Andrew Cartmel v JNT
Dave Roy
<st...@redimp.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> Was Cartmel a bad script editor, or needlessly let down by
> cartoony production values?
Putting aside for a moment whether or not I think they were bad, I
would say that the answer to your question depends on whether or not
you actually liked the scripts. If your only problem with the shows
were production values and acting, but you thought the stories were
good, then I'd say that he wasn't a bad script editor.
On the other hand, if you didn't like the scripts, and you felt that
not even Star Wars type production values could save them, then yes,
he was a bad script editor.
IOW, I don't think one has anything to do with the other.
I think that a better question would be: Was the 7th Doctor era more
harmed by a bad script editor or by cartoony production values?
Dave Roy
Dave Roy
dburn...@aol.com (DBurns6554) wrote:
> writers. Another 33% of the problem was the script editor, but
> there are times when some scripts are beyond the help of a script
> editor.
Then isn't it time to throw out the script?
I don't know the details so maybe I'm wrong, but given the fact that
there were only 14 episodes during the McCoy years, wouldn't there be
enough lead time to do something like that?
Dave Roy
Steve Day
production values?
---
How many Doctor Who fans does it take to change a lightbulb?
None, they just sit around and wait for it to come back on.
--
DBurns6554
>Was Cartmel a bad script editor, or needlessly let down by cartoony
>production values?
>
Since there seemed to be a lack of chemistry from the beginning idea to the
final product during the Cartmel era, I think you could divide the blame three
ways.
33% of the problem was the writers. Another 33% of the problem was the script
editor, but there are times when some scripts are beyond the help of a script
editor. The final 33% of the problem was the producer that was no longer in
producing Doctor Who.
DBurns6554
>> there are times when some scripts are beyond the help of a script
>> editor.
D. Roy
>Then isn't it time to throw out the script?
Well, during the last four or five years of the program, JNT was not planning
each new season well in advance (an example would be Trial Of A Timelord).
According to Eric Saward, "It was as much an 'idea off the top of my head'
suggestion to just get things moving. This was July. We'd done nothing for four
months, apart from John going to conventions in America, which was the other
thing that pissed me off. It was as though he wanted to go to the conventions,
but wanted to show everyone that nothing was distracting him from his duties as
producer, so he would do the lunatic thing of coming back Sunday/Monday
morning, coming into his office, and just shutting the door and going to
sleep."
JNT also was not on hand for the script editors and the directors that needed
to see him about Doctor Who. "But the one thing that again aggravates when
someone takes a 2 1/2 to 3 hour lunch break every day you know that you're not
going to be able to speak with him during that time." and "I was standing
outside his office, needed to see him and two of his directors needed to see
him, and he'd been there chatting on the phone, as far as the secretary was
concerned, for at least an hour. It wasn't just once, it was often, and with
people waiting to see him - waiting to make the goddamn show he was supposed to
be the producer of."
If JNT was supposed to be the producer of Doctor Who for the last four seasons,
then somebody in power should have relieved him of duty. Going to conventions,
sleeping in the office, taking long lunch breaks that results in ignoring the
script editor/directors, and chatting on the phone is not producing Doctor Who.
D. Roy
>I don't know the details so maybe I'm wrong, but given the fact that
>there were only 14 episodes during the McCoy years, wouldn't there be
>enough lead time to do something like that?
You make an excellent point, but that was not the case. When each season ended,
JNT had plenty of time to hire good writers and good directors for the
following season. Planning ahead is one critical thing a producer must do for
each new season. When a new televised season starts in September and you don't
start planning until July, then you will have problems.
JNT didn't plan to fail, he just failed to plan.
Exorse
>production values?
>
Both.
~~~-~~~-~~~-~~~-~~~-~~~
Scene 2: Rocky terrain (any quarry will do)
Doctor: Shh! Quiet, Exorse - it's the Daleks!
Exorse: (shouting) You're damn right it's the Daleks!
(The Doctor and Exorse are exterminated by some Daleks)
Mark Duncan
original ideas floating around in this era, the facts are fairly plain to
see as to why things went "tits up!" and that was that JNT simply did not
get on with his job when he should have and of course as was stated earlier,
the beeb should have punted him out on his arse after the debacle that was
"Trial" not to mention the ridiculous other exesses of his helmship.
Mark
Exorse <exo...@aol.commerce.us> wrote in message
news:20000330222408...@ng-ca1.aol.com...
TobiasVaughn
>
>>> writers. Another 33% of the problem was the script editor, but
>>> there are times when some scripts are beyond the help of a script
>>> editor.
>
>D. Roy
>>Then isn't it time to throw out the script?
>
>Well, during the last four or five years of the program, JNT was not planning
>each new season well in advance (an example would be Trial Of A Timelord).
