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

Moffat On Those Doctor Who Movie Plans

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News >> Moffat On Those Doctor Who Movie Plans Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Moffat On Those Doctor Who Movie Plans - 2/12/2011 9:54:20 AM   
Empire Admin

 

Posts: 30145
Joined: 29/6/2005
Post your comments on this article
Post #: 1
Thank God - 2/12/2011 9:54:20 AM   
blink

 

Posts: 11
Joined: 3/10/2005
Case in point - the recent torchwood crap produced by bbc america. That goes to show how the Americans destroy a decent british sci-fi.

By the way does anyone think that the Americans realise torchwood is an anagram of doctor who????

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 2
RE: Thank God - 2/12/2011 10:28:55 AM   
keatsmeister


Posts: 751
Joined: 21/6/2007
quote:

ORIGINAL: blink

Case in point - the recent torchwood crap produced by bbc america. That goes to show how the Americans destroy a decent british sci-fi.

By the way does anyone think that the Americans realise torchwood is an anagram of doctor who????


I think it was a great idea, and I like that serial plots are being used as opposed to the 1/2 episode plots, but that particular plot was one that should have been limited to a 2/3 episode run at most, it dragged on too much.

Back to the article, personally I'm not that bothered if it's canon or not. I'm not that bothered if it is a different Doctor or not - as long as it remains true to the core Doctor Who qualities, and is well written, produced and is enjoyable, that would suit me fine


< Message edited by keatsmeister -- 2/12/2011 10:31:48 AM >

(in reply to blink)
Post #: 3
Not sure about this! - 2/12/2011 10:39:13 AM   
dannyfletch


Posts: 650
Joined: 25/5/2008
From: Bromley
While it is definately good news that there's no U.S involved. However I did want this to be different from the new series and a more serious version. Would've been good to have an origins story with different british actors. Oh well, I may just wait for the dvd!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 4
RE: Not sure about this! - 2/12/2011 10:54:40 AM   
JIm R

 

Posts: 9185
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Surrey
If Smith is as rumoured off after Series 7 then get this made as his 'departing' gift, and lead the film into Series 8 and new Dr.

Personally, I think Matt Smith has been our finest Dr of them all, including Tom B.

(in reply to dannyfletch)
Post #: 5
RE: Not sure about this! - 2/12/2011 1:01:16 PM   
Heisenberg

 

Posts: 14
Joined: 7/8/2011
what does "canon" mean?

(in reply to JIm R)
Post #: 6
RE: Not sure about this! - 2/12/2011 1:09:30 PM   
JIm R

 

Posts: 9185
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Surrey
quote:

ORIGINAL: Heisenberg

what does "canon" mean?


Canon of any long running programme or book / graphic novel refers to 'official' timeline regarded as the extended story arc that is 'true' to the characters in their orginal format.

(in reply to Heisenberg)
Post #: 7
bit happier about this - 2/12/2011 1:20:31 PM   
artilleryman


Posts: 100
Joined: 9/1/2008
but I wonder if it's the result of frantic damage-limitation talks after the negative reaction to Yates's comments...

I kind of hope it's Matt Smith that plays the Doc though. He's been the best one in the show's entire existence if you ask me. Maybe finishing up with his regeneration into a new doc would make sense for the movie and setting up the next series nicely. Unless of course they're just planning to 'rest' the series after that and settle on an ongoing movie series a la Harry Potter

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 8
Oh... - 2/12/2011 1:34:23 PM   
waltham1979


Posts: 1240
Joined: 18/3/2008
From: San-Diago, which is German for 'Whales virgina'...
does that mean that any movie will be as appalling as the last series was?!?! Matt Smith is a great Doctor BUT the last series was very very poor...

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 9
A more serious version? - 2/12/2011 1:34:31 PM   
bobthegrinch

 

Posts: 113
Joined: 21/11/2007
I have to disagree with Danny Fletch. I think the show is as serious as it needs to be currently. While I don't want to see it return to being quite as light hearted as the RTD era (with the cute little walking blobs of fat for instance or the guy who had a sex life with a paving slab woman in the worst episode ever) the balance it strikes between drama and fun is what drew me in. Being able to be a bit eccentric and fun is, in my view, essential to the character?

On another note, what happened to 'it is happening' as Empire stated when Yates first piped up and it hadn't been confirmed by anyone else? Will this serve as a lesson to check your facts in future?

