|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Feb 24, 2018 0:12:50 GMT
Clones from rivals, or even attempts by the BBC themselves: Atlantis, Jekyll & Hyde, evenfairly successful shows like Merlin and Primeval didn't seem to have much pop culture staying power after they ended their pretty healthy runs. Soon, we'll have Alex Rider and the live action One Piece stepping up to the plate to take on the Time Lord.
But what is it that these shows lacked compared to NuWho? Was it just a 40-50 year head start, or something else?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2018 0:16:43 GMT
Well Doctor Who has a core fanbase, and it's return probably brought enough nostalgia for people to tune in- especially for people old enough to have had kids by 2005. There's also the blessing of Series 1 being absolutely phenomenal and hitting the ground running almost seamlessly. The BBC 'competitors' aren't really competitors, though- I don't think any of them intended to go beyond five series (although only Merlin made it this far).
|
|
shutupbanks
Castellan
There’s a horror movie called Alien? That’s really offensive. No wonder everyone keeps invading you.
Likes: 5,677 
|
Post by shutupbanks on Feb 24, 2018 0:55:13 GMT
While it's more common for a show to build a solid fanbase for a good, longish run these days (compare genre shows running for more than two seasons now with even thirty years ago) it's harder for them to build up a comparable base to Who because we are spoiled for choice. Shows like Doctor Who, Star Trek (only 3 seasons of TOS) and Blake's 7 stood out because they had quite long runs compared to other genre shows of the same period. In today's market a show that runs five years is considered healthy but not remarkable. Who stands out because for many years it seemed to be the only show that kept going. It's mythology as a show - rather than of the show - makes it pretty much unique. The only other comparable show is Star Trek, which had its own version of the wilderness years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2018 8:46:08 GMT
Different times, different audiences. Doctor Who was ALWAYS top of the polls when the public were asked wat show should come back - there was a massive appetite for it in 2005. A built in audience ready to go - other shows don't have that luxury of brand awareness and every adult in the country knowing what your show is and that it's something they can show their kids. Witness complaints when the Musketeers show turned out to be not so family friendly, or the poor ratings when Atlantis was on so late at night.
The Beeb did get Sherlock which has a massive international following so it's not impossible for a new show to come along and get that but perhaps not in the family slot. Who is quite a unique beast in that regard these days - there isn't a lot of TV drama made for kids and grandparents alike. ITV's biggest hit that cracked America, after all their Who efforts failed, was Downton Abbey which could easily have just been one of those "nice" Sunday night shows that run for a year or two and vanish. There's no real formula.
I don't think you can possibly say Merlin failed though - it did damn well for 5 years and was a BIG seller internationally. Sure, it's not built much of a cult following but that's a barometer of obsession not success. Even Primeval - which didn't ever feel like it was a smash - went for 5 years. Did it "fail"? Most shows would kill for a 5 year run in primetime.
|
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Feb 24, 2018 9:30:39 GMT
I don't think you can possibly say Merlin failed though - it did damn well for 5 years and was a BIG seller internationally. Sure, it's not built much of a cult following but that's a barometer of obsession not success. Even Primeval - which didn't ever feel like it was a smash - went for 5 years. Did it "fail"? Most shows would kill for a 5 year run in primetime. Oh, I agree that it ran quite well, and I imagine Capps & Howard are cutting a nice royalty regularly, but it didn't have any real staying power. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2018 9:41:40 GMT
I don't think you can possibly say Merlin failed though - it did damn well for 5 years and was a BIG seller internationally. Sure, it's not built much of a cult following but that's a barometer of obsession not success. Even Primeval - which didn't ever feel like it was a smash - went for 5 years. Did it "fail"? Most shows would kill for a 5 year run in primetime. Oh, I agree that it ran quite well, and I imagine Capps & Howard are cutting a nice royalty regularly, but it didn't have any real staying power. Right but you seem to be saying then that success and staying power are the same thing - Merlin did well for the BBC when it was on. The DVDs and repeat broadcasts are still selling. If you're really asking "Why do Who competitors not build the same level of cult following?", that's a different question. Merlin was a success at the time it needed to be - first broadcast and international sales. Only in the cult TV world would this even be a debate - any drama or comedy that ran for 5 years in primetime would be deemed a success just for doing so. It wouldn't need to somehow stay in the zeitgeist to avoid being labelled a failure. What does staying power have to do with success? That's the gilding of the lilly. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2018 10:21:00 GMT
Different times, different audiences. Doctor Who was ALWAYS top of the polls when the public were asked wat show should come back - there was a massive appetite for it in 2005. A built in audience ready to go - other shows don't have that luxury of brand awareness and every adult in the country knowing what your show is and that it's something they can show their kids. Witness complaints when the Musketeers show turned out to be not so family friendly, or the poor ratings when Atlantis was on so late at night. The Beeb did get Sherlock which has a massive international following so it's not impossible for a new show to come along and get that but perhaps not in the family slot. Who is quite a unique beast in that regard these days - there isn't a lot of TV drama made for kids and grandparents alike. ITV's biggest hit that cracked America, after all their Who efforts failed, was Downton Abbey which could easily have just been one of those "nice" Sunday night shows that run for a year or two and vanish. There's no real formula. I don't think you can possibly say Merlin failed though - it did damn well for 5 years and was a BIG seller internationally. Sure, it's not built much of a cult following but that's a barometer of obsession not success. Even Primeval - which didn't ever feel like it was a smash - went for 5 years. Did it "fail"? Most shows would kill for a 5 year run in primetime. Although Primeval did get messed about with in the scheduling in its last series. I don't think I've ever seen a series be split in half and broadcast across two channels before... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2018 11:14:12 GMT
I think it is because Doctor Who has, over the years, covered several niche markets all at once. There have been scary shows for the family, drama shows, comedy shows, monster shows, sci-fi-shows, shows with an emotional charge, shows that occasionally change their entire cast ... but none of them do all of these things. Doctor Who does. Doctor Who has, if you will, cornered the market, to such an extent that if any other show tried to replicate that, it would just be ... Doctor Who. So while some of these competitors tick some of the boxes, Doctor Who ticks all of them at one time or another. I'd go further: I don't think we can say competitors are failing, it's just that Doctor Who continues to succeed.
|
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Feb 24, 2018 14:59:35 GMT
You can't compete with Who without being Who.
The closet thing anything else comes is The Twilight Zone, but that's an entirely new cast every episode.
If you took The Twilight Zone added a resident cast you'd need to explain how and why they went from place and time to another and that looks extremely like Who.
Then to get the longevity you have to be able to swap out the resident cast from time to time and again that looks like Who.
Who has found a format that allows it to change with the times and change the story week to week, but without throwing out the continuity that committed fandom craves.
I'm not sure you can make another show that fits that description without it being more or less a clone of Who.
|
|
|
|
Post by whiskeybrewer on Feb 26, 2018 12:58:15 GMT
Its because they are trying to replace Who in the schedules with a who-lite type thing. But nothing that's really its own
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2018 4:30:30 GMT
Its because they are trying to replace Who in the schedules with a who-lite type thing. But nothing that's really its own Mmm, it's the ones which develop their own personality that end up lasting. Of the pre-NuWho attempts I've seen, Sapphire and Steel is the one that appeals the most. It's very Prisoner-esque in the uniqueness of its format. Genuinely alien protagonists operating for/against a shapeless antagonist that dwell between the lines in Time. Ghost stories with a nice twist in the tale. The only thing that really hurts it in retrospect is the padding in some stories. Assignment 3 in particular suffers from quite a lot of it, despite a really interesting premise at its centre (it probably only needed to be three-ish episodes). Nicely though, the four-parter that comes right after it is one of the series's best -- filled with paper urchins, faceless landlords and lethal photography. |
|
|
|
Post by omega on Feb 27, 2018 10:17:53 GMT
You get shows that are popular when they're on, but once they've finished don't remain in the viewing public consciousness. Who knows, Merlin may get a cult following but except for people who are big enough fans to still remember and want to watch the DVDs, it's past it.
|
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Feb 27, 2018 13:32:34 GMT
The formats don't have the staying power that Doctor Who does. Doctor Who has lasted as long in the public eye as it has because its format allows a change of actor for the lead character every three-five years. In Primeval (for example), on the other hand, the characters are all human and therefore it doesn't have that advantage.
