?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Who? - The Villages

hutch0
Date: 2009-01-02 22:54
Subject: Who?
Security: Public
Location:the utility room in the sky
Mood:calmcalm
Music:porcupine tree
For those of us who care - and there are a few, I know - the BBC will be announcing the identity of the new Doctor Who tomorrow. I'm still hoping it'll be Jason Isaacs or Jimmy Nesbitt.
Post A Comment | 22 Comments | | Link






The Texas Triffid Ranch - Odd Plants and Oddities
User: txtriffidranch
Date: 2009-01-02 23:10 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Let's just say that the Canadian Broadcasting Company, as a major financier, gets a say.
Reply | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2009-01-02 23:29 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I've been trying to look at this over at your place - and other Red Green videos - most of the evening, but they're not loading. Does someone know something we don't?
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



The Texas Triffid Ranch - Odd Plants and Oddities
User: txtriffidranch
Date: 2009-01-02 23:31 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Well, if the Movellans don't find you handsome, at least they should find you handy.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2009-01-02 23:38 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I'm going to keep trying to watch these videos, if only to find out what the hell you're talking about. Although I am strangely attracted to his motto: quando omni flunkus moritati. I've been doing that all my life.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



The Texas Triffid Ranch - Odd Plants and Oddities
User: txtriffidranch
Date: 2009-01-03 00:13 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Try this one: I just checked to make sure, and it seems to be working well. Best of all, I could see this one being redone by Patrick Troughton.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2009-01-03 00:41 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
That took a long time to load, but now I get it. Yes, he'd be an interesting Doctor, wouldn't he? He strikes me as a chap who'd know what to do with a sonic screwdriver. I need to watch some more of these. Many thanks.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



The Texas Triffid Ranch - Odd Plants and Oddities
User: txtriffidranch
Date: 2009-01-03 00:47 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Not a problem. I've joked for years that The Red Green Show and Doctor Who were pretty much the same program, and it's not helped by the fact that the show is pretty much considered a documentary of eastern Canada. (I started watching it nearly fifteen years ago, and it's truly terrifying how some of those "Handyman's Corner" segments reminded me of projects my paternal grandfather would start up. Considering that he was Canadian, I chalk it up to proof that some cliches have a basis in fact.)
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2009-01-03 01:12 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I find myself strangely attracted to Red Green. That line about `if you add up the amount of time I paid attention, I didn't get any education at all' is very sly. On a very limited viewing, he looks like Home Improvement written by the Monty Python team, and I thank you for introducing him to me.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



The Texas Triffid Ranch - Odd Plants and Oddities
User: txtriffidranch
Date: 2009-01-03 01:24 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Oh, it's much worse than that. Trust me. You're just catching the "Handyman's Corner" segments: wait until you meet Ranger Gord.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2009-01-03 23:41 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I will look forward to that.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



mylefteye
User: mylefteye
Date: 2009-01-02 23:26 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I'm in a minority, but I'd like to see Nesbitt as Who.
Reply | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2009-01-02 23:35 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
After his turn in Jekyll, I think he'd be brilliant. He's got that talent Tennant has to turn on a sixpence from comedy to menace.
As an indicator of just how seriously the BBC regards this, the announcement is going to be simulcast live on giant screens in places like Liverpool, Swansea and, er, Rotherham. You're probably too young to remember, but there was a time when only about a thousand people cared there was a Doctor Who at all, and only about six of them worked at the BBC.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



The Texas Triffid Ranch - Odd Plants and Oddities
User: txtriffidranch
Date: 2009-01-03 00:13 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
That's impressive in its own right. By the time the classic series shut down, I honestly think the only people who cared any more were in the States, and they still thought that Tom Baker was in the role. (Me, I still submit that Sylvester McCoy would have worked out well if he'd had some decent scripts. This also implies that someone would have taken John Nathan-Turner out back and put him down like Old Yeller.)
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2009-01-03 00:23 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I interviewed McCoy when he took over the role, and he was really up for it, really keen, and I agree he would have made a good fist of it if he hadn't been saddled with poor scripts. I got the feeling that by then the BBC were only running Doctor Who because they'd always run it, but they didn't want to spend too much time and money on it. In retrospect the break may have been the best thing that could have happened to the show because it gave fans like Davies and Moffat and Cornell and Gatiss time to mature and gather themselves enough clout to do it the way they'd always dreamed it should have been done. And in doing so to turn BBC Wales from a distant outpost into something of a powerhouse within the Beeb, and more power to their elbows.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



The Texas Triffid Ranch - Odd Plants and Oddities
User: txtriffidranch
Date: 2009-01-03 00:37 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
True, and it also gave plenty of time for people to forget the Nathan-Turner years. I realize the Paul McGann minimovie was pretty poor, and I expected a lot more, but you should have heard the response here in the States when it actually came out. Folks who couldn't have given a fart in a high wind about a Star Trek franchise were actually excited, and they would have been willing to give a 1996 series a fighting chance to get established.