>According to Eric Saward, "It was as much an 'idea off the top of my head'
>suggestion to just get things moving. This was July. We'd done nothing for
>four
>months, apart from John going to conventions in America, which was the other
>thing that pissed me off.
He can't have meant July 1996. Shooting would have
been well underway by this time. I suppose he meant
July 1995, which would tie in with the "four months,"
since the show had been on hiatus about that long.
>D. Roy
>>I don't know the details so maybe I'm wrong, but given the fact that
>>there were only 14 episodes during the McCoy years, wouldn't there be
>>enough lead time to do something like that?
>
>You make an excellent point, but that was not the case. When each season
>ended,
>JNT had plenty of time to hire good writers and good directors for the
>following season.
It's tough to do without a pickup from the BBC for
the next season, which could come as late as March.
And generally speaking, it is the script editor who
hires writers. Before the official pickup, the script
editor can have informal discussions with writers, as
Cartmel seems to have done for the ultimately
unmade Season 27, for instance, but he can't
commission anything.
DBurns6554
>He can't have meant July 1996. Shooting would have
>been well underway by this time. I suppose he meant
>July 1995, which would tie in with the "four months,"
>since the show had been on hiatus about that long.
I like your sense of humor.
Tobias Vaughn
>It's tough to do without a pickup from the BBC for
>the next season, which could come as late as March.
If JNT and the script editors would have gotten together and planned at least
something in advance, then they wouldn't have been caught with their pants down
at the last moment.
Tobias Vaughn
>And generally speaking, it is the script editor who
>hires writers.
And the producer hired the script editor. If the script editor is fouling up
with the decisions he/she is making, then the producer has to take the
responsibility for the people he hires.
Tobias Vaughn
>Before the official pickup, the script
>editor can have informal discussions with writers, as
>Cartmel seems to have done for the ultimately
>unmade Season 27, for instance, but he can't
>commission anything.
>
Then the script editor should be working with the producer on planning new
seasons. A little bit of communication and advance planning could make all the
difference in the world.
TobiasVaughn
>
>Tobias Vaughn
>>He can't have meant July 1996. Shooting would have
>>been well underway by this time. I suppose he meant
>>July 1995, which would tie in with the "four months,"
>>since the show had been on hiatus about that long.
>
>I like your sense of humor.
Then you'll find this hilarious. I've got the Sixth Doctor
Handbook here. By 1 July 1996, they had already
finished taping the first eight episodes of "Trial." So
it would be a pretty good trick if they weren't written
by then.
Charles Martin
tobias...@aol.com (TobiasVaughn) wrote:
> He can't have meant July 1996. Shooting would have
> been well underway by this time. I suppose he meant
> July 1995, which would tie in with the "four months,"
> since the show had been on hiatus about that long.
Ah, sorry, I forgot to tell you, didn't I? You have to subtract 10 years
from every calendar date Mr. Vaughn gives you. Otherwise he's perfectly
all right! Perfectly!
--
_Chas_
(it's "bigfoot" in the email addy, btw)
Need a really funny book? Check out Liz Langley's "Pop Tart : A Fresh, Frosted
Sugar Rush Through Our Pre-Packaged Culture" at Amazon.com (under $10!)
Charles Martin
DBurns6554
Tobias Vaughn
>Then you'll find this hilarious. I've got the Sixth Doctor
>Handbook here. By 1 July 1996, they had already
>finished taping the first eight episodes of "Trial." So
>it would be a pretty good trick if they weren't written
>by then.
By July 1996? Hell, that means they already made the movie with Paul McGann
before they finished The Trial Of A Timelord.
DBurns6554
>Ah, sorry, I forgot to tell you, didn't I? You have to subtract 10 years
>from every calendar date Mr. Vaughn gives you. Otherwise he's perfectly
>all right! Perfectly!
Well, that explains everything. I was beginning to wonder what type of Tardis
he was using to change the history of the timestream.
DBurns6554
>Then you'll find this hilarious. I've got the Sixth Doctor
>Handbook here. By 1 July 1996, they had already
>finished taping the first eight episodes of "Trial." So
>it would be a pretty good trick if they weren't written
>by then.
There is a bit of a problem. I am currently looking at "Doctor Who - The
Eighties" by Howe, Stammers, and Walker, and on page 85 they show "Two pivotal
figures in the proceedings would be prosecuting counsel - the Valeyard - and
the judge - otherwise known as the Inquisitor - for whom John Nathan-Turner and
Saward worked out character notes dated 5 July 1985."
If they already started filming prior to the incident mentioned above, then
they should have met and worked out the character notes a long time before
this. If what you say is true, then they already filmed 8 episodes when they
were not 100% sure on the characters of the Inquisitor and the Valeyard. They
are talking about characters that have appeared in 8 episodes already, and now
they are beginning to compare notes? What sort of inefficiency is this?
