|
Post by librarylover on Aug 29, 2010 12:14:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by merrythemad on Aug 29, 2010 13:08:23 GMT
what? really? this was a big rumor last year due to the World CUp and I was sooooo glad we avoided it but nooooooo they can't do this
also here is Moffat on what they are doing and why: ”Doctor Who will come back for 7 episodes at Easter, building up to an Earth-shattering climax in Episode 7. There will be a huge game-changing cliffhanger, one we could never do normally at the end of a series. It will change everything for the Doctor, Amy and Rory.”
He continued: ”In order to give you time to recover, we’ll let you go off, have your summer holidays, then come back in the Autumn for another 6 episodes in what will be Series 7, I suppose. We’re not just splitting it, we’re making two separate series.”
|
|
|
Post by clocketpatch on Aug 30, 2010 12:23:36 GMT
On the one hand, this means that there will be no Who playing when I'm Internetless and doing my internship this summer, and that by the time it comes back I'm probably have Internet again. So, for the first time since series 1 I might actually see everything in order and reasonably soon after it airs. On the other hand...
Nooooooooo! WTFBBQ! This smacks of Rusty's Christmas Specials and I for one do not want another year of that nonsense. And if the show is working this hard to get it's ratings up then... *trails of into sadness*
Though, on the other hand, if it really does work with the plot... it does mean we'll be having less of a wait between Who, and that can only a good thing, I think?
|
|
|
Post by jjpor on Aug 30, 2010 23:07:22 GMT
At least we've got a year to get used to the idea...it'll be hard waiting over the summer, but at least it's not as hard a whole year...
Do you know what I think, though? I think this is Moffat's way of getting Who back as part of the autumn programming the way it traditionally was and the way he's said he'd prefer it to be. Partly because ratings are better for early evening programmes when it's not spring/summer, that's true (although the Beeb doesn't seem as anxious about the allegedly terrible ratings for S5 as some fans are - could it be that they - gasp! - knew it was always going to suffer scheduled against the World Cup?? Or indeed that the good weather and the Beeb's own insane policy of bouncing it around the schedules weren't exactly helping), and it was historically true in the days of classic Who, but partly out of his sense of what Who "should" be like.
So, think of it this way - if Moffat announced that S6 was going to air in September or October instead of April, well people would be annoyed at the wait and the longer gap might not do the show's momentum any good (Clocket's right about the year of specials - I don't think that did Who's brand any good at all - it's the only grudge I hold against Tennant, preferring to save all of my other bile for RTD ;D). However, now he can push for S7 (optimistically assuming there is one!) to be scheduled in the autumn of 2012 instead of the spring, and the gap between S6 and S7 will be no greater than that between previous series of NuWho.
I could be completely wrong about the above, but it makes a kind of sense to me anyway...
|
|
|
Post by reversethepolarity on Aug 30, 2010 23:55:22 GMT
This kinda scares me. I'm not sure I like the idea of something that'll completely change Doctor Who and be all earth-shatteringly big. Now I'm really nervous. Why does the new series always have to be so big? Why can't we just have a normal, fun season like we used to?
|
|
|
Post by jjpor on Aug 31, 2010 19:04:30 GMT
Why not indeed? It's the need to top what came before, I suppose... I think the thing is we in the UK are sort of used to six-episode series or whatever, so I don't know if it will seem as bad to us. I'm just wondering what kind of astonishing mid-season cliffhanger they could possibly be talking about...
|
|
|
Post by reversethepolarity on Sept 1, 2010 3:55:14 GMT
I bet it has something to do with River Song. Unless they plan to milk that mystery for a few more seasons. I certainly hope not. I don't really like waiting years to find out something like that. I had enough trouble waiting for Jon Pertwee to finally get to Metebelis III! = ) Now, there was a disappointing climax if ever I've seen one. 'Oh, isn't this just grand, we've finally reached Metebelis. What, we're not actually going to see a lot of it? How sad... Oh, look, we're here again in another episode and now we get to see the whole planet. How wonderful!... Wait, what's happening to Jon! Oh, no!'
After that experience, I'm rather uneasy about waiting around for any big plot points to be revealed. 'Course, I guess we did get Tom out of that last one, so maybe this one won't be so terrible either. = )
|
|
|
Post by clocketpatch on Sept 1, 2010 4:01:09 GMT
I'm thinking it probably has more to do with that "Silence will Fall!!" voice (unless that's covered in the Christmas episode), though... at a guess, River's probably mixed up in that business as well. The Moff does seem to like his plot lines good and interwoven.