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 10
RE: A more serious version? - 2/12/2011 1:41:09 PM   
Spaldron


Posts: 10485
Joined: 6/10/2006
From: Chair
I don't get it. What's going on?!!!

_____________________________

And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts
And I looked and behold, a pale horse
And his name that sat on him was Death
And Hell followed with him.

(in reply to bobthegrinch)
Post #: 11
RE: A more serious version? - 2/12/2011 1:57:53 PM   
artilleryman


Posts: 100
Joined: 9/1/2008
nah. I don't agree. The last two seasons have been great. We're having something of a golden age for Who at the moment...

_____________________________

http://artilleryman.blogspot.com

(in reply to bobthegrinch)
Post #: 12
RE: Not sure about this! - 2/12/2011 2:00:47 PM   
artilleryman


Posts: 100
Joined: 9/1/2008
I think Smith will stay until the end of Season 8, which is 50th anniversary year, and then be off, leading to a new doc from then on in, whether that's on TV or film, or both

_____________________________

http://artilleryman.blogspot.com

(in reply to Heisenberg)
Post #: 13
Glad to this - Moffat is good for something - 2/12/2011 2:45:07 PM   
potemkin1925

 

Posts: 147
Joined: 17/10/2007
Hopefully Moffat will not be the head man by then. He really is just dredging the bottom with his "arcs" and River Song is the worst character in the history of TV. Not helped by the actress being beneath the talent of a panto dame.

On the plus side, Smith & Co. are the finest and the stand alone stories are ace.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 14
RE: Not sure about this! - 2/12/2011 2:46:15 PM   
JIm R

 

Posts: 9185
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Surrey
Smith's two series to date have uniformally been excellent, the only argument of qulaity about S6 could be the excellent build up wasn't resolved partcuarly well, it felt like they'd written themselves into a whole and just gone 'oh fuck it' a bit towards the end but the narrative was still as strong as 5 in certain episodes. The opening two episodes of S6 were as good as anything we have ever seen previously in the history of the programme.

(in reply to artilleryman)
Post #: 15
RE: Not sure about this! - 2/12/2011 3:05:04 PM   
artilleryman


Posts: 100
Joined: 9/1/2008
yeah, I'd agree with that. The finale didn't quite live up to its promise but I was giving it the benefit of the doubt of being not quite the end of the story, as it were. Not so much a finale, as just moving the arc along a bit further...

_____________________________

http://artilleryman.blogspot.com

(in reply to JIm R)
Post #: 16
THANK YOU STEVEN! - 2/12/2011 4:45:00 PM   
Coro1234

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 20/11/2010
I am so glad!! And so relieved - I was so worried before. Long live DOCTOR WHO & MATT SMITH !

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 17
Moffat, just let go... - 2/12/2011 4:50:13 PM   
The Watcher

 

Posts: 56
Joined: 29/9/2011
So defensive, and getting it wrong. Dr. Who is ok for a Sat teatime, but if I was going to see a 3D blockbuster I'd want a meaty reboot rather than the charming but predictable fluff we get on BBC1. Both casts of DW and Torchwood should be exterminated to make way for film stars opposed to One Show fillers. Was John Barrowman ever reeeeally convincing as a Poundland Tom Cruise? I'd want a streamlining of the myth, a visit to Gallifrei and 2 hours of Super-Dalek bashing. Easy! Sod the whimsical history of the show, sod the cast - gimme 3D spectacle! KA-BOOM!!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 18
Well done Watcher! - 2/12/2011 8:29:31 PM   
leroythemasochist

 

Posts: 792
Joined: 1/9/2006
From: The Point
Sorry but 'Poundland Tom Cruise' is the best summing up of that walking cliche Barrowman I have ever heard! Sheer brilliance.
AS for Dr Who as a movie, no thanks.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 19
Bring back U.N.I.T ! - 2/12/2011 8:41:17 PM   
darkspringxl

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 7/10/2005
I loved Torchwood but I think it's run it's course now. A solid TV show based on the United Nation's International TaskForce (U.N.I.T.) would be a great way of expanding the Doctor Who universe on TV. As for the movie....glad that it's staying in canon and not going all Americanised.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 20
- 2/12/2011 9:30:24 PM   
clarkkent

 

Posts: 761
Joined: 20/7/2006
Good to hear, happier about the film, but if it's Moffat era stories it'll be flat out unintelligible.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 21
Pound land Tom Cruise - 2/12/2011 9:39:31 PM   
leroythemasochist

