|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Sept 13, 2016 12:48:23 GMT
If you were the BBC controller, how would you improve it?
Personally, I would:
- Reduce the number of period dramas - way too many - Increase the number of sci-fi/fantasy dramas - not enough of them - Axe Top Gear - doesn't work without Clarkson Hammond and May - Replace Top Gear with two series of Robot Wars a year - Tell every Doctor Who showrunner that joins the show during my time that he must include Captain Jack in at least one episode during his era or face the sack - Commission BBC Films to make movies based on Miranda and Doctor Who - Commission several BBC sitcom pilots based on new ideas - the public vote for the one they prefer via an online vote after all the pilots have aired. The winner is turned into a series.
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Sept 13, 2016 13:44:00 GMT
Give them more (indeed all) of the licence fee, stop top slicing it for other things. Allow them to make more content inhouse so that external parties don't keep ending up owning the BBC's top properties (ala Bake Off). And when it comes to personal axe grind stuff, cancel all soap operas, but despite my own personal preferences, that wouldn't actually improve the BBC. I suspect several of your suggestions dalekbuster523finish fall into the same category as my distaste for soap operas, a personal preference and nothing to do with actually improving the BBC.
|
|
|
Post by mark687 on Sept 13, 2016 14:14:05 GMT
Dedicated content channels ideally that way everyone should be thinking "at least I'm paying for content I want to watch."
Regards
mark687
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2016 14:26:56 GMT
I like the BBC, generally it does what it does very well. However, Top Gear without Clarkson & Hammond just isn't Top Gear, so they should put that show out of it's misery and cancel it!
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Sept 13, 2016 14:37:10 GMT
I enjoyed the new Top Gear, it was a but cluncky to start, but got better and I'm looking forward to new season.
You can't please all of the people all of the time.
|
|
|
Post by whiskeybrewer on Sept 13, 2016 14:39:29 GMT
Top Gear was going long before Hammond, May and Clarkson, so i think they'll try and keep it going for as long as possible.
But i do like the idea of a Comedy Pilot season, but after the vote, depending on how many series are in that season, i'd say the top 2 or 3 would get a series and then from there after the first season of each. The one with the best ratings gets a second
|
|
|
Post by muckypup on Sept 13, 2016 19:37:13 GMT
Drop sport, politics, magazine & news shows apart from news slot 6pm etc Less high drama, house, antiques & event programs Bring children's back to a family slots Kill bbc four and three concentrate on one & two.
Look at the schedules from the 70's & 80's & try to bring back the variety of shows we had then, we need different programs on different days not one program seven days a week until we are driven to dispair!
Bring back play for today, why does every idea have to be stretch to a series
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Sept 13, 2016 20:09:54 GMT
Top Gear was going long before Hammond, May and Clarkson, so i think they'll try and keep it going for as long as possible. It was, but it was nowhere near the success of Clarkson, Hammond and May. It was dull; more like Countryfile.
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Sept 13, 2016 20:20:30 GMT
Top Gear was going long before Hammond, May and Clarkson, so i think they'll try and keep it going for as long as possible. It was, but it was nowhere near the success of Clarkson, Hammond and May. It was dull; more like Countryfile. I enjoyed it, sure not full of the buffoonery that Clarkson, Hammond and May brought, which I also enjoyed, but it addressed a section of the audience, was fairly cheap to make and was on BBC2 on a Sunday afternoon (if I recall correctly) even if it were to return to the format of old (which I doubt) there would still be no reason to cancel it.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Oct 3, 2016 13:26:46 GMT
Bring back play for today, why does every idea have to be stretch to a series Would there really be a market? People who want theatre would like be going out to see it, given how big the indie and fringe scene is nowadays, and besides, for the effort you put into basically a play recording, you might as well just make it a proper TV special or TV movie. The notion of a TV play is more of a relic of the early live days. Really, I´d advocate more for just streaming proper productions over Netflix, like they do with operas.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2016 15:50:21 GMT
Just leave it alone and stop political meddling
|
|
aztec
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,849
|
Post by aztec on Oct 3, 2016 16:18:24 GMT
I didn't enjoy the last series of Top Gear that much (mainly because of Chris Evans) but I'm willing to give it another shot eventually (was more of a casual viewer, I don't drive and have little interest in cars, only watched it for the humour and stunts) as it will take a while for them to work out exactly how to tweak the format, Matt Le Blanc shows alot of promise, as much as I enjoyed Hamster, Captain Slow and Jezza's antics I did feel the last few series were getting a bit stale and repetitive and they were probably getting a little old for the roles....
