Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

ALL WHOVIANS SAY NO!

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News >> ALL WHOVIANS SAY NO! Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
ALL WHOVIANS SAY NO! - 15/11/2011 3:35:11 PM   
Radical_Duck


Posts: 51
Joined: 31/1/2008
From: Manchester, England, Earth
Sorry, but this is just stupid. You can't just disregard 50 years of tv history; actually no, you can if you do it Star Trek style, but you've got to do it very well. Which you can bet they wont for the Doctor. And the fact that this is being organised by the LA based part of the BBC is highly significant...Americanisation here we come! If they do it will be simply awful...

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 31
David Tennant - no thanks - 15/11/2011 3:39:43 PM   
jem0013

 

Posts: 30
Joined: 20/6/2009
Do not bring David Tennant back, he's had his go at the role and he certainly isn't the be all and end all of the part. He was okay but he's no Matt Smith plus I don't think there's room for his ego. The only way to go is for a new face for the big screen. Although I could see Cumberbatch doing the Doctor some serious justice.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 32
A world of no - 15/11/2011 4:51:24 PM   
artilleryman


Posts: 100
Joined: 9/1/2008
Especially since the TV series is hitting something of a golden age at the moment. It would be typical of the BBC if it's so starstruck that it screws up the one bona fide success it's had in recent years....

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 33
- 15/11/2011 4:57:05 PM   
DeppBurtonAlliance


Posts: 198
Joined: 15/8/2006
I'd like to see Christopher Ecclestone as The Doctor again... I think he was the best out of the new lot.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 34
There is no movie - 15/11/2011 7:15:10 PM   
iain99

 

Posts: 18
Joined: 14/1/2006
Let's clarify: There is no Doctor Who movie. It exists as a possible future project the BBC are investigating. It is not greenlit, there is no studio involved, no project in active development. The BBC have been knocking around a movie version for the last 20 years

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 35
Great idea - 15/11/2011 10:23:04 PM   
seawalker

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 25/5/2006
From: Birmingham, United Kingdom
Great idea, if it happens. I would love to see Doctor Who on the big screen, but I certainly would not want to see a movie that does not fit in with the TV Series.

Two ideas. 1. Do the young version of Hartnell's Doctor. (Stealing the tardis, the first adventure, etc.) 2. Do the Time War, starring McGann (first half) and Ecclestone (second half), assuming that they would want to do it, of course.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 36
Benedict Cumberbatch - 18/11/2011 10:43:55 AM   
lorib

 

Posts: 9
Joined: 2/3/2009
He'd be perfection in this role.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 37
Only if it involves an "unseen adventure" - 18/11/2011 8:03:10 PM   
angel2loveu

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 12/9/2011
They'd have to cast one of the actors who've played the Doctor at some point in order not to mess up the timeline. That way, they could produce a film relating to an "unseen adventure" (mention is often made by the Doctor or his companions in the series of visits to places that the BBC obviously couldn't afford to film). Using a current or previous actor to flesh out a different adventure whilst keeping well within the timelines would be the only way DW fans would accept a new film. Additionally, keep it away from the homogenised world of the US writers and producers as a Hollywoodized DW wouldn't work. Other posters have suggested Eccleston and the Time Wars as a possible plot which might also work. It would probably have to be McGann, Eccleston, Tennant or Smith though as it might be difficult to explain why a particular Doctor has aged (unless they use the Children in Need sketch excuse of having two Doctors in the same Time line). At the moment I'm apprehensive of a film as the potential to seriously mess it up is huge but with the right plot, writers, actors, directors and british sensibilities it might, just might, work.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 38
Matt Smith IS THE DOCTOR - 18/11/2011 9:18:42 PM   
Dalekbuster523

 

Posts: 28
Joined: 4/1/2010
Matt Smith needs to be the Doctor in it,presuming he's still the Doctor by then.Otherwise,it'd be unfair on him and could affect the TV series.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 39
Dr Depp & Ben Davros Kingsley ? - 19/11/2011 4:15:02 PM   
metalig

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 16/2/2006
well it will be a reboot and have an "origin story" yanks like to do that and have a trilogy of films where the 2nd one the hero doesn't want to be a hero anymore and then the 3rd they try to throw everything fanboys want in so that it becomes a complete mess of a film......

so 1st one; nicks a TARDIS fights some Daleks, 2nd a companion dies and he doesn't want to do it anymore but has to save the new companion from the Cybermen and the Daleks and starts over, 3rd one would be the mess that the end of the pandorica was but worse and they'll all have shite brit accents or annoying yanky ones.............and if it's the guy who did the last 2 harry potter films they'll be slow and boring with the odd set piece of action......

