|
Post by Patrick Coles on Nov 25, 2013 11:44:23 GMT
They were already location filming in the Hartnell days, and even more so with Troughton, costs rose generally but the Earth exile was purely for financial reasons, hence only the three Daleks in 'Day of...' and that was why The Brigadier - promoted from Colonel - and UNIT were re/introduced in 'The Invasion' towards the end of Troughton's era to prepare for the exile, the alternative to which was the show being axed which it nearly was, until the powers that be relented.
A number of long running iconic sixties shows ended in 1969, including ITV's 'The Saint' and 'The Avengers' despite still being popular as the decade drew to a close...
Ron Moody was initially envisaged as the Third Doctor before Pertwee was chosen.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2013 11:48:26 GMT
Terrance has said this more than once in commentaries, and similar things besides, but this recent link has him saying as much here, albeit politely: www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/22/doctor_who_gaiman_dicks/?page=2Barry was pretty unimpressed about the sonic screwdriver being a wand nowadays, which I think speaks to the general creative direction you refer to. Thanks for the link, Paul. I appreciate the fact that Terrance speaks his mind in that piece. He's pretty categorical about the '80s too - and JNT in particular ("not fit for purpose", which has always been my view as well). I feel sad that solid structure and good storytelling are not considered the most important thing any more and that writers with a proven track record in this area are not asked to write for the show. I think it was proved time and again in the past that good coherent stories do actually bring in a broader audience, beyond just the fans (e.g. Letts / Dicks and Hinchcliffe eras). You can have both. They currently choose not to though.
|
|
|
Post by John Wall on Nov 25, 2013 11:56:05 GMT
The earthbound stories had far more location filming than anything in the b&w era.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2013 12:03:36 GMT
I take Laurence point re the earth exile and it's to Barry Letts credit he MADE it work so well - plus Jon Pertwee held the thing together superbly... BUT remember it was done purely for financial reasons (as Spike Milligan lampooned with his 'BBC Economy sketches' in his 'Q' show at the time) - basically they turned Dr.Who into 'Quatermass' then adding a 'Moriaty' figure in 'The Master' & hoped it now being in colour would be an additional big asset (it certainly helped). Yes, although a lot of what DW has done throughout it's history has been for financial reasons. It's how well they achieved results on that basis that counted. I found the Earthbound era to be a fresh twist on what was previously a tired series and this aspect grabbed my interest again (although it was right to leave the Earth setting once more when they did). I feel that Sherwin and Bryant have never been given the credit they deserve for bringing in the Earthbound era: casting Pertwee, inventing the U.N.I.T. / Brigadier concept, bringing in one of the best assistants in Liz Shaw, focussing on more realistic / contemporary storylines and increasing the ratings (which Letts / Dicks bulit on afterwards) and saving the programme from cancellation overnight. Season 7 is one of my favourites and even though the show couldn't have carried on that way forever, I'd have liked to see another season in that mould before the format was watered down (and good though season 8 was, that was really where the repetition of formula became apparent, with every story featuring The Master - as much as I love Delgado ).
|
|
|
Post by John Wall on Nov 25, 2013 12:19:28 GMT
It's also important to remember that the 70s were a good time for BBC finances. The licence fee was rising with inflation and people were progressively buying colour TV licences which were more expensive than b&w. Income was rising in real terms.