As for how to improve the BBC, keeping BBC3 on air would have been a start...
|
|
|
Post by muckypup on Oct 4, 2016 8:07:01 GMT
Bring back play for today, why does every idea have to be stretch to a series Would there really be a market? People who want theatre would like be going out to see it, given how big the indie and fringe scene is nowadays, and besides, for the effort you put into basically a play recording, you might as well just make it a proper TV special or TV movie. The notion of a TV play is more of a relic of the early live days. Really, I´d advocate more for just streaming proper productions over Netflix, like they do with operas. You misunderstand me, play for today is not filming stage productions....is was regular tv production just one episode is one story, so one week it could be about a postman losing a letter, next week robbery story etc. no links, no ongoing story line just one episode one story. the bbc dabbled with it again, in the afternoons a few years ago before all the cuts! not as long as a movie, it's a good way to tell smaller stories without having to stretch & pad them out
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Oct 4, 2016 8:08:52 GMT
It was, but it was nowhere near the success of Clarkson, Hammond and May. It was dull; more like Countryfile. I enjoyed it, sure not full of the buffoonery that Clarkson, Hammond and May brought, which I also enjoyed, but it addressed a section of the audience, was fairly cheap to make and was on BBC2 on a Sunday afternoon (if I recall correctly) even if it were to return to the format of old (which I doubt) there would still be no reason to cancel it. I disagree, if it doesn't get the ratings then it's a waste of the license fee. I would go full Michael Grade on it and suggest they either fire Matt Le Blanc and the other remaining presenters and entice Clarkson, Hammond and May back or the show will be scrapped.
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Oct 4, 2016 12:06:39 GMT
I enjoyed it, sure not full of the buffoonery that Clarkson, Hammond and May brought, which I also enjoyed, but it addressed a section of the audience, was fairly cheap to make and was on BBC2 on a Sunday afternoon (if I recall correctly) even if it were to return to the format of old (which I doubt) there would still be no reason to cancel it. I disagree, if it doesn't get the ratings then it's a waste of the license fee. I would go full Michael Grade on it and suggest they either fire Matt Le Blanc and the other remaining presenters and entice Clarkson, Hammond and May back or the show will be scrapped. Thing is, from what you say, it's not that you don't think the show should be scrapped because it has so little value that no one can love it, you want Clarkson et al back and if they don't you want to condemn it. If it has appeal to some, why does it have to appeal to you?
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Oct 4, 2016 12:39:48 GMT
I disagree, if it doesn't get the ratings then it's a waste of the license fee. I would go full Michael Grade on it and suggest they either fire Matt Le Blanc and the other remaining presenters and entice Clarkson, Hammond and May back or the show will be scrapped. Thing is, from what you say, it's not that you don't think the show should be scrapped because it has so little value that no one can love it, you want Clarkson et al back and if they don't you want to condemn it. If it has appeal to some, why does it have to appeal to you? The thing is, without Clarkson, Hammond and May it doesn't appeal to enough people. It is no coincidence that the ratings went straight down when they left. Yet the BBC fail to realise that.