Having said that, Alex Rider could have the potential to break this mould and become a small-screen equivalent to Harry Potter.
|
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Feb 27, 2018 13:36:36 GMT
Different times, different audiences. Doctor Who was ALWAYS top of the polls when the public were asked wat show should come back - there was a massive appetite for it in 2005. A built in audience ready to go - other shows don't have that luxury of brand awareness and every adult in the country knowing what your show is and that it's something they can show their kids. Witness complaints when the Musketeers show turned out to be not so family friendly, or the poor ratings when Atlantis was on so late at night. The Beeb did get Sherlock which has a massive international following so it's not impossible for a new show to come along and get that but perhaps not in the family slot. Who is quite a unique beast in that regard these days - there isn't a lot of TV drama made for kids and grandparents alike. ITV's biggest hit that cracked America, after all their Who efforts failed, was Downton Abbey which could easily have just been one of those "nice" Sunday night shows that run for a year or two and vanish. There's no real formula. I don't think you can possibly say Merlin failed though - it did damn well for 5 years and was a BIG seller internationally. Sure, it's not built much of a cult following but that's a barometer of obsession not success. Even Primeval - which didn't ever feel like it was a smash - went for 5 years. Did it "fail"? Most shows would kill for a 5 year run in primetime. Although Primeval did get messed about with in the scheduling in its last series. I don't think I've ever seen a series be split in half and broadcast across two channels before... The way they treated Primeval's final run was disgusting. It's like they were deliberately trying to kill all chances of a Series 6. |
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Feb 27, 2018 13:43:59 GMT
I wouldn't say Merlin failed. It had a good run, and due to its concept was always going to have an inevitable endpoint. Sure it didn't pick up a cult following, but that's not the barometer for success. Atlantis just seemed conflicted with what story it was trying to tell.
Can't quite put my finger on why Primeval failed, the scheduling issues probably killed its final series. Personally my family stopped following it mid-Series 3, though we did come back for Series 4.
|
|
|
|
Post by omega on Feb 28, 2018 8:36:30 GMT
I think another factor is non-TV material. Comics, novels (original and novelisations), games, collectible cards, Viewmaster discs etc. For a long time the only way to experience a Doctor Who story after initial broadcast was to read the Target novelisation. Buffy the Vampire Slayer has an ongoing comicbook continuation, showing there's still interest in the franchise over twenty years after the show first started. Loads and loads of shows have original novels. It's giving fans more material, and that it's not just watching the episodes or getting the season set DVD helps to develop fan cred. Good or bad, novels, comics and fanzines even offer the possibility of fans getting in on the creative action, resulting in officially published fan fiction, leading to a fan community developing. Look at Star Wars, which has a massive expanded universe, so sprawling and contradictory that Disney had to establish a new canon to fit what they wanted in. Doctor Who had Dalekmania on its side, which helped the show actually for when they needed to create the model shot of the Daleks in the volcano in Planet of the Daleks. There's a decent trade in old props or replicas, like Star Trek Phasers.
