|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Nov 23, 2016 11:22:49 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Nov 23, 2016 12:13:25 GMT
Interesting read. However, I feel that someone in Moffats position would have listened to some of the Big Finish audios,(Night of the Doctor made it canon) and at least commissioned one to be adapted for tv. Its certainly unfair and a criticism of the audios writers to defend themselves, when Moffat should be explaining himself! |
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Nov 23, 2016 13:44:15 GMT
Steven Moffat is from what he's said a fan of BF.
I'm glad he hasn't had any BF's adapted for TV. If he wants BF writers to make new stories great, but I really don't want any adapted.
And the ONLY reason the BF writers have to "defend" themselves is because some fans keep using the question like an accusation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2016 3:24:13 GMT
Steven Moffat is from what he's said a fan of BF. I'm glad he hasn't had any BF's adapted for TV. If he wants BF writers to make new stories great, but I really don't want any adapted. And the ONLY reason the BF writers have to "defend" themselves is because some fans keep using the question like an accusation. was one of his favourite stories from memory. Yeah... The last thing we really need for NuWho right now is for it to become an ouroboros feeding off of past victories. And no, you may not have that cheap shot.  The quality of Big Finish is such that I sometimes consider writing for it to be more of an achievement than the television series. Jonny Morris has done fine work where he is, both in print and audio, and we're glad to have him in the BF regular stable. The same is true of John Dorney, Jacqueline Rayner, Marc Platt, Lance Parkin, Nick Briggs, Barnaby Edwards and every other writer who hasn't yet made the transition to television. We get more of them at BF than we would from NuWho anyway, purely because of the difference between that forty-five minute timeslot and two disc storage capacity. |
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Nov 24, 2016 15:33:55 GMT
I'm also going to expand further on some things that John has covered, reposting this up:
1) It's not about progression, but experience. Most of BF's staff are novelists, comic writers or non fiction authors, with little to no TV experience. Production companies and broadcasters won't consider non screenwriters for projects most times without a track record of some sort. And then there´s the five tons of legal red tape involving solicited submissions and agents, but that would take all day.
2) Competition: compare the two or three dozen BF regulars that we all want to see on the show versus the thousands of UK TV writers who all want to write for Who and have likely pitched for it multiple times. As a showrunner and script editor with superiors and executives to answer to, are you more likely to gamble on novices in this particular field, or go with someone experienced, who can be trusted to meet a deadline and not need potentially time consuming handholding (this is not about who is more talented, but again, experience and dependability)?
3) Schedules: it's no secret that BF make their stuff months before they are even announced, meaning they have to contract writers for however many stories/series they need, which affects how much spare time they have and when they are free (in addition to sometimes doubling up as actors, script editors, directors and producers, as well as outside projects). Same goes for the TV series: Series 10 is nearly all in the can and I imagine Series 11 has most of, if not all, of its staff and stories locked down, so even if they wanted to, Dorney or Morris or Magrs or Smith or whoever you'd want may or would not be able to contribute at this point.
|
|
|
|
Post by J.A. Prentice on Nov 25, 2016 3:07:20 GMT
While I'd love for Big Finish writers to work on the show, I also understand why they don't. I really wouldn't have any interest in directly adapting Big Finish stories for TV. What would be the point? Doctor Who needs to move forward and make new material, not retread and remake.
