Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2014 19:00:08 GMT
It would be interesting to know what the BBC considers the core audience for Doctor Who nowadays
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon Smith on Nov 9, 2014 19:02:49 GMT
It would be interesting to know what the BBC considers the core audience for Doctor Who nowadays My guess would be 12-year-old American girls. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2014 21:06:05 GMT
As a collector of and dealer in vintage comics, I can also assure you that prior to a few years ago, there were no Doctor Who comic strips "with a US bias" (except possibly the Dell Comics adaptation of the first Peter Cushing movie in 1965). The strip was always produced for an almost exclusively British audience. Yes, the DW strips have often seemed more British than the actual show. The current Capaldi series aside, it's the new run of the show itself which has come across a lot like a live action version of a Marvel comic book, rather than a real drama.  |
|
|
|
Post by shellyharman67 on Nov 9, 2014 21:23:26 GMT
Simon, i totally agree mate ! who is in charge really ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Nov 9, 2014 21:29:55 GMT
It would be interesting to know what the BBC considers the core audience for Doctor Who nowadays My guess would be 12-year-old American girls. I expect you're serious. I'm pretty sure that's not the Beeb's view, or that of much of the audience.  Doctor Who has always been a bit of an acquired taste, and that's perfectly okay. As McGoohan said when he made The Prisoner the way he did, he wasn't trying to make Coca Cola.  There's many many things in the new run that are more like how it used to be than it once was. Laurence has noted a few things, as have others. Yet there's also some aspects which are pretty much universals of story telling, that offer a distinctive appeal to a very broad audience, perhaps precisely because they are really pretty uncommon on telly now. Consider this bit from Dark Water, please: It's hard to find a lead in a modern adventure series acting like this, or written so well. All too often, it's much more "manly" for a rugged individualist to do the opposite, to have booted Clara into the volcano. Or let her choose to be a murderer, at the end of Death In Heaven. Yet this isn't so surprising. The Doctor was always a hell of a male role model!  As I said, Doctor Who may be a family show but it's not always for everyone's taste. Nor need it be! Yet little bits like the snippet above (there are many others if you really look for them) are hardly a deviation from who the character has always been. With respect to the chap at the helm of the show, he's got the odd award under his belt for writing telly well. Even though I don't like all of those things, or like the ones I do equally well, I can concede that. I don't see a tired guy now. I see someone who's been turning an ocean liner around, carefully and whilst keeping the passengers out of the sea.  Capaldi's Doctor to me offers a wonderful mix of familiar but different, of brilliance, integrity, uncommon wisdom, iconoclastic dissent, mad energy and (finally, finally) reserve and quiet emotion. I don't think he's all the way there yet, I doubt he does too. His Time Legs are still coming in, as it were! The show has to adapt to him, as the viewers do. I do think more of the latter will come around and see what a treat they've been offered, and I'm sure Series 9 will be the start of what we'll look back on as his more authentic era - just as Season 7 was to Season 8 in the old money.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2014 22:14:23 GMT
Doctor Who used to be on at around 5.40pm on a Saturday night in the 1970's in the UK. It is now on from 8.00pm or later.
Doctor Who used to be a family show aimed primarily at children.
Is Dark Water / Death in Heaven suitable for a child to watch?
In my opinion to screen Death in Heaven (with its subject matter of reanimated corpses turned into a Cyber army) a day before Remembrance Sunday is in particularly bad taste.
|
|
|
|
Post by Will Weller on Nov 9, 2014 23:12:15 GMT
I feel I need to ask this question, I might make a thread, but I'll just see how popular it is first.
I know that opinion of last nights episode is very much split, and that some would argue that the show really hasn't been up to good standards recently, but if I asked you, should Doctor Who be cancelled, and you could only reply with yes or no, what would you choose???
