h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/dec/11/bbc.television

"The producer of the multi-award-winning Victoria Wood drama Housewife, 49 is to take over as the executive producer of Doctor Who.

Piers Wenger will work on the fifth series of Doctor Who and also take over as head of BBC Wales drama in January 2009 when current boss Julie Gardner steps down, MediaGuardian can reveal."

Not so sure about Media Guardian revealing it though: their story seems more than a whiff similar to the BBC's press release:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2007/12_december/11/who.shtml

<>

Thanks Holmes for that!

Might cut down on some of the sentimental clap trap, but I wouldn't count on it. I reckon RTD's fingers will remain quite firmly in the Who pie for some time, which one couldn't blame him for: he has done quite well with it all told.

Still, three series in and nothing to touch City Of Death yet...

"Still, three series in and nothing to touch City Of Death yet..."

Steven Moffat said, on the CoD DVD, "City of Death shows us what Doctor Who would be like when written by a genius. Trouble is, that's not very useful because there aren't many geniuses around."

That David Agnew was one hot writer.

*One* hot writer?

I think it's likely that the distinctly RTD features of the show (notably the soap opera-ish tendecys) will be scaled-back.

You mean those aspects which have helped secure a large mainstream audience?

I honestly doubt there's many people in the BBC who think that RTD is doing *anything* wrong. What fans think and what real people think are often two different thing.

Personally I'd sooner it lost some audience in exchange for a bit of the old atmosphere. It might help curb some of the cynical, somewhat nauseating, toy marketing that's being inflicted by the BBC onto unsuspecting parents eveywhere.

Fortunately for everyone else I'm not the DG!

>You mean those aspects which have helped secure a large mainstream audience?

Have they? I doubt that large mainstream audience are watching because they feel it's like a soap opera - it's much more likely that they're watching because it's escapist light-hearted telefantasy. Certainly, of the members of the "large mainstream audience" who I've spoken to and who weren't previous Who-fans none of them seem to cite the soap-opera elements as their reason for watching so much as they find it engaging escapist entertainment.

The whole "it needs a kitchen sink element or people stop watching" always seems to be trotted out by those who have the entrenched belief that telefantasy as a genre simply can't be populist entertainment and if it is then there's another reason for it. Might it be, just possibly, that there's a bigger audience for sci-fi than some of them assume?

" What fans think and what real people think are often two different thing."

Again more lazy assumption. Leaving aside the meaningless term "real people" has it occured to you that those millions watching *are* fans? Has it occured to you that many of them actually like the sci-fi/fantasy elements of the stories? Have you tried speaking to some of them?

All the 'favourite episode' polls that I've seen (none of which I can find right now) whack stories such as 'Girl In The Fireplace', 'Blink', 'The Doctor Dances/The Empty Child' etc up at the to. All are emotionally charged the lack of Jackie and that bleedin' council estate are conspicuous by their absence. Of course, polls are based on the replies of people who answer polls so might not be representative, but I've not come across one fan, old or new, that didn't want to see the back of Eastenders and the arrival of a few more exciting, tense, SF episodes.

A few words and letters missing or superfluous there: keyboard batteries flagging a bit (and no edit facility!)

I haven't responded to any polls but the stories you've mentioned have been up in my favourites. I have felt that some 'family' bits were necessary (Rose going back to hug her mum after Mickey left, Martha's opening scene with the multiple phone calls- v funny, Martha calling her mum in 42, &c.) but they're mainly incidentals; the 'family heavy' episodes can grate with me a little (The Lazarus Experiment, for instance, was a good enough story without the Jones clan being involved.)

I grew up with Nyssa, Adric and Tegan and, having watched tapes of the first Doctor, Susan, Ian and Barbara, I feel that the TARDIS crew is the family that should be the focus. (However dysfunctional a family the crew may be! )

The Doctor, Rose and Jack seemed like more of a family to me than The Tylers or the Joneses.