|
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Nov 25, 2016 9:51:21 GMT
While I'd love for Big Finish writers to work on the show, I also understand why they don't. I really wouldn't have any interest in directly adapting Big Finish stories for TV. What would be the point? Doctor Who needs to move forward and make new material, not retread and remake. Jubilee/Dalek! |
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Nov 25, 2016 10:02:13 GMT
I'm also going to expand further on some things that John has covered, reposting this up: 1) It's not about progression, but experience . Most of BF's staff are novelists, comic writers or non fiction authors, with little to no TV experience. Production companies and broadcasters won't consider non screenwriters for projects most times without a track record of some sort. And then there´s the five tons of legal red tape involving solicited submissions and agents, but that would take all day. 2) Competition: compare the two or three dozen BF regulars that we all want to see on the show versus the thousands of UK TV writers who all want to write for Who and have likely pitched for it multiple times. As a showrunner and script editor with superiors and executives to answer to, are you more likely to gamble on novices in this particular field, or go with someone experienced, who can be trusted to meet a deadline and not need potentially time consuming handholding (this is not about who is more talented, but again, experience and dependability)? 3) Schedules: it's no secret that BF make their stuff months before they are even announced, meaning they have to contract writers for however many stories/series they need, which affects how much spare time they have and when they are free (in addition to sometimes doubling up as actors, script editors, directors and producers, as well as outside projects). Same goes for the TV series: Series 10 is nearly all in the can and I imagine Series 11 has most of, if not all, of its staff and stories locked down, so even if they wanted to, Dorney or Morris or Magrs or Smith or whoever you'd want may or would not be able to contribute at this point. 1) Everybody has to start somewhere. Neil Gaiman started with journalism, comics and novels. Probably one of the reasons British tv is getting stagnant, with it always being the same people writing and appearing on tv. 2) I'm sure the BF writers are familiar with a deadline, and Moffat only has to look at the back catalogue of those experienced writers. Its the Script Editors job. 3) I'm sure BF would be chuffed if one of their writers became a tv writer. Its irrelevant that series 10 is nearly in the can, fans have been asking for BF writers to write for tv, for years! Writers can only contribute if they have an idea. |
|
|
|
Post by whiskeybrewer on Nov 25, 2016 11:45:31 GMT
While I'd love for Big Finish writers to work on the show, I also understand why they don't. I really wouldn't have any interest in directly adapting Big Finish stories for TV. What would be the point? Doctor Who needs to move forward and make new material, not retread and remake. Jubilee/Dalek! Tbh with that they only took the core basics and tiny elements of that in the end. The stories otherwise are extremely different |
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Nov 25, 2016 14:16:46 GMT
I'm also going to expand further on some things that John has covered, reposting this up: 1) It's not about progression, but experience . Most of BF's staff are novelists, comic writers or non fiction authors, with little to no TV experience. Production companies and broadcasters won't consider non screenwriters for projects most times without a track record of some sort. And then there´s the five tons of legal red tape involving solicited submissions and agents, but that would take all day. 2) Competition: compare the two or three dozen BF regulars that we all want to see on the show versus the thousands of UK TV writers who all want to write for Who and have likely pitched for it multiple times. As a showrunner and script editor with superiors and executives to answer to, are you more likely to gamble on novices in this particular field, or go with someone experienced, who can be trusted to meet a deadline and not need potentially time consuming handholding (this is not about who is more talented, but again, experience and dependability)? 3) Schedules: it's no secret that BF make their stuff months before they are even announced, meaning they have to contract writers for however many stories/series they need, which affects how much spare time they have and when they are free (in addition to sometimes doubling up as actors, script editors, directors and producers, as well as outside projects). Same goes for the TV series: Series 10 is nearly all in the can and I imagine Series 11 has most of, if not all, of its staff and stories locked down, so even if they wanted to, Dorney or Morris or Magrs or Smith or whoever you'd want may or would not be able to contribute at this point. 