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Nov 9, 2014 23:15:02 GMT
Doctor Who used to be on at around 5.40pm on a Saturday night in the 1970's in the UK. It is now on from 8.00pm or later. Doctor Who used to be a family show aimed primarily at children. Is Dark Water / Death in Heaven suitable for a child to watch? In my opinion to screen Death in Heaven (with its subject matter of reanimated corpses turned into a Cyber army) a day before Remembrance Sunday is in particularly bad taste. Certainly, I think that two-parter was very suitable in the context you describe. I'll try to explain why! It’s not a documentary about the horror of war. It’s escapist fictional entertainment, yet it has a solid ethical core to it that more than a few of us who grew up learning to read with Target books will recognise and appreciate. Does the Doctor ignore the horrors perpetrated on the fallen by his returned foe? On the contrary, he fights her every step of the way. Does he win out with force of arms? On the contrary, he turns down the Mistress’s offer of a free Cyber army to fight the battles he engages in across time and space. (Just like in Colony In Space!) Does he win the day off his own bat? No, he gives way to those who know the meaning of loss and sacrifice - including those already dead, soldiers like Danny and the Brig, the latter an officer who stands and falls with his troops and died again as he lived. Does the Doctor bound off sunnily, all problems resolved? No, he feels the responsibility of a man who’s stood between Earth and those who would destroy it, and has never once failed to count the cost. Clara knew that, and let him keep his reassuring fiction that she was happily reunited with Danny - just as he wanted her to feel at ease that her strange but familiar old friend was no longer alone, but returning to a home he bitterly misses and presently is condemned to be denied.  The Doctor has shown uncommon charity and wisdom this week, and unless the stakes are serious and real the tale is lopsided and uncompelling. Unlike the Series 3 return of the Master, the horror inflicted by the Doctor’s arch enemy wasn’t magically removed. Nor was it a blub fest saved with the power of prayer!  It was a bad scene, it really happened, and people we had grown to care for really died. That’s what makes the difference. Loss is real, it hurts. Sacrifice is to be applauded, and tragedy is to be understood and strived against reoccurring. Danny gave that boy he killed back his life at the cost of his own, and charged Clara to reunite him with his family.  So it wasn’t just the Doctor who embodied these laudable virtues this week, and I think they are very relevant in the run-up to Remembrance Day. Seriously, Lest We Forget. |
|
|
|
Post by John W King on Nov 10, 2014 0:10:36 GMT
Well I've said my bit and unlike many other posts on this thread I've tried to relate it to missing episodes. My worry remains. When a programme, like Dr Who starts using plot devices like the moon being an egg, flying cybermen and other things that look good but are blatantly unreal then there is a danger of the programme losing its audience. It happened in particularly in the 1980s. Don't get me wrong. There bits from each episode in series 8 I thought were excellent. The scenes on the moon sere terrific but the final denouement was just plain silly. The opening story had its moments but again the finale was a tad daft. Flying cybermen! Don't forget the Cybermen were devised by scientists and were logical. The (in)famous sonic screwdriver was a clever idea but later became a silly plot device the help the Dr escape difficult situations. It was a magic wand. Magic is an illusion. It does not exist. Magic belongs to the worlds of Harry Potter, Narnia and Tolkien. In those environments magic is acceptable because we know those worlds are not part of a real universe. The Dr has, in effect, become a cartoon character. Series 8 is using plot devices that are not believable. For the sake of brevity my analogy to Dr Who comics I did not explain my self clearly. I know there were no US Dr Who comics but what I really meant was the strips published in Dr Who monthly are closer to series 8 in style. However, these strips were published by Marvel - an American publisher and contrary to what other posts state are Not British in style but more American. They are closer to the Hulk than Dan Dare. Those comics turned Doctor Who into a super hero instead of a traveller in time. The action has to be huge and graphic. I remain a huge fan of Dr Who or I would not still be watching after 51 years. But I want it to continue for another 51 years. My final hop series 8 is that the DVD release will include a prequel.
The Tardis is travelling through time and space. Suddenly it explodes with the 6 walls hurtling off in different directions. The Dr (Capaldi) is seen clinging to the control console spinning aimlessly in the void....
In series 9 we return from the Lands of Fiction to the real universe...
... and through out series 9 he gradually finds metal canisters that in the series finale turn out to be 97 missing episodes from the Doctor's life!
