I've just seen a trailer for Jody Whittaker as the new Doctor, and for what I've seen, it looks good. I won't even go there regarding the fact that a female has taken over this iconic role. Jody Whittaker will be absolutely fine, although she has a difficult job, following on from all the other versions of the character. Just make the role her's and she'll be great. But, please, can we now stop making an issue out of it now being a female character and just enjoy the journey, which is bound to be fun. I had my doubts as regards what it looks like, even in a short trailer of barely a minute or two, it has a sort of cinematic gloss, a look the show hasn't had in years. Definitely a Doctor for the 21st Century. If I have a quibble with how the BBC handles 'Doctor Who,' and that's can they stop giving away plot details, what the monsters are going to be like? It's a bit like reading a novel and suddenly jumping a few chapters forward to find out what's going to happen. In the old days of 'Doctor Who,' half the fun of the show was when the Doctor and his companions were travelling to their next adventure, whether in the past or the future, and we had absolutely no idea where they were going to end up, when the Tardis's doors opened, we saw the new 'world' for the first time, it was all a mystery, we had to discover who the villains were, or what the monsters we were about to encounter would be like. Today it's all spoilt by giving away far too many details and ruining the anticipation. Please, BBC, don't spoil things. If they do anything, the stories need to be better. It's a pity it all has to be played out within a 45-50 minute time frame. It must be an extremely tall order for the writers to tell a story decently in such a length of screen-time. The old Doctor Who was in a 25-30 minute slot and most adventures ran for about 4-6 episodes, giving a far better running time. But of course, in today's broadcasting landscape, everything has to fit the American format for television. Of course it's 45-minutes so when they sell the show to a commercial network they can put 15 minutes of advertising in to make the show run for an hour. With the shorter episodes the writers can have cliff-hangers at the end of each episode which keeps you guessing as to what happens in the next episode.
I couldn't believe that Bradley Walsh was to be cast in 'Doctor Who.' When I first heard about this, I didn't believe it, because I don't believe everything I see on the internet. After all, Bradley is best known as a comic as well as presenter of 'The Chase' on ITV. He's well known as a corpser, a giggler when some unusual or unsavoury answer comes up for the contestants to guess. He has done 'straight' acting, especially in 'Coronation Street' but not in anything such as 'Doctor Who,' so it will be interesting to see what he's like in this show.
The BBC has seen fit to put some of their classic material on iPlayer, in the archive section. I think this is an attempt to counter what Netflix and Amazon are doing with all episodes of a series downloadable so that viewers can 'binge' watch, shows such as 'The Crown,' and 'House of Cards,' (all, at least the new version, although I see the BBC version of 'House of Cards' is available in the archive section. Other stuff includes the brilliantly funny 'Nuts In May,' a really classic Mike Leigh play with stars Alison Steadman, which I clearly remember seeing when originally broadcast in the 1970's.) I'm currently watching 'Quatermass and The Pit,' which comes from the late 1950's. I think I've seen the Hammer version of one of the Quatermass stories but have never seen this television version of a later story. I'm surprised it survives in this 6-episode form and it's quite clear that it must have had an influence on the early 'Doctor Who' series and shaped it's development. Some of the acting and the sets are a bit creaky but nevertheless the story does grip and it's quite scary. Considering the technology of the period it was made and the fact they couldn't edit tape like they can now, it stands up remarkably well. It beats a lot of modern stuff. None of those annoying whip-pans and strange camera angles which add nothing. I believe it was broadcast 'live,' which must have been quite stressful for the actors and technicians. Some sections were on film and would have no doubt have been put in so that actors to move to other sets and cameras moved around the studio. I'm certain that the BBC attempted to restage one of the 'Quatermass' stories 'live' on BBC Four early in the 2000's, at about the time I switched over to digital when I got a Freeview box and I seem to remember watching it and it had David Tennant in it, before he took on the central character in the revived version of 'Doctor Who.'
I couldn't believe that Bradley Walsh was to be cast in 'Doctor Who.' When I first heard about this, I didn't believe it, because I don't believe everything I see on the internet. After all, Bradley is best known as a comic as well as presenter of 'The Chase' on ITV. He's well known as a corpser, a giggler when some unusual or unsavoury answer comes up for the contestants to guess. He has done 'straight' acting, especially in 'Coronation Street' but not in anything such as 'Doctor Who,' so it will be interesting to see what he's like in this show.
The BBC has seen fit to put some of their classic material on iPlayer, in the archive section. I think this is an attempt to counter what Netflix and Amazon are doing with all episodes of a series downloadable so that viewers can 'binge' watch, shows such as 'The Crown,' and 'House of Cards,' (all, at least the new version, although I see the BBC version of 'House of Cards' is available in the archive section. Other stuff includes the brilliantly funny 'Nuts In May,' a really classic Mike Leigh play with stars Alison Steadman, which I clearly remember seeing when originally broadcast in the 1970's.) I'm currently watching 'Quatermass and The Pit,' which comes from the late 1950's. I think I've seen the Hammer version of one of the Quatermass stories but have never seen this television version of a later story. I'm surprised it survives in this 6-episode form and it's quite clear that it must have had an influence on the early 'Doctor Who' series and shaped it's development. Some of the acting and the sets are a bit creaky but nevertheless the story does grip and it's quite scary. Considering the technology of the period it was made and the fact they couldn't edit tape like they can now, it stands up remarkably well. It beats a lot of modern stuff. None of those annoying whip-pans and strange camera angles which add nothing. I believe it was broadcast 'live,' which must have been quite stressful for the actors and technicians. Some sections were on film and would have no doubt have been put in so that actors to move to other sets and cameras moved around the studio. I'm certain that the BBC attempted to restage one of the 'Quatermass' stories 'live' on BBC Four early in the 2000's, at about the time I switched over to digital when I got a Freeview box and I seem to remember watching it and it had David Tennant in it, before he took on the central character in the revived version of 'Doctor Who.'
No comments:
Post a Comment