|
||||||||
Moffat: "There is no need for a doctor/showrunner to leave at the same time" |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,217
|
Moffat: "There is no need for a doctor/showrunner to leave at the same time"
/......."There is no need for that to be the case , thats what happened the last time and that why people are thinking that way. If you look back at the history of the show, producers and doctors , they leave at different times. There is no need for those things to be in sync.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUBV-XxiYEY |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,079
|
Quote:
/......."There is no need for that to be the case , thats what happened the last time and that why people are thinking that way. If you look back at the history of the show, producers and doctors , they leave at different times. There is no need for those things to be in sync.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUBV-XxiYEY
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,217
|
Quote:
True. Lots of Producers in the Sixties. And Tom didn't leave with Hinchcliffe. Or indeed Williams. And if he'd left with Letts...
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,506
|
The only way a Doctor should really be leaving with a showrunner is because they don't feel comfortable continuing under another, but this shouldn't really be happening when it's a show that does indeed guarantee change. Otherwise it just comes across as something done for the sake of it and I hope Capaldi isn't thinking along the lines of "Well, if Moffat's going, I might as well too".
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,217
|
Quote:
hope Capaldi isn't thinking along the lines of "Well, if Moffat's going, I might as well too".
Hopefully he will not end up like the other nuwho actors who regret not staying longer. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 339
|
Moffat lies
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,217
|
Quote:
Moffat lies
How can his opinion be a lie exactly? LOL yikes streeeetching
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,831
|
Quote:
How can his opinion be a lie exactly? LOL
yikes streeeetching![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,355
|
I'd agree that it shouldn't be a rule that Doctors and show runners need to leave at the same time, and I don't think that so far it is, as Obviously Eccleston and Smith left way before their respective showrunners, and Tennant said he was very tempted by staying for series 5.
At the same time though, I can see there are times when it can be seen as a good and/or bad thing to change it up all at once. Take 2010 for example - Moffat had the chance to completely revamp the show and the Doctor all in his own idealised image at the same time. Now had Tennant stayed on, yes Moffat would have had the Tennant popularity for that series carried over from the RTD era, but would those who love Smith and series 5 as it is, but didn't enjoy Tennant as much, have enjoyed series 5 as much as they did with Tennant at the helm? Likely not. That's why it would have been great for some (the RTD era fans) but probably not so good for others (the Smith fans). I think it's a grey area that can only be judged by the people involved on a case by case basis. In this particular case, I personally think Chibnall would be limited in his own personal creative freedom and chance at making the show fully his own if he keeps Capaldi, but at the same time, if it happens to be the case, then obviously he will think he can make it work for him. All I do know is that its between Chibnall and Capaldi. As such, comments Moffat keeps making on the subject don't seem to be any more important or relevant than anyone else who won't be involved. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,079
|
Quote:
I'd agree that it shouldn't be a rule that Doctors and show runners need to leave at the same time, and I don't think that so far it is, as Obviously Eccleston and Smith left way before their respective showrunners, and Tennant said he was very tempted by staying for series 5.
At the same time though, I can see there are times when it can be seen as a good and/or bad thing to change it up all at once. Take 2010 for example - Moffat had the chance to completely revamp the show and the Doctor all in his own idealised image at the same time. Now had Tennant stayed on, yes Moffat would have had the Tennant popularity for that series carried over from the RTD era, but would those who love Smith and series 5 as it is, but didn't enjoy Tennant as much, have enjoyed series 5 as much as they did with Tennant at the helm? Likely not. That's why it would have been great for some (the RTD era fans) but probably not so good for others (the Smith fans). I think it's a grey area that can only be judged by the people involved on a case by case basis. In this particular case, I personally think Chibnall would be limited in his own personal creative freedom and chance at making the show fully his own if he keeps Capaldi, but at the same time, if it happens to be the case, then obviously he will think he can make it work for him. All I do know is that its between Chibnall and Capaldi. As such, comments Moffat keeps making on the subject don't seem to be any more important or relevant than anyone else who won't be involved. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,355
|
Quote:
True, and sure Moffat would agree with you. He just keeps getting asked all the time!
I can't really recall whether Moffat was a big presence in terms of comments and statements during RTD's final year. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London or Valencia
Posts: 5,732
|
Quote:
In this particular case, I personally think Chibnall would be limited in his own personal creative freedom and chance at making the show fully his own if he keeps Capaldi, but at the same time, if it happens to be the case, then obviously he will think he can make it work for him.
