Haha! Brilliant. You know its weird but I was stuck in traffic today and ended up talking to my husband about Moffat leaving/Chibnall taking over. He's only moderately interested in Doctor Who but did his best to pretend to care.

But I made that exact same comparison with JNT. Which is a worry if you remember what then happened to poor old Colin Baker!

Wait Mulett you're a girl? Always thought you were a male .

I'd hardly describe a married woman twice your age as a 'girl'.

I thought Levine had been very seriously indeed and is still recovering as best he can?

I am a 45 year old man.

Goodness, you lot are old fashioned. And for the record, I'd much rather be called a girl than a woman

Ahh I see lol

I have, for a couple of years, guessed that Chibnall was the person the BBC wanted. And given his success with Broadchurch it's quite easy to imagine that this progression was long planned, but needed time for his commitments to Broadchurch to end - hence Moffat's extended run.

Its hard to discern much from Chibnall's previous Dr Who output - He seems fairly adaptable and all the episodes sat well in their series. The two he wrote for series 7 are quite different - Dinosaurs on a Spaceship seems very "Moffat" with fast wise-cracking dialogue, a mix of humour and a truly chilling villian. The Power of Three seems to have deliberate nods to the RTD era - the newsflashes and UNIT - and a relatively slight threat and some dubious science (the miraculous heart attack recovery). The Silurian story in series 5 was very enjoyable - a nod to classic Who when the Dr and companions are inevitably split up. 42 from series 3 was OK, it suffered from a somewhat ludicrous premise - a conscious star - however.

I agree with Mulett - I think the timey-whimy stories are very much a Moffat device - trying to copy them (whether he wants to or not) will invite comparison and accusations of "copying". So I imagine some more straightforward story telling. My guess is that Chibnall will want Capaldi to stay - but in actual fact I think it would be better if he didn't. The clean break with Moffat, Smith and Gillan was a great re-boot of the show (IMHO) and I hope Chibnall has the confidence to do the same.
I also think that he will be more interested in character development - but where this leads the show may be controversial - this will inevitably mean the Dr and/or his companions; RTD did companion-Dr relationships(even series 4 focussed on the non-sexual "mates" relationship between Donna and Dr). Moffat did more companion-companion relationships (Amy/Rory, Clara/Danny) A focus of character development surely implies a degree of arc-iness.

The best things that Moffat achieved are (again IMHO)
1. A return to the eccentric and otherworldly-ness of the Doctor (in contrast to the distinctly human 10th doctor)
2. Some new "monsters" (Weeping Angels and the Silence) which are up there with the best of "Classic" who
3. A much better visual "look" to the show. It's easy to forget how much like a soap opera the RTD era looked - with very bright lighting and lots of outside locations. The look and colour palette of Moffat's era have been very much more to my taste.
Obviously those are things I would like to see retained.

I think the situation is very different this time around. Moffat was a showrunner who people largely had confidence in and indeed great expectations of. Chibnall is a more low key and divisive appointment. I think they need to keep some familiar elements to lessen the likelihood of a significant backlash.

Keeping Capaldi would be perfect for that.

You don't want fans feeling like they're watching a totally new show because in the majority of cases that will translate to a 'worse show' with the standard having previously been set so high.

I don't agree at all. If anything the last couple of years have shown that there's a base audience of about 6m who will watch DW because it's DW and the 3-4m more who used to watch it are dependent on how much they were enjoying what they saw.

Capaldi is associated with a DW that has become niche. People have already decided if they like the current Doctor and a new guy writing it won't make a difference. New people won't give it a try if they see the same face in the lead - the showrunner doesn't make a difference to the general audience and frankly the idea of a 'backlash' just doesn't track. The only way to refresh the show again is a totally fresh set of actors and tbh there's little risk - DW has loyal core audience regardless it seems.

From an advertising POV it would be very difficult to sell a whole new era with the same faces. From a writer's POV it's difficult to make something properly your own if you've got to work with leftovers from the last guy.

If they don't change Doctor and companion they're wasting a huge opportunity.

Regarding the bolded bits, you say that new people won't give it a try if they see the same face in the lead... would that be the same 'new people' that decided to tune into Voyage of the Damned? Or the more than 9 million viewers that The Fires of Pompeii held onto? Or indeed the Series 4 finale which got a huge audience? Or The Waters of Mars which again got over 10 million? Or A Christmas Carol which got over 12 million? A new lead results in a brief spike, but isn't the only way you up the viewership. A mixture of decent casting, competent writing and successful promotion can all contribute to that. Casting someone new always runs the risk that they'll be less successful and cause the show some really serious decline - something we've not seen so far. Once that initial spike is done with you don't want to lose a quarter or a third of your audience, but you run that risk every time.

The idea that the only way of refreshing the show is with a fresh set of actors is a decidedly one-way perspective of the issue. A complete recasting with a new writer opens you up to the media suggestion that the show is in huge trouble and is opting for a total rebrand. It shows a lack of confidence in the brand 'as is'. Again, after the initial spike of viewership for The Eleventh Hour, Series 5 didn't do any better than Series 4 did by having a wholly new lead cast. In fact on average it did a little worse.

As for working with the leftovers from the previous writer, Doctor Who is in a rather unique postion where you replace actor, but you don't replace character. Each Doctor might have his own unique twang, but beneath it all he is fundamentally the same character and the status quo must be adhered to to some degree. Chibnall will get his chance to write his own Doctor undoubtedly, but it's not the greatest hardship to build upon the character as he is right now when he's always adhering to that status quo. This is also why I support the notion that the show is typically seen through the eyes of the companion anyway... they're the one who can go on a journey and be left in a different place to where they started, with consequences actually having a lasting impact on their fate. If anything, a new companion would fit very well for Series 11 (even if it cuts the Series 10 companion short, I guess we'd have to wait and see) because it is the companion, rather than the Doctor, that voices the tone of the show and steers its direction to a significant degree.