I like JJ's sneaky autumn shift idea, mostly because I haven't seen that mentioned elsewhere and it sounds suitably devious and non-threatening.
As long as we get a sword fight between Eleven and Possessed!Rory I'm happy (okay, I'd be happy with pretty much anything, BUT SWORDFIGHT DAMNIT!)
Why yes, I do have a one track mind.
Having them reveal Donna as Romana would also make me happy in a pinch
|
|
|
Post by jjpor on Sept 1, 2010 19:49:48 GMT
Well, spread the conspiracy theory around...it doesn't matter whether it's true or not, it's a conspiracy theory... ;D
I will be very disappointed if the shocking cliffhanger in question doesn't involve the identity of the "Silence Will Fall!" voice being revealed as Handy!Valeyard!Ten, River Song turning out to be an agent of the Black Guardian all along and Rory running Eleven through with a massive sword following the epic swordfight-to-end-all-swordfights...
Which I think you'll all agree is almost certain to be what actually happens... ;D
|
|
|
Post by clocketpatch on Sept 2, 2010 1:40:16 GMT
... you forgot the bit where it'll all be written by Neil Gaiman.
OH WAIT!!
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by Stripes on Sept 2, 2010 1:59:37 GMT
I like this idea alot. I approve. More who through the year makes me happy.
|
|
|
Post by merrythemad on Sept 2, 2010 14:23:57 GMT
It likely does involve River as she said when asked who she was "You'll find out very soon now and I'm sorry but that's when everything changes" and Moff keeps saying "everything changes" at the mid series finale, also some details have "leaked" (by the Sun mind so do remember the flying shark business)** **** www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/tv/3116628/Amy-Pond-played-by-Karen-Gillan-may-be-killed-off.html**** What I find interesting in the article, is it reads as if the first half will start shortly after Christmas and lead us into Easter, where I thought it was starting at Easter and ending seven weeks later n then summer hols (as you tea-drinkers say) then Autumnal DW, is this correct? Am I misreading? Are they wrong? oh someone clarify!!!! JJ, I totally love you have accepted Handy! as Valeyard, this pleases me greatly especially as I am writing a series where John Smith goes slowly insane (it's crazy dark and am having some HUGE issues with bits of it) ACK MOD HELP!!! I whited out the link but erm it won't white out!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by jjpor on Sept 2, 2010 20:16:15 GMT
Well, Clocket, forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't Gaiman''s story ep 6? Or a good place to break off in mid-season in other words?? I would have thought Moffat would write any big game-changing story himself, but on the other hand...Gaiman... ;D
I think I'm with Newton on this one anyway - yes, the gap in the middle might be frustrating, but potentially less waiting time between doses of Who...
I read it to mean one Xmas special, then one mini-season starting at Easter, then another mini-season in the autumn, then another Xmas special. At least that's what I thought...I may need to have another look at the article.
Merry, I completely accept your Handy-Valeyard theory - I don't know if it's 100 percent consistent with what was said in Trial of a Timelord, but it makes more sense than Trial of a Timelord, that's for sure. I mean, it seems so obviously true to me... That could just be my horrible, unpleasant desire to see Handy/Rose come to an unhappy end coming out there... ;D
And I wouldn't worry about whiting it out...if it's in The Sun it's unlikely to need whiting out... ;D
|
|
|
Post by clocketpatch on Sept 3, 2010 3:22:40 GMT
I think it's the 3rd episode actually (which, in it's way is even better, because we get to watch it sooner!) Yes, I am an impatient three year old.
That link Merry...
If it's for keeps then I will be impressed (because given the Moff's nobody dies attitude, anything permanent will be shocking) and also very interested to see what happens next. Especially Rory-wise.