Basically it needs to leap off the screen and engage the minds and wallets of the viewers. People who will shell out for the collectibles, forming stronger memories and reinforcing the connection with the property.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2018 1:42:30 GMT
I think another factor is non-TV material. Comics, novels (original and novelisations), games, collectible cards, Viewmaster discs etc. For a long time the only way to experience a Doctor Who story after initial broadcast was to read the Target novelisation. Buffy the Vampire Slayer has an ongoing comicbook continuation, showing there's still interest in the franchise over twenty years after the show first started. Loads and loads of shows have original novels. It's giving fans more material, and that it's not just watching the episodes or getting the season set DVD helps to develop fan cred. Good or bad, novels, comics and fanzines even offer the possibility of fans getting in on the creative action, resulting in officially published fan fiction, leading to a fan community developing. Look at Star Wars, which has a massive expanded universe, so sprawling and contradictory that Disney had to establish a new canon to fit what they wanted in. Doctor Who had Dalekmania on its side, which helped the show actually for when they needed to create the model shot of the Daleks in the volcano in Planet of the Daleks. There's a decent trade in old props or replicas, like Star Trek Phasers. Basically it needs to leap off the screen and engage the minds and wallets of the viewers. People who will shell out for the collectibles, forming stronger memories and reinforcing the connection with the property. I think you've hit the nail on the head. Exactly, something that welcomes audience engagement beyond casual viewing and helps to push the show beyond things like advertising. A form of cultural currency that comes from worldbuilding. There's never a "too late" on that kind of material either. I've still got a Tracy Island somewhere that was gifted to me as a kid when Thunderbirds rocketed back up on television in the late 90s. Brand new, made especially for that decade. |
|
|
|
Post by omega on Mar 1, 2018 5:00:44 GMT
I think another factor is non-TV material. Comics, novels (original and novelisations), games, collectible cards, Viewmaster discs etc. For a long time the only way to experience a Doctor Who story after initial broadcast was to read the Target novelisation. Buffy the Vampire Slayer has an ongoing comicbook continuation, showing there's still interest in the franchise over twenty years after the show first started. Loads and loads of shows have original novels. It's giving fans more material, and that it's not just watching the episodes or getting the season set DVD helps to develop fan cred. Good or bad, novels, comics and fanzines even offer the possibility of fans getting in on the creative action, resulting in officially published fan fiction, leading to a fan community developing. Look at Star Wars, which has a massive expanded universe, so sprawling and contradictory that Disney had to establish a new canon to fit what they wanted in. Doctor Who had Dalekmania on its side, which helped the show actually for when they needed to create the model shot of the Daleks in the volcano in Planet of the Daleks. There's a decent trade in old props or replicas, like Star Trek Phasers. Basically it needs to leap off the screen and engage the minds and wallets of the viewers. People who will shell out for the collectibles, forming stronger memories and reinforcing the connection with the property. I think you've hit the nail on the head. Exactly, something that welcomes audience engagement beyond casual viewing and helps to push the show beyond things like advertising. A form of cultural currency that comes from worldbuilding. There's never a "too late" on that kind of material either. I've still got a Tracy Island somewhere that was gifted to me as a kid when Thunderbirds rocketed back up on television in the late 90s. Brand new, made especially for that decade. I think a major influence is having something tangible you can hold. Books give you more stories, action figures let you play out your own narratives (what's more fun than bashing figures of Batman and Joker together?). You can get the novelty whatever you can use in the bathroom, kitchen or home in general. Sonic screwdriver universal remote, Star Fleet uniform, Hobbit ears, Death Star pizza cutter. The ever growing wave of Funko pop vinyl figures. There's even a Doctor Who novelty cook book. These things appeal to the collector in us and the fact it's themed after something we like doesn't hurt. For Doctor Who fans were able to get the New Adventures up and running, leading to the Missing Adventures. Doctor Who Magazine has been going continuously since 1979, each issue with a new comic strip instalment. Big Finish brought the Classic Series into the 21st century. The Target novels kept the memories of many Classic serials alive, even inspiring their own memories. Klack! for example, or Ycarnos as a Mexican wrestler or Jo's two introductions or the Doctor peeing over a shelf. Nightmare Fair, Ultimate Evil and Mission to Magnus saw publication long before Nightmare Fair and Mission to Magnus saw any dramatisation. Fans collected unmade scripts like Masters of Luxor. I'm no expert but I'd probably say that Doctor Who was a significant factor for the convention scene in the UK, actors going around event centres and town halls talking to fans. |
|