Series 2 distinctly feels the most 'budget' of all nine so far. It has seven episodes set in contemporary London, including the final four (which are then followed by a contemporary London Christmas special, and a contemporary London start to the third series too... in fact London appears to some significant capacity in every episode between The Satan Pit and Gridlock). It's also where the divisive romanticised relationship between The Doctor and Rose can be found, with the popularity of the latter taking a bit of a hit compared to a much more successful first series. Series 2 is regularly considered by many people to be the weak link in RTD's chain. Moffat's second series was Series 6. The production values are there but only thanks to the show being seven years in at this point and having a reputation to uphold... the reality was that the series before it had gone massively over-budget. But more than that, this was really when people first started raising an issue with the quality of the writing on the show. I personally don't mind Series 6, take out the story arc and there's some of the most inventive stories in here and a real variety of them too. It looks visually stunning, but like Series 2 it suffers from burnout - whilst the second series saw us traipsing contemporary London for the final four episodes including two of the most universally detested episodes of the show ever, Series 6 attempted to wrap up a huge story arc that was ultimately quite dissatisfying to most. It had consumed much of the series and then amounted to little in a one-part 45 minute resolution to the series, all the while people also raising issue with the fact that the Doctor was now spouting too many catchphrases and essentially becoming a caricature of himself. In terms of direction, from a writing perspective Series 6 exhausted itself a little prematurely. Where Chibnall is concerned, maybe it could be beneficial to hold back the introduction of his own appointed Doctor. Rather than having to pile on all his ingredients in one go, use Series 11 to establish his tone and get some solid stories in with a Doctor and possibly a companion already there waiting for you. Introducing your new Doctor and/or companion a year or two into your tenure might give it a refresh, a new lease of life... potentially avoiding the struggles of that difficult second series for a showrunner. I've said for a while that for Doctor Who, sometimes sameness is change. Ignoring the abysmal marketing direction of "same old, same old" for Series 9, it was previously unprecedented territory for 'NuWho' to carry over the same Doctor and companion with no changes at all from one series to the next. And yet we got that with Series 8 to Series 9... in other words, staying the same was actually trying something new. And whilst not everyone is a fan of Series 9, it has to be said that critically it went down quite well - fans loved it, more mainstream viewers have praised it, actual critics have said good things. It did the show no harm to try something new, in the sense that it kept up what it had before rather than changing for the sake of change. On that note, I think it could hypothetically be to Chibnall's advantage to keep Capaldi around for a year or two. His eventual departure could very well spare Chibnall having to deal with a lull in the middle of his tenure...something both previous showrunners seem to have had to deal with. |
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Scattered
Posts: 7,444
|
He has a point but saying that as well, I can see Capaldi leaving with him and Chibnall starting with everything new. Maybe a Doctor will do four series and/or more but I don't think it's going to be Peter though.
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Green Hills of Earth
Posts: 80,414
|
The Showrunner jobtitle is a recent concept.
Classic Who producers were not lead writers, or even writers at all (only occasionally). The Script Editor filled that role. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,355
|
Quote:
At the same time though you could argue that the two previous showrunners have had to pace themselves or even faced an aspect of burnout in their second series.
Series 2 distinctly feels the most 'budget' of all nine so far. It has seven episodes set in contemporary London, including the final four (which are then followed by a contemporary London Christmas special, and a contemporary London start to the third series too... in fact London appears to some significant capacity in every episode between The Satan Pit and Gridlock). It's also where the divisive romanticised relationship between The Doctor and Rose can be found, with the popularity of the latter taking a bit of a hit compared to a much more successful first series. Series 2 is regularly considered by many people to be the weak link in RTD's chain. Moffat's second series was Series 6. The production values are there but only thanks to the show being seven years in at this point and having a reputation to uphold... the reality was that the series before it had gone massively over-budget. But more than that, this was really when people first started raising an issue with the quality of the writing on the show. I personally don't mind Series 6, take out the story arc and there's some of the most inventive stories in here and a real variety of them too. It looks visually stunning, but like Series 2 it suffers from burnout - whilst the second series saw us traipsing contemporary London for the final four episodes including two of the most universally detested episodes of the show ever, Series 6 attempted to wrap up a huge story arc that was ultimately quite dissatisfying to most. It had consumed much of the series and then amounted to little in a one-part 45 minute resolution to the series, all the while people also raising issue with the fact that the Doctor was now spouting too many catchphrases and essentially becoming a caricature of himself. In terms of direction, from a writing perspective Series 6 exhausted itself a little prematurely. Where Chibnall is concerned, maybe it could be beneficial to hold back the introduction of his own appointed Doctor. Rather than having to pile on all his ingredients in one go, use Series 11 to establish his tone and get some solid stories in with a Doctor and possibly a