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Nov 25, 2013 13:18:38 GMT
Terrance has said this more than once in commentaries, and similar things besides, but this recent link has him saying as much here, albeit politely: www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/22/doctor_who_gaiman_dicks/?page=2Barry was pretty unimpressed about the sonic screwdriver being a wand nowadays, which I think speaks to the general creative direction you refer to. Thanks for the link, Paul. I appreciate the fact that Terrance speaks his mind in that piece. He's pretty categorical about the '80s too - and JNT in particular ("not fit for purpose", which has always been my view as well). I feel sad that solid structure and good storytelling are not considered the most important thing any more and that writers with a proven track record in this area are not asked to write for the show. I think it was proved time and again in the past that good coherent stories do actually bring in a broader audience, beyond just the fans (e.g. Letts / Dicks and Hinchcliffe eras). You can have both. They currently choose not to though. Glad to share, Laurence! I really don't get Moffat et al as geniuses, they seem slapdash hype mongers to me, making the kind of show I avoid watching out of one I used to never miss. Would Bob Holmes find work on the show today? Would Pedler and Davis? I really doubt it. The choice to keep creative direction static since '05 has hobbled rather than added substance to this venerable thoroughbred, I think. You can have style with substance. Humour and suspense. Continuity and variety. None of these are mutually exclusive. Maybe some day, we'll see it all return to Doctor Who. Actually, in light of the nice bit of 50th anniversary coverage of Waris Hussein in AAISAT, this might be of interest too: www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/doctor-who-become-too-sexy-1816600
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Nov 25, 2013 13:53:43 GMT
I take Laurence point re the earth exile and it's to Barry Letts credit he MADE it work so well - plus Jon Pertwee held the thing together superbly... BUT remember it was done purely for financial reasons (as Spike Milligan lampooned with his 'BBC Economy sketches' in his 'Q' show at the time) - basically they turned Dr.Who into 'Quatermass' then adding a 'Moriaty' figure in 'The Master' & hoped it now being in colour would be an additional big asset (it certainly helped). Yes, although a lot of what DW has done throughout it's history has been for financial reasons. It's how well they achieved results on that basis that counted. I found the Earthbound era to be a fresh twist on what was previously a tired series and this aspect grabbed my interest again (although it was right to leave the Earth setting once more when they did). I feel that Sherwin and Bryant have never been given the credit they deserve for bringing in the Earthbound era: casting Pertwee, inventing the U.N.I.T. / Brigadier concept, bringing in one of the best assistants in Liz Shaw, focussing on more realistic / contemporary storylines and increasing the ratings (which Letts / Dicks bulit on afterwards) and saving the programme from cancellation overnight. Season 7 is one of my favourites and even though the show couldn't have carried on that way forever, I'd have liked to see another season in that mould before the format was watered down (and good though season 8 was, that was really where the repetition of formula became apparent, with every story featuring The Master - as much as I love Delgado ). Ah, Liz Shaw! Ah, Caroline John! Really like her commentaries, and the character has grown on me over the years. For mine, she was a tragically missed opportunity. Jo and Sarah are beyond reproach, of course, but I just think Liz's handling as a character was a bit bungled. She had smarts, but Liz wasn't just an emotionless boffin as some contend. She was funny - and she could be brave. "It's all right, I won't hurt you." With Katy, the balance went totally the other way - less book smart but more plucky, enthusiastic youth, and a heart bigger than Phar Lap's - she did have some pretty solid moments, Peladon being a particular standout for me. Sarah saw a kind of fusion of the two approaches - and I think that if only Liz had been there for another season, perhaps we might have seen that a lot sooner. Instead, they let her go. I understand from listening to what Barry and Terrance had in mind for Sarah evolved out of their awareness of the need for more independent female characters, as the social issue of the rights of women became a more well-understood thing, just as concern about the natural environment and Buddhism in the off-duty hours influenced the work, too. Maybe timing was just never in Liz's favour. But I wonder how things might have gone, if it had. Could Pertwee have handled two female assistants, that balanced each other? I think so. Just imagine the Master tempting Liz, a whole story could have involved him poaching her as she played a dangerous double game, whilst the Doctor and Jo try to figure things out! Not quite a Barbara-Vicki dynamic between Liz and Jo, but something a little similar, perhaps. Thinking forward, Martha Jones was by contrast much more a one-note waste than Liz was, and an overdue bit of ethnic diversity that left far too soon. She was written only as "she who wanted to be Rose" and when she inevitably failed, she split after one season - gaining Mickey in a last hurrah scene later as a booby prize! Is this progress?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2013 14:23:48 GMT
I agree with Warris. Too much has been spelled out about the doctor generally, not just the relationship thing. Being "unavailable" and a bit apart from the rest of us was part of what made him and the show intriguing. Too much of the mystery has been explained away and there is no mystique any more and the doctor has become too "bloke-ish", with no authority.