1) Everybody has to start somewhere. Neil Gaiman started with journalism, comics and novels. Probably one of the reasons British tv is getting stagnant, with it always being the same people writing and appearing on tv. 2) I'm sure the BF writers are familiar with a deadline, and Moffat only has to look at the back catalogue of those experienced writers. Its the Script Editors job. 3) I'm sure BF would be chuffed if one of their writers became a tv writer. Its irrelevant that series 10 is nearly in the can, fans have been asking for BF writers to write for tv, for years! Writers can only contribute if they have an idea. I will lay out the facts: 1) Like your Douglas Adams rebuttal, Gaiman entered the industry decades ago when the rules were different, as was the landscape. You are once again using out of date information. The only way to get in, other than starting at the bottom on soaps and other low budget productions, is A) Be buddy-buddy with a head honcho or B) Be an incredibly powerful figure in the business (see J.K Rowling), whose name no one will say no to. 2) Audio and television are different formats. As these scripts from the BBC Writersroom will demonstrate (audio: www.bbc.co.uk/writersroom/scripts/how-the-marquis-got-his-coat-back - television: www.bbc.co.uk/writersroom/scripts/the-night-manager) the format, structure, pacing and scene construction are not the same. It's like saying you can cook a steak, so you can change an engine. Good writing is good writing, but it won't matter if you can't present and articulate it well. Some of the greatest authors of all time have been tripped up in making the transition, just look up stories about F. Scott Fitzgerald and Vladimir Nabokov. Thus, deadlines and other rules will be different, and as said in the past, a script editor has got more important things to do, and more people to answer to, than be a glorified babysitter. (Note, I've also put up a link about script editors in the industry thread) 3) You took me out of context: this isn't about if BF would be proud or not, this is about scheduling. BF contract people months ahead of time (literally any behind the scenes feature on the releases will tell you this), same with NuWho. How can you work for x amount of stories for BF, going through meetings, discussions with your editor, drafting and redrafting and then do the same with NuWho? The thinner you spread, the lower the quality of output, which would be counterproductive to the extreme. Also, irrelevant how? If a series is well into production, by now going into post, how are you going to randomly shove in another episode (not a replacement, but an extra), which has to be written, budgeted, planned, casted, filmed and edited? The earliest you can expect is maybe S11, and that's 'if', since we don't know how Chibnail's writer's room will work or who he'll choose. Also, using the 'what fans want' argument is a double edged sword: there are sections of fandom that want a 'gritty adult' Who, that want a prequel series about little Theta and Koschei as 'desu kawaii time tots', and want BF to do a Clar/Ashildr boxset. We as fans are not always the ones who have the programme's best interests at heart because, well, we're fans and we want things a certain way, based our own interpretation of the franchise. Look at the diversity of views on this forum alone as an example. I would like BF writers onboard, but I'm not acting perpetually surprised they aren't being chosen, because I see the mindset of why and, above all else, the reality of why. Not saying I agree with or endorse it, but that is how things are done in real life. |
|
|
|
Post by escalus5 on Nov 25, 2016 16:38:51 GMT
2) Audio and television are different formats. As these scripts from the BBC Writersroom will demonstrate (audio: www.bbc.co.uk/writersroom/scripts/how-the-marquis-got-his-coat-back - television: www.bbc.co.uk/writersroom/scripts/the-night-manager) the format, structure, pacing and scene construction are not the same. It's like saying you can cook a steak, so you can change an engine. Good writing is good writing, but it won't matter if you can't present and articulate it well. Some of the greatest authors of all time have been tripped up in making the transition, just look up stories about F. Scott Fitzgerald and Vladimir Nabokov. Thus, deadlines and other rules will be different, and as said in the past, a script editor has got more important things to do, and more people to answer to, than be a glorified babysitter. (Note, I've also put up a link about script editors in the industry thread) It's awfully presumptuous to assume that people like Morris, Dorney, Fitton and Briggs (and many other BF writers) wouldn't be able to make the transition. This is not rocket science. The BF crew have already proven themselves writing for a difficult format, audio drama, and they're perfectly capable of writing for television. It's insulting to the writers to assume that they would need a "babysitter," something that hasn't even been borne out by history considering that Rob Shearman and Russell Davies had a very positive experience working together on Series 1. Of course none of us know what's going on in Moffat's head, but this idea of episodic television as an intricate science requiring decades of experience is ridiculous. Have you seen the crap that's been thrown on the screen over the past few years? I thought The Husbands of River Song was embarrassingly bad -- you could have passed the keyboard to a reasonably intelligent teenager and gotten a better story. |
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Nov 25, 2016 16:42:31 GMT
I will lay out the facts: 1) Like your Douglas Adams rebuttal, Gaiman entered the industry decades ago when the rules were different, as was the landscape. You are once again using out of date information. The only way to get in, other than starting at the bottom on soaps and other low budget productions, is A) Be buddy-buddy with a head honcho or B) Be an incredibly powerful figure in the business (see J.K Rowling), whose name no one will say no to. 2) Audio and television are different formats. As these scripts from the BBC Writersroom will demonstrate (audio: www.bbc.co.uk/writersroom/scripts/how-the-marquis-got-his-coat-back - television: www.bbc.co.uk/writersroom/scripts/the-night-manager) the format, structure, pacing and scene construction are not the same. It's like saying you can cook a steak, so you can change an engine. Good writing is good writing, but it won't matter if you can't present and articulate it well. Some of the greatest authors of all time have been tripped up in making the transition, just look up stories about F. Scott Fitzgerald and Vladimir