Potential Doctor Who Shake up(Status Quo Remains)

[Enigma]

Potential shake up?

Doctor Who due a major shake-up as bosses aim for 'brand new show' in 2018

00:05, 14 Nov 2016
Updated 18:05, 14 Nov 2016
By Mark Jefferies , Nicola Methven

Source said BBC bosses want a return to the format from the David Tennant era, with a dashing male lead and young female companion

BBC bosses want Doctor Who to feel like “a brand new show” under incoming boss Chris Chibnall... so we can expect a whole new line-up in 2018.

Insiders say the Broadchurch writer will have a “clean slate” to start afresh for his first series – rather bad news for actress Pearl Mackie, who plays new assistant Bill in Steven Moffat’s last run, currently filming for next year.

Pearl, 29, yet to be seen by viewers, is said to have been signed on a one-year contract and is expected to depart with Peter Capaldi , 58, and Moffat after 2017’s Christmas special.

The replacement Time Lord is likely to be played by a younger actor in a bid to help boost the flagging sales of dolls, books, DVDs and toys.

Our source says: “BBC management wants a return to the format from the David Tennant era, when you had a dashing male lead and young female companion.

"Merchandising has dropped off sharply in recent years and there is a strong desire to boost the show’s popularity among kids.”

One way to do that, of course, is by returning to its traditional tea-time slot, rather than the post-Strictly position it languished in last year.

Next year’s show is expected to air in spring rather than autumn, to avoid the Saturday clash with Strictly.

Chibnall, putting the finishes to the third and final series of ITV’s Broadchurch, will very soon put together his own team of writers and producers for Doctor Who. They are expected to work in parallel with Moffat’s unit, who finish up in the late spring of next year.

BBC chiefs have also stressed that they want a full series every year (there hasn’t been one at all in 2016) and more accessible story arcs than those seen in recent times.

But all this is more than a year away for viewers. Those looking forward to seeing Capaldi’s Doctor back in action in spring might like to hear about some of the monsters coming up.

Our spoiler-sport source whispers: “Episode three of the new series features the snake monster that lives under the Thames.

“Then in episode four, we find out why our floorboards squeak – there are giant woodlice in there. Another episode features killer robots that have emoji faces. They like to give hugs, then reduce their victims to skeletons.”

Cripes.

So, the shake up isn't a shake up but returning to the status quo of young male lead and a female companion. Looks like Pearl Mackie and Capaldi will be gone by the end of the next series.

[The Romulan Republic]

Translation: The "bring back Tennant" shipping obsessed whiners won.

Peter Capaldi should file suite for age discrimination.

Edits: And its completely unfair to give Mackie only one season before she's even had a chance to show weather she's any good at the role.

On the plus side, if they actually try to keep a regular schedule, that's something.

Oh, and so much for a female Doctor, I guess.

If they want to give the impression that show is for shipping obsessed adolescents only, they're certainly taking the right track.

Shows shouldn't be written by their marketing divisions.

I'm just clinging to the hope that this is bullshit because of the source.

[Iroscato]

I'm up for it. Moffat' tenure is often too clever for its own good, with many epidodes collapsing into incoherency. Overall Capaldi's run has been wasted by having a talented writer do a terrible job of overseeing the show.

[Iroscato]

Peter Capaldi should file suite for age discrimination.

Don't be absurd.

[The Romulan Republic]

Yeah, I'm kind of joking their.

But I am seriously pissed about this news, if its true.

[Gandalf]

Edits: And its completely unfair to give Mackie only one season before she's even had a chance to show weather she's any good at the role.

Yes, how terrible that an acting gig isn't open ended.

How do you feel about the waves of guest stars on the show? Should they all stay around just in case Delivery Man #2 turns out to be a sensation?

[The Romulan Republic]

Why do some people seem to have a compulsive need to straw man posts? Or is it just me who experiences this?