...
|
|
|
Post by jjpor on Sept 3, 2010 18:46:51 GMT
Aw well, third it is yet. He keeps posting things on his blog about how stupendously large-scale it all is and everything, how it stretched the BBC's capabilities to their limits etc. etc. Which is all to the good, I say! *And yet weren't there also rumours about it being a TARDIS-heavy story too...which makes me envisage vast CGI landscapes inside the TARDIS etc...which would make me squee if it did happen, as vanishingly unlikely as it may be...* ;D
*As I say, take everything you read in The Sun with a pinch or three of salt ;D, but if it is true it would be an interesting departure for NuWho...of course the suspicion with Moffat would always be that it would somehow turn out to be not for keeps...which as Clocket says would lend it even more impact if it turned out to be true...*
|
|
|
Post by merrythemad on Sept 3, 2010 18:52:59 GMT
Yay more rumors **Doctor Who:
Steven Moffat strongly implied there won't be any Daleks in series six, because they haven't come up with a good story for them (since when has that ever stopped Doctor Who?). [Digital Spy]
And now for another great spoiler roundup by super commenter bluehinter. The biggest news is that one of the two-parters - probably the first - will likely be set in Egypt, and it's rumored to be written by an unknown new writer. (If I had to guess, that'll be episodes 5 and 6, because Richard Clark is directing Neil Gaiman's third episode as well as episode 4, so that means the first slot for a two-parter is 5 and 6.) The series is also filming at the 17/18th century house Dyrham Park, and some third-hand information suggests the story is about "the Doctor in a giant dollhouse!" (Who wants to start a return of the Celestial Toymaker rumor?) And Neil Gaiman's script was originally called The House of Nothing, which might suggest the Dyrham Park episode is his... or maybe they're just doing a lot of house-related stuff this season. [Huge thanks to bluehinter for all these tips!]**
The above is from Io9 but as I don't know how familiar any of you are (or aren't) I decided it was easiest to just highlight and paste
|
|
|
Post by jjpor on Sept 3, 2010 19:03:55 GMT
*Which of course means that S6 will be full of Daleks!!! Wily of you, Moff, but you don't fool me... ;D
Egypt...doesn't necessarily mean ancient Egypt, I suppose, but an ancient Egypt story would be very cool... And a giant doll's house sounds like just the sort of Moffat-era dark-fairytale ticket, as well as being the sort of thing you could expect Gaiman to go in for too (which of course means it's not his story! ;D), but yes...very encouraging...
I may have to start spreading that Celestial Toymaker rumour too...it'll make a change from me babbling about the Black Guardian I guess...*
|
|
|
Post by happysquirrel on Sept 4, 2010 17:37:47 GMT
I'm torn between loving and hating the idea of the split. On the one hand it means far less of a wait each time which would be nice but on the other it means less episodes each time (and on a purely OCD side-note will throw my annual marathon out of place.) I wouldn't be surprised if the theory that it is Moffat's sneaky way of pushing it to an autumn slot is true.
As for the rumours in The Sun, well I wouldn't trust them to tell me what colour the sky is so I'm taking it with one very unhealthy dose of salt.
*** And frankly I don't want it to be true, I want some companions to stick around for a couple of series at least, I'm sick of all this one series and then leaving nonsense!
An egyptian story sounds fab, as does a giant dollhouse. If the Celestial Toymaker turned up I would probably keel over in joy, he's one of my top want-to-return baddies. And I do hope the Daleks get left alone for a bit, even if just for a year.***
|
|
|
Post by jjpor on Sept 4, 2010 23:47:37 GMT
Yes, it has pros and cons. And he is a wily one, that Moff... I bet it is something to do with his ambitions of autumn-Who. I bet it is... ;D
And I totally agree about The Sun as a source of information. Or The Scum as it is commonly referred to in my neck of the woods...
*I agree that I want Amy (and Rory!) to stick around as long as possible. On the other hand, an honest-to-goodness companion death would be a shocking and dramatic thing, or at least it should be...
I'm a big old Dalek fan; I don't really subscribe to the argument that they are overexposed, more like they're just not used to their full horrifying potential... But yes, Moffat has sort of said already that he couldn't think of anything more interesting to do with them, so in that case he probably ought to leave well alone.
And the Celestial Toymaker showing up would be kind of cool... ;D*
|
|
|
Post by clocketpatch on Sept 5, 2010 1:08:09 GMT
* I agree that I want Amy (and Rory!) to stick around as long as possible. On the other hand, an honest-to-goodness companion death would be a shocking and dramatic thing, or at least it should be...
* My first reaction, I'll admit it, was girlfriend-in-the-icebox... but it would HAVE to be Amy wouldn't it? Or River? I mean, they can't very well kill off Rory... again.
though I almost want them too, much as I love Rory, just for the ridiculousness of it.
|
|