"All the 'favourite episode' polls that I've seen (none of which I can find right now) whack stories such as 'Girl In The Fireplace', 'Blink', 'The Doctor Dances/The Empty Child' etc up at the to. All are emotionally charged the lack of Jackie and that bleedin' council estate are conspicuous by their absence. Of course, polls are based on the replies of people who answer polls so might not be representative, but I've not come across one fan, old or new, that didn't want to see the back of Eastenders and the arrival of a few more exciting, tense, SF episodes."

What's interesting about RTD's take on "Who" is that he frames himself as a populist who's taken the show out of the hands of the fanboys who think it belongs to them and given it back to the nation as a whole. The thing is, RTD *is* a shameless Who fanboy and the show *does* belong to him and so he's creating the show the way *he* wants it to be. In interviews, he's always said he felt the show was best when it was about the normal, everyday world suddenly becoming hostile ("Rose" pretty much encapsulates his idea of what the show should be) and under his guidance, that is what "Doctor Who" has largely become. I can't help but think he's making his very-own take on the series and taking its popularity as evidence of the essential populism of his vision when talking to the fans themselves (that's fans, not Fans) I get the impression "yes, it's good, but we'd like more sci-fi and more escapism".

Also interesting was that in a rubbish article for The Times last year he was pitching "Torchwood" as some sort of prime example of his take on populist sci-fi and, despite the BBC's spin, that series wasn't the success it was supposed to be jetissoning around half of its audience after the dismal opening episode. Of course, it still did well by digital standards (which isn't difficult) but it'll be interesting to see how it fares on BBC2...

Interesting that Roy also mentions the thing RTD's tenure has brought to the series that improves it massively which is the emotional and human-drama angle. The thing is, it works best when it focuses on often story-specific characters (I'm thinking in particular of the John Smith story in "Human Nature/Family of Blood") or relations within the TARDIS crew rather than the "down to earth" soap opera elements (many of which tend to be a little pantomimish, especially Jackie and her comedy-ageing-shagger routine).

They aren't fans - they're regular viewers. There's a big difference. Regular viewers don't spend time online for one thing (which is why online events are still, generally, counted in thousands rather than millions).

As for what would happen if, say, Steven Moffat took over as lead writer, well... anyone who is familiar with 'Press Gang' (the greatest drama ever put out in children's hour) will know, he'd probably go for as light-hearted an approach as Russell has done. Lots of fun, escapist episodes with a lot of humour interlocked with darker episodes. HIs second series of press Gang would probably be a good template for a theoretical Who series, being 13 episodes.

Episodes 1 & 2 - standalone, light-hearted stories.
3 - a link to the past, guaranteed to raise a lump in the throat
4 - comedy
5 & 6 - linked stories, so a possible two-parter here
7 & 8 - a really dark two-parter
9 - light-hearted and with a big famous name in the guest cast
10 - another dark episode
11 - fun dash-about episode leading into
12 & 13 - in which one of the regular cast looks on the verge of a life-changing decision. Emotional, with comedy elements.

In fact, if Press Gang were the template, you'd probably get more comedy than Russell has done, and just as many big names in the cast.

Everyone should watch Press Gang anyway. The first series is a good kids' show, but from series two onwards it's just a blinking solid drama series.

I haven't seen Press Gang (except for the odd clip) since it was on but I remember it being very good and, like you say Smij, not just good for a kids' programme.

Whoever is executive producer/producer of Who, I can't see them changing it much because they seem to have got a decent 'formula' that mixes comedy, drama, scariness for the kids and enough of the essence of 'classic' Who to appeal to the old fans.

I think the Doctor-lite episodes have been a revelation and I hope they carry on with one per season.

I don't really like them...

Out of the two they've done in the new serie,s you don't like either of them?

You don't like 'Blink'?

Then again, Doctor-lite stories were a common element of the original series. Hartnell was missing for over two episodes of 'Keys of Marinus', plus an episode of 'Dalek Invasion of Earth', 'The Tenth Planet' and others. Troughton missed a few too, but then, they made the show all year round in those days.

Blink was OK, but it's far from my favourite...