 

Posts: 792
Joined: 1/9/2006
From: The Point
Best description of that prat Barrowman and the terrible Torchwood ever! Genius. Horrific show, awful acting, dreadful plots.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 22
Moffat vs Bags O' Money! Ding! Round one... - 3/12/2011 3:21:01 AM   
Thumbsucker


Posts: 24
Joined: 30/9/2005
So, Moffat has weighed in on the intention of one of the main directors of, let's not forget, the Biggest Movie Franchise On The Surface Of God's Green Earth to make a movie adaptation of Doctor Who? I get the feeling that he has, in his head, slightly more power and influence over the fortunes and development of this character than he actaully has. Yes, it's fun to look back and dismiss the last time American money attempted to get involved with the good Doctor (terrible script, appalling secondary actors, mind-numbingly god-awful script...!) but that was a television co-production; this would be a big screen affair, guaranteed to shake more than a couple of shekels from the evergreen cash cow - and the one thing the BBC delights in doing is dismissing any kind of shame when it comes to shagging any pennies it can from its Doctor Who bitch. Wait till Hollywood starts flashing some chequebooks in Media City's direction... then you'll see how quickly Moffat's arse can hit the door. Your move, Yates. Your move.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 23
Stephen Who ? - 3/12/2011 10:26:38 AM   
THERAHMAN

 

Posts: 16
Joined: 28/6/2006
Fuck Moffat. He gets up in the morning and googles himself all day. His take on Dr Who is boring. He is a real life David Brent. I hate what he's done to Dr Who. Give me Johnny Depp as Dr Who, with a script by Joss Wheadon directed by JJ abrams.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 24
RE: Moffat On Those Doctor Who Movie Plans - 3/12/2011 10:55:33 AM   
MisterCapone

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 3/12/2011
And lo did Moffat say unto the heathens

"Thou shalt not urinate up the side of the blessed blue police box without my express permission, for my wrath will be mighty"

Here end'th the lesson.

Amen.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 25
RE: Moffat On Those Doctor Who Movie Plans - 3/12/2011 12:44:14 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1895
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
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 people 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.






< Message edited by jobloffski -- 3/12/2011 3:07:12 PM >


_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to MisterCapone)
Post #: 26
Dr Who Shenannigins - 4/12/2011 8:50:37 AM   
kittybinks


Posts: 77
Joined: 9/11/2005
As a long-time fan of the show, no-one has the exclusive rights to take the story down their own little cul-de-sac. Steven Moffat has had some great input on the show Weeping Angels in "Blink" (Superb!) but the last series has been a bit of a dud. The whole thing has tried to be too clever for it's own good. Too much tinkering and nonsensical plet-lines have made the ratings suffer. Personally I think he has been too distracted by his take on Sherlock Holmes. Time for him to move on and let someone with the love of the show take over, dust it off and restore Dr Who to the glory of The Tennant years. In regards to a movie treatment, why not? there is enough room in the Who universe to run divergent story arcs and make something epic for the big screen.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 27
- 8/12/2011 10:13:16 AM   
Tankgirl

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 8/2/2006
OMG. I am a massive Doctor Who fan, but I completely agree with Therahman. Johnny Depp as the Doctor, written by Whedon, directed by Abrams.....I would just about pee myself with anticipation for that!!!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 28
RE: Moffat On Those Doctor Who Movie Plans - 27/12/2011 5:52:30 PM   
Sotto Voce

 

Posts: 814
Joined: 5/9/2009
quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

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 people 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.






With you, Job. I would love to see it happen along those lines. I would pretty much restage the first episode to open with. A bit of a long build up perhaps, but it gave so much mystery to the Doctor. Don't do an 'origin story', keep the Doctor's past very ambiguous. In fact don't even mention the word 'Timelord' until maybe the third film. I would definitely use the line "Have you ever thought what it would be like to be wanderers in the fourth dimension? Exiles?".
Probably do The Daleks in the first film, but don't limit it to the big villains. Have the end of each film lead into the next so you get the traditional cliffhangers. Basically avoid everything people don't like about the new show (The Doctor snogging almost every female character, for instance), and they'll pick up a lot of old fans. It would be the new Doctor Who a lot of people have been dreaming of.


_____________________________

All things digested have a similar hue.

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 29
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News >> Moffat On Those Doctor Who Movie Plans Page: [1]
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

0.328