Doctor Who Club of Australia

[Greg]

OK - series 5 confirmed, but not until 2010, with three 'specials' in 2009. Press release with the information available.

As you may be aware, speculation has been rife that both David Tennant and Russell T Davies were leaving the show at the end of series 4, and some recent announcements (notably the Royal Shakespeare Company's announcement of Tennant's appearances in two plays, which wouldn't fit in with filming for series 5 in 2009) seemed to give that substance.

I'm not sure what to think. Tennant and Davies looking for a Who-lite year to recharge? BBC making time while they look to fill big shoes? I'm more inclined to think the former, as Who is such a success for the BBC that it would seem likely that they'd want to keep going with it unless they felt that having a 'gap year' would allow them to retain specific people.

[ADAMK]

Personally I don't think this is a bad thing. It gives everyone a chance to refresh their batteries and it also means a very popular and skilled actor, ie. Mr Tennant, remains in the role until at least 2009!

We also have a 2008 Xmas special and three other specials to get us through the so-called 'gap year' before another full series in 2010!

A few years ago all we had to look forward to was a short web-based animation! We Doctor Who fans are blessed at the moment!

[Tegan]

"Gap Year"? Don't anyone mention the "H" word.

I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it.

[KnottyEmily]

I just read about this today, and I wasn't sure what to think. However, after reading Greg's post I think it's fine, so long as Tennant and Davies stay on, the opposite of which was suggested in the little article I read in MX:

[kangamac]

If David Tennant and/or Russell T Davies are looking for a year off to pursue other projects then they should stand aside and allow someone else to take over. If DT wants to move on with his career, then that is fine.

However, he should do a regeneration scene and allow someone who wants to do the role take over. The same also applies for any member of the production team who feel they do not have what it takes to continue. Doctor Who is a BBC production - not their personal bloody hobby.

Did any of this nonsense occur in the original TV series? No. When someone involved in the TV show - in front or behind the camera - got to the point where their interest waned or other projects took greater precedence, then they got the hell out and someone else stepped into the breach.

This method of constant turnover in the production worked quite well for the majority of the original run and kept the program fresh and relatively vigorous. In fact, one of the reasons for the end of the original TV program could be the fact that JN-T was kept on even after he had expressed his doubts about continuing.

He had obviously realized that he could no longer make positive contributions to the TV show and felt it was time to move on. However, for one reason or another, his BBC superiors failed to heed his request and Doctor Who suffered as a consequence. One can only hope that someone somewhere remembers this and does not let history repeat itself.

Alternatively, in the wake of the success of this year's "Doctor-lite" story, perhaps they could have considered the concept of a "Doctor-lite" season. After all, if DT has the time to make three Doctor Who specials, then surely that time could have been spent filming his contribution to an entire season. There is no reason why he could not make cameo appearances in every episode, to help certain aspects of the overall plot progress.

There are plenty of opportunities for making a story-arc of this nature work. The Doctor could be kidnapped by unknown forces at the end of the first story and then the companion or companions must then embark on a season long quest to find and rescue him. This particular type of storyline could easily be done in the same way as the Key to Time season.

There was once a "choose-your-own-adventure" novel called "Search for the Doctor" and while that particular publication may have its various strengths and weaknesses, there is no reason why a properly designed and thought out season could not work rather well. With the right type of companions - perhaps Jack and Martha - there is no reason why it could not be a success...

The point is, with a little imagination and intelligent thought, there is no reason why certain limitations cannot be capitalized upon...

[Greg]

The information in my post was speculation on my part, other than where it draws directly from the BBC media release, was speculation on my part. In the absence of facts, there's plenty of room for speculation! We don't know anything about Davies' activities in the 'gap' year at this time, or indeed whether the 'gap' year was put forward by someone and Tennant decided to get extra work with the Royal Shakespeare Company as a consequece (he's done plenty of work with them before).

For all we know, the BBC could have decided that it had a lot of expensive productions in 2009, so cutting back Who would help balance the books - though I think that's a less likely scenario than Davies and/or Tennant wanting some time for other projects.

Let's not forget, Torchwood did one season, then effectively had a year off before the second season. And Sarah Jane had a pilot then a year off before the actual series started!