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Nov 10, 2014 3:31:29 GMT
Yes Virginia, there really is a Skarasen. You’ve hopefully noticed that the TARDIS console is a bit more like a machine, one that doesn’t shy away from being what it is. It’s not hidden or excused by kitschy bric-a-brac like a model junkyard. I can imagine Tennant’s Doctor compulsively apologising all over the place for it being unashamedly technological, baby-speak in full flow!  And yes, it’s still both alien and weird. The police box remains smaller than the interior! There’s even now a squelchy panel that to my mind harkens to the notion we saw long back in the Hartnell era, that the TARDIS could literally go anywhere. And sometimes, that can result from instinct and emotion rather than the precise calculation of a skilled operator. Seeing a physical manifestation of the living, organic, sentient nature of the TARDIS on the console is yet another savvy new way to bring front and centre the cool and unusual aspects of the Ship that was always there. The redress of the console room in Smith’s penultimate Christmas special is getting a lot more mileage now, and though I’d be surprised if they don’t mix up the lighting a little bit to add some colour here and there, Capaldi has a very cool place to play in. One that actually heightens the science side of the science fantasy a little more. Yay team! So too the screwdriver. I agree with you and Barry and many here - the sonic has been distorted to silly levels. But how much spell casting did the Doctor get up to with the trusty implement the last couple of weeks? Near as I can see, it’s been dialled way down. Not a laser screwdriver in sight, neither! [No swordplay atop the UNIT plane (another nod to The Invasion, a flying HQ with a Lethbridge Stewart in charge!) between the Doctor and Missy, question mark brolly versus exclamation mark parasol! She didn’t even swipe the TARDIS when locked up next to it. She didn’t want it! And unlike Delgado, she got to take out a couple of major supporting cast - and in her first outing, too!] Just like the Doctor turning up in the TARDIS later or further away from where he was expected to meet up with Clara all through Series 8. TARDIS travel isn't the cozy convenience we've been lulled into accepting over recent series. And again, this is not a new thing in the history of the show - it’s just about rebalancing the current mix. It’s all subtle but clear signs that things that were once old and lost, are now new and found again. That really ought to satisfy most viewers, even formerly lapsed ones like me. And yes, I really do take your point re Kill The Moon. But like Salamander’s advice to Fedorin, it didn’t fall out of the sky - even if it was a bit less than entirely satisfactory. Given the closing shot on the beach, I could almost believe that Enemy Of The World was an influence for the germ from which the story sprang! We all want those missing eps back. I just don’t see a good reason to deny what is being offered today because they aren’t back. Especially if it’s good! It stopped being the 1960s a long while ago, and TV can’t be made that way anymore, even if the desire was somehow there. But well written, well made stories that grip the imagination, fire the mind and the feelings, these are timeless. And for mine, that now seems much more likely to be on the menu than in recent years. All Doctors have turkeys in their run. Nobody sets out to make them. But as a friend once told me, we don’t give up eating because we get a bad meal - even a run of them. Remember why you like Doctor Who, take a break, come back and see if what you want from it is still there in the form you miss. Maybe it’ll pop out at you in ways you really weren’t expecting! That’s how it was for me. I took a few years off, then came back. I see a show on the return to greatness. But if it was what I saw in Series 6 or even some of the earlier RTD run, I’d be pretty disconsolate. Why does good Doctor Who deserve its place in the schedules to this day? The show’s unique qualities that resonate down through the decades will surely keep on satisfying audiences as long as the series continues to remain in the custody of those who love and understand it, and the needs of the audience, and can bring to bear the appropriate level of heritage, innovation, good humour and restraint in finding a judicious and satisfying balance. On the back of Series 8, I think Doctor Who is looking fresher than it has in years. When Lambert and Newman got together and made magic, it was a strangely contemporary yet ultramodern high concept show, hewn throughout with the timeless qualities of gripping adventure. We cannot expect or desire Doctor Who to now turn away from that approach, the addictive blend of present, future and past all in one. That’s not how it began, survives, works. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Nov 10, 2014 4:02:45 GMT
I feel I need to ask this question, I might make a thread, but I'll just see how popular it is first. I know that opinion of last nights episode is very much split, and that the show really hasn't been up to good standards recently, but if I asked you, should Doctor Who be cancelled, and you could only reply with yes or no, what would you choose??? Anne Other: What are you waiting for? Me: Just touch these two strands together and Doctor Who is finished. Have I that right? Anne: To destroy the New Series? You can't doubt it. Me: Well, I do. You see, some things could be better with the Doctor. Many future fans will become friends just because of their fondness for the show, even if it's no longer in B&W. Anne: But it isn't like that. Me: But the final responsibility is mine, and mine alone. Listen, if someone who knew the future pointed out a series to you and told you that that series would be returned after years of neglect and misdirection, to become a wildly popular, familiar but different take on a British institution that would entertain and inspire millions of new lives the world over, could you then kill that series? Anne: We're talking about Doctor Who, the most distorted childhood precious ever sullied by modern TV makers of critical and commercial acclaim. You must destroy it. You must complete your mission for the Fan Lords. Me: Do I have the right? Simply touch one wire against the other and that's it. The Doctor will cease to exist. Hundreds of millions of people, thousands of generations can live without a modern fictional paragon, fun ideas, excitement and fear, immersed in chat shows and reality TV, and never even know the word Dalek. Anne: Then why wait? If it was a disease or some sort of bacteria you were destroying, you wouldn't hesitate. Me: But if I kill, wipe out whole future eras and new fans of it, then I become like them. I'd be no better than those who through error and ill fate discarded the lost stories of Hartnell and Troughton. Anne: Think of all the internet bickering there'll be if you don't do it. |