I'm not saying all gigs should be opened-ended, for fuck's sake. I'm saying that it sucks if someone is getting preemptively fired for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of their work.

[Iroscato]

I agree studio interference doesn't exactly bode brilliantly for creativity, but at least most of the episodes should make a lick of sense for a change.

The Beeb's probably feeling extremely paranoid right now after losing GBBO and having another flagship show's merch sales dip, I can understand the need for them to step in.

[Joun_Lord]

Some pluses in my opinion......

Regularity. For shows like Dr Who they require a dedicated fan base and its hard to keep viewer interest especially during poorer times with the show jumping everywhere in time and not in the way we want. One of the reasons I stopped watching.

More accessible story arcs. Assuming that means less self referential stuff, more standalone stuff rather then story arcs, that could be a good thing. Dr Who is and probably has been already facing the same problem comics regularly face and the old Star Wars canon faced, too much stuff. It becomes too unwieldy for one and it requires viewers to sit through hundreds of hours of programming (or look up shit on the internet) to get some shit. Some of the stuff they reference is from shows that first aired back before a significant portion of the audience was alive. Casual watchers won't be able to really get into stuff. Same with the problems of the series story arc, when it creeps too much into episodes.

Dr Who has seemed less....fun as of late. Maybe its me but considering alot of other people have been complaining about the same thing maybe not. There also has been complaints the show has tried to do too much, have too many "end of the world" episodes. The old series had their share too but its seems like the new one far too many threats are world ending. Dialing the shit back a bit to more grounded stories and fun ones that get audiences wanting to watch might help.

Bye bye Moffatt, you had some good shit but got too far up your own ass to make much good anymore. Robots with emoji faces? Really? Really? Ohh I know create a monster that give a Twitter update anytime it kills or a monster that makes Vine videos of its kills.

Some negatives.......

Like TRR I want a different Doc. Not a female Dr exactly (though not opposed beyond worrying what the writers would do with a Doc that is a chick, but this is true for any change and even "normal" Dr, and knowing the hell transgender people go through think maybe the guy who has spent thousands of years as a guy and was presumably born that way and already shows sometimes pretty extreme cases of identity disorder when he changes faces might have a problem or two with a plumbing change but he is an alien so maybe it wouldn't effect him the same but still, a bit of sympathy for people who are trapped with the wrong gender might be nice) but just a different Doctor rather then the hyper active spazz's or the grumpy old man. Doesn't matter to me if they are played by white men or black women or whatever, just as long as the actor best for the role gets it.

What I realllllllly want though is a different companion. Something different from the young human females that have been the companions. The only companion that really broke the mold was Donna Noble and she wasn't even that much of a stretch, though I did appreciate she felt more of an equal to the Doctor even if her ending was shite. Plus her family wasn't insufferable. A companion that challenges the Doctor, doesn't just act as a safety blanket like it seems most companions are. Something really different. I've said before and I'll say it again, I'd love LOVE if there was a Dalek or Cyberman companion. Could even have it be a female, have it look human to blend in (to save on costs) but still be something truly inhuman, monstrous, something the Doctor has to make human like humans made him.

The sticking with younger guy with young female companion does seem to be bending over for the shipping crowd. The same crowd that threw a shit fit when Amy brought Rory onboard (when they weren't wanting the Doctor to be the top or bottom bun of an Amy/Rory sandwich), bitched something fierce about "creepy old man" Peter Capaldi being the Doctor and absolutely swooned when the Master, who already had a obsession bordering on the sexual for the Doc, became a woman because now all their slash Master preggers with the Doctors babies tumblr fantasies can become canon.

It will further alienate fans who don't tune in to see CW tier relationship drama but to see strange new worlds and new civilization, to boldly go where no Doctor has gone before. Thats one thing some people seemed to enjoy about Capaldi, because of his age or whatever, he treated Clara more like a friend, like he was her mentor, rather then treating her like she was his girlfriend. I'm not saying the Doctor shouldn't have romance but maybe a bit less robbing the cradle and taking advantage of young impressionable girls (or guys, whatever). Less of his companions throwing themselves at him. It should be a relationship of friends, not one where either party wants to shag.