On page 86 "On 9 July 1985, all four writers travelled to the BBC's Threshold
House offices for an initial discussion with Nathan-Turner and Saward, who
explained the format to them and briefed them on their respective
contributions."
This is another case of them not preparing well ahead of time. If they had
already done half the filming, then this meeting should have been completed
before any filming took place.
DBurns6554
>He can't have meant July 1996. Shooting would have
>been well underway by this time. I suppose he meant
>July 1995, which would tie in with the "four months,"
>since the show had been on hiatus about that long.
July of 85? Now that sounds more reasonable for preparation, but that is
damnable misery of it all. If they had well over a year to prepare for the new
season, then they should have come up with something better. When they were put
on "hiatus", then that should have been a wakeup call for them to produce a
better product.
As soon as each season ended, JNT and the script editor should have been
talking to writers and directors by planning ahead and working on possibilities
in case "Plan-A" failed.
David Brunt
>Mr. Vaughn
>>Then you'll find this hilarious. I've got the Sixth Doctor
>>Handbook here. By 1 July 1996, they had already
>>finished taping the first eight episodes of "Trial." So
>>it would be a pretty good trick if they weren't written
>>by then.
>
>There is a bit of a problem. I am currently looking at "Doctor Who - The
>Eighties" by Howe, Stammers, and Walker, and on page 85 they show "Two
>pivotal figures in the proceedings would be prosecuting counsel - the
>Valeyard - and the judge - otherwise known as the Inquisitor - for
>whom John Nathan-Turner and Saward worked out character
>notes dated 5 July 1985." If they already started filming prior to
>the incident mentioned above,
So shoot him for hitting a *9* key instead of an *8*...... He obviously
meant to write 1986.
>they should have met and worked out the character notes a long time before
>this. If what you say is true, then they already filmed 8 episodes when
>they were not 100% sure on the characters of the Inquisitor and the
>Valeyard. They are talking about characters that have appeared in 8
>episodes already, and now they are beginning to compare notes?
>What sort of inefficiency is this?
Er, Dave. That story was filmed almost a year later in April/May *1986*.
The fact that the characters of the Valeyard, Inquisitor and Mel were
developed by the summer of 1985 showed that they did have some pre-planning
on that season. Indeed, it had the longest run-in of any season in the
show's history. It also had one of the biggest problems in getting
workable stories (the record goes to Season 6's abandoned stories if it
matters). How much of that falls to Saward not having any interest in the
series' future at that time is debatable.
>On page 86 "On 9 July 1985, all four writers travelled to the BBC's
>Threshold House offices for an initial discussion with Nathan-Turner
>and Saward, who explained the format to them and briefed them on
>their respective contributions."
This is another case of them not preparing well ahead of time. If they had
>already done half the filming, then this meeting should have been
>completed before any filming took place.
Aren't you getting mixed up with dates here?
David
DBurns6554
>So shoot him for hitting a *9* key instead of an *8*...... He obviously
>meant to write 1986.
Shoot him? No, my trigger finger is not that itchy. At least not yet.
Brunt
>Aren't you getting mixed up with the dates here?
Yeah, I admit that error, but this is quite shocking to know that they had that
much time to prepare for the new season, and then they came up with The Trial
Of A Timelord. To build an entire season around one story is a hell of a risk.
After the hiatus, there were promises that the series would come back better
than ever. I was a little surprised by the final product on the screen. I must
admit that I liked the courtroom setting, but I was kind of hoping for better.
David Brunt
>Vaughn
>>He can't have meant July 1996. Shooting would have
>>been well underway by this time. I suppose he meant
>>July 1995, which would tie in with the "four months,"
>>since the show had been on hiatus about that long.
>
>July of 85? Now that sounds more reasonable for preparation, but that is
>new season, then they should have come up with something better.
>When they were put on "hiatus", then that should have been a
>wakeup call for them to produce a better product.
But when neither Saward or JNT really wanted to be in their jobs, their
work was going to suffer in both areas. Because of Saward's lack of
interest the scripts suffered - when they could get any workable.
Arguably, the on-screen material generally *looked* better than before, so
it wasn't a production problem, merely the scripting side.... And that was
Saward's job to get right - not JNT's.
>As soon as each season ended, JNT and the script editor should have been
>talking to writers and directors by planning ahead and working on
>possibilities in case "Plan-A" failed.
Production on the following season usually began just prior to the end of
production on the previous block - i.e. some six months prior to the start
of recording around April. Season 24 was a last-minute rush job because
JNT had been led to believe he was moving to another series, yet was thrown
back into his old seat with a job of getting new scripts, a new Script
Editor and lead actor within a four month period. All then had to settle
in. Season 24 had half the preparation time with a Script Editor thrown in
at the deep end. That season suffered from a rush job and it shows in
places, but if a new Producer had come in at that point it would have been
the same sort of patchy work as there wasn't enough time to plan beyond one
story.
