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

I think we should give American audiences a bit more credit! What problem could an intelligent person have with the current imaginings? Trouble is the decision's not up to us and will be made by the money.

>Personally speaking, with the benefit of hindsight, I'm glad the series didn't carry on then (as much as I think McGann was a brilliant Doctor) because I think the show would have become 'Star Treky' (and probably died an even more ignominious death than we thought it had in '89.) The way Who came back under RTD was how it should have always stayed; a "family" show that entertains children and yet has the intelligence to pose questions to the adults that the children wouldn't even consider. Dare I say that this formula explains the success of Harry Potter?

The US version *was* aimed at a family audience from what I recall; it felt a bit more "grown-up" than the original UK show but that wasn't really difficult. I agree with you, though, that it's probably best that the pilot failed over there. It was crazy that the BBC was part-sharing such an iconic UK series with an American broadcaster anyway; it showed a pathetic lack of confidence on our part. Thank goodness we've got over that. If it had gone ahead it would have been disappointing (the pilot was bad enough), there'd have been too much schmaltz, a nasty slick feel to everything, the eccentricity would have been toned-down, and the worst thing is it might have run for several series and we'd *never have got it back* for decades.

The way the BBC treated "Who" from 1989-2005 was just plain weird; they clearly wanted to bring it back at some point but clearly had no real plan for the how or why and kept trying to tie it into something else (after the McGann series didn't happen they dumped it on the BBC's film wing where it stayed until the BBC proper wrested it back in 2003 because they clearly weren't interested in doing anything with it).

Hi BBS,

>What do people think about the suggestion I read in DWM that if Dr Who ever wants to take off in the U.S. they should rewrite/reimagine it to their tastes as has been done for The Office, Life on Mars etc.

I thought they already did that as an obscure US TV show called 'Star Trek'.

Gif

Dr Who rewrite US style? Is their style so different to ours really? Shows and films like Star Trek, Star Wars, Stargate, etc are popular on both sides of the Atlantic. And I heard that Dr Who is getting a following in the US.

I'm not saying they should do a US 'reboot' but it would be interesting to see how they did it.

Does anyone know if we get our five minutes of fun during Children In Need in a few weeks' time?

I know whether we get our five minutes of fun during CiN ... we don't. Apparently with the recording schedules for the BBC Proms, Christmas special, and the 2009 specials; there wasn't time.

Ah well, no point in watching it then!

Nooooo!!! Not fair!! We always* get a bit!!

*And I suppose by "always" I really mean over the past 3-4 years, but still.

I just ordered a copy of The Time Traveller's Wife off Amazon, I have high hopes after reading about it on here. Incidentally, it looks like they're making a film. Eric Bana and the queen bee girl from Mean Girls (can't remember her real name) are signed up I think. One to keep an eye on.

Don't read it in a public place is my advice. There were a couple of bits that had me in floods of tears and I *never* cry at books. On both occasions I was on a busy train and it was a touch embarrasing.

Oh dear. Picked it up on a second-hand stall last week but haven't got around to it yet. Thanks for the warning!

Ooh, I loved that book!

Yep the film is due out at Christmas? Or Easter 2009. I think it's produced by Brad and Jen(?)'s company; or some famous (ex-)couple.

I probably said before ... as a bloke I really enjoyed TTTW because of the timey-wimey travelly bits. Essentially it's a romantic novel and without the time element it would be yeuchhhh. But it is great!

Apparently it WILL be worth watching Children in Need this year, after all ... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7689906.stm

Oh well it had to happen eventually http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7698539.stm

This post has been removed.

I really thought he'd do the season after the specials and then go

Please restore post 1996- it wasn't offensive

I'd love to see McGann back but I know how unlikely it is. DT has been brilliant and I look forward to his last year. I'm just a bit worried because this strikes me as a bit like when Davison left and we all know what happened after that

"Please restore post 1996- it wasn't offensive"

I didn't see it, but I expect everyone at the BBC is a bit twitchy today...

Disappointed to see Tennant go, excited by the prospect of finding out who will replace him, hope they don't mess it up. Think that maybe there needs to be a 'Some number of Doctors' time paradox special at some point.

Yay, I've been modded!!

It was only a Neil Gaiman quote. From the Books of Magic too which I thought was a kids book!

They've got to do a multi-Doctor episode soon (especially given that Tom Baker isn't getting any younger!)

I'd love an episode to start with Tom as a voiceover along the lines of "As I get older, my past catches up with me." (ok, maybe a bit trite but my concept is that the time war is catching up with the Doctor, hence his previous incarnations (actors!) are getting older and withering away.)

I expect I've just proved why I'm not a writer for the show