What's new

Doctor Who (1 Viewer)

Simon Massey

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2001
Messages
2,557
Location
Shanghai, China
Real Name
Simon Massey
I will also be sad to see Moffat go, though whatever you think of him it is a good time to move on and freshen up the show with a new guiding hand. Five series seems to be a decent run.
 

Jeffery_H

Supporting Actor
Joined
Nov 27, 2005
Messages
912
Adam Lenhardt said:
Great news for Jeffery, bittersweet news for me:

Series ten will be Steven Moffat's last


"Broadchurch" showrunner Chris Chibnall will take over starting with Series Eleven. He was previously the head writer on the first two series of "Doctor Who" spinoff "Torchwood". During the RTD era, he wrote the real time third series episode "42". During the Moffat era, he reintroduced the Silurians in the fifth series two-parter "The Hungry Earth"/"Cold Blood", put dinosaurs on a spaceship in the seventh series episode of the same name, and gave us one of the more unusual episodes of new "Who" with "The Power of Three" (also in the seventh series).


He's not my favorite new-"Who" writer by a long shot, but I'm just really happy Mark Gatiss isn't taking over, since I've never cared for his "Doctor Who" episodes.


As suspected, "Doctor Who" won't air a new series in 2016. There will be the customary Christmas Special in December, and then Moffat's final series will kick off in Spring 2017. I hope he gives it everything he's got.

That's the best news I have heard since RTD left the show. FINALLY, I get rid of Moffat who never knew what REAL Who actually was. But....UGGG, he's doing one last season and you have to wait until after that in 2017 to finish his rubbish. Otherwise, there is hope at last on the horizon for Who, which took its sweet time but finally moving in that direction.
 

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
26,250
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
Adam Lenhardt said:
As suspected, "Doctor Who" won't air a new series in 2016.

This really annoys me. They make so few episodes as is, and now they're going to take a year off? I know the BBC has always operated a little differently than typical American networks, but this is ridiculous. I've felt more strung along as a TV fan in the past few years than I have at any other point in my life, with the number of "mid season finales", two month breaks, split seasons spread over two years, and all the other dumb tricks that networks have been pulling to make less episodes of a show but milk each one for more than ever.


Can you imagine what it would be like to try this at a normal job? "Hey, I don't really feel like working this year… but I expect my job to be there when I get back next year."


Sorry if I'm blowing this out of proportion, but it feels lately that TV makers haven't been holding up their end of the bargain. The bargain was that I'd come and spend my time with you, become attached to the story you're telling and the characters you're creating, and sit through the commercials paying for it all, and in return you'd show up in my house most weeks and tell me a story. TV seasons haven't been "most weeks" or even "half the year" for a long time now, but this is a new kind of low. You've got a show that's more popular now than it's been in decades, but with a showrunner that wants out, a lead actor who apparently does too, and a network that's happy to go over a year without regularly scheduled episodes. I just don't get it. If the ratings are lower when they come back, if people have lost some interest, they deserve it.


Don't mean to be shooting the messenger, this is just immensely disappointing news. In terms of the quality of content that's being produced on TV these days, we're seeing some of the best stuff that's ever been done in the medium, but in terms of the experience of actually watching TV on TV as TV, it's awful.
 

Jeffery_H

Supporting Actor
Joined
Nov 27, 2005
Messages
912
Josh Steinberg said:
This really annoys me. They make so few episodes as is, and now they're going to take a year off? I know the BBC has always operated a little differently than typical American networks, but this is ridiculous. I've felt more strung along as a TV fan in the past few years than I have at any other point in my life, with the number of "mid season finales", two month breaks, split seasons spread over two years, and all the other dumb tricks that networks have been pulling to make less episodes of a show but milk each one for more than ever.


Can you imagine what it would be like to try this at a normal job? "Hey, I don't really feel like working this year… but I expect my job to be there when I get back next year."


Sorry if I'm blowing this out of proportion, but it feels lately that TV makers haven't been holding up their end of the bargain. The bargain was that I'd come and spend my time with you, become attached to the story you're telling and the characters you're creating, and sit through the commercials paying for it all, and in return you'd show up in my house most weeks and tell me a story. TV seasons haven't been "most weeks" or even "half the year" for a long time now, but this is a new kind of low. You've got a show that's more popular now than it's been in decades, but with a showrunner that wants out, a lead actor who apparently does too, and a network that's happy to go over a year without regularly scheduled episodes. I just don't get it. If the ratings are lower when they come back, if people have lost some interest, they deserve it.


Don't mean to be shooting the messenger, this is just immensely disappointing news. In terms of the quality of content that's being produced on TV these days, we're seeing some of the best stuff that's ever been done in the medium, but in terms of the experience of actually watching TV on TV as TV, it's awful.

This I can agree fully with you on. But keep in mind, while Doctor Who is more popular and they are not cardboard sets anymore, the show still has little budget compared to big USA shows as a whole. I don't know what the exact numbers for the BBC production of Who are, but I would guess about a quarter of shows like 24, Flash, etc. are given.


That is why we still get special effects that are still crude and appear like they are done with Adobe After Effects by a college student. The episodes are limited for budget reasons as well. Same goes for other shows like Longmire or streaming shows with limited 10-12 runs. At least some is better than none at all, but yes it does take a toll on the overall enjoyment.
 

Adam Lenhardt

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2001
Messages
26,956
Location
Albany, NY
It is frustrating, but not a huge surprise.


The BBC is a non-commercial public institution, like PBS on steroids, that is financed through an annual television "licence fee" paid by every household, business and organization with a television. The BBC has a for-profit commercial arm, BBC Worldwide, which leverages its assets internationally and owns channels like BBC America and produces shows like "Dancing With the Stars". BBC Worldwide is very successful and is flush with cash, but the core British BBC, under the current Conservative government, is under significant pressure to rein in costs. "Doctor Who" is a strong contender for the BBC's most expensive series. Given those fiscal realities, and the current political constraints, it makes sense to spread the cost for two series (Moffat's last series and Chibnall's first series) over three years instead of two.
 

NeilO

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2002
Messages
4,447
Did anyone watch the Doctor's Notes version of The Magician's Apprentice? Any good notes? Was it worth the time?
 

Lord Dalek

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2005
Messages
7,090
Real Name
Joel Henderson
People didn't start "liking" RTD's era until after he left. I expect the same for Moffatt except on a much larger scale.

EDIT: I love how people use this casual "so-and-so didn't know what real Who was"-attack to bash the outgoing guy (I distinctly remember the same thing when RTD left, and we'll get it the same when Chibnall packs it in, although I strongly suspect he'll actually deserve it) then fail to elucidate on what "real Who" actually means.

That's because there is no such thing as real-Doctor Who. The old show changed its style on a whim, depending on who was running the production team and what orders came down from the Director General. It was an educational show, then it was a light scifi thriller for children about monsters on the run, then it was a gritty scientific investigation show about alien invasions and government conspiracies, then it was the same thing except considerably less gritty, then it was gothic horror, then it was goofy panto, then it was a really dry hard science fiction show, then it was something very very 80s, then McCoy appeared and it just kinda fell apart from there. If Classic Who had no concept of a solid identity then what the hell was Moffatt supposed to do besides masturbate to old Hinchcliffe-Holmes cliches since that's the only Who that matters to most Americans/casuals?
 
Last edited:

Jeffery_H

Supporting Actor
Joined
Nov 27, 2005
Messages
912
EDIT: I love how people use this casual "so-and-so didn't know what real Who was"-attack to bash the outgoing guy (I distinctly remember the same thing when RTD left, and we'll get it the same when Chibnall packs it in, although I strongly suspect he'll actually deserve it) then fail to elucidate on what "real Who" actually means.

That would NOT include myself as I happen to like RTD, especially since he went back to Classic Who. I'm just more of a Classic Who style of fan and can't abide the direction Moffat took the show. I still have ALL the old Classic Who on DVD and like most of the RTD shows before he departed.

Unless you started watching back when the show was on PBS here in America, you can be a fan of New Who but not fully understand what the show TRULY was unless having seen Classic Who. It had MUCH better writing back then and the special effects were always overlooked as an afterthought. Just read the books of Classic Who and don't watch them at all, story for story, they are much better.
 

Stan

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 18, 1999
Messages
5,177
I'm one of the "new" Who fans, started watching in the Tennant/Tate years. Going to start catching up on the older, classic stories in the next few months.

Quick question, but what does RTD mean?
 

Josh Dial

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2000
Messages
4,496
Real Name
Josh Dial
For the current run from 2005 forward, a Complete Series 1-7 Blu-Ray set is available. But I wouldn't recommend it because they slowed the episodes down from 25 fps to 24 fps to make a 1080p24 release. In addition, all of the episodes from "Rose" at the start of the first series through "The Next Doctor" were upconverted for the Blu-Ray, since they were produced in standard definition, "filmised" from 50 interlaced fields per second video.Instead, I'd recommend buying the first four series individually on DVD, buy the "Complete Specials" Blu-ray set, buy the complete series Blu-Ray sets for series 5 and 6, and then buy the series 7 part one and part two sets on Blu-Rays. That will get you everything through "The Name of the Doctor" at the original playback speed. Unfortunately, "The Day of the Doctor" has only been released in 1080p24.

