Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Sci-Fi Media Television

New Dr Who Actor Named 211

Posted by Hemos from the who-da-thunk-it dept.
gdav writes "Well, after all that talk about Bill Nighy, it's actually going to be Christopher Ecclestone. He was prominent in Cracker, Our Friends in the North, and more recently 28 Days Later."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Dr Who Actor Named More

New Dr Who Actor Named

Comments Filter:

  • Who? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:03AM (#8620669)
    Doctor who? Say again please.
    • Chalmers: Doctor who?
      Skinner: Not the pronoun, but rather a doctor with the unlikely name of "Who".
      Chalmers: Well that's just great, Seymour. We've been out here six seconds and you've already managed to blow the routine.Sexless freak.

  • Lets face it though.... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by andy666 ( 666062 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:04AM (#8620676)
    nothing beats the good ol' Tom Baker days. Not that I didn't like the other doctors...

    • Re:Lets face it though.... (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:11AM (#8620708)
      Tom baker prank calls [bbc.co.uk]

    • Re:Lets face it though.... (Score:5, Funny)

      by torpor ( 458 ) <ibisumNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:17AM (#8620742) Homepage Journal
      yeah, you just can't go ooo-eee-ooooh without thinking of Tom.

    • Re:Lets face it though.... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Masem ( 1171 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:24AM (#8620772)
      The reason that many people like Tom Baker is that during that time, the complete DW production staff was one of the best assembled, from writing to direction, and thus has some of the more memoriable stories, and just so happened that Tom Baker was the Doctor at that time. But I know more DW fans that appreciate Patrick Trougton, Jon Pewtree, and Peter Davidson as the Doctor, given some of the intensity of acting which they supplied to the roles, while Tom Baker's was more a jovial approach - there's also the change in approach from more cerebrial stories to more action-oriented ones as the sfx budget increased.

      The question here, is, is this going to be the 9th Doctor (as the BBC canon (which includes the made-for-tv movie) has McGann as the 8th, or are they planning on retcon?

      • Lets read the article shall we :)

        Eccleston, who starred alongside Nicole Kidman in the horror movie The Others, will be the ninth TV Time Lord to control the Tardis in a 13-part series.

        Now, does that clear that up?

        • Re:Lets face it though.... (Score:4, Informative)

          by Masem ( 1171 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:46AM (#8620871)
          I read that as "9th actor to play the Doctor" , not necessarily the 9th Doctor (aka 8th regeneration), only because, again, the question of the movie-as-canon is still in question, plus it certainly is possible to say the movie was canon, they could pull an actor change at this point without upsetting too much.

          • Re:Lets face it though.... (Score:4, Interesting)

            by Richard_at_work ( 517087 ) * on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:57AM (#8620922)
            Since they killed off the previous actor within the movie, and the creators have previously said that the movie was to be included, I would say that the BBC article is correctly worded as the 9th Time Lord. Its possible we wont see McGann being killed off, but we will pick back up with the Dr after a undetermined period of time in his life.

            On a similiar note, can anyone tell me the title and writer of the book where the Dr met Hitler? From what I recall, it was written for an older audience than the normal books, and was very good.
          • I read that as "9th actor to play the Doctor" , not necessarily the 9th Doctor (aka 8th regeneration), only because, again, the question of the movie-as-canon is still in question, plus it certainly is possible to say the movie was canon, they could pull an actor change at this point without upsetting too much.

            I believe the BBC considers the movie canon, as they themselves publish a line of Eighth Doctor books, not to mention had Paul McGann play the Doctor in a new version of Shada. Shada is currently

      • If you're going to count movies... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by dpilot ( 134227 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:55AM (#8620912) Homepage Journal
        What about Peter Cushing in "Day of the Daleks"?

        I suspect the can(n)on has to boom in a different direction for the movies, though I did like the touch of including Sylvester McCoy in the McGann movie, even if the movie itself wasn't generally well received. For all of the running through the Tardis in "Invasion of Time", we never saw such an essential and powerful piece of the Tardis as the Eye until 1996?
        • Peter Cushing starred in the movies "Dr. Who and the Daleks" and "Daleks: Invasion Earth 2150AD", which were based on the original TV stores "The Daleks"[1] and "The Dalek Invasion of Earth". "Day of the Daleks" was a Jon Pertwee TV story.But those two 1960s movies don't fit in with the TV series at all, being remakes of TV stories, featuring a human Dr. Who (not The Doctor) in his space ship Tardis (not the TARDIS) and various other changes. You'd have to really twist the timeline to include them. I think

      • Re:Lets face it though.... (Score:4, Informative)

        by gilesjuk ( 604902 ) <giles.jones@nospaM.zen.co.uk> on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:58AM (#8620925)
        Tom Baker also played the doctor for the longest period from 1974 to 1981. Most of the others did a stretch of about 3-4 years.
      • The reason that many people like Tom Baker is that during that time, the complete DW production staff was one of the best assembled, from writing to direction, and thus has some of the more memoriable stories, and just so happened that Tom Baker was the Doctor at that time.