Nabokov. Thus, deadlines and other rules will be different, and as said in the past, a script editor has got more important things to do, and more people to answer to, than be a glorified babysitter. (Note, I've also put up a link about script editors in the industry thread) 3) You took me out of context: this isn't about if BF would be proud or not, this is about scheduling. BF contract people months ahead of time (literally any behind the scenes feature on the releases will tell you this), same with NuWho. How can you work for x amount of stories for BF, going through meetings, discussions with your editor, drafting and redrafting and then do the same with NuWho? The thinner you spread, the lower the quality of output, which would be counterproductive to the extreme. Also, irrelevant how? If a series is well into production, by now going into post, how are you going to randomly shove in another episode (not a replacement, but an extra), which has to be written, budgeted, planned, casted, filmed and edited? The earliest you can expect is maybe S11, and that's 'if', since we don't know how Chibnail's writer's room will work or who he'll choose. Also, using the 'what fans want' argument is a double edged sword: there are sections of fandom that want a 'gritty adult' Who, that want a prequel series about little Theta and Koschei as 'desu kawaii time tots', and want BF to do a Clar/Ashildr boxset. We as fans are not always the ones who have the programme's best interests at heart because, well, we're fans and we want things a certain way, based our own interpretation of the franchise. Look at the diversity of views on this forum alone as an example. I would like BF writers onboard, but I'm not acting perpetually surprised they aren't being chosen, because I see the mindset of why and, above all else, the reality of why. Not saying I agree with or endorse it, but that is how things are done in real life. Would it not be worth the experiment of asking ONE BF author to write for the tv series? |
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Nov 25, 2016 16:57:18 GMT
2) Audio and television are different formats. As these scripts from the BBC Writersroom will demonstrate (audio: www.bbc.co.uk/writersroom/scripts/how-the-marquis-got-his-coat-back - television: www.bbc.co.uk/writersroom/scripts/the-night-manager) the format, structure, pacing and scene construction are not the same. It's like saying you can cook a steak, so you can change an engine. Good writing is good writing, but it won't matter if you can't present and articulate it well. Some of the greatest authors of all time have been tripped up in making the transition, just look up stories about F. Scott Fitzgerald and Vladimir Nabokov. Thus, deadlines and other rules will be different, and as said in the past, a script editor has got more important things to do, and more people to answer to, than be a glorified babysitter. (Note, I've also put up a link about script editors in the industry thread) It's awfully presumptuous to assume that people like Morris, Dorney, Fitton and Briggs (and many other BF writers) wouldn't be able to make the transition. This is not rocket science. The BF crew have already proven themselves writing for a difficult format, audio drama, and they're perfectly capable of writing for television. It's insulting to the writers to assume that they would need a "babysitter," something that hasn't even been borne out by history considering that Rob Shearman and Russell Davies had a very positive experience working together on Series 1. Of course none of us know what's going on in Moffat's head, but this idea of episodic television as an intricate science requiring decades of experience is ridiculous. Have you seen the crap that's been thrown on the screen over the past few years? I thought The Husbands of River Song was embarrassingly bad -- you could have passed the keyboard to a reasonably intelligent teenager and gotten a better story. I didn't say they couldn't: I'm simply providing a reason why they haven't. Not every writer is Bob Sherman (and he falls under my buddy buddy example anyway): some would need more coaching then others, and you can say 'but they're professionals': how many novelists try to do scripts and can't crack it, because they are used to what one format can do over the other. Browse the comments section of an article on writing if you're not convinced. The babysitting was not meant to be derogatory, just affirming that if something may, may, go wrong, it'd be a fine mess to fix. Also, you missed the point: this isn't about the quality of the output, it's about if they can expect you to do your job within a set time and budget. Moffat has the clout underneath him, so he can put out what he wishes. Sometimes it's gems like Blink, other times, dross like Husbands. I'm not the one making the rules here, and I'm not endorsing them. I'm just relaying how this happens, whether I agree with it or not (which is not the point of the thread). |
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Nov 25, 2016 17:02:06 GMT