David
David Brunt
>Brunt
>>So shoot him for hitting a *9* key instead of an *8*...... He obviously
>>meant to write 1986.
>
>Shoot him? No, my trigger finger is not that itchy. At least not yet.
Good to hear.
>Brunt
>>Aren't you getting mixed up with the dates here?
>
>Yeah, I admit that error, but this is quite shocking to know that they had
>that much time to prepare for the new season, and then they
>came up with The Trial Of A Timelord. To build an entire
>season around one story is a hell of a risk.
Agreed. Shooting themselves in the foot by alienating viewers with a 14
week apparently single story. If they'd kept quiet about the links - like
the 'Key to Time' season, then they might have picked some viewers along
the way.
>After the hiatus, there were promises that the series would come back
>better than ever. I was a little surprised by the final product on the
>screen. I must admit that I liked the courtroom setting, but I was
>kind of hoping for better.
Hindsight's a wonderful thing. What would have sounded good on paper
doesn't always make good TV and it does have the ring of a discussion that
should have had more thought made to it.
Of course, if a new Producer and Script Editor had been appointed to take
over it could have been, at least, very different.
David
Pope Snarky Goodfella of the undulating cable, JM, CK, POEE, KOTHASK
>
> Steve
> >Was Cartmel a bad script editor, or needlessly let down by cartoony
> >production values?
> >
>
> final product during the Cartmel era, I think you could divide the blame three
> ways.
> editor, but there are times when some scripts are beyond the help of a script
> producing Doctor Who.
No, four ways -- I won't let Grade and Powell off lightly -- they set
out to sabotage Who for their own pathetic reasons, and ultimately got
it put on *hiatus* -- indefinitely -- even if Grade was no longer with
the Boob to celebrate dark vengeance on the source of his
*embarrassment*, he was (and still is, damn him) around in show biz,
which is grating enough, and I don't have enough time to tell you how I
feel about Jonathan Powell (I'd like to go to sleep eventually...);
plus, we should leave ten percent aside for Thatcher and Whitehouse (the
short-sighted policies of one, and the sheer...desperate need the other
had to be boarded up, before MG decided to make damn sure there'd be no
more overt violence in DW); otherwise, I agree with you about JN-T, I
suppose -- it wasn't his fault, he'd been dealing with gits in his
higher-ups for too long, but all the same, losing heart like that
ultimately killed it -- the producer has to _believe_ in his product,
and he'd lost the capacity to believe, I think. It's sad, really,
because things were picking up at the end, but he'd lost faith in it. As
I've mentioned previously, I like half the McCoy era quite well, and can
take or leave (but prefer to leave) the rest -- the Aaronovitch stories
didn't work terribly well for me, on-screen, and neither did SN or the
first three stories of S24. Blaming it all on the novice script editor
isn't really fair, either -- not that you are, of course -- he was
learning on the fly (and he was picked, remember, *because* he was a
novice, not in spite of it, so he'd bring a *fresh approach* -- failure
just sort of goes with the territory...BTW, have I mentioned lately how
painful I found the *cliffhanger* to watch? Liked the rest of the story,
but that bit sucked like deep space...), and his writers were all
novices like him, for the same reason (and the only vets who'd work with
JN-T by that time were you-know-who); so we can blame bad writing on the
writers, perhaps, but they were pretty new at it, and we can blame
Cartmel, but so was he, and we can blame JN-T, but...that just seems
like killing the scapegoat -- playing into the hands of the
scapegoaters: Grade and Powell, plus Grade's successor, and beyond them,
ol' Mags herself, and Bloody-minded Mary -- everyone who either hated
the show, was sick of it, or wanted it gone for whatever reason. JN-T
was one of _us_, after all.
My, that's a long one, isn't it? Please don't take this as a flame,
David -- not of you, anyroad....;-)
--
========================================================================
Hail Eris! All hail Discordia!! We must stick apart!!!
Lola, called Snarky, The Chocolate Snark, Queen of the Snarks of Ærisia;
Queen of Rice; loud and flaming queer Demon of Mockery and Silliness,
Demon Lord of Confusion; Pope Snarky Goodfella of the undulating cable,
JM, CK, POEE, KOTHASK
The Principia Discordia: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~tilt/principia/body.html
ADRIC Awards 2000 now open! Email Sna...@yahoo.ca or
feeto...@home.com -- or even the_choco...@my-deja.com -- with
your second-round submissions. Lurkers, posters, come one, come all!
Francis Shailes
entrepreneur as Sir Lew Grade (the only man in time and space who would ever
bankroll something as weird and wonderful as The Prisoner, not to mention
all those other wonderfully entertaining ITC series) should be related to
someone as cynical and destructive as the man who truly killed Dr Who (and
murdered a lot of children's dreams as a result -- he is the Anti-Santa!!).