How much did Moffat preserve from Russell T ?

I don't think Chibnall will go back to Moffat or RTD characters, why would he, he will want to create his own characters not drag up old ones that are not his, people wanting RTD characters to come back or Moffat's are just letting their personal bias dictate what they say rather than looking at it rationally and what's best for the show.

Chibnall has said in his statement about taking over that he's excited to create new characters new creatures new worlds (which is the most exciting thing he has said) that doesn't sound like someone who wants to drag up the past, and I hope he sticks to that.

The only characters I can see him bringing back because it makes logical sense within the who-verse is the Unit characters (which he has already written for) if there's ever a story need for Unit to show up.

http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/doctor-...th-doctor-who/

I notice that Capaldi is VERY careful not to use the term 'working with' when discussing Chibnall. He is excited to see what Chibnall does but does not yet state that he is excited at the prospect of working with him. However, don't take this is confirmation that Capaldi will leave with Moffat; it all confirms at the moment is what we already knew; that Capaldi is currently only contracted to produce series ten. That could well change.

This is very much what I want to see. Occassional reappearances and such are nice but overall Chibnall needs to make his own mark on the show (even if people will moan about him treating the show like his own).

But there'll still be Daleks and probably Cybermen too. No reason not to use other popular villains originating in classic DW, if there's a good story to tell with them.

I guess he'd likely use UNIT as well if there's a story that needs them, and probably Kate too.

The interesting thing for me would be whether he'd use any of the most popular of the villains originated in C21 DW by either RTD or SM. Angels? Missy?

The classic DW villains were similarly "new" once upon a time.

As difficult as it is to say if Capaldi will stay on or not, I think if anyone was to decide to try it out under a new showrunner rather than moving on, he would be the one.

I think it is a shame when a new showrunner moves on from what has been done by a predecessor. There's plenty of room to develop new characters and monsters without putting up a partition between your Who and whatever was done before. Change is good when necessary. But change for the sake of change is pointless.

I would have loved to see some of the RTD-era characters like Jack, Martha & Mickey turn up during Matt Smith's time as the Doctor, or even now with Peter Capaldi. I probably would have enjoyed the Moffat era far more if there had been a stronger link to what had come before 2010.

And the same with Chibnall - I'd be really sad if we don't get to see the likes of the Paternoster Gang again, once he takes over. Or if he brings in his own UNIT team and we say goodbye forever to Kate Stewart and Osgood.

I do love River but I do get a sense that her story has now been told - from start to finish.

One thing I would love Chibnall to do is revisit a classic companion in the way RTD did with Sarah Jane.

Its a long way off too - Capaldi might be thinking "four years and I'm done".

Are there any characters first seen in C21 DW that Chibbers should consider bringing back? After 10 years of C21 DW surely there should be a few that are popular enough to be worth returning?

After all, DW got the primary recurring villains in only its second story and the Daleks and a few others have returned from the classic era.

In C21 DW it seems the prevailing view is that only a new character's creator can write for that character. Some of the characters have had their story told (thinking of River Song there), so I doubt they'd return, but others, such as the Angels were very popular. Could they return? And what about Missy? I expect she'll return in S10, maybe even as the season "big bad", but will her story be concluded? If not, and if Chibbers wants to bring back the Master, will it be in the guise of Missy? If not, will we finally get a full Master regeneration? (I don't count the Derek Jacobi transformation because we really didn't see much of his version of the Master, only the Master hidden in "human" form).

As I understand it, Jack was in the first drafts of "A Good Man Goes to War", but John Barrowman had other commitments that meant he wasn't available for the shoot.

Remember not everyone likes PC

Has any Doctor ever been universally loved?

Isn't there some sort of contractual obligation to feature the Daleks every year? Even if it's just a cameo like in 2009 and 2011. So they have to appear in 2018's series, and they have to appear in this year's Christmas Special.

2005: Dalek, Bad Wolf, Parting of the Ways
2006: Doomsday
2007: Daleks in Manhattan, Evolution of the Daleks
2008: Stolen Earth, Journey's End
2009: Waters of Mars (cameo)
2010: Victory of the Daleks, The Pandorica Opens
2011: The Wedding of River Song (cameo)
2012: Asylum of the Daleks
2013: The Day of the Doctor, The Time of the Doctor
2014: Into The Dalek
2015: The Magician's Apprentice, The Witch's Familiar

That's never been more than an unsubstantiated rumour. While it's true that they have appeared every year in some form, it doesn't necessarily mean they are contractually obliged to use them. I'd think it a bit odd if a creative like RTD would have allowed himself to creatively constrained by agreeing to a deal which would mean he would have to use them every year. I would have thought it more likely that he would have just started his new who without them than agree to such a deal.

I've always felt that them appearing was more just co-incidence, and the fact that in some of the cameo examples, such as the pandorica opens and the wedding of river song, they are just handy props that are always in the store room and easy to fish out when you need a quick cameo or background monster. Same as how the cybermen, Ood, weeping angels, and sontarans often get used for cameo's also.

Not saying it's definitely not true, just that it's always sounded a bit dubious to me. I suppose if the 2016 special doesn't feature them then it would settle it and prove the contract deal isn't true. If it does though, especially if only for a cameo, it still wouldn't conclusively prove the existence of such a deal.

Who has been around again for over a decade so it's important the show continues to hark back from the past. While I agree, Chibnall needs to do his own thing, I think it's important that he also keeps thing connected.

While Martha was my least favourite companion, I've always thought that Moff was missing a trick not getting her involved in some of Smith and Capaldi's UNIT stories.