Hey Guys,
Just thinking which classic who writers living or dead do you think would fit the new series?

Mine:
Bob Holmes{of course)
Ben aaronavitch
Rona Munro
David Whittaker
Chris Bailey

your thoughts?

Bob Holmes
Terrence Dicks
Douglas Adams

Pip and Jane Baker
Terrance Dicks
Robert Holmes

and Terry Nation to create a new iconic villain.

doug adams has the required mix of things he thinks are very witty, going all over the place disconnectedly, and stuff pinched from other places.

i would have thought dicks and holmes are the antithesis of nu who.

Ben Aaronovich - his Peter Grant novels show he's got a lot of new ideas.

Holmes and Adams - like everyone has said. Co s its true innit

Robert Holmes, off course and Terrance Dicks, surely two of the finest Who writers ever.

Pip and Jane Baker I agree with as well as Douglas Adams.

Also think Bob Baker and Dave Martin and Ian Stewart Black, who wrote The War Machines and The Savages.

Dennis Spooner.

David Whitaker to write some more awesome Dalek Stories

But Not Terry Nation..........

Bob Baker and Dave Martin - all of their scripts had WAY more ideas than they knew what to do with, and they always came up with scenarios that 1970s Who struggled to realise on 70s budgets.
For example, with today's CGI imagine how vast Omega's palace could have been, and the Flame Of Singularity could actually have been a roaring furnace (which is what they envisaged) rather than a wisp of smoke (which is what was achievable).

Robert Banks Stewart

- Terror of the Zygons
- The Seeds of Doom

Not sure if he would technically count as a classic who writer but..
Andrew Cartmel
Also Marc Platt and Ian Briggs

True as that maybe The Claws Of Axos and The Three Doctors are still enjoyable stories.

Oh yeah, most of the Bristol Boys' stories are terrific fun, despite the limitations of the production.
I was just thinking how Bob 'n' Dave's wild imaginations would really love the almost limitless effects capabilities of the show today.

Robert Bank Stewart
Bob Holmes (if only he were alive)
Chris Bailey
Andrew Smith
Bob Baker
Ian Briggs

Definately not:
Pip and Jane Baker
The person that wrote Paradise Towers (Stephen Wyatt?)

Dicks and Holmes go without saying.

Bidmead would also be a good fit, I'd say. Moffat's era seems more charitable to straight edge sci-fi than RTD's reign ever was.

Aaronovich certainly. I'm surprised he hasn't been asked actually.

Whoever said Pip & Jane Baker, shame on you!

Each to their own....

I don't understand why Pip & Jane Baker are made fun of. As far as I can make out it is because they're a married couple and one of them is called Pip. Their scripts are perfectly fine. Not the best Who ever seen but certainly of a decent standard, and a lot more technically sound than a lot of them. Listening to their commentaries on the DVDS they speak perfectly reasonably and interestingly about their scripts. It's like people see the name and make up some idea in their head about what their stories must be like.

I think any of the old writers who did a good job on the classic series (ie the good ones) could also write the modern show, assuming they've kept their hand in with writing. People talk as if the quality of the writing has risen or that the show is some completely different genre now but this is erroneous. The style has changed (of television generally, not just Doctor Who)is all. Every writer then and now was writing in the context of the influences and prevailing styles of the times. If Terrence Dicks, for example, was entering into tv script writing now, he would be writing in the same style as the writers now and would fit in seamlessly. He wouldn't be writing them as if they were 6 part 25 minute stories!

The content of the show hasn't changed, the tone hasn't changed. They'd all do just fine.

I agree. Colin Baker has acknowledged that they wrote the best for his Doctor and aside from Time And The Rani, I've enjoyed their other scripts for the show, but that wasn't totally their fault as circumstances and a hasty change of Doctor was forced upon them.

Reading the novels of their stories is quite an experience as well. It's actually quite enjoyable and really different in tone and style to say, Terrance Dicks for example.

they're always voted the worst writers - weird choice!


EDIT: oh right, been said by everyone already!

Ben Aaronovitch
Mark Platt
Christopher Bailey
Christopher H Bidmead

also ... "David Agnew" & "Robin Bland"


.... but definitely NOT Pip&Jane Baker

I refer you to the post above yours for my explanation and I don't regard it as weird at all.....

Terrance Dicks.

He always wrote good, solid stories - maybe not exceptional ones, but he seemed to understand Dr Who.

Yes he did.
Terrance may be a little old fashioned in his approach but all his stories have a beginning, middle and end. Every character has a motive for doing what they do, and every plot point flows coherently on from the previous one. His scripts are logical and straightforward in their approach to storytelling. Nothing wrong with that.

Much as I like Moffat's timey wimey approach I sometimes wish we could have the odd story that starts at the beginning and ends at the end with all the plot points neatly resolved within the story.

Maybe that's an old fashioned, traditional approach to television, but these days in Doctor Who that wouldn't be seen as traditional, it would be quite a departure!

I believe I mentioned Pip & Jane Baker first. My reasoning is simple - I can't honestly vote for writers if I have never seen their episodes, its wrong. Secondly, I then choose the writes who I think would write good New Who stories. Now, as I've only just reached the last Hartnell episode, I watched Colin Baker/McCoy when I was young, and have only seen the few odd episodes from other doctors along the way - my list reflects the writers in that set of episodes.

Based on the episodes I saw, I quite enjoyed Pip & Jane Bakers episodes, but if everyone else doesn't - then each to their own