Steven Moffat. Doctor Who. Doctor Who Miscellaneous. The Sarah Jane Adventures. K-9 and Company. Related Items. Since the UK lockdown began Moffat has been involved with a number of fan community projects, temporarily joining Twitter to offer behind-the-scenes commentary on some of his biggest episodes and writing short new prequels and introductions later filmed in isolation by actors to tie into regular series watchalongs.
What else would you call this? It just felt right to me to write the current one. And how the Doctor sits in the head of people who follow those adventures, particularly children.
Quite right too. Want something else to watch? Check out our full TV guide. But mixed in with that are some insanely vocal ones who go on about how they hated it every single week. Which raises the question, 'Why are you fucking watching it then? It makes no sense, especially when you look at what I was praised for by those vocal fans.
They'd say, 'It will be great when Moffat takes over, because then there won't be so much romance, there won't be all that soapy stuff, there won't be all this comedy, and there won't be overuse of the sonic screwdriver'. But I do all those things, even more than Russell Russell T.
Davies does! And I've got the record for gay jokes. I've got the gayest joke of all time in Doctor Who - I've got the 'beard' joke about the Master. I'm worse than he is for most of that! I'm all for whingeing, of course - we're writers, it's our golf. People love talking about the past, because they know they survived it.
People hate the future cos they know they won't. I like the past too, but I don't think living there's an option. I feel creatively stifled by the BBC every single day - but I'm a writer and 'creatively stifled' counts as anything short of an instant series commission, a guaranteed second series, a cuddle, a guaranteed third series, and a whispered invitation back to 'my place' where I'll explain that really I've got a five-series arc in mind, and a spin-off.
I can answer it with three letters: N-B-C. Very, very good writing team. Very, very good cast. The network fucked it up because they intervened endlessly. If you really want a job to work, don't get Jeff Zucker's team to come help you because they're not funny I think I'm entitled to say that because I think the way in which NBC slagged off the creative team on American "Coupling" after its failure was disgraceful and traitorous. So I enjoy slagging them off.
That's the end of my career in L. I'll be leaving shortly. Sherlock Holmes is a human that longs to be a god, The Doctor is a god that longs to be a human. Murray Gold is a genius. The number of melodies that man has come up with that are utterly haunting, utterly memorable. I like that Helen Mirren has been saying the next Doctor should be a woman. I would like to go on record and say that the Queen should be played by a man! Peter Davison is a better actor than all the other ones.
That's the simple reason why it works better. There's no complicated reason why Peter Davison carried on working and all the others disappeared into a retirement home. Don't you think it's fair to say that Doctor Who was a great idea that happened to the wrong people? I think the actual structure, the actual format is as good as anything that's ever been done. There was some very good stuff spread over the twenty-five years, but that wasn't enough. When I look back at Doctor Who now, I laugh at it fondly.
As a television professional, I think 'How did these guys get a paycheque every week? Nothing from the black and white days, with the exception of the pilot episode, should have got out of the building. They should have been clubbing those guys to death. You've got an old guy in the lead [ William Hartnell ] who can't remember his lines. You've got Patrick Troughton , who was a good actor, but his companions - how did they get their Equity card? They're unimaginably bad.
Once you get to the colour stuff, some of it's watchable, but it's laughable. Mostly now, looking back, I'm startled by it. Given that it's a teatime show, a children's show, I think most of the Peter Davison stuff is well-constructed, the characters are consistent.
I dearly love Doctor Who , but I don't think my love of it translated into it being a tremendously good series. It was a bit crap at times, wasn't it? And it had been pretty good I think when Peter [ Peter Davison ] was in it and then suddenly, suddenly it really wasn't. And you were going 'Ugh, it's a bit charmless, it's a bit losing its way', and so when the axe fell that terrible day, it didn't feel like a surprise, it felt 'Oh no!
That's like cancelling James Bond because there's been a bad one! Proper, proper Doctor Who fan, not unaware that it was crashing and burning at that moment. Doctor Who wasn't limited by the times or the style that were prevalent then. It was limited by the relatively meagre talent of the people who were working on it.
Mostly they were middle of the range hacks who were not going to go on to do much else. Over 26 years, the hit rate is not high enough. There are people who have worked on Doctor Who and gone on to great things, like Douglas Adams.
0コメント