I know this has been mentioned before but in light of all the news about the 50th anniversary, I can't help but feel cheated by the BBC...

The 2nd part of "Series 7" is different to the first part and has no real connection to Part 1 (Amy, Rory not mentioned, brand new story arc etc). Indeed, with the introduction of Clara, the first episode of 7b actually played like the first episode of a new series which, let's be honest, it really is.

If Series 7 had been shown in the one calendar year, we should now be watching Series 8 (i.e. 13 new episodes). What we are actually getting is the remaining episodes we should have had last year and one special. In effect, the only real new episode this year will be the 50th Anniversary hour episode. When you think about it, this is really poor.

In 2011, Series 6 was filmed continuously and the BBC chose to split it. In 2012, Series 7b was not completed at the time Series 7a aired.

In effect, the BBC have planned for 2 series: one with 6 episodes and one with have 7.

By naming the series "7 - Part 1" and "7- Part 2", they are playing with us.

No they aren't. If we'd had series 7 last year, most of it would have had to be done live, as they only finished filming the series last December

That's exactly my point - the BBC treated it as 2 series instead of one.

It didn't exactly help that the show relocated to Roath Lock midway through production, and that Moffat spent a long time (as usual!) writing the Christmas special, all in all 7A was filmed February - may 2012. As for 7B: Rings was shot in may, a break in June (maybe for the relocation?) Crimson Horror and Cold War in July, the Christmas special in August, Journey in September, Bells in October, Nightmare in Silver in November, and the finale in December.

pretty much a straight run, apart from the july break.

Well, yes...but this is hardly a new feeling. This has felt like this ever since they announced it.

You have to ask what defines a series, and anything that takes a production break for several months (Pre-Production on The Bells of St John seemed to follow immediately after The Snowmen...but six months after The Angels Take Manhattan) and airs in a completely different year.

I wouldn't be irritated were it not for the fact that we were told we were getting a short run in 2012 to make way for a huge amount of Doctor Who in its 50th Anniversary...and we're actually getting less than we did in 2005-2008.

One wonders what we'll get in 2014...

Wouldnt say we are being conned, but would say we should be thankful we have Dr Who on the telly at all.

Seems people are never happy, does it honestly matter if its season 7 or 8 or whatever?? We would moan equally if it was cancelled

Yeah, I seem to actually recall that in late 2011, they only announced at first that Series 7 would be delayed until Autumn with Moffat giving some quote about "how Doctor Who only feels right on Winter nights when it is dark outside" - a quote that of course no-one bought.

I think it was only in 2012 that they announced that only 6 new episodes (excluding the usual Christmas Special) would actually be shown that year with the "second part of the series" to follow in 2013.

This represents a trend which has appeared elsewhere...for example, Warehouse 13 Season 4.5 has just premiered (in actuality the premier date is towards the end of April, but the first episode of Season 4.5 has been distributed online), and earlier you had The Walking Dead Season 3.5, and Eureka Season 5.5.

This is the quote here:

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s7/do...en-moffat.html

I think the broadcast of Series 8 will be very telling of things, but I personally think they'll opt for 8A in Spring and 8B in Autumn of next year. This was the set-up they used for Series 6 and I found it to work quite well...I suspect they'd have used it straight away again for Series 7 if the anniversary special hadn't gotten in the way of that.

For now, I'm willing to accept that it is the 50th anniversary that has gotten in the way a bit. It understandably has taken a lot of effort to put it together, whilst trying to broadcast a full series at the same time. Yes, there have been less episodes than there might have been if it had all stuck to its usual set-up, but I don't feel conned in any way, and this all does feel like Series 7 to me... no matter how big the gap was. True, they could probably have aired the whole of Series 7 in 2012 and then spent all of this year focusing on the Anniversary, but then people would have moaned about the lack of content through January-October of this year. It was a likely decision to spread Series 7 out a bit more.