[Gandalf]

I agree studio interference doesn't exactly bode brilliantly for creativity, but at least most of the episodes should make a lick of sense for a change.

The Beeb's probably feeling extremely paranoid right now after losing GBBO and having another flagship show's merch sales dip, I can understand the need for them to step in.

Also Top Gear. I can't imagine what their balance sheets look like now.

Why do some people seem to have a compulsive need to straw man posts? Or is it just me who experiences this?

I'm not saying all gigs should be opened-ended, for fuck's sake. I'm saying that it sucks if someone is getting preemptively fired for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of their work.

You stated that this was "completely unfair." This is pretty fair for an actor, who will be employed for the term of the contract, and presumably earn decent money. Acting is an inherently nomadic job, where one moves from gig to gig as needed, because "permanent" jobs don't really exist. Every contract ends at some point.

[Iroscato]

Oh god yeah, I forgot about the despairing mess that is Top Gear these days.

[Crazedwraith]

Translation: The "bring back Tennant" shipping obsessed whiners won.

-snip even more drivel-

That is an oddly specific accusation. You realise every other doctor and companians have shippers right and that lots of popular Doctors have had fans want them back. Why do you think multi-doctor stories are a thing?

Its not any set of fans winning anything. It is the BBC trying to get back to what worked.

[Iroscato]

As long as they don't start going down the "RAAARGH I AM AN ETERNAL GOD OF TIME I BURN AT THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE" tripe that Tennant started careening into at the tail-end of his run, I'm absolutely fine with them taking it back to that era.

They better bring back the fucking Time Lords soon though.

[Gandalf]

They better bring back the fucking Time Lords soon though.

If they're going back to the Tennant era of things, then they'll probably keep the Time Lords dead so that nuTennant can be all sad periodically.

[Crazedwraith]

They better bring back the fucking Time Lords soon though.

Did they die again or something? I didnt watch s9 but I thought the last episodes were on gallifrey.

[Batman]

I think when TRR said 'unfair' he didn't mean legally or professionally, but artistically. Saying 'you no longer get to be Companion' after a single season that hasn't even happened yet means Mackie loses the job regardless of whether or not she's any good at it. I definitely see where he's coming from.
Yes, it's a finite term contract, but (assuming that's what's actually happening) saying 'we're not going to extend it period' DOES seem a bit dickish. Why not see how she does as companion THEN decide whether or not to keep her?
And while I've had nothing but scorn for the Capaldi era of nuWho, none of it had anything to do with Capaldi himself, I think he was a brilliant Doctor...when the writers actually let him. Unfortunately usually the writing was terrible...by superhero comic standards.
Doing brand new for brand new's sake isn't necessarily a good idea, especially if the old has so much untapped potential.

[The Romulan Republic]

Translation: The "bring back Tennant" shipping obsessed whiners won.

-snip even more drivel-

That is an oddly specific accusation. You realise every other doctor and companians have shippers right and that lots of popular Doctors have had fans want them back. Why do you think multi-doctor stories are a thing?

Its not any set of fans winning anything. It is the BBC trying to get back to what worked.

Its very obvious which group of fans such a decision would be catering to.

And frankly, whatever problems Doctor Who is having now, I am quite confident its not Peter Capaldi's fault.

Moreover, you have to think long term. Doctor Who has survived and succeeded as long as it has because it is built on change, on each Doctor bringing something new to the table. Settling into a rut of "young male romantic lead Doctor, young female companion" (and doesn't the latent sexism just ooze out of that arrangement) is not going back to what works. Its throwing out what's worked for fifty years- a show that grows and changes with each new era.

