|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Jun 17, 2017 22:25:39 GMT
Why would it be an Act II to AAiSaT? It would be a drama in its own right. The argument is that a docudrama of the show's death would be act two, with a potential future RTD era docudrama act three. I don't agree though because a docudrama of the show's original death in 1989 would be too morbid for a 60th anniversary docudrama. And I still counterargue that it would not be. Adventure wasn't all sunshine and rainbows either, containing several rather morbid scenes and elements, yet found a way to end on an upbeat note, despite the negative surrounding context. The right writer could easily do the same with Survival, as I and several others have argued on here. You're acting like it's impossible when it's not. An old actor losing his mind to dementia isn't exactly celebration material either, and yet, Gatiss made it work.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2017 22:34:49 GMT
The argument is that a docudrama of the show's death would be act two, with a potential future RTD era docudrama act three. I don't agree though because a docudrama of the show's original death in 1989 would be too morbid for a 60th anniversary docudrama. And I still counterargue that it would not be. Adventure wasn't all sunshine and rainbows either, containing several rather morbid scenes and elements, yet found a way to end on an upbeat note, despite the negative surrounding context. The right writer could easily do the same with Survival, as I and several others have argued on here. You're acting like it's impossible when it's not. An old actor losing his mind to dementia isn't exactly celebration material either, and yet, Gatiss made it work. Well, the end scene would be pretty easy to achieve. A sad looking Sylvester McCoy walks past a bookstore couple years later and spies the first New Adventures cover on the shelf. He opens the cover and begins reading as we pull out and see that the store is full of other figures that would contribute to Doctor Who in the Wilderness Years, everyone from Ben Aaronovitch to Nick Briggs, until we get to the last figure who's the latest Doctor. He/she smiles and we're off to the credits.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Jun 17, 2017 22:36:13 GMT
The argument is that a docudrama of the show's death would be act two, with a potential future RTD era docudrama act three. I don't agree though because a docudrama of the show's original death in 1989 would be too morbid for a 60th anniversary docudrama. And I still counterargue that it would not be. Adventure wasn't all sunshine and rainbows either, containing several rather morbid scenes and elements, yet found a way to end on an upbeat note, despite the negative surrounding context. The right writer could easily do the same with Survival, as I and several others have argued on here. You're acting like it's impossible when it's not. An old actor losing his mind to dementia isn't exactly celebration material either, and yet, Gatiss made it work. Maybe I'm alone but I really wouldn't want to see something about the show's cancellation in a year that should be about celebrating its success. To me that's like if a married couple renewed their vows in their anniversary year, and suddenly the bride said 'Hey, remember when our marriage was on the rocks for a few years, and then we divorced?'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2017 22:50:53 GMT
I'd like to see a docudrama on the birth of the 2005 revival. That would be the next big major Who history that needs to be covered. Yeah. But I doubt that - by that point - people will start telling the truth about how disastrous the production of that year was.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jun 18, 2017 0:07:29 GMT
A docudrama of the death of the programme would not be a good way to celebrate the show's 60th anniversary. You don't want to say the show failed at some point in its long history during an anniversary year. A docudrama of the RTD era would cover the same themes present in the first docudrama of going against the odds to achieve the impossible, and the importance of standing for what you believe is right rather than following what the superiors want. Plus it would also deliver the message that Doctor Who always continues - a show that is impossible to kill, rather than showing it as a show that has died before. I emphasize three act structure. The end of an act two appears like no hope, but in truth, it's setting up something bigger and better. Survival fits that to a T, and would indeed 'deliver the message that Doctor Who always continues - a show that is impossible to kill' as Survival was, well, about precisely that. The show didn't die, and kept on going in a new form. Arguably, that's Who to its very, very core - same show, new face. You continue to be correct.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Jun 18, 2017 12:45:39 GMT
I'd like to see a docudrama on the birth of the 2005 revival. That would be the next big major Who history that needs to be covered. Yeah. But I doubt that - by that point - people will start telling the truth about how disastrous the production of that year was. We already know some of it, and we don't need to know everything. Runners were treated badly, the production was poorly produced and managed. Enough there to make a compelling docudrama IMO.
