor. It's like having your family turn up at a big birthday party and pretend to be someone else for the evening. Just doesn't make sense.
The whole point of an anniversary is to celebrate what's gone before. I'd rather have those actors back playing The Doctor or not at all.
Somehow I can't see future anniversaries with Matt Smith turning up playing someone else so why should any of the previous Doctors do it?
”
“I don't really see the point in doing that. It seems pretty pointless having past Doctors back and not having them play The Doctor. It's like having your family turn up at a big birthday party and pretend to be someone else for the evening. Just doesn't make sense.
The whole point of an anniversary is to celebrate what's gone before. I'd rather have those actors back playing The Doctor or not at all.
Somehow I can't see future anniversaries with Matt Smith turning up playing someone else so why should any of the previous Doctors do it?
”
Actually, the idea of having the actors back but not playing the Doctor due to some timey-wimey stuff (just up Moffat's street) has quite tickled me.
I can imagine Matt meeting the earlier versions of himself as they are now, but they aren't the Doctor - Davison an ex-cricketer, T. Baker a wacky inventor, C Baker a clown (sorry) Sylvester a professor (geddit?). Lovely McGann as a Shakespearian actor. And having to sort it all out and restore them to their true selves.
Pity Eccleston won't be in it, as he would be a great brickie.
And, of course, there would be Tennant in cap and gown as a history teacher.
Originally Posted by TheSilentFez:
“He has decided to completely get rid of two-part episodes, so that may upset a few people.
Anyway, whatever the 50th anniversary is, the one thing you can be sure of is that a flood of people will come on here after the episode airs to complain about every conceivable thing.”
“He has decided to completely get rid of two-part episodes, so that may upset a few people.
Anyway, whatever the 50th anniversary is, the one thing you can be sure of is that a flood of people will come on here after the episode airs to complain about every conceivable thing.
”
And others will say it's brilliant even if it's abysmal.
2 of 4