        Also, people usually imprint on the first Doctor they're exposed to (same applies with James Bond), and since Tom Baker did more episodes than anyone else, most people see his episodes first.
    • There are some quite entertaining expletive-ridden audio outtakes from Tom Baker doing a voiceover for a company called Symphony [snurl.com]...
    • --I agree; but since he's apparently not open to doing anything related to WHO anymore (I sent him an email asking if he would consider trying out for the role of The Master in the new series) it would have been nice to see what Sean Bean might have done with the role:

      http://imdb.com/name/nm0000293/
    • Saying Tom Baker is the best Dr. Who is like saying Roger Moore was the best James Bond.

      There's only one Dr. Who and that's Jon Pertwee, although this new bloke looks like one of the best Dr. Who's since Pertwee!!!

  • Samuel L Jackson as Dr Who (Score:5, Funny)

    by Average_Joe_Sixpack ( 534373 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:05AM (#8620679)
    "Get the F*ck off my TARDIS ya punk ass bitch!!"

  • Paul McGann (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:07AM (#8620686)
    It should have been Paul McGann. He did such a great job in the 1996 movie.

    --
    M
    • I too liked him as the Doctor. I thought he was the best Doctor since Tom Baker. But he did some interviews where he basicly said he just wasn't into it anymore and didn't care. Kind of hard to (re)hire someone who doesn't feel like doing the job. Pitty though.

    • Re:Paul McGann (Score:4, Informative)

      by D'Arque Bishop ( 84624 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @11:16AM (#8621053) Homepage
      He actually said himself that while he would have accepted the role if it had been offered to him, he would prefer to see someone with more drive and desire to play it, as he had already been there and done that, so to speak. However, he has said that he would love to come back and film the regeneration sequence.

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/news/drwho/2004/01/22/ 90 05.shtml
  • I was holding out to see Richard E. Grant in the role, as he did an excellent job during the recent BBC/Cosgrove Hall co-produced web animation, "Scream of the Shalka".
    That said, I'm more interested than disappointed, because I've seen some of Ecclestone's other work and I think he could bring a new perspective to the role.
    (And I'm also very grateful that the role didn't go to Joanna Lumley. That joke's been done to death since the mid-1980s, and the Comic Relief episode a few years back is as close to that prediction as I want to get!!)

    All we need to know now is, who are his new companions?
    • Richard E Grant would have done a fine job but he would have been almost too good a fit for the part - you get the impression he could do haughty but eccentric without having to think about about it.
      Same with one of the other hotly tipped actors - Alan Davies - who could easily have done slightly shambolic and eccentric as he has done in several series of 'Jonathan Creek.'
      And much as I love Eddie Izzard I'm kind of relieved it wasn't him in the end.
    • Couldn't agree more about Richard E. Grant, I am disappointed that he won't be taking on the role again though. I don't think Christopher Ecclestone will be able to carry it off, but I guess time will too.
      As for companions, I wouldn't mind seeing:
      -Lucy Davis (The Office)
      -Daniela Denby-Ashe(My Family)
      -Lauren Laverne?
      • "time will tell", oh...and no pun intended.
      • Which doctor was Richard E. Grant? (ninth? tenth? ???) And this new guy... does he come before or after Richard E. Grant? Or... is Richard E. Grant's doctor from an alternate universe? Can Quinn Mallory (Sliders reference) explain? Which brings me to another point... how can you be a Doctor Who fan and NOT like Sliders?
    • Morena Baccarin [imdb.com] aka Inara from Firefly. Not sure the BBC could afford her, but she's currently out of a job I guess....

  • One question.... (Score:3, Funny)

    by sh0dan ( 762382 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:08AM (#8620695) Homepage
    Christopher who?