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Jun 18, 2017 12:52:14 GMT
I'd like to see a docudrama on the birth of the 2005 revival. That would be the next big major Who history that needs to be covered. Yeah. But I doubt that - by that point - people will start telling the truth about how disastrous the production of that year was. In the DWM retrospective two years ago and in The Writer's Tale RTD is quite honest about the problems they faced in production, falling weeks behind very early on. What hasn't ever really been openly addressed (or at least not to my knowledge) is the exact nature of the dispute with Eccleston that led to him leaving.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Jun 18, 2017 13:44:59 GMT
Yeah. But I doubt that - by that point - people will start telling the truth about how disastrous the production of that year was. In the DWM retrospective two years ago and in The Writer's Tale RTD is quite honest about the problems they faced in production, falling weeks behind very early on. What hasn't ever really been openly addressed (or at least not to my knowledge) is the exact nature of the dispute with Eccleston that led to him leaving. Eccleston wasn't happy because the runners and other members of staff with lower ranks than the main production crew were treated poorly and with little respect. I remember him saying it ages ago in an interview. I think it was in 2013.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2017 14:10:59 GMT
Yeah. But I doubt that - by that point - people will start telling the truth about how disastrous the production of that year was. In the DWM retrospective two years ago and in The Writer's Tale RTD is quite honest about the problems they faced in production, falling weeks behind very early on. What hasn't ever really been openly addressed (or at least not to my knowledge) is the exact nature of the dispute with Eccleston that led to him leaving. This is true. Whenever Chris was asked why he left, his standard quote was 'it doesn't matter how I left; what matters is that I played Doctor Who for 13 episodes' - and really, I suppose he is right. There were conflicting reports of him being upset by how a junior staff-member was spoken to, but nothing concrete. Other reports were that he was only going to star in Doctor Who for a year anyway, because at that time, no-one knew if the show would continue past 'The Parting of the Ways' - indeed, RTD was doubtful it would!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2017 14:18:29 GMT
In the DWM retrospective two years ago and in The Writer's Tale RTD is quite honest about the problems they faced in production, falling weeks behind very early on. What hasn't ever really been openly addressed (or at least not to my knowledge) is the exact nature of the dispute with Eccleston that led to him leaving. Eccleston wasn't happy because the runners and other members of staff with lower ranks than the main production crew were treated poorly and with little respect. I remember him saying it ages ago in an interview. I think it was in 2013. I doubt people will reveal the WHOLE truth, though, for a long time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2017 14:19:07 GMT
Yeah. But I doubt that - by that point - people will start telling the truth about how disastrous the production of that year was. In the DWM retrospective two years ago and in The Writer's Tale RTD is quite honest about the problems they faced in production, falling weeks behind very early on. What hasn't ever really been openly addressed (or at least not to my knowledge) is the exact nature of the dispute with Eccleston that led to him leaving. Yeah, but I'd say that I'm not even sure if he's mentioned EVERYTHING.
|
|
|
Post by whiskeybrewer on Jun 18, 2017 15:49:17 GMT
And I still counterargue that it would not be. Adventure wasn't all sunshine and rainbows either, containing several rather morbid scenes and elements, yet found a way to end on an upbeat note, despite the negative surrounding context. The right writer could easily do the same with Survival, as I and several others have argued on here. You're acting like it's impossible when it's not. An old actor losing his mind to dementia isn't exactly celebration material either, and yet, Gatiss made it work. Well, the end scene would be pretty easy to achieve. A sad looking Sylvester McCoy walks past a bookstore couple years later and spies the first New Adventures cover on the shelf. He opens the cover and begins reading as we pull out and see that the store is full of other figures that would contribute to Doctor Who in the Wilderness Years, everyone from Ben Aaronovitch to Nick Briggs, until we get to the last figure who's the latest Doctor. He/she smiles and we're off to the credits. SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2017 15:56:01 GMT
As much as, yes, we'd all watch it...the idea of a docudrama about the end of the Classic Series is baffling from a realist POV. It took someone with as much clout as Gattis YEARS to get An Adventure off the ground and that was about the show'searly heyday when it took over TV. It had a compelling story about Hartnell's rise and decline to tell.
Now someone else with a similiar level of sway needs to convince the controller to fund a drama about when Doctor Who was getting it's worst ratings ever and was a bit of a joke with the public? Can't see it. The appeal of An Adventure was that it used the premise to tell stories about Hartnell, about Verity....where's the emotional investment in any story about McCoy coming from? What's the pathos behind Andrew Cartmel's motivation?
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Jun 18, 2017 17:18:38 GMT
As much as, yes, we'd all watch it...the idea of a docudrama about the end of the Classic Series is baffling from a realist POV. It took someone with as much clout as Gattis YEARS to get An Adventure off the ground and that was about the show'searly heyday when it took over TV. It had a compelling story about Hartnell's rise and decline to tell. Now someone else with a similiar level of sway needs to convince the controller to fund a drama about when Doctor Who was getting it's worst ratings ever and was a bit of a joke with the public? Can't see it. The appeal of An Adventure was that it used the premise to tell stories about Hartnell, about Verity....where's the emotional investment in any story about McCoy coming from? What's the pathos behind Andrew Cartmel's motivation? Plus with a RTD era docudrama Christopher Eccleston would make a far more interesting protagonist given how unsettled he was with what was going on behind the scenes.
