Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 
 

Is 75 minutes an insult?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 27-10-2013, 16:19
dantay24uk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,277

As the title explains, this thread is to discuss whether or not fans believe 75 minutes is enough for the 50th anniversary special: The Day of the Doctor.

Is 75 minutes an insult?

Should it be longer? Shorter? Or is 75 minutes fair?
dantay24uk is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 27-10-2013, 16:20
mossy2103
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 57,178
It should be as long as is needed to tell the story effectively, without rushing and without padding.
mossy2103 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 16:29
CD93
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lancashire, UK
Posts: 9,353
Adjust the time slot to fit the story.

Not the story to fit the time slot.
CD93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 16:48
human nature
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 995
As the title explains, this thread is to discuss whether or not fans believe 75 minutes is enough for the 50th anniversary special: The Day of the Doctor.

Is 75 minutes an insult?

Should it be longer? Shorter? Or is 75 minutes fair?
You're asking people who have never seen the programme to consider whether they feel insulted that it's too long?
human nature is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 17:01
Face Of Jack
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: N. Yorkshire
Posts: 5,813
Bearing in mind - the sales to other places will mean that it will probably last at least 90 minutes if not more, with commercial breaks. That's surely why DW is only made in 45 minute episodes. That's my reckoning anyway.
Face Of Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 17:15
saladfingers81
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: The Tardis
Posts: 7,134
What a bizarre question considering no one has seen it yet. Quality not quantity.

Midnights 43 minutes are a darn sight better than The End of Times 135.
saladfingers81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 17:35
LeslieGrufford
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 100
What a bizarre question considering no one has seen it yet. Quality not quantity.

Midnights 43 minutes are a darn sight better than The End of Times 135.
Matter of opinion. I loved The End of Time a very fitting and emotional send off. The best send off any of the Doctors have ever had IMO.

Midnight. Messy. Rubbish ending.
LeslieGrufford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 17:41
TEDR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,183
75 minutes? It's the biggest insult I've ever heard! I don't like what the BBC is trying to imply by picking a length equal to the atomic number of a third-row transitional metal.
TEDR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 17:52
saladfingers81
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: The Tardis
Posts: 7,134
Matter of opinion. I loved The End of Time a very fitting and emotional send off. The best send off any of the Doctors have ever had IMO.

Midnight. Messy. Rubbish ending.
Well obviously. But the critical consensus of Midnight generally is that it is more highly rated than TEOT. I was just using it to make my point that its the quality of the story that matters not necessarily the running time. Another example- Blink versus the many many hours of Trial of...cue someone saying they prefer the latter.
saladfingers81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 18:09
Abomination
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,361
The Wedding of River Song was a 45 minute story. I thought that was an insult, because it had to wrap up the 90 minute two-parter from the start of Series 6, as well as the developments across 95 further minutes from A Good Man Goes to War and Let's Kill Hitler. To me, the whole finale felt rushed and poorly resolved. It's for THAT reason it was an insult.

The End of Time was a 135 minute story, spread across two episodes. I thought that was an insult, as it seriously could not justify that length. The story was heavily padded, and most of the development from Part One was thrown away in Part Two through a five second deux ex machina incident between The Master and Rassilon. It just seemed overdone, and for THAT reason it was an insult.

The Day of the Doctor sits at 75 minutes. It's longer than a single story, but shorter than the average two-parter. Until we've seen it, we shouldn't judge it for its length. 75 minutes is a decent time to tell a decent story... it won't be a rushed 45 minutes, but it won't be an overdone 135 minutes either.
Abomination is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 18:13
frankiecam
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 23
2 hours at least
frankiecam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 18:29
adams66
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 1,682
Dopiest post of the day!
Who can possibly be 'insulted' by the length of an as yet unseen tv programme?
adams66 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 18:29
Shawn_Lunn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Scattered
Posts: 5,345
No, I actually think it's a reasonable amount of time.
Shawn_Lunn is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 18:34
Eighth Doctor
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The TARDIS
Posts: 656
Well obviously. But the critical consensus of Midnight generally is that it is more highly rated than TEOT. I was just using it to make my point that its the quality of the story that matters not necessarily the running time. Another example- Blink versus the many many hours of Trial of...cue someone saying they prefer the latter.
No-one would have an issue with Trial of a Timelord if it had Sally Sparrow instead of Mel.
Eighth Doctor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 18:35
dantay24uk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,277
Dopiest post of the day!
Who can possibly be 'insulted' by the length of an as yet unseen tv programme?
You don't have to have seen the episode. If I told you the episode was going to be 10 minutes, what would you say then!?