Jonathan Powell - where he now? Isn't he destroying some other station?
The Valeyard's Cap
Pope Snarky Goodfella of the undulating cable, JM, CK, POEE, KOTHASK
<feeto...@home.com> wrote in message news:38E4BB09...@home.com...
Adam Richards
<st...@redimp.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>Was Cartmel a bad script editor, or needlessly let down by cartoony
>production values?
I think Cartmel had some great ideas and a keen eye for the oddball
stories, but didn't care about stuff like scripts over-running, or
whether they made sense to a casual viewer; he was more interested in
artyness and surrealism. Having said that, I didn't generally approve
of all of his ideas; many of them seemed un-Who-ish to me.
Wheras JN-T spent the money, and often none-too wisely IMHO. For every
triumph there seemed to be two disasters, and a persistence of
underachievement and light-entertainment trappings used without much
care or restraint.
I liked the Davison era a lot, and thought Colin's tenure showed
promise, but really, after "Caves of Androzani" I think he turned into
a monster...
======================================================
Adam Richards Ad...@roblang.demon.co.uk
DBurns6554
>>season around one story is a hell of a risk.
Brunt
>Agreed. Shooting themselves in the foot by alienating viewers with a 14
>week apparently single story.
I feel the same. If the viewers didn't like the first episode or two, then what
is the incentive for tuning into the same story the following week?
DBurns6554
>No, four ways -- I won't let Grade and Powell off lightly -- they set
>out to sabotage Who for their own pathetic reasons, and ultimately got
>it put on *hiatus*
That is also true. When you have idiots like these calling the shots from high
above, then that is a problem that could be insurmountable.
Francis Shailes
promise, but that after Androzani (can I call it Caves - it's easier to
type, especially when I'm pished on rum) he became a monster, is a bit rich!
After all in Caves he only spoke a couple of lines! Anyway, I like Colin as
a person but don't like the way the programme went - Colin would have liked
to be a quirky Hartnell/Baker "alien" and the production team weren't
interested (in anything). Look at his acting in the "desert death" scene in
Varos to see his true range -- I've been watching/listening to all the
stories from the pilot to "Curse of Fatal Death" (missing out only
Dimensions in Time as it is tedious rot) and that scene of the Doctor's
final 'giving up' and, in his own mind at least, dying, is as good as
Davison's death scene (and that was brilliant.... I love the way that after
the rush of Logopolis, Davison seems prepared for the last minute nature of
the Androzani sequence -- oops should have typed Caves it's quicker -- and
gives one of the best performances of his life outside "Mrs Bradley
Investigates" denouement.)
I love the Davison era too. Even Adric wasn't too bad -- it must be
jealousy. Frankly Matthew's acting was no worse than Katy Manning's (and
she was tearjerking in The Green Death), Lalla Ward's (so much more naive
than Mary Tamm), or any of the guest actors (stand up Stike in State of
Decay) in fact at the age of 14 I totally believed in Adric, so there.
Enough drunken waffle, Ever Yours,
The Valeyard's Cap
Adam Richards <Ad...@roblang.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ioh9es4qt25l75v8u...@4ax.com...
Francis Shailes
DBurns6554
>Perhaps they wanted to recreate the KEY TO TIME (Season 16)? Or at least
>something with that sort of epic scope.
Styre
> TRIAL mixed everything up into - basically - "flashbacks" and
>"flashforwards". That was the thing that bugged me the most about it.
I wouldn't actually say that it bothered me, but the trial sequences kind of
reminded me a little of "The Menagerie" from Star Trek.
Dave Roy
<fr...@fshailes.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> I think I understand what you mean, though by saying that Colin's
> era showed promise, but that after Androzani (can I call it Caves
> - it's easier to type, especially when I'm pished on rum) he
> became a monster, is a bit rich! After all in Caves he only spoke
> a couple of lines!
Uh, not to speak for Adam here, but I think he's talking about JNT
turning into a monster, not Colin.
Adam, please correct me if I'm wrong.
Dave Roy
Styre1
> Yeah, I admit that error, but this is quite shocking to know that they had
that
> much time to prepare for the new season, and then they came up with The
Trial
> Of A Timelord. To build an entire season around one story is a hell of a
risk.
> After the hiatus, there were promises that the series would come back
better
> than ever. I was a little surprised by the final product on the screen. I
must
> admit that I liked the courtroom setting, but I was kind of hoping for
better.
Perhaps they wanted to recreate the KEY TO TIME (Season 16)? Or at least
something with that sort of epic scope. If so, their main failure was to
have all the "real time" action going on in a single setting, and the
stories themselves being "archives from the Matrix". KEY was a series of
independant stories that would have worked well on their own with just a
little work. TRIAL mixed everything up into - basically - "flashbacks" and
"flashforwards". That was the thing that bugged me the most about it.