|
|
|
Post by Tony Ingram on Nov 10, 2014 8:18:38 GMT
It would be interesting to know what the BBC considers the core audience for Doctor Who nowadays According to some statistics released a few years ago (in 2010, I believe, or thereabouts) around 12-15% of Doctor Who's regular audience are children under 15, but the bulk of it is people aged between 20 and 35, around 40% of whom are women. There are some older people watching, but comparatively few teenagers between 15 and 20 (perhaps because they drift away for a few years believing that it isn't "cool"). I may be misremembering, but I think that was the gist of it. So I would guess they consider their core audience to be twenty and thirty-somethings, with kids also being a target for merchandising. I suspect the group they are considering least are the middle aged. After all, they provide New Tricks for us... |
|
|
|
Post by Tony Ingram on Nov 10, 2014 8:21:02 GMT
I feel I need to ask this question, I might make a thread, but I'll just see how popular it is first. I know that opinion of last nights episode is very much split, and that the show really hasn't been up to good standards recently, but if I asked you, should Doctor Who be cancelled, and you could only reply with yes or no, what would you choose??? Absolutely not. But then, I don't think that it "really hasn't been up to go good standards recently". |
|
|
|
Post by Tony Ingram on Nov 10, 2014 8:29:28 GMT
Well I've said my bit and unlike many other posts on this thread I've tried to relate it to missing episodes. My worry remains. When a programme, like Dr Who starts using plot devices like the moon being an egg, flying cybermen and other things that look good but are blatantly unreal then there is a danger of the programme losing its audience. It happened in particularly in the 1980s. Don't get me wrong. There bits from each episode in series 8 I thought were excellent. The scenes on the moon sere terrific but the final denouement was just plain silly. The opening story had its moments but again the finale was a tad daft. Flying cybermen! Don't forget the Cybermen were devised by scientists and were logical. The (in)famous sonic screwdriver was a clever idea but later became a silly plot device the help the Dr escape difficult situations. It was a magic wand. Magic is an illusion. It does not exist. Magic belongs to the worlds of Harry Potter, Narnia and Tolkien. In those environments magic is acceptable because we know those worlds are not part of a real universe. The Dr has, in effect, become a cartoon character. Series 8 is using plot devices that are not believable. For the sake of brevity my analogy to Dr Who comics I did not explain my self clearly. I know there were no US Dr Who comics but what I really meant was the strips published in Dr Who monthly are closer to series 8 in style. However, these strips were published by Marvel - an American publisher and contrary to what other posts state are Not British in style but more American. Sorry to be contrary again, but the strips you are referring to were published by Marvel UK, a pretty much autonomous British based and British run company owned by the Marvel Comics Group, which was then being run by Dez Skinn, who is about as American as Eric Morecambe. In fact, Doctor Who Weekly was Marvel UK's first foray into totally original British created material, after Skinn was hired to run the operation (which for its first seven years had just been a reprint line managed by a London office under the overall control of the American office). They are nothing like either, in fact. By 1979, the original Eagle was long gone, and that style of storytelling considered rather old fashioned. I suspect that if the Doctor Who Weekly/Monthly strips were inspired by anything, it was not by American comics, but by what Fleetway were doing in 2000 AD. After all, Skinn hired Dave Gibbons to draw the strips, and Gibbons was at that time best known for his work on 2000 AD. Again, I would strongly disagree with this statement, having read all of them. Stories like The Iron Legion and The Star Beast are very much in the spirit of the Doctor Who of the time, while later strips like The Tides of Time were unlike anything previously published in my opinion, and certainly nothing like superhero stories. Which it will only do if it continues to adapt to the changing tastes of a modern audience. Which is all that it has done. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2014 9:27:31 GMT
It would be interesting to know what the BBC considers the core audience for Doctor Who nowadays According to some statistics released a few years ago (in 2010, I believe, or thereabouts) around 12-15% of Doctor Who's regular audience are children under 15, but the bulk of it is people aged between 20 and 35, around 40% of whom are women. There are some older people watching, but comparatively few teenagers between 15 and 20 (perhaps because they drift away for a few years believing that it isn't "cool"). I may be misremembering, but I think that was the gist of it. So I would guess they consider their core audience to be twenty and thirty-somethings, with kids also being a target for merchandising. I suspect the group they are considering least are the middle aged. After all, they provide New Tricks for us... Thanks Tony for the reply |
|