Liz Shaw was Dr.Who's first credible, independent and fully rounded female character, rather than Sarah Jane Smith, as the received wisdom has it (no disrespect to Liz Sladen's great companion, who I also liked). The only problem with Liz Shaw was that she was not given a second season to develop further.
|
|
|
Post by briancook on Nov 25, 2013 14:26:49 GMT
can I just remind people that the show is aimed at children, in households with multi platform and channel tv's in the 21st century.
[hunkers down, tin hat on...]
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2013 14:28:01 GMT
No, it's aimed at a general family audience (and always has been). There's a difference. It occupies an early evening slot accordingly.
|
|
|
Post by John Green on Nov 25, 2013 14:36:22 GMT
I agree with Warris. Too much has been spelled out about the doctor generally, not just the relationship thing. Being "unavailable" and a bit apart from the rest of us was part of what made him and the show intriguing. Too much of the mystery has been explained away and there is no mystique any more and the doctor has become too "bloke-ish", with no authority. Liz Shaw was Dr.Who's first credible, independent and fully rounded female character, rather than Sarah Jane Smith, as the received wisdom has it (no disrespect to Liz Sladen's great companion, who I also liked). The only problem with Liz Shaw was that she was not given a second season to develop further. It was a shame that the after-party section devoted to the companions was introduced with the words "Forget 'School Reunion'".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2013 14:43:17 GMT
Yes, I'm just thinking of the impressive array of companions assembled from 50 years sitting there and probably many of them were thinking that the 75 minute show wasn't as "special" as all those involved in it were trying have us believe. It was all a stage-managed spin anyway as when anyone was asked for their opinion, they weren't going to want to be the one to say "it was rubbish!"
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Nov 25, 2013 14:50:13 GMT
Yes, I'm just thinking of the impressive array of companions assembled from 50 years sitting there and probably many of them were thinking that the 75 minute show wasn't as "special" as all those involved in it were trying have us believe! It was all a spin as when someone was asked for their opinion, weren't going to be the one to say they didn't like it! Is this event aftershow thing available to see online? Sounds like fun, though from comments it seems a little frustrating as concision overrode other considerations. Aside from Jackie Lane (I assume?) who didn't make it?
|
|
|
Post by John Green on Nov 25, 2013 15:52:03 GMT
Yes, I'm just thinking of the impressive array of companions assembled from 50 years sitting there and probably many of them were thinking that the 75 minute show wasn't as "special" as all those involved in it were trying have us believe! It was all a spin as when someone was asked for their opinion, weren't going to be the one to say they didn't like it! Is this event aftershow thing available to see online? Sounds like fun, though from comments it seems a little frustrating as concision overrode other considerations. Aside from Jackie Lane (I assume?) who didn't make it? Elizabeth Sladen.When they started waffling about the Doctor's greatest companion,she was the one I thought of.Did they have a moment for thinking about those who had died? Then they started a 'musical chairs' thing which didn't work because ALL of them had run down corridors,etc.I turned off at that point-and I'd been skipping through at 5-minute intervals to start with,though in a sense this bit was endearingly amateur,it just didn't work trying to get 30 or so disparate people to play a live party game.
|
|
|
Post by Brad Phipps on Nov 25, 2013 19:47:00 GMT
I find it really amazing that Moffat can showrun a show like Sherlock and produce excellent scripts, great acting and good storytelling, and yet with Doctor Who, just because it's still primarily a kids show the stories are all filled with monsters and FX. I would LOVE to see a historical. It doesn't have to be a complete character study on an historical figure but just break the monotonous monster of the week which the show seems to be filled with these days.
I also wonder if, maybe just for a season, we go back to how the original series was structured with longer stories. Instead of 13 single eps or a handful of two parters plus singles, we have all multi-ep shows, like 5x 2 parters and a 3 parter to finish the season. It would allow for more development instead of a monster runaround.
Granted it would mean you would only have 6 monsters (etc) per season instead of potentially 13, but I think it would be refreshing.
And ditch Moffat, he's been at the helm long enough.
|
|