• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Doctor Who
What if Matt Smith's era had had a full series per year, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013?
lotrjw
07-06-2015
I want to know what people think of the idea of Matt Smith being given a full series per year instead of two full series and two half series?

I'm assuming that 2010 and 2011 would have been as was, with 2012 having a full Autumn series and 2013 having a full Autumn series, ending with the 50th special as the finale, then Time of the Doctor as the Christmas special as was.
Dalekbuster523
07-06-2015
I think it would have flowed much better. Series 7 would have seemed very inconsistent though with the Ponds leaving halfway through, unless they'd have had them leave at the end of series 7 and Clara join in series 8.
lotrjw
07-06-2015
Originally Posted by Dalekbuster523:
“I think it would have flowed much better. Series 7 would have seemed very inconsistent though with the Ponds leaving halfway through, unless they'd have had them leave at the end of series 7 and Clara join in series 8.”

Yes I agree it would have been a good idea for the Ponds to leave at the end of what would have been series 7 in this example.
Although Clara splinters could have been appearing all throughout series 7 and resolved in the Christmas 2012 episode as was, with her starting properly as a companion in series 8 in this scenario.

We were basically short changed a whole series with Matt but I don't like the idea of Matt staying on to do what Capaldi actually did in 2014. They could have wrapped up Matt's era stuff better in my scenario whilst keeping Capaldi's start the same.
Dalekbuster523
08-06-2015
Originally Posted by lotrjw:
“Yes I agree it would have been a good idea for the Ponds to leave at the end of what would have been series 7 in this example.
Although Clara splinters could have been appearing all throughout series 7 and resolved in the Christmas 2012 episode as was, with her starting properly as a companion in series 8 in this scenario.

We were basically short changed a whole series with Matt but I don't like the idea of Matt staying on to do what Capaldi actually did in 2014. They could have wrapped up Matt's era stuff better in my scenario whilst keeping Capaldi's start the same.”

Clara splinters throughout series 7 would have been interesting. I actually feel it would have helped the whole Clara-timestream resolution.
lotrjw
08-06-2015
Originally Posted by Dalekbuster523:
“Clara splinters throughout series 7 would have been interesting. I actually feel it would have helped the whole Clara-timestream resolution.”

That's my thoughts too and giving the Ponds 8 more episodes with a bigger end of a full series finale would have been much better!

Also with Name of being the week before Day of it would have well flowed without such a big gap
doctor blue box
08-06-2015
Well better, as we'd have got a whole extra series. Rather than being given excuses for split series, and having one series air over 2 years (series 7) we would have actually had 4 series in 4 years.
Abomination
08-06-2015
Of course more Doctor Who is always awesome, but first and foremost I would have guaranteed at least some coherency and stability in the series we got. Between 2010 and 2013 we got three series (not necessarily "rather than four" as that is a very demanding sort of attitude, I guess), of which there was a lot right and a lot wrong. One of the biggest criticisms, and it is actually more obvious with the element of hindsight, is that the series gaps did not help.

The Series 6 divide wasn't too bad, but at the same time I don't feel that it benefited in anyway. In fact, you could probably argue that the divide is what led to the structure lending itself to the one-part finale we got, and I wasn't a fan of that.

The Series 7 divide was considerably worse. It wasn't an equal divide (5 episodes in one "half" and eight in the other "half"), and when combined with the standalone nature of the stories offered up that year it meant that the Pond's final run of episodes felt very reminiscent of the 2009 Specials year - and that's no good thing. The latter Clara-half of the series didn't fare much better, feeling like an abbreviated series rather than the second half of one - and that's being generous. When viewed collectively the seventh series feels more coherent - the Oswin appearance in the first half, and the few Amy references in the second half help it it to feel more complete. And so I would argue that while a series every year between 2010 and 2013 would have been brilliant, it was the structuring of the series we got that mattered most and the show was let down a little. Experimenting both with the story type, and the series structure simultaneously didn't do it any favours, so whilst four series rather than three sounds great in theory I'd also exercise caution if it were me and actually try to make the three series we got as stellar a final product as possible.

And it feels important to add that this is by no means a dig at anyone who worked on the show throughout the Smith Era. I loved Smith's Doctor but felt he was having to do his absolute best with minimal to go on some of the time. And I'm sure that the Anniversary was somewhat responsible in no small measure for the scheduling issues with Series 7 - having to fit in a whole extra feature-length special on top of the regular output isn't necessarily easy... and with that in mind perhaps the decision to split Series 6 into the autumn was a bad decision, as it likely held back Series 7 as well.
lotrjw
08-06-2015
Originally Posted by Abomination:
“Of course more Doctor Who is always awesome, but first and foremost I would have guaranteed at least some coherency and stability in the series we got. Between 2010 and 2013 we got three series (not necessarily "rather than four" as that is a very demanding sort of attitude, I guess), of which there was a lot right and a lot wrong. One of the biggest criticisms, and it is actually more obvious with the element of hindsight, is that the series gaps did not help.

The Series 6 divide wasn't too bad, but at the same time I don't feel that it benefited in anyway. In fact, you could probably argue that the divide is what led to the structure lending itself to the one-part finale we got, and I wasn't a fan of that.

The Series 7 divide was considerably worse. It wasn't an equal divide (5 episodes in one "half" and eight in the other "half"), and when combined with the standalone nature of the stories offered up that year it meant that the Pond's final run of episodes felt very reminiscent of the 2009 Specials year - and that's no good thing. The latter Clara-half of the series didn't fare much better, feeling like an abbreviated series rather than the second half of one - and that's being generous. When viewed collectively the seventh series feels more coherent - the Oswin appearance in the first half, and the few Amy references in the second half help it it to feel more complete. And so I would argue that while a series every year between 2010 and 2013 would have been brilliant, it was the structuring of the series we got that mattered most and the show was let down a little. Experimenting both with the story type, and the series structure simultaneously didn't do it any favours, so whilst four series rather than three sounds great in theory I'd also exercise caution if it were me and actually try to make the three series we got as stellar a final product as possible.


And it feels important to add that this is by no means a dig at anyone who worked on the show throughout the Smith Era. I loved Smith's Doctor but felt he was having to do his absolute best with minimal to go on some of the time. And I'm sure that the Anniversary was somewhat responsible in no small measure for the scheduling issues with Series 7 - having to fit in a whole extra feature-length special on top of the regular output isn't necessarily easy... and with that in mind perhaps the decision to split Series 6 into the autumn was a bad decision, as it likely held back Series 7 as well.”

Yes I see they should have filmed series 6 in one block even though they planned to split it up, so series 6 part 2 was completely in the can so to speak and sitting at RedBee ready for the BBC to play out later in the year.
Then record series 7 from October/November 2011 to February 2012 but again not play out till Autumn 2012.

Then the same with what would have been a series 8 in 2013 start recordings it in October/November 2012 going to February 2013, which would have left extra time in 2013 to film a proper set of specials including the 50th Special and the Christmas Special for 2013.
Then start a series 9 recording with Capaldi in January 2014.
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map