companion already there waiting for you. Introducing your new Doctor and/or companion a year or two into your tenure might give it a refresh, a new lease of life... potentially avoiding the struggles of that difficult second series for a showrunner. I've said for a while that for Doctor Who, sometimes sameness is change. Ignoring the abysmal marketing direction of "same old, same old" for Series 9, it was previously unprecedented territory for 'NuWho' to carry over the same Doctor and companion with no changes at all from one series to the next. And yet we got that with Series 8 to Series 9... in other words, staying the same was actually trying something new. And whilst not everyone is a fan of Series 9, it has to be said that critically it went down quite well - fans loved it, more mainstream viewers have praised it, actual critics have said good things. It did the show no harm to try something new, in the sense that it kept up what it had before rather than changing for the sake of change. On that note, I think it could hypothetically be to Chibnall's advantage to keep Capaldi around for a year or two. His eventual departure could very well spare Chibnall having to deal with a lull in the middle of his tenure...something both previous showrunners seem to have had to deal with. My main reasoning for wanting to see Doctor 13 as soon as possible is really just my thinking that anyone who might be won over by Chibnalls version of the show, won't know there is a new reason to try it with Capaldi still the face of the show, if they aren't fans who keep track of things like showrunners, whereas the advent of a new Doctor is an obvious jumping on 'i'll give it a go' type moment. Basically, I'm hoping to love the show once again from series 11, rather than just partially like it like I have with Moffat's era, and I'm hoping any casual viewers who might have switched off during that time do too, so that watching and liking who can once again feel to me like a mainstream popular show that everyone watches, the way it seemed to me during the RTD era. I know that if your enjoying the show personally, then it doesn't matter too much who else is enjoying it, but its certainly doesn't hurt, and it's nice to hear it brought up in conversation as an interesting topic. Either way, Capaldi or someone new, I'm feeling pretty optimistic for series 11 at this point. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Essex
Posts: 8,405
|
An interesting conundrum for me.
I wonder if I would have enjoyed season 5 more if David Tennant had agreed to stay an extra year. Perhaps my overall dissatisfaction with the Moffat era would have been lessened if there had been more of a merge with the RTD years, rather than (what felt like) a virtual re-boot. But as we approach another new era for Who with another new showrunner, I am thinking the exact opposite of that - I would rather have a new Doctor too because I dislike the incumbent. I guess there's no way of knowing for sure. And I think what happens to the new companion will probably be key. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,217
|
Quote:
He has a point but saying that as well, I can see Capaldi leaving with him and Chibnall starting with everything new. Maybe a Doctor will do four series and/or more but I don't think it's going to be Peter though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Essex
Posts: 8,405
|
Quote:
Cant see why not, its his dream role. After leaving after only 3 yrs, really did nothing significant for Smiths career
If Peter Capaldi left after season 10 it would also be four years/three seasons. Matt's been busy, though, and still is. It may be he's getting jobs now he might not have been auditioned for without the profile Doctor Who gave him. And David's hardly stopped since he left the show! |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,217
|
Quote:
It was four years for Matt Smith - four years/three seasons. The same for David Tennant.
If Peter Capaldi left after season 10 it would also be four years/three seasons. Matt's been busy, though, and still is. It may be he's getting jobs now he might not have been auditioned for without the profile Doctor Who gave him. And David's hardly stopped since he left the show! |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Essex
Posts: 8,405
|
Quote:
True, but Smith never really got any major roles in movies like he wanted,/ DT eventually became successful in TV again.
Looking at Classic Who, I would say the majority of Doctors and companions vanished forever from film and TV after they left the show. At least nowadays they all seem to have a post-Who career. OK, so maybe they're not winning Oscars but at least they are still working. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,079
|
Not his agent, honest, but Matt's been doing some interesting stuff in the theatre, a few films and obviously 'The Crown' is coming up. He's about to start filming 'Mapplethorpe', where he plays Robert Mapplethorpe. Okay, doubt whether that's going to be a big multiplex hit, but could be artistically interesting! Think he's going to have an idiosyncratic, quirky career. He's only 33, the whippersnapper!
I hope The Crown goes well for him, even though I probably wont be watching. Not my cup of tea, the costume drama/royalty stuff... |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,506
|
Quote:
Cant see why not, its his dream role. After leaving after only 3 yrs, really did nothing significant for Smiths career
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 2,295
|
No I don't think David Tennant could pull of Series 5 like Matt Smith could, I Love David Tennant to the moon back but, Matt Smith fit the fairytale, runaway with me Amelia Pond theme more of 2010, It was such a magical time back then seeing little Amelia Pond and The Doctor, IMO That was when Moffat was at his best as showrunner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,217
|
Quote:
Thing is, once you become the Doctor, that's the peak of your career before you've even started. I don't think any of them could ever say they truly "let go" of the role.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Essex
Posts: 8,405
|
Quote:
But, Capaldi has been in the showbiz game a long time already.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:08.



streeeetching