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 40
Will either be very good or very bad! - 22/11/2011 1:01:45 PM   
dannyfletch


Posts: 651
Joined: 25/5/2008
From: Bromley
As a long term Dr Who Fan ( personal fav is Jon Pertwee closely followed by Tom Baker ) my opinion is someone like Benedict Cumberbach or Gary Oldman as the Doctor and maybe Mark Strong as the Master. They need to also do away with the comedy feel that the new series seems to have ( as much as i enjoy the Matt Smith seasons ) and give it a slightly darker and more serious tone.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 41
Happy if its Benedict Cumberbatch - 22/11/2011 11:07:55 PM   
cazzybbb

 

Posts: 12
Joined: 27/8/2008
If Cumberbatch played the role I'd be happy. If a foreign actor plays him I'll be fuming.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 42
phonebooth2 - 23/11/2011 8:59:48 PM   
Sion Pen

 

Posts: 4
Joined: 22/6/2006
colin farrell as 'doc'...kiefer sutherland as the master...guest appearance from jean-luc picard playing bernard cribbins....sorted...so get rid of the blue police box and replace with the see through variety....just so we don't freak anyone out

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 43
Bad idea! - 30/11/2011 10:54:09 PM   
ARN1701D

 

Posts: 4
Joined: 27/3/2006
Just don't think it'll work. Okay the series runs on a much grander scale now, but it's still not suited to a big screen adventure. Like Star Trek, Doctor Who is far too character driven to work well on film. Sure the Star Trek movies have been successful, but the character development has been diluted. The Doctor is one of the most fantastic. multi-faceted characters ever created; don't diminish our beloved time lord by trying to make him appeal to a larger audience that just won't get him!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 44
WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU THINKING!!! - 7/2/2012 11:37:45 PM   
OK Fine. Do it then

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 7/2/2012
NO NO NO NO NO MO FREAKIN NO!!!!!! ITS FINE AS A TV SHOW! AS DANIEL RADCLIFFE SAID HIMSELF MATT SMITH IS A FANTASTIC ACTOR AND WE SHOULDN'T TAKE OVER THE FRANCHISE! THE DOCTOR DOESNT NEED TO BE REBUILT AND EVERYONE WILL HATE IT! IF YATES DARES LAY A FINGER ON DICTOR WHO IM NEVER WAYCHING ONE OF HIS MOVIES AGAIN! NOT EVEN HARRY POTTER! It will be a load of C**P and Noone should be able to rewrite it. Plus they need permission from Steven Moffat. All DW supporters will hate it and basically the only people who will watch it are only watching it coz it's A Yates movie. Then they will hate him for making an awful movie. If they hire Matt smith and dont rebuild the doctor I may consider it but we all know how the previous DW movie went down. DONT MAKE THE FREAKIN' MOVIE!!! ITS A WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY!!! I certainly will not pay to watch it!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 45
Cumberbatch! - 7/2/2012 11:41:44 PM   
OK Fine. Do it then

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 7/2/2012
If they decide to make this crapoy movie Benedict Cberbatch (yes, the amazing actor) should be in it :) even though he said he doesn't want to do Doctor Who :(

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 46
RE: Geronimo!!! - 7/2/2012 11:48:00 PM   
OK Fine. Do it then

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 7/2/2012
GO F**K YOURSELF!!!!!! MATT SMUTH RULES AND THE MOVIE WILL BE A LOAD OF Sh***y C**P! FACE IT! MOFFAT RULES!

(in reply to clonard)
Post #: 47
RE: Geronimo!!! - 8/2/2012 1:40:54 AM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1896
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
My thoughts from an earlier thread on this subject...angry fanboys can go to hell by the way:


What the Hell...Yates, and Warner Brothers (if you want in), this is for you:

Rework the opening of the first ever series, pick up the pace a bit, and do a 'from the start' movie franchise that has nothing to do with the continuity of the TV series. Same intro, different timeline, with all the rogues gallery available for first ever encounter on the big screen.

Maybe kill 'grandfather' off a third into the film to have an onscreen regeneration to introduce that aspect of the franchise and drop the the actor cast to carry the role for the first few films into a hit the ground running, now keep up, narrative and go places visually the series can never go.

