![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
For 'Doctor Who' executive producer, there's no time like the present - Los Angeles Times:
Hmm. I thought Tennant was recruited to play the doctor in part because he already was a high-profile star. Well, whatever.
You know, it may be true, up to a point, that US shows can engage their fans a bit too much ... but then, it's far easier to say "ignore your fans" when you know going in that you're at least going to get your season. The BBC pays attention to ratings, yes, but it's not ad-supported in the same way that US shows are. On the Beeb, if they commission a 12-episode season, you're going to get to produce and show those 12 episodes, more often than not. Over here, if NBC or CBS or ABC commissions a 22-24 episode show, chances are better that it's going to air 3-6 times and then never be heard from again; if it's on Fox, it may only get one episode before vanishing into the mists. And for some reason, over here, science fiction doesn't survive on non-ad-supported channels. Pay cable Showtime made a valiant effort at doing science fiction shows for a few years, though they made what I think of as the Fox mistake. First, they decided that they needed young males as their audience, because science fiction is typically a young male genre. (I don't know why everyone discounts women as an audience for the genre so much; if you pay the slightest attention to what's going on with most science fiction television these days, it seems to all appeal much more to women than to men. But then, I may have a biased view on that phenomenon.) Showtime then scheduled a strong block of shows called SciFriday -- that is, they scheduled their science fiction on not only the second lowest viewership day of the week, but also the one day on which young males are reliably not at home. Needless to say, most of the shows didn't last all that long -- although the Stargate franchise drifted off Showtime to become a strong show for SciFi, curiously enough on Fridays. Apparently SciFi is perfectly happy with a largely female audience for some of its shows. But I digress.
BBC shows can afford to remain disengaged from their fandoms because they really don't depend on them in quite the same way. Even the most unwatched, deadliest show seems to be able to run for a full season of episodes, both because of the lack of ad support and because the seasons are much, much shorter. A US show that disengaged from its viewers is a cancelled show. A show engaged with its fans, by contrast, has a better chance; look at Jericho, which wouldn't be airing now but for a sincerely demented fan campaign that actually worked.
I do wonder how long it will be before he signs on, and whether or not Tennant will. Of the two of them, I'd think Tennant's far more likely to walk away after the gap year; somehow, I'd think that Davies would want to sign on for one more season, get the show going again, and then walk away. But it's only a guess, based purely on the fact that he seems to love this series with a love that is pure (if periodically shockingly badly written). And the gap year may be enough for him to recharge and get a fresh perspective, if that's what he needs.
IT was a damp and windy afternoon in Cardiff, and Russell T. Davies had a cold. Also, he had been crying. He had just watched the latest cut of a new "Doctor Who" episode, and one scene really moved him. "I'm going to look really stupid," he later admitted to worrying. "But it was so beautiful, I was bloody crying."
In 2003, the BBC approached Davies to revamp "Doctor Who," and under his leadership, the show's success has ballooned. It survived what could have been a massive blow when after the first season it lost its lead, Christopher Eccleston. He was succeeded by David Tennant, who has since become a high-profile star here; he will play Hamlet for the Royal Shakespeare Company later this year. An audience of 13.31 million watched "The 2007 Doctor Who Christmas Special" (with guest star Kylie Minogue) -- a lot of people for a small country.
[... Doctor Who, Torchwood, and the Sarah Jane Adventures] also share an increasingly complicated mythology. It falls to Davies "to keep balancing how much continuity there is, how many stand-alone elements there are." Ever mindful of the shows' "mainstream audience" (meaning, not just sci-fi enthusiasts) and put off by "exclusivity" in general, he said he is reticent of creating overly inclusive stories dependent on viewers' in-depth knowledge of ornate histories. This job is made easier by Davies' policy of ignoring the voices of those most vigilant. "I think we're an unusual science-fiction franchise in taking a very big step back from fandom and having nothing to do with them. . . . Every program on the BBC has a message board on the website. I forbid it to happen on 'Doctor Who.' I'm sorry to say this, all the science fiction producers making stuff in America, they are way too engaged with their fandom. They all need to step back." [...]
Hmm. I thought Tennant was recruited to play the doctor in part because he already was a high-profile star. Well, whatever.
You know, it may be true, up to a point, that US shows can engage their fans a bit too much ... but then, it's far easier to say "ignore your fans" when you know going in that you're at least going to get your season. The BBC pays attention to ratings, yes, but it's not ad-supported in the same way that US shows are. On the Beeb, if they commission a 12-episode season, you're going to get to produce and show those 12 episodes, more often than not. Over here, if NBC or CBS or ABC commissions a 22-24 episode show, chances are better that it's going to air 3-6 times and then never be heard from again; if it's on Fox, it may only get one episode before vanishing into the mists. And for some reason, over here, science fiction doesn't survive on non-ad-supported channels. Pay cable Showtime made a valiant effort at doing science fiction shows for a few years, though they made what I think of as the Fox mistake. First, they decided that they needed young males as their audience, because science fiction is typically a young male genre. (I don't know why everyone discounts women as an audience for the genre so much; if you pay the slightest attention to what's going on with most science fiction television these days, it seems to all appeal much more to women than to men. But then, I may have a biased view on that phenomenon.) Showtime then scheduled a strong block of shows called SciFriday -- that is, they scheduled their science fiction on not only the second lowest viewership day of the week, but also the one day on which young males are reliably not at home. Needless to say, most of the shows didn't last all that long -- although the Stargate franchise drifted off Showtime to become a strong show for SciFi, curiously enough on Fridays. Apparently SciFi is perfectly happy with a largely female audience for some of its shows. But I digress.
BBC shows can afford to remain disengaged from their fandoms because they really don't depend on them in quite the same way. Even the most unwatched, deadliest show seems to be able to run for a full season of episodes, both because of the lack of ad support and because the seasons are much, much shorter. A US show that disengaged from its viewers is a cancelled show. A show engaged with its fans, by contrast, has a better chance; look at Jericho, which wouldn't be airing now but for a sincerely demented fan campaign that actually worked.
...Season 4 of "Doctor Who" airs in the spring here and in the U.S. (on Sci Fi, starting in April). Then 2009 will be what Davies calls a "gap year," with only four one-hour specials. Although the show has been commissioned for a complete season in 2010, he and Tennant are not yet signed on. "I can't carry on like this forever," Davies said, sniffling -- his cold was acting up. He said that after this, he will likely return to drama about "the epic-ness of ordinary intimate deals of ordinary people's lives," which is what he really loves writing. "The only place for me to go here is back to six-parters or one-offs which won't have the publicity, the merchandise, the budget, the profile." He took a deep breath. "And I'm so looking forward to it."
I do wonder how long it will be before he signs on, and whether or not Tennant will. Of the two of them, I'd think Tennant's far more likely to walk away after the gap year; somehow, I'd think that Davies would want to sign on for one more season, get the show going again, and then walk away. But it's only a guess, based purely on the fact that he seems to love this series with a love that is pure (if periodically shockingly badly written). And the gap year may be enough for him to recharge and get a fresh perspective, if that's what he needs.
Tags:
