Do we think Chibnall will introduce a female Doctor?

Do we think Chibnall will ever mention Clara ?

Do we think Missy will stay - will we see a new Master?

Hopefully not.


Hopefully not. Though i'd be happy for him to mention virtually any other companion or Jack, river, and the paternoster gang.


I like Missy so would be happy to see her stick around, especially since Chibnall might use her more effectively. At the same time though it would be interesting to see his interpretation of a new master. Leaning towards Missy staying though because something I admire about Classic who is that their only seemed to be 2 main masters throughout the whole thing, and I would quite like to see one constant Missy/master stay for long enough to take on different incarnations now.

That is a tough one, whatever Moffat has planned with her in season 10 may play a part in his decision, it also depends if he wants to use the Master as a villain, and if so what type of Master? I think Missy should just be the Master for as long as Capaldi is Doctor, as they have great chemistry. And when he leaves i think we should get a new Master and probably will i imagine. So we may see her in season 11, but 12 onwards i doubt it.

For me it really depends who the next Doctor is, because the best thing about the Master was the relationship/chemistry they had with the Doctor's. I think Missy is a great fit with Capaldi, but if it is lets say a younger Doctor, not sure it would work as well.

No. Isn't taking on the job of Doctor Who showrunner daunting enough without doing something as devisive as that? It's such an unnecessary risk for him to take. I'd be amazed if he took a gamble like that.

Thanks all. I think without fully realising it, my questions were actually less about Chris Chibnall and more about Steven Moffatt.

Tom, you put it so well in the appreciation thread, Steven has been ambitious, he's taken risks for the show he loves in order to keep moving it forward. I suppose behind my questions was a single idea - should anyone else take on some of these ambitious ideas? Would it be rude to just ignore them and forget about them totally once Steven left, or .. are they ideas that Moffatt and Moffatt alone should be allowed to build on, in his remaining time with the show.

It's interesting, I think I'd like Chris Chibnall to be free to take his own direction ofcourse, without big "pointers to weave in - like making the doctor female", and rather his own ambitions and ideas for the show. Yet, also somehow preserve some aspects from Moffatts time like the core "character" of the current characters, e.g. Capaldis' incarnation.

I hadn't realised it was Chris Chibnall who gave us Kate. Kate was introduced as a non-war type - who led with science not war. Over time though, she became much less science-y and back to the original core-UNIT stereotype - let's just blow it up, but both UNIT & Kate effectively were given a new (renewed direction) after that "war speech" which may or closer to what Chris Chibnall originally intended.

I guess the situation is different this time to when Moffat took over in 2010, because Chibnall isn't inheriting a hit show. Viewing figures are significantly down and the 12th Doctor doesn't seem to be connecting with the audience. There also seems to be a disconnect between those episodes that are popular on here and with critics (e.g. Heaven Sent) and those which score well with viewers more generally.

If Chibnall is smart (and I think he is) he won't be thinking purely in terms of what he wants Doctor Who to be. He'll be looking at lots of feedback/audience research to give him insight into what is/is not working.

Because of this, I am expecting Chibnall's Doctor Who to be a real step change from Moffat's. Personally, I could see a lot being chucked out - all the Gallifrey stuff, the non-linear storytelling, the part-time companion, the endless predictions of the Doctor's death and the more adult style.

I could see Chibnall trying to reposition the show as a popular family drama. And I think a showrunner has more of a mandate to implement change when taking over a show which isn't the success it once was. So on this occasion I think any changes he brings in would be justified.

I'm just trying to remember when Doctor Who stopped being a hit show.

After season 8 in terms of viewing figures. After season 5 in terms of popular awards.

Even the Editor of Doctor Who Magazine has written about how the show is no longer the success it once was.

BIB1: Audience research? Creation by committee of the masses? We know what that leads to: Strictly Come Find Me a Celebrity in the Jungle On Ice. He has to have a strong vision of his own, but perhaps moderated a little by audience research.

BIB2: Re-position? DW has always been and currently remains a popular family drama.

Audience research is massively important and widely used, particularly when a show is declining in popularity. Simply giving Chibnall a few bullet points from the audience research as clues about the show's declining popularity and then telling him to do his own thing . . well, that's just not how TV works. And frankly, that's not how I would want TV to work, especially when it comes to an important show like Doctor Who.


I would struggle to agree with that, and not just because of the time the show is broadcast.

It's not at the heights of the Tennant era, for sure, but it remains hugely popular and amongst the top BBC programmes.

You should read the piece the editor of Doctor Who magazine wrote about it - he captures the current position of the show in the BBC's hierarchy in a very fair and honest way. I am not saying the performance of S8 and S9 was disastrous but it is a great worry and rightly so.

You mean viewing figures that are far from the worst in the show's half-a-century history but that some current shows would kill for, and awards that you win for having a nice body and taking your top off?