STYRE
Mike C.
>No, four ways -- I won't let Grade and Powell off lightly -- they set
>out to sabotage Who for their own pathetic reasons, and ultimately got
>it put on *hiatus*
Burns:
>That is also true. When you have idiots >like these calling the shots from
high
>above, then that is a problem that could >be insurmountable.
There's only one thing we can do now: Get em all and make them "pay"!!!!!
-Fett
-"And if you're not down with that, I got 2 words for ya!: SUCK IT!"
Pope Snarky Goodfella of the undulating cable, JM, CK, POEE, KOTHASK
>
> Snarky
> >No, four ways -- I won't let Grade and Powell off lightly -- they set
> >out to sabotage Who for their own pathetic reasons, and ultimately got
> >it put on *hiatus*
>
> above, then that is a problem that could be insurmountable.
Ohhhh, that felt _good_! A little agreement works wonders, I tell ya....
<sniffle> :-)
Pope Snarky Goodfella of the undulating cable, JM, CK, POEE, KOTHASK
>
> Snarky
> >No, four ways -- I won't let Grade and Powell off lightly -- they set
> >out to sabotage Who for their own pathetic reasons, and ultimately got
> >it put on *hiatus*
>
> >That is also true. When you have idiots >like these calling the shots from
> high
> >above, then that is a problem that could >be insurmountable.
>
Force 'em to watch SN and TatR over and over...that'll sort 'em
out....>B-D>
Pope Snarky Goodfella of the undulating cable, JM, CK, POEE, KOTHASK
>
> Hmm, personally I feel that conceptually there were a lot of very good and
> original ideas floating around in this era, the facts are fairly plain to
> see as to why things went "tits up!" and that was that JNT simply did not
> get on with his job when he should have and of course as was stated earlier,
> the beeb should have punted him out on his arse after the debacle that was
> "Trial" not to mention the ridiculous other exesses of his helmship.
Attention: Jonathan Powell, the lying git.
MAPPY
>
> >To build an entire
> >>season around one story is a hell of a risk.
>
> >Agreed. Shooting themselves in the foot by alienating viewers with a 14
> >week apparently single story.
>
> I feel the same. If the viewers didn't like the first episode or two, then what
> is the incentive for tuning into the same story the following week?
Let alone, the incentive to tune into a story that they know will last
the entire season run. And even if they didn't know, tuning in later in
the season to find it is still the same story and not knowing what the
hell is going on certainly hammers in the final nail.
--
MAPPY the Mouse - Pro Colin Baker Troll Extraordinaire ^_^
High on Life, Cheese and Caffeine >^.^< Squeak!
--
Piro-chan's Page - http://www.pirotess.net - Anime Style Art
(Normal, Bishounen and Shounen-Ai) by Pirotess ^_^
Anthony Brown
dburn...@aol.com (DBurns6554) wrote:
> Tobias Vaughn
> >He can't have meant July 1996. Shooting would have
> >been well underway by this time. I suppose he meant
> >July 1995, which would tie in with the "four months,"
> >since the show had been on hiatus about that long.
>
> I like your sense of humor.
>
> Tobias Vaughn
> >It's tough to do without a pickup from the BBC for
> >the next season, which could come as late as March.
>
> If JNT and the script editors would have gotten together and
planned at
> least
> something in advance, then they wouldn't have been caught
with their
> pants down
> at the last moment.
The screen writers' unions frown on what's called speculative
writing - asking a writer to outline ideas without a formal
commission following directly should they prove suitable - (as
opposed to unsolicited writing, where the writer sends
something in enitrely off his own back, without prompting).
And with good reason, because it is asking a professional to
work for nothing.
Of course, as with most things in TV, times have changed
somewhat over the last decade.
`
Anthony Brown
D...@btinternet.com (David Brunt) wrote:
> DBurns6554 wrote in message
> >Brunt
> >>So shoot him for hitting a *9* key instead of an *8*......
He
> obviously
> >>meant to write 1986.
> >
> >Shoot him? No, my trigger finger is not that itchy. At
least not yet.
>
> Good to hear.
>
> >Brunt
> >>Aren't you getting mixed up with the dates here?
> >
> >Yeah, I admit that error, but this is quite shocking to
know that they
> had
> >that much time to prepare for the new season, and then they
> >came up with The Trial Of A Timelord. To build an entire
> >season around one story is a hell of a risk.
>
> Agreed. Shooting themselves in the foot by alienating
viewers with a 14
> week apparently single story. If they'd kept quiet about
the links -
> like
> the 'Key to Time' season, then they might have picked some
viewers along
> the way.