Apologies for quoting a really old post, but I'm hoping to leverage the expertise of the regular posters in this section of the HTF.

I'm looking to purchase all of the modern Doctor Who, and the broader internet is really no assistance at all in determining the best purchases with any degree of certainty. Here is what I'm looking for:
  • Every season of modern Doctor Who;
  • Avoid completely if possible any slow-down associated with PAL to NTSC conversion;
  • Blu-ray if possible (but see above re slow-down); and
  • I will double dip if necessary.
What is the best way to accomplish this? Buying series 1 to 4 on DVD, and thereafter each individual series on Blu-ray? Do the half-series volumes suffer from slow-down? For instance, series 9 parts 1 and 2 both indicate they are 1080p, but word on the internet is they are incorrectly labeled and are actually 1080i.

Thanks everyone in advance!
 

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
26,250
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
Hi other me!

I had the same questions a while ago. I never ended up committing to purchases but the best I could find out was:

- The US Blu-rays of the Tennant Specials and Seasons 5 and 6 are 1080i. My fiancé has them so I can vouch for that.

- The US BD of Seasons 7 and 8 are 24p, but have been pitch corrected so it's really hard to notice the slowdown. We've got Season 7 and I can't really tell. Season 8 I didn't get yet but will probably get the UK version at 1080i.

- Don't have season 9 yet.

- I've read that the UK BD releases for Seasons 7 & 8 are 1080i, not slowed down.

- The US BDs (box set) and UK BDs (individual releases) for Seasons 1-4 are 24p, so they have the slowdown. Apparently they did a good job on the pitch correction. They were originally shot on PAL tape so they are upscaled. The audio is lossless.

I have a player and display that can do native PAL, so I'm thinking one day I will upgrade my fiancé's season 1-4 US NTSC DVD versions for the UK PAL DVD versions and call it a day. I can get those four for the cost of one of the BD seasons. For new seasons I don't have I'll likely stick with UK releases but I don't think I'll replace the US S7 that I already have.

Hope this helps a little.
 

Josh Dial

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2000
Messages
4,496
Real Name
Josh Dial
Thanks both of you. So it looks like this is the best way:
  • DVD for series 1 through 4
  • series 5 and 6 on BD (1080i)
  • 10th Doctor Specials on BD (1080i)
  • series 7 parts 1 and 2 (not the complete series) on BD (1080i)
  • The Doctor, the Widow and the Wardrobe on BD (not part of series 7, part 1, right; anyone know if it's 1080i?)
  • The Day of the Doctor on BD (seems to be confirmed 1080p)
  • The Time of the Doctor on BD (likely 1080p)
  • series 8, parts 1 and 2 (playing the odds that they are 1080i)
  • Last Christmas on BD (anyone know if it's 1080i?)
  • series 9, parts 1 and 2 (reports elsewhere are that the 1080p indication on the packaging is incorrect)
  • The Husbands of River Song (anyone know if it's 1080i?)
Does this look correct?
 

Stan

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 18, 1999
Messages
5,177
This really annoys me. They make so few episodes as is, and now they're going to take a year off?

Can you imagine what it would be like to try this at a normal job? "Hey, I don't really feel like working this year… but I expect my job to be there when I get back next year."

I just don't get it. If the ratings are lower when they come back, if people have lost some interest, they deserve it.

All these "breaks" that are taken, I'm not to surprised. Lots of special effects, CGI, etc. that need to be added (The Walking Dead for example). So I'm getting used to the partial seasons, where they return in 2-3 months. But this Dr. Who thing is ridiculous.

I've already lost a lot of interest. Capaldi is one of the worst Doctors, if and when they return, assuming I even watch, let's hope he regenerates into almost any other actor.
 

Adam Lenhardt

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2001
Messages
26,956
Location
Albany, NY
The first four bullets look correct, Josh. I believe the Day of the Doctor Blu-Ray was 1080p24 around the globe, with audio issues from the slowdown to boot. Partially this is because the requirements of the Blu-Ray 3D format. The rest I can't speak to.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,710
Messages
5,121,078
Members
144,145
Latest member
treed99
Recent bookmarks
0
Top