    • Re:One question.... (Score:5, Informative)

      by kamawell ( 587003 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:35AM (#8620812)
      Eccleston. In the UK he's a well repected TV actor but he was in '28 Days Later' and 'Elizabeth' too. He's an interesting choice and over here at least he's certainly going to lend a bit of adult credibilty to the new version of the show.
      http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001172/

    • Re:One question.... (Score:3, Informative)

      by ader ( 1402 )
      Before anyone else does that joke, please get thee to a vid store and rent (or buy, it's worth it) "Elizabeth" and note his performance as the papal assassin (although in the end, Geoffrey Rush's Walsingham is the more ruthless and effective).

      Ade_
      /

      • ...note his performance as the papal assassin...

        I'm ashamed that, even having seen Elizabeth, I first read this as "the paypal assassin".

  • A good Docotor does not a good show make... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by eweu ( 213081 ) * on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:13AM (#8620723)
    Paul McGann was a fabulous Doctor in the 1996 movie, but the writing was terrible. That's why it flopped.

    I only hope the BBC holds back on budget just like the old days so the storytelling has to bear the weight, not the effects.
    • Based on the flash movies already on the BBC website I'd say they plan to use a great deal of specal effects BUT the writers will not be permitted to let the effects tell the story.

      I won't speak for the quality of the writing. However every TV executive will tell you if you just toss a TV show on the air and tell nobody you will get no viewers. That is exactly what Fox pulled with the 1996 movie.

      • Re:A good Docotor does not a good show make... (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        I won't speak for the quality of the writing. However every TV executive will tell you if you just toss a TV show on the air and tell nobody you will get no viewers.

        It was awful as an example of Doctor Who. If they wanted to start over from scratch then they should have started over from scratch, not pretend to be writing a Doctor Who movie. If they wanted to continue a tradition then they needed to stay more in that tradition. The movie they made just didn't work as Doctor Who.

        If they wanted to take the
      • Yeah, Fox is good at failing to promote good shows. They must have some really pathological office politics. Remember Firefly? No? Guess why. :-)
    • Yes he was a fabulous Doctor. Wish he had been interested in staying.

      I can remember being so stunned the movie even existed (I was in Taiwan at the time I saw it, which was the first I had heard of it) that I never noticed how awful story was. For me, the fabulous job by Paul McGann made up for it all.

      Ahh well, least we got a Flash Movie with his voice that was pretty good.

      And yes, I secretly hope they make the Special Effects especially cheesey to make it funnier to watch. I doubt they will though. it i

    • Non-lameness does not a good Doctor make. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by fm6 ( 162816 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @11:58AM (#8621284) Homepage Journal
      Lame as it was, the movie doesn't begin to compare with most of the BBC scripts. Tom Baker once told an interviewer that his famous puzzled expression was not acting -- he often had no idea what was supposed to be going on, the script usually not being finished until shooting was well underway!

      I wonder if the Beeb will just pretend the movie never happened? They certainly can't afford to reproduce Hollywood's version of the Tardis.

      • I wonder if the Beeb will just pretend the movie never happened? They certainly can't afford to reproduce Hollywood's version of the Tardis.

        The console room could have simply been reconfigured since the movie... which it has in the BBC novels. Currently, I think it's something closer to what the original console room was.
        • You obviously haven't seen most of the earlier episodes. The Tardis supposedly has hundreds, maybe thousands of rooms, most of which The Doctor has simply forgotten about. This includes multiple control rooms. Whenever they decided to totally redesign the set (minor redesigns did not require explanation), The Doctor would wander into an unfamiliar room and say, "Oh, here's a fine control room I forgot I had! I think I'll use it instead!"

          What's lame about this is that the Doctor is rarely shown in any room

    • the writing was terrible. That's why it flopped

      So how do you explain every other season of Doctor Who that got renewed?
      • Well, they had good writing on and off. Most of the really bad writing was toward the end of the series. Douglas Adams did a few episodes. "City of Death" is the only one I remember off the top of my head.

      • Because in Soviet UKistan, there were only another two, later three channels competing with Dr Who for most of its run. And you can knock one off of that because BBC 2 wouldn't compete with BBC 1 over such an expensive (in BBC terms) show.

        Now that even UKia has hundreds of cable and satellite channels, Dr Who will have to compete on its merits rather than win by default.

  • Bill Nighy? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    You mean the Bill Nighy the Science Guihy?
  • Isn't that a triangular rubber coin several thousand miles long?

  • Am I the only one? (Score