Equally, if it had come back with a bang of 9 million or more,
then having one tale leading up to a great ending (which
should have been in mind from the start - that's the real
criticism of the production team here, I reckon) might have
minimised defections. Whereas, with the hindsight of a 4
million start, not having new stories as entry points was a
bad mistake.
Anthony Brown
Ad...@roblang.demon.co.uk (Adam Richards) wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2000 00:44:18 +0100, Steve Day
> <st...@redimp.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Was Cartmel a bad script editor, or needlessly let down by
cartoony
> >production values?
>
> I think Cartmel had some great ideas and a keen eye for the
oddball
> stories, but didn't care about stuff like scripts
over-running, or
> whether they made sense to a casual viewer; he was more
interested in
> artyness and surrealism. Having said that, I didn't
generally approve
> of all of his ideas; many of them seemed un-Who-ish to me.
>
IMHO Cartmel had some great iconoclastic ideas, but didn't
have the experience needed to make them work in a mainstream,
on during dinner, TV show. His mistake was then to hire young
turks as writers. Robert Holmes (ignoring the obvious problem)
script editing the 7th Doctor writers might well have worked
well; Cartmel chucking weird and wonderful ideas from cutting
edge F culture at experienced TV hacks might have done (though
season 17 suggests it might not also have run into troubles).
As it is, they all learnt on the job and took two years to
learn the ropes and produce a great season 26.
Adam Richards
You're right, but to give Francis due credit, my comment was a bit
disconnected there, sorry!
======================================================
Adam Richards Ad...@roblang.demon.co.uk
TobiasVaughn
But of course, the traditional way around that is the
spoken pitch. Cartmel and the writers could talk
about the plots for the upcoming season, but they
couldn't be commissioned to actually write anything
until the pickup came. (Which is not to debate your
point that they couldn't work on scripts year-round,
just to clarify it a bit.)
TobiasVaughn
>
What might have worked even better would have been
something like Christopher H. Bidmead's self-
deprecating description of Season 18, where new
writers full of ideas were helped with structure by
"that old hack, Chris Bidmead."
Francis Shailes
> What might have worked even better would have been
> something like Christopher H. Bidmead's self-
> deprecating description of Season 18, where new
> writers full of ideas were helped with structure by
> "that old hack, Chris Bidmead."
Agreed -- I loved the writing in Season 18, it shows enthusiasm tempered
with experience, like the early days of the 1960s. It is also apparent when
slogging through the episodes in order that a lot more humour got injected
by Douglas Adams in S17 (at the loss of much structure!) which really
relieves the "heaviness" that came on with dull episodes like Underworld and
other Williams-era stuff. The humour tailed off towards the end of
Davison's era, and Mr Davison has spoken of how the "magic" seemed to be
going form the show about then. Still, I can't be depressed about the
mid-80s onwards as that was when all the old material began to be available,
and when fandom became "post-modern" enough to have a laugh at itself and
the show... something I really enjoy about rec.arts.drwho. Oh, I'm going
all mushy! Sorry.
The Valeyard's Cap
Joxer
"Charles Martin" <cha...@largetoes.com> wrote in message
news:chas_m-25BE2A....@news-server.cfl.rr.com...
> In article <20000331002348...@ng-fb1.aol.com>,
> tobias...@aol.com (TobiasVaughn) wrote:
>
> > He can't have meant July 1996. Shooting would have
> > been well underway by this time. I suppose he meant
> > July 1995, which would tie in with the "four months,"
> > since the show had been on hiatus about that long.
>
> from every calendar date Mr. Vaughn gives you. Otherwise he's perfectly
> all right! Perfectly!
Just remember to call Mindwarp the Dog Kennel, if you want to avoid
singing in the fishtank....
--
...and so forth.
Colin B, baggy... and a bit loose at the seams
The Unwilling Warriors webzine: http://x-stream.fortunecity.com/scullyst/25/
Joxer
"DBurns6554" <dburn...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000331163511...@ng-cm1.aol.com...
> >To build an entire
> >>season around one story is a hell of a risk.
>
> >Agreed. Shooting themselves in the foot by alienating viewers with a 14
> >week apparently single story.
>
what
> is the incentive for tuning into the same story the following week?
IIRC, JN-T's justification was that making a 14-episode story would keep
viewers tuning in, to find out what happened at the end. I guess the
thought that people might not be that bothered, or actually dislike the
story
and then not have the incentive of a new story didn't occur to him...
--
Colin B, baggy... and a bit loose at the seams
The Unwilling Warriors webzine: http://x-stream.fortunecity.com/scullyst/25/
The Day of the Daleks convention: http://www.phoenix50.com/daleks/
Styre1
> Vaughn
> >But of course, the traditional way around that is the
> >spoken pitch. Cartmel and the writers could talk
> >about the plots for the upcoming season, but they
> >couldn't be commissioned to actually write anything
> >until the pickup came. (Which is not to debate your
> >point that they couldn't work on scripts year-round,
> >just to clarify it a bit.)