[Gandalf]

Moreover, you have to think long term. Doctor Who has survived and succeeded as long as it has because it is built on change, on each Doctor bringing something new to the table. Settling into a rut of "young male romantic lead Doctor, young female companion" (and doesn't the latent sexism just ooze out of that arrangement) is not going back to what works. Its throwing out what's worked for fifty years- a show that grows and changes with each new era.

Doctor Who is a commercial enterprise. They survive and succeed though adapting to the demands of the paying audience. Say what you will about David Tennant, but he moved a lot of merch. He looks good on shirts, posters, pencil cases, you name it. Capaldi doesn't, unless he's dropping some Thick of It wisdom.

[The Romulan Republic]

Its not even that they'd be going with a younger Doctor alone, although the refusal to even consider an old Doctor irks me for its narrow-mindedness, especially when he'd be sharing the company of the likes of Hartnell and Pertwee.

Its the specific narrow box they're describing. Insisting on a status quo of a young romantic male lead with a (implicitly subordinate) young female companion just sounds seriously cringeworthy.

I want a female Doctor. I want more companion duos like Amy and Rory. I want the show to think outside the box sometimes, and if any show should be able to, its this one.

Edit: It would just be... so lame, so cowardly, so creatively vapid, and such a God damn waste of potential.

[Tribble]

As long as they don't start going down the "RAAARGH I AM AN ETERNAL GOD OF TIME I BURN AT THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE" tripe that Tennant started careening into at the tail-end of his run, I'm absolutely fine with them taking it back to that era.

They better bring back the fucking Time Lords soon though.

YMMV I suppose as I rather enjoyed that part, though I agree that its run it's course. The new Doctor should be more optimistic - Gallifrey's back and the Time War would long time ago from his perspective. Time to go back to adventuring.

Funnily enough unless you count the Doctor remembering all of his deaths in "Heaven Sent" he's actually still pretty young by Time Lord standards given that most of his regenerations were due to injuries on the job rather than old age.

Did they die again or something? I didnt watch s9 but I thought the last episodes were on gallifrey.

They are back, though that's not necessarily a good thing for the rest of the universe. And as for Clara... well the less I say the better.

Feel sorry for Capaldi though. Good actor, terrible writing (for the most part).

Doctor Who is a commercial enterprise. They survive and succeed though adapting to the demands of the paying audience. Say what you will about David Tennant, but he moved a lot of merch. He looks good on shirts, posters, pencil cases, you name it. Capaldi doesn't, unless he's dropping some Thick of It wisdom.

Yep, it's all about the merchandising!

[The Romulan Republic]

And I mean, yeah, Doctor Who is a commercial enterprise, but their is a reason why marketing executives aren't fiction writers- for the most part, they're probably not very good at it.

If you want to make money, you need a product people will like. And its my impression that one rarely gets that from something written by a marketing committee.

Edit: I mean, look at DC's film ventures. I don't hate the DCCU, but their's no denying that the films have the sense of being made by committee, and they are disjointed messes, with the good ideas and moments often scattered and buried amid the pandering.

Whereas Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy was primarily the vision of a few writers and a single director telling a more or less cohesive story, and is probably the only unambiguous major success DC has had with film in decades.

[Batman]

I guess that depends on what part of the franchise you want to/expect to make money with. Is it the actual series with the merchandise as a bonus or is the whole purpose of the series to sell merchandise, in which case as long as it works the quality of the series is essentially irrelevant?

[The Romulan Republic]

I am skeptical that merchandise sales will remain high even if the quality of the show flounders, though I am admittedly not a marketing exec.

[Batman]

I was thinking mainly of shows that exist primarily to sell toys, like Transformers, GI JOE, Power Rangers and the like.

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, frankly, I don't think that model is viable for Who, because Who's audience is not small children specifically (it may include children, but it has strong young adult and adult audiences), and besides, that doesn't sound like who this is really aimed at anyway, so much as the shipping-obsessed Twilight demographic.

Trying to follow the kids' toys show model sound like a way to lose half the audience and get the show another couple of decades on hiatus.