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Oct 4, 2016 12:52:46 GMT
No, whilst the viewer numbers did plummet, Top Gear is cheap to make, so doesn't have the pressures on it that say Doctor Who does, then there's the fact that the BBC doesn't make commissioning decisions purely based on appeal over cost, part of what makes the BBC unique is that they make programs that appeal across the spectrum and often make niche programs of little interest to the wider audience but most of all in the case of Top Gear, BBC Worldwide really want to find a version of the program that does appeal to the mass audience, and as such I expect the BBC to keep re-rolling the dice for a while yet, in an attempt to get that appeal back. But even if they never do, and Top Gear returns to the viewer numbers of yesteryear, why on earth cancel a program that has appeal (to some) and is cheap to make?
Would you cancel The Sky at Night? Do you regard that show as not having enough appeal, and the BBC not realising it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2016 18:45:17 GMT
No, whilst the viewer numbers did plummet, Top Gear is cheap to make, so doesn't have the pressures on it that say Doctor Who does, then there's the fact that the BBC doesn't make commissioning decisions purely based on appeal over cost, part of what makes the BBC unique is that they make programs that appeal across the spectrum and often make niche programs of little interest to the wider audience but most of all in the case of Top Gear, BBC Worldwide really want to find a version of the program that does appeal to the mass audience, and as such I expect the BBC to keep re-rolling the dice for a while yet, in an attempt to get that appeal back. But even if they never do, and Top Gear returns to the viewer numbers of yesteryear, why on earth cancel a program that has appeal (to some) and is cheap to make? Would you cancel The Sky at Night? Do you regard that show as not having enough appeal, and the BBC not realising it? I haven't seen figures recently, but under Clarkson and Co Top Gear was anything but cheap TV. there were frequently news stories about how much the BBC had to pay to keep them under contract.
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Oct 4, 2016 21:02:59 GMT
No, whilst the viewer numbers did plummet, Top Gear is cheap to make, so doesn't have the pressures on it that say Doctor Who does, then there's the fact that the BBC doesn't make commissioning decisions purely based on appeal over cost, part of what makes the BBC unique is that they make programs that appeal across the spectrum and often make niche programs of little interest to the wider audience but most of all in the case of Top Gear, BBC Worldwide really want to find a version of the program that does appeal to the mass audience, and as such I expect the BBC to keep re-rolling the dice for a while yet, in an attempt to get that appeal back. But even if they never do, and Top Gear returns to the viewer numbers of yesteryear, why on earth cancel a program that has appeal (to some) and is cheap to make? Would you cancel The Sky at Night? Do you regard that show as not having enough appeal, and the BBC not realising it? I haven't seen figures recently, but under Clarkson and Co Top Gear was anything but cheap TV. there were frequently news stories about how much the BBC had to pay to keep them under contract. Paying for presenters may well cost, but the production itself was never going to be that expensive, and if the mass appeal falls away, the need for expensive presenters will too.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Oct 7, 2016 8:29:09 GMT
No, whilst the viewer numbers did plummet, Top Gear is cheap to make, so doesn't have the pressures on it that say Doctor Who does, then there's the fact that the BBC doesn't make commissioning decisions purely based on appeal over cost, part of what makes the BBC unique is that they make programs that appeal across the spectrum and often make niche programs of little interest to the wider audience but most of all in the case of Top Gear, BBC Worldwide really want to find a version of the program that does appeal to the mass audience, and as such I expect the BBC to keep re-rolling the dice for a while yet, in an attempt to get that appeal back. But even if they never do, and Top Gear returns to the viewer numbers of yesteryear, why on earth cancel a program that has appeal (to some) and is cheap to make? I don't believe Top Gear has appeal and I think the viewing figures of the previous series reflect that. When Clarkson, Hammond and May were presenting people didn't watch it for the motoring, they watched it for three blokes larking about. As soon as they left the personalities were gone and consequently the appeal is lost. I also wouldn't say Top Gear is cheap to make; there will be a lot of crew on the show for a start, not to mention location costs.
|
|