Or even start the film with what is essentially a self contained initial exposition adventure culminating with the totally untelegraphed 'death' of 'grandfather' at the hands of whoever they will be standing off against for the rest of the movie. So the entire premise is set up, the regeneration coming as quite the sucker punch to the tone of the film/what was clearly longstanding relationship between lead character and granddaughter. So the 'Who' undercurrent is sustained for the first film: who is he for the benefit of the audience proxy adults, then you're not him I don;t know who you are undercurrent for the dramatic benefit of the companion, doing the job of keeping the 'can he be trusted' through line carrying right through the film, which has him being completely trusted by the end.

Add into that a strong enough villain, whoever it is being encountered by the lead for the first time immediately before they suddenly kill him, and you have an adventure movie with character conflict, and spectacle, er, and stuff!

Independent of the TV series, venturing out into it's own continuity, lots of baddies to introduce, a budget per movie equivalent to a number of entire TV seasons, fifty years of storylines to 'research' for their best moments of drama,etc, moral dilemmas galore...holy shit, why not?

In cash terms, if you were head of a studio and you have seen how much dosh there is to be made from long running franchises, and how effective it is NOT to compromise on themes and emotion these days, would you not KILL to start a movie franchise that could go on, basically, forever?

Totally makes sense on all levels, given the interest that would be generated in the back catalogue, even more TV sales abroad, 'controversy' over whether the films or the show are better for people to bitch about online, and event movie status guaranteed, because totally regardless of box office take in the US, the worldwide fanbase can't get enough of the character, and the US, even if lagging behind in the obsessive stakes would catch up soon enough.

And, to be totally honest, I would rather see an amazing event movie every two to three years, perhaps with some undercurrent/masterplan building up over time, than a formula flogging to death of the entire idea of the show as a result of the demands of trying to make 13 episodes a year. The series died the first time because almost everybody got fucking pig sick of it (the CONTINUOUS promotion of the show as AMAZING!!! AMAZING!!!!! AMAZING!!!!!!!!!!. is tedious noise, considering at least half the time it is far from being amazing and the other half of the time self professed fans can't even seem to decide if they love it, hate it, hate loving it or love hating it).

Harry Potter largely redefined the extent to which 'Britishness' is allowed to work unfettered on the big screen. Given the endless possibilities for what the films could be about, with no restriction on period, location, or planet thus radically different visuals possible and justifiable from one scene to the next, it is an absolute no-brainer for a studio with the kind of money say Warner Brothers has, to fire up a movie franchise in which literally ANYTHING could happen. It's a toybox filmakers would love too, and a playroom actors would kill to be let into.

I understand that these words would seem like heresy to some Doctor Who viewers, but some DW viewers are too obsessed with the show to even contemplate the possibility that movies made of the show might actually stop them in their tracks, with the kind of money that could go into it, with the commitment of major studios to 'getting it right' (especially if getting it right means a cash cow that could live forever), movies made with the right intentions, by the right people could actually work.

(in reply to OK Fine. Do it then)
Post #: 48
RE: Geronimo!!! - 8/2/2012 6:09:04 AM   
Sotto Voce

 

Posts: 815
Joined: 5/9/2009
A Doctor Who movie could be brilliant, but I don't like the sound of 'radical transformation'. They really don't need to mess with the set up from the show. Its all there. I'd say just keep it fairly serious in tone, no tongue in cheek, and keep plenty of mystery around the Doctor. Don't do an origin story. I agree with job's idea of recreating the first episode as an opener. But 'radical transformation'..........

_____________________________

All things digested have a similar hue.

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 49
RE: Geronimo!!! - 8/2/2012 10:07:41 AM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1896
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
Unless radical transformation means no more scripting that has dialogue refer to bigger, unseen events outside the budget in order to make a story seem bigger than what is on screen, which for me, betrays a lack of confidence in what is on the screen and can have the opposite effect of making the story we see seem smaller than it really is, and as an example of the opposite:

Eps like The Girl Who Waited make for 'bigger' TV than exposition based context can create, because instead of being told the world/galaxy/universe/reality is in danger of coming to an end and expected to suddenly care for dozens of badly acting extras representing all the people in the world, we are shown the look in one person's eyes when their world is coming to an end, and in therms of how affecting that can be for a viewer, that's bigger than a million exploding stars (though with a decent enough budget, a movie could make such an image pretty cool)).



< Message edited by jobloffski -- 8/2/2012 10:08:57 AM >

(in reply to Sotto Voce)
Post #: 50
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News >> ALL WHOVIANS SAY NO! Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.109