It's not seeing the same kind of mainstream success as it did when RTD ran things but considering how successful it was back then it's hardly an insult to be less so.

There's a lot of 'head in the sand' going on here

Yes, we've been ignoring the oncoming doom of this show ever since Moffat took over. It's only made it to its 53rd year... how rubbish!

I think there's a lot of projecting one's own opinion here. It's only the people who passionately hate Moffat who are convinced the show is a universal flop and that his era will be remembered with hatred.

I can't speak to the article you mention as I don't take the magazine, but I'm not complacent, nor am I thinking everything in the garden is rosie. For me, the tone of season 8 plus the late showings of season 9 (and its tone too) were mistakes, at least as far as gathering a mass audience is concerned.

I feel confident that the move back to spring, which allows earlier showings (cirtical in capturing that young audience who will become us in the years ahead) and SM's swansong year will mean audience figures will recover and have time to recover. This is not like season 4 of Enterprise.

Do not even get me started on season 4 of Enterprise!

I am personally really thrilled about the move back to the spring although I know not everyone is. And I hope it means a return to 6.30pm/7pm start time for the show. 8pm is just too late for the show.

I have nothing to support this view apart from anecdotal evidence, but I don't think Clara was liked. I do think keeping her on for such a gloomy storyline in S9 was a massive own-goal for the show.

I think a new companion automatically brings a sense of renewal and I will be interested to see if the 12th Doctor becomes more palatable/endearing with a different companion. Right now, though, I am hoping season 10 will be Capaldi's last.

While I certainly think "past performance is no guarantee of future returns" or indeed of a returning audience, I think BIB is true and, sorry Mulett, you overstate your case.

I think it a bit odd when forum members respond to criticisms no one has actually made. Who has said the show is a universal flop? I certainly haven't. I haven't seen anyone else on here say so either.

As for "projecting one's own opinion here" . . . that is sort of the point of a discussion forum.


I think I am stating my case in a perfectly legitimate way. I have said the show is far less successful than it was. And that's true. And if you love the show as much as I do, that's a serious issue that needs addressing rather than being accepted as the new status quo.

My personal view is that S8 and S9 were the perfect storm of unlikeable Doctor/dislikeable companion. A new companion and Doctor for season 11 and I think Chibnall will be 70% there.

I think Lord Smexy's point was about projecting opinions on to the facts at hand and so misrepresenting the facts, rather than just giving one's opinion.


No problem with this second bit if you just replace the word I've highlighted with "currently". And I don't accept the status quo, as I think my posts have consistently shown.

I absolutely adore Doctor Who more than other show I've ever seen and it's been a big part of my life since I was a toddler, and I'm perfectly happy with the way it is now, even moreso than I was with RTD at the helm where I personally felt the show sacrificed quality and its spirit for mainstream popularity. I don't know what you're trying to imply with that statement.

Furthermore, your constant attitude of doom mongering amd statements that it isn't a hit show anymore are what give the impression of you touting it as a universal flop. By "projecting one's own opinion" I meant that your opinion seems to cloud what is actually real.

Also, who is this editor of DWM whose article you spoke of?

To be honest, GDK, I'm as clear as anyone else on here when it comes to what I am stating as a fact and what I am presenting as opinion. If others don't agree with my take on the facts, that's up to them.

I think an 18% audience drop in a single year is a big issue. Others say they're happy to get rid of certain sections of the audience. But it doesn't mean the drop didn't happen.

I think the show no longer winning awards at the NTAs (and the lead actor not even getting shortlisted) is a big issue. Others think it demonstrates the show has now transcended such crass events. But it doesn't mean it's not true to say we no longer have success at a popular awards like the NTAs.

I think Heaven Sent was dull and plodding. Others think it was a masterpiece and was universally applauded. But it got the second lowest AI of season 9 (only beaten by Sleep No More).


For the reasons I've listed above (among others) I am happy to leave the word in. But understand if others disagree.


To be fair, Lord Smexy, there is a BIG difference between saying the show is no longer a hit and saying it is a flop. I have said the former - as this is my opinion - but have never said or even alluded to the latter. No one on this forum has called the show a flop as far as I am aware.

It's the current editor. No idea what his name is. I believe the article is the foreword he writes at the beginning of each edition and this was one of two editions ago.

I think you're still missing my point, which is made with the following analogy.

If a glass was 90% full you would be the one highlighting the fact it was 10% empty (or only 90% full).

It's not a falsehood. It's not incorrect to say it's 10% empty. It's about which of the two values is the more significant towards the understanding of the situation. You are projecting your own negative view (in this case of the quality of the show, which is merely subjective opinion) onto the actual statistics, so in your mind's eye, the dip becomes more significant to you, especially as it supports your opinion of the quality of the show.

The rest is confirmation bias, which is a common human perceptual failing from which everyone suffers from time to time.

Your huge drop is not mine.