>
> assigned properly. That trip to Spain to shoot The Two Doctors was part of
the
> production funds, wasn't it? Imagine what they could have done with that
money.
Must agree with this. I'm a fan of TTD, but I can see no real reason
storywise to set it in Spain - it could have been set, and would have
worked, almost anywhere. Even if they felt the Spanish setting was
necessary...did that fact insist on LOCATION shooting? Couldn't hey have
faked it?
STYRE
Styre1
> Styre
> >I'm a fan of TTD, but I can see no real reason
> >storywise to set it in Spain - it could have been set, and would have
> >worked, almost anywhere. Even if they felt the Spanish setting was
> >necessary...did that fact insist on LOCATION shooting? Couldn't hey have
> >faked it?
> >
>
> sounds of Spain. Talk about taking a paid vacation.
Yeah, that sounds about right. What a shame. The whole season probably
suffered for this "vacation".
STYRE
DBurns6554
DBurns6554
TobiasVaughn
>news:20000401194017...@ng-bd1.aol.com...
>storywise to set it in Spain - it could have been set, and would have
>worked, almost anywhere. Even if they felt the Spanish setting was
>necessary...did that fact insist on LOCATION shooting? Couldn't hey have
>faked it?
The Spanish location was pre-determined, and Holmes
had to write around it. It's amazing the story was as
good as it was, given all the things he had to fit in:
"Hey, Bob, we're going to do a story with the Second
Doctor. And put the Sontarans in it. And have it
take place in New Orleans. No, wait, forget New
Orleans, make it Spain." (Yes, it was going to be New
Orleans at first.)
Jonathan Blum
>Must agree with this. I'm a fan of TTD, but I can see no real reason
>storywise to set it in Spain - it could have been set, and would have
>worked, almost anywhere. Even if they felt the Spanish setting was
>necessary...did that fact insist on LOCATION shooting? Couldn't hey have
>faked it?
When the story was written, they thought they were getting US
co-production money. When that fell through late in the day, they did a
high-speed rewrite to move it from New Orleans to Spain, where the
favorable exchange rate apparently saved them a chunk of change.
If they'd simply set the whole thing in sunny Manchester, I don't think it
would have saved them enough cash to make "Timelash" a good story.
Regards,
Jon Blum
TobiasVaughn
>
>"Charles Martin" <cha...@largetoes.com> wrote in message
>news:chas_m-25BE2A....@news-server.cfl.rr.com...
>> In article <20000331002348...@ng-fb1.aol.com>,
>> tobias...@aol.com (TobiasVaughn) wrote:
>>
>> > He can't have meant July 1996. Shooting would have
>> > been well underway by this time. I suppose he meant
>> > July 1995, which would tie in with the "four months,"
>> > since the show had been on hiatus about that long.
>>
>> Ah, sorry, I forgot to tell you, didn't I? You have to subtract 10 years
>> from every calendar date Mr. Vaughn gives you. Otherwise he's perfectly
>> all right! Perfectly!
>
>Just remember to call Mindwarp the Dog Kennel, if you want to avoid
>singing in the fishtank....
Whoops. Would you believe "Mr. Vaughn" is screwed
up because the UNIT stories really took place ten
years after their airdates, and...
No, huh?
MAPPY
> When the story was written, they thought they were getting US
> co-production money. When that fell through late in the day, they did a
> high-speed rewrite to move it from New Orleans to Spain, where the
> favorable exchange rate apparently saved them a chunk of change.
I don't think having it set in New Orleans would have saved TTD,
either. Not with an obviously inattentive director like Peter Moffatt
in charge....
Of course, Moffatt was one of JNT's mates, wasn't he?
Nicholas Smale
> If they'd simply set the whole thing in sunny Manchester, I don't think it
> would have saved them enough cash to make "Timelash" a good story.
Woa! Imagine the second Doctor and Shockeye sampling the delights of the
'curry mile' in Rusholme! Now *there's* a story I'd love to see! :-)
--
Nick Smale
Manchester, UK
Adam Richards
>Styre
>>I'm a fan of TTD, but I can see no real reason
>>storywise to set it in Spain - it could have been set, and would have
>>worked, almost anywhere. Even if they felt the Spanish setting was
>>necessary...did that fact insist on LOCATION shooting? Couldn't hey have
>>faked it?
>>
>
>Yeah, they could have done that, but then they couldn't see the sights and
>sounds of Spain. Talk about taking a paid vacation.
Well, Peter Grimwade actually descibed the "Planet of Fire" location
junket, on which most of the production team was invited (except him)
as "a gang bang at the Corporation's expense".
======================================================
Adam Richards Ad...@roblang.demon.co.uk