Until and unless someone has real and hard facts about why this is happening, there's no point in cursing the people whose names come up in speculation.

[kangamac]

"The information in my post was speculation on my part, other than where it draws directly from the BBC media release, was speculation on my part."

Yes, I realize this.

My post was based upon my own thoughts on the matter, which has been widely advertised on the internet - including the BBC Doctor Who Homepage. I simply posted them here as this was a thread discussing the situation.

"In the absence of facts, there's plenty of room for speculation!"

Which is precisely what I am doing.

Regardless of the reason or reasons, the consequence is still the same. It is that consequence I am focusing upon.

"We don't know anything about Davies' activities in the 'gap' year at this time, or indeed whether the 'gap' year was put forward by someone and Tennant decided to get extra work with the Royal Shakespeare Company as a consequece (he's done plenty of work with them before)."

As I stated: "If David Tennant and/or Russell T Davies are looking for a year off to pursue other projects then they should stand aside and allow someone else to take over."

As I used "if", I had hoped to convey that I was uncertain of the precise reason for what has happened. However, the consequence is still the same.

If there is another reason for the hiatus - now where have I heard that term used before in relation to DW - then I will address it as and when it is raised.

And as before: "Regardless of the reason or reasons, the consequence is still the same."

"For all we know, the BBC could have decided that it had a lot of expensive productions in 2009, so cutting back Who would help balance the books - though I think that's a less likely scenario than Davies and/or Tennant wanting some time for other projects."

If so, then they should cut back on the costs of DW by focusing on a bit more "substance" and a bit less "style"...

An over abundance of SFX is not required for a decent DW story.

"Let's not forget, Torchwood did one season, then effectively had a year off before the second season. And Sarah Jane had a pilot then a year off before the actual series started!"

I couldn't give a Raxicoricofallapatorian's fart for either of them. My only concern is the TV program known as Doctor Who. What happens to the others is irrelevant to me.

"Until and unless someone has real and hard facts about why this is happening, there's no point in cursing the people whose names come up in speculation."

The point is it is happening. I have previously acknowledged that there may be various reasons for this. However, at the end of the day, it is happening.

The thrust of my previous post was: "The point is, with a little imagination and intelligent thought, there is no reason why certain limitations cannot be capitalized upon..."

Whatever those limitations or setbacks are...

[uhumanite]

I'm very pleased by this

Doctor number 10 lasting from 2005-2009 (possibly 2010) is wonderful!

[kangamac]

[Sulp Niar]

It depends, the potential of RTD writing it. On the one hand, when he has less scripts and is able to put more effort into them, he's more liable to strike gold, and I feel the specials could all have their own self-contained 'Gridlock' feel about them rather than an epic 'Last of the Time Lords' or two. That said, considering the specials he usually does are the, erm, Christmas Specials (of which the word "special" is a gross misnomer), they're bland and dull and trying hard to be epic. I'm leaning towards the latter being more likely, as the audience will expect this kind of stuff, which doesn't exactly fill me with confidence.

[Davros]

It would be good if the BBC could do a 7 doctors type movie ....give us something decent to watch while the show is in hiatous! Doc #3 is now dead and #2, 4 & 5 are getting on a bit so unless alot of $$$ and a dam good hollywood script was involved, would most likely be a flop ....it's nice to dream isn't it!

[Greg]

Patrick Troughton, Doctor #2, sadly passed away in 1987.

[Davros]

[dave]

Tom was born in '34, I believe, so he's about 73.

[Davros]

[Speckled Jim]

This gap year theory could just be a red herring to keep the buzz going and debate about the show in the press. I wouldn't put it past RTD, he's a canny marketer.
But I wouldn't mind it happening; as long as something happens in 2009, whether it's a few specials or a regular series. I don't know about a Doctor Lite series, as has been mentioned - I think that's OK for one story in a 13-part season, but not for a whole season. The show is called Dr Who after all.
I mean, the format changed in 1985. Now I know that was to do with the dissent at the Beeb and all that, and OK, the show died a temporary death shortly after followed by a long hiatus after '89, so maybe it's not a great example.
As long as they don't give it a "year off" - it might never come back.

[Davros]