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Jun 18, 2017 17:36:44 GMT
As much as, yes, we'd all watch it...the idea of a docudrama about the end of the Classic Series is baffling from a realist POV. It took someone with as much clout as Gattis YEARS to get An Adventure off the ground and that was about the show'searly heyday when it took over TV. It had a compelling story about Hartnell's rise and decline to tell. Now someone else with a similiar level of sway needs to convince the controller to fund a drama about when Doctor Who was getting it's worst ratings ever and was a bit of a joke with the public? Can't see it. The appeal of An Adventure was that it used the premise to tell stories about Hartnell, about Verity....where's the emotional investment in any story about McCoy coming from? What's the pathos behind Andrew Cartmel's motivation? Plus with a RTD era docudrama Christopher Eccleston would make a far more interesting protagonist given how unsettled he was with what was going on behind the scenes. Him leaving apparently unsatisfied with the way stuff was managed behind the scenes would be a bit of a downbeat ending.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Jun 18, 2017 17:53:20 GMT
Plus with a RTD era docudrama Christopher Eccleston would make a far more interesting protagonist given how unsettled he was with what was going on behind the scenes. Him leaving apparently unsatisfied with the way stuff was managed behind the scenes would be a bit of a downbeat ending. That would be the moment in act three where it looks like all is lost...then the hero triumphs as the ratings come in for Rose and the new series of Doctor Who is a SUCCESS.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2017 19:46:21 GMT
As much as, yes, we'd all watch it...the idea of a docudrama about the end of the Classic Series is baffling from a realist POV. It took someone with as much clout as Gattis YEARS to get An Adventure off the ground and that was about the show'searly heyday when it took over TV. It had a compelling story about Hartnell's rise and decline to tell. Now someone else with a similiar level of sway needs to convince the controller to fund a drama about when Doctor Who was getting it's worst ratings ever and was a bit of a joke with the public? Can't see it. The appeal of An Adventure was that it used the premise to tell stories about Hartnell, about Verity....where's the emotional investment in any story about McCoy coming from? What's the pathos behind Andrew Cartmel's motivation? Plus with a RTD era docudrama Christopher Eccleston would make a far more interesting protagonist given how unsettled he was with what was going on behind the scenes. That's not going to happen either. Where's the "story"? Where's the heart? There was one good idea for a Who docudrama and we got it. It used the facade of being about Doctor Who's creation to tell a very universal story about aging, success, failure and struggle. You don't get that with any old era of the show.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Jun 18, 2017 20:16:10 GMT
Plus with a RTD era docudrama Christopher Eccleston would make a far more interesting protagonist given how unsettled he was with what was going on behind the scenes. That's not going to happen either. Where's the "story"? Where's the heart? There was one good idea for a Who docudrama and we got it. It used the facade of being about Doctor Who's creation to tell a very universal story about aging, success, failure and struggle. You don't get that with any old era of the show. The story is in Christopher Eccleston's disgusted reaction to the behind the scenes chaos. The heart is how he acts on it, and manages to turn a badly produced/organised production from what could have been a failure into a massive primetime success.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2017 20:20:11 GMT
That's not going to happen either. Where's the "story"? Where's the heart? There was one good idea for a Who docudrama and we got it. It used the facade of being about Doctor Who's creation to tell a very universal story about aging, success, failure and struggle. You don't get that with any old era of the show. The story is in Christopher Eccleston's disgusted reaction to the behind the scenes chaos. The heart is how he acts on it, and manages to turn a badly produced/organised production from what could have been a failure into a massive primetime success. Yeah..I'm sure Julie, Russell, Phil and Chris will all sign off on that being made.
|
|
|
Post by doomlord on Jun 18, 2017 22:26:22 GMT
The three act structure is great for a single TV episode or film but not for individual episodes or films. Isn't a single film and individual film the same thing? A docudrama on the RTD era on the other hand would be much more optimistic. Optimism is what you would want to show in an anniversary year, not cynicism. We already know some of it, and we don't need to know everything. Runners were treated badly, the production was poorly produced and managed. Enough there to make a compelling docudrama IMO. That doesn't sound very optimistic to me. I'd rather a film that dealt with the cancellation, the heartache of all involved (end of Act I), yet against all the odds, Doctor Who lived on, exploring the wilderness years. Here we could be introduced to a young RTD still doing his children's television stuff as an anchor, plus the many other milestone instances that dotted along the way, the fan-organised BBC phone-in, it winning the top 'Best Drama' award the corporation had ever produced during the celebration of 60 years of BBC television broadcasting, ahead of such ratings heavyweights as EastEnders and Casualty, much to the embarrassment of the people whom ran the BBC. The conventions, the New Adventures books (RTD penning a few), the Americans wanting to produce the show, the nearly made films falling through until finally the 1996 TV Movie. RTD making waves once again from his other acclaimed dramas (end of Act II). Then of course the light at the end of the tunnel as DW is seriously a strong contender for a return as now all the people we've been introduced to in Act II are in the driving seat (the start of Act III), the creation of the new series and the gathering of the most talented people around from writers, actors, monster makers, designers, SFX, etc. etc. Highs and lows and highs, that's drama. ETA. plus it's educational.
|
|