I will lay out the facts: 1) Like your Douglas Adams rebuttal, Gaiman entered the industry decades ago when the rules were different, as was the landscape. You are once again using out of date information. The only way to get in, other than starting at the bottom on soaps and other low budget productions, is A) Be buddy-buddy with a head honcho or B) Be an incredibly powerful figure in the business (see J.K Rowling), whose name no one will say no to. 2) Audio and television are different formats. As these scripts from the BBC Writersroom will demonstrate (audio: www.bbc.co.uk/writersroom/scripts/how-the-marquis-got-his-coat-back - television: www.bbc.co.uk/writersroom/scripts/the-night-manager) the format, structure, pacing and scene construction are not the same. It's like saying you can cook a steak, so you can change an engine. Good writing is good writing, but it won't matter if you can't present and articulate it well. Some of the greatest authors of all time have been tripped up in making the transition, just look up stories about F. Scott Fitzgerald and Vladimir Nabokov. Thus, deadlines and other rules will be different, and as said in the past, a script editor has got more important things to do, and more people to answer to, than be a glorified babysitter. (Note, I've also put up a link about script editors in the industry thread) 3) You took me out of context: this isn't about if BF would be proud or not, this is about scheduling. BF contract people months ahead of time (literally any behind the scenes feature on the releases will tell you this), same with NuWho. How can you work for x amount of stories for BF, going through meetings, discussions with your editor, drafting and redrafting and then do the same with NuWho? The thinner you spread, the lower the quality of output, which would be counterproductive to the extreme. Also, irrelevant how? If a series is well into production, by now going into post, how are you going to randomly shove in another episode (not a replacement, but an extra), which has to be written, budgeted, planned, casted, filmed and edited? The earliest you can expect is maybe S11, and that's 'if', since we don't know how Chibnail's writer's room will work or who he'll choose. Also, using the 'what fans want' argument is a double edged sword: there are sections of fandom that want a 'gritty adult' Who, that want a prequel series about little Theta and Koschei as 'desu kawaii time tots', and want BF to do a Clar/Ashildr boxset. We as fans are not always the ones who have the programme's best interests at heart because, well, we're fans and we want things a certain way, based our own interpretation of the franchise. Look at the diversity of views on this forum alone as an example. I would like BF writers onboard, but I'm not acting perpetually surprised they aren't being chosen, because I see the mindset of why and, above all else, the reality of why. Not saying I agree with or endorse it, but that is how things are done in real life. Would it not be worth the experiment of asking ONE BF author to write for the tv series? Did I say they couldn't? As stated above, this thread to to provide an explanation as to why this hasn't happened. Cornell, Sherman, Roberts and Gatiss made the jump, but either had prior experience or got the go-ahead with Russell, then one of the biggest names in British TV (which falls in with my examples). Could it happen under Chibnail, and maybe he's had secret meetings with Magrs or Dorney? We don't know, but again, this is not a speculation/predictions thread. |
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Nov 25, 2016 19:08:32 GMT
Would it not be worth the experiment of asking ONE BF author to write for the tv series? Did I say they couldn't? As stated above, this thread to to provide an explanation as to why this hasn't happened. Cornell, Sherman, Roberts and Gatiss made the jump, but either had prior experience or got the go-ahead with Russell, then one of the biggest names in British TV (which falls in with my examples). Could it happen under Chibnail, and maybe he's had secret meetings with Magrs or Dorney? We don't know, but again, this is not a speculation/predictions thread. Shame we couldn't substitute Mark Gatiss series 10 script for a BF writer, especially after Sleep No More! |
|
|
|
Post by escalus5 on Nov 25, 2016 19:46:10 GMT
Gatiss wrote two of the worst Who episodes in recent memory.
But he turned his scripts in promptly, so I guess it's okay!
|
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Nov 25, 2016 21:02:45 GMT
Gatiss wrote two of the worst Who episodes in recent memory. But he turned his scripts in promptly, so I guess it's okay! Again, this is not about who is better. This is an informative thread, meant to dispel a common misconception. There are other ones on this site where you can vent on Gatiss and his output. |
|
|
|
Post by anothermanicmondas on Nov 26, 2016 17:34:08 GMT
I think we should remember
1) that Jonathon Morris does not actually know the reason (beyond the people at the BBC not being sufficiently impressed by the scripts he sent in)
and
2) Steven Moffat is subject to rules imposed by above (Russell may have had more freedom as he relaunched a "dead" show, whereas Steven took over a succesful show).
(I suspect that Night of the Doctor might have been inspired by the words of Paul McGann on the bonus disc with Dark Eyes)
Personally, I believe that Marc Platt, Jacqueline Rayner, James Goss, Nev Fountain and others could do great new Who stories if they got the chance. Whether they will, or if someone is deliberately drawing a line between the TV series and the other media (books, comics and audios) by keeping the writers different is something I can only wonder about.
|
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Nov 26, 2016 19:36:34 GMT
Gatiss wrote two of the worst Who episodes in recent memory. But he turned his scripts in promptly, so I guess it's okay! Again, this is not about who is better. This is an informative thread, meant to dispel a common misconception. There are other ones on this site where you can vent on Gatiss and his output. Well, you could say that there are far more better BF stories than Moffat Produced stories! |
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Nov 26, 2016 22:04:31 GMT
Again, this is not about who is better. This is an informative thread, meant to dispel a common misconception. There are other ones on this site where you can vent on Gatiss and his output. Well, you could say that there are far more better BF stories than Moffat Produced stories! This is an informative thread. There are other threads on this site where you can vent on Moffat. |
|