Me, I was lucky in that our local PBS station was one of the first to start running Doctor Who in the mid-Eighties, and by 1988, the show was the station's big pledge drive moneymaker. (For a little while back in 1987, I was dating a bouncer at one of Dallas's best clubs, and she and I met because she was commenting on how she hoped her VCR was working so she could watch "Earthshock" after she got home. I quickly discovered that everybody in that club would go home and watch Doctor Who after they were finished for the night.) This meant that I had the chance to watch all of the McCoy episodes about a year behind you guys: for the States, where most PBS stations were still running Are You Being Served? as if it was still relevant, this was nothing short of amazing. It's just a damn shame that Time and The Rani had a lot of wasted potential, and Delta and the Bannermen and Happiness Patrol were nearly unwatchable. I still haven't brought myself to watch Silver Nemesis, but that's partly because BBC America is taking its sweet time with putting out DVD sets of the classic series.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2009-01-03 01:06 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I thought McGann didn't get a fair shake. There was real potential there, but my feeling was that the BBC had staked one last throw of the dice on internationalising the series, and in the process had lost pretty much all of the Englishness which gives Doctor Who its charm. I actually enjoyed McGann's take on The Doctor and I thought it had potential, but the film tried so hard to be `Hollywood' that it wound up being bland and uninteresting. I didn't think any of the cast did a bad job - Eric Roberts in particular had the potential to be a very interesting Master - it's just that the film seemed too much like a calling-card. As you say, the audience was there in the States, but I understand it was ruinously expensive to make and the viewing figures precluded taking it further.

To my shame, I kind of lost track of Who after McCoy took over. As I said, I think by then the BBC were only putting out Doctor Who because that's what they'd been doing since 1963. It was kind of a rote thing, and in those days the BBC could still do that. I have only the greatest admiration for the excutives who signed off on Davies's reinvigoration of the series - I can't imagine the meetings and discussions and heart-searching involved in that decision.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



The Texas Triffid Ranch - Odd Plants and Oddities
User: txtriffidranch
Date: 2009-01-03 01:23 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
The funny thing about that? By US standards, it wasn't all that expensive to put it out, but it was co-financed by Fox. To this day, I can't figure out exactly what sort of sexual favors are necessary to keep a show going on Fox, but the network is notorious for cancelling shows after as few as single episodes, and everyone I've talked to in the States said the McGann Who was murdered from high up. (I'm not kidding about the sexual favors suspicion: the series Family Guy was cancelled some four separate times, with one exec claiming that a potential Screen Actor's Guild strike in 2000 didn't bother Fox because it had some three years of new episodes to run. It and Sliders were notorious for being cancelled and resurrected over and over after superior series were cancelled and pretty much banned, and no, I'm not counting Firefly among that number.)

That said, when I was commenting about the McGann movie being disappointing, a lot of that was because you had to be intimately familiar with the old series to figure out what the hell was going on, and that was enough to scare the hell out of Fox. The smartest thing the Davies revival did was to start with a clean slate and reveal little bits of back history for longtime fans. The McGann pilot went too American with its emphasis on revealing too much of the series bible in the first segment, in the desperate hope that viewers would continue to come back to find out more. (While the series hasn't aged well at all, I'm still amazed at how indebted standard serial television these days, especially genre shows, are to Babylon 5. After getting a reasonably consistent ongoing story for five years, it's particularly jarring to come across a genre show where everyone's faking the backstory, as with Farscape.)
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2009-01-03 23:52 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I think that was a definite weakness of the McGann Who. I got the impression it was a pilot for a BBC-Fox coproduced American series and so it had to bang all the backstory in at the front. Presumably it didn't bring in big enough viewing figures to satisfy Fox and they decided not to go ahead with the series.
I'd count Firefly among the superior series. I thought that was a marvellous piece of work and one of the great lost shows. HBO seems to be doing the same thing now. Carnivale had enormous potential, but it was cancelled after two seasons. Deadwood, okay, it's hard to see how much further they could have taken it, but I understand the cast and writers were game for at least one more season.
I haven't watched Babylon Five for a very long time, but I enjoyed that immensely. It's rare to see something on television and know instinctively that there's a functioning intelligence behind it. And Ivanova was h4wt!
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



teacher_bear
User: teacher_bear
Date: 2009-01-03 00:49 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I will be interested to see who it is. I was always sorry to see Tom Baker leave, similarly David Tarrant. I was an avid watcher from the inception in 1963 and continued to be with just a few breaks. Expecially I think in the Jon Pertwee era.
Reply | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2009-01-03 01:08 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Yeah, I'm from the Jon Pertwee/Tom Baker era. But Tennant's my perfect Doctor. He's been brilliant. I wish all the very best to whoever takes over from him; those are going to be big sneakers to fill.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



RealThog
User: realthog
Date: 2009-01-03 01:36 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)

Oh, there's going to be a new Doctor Who, is there? Has Tom Baker decided to stop doing it?
Reply | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2009-01-03 11:15 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
*sigh*
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



browse
the villages
the links
December 2013
the promo