If Series 8 is subjected to massive delays and overly long divides, I'll perhaps reconsider that there may be larger problems behind-the-scenes, but for now it's a difficult schedule to work with and one I feel that people other than Moffat are managing a lot better than they could be. It's better than having the whole of Series 7 last year, and then a lack of episodes in the actual anniversary year because they're pulling together the special instead.

It's Series 7.

Series 8 has not been filmed yet.

Exactly.
And really, does it matter anyway?

You've missed the point of this thread.

Well whether it's labelled series 7 or 8 I can't believe people are saying it doesn't make a difference. It makes a huge difference.

7 and 8 over two years would be 26 episodes and 2 christmas specials over 2012/2013 but we're getting 13 regular episodes, 2 christmas specials and an anniversary special.

So 16 episodes compared to the usual 28.

Personally, I don't particularly care about the less episodes as long as I enjoy them, but there is definitely a huge cutback in the amount.

Whether that's BBC budget cuts or Steven Moffat struggling with the workload I don't know.

I find the argument "7a bears little resemblance to 7b" ridiculous - the whole series has pretty much a stad-alone thing going on. And Clara has appeared, in one form, with the previous TARDIS incumbents, clearly linking both parts of series 7.

You can call it what you like. But the production states it's series 7, and the DVD collection states its aeries 7. And in much the same way that you feel these episodes bear little resemblance to 7a, all the episodes are stand-alone, so bear almost the same to each other in their part of series 7 as they do to those in the other part of series 7.

There is no real difference between the relationship that episode 1 has with episode 2, than episode 1 has with episode 8. There are only slight differences as to the make-up of the TARDIS crew and the very faint arc running through each part of series 7.

That is true. It's one whole series when it comes together.

But I think the point of the OP is essentially that we're only getting one series in two years instead of two.

So, series 7 is split up with the second half replacing what *should* have been another series altogether.

Thanks - this is exactly my point. We've effectively had 2 half-sized series over 2 years instead of 2 full series.

Yes it is irritating. I dont care about the numbering of the series but we are being short changed with the number of episodes.

We have been conned. We have had less who this year. It's not comparable with walking dead because even with there series split they still get 12 or 13 per year. Plus they air shows different in the states. They give them a split, show repeats, and the. Show the following epesodes.

I know exactly where you're coming from and Private Eye was on the case as far back as June 2011. Although its initial prediction of a year of 'specials' proved to be untrue, it did later go on to predict that in 2012 and 2013 we would only get half as many episodes, which did turn out to be true.

Although the BBC is calling this 'Season 7a' and 'Season 7b' what we've essentially had (by the back door) is another 'Trial of a Timelord' situation, where the BBC has halved the number of episodes per season - although at least in 1986 the BBC was honest enough to admit it!

Otherwise, season 8 would be airing in the autumn as previously announced by Moffat.

So, sadly, I have to agree with macman11. The BBC can play about with titles as much as it likes, the facts remains that we've had half as many episodes as we should have had. It would have been much more honest if the BBC had just admitted to this and called the episodes showing this year Season 8.

Irrelevant.

US TV shows tend to be shown either side of the Christmas break unless they have less episodes and run as a half season.

They may run from 2012-2013 but then their next season will presumable run 2013-2014.

Doctor Who won't return until some point in 2014 (no doubt later in the year) so the number of episodes over the two years is proportionally different.

It IS series 7b, it WAS filmed as such.

And no, I don't feel conned.


And even if it were Series 8, I would still not feel conned.

We would still get the same number of episodes in a 12-month period as we have had with 7a/7b.

After all, it's only a number. why get hung up on a number?

And there has never been any commitment to produce a set number of episodes in any 12-month period.

Exactly!

I agree. Last year felt a bit like 2009 again to me, given the minimal Doctor Who output.

I didn't mind the divide in series 6 but this one just feels wrong. I hope to see a full run of 14 episodes next year, with or without a break in the middle.

Yes, the divide in Series 6 actually worked for me as it spaced the series over the year, like they do with US TV shows. The divide in this one is a back-door method to cut back on episodes.