Now who sounds dopey?
dantay24uk is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 18:44
saladfingers81
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: The Tardis
Posts: 7,134
You don't have to have seen the episode. If I told you the episode was going to be 10 minutes, what would you say then!?

Now who sounds dopey?
But the episode isn't ten minutes.
saladfingers81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 18:46
Benjamin Sisko
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Deep Space Nine
Posts: 1,440
Matter of opinion. I loved The End of Time a very fitting and emotional send off. The best send off any of the Doctors have ever had IMO.

Midnight. Messy. Rubbish ending.
You'd seriously put Ten's sappy, tantrumous, selfish, depressing, Just-Die-Already and cowardly ending above the extremely dignified endings of Five in Caves of Androzani, or Nine in Parting of the Ways?

On topic, I agree with the majority - A brilliant 60 minute story would be infinitely preferred to a 90 minute story that feels like it drags and bores the viewers.
Benjamin Sisko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 19:07
bohoboy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 788

The End of Time was a 135 minute story, spread across two episodes. I thought that was an insult, as it seriously could not justify that length. The story was heavily padded, and most of the development from Part One was thrown away in Part Two through a five second deux ex machina incident between The Master and Rassilon. It just seemed overdone, and for THAT reason it was an insult.
TEOT can be criticized for many thing but there is no Deus ex Machina as you describe.
bohoboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 19:09
be more pacific
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,944
TEOT can be criticized for many thing but there is no Deus ex Machina as you describe.
Didn't Rassilon magic away the Master's control over humanity with a single waft of his gauntlet?
be more pacific is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 19:23
Abomination
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,361
^ That's the exact thing I was referencing... the already ridiculous Master-race plot which was set up as the massive cliffhanger in the middle, was later ridiculed further by not even being taken seriously by the writer and was chucked away in an instant. I love RTD but really don't know where he was going with this one.

In fact The End of Time is full of deux-ex-machina-esque moments - the White Point Star was an out-of-nowhere plot convenience, never previously mentioned, or even explained properly. The fact that Donna had some kind of previously never mentioned protection from The Doctor...not explained, or explored...just there to keep the plot going. The Secret Books of Saxon, or the Potions of Life. All of these contrived plot devices to keep things going...it was insanity!
Abomination is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 19:27
taliesin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Stoke On Trent
Posts: 615
The 30th was an insult

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQCeMIQpFBc

but back in the dark days of no-who we took what we were given with song's in our heart's and smile's on our faces
taliesin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 19:34
dave9946
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 166
The BBC had been working on this special on and off from the initial ideas stage for about 2 years pretty much by the time production had completed.

They could easily have made at least a quality 90-100 min special with no padding as some call it when you realise the time it had been worked on for. There is no reason in the slightest to assume or be concerned that a longer 90-100 min could not have an equally quality story as say a 60 or 90 min special.

And let's face it, they have also not spent as much making Dr Who this year as in any other year since it came back in 2005. And cost aide, Dr Who makes serious money for the BBC and runs at a massive profit to cost ratio. So an affordability reason is also no reason for the specials length. More so in that cinema ticket sales alone will have easily already covered the cost of making it.

Personally it should have been 90 mins. But is 75mins a compromise for getting more people in it and a major global star in John Hurt?. Perhaps actors availability caused issues and it was planned as a 90 mins and they had to cut in back for actor availability reasons or replace some actors?. Maybe 1 day we will find out?.
dave9946 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 19:45
bp2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 879
75 minutes? It's the biggest insult I've ever heard! I don't like what the BBC is trying to imply by picking a length equal to the atomic number of a third-row transitional metal.
Couldn't you have just said Rhenium?
bp2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 19:55
Mikeyboss182
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 26
To be honest I expected it to be a least 90 mins but if the story's good and doesn't feel rushed then that's all that matters.

We're just going to have to wait and see.
Mikeyboss182 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2013, 21:01
TEDR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,183
Couldn't you have just said Rhenium?
I thought I'd try to describe why the comparison is insulting. Since that's the conclusion the poster wants us to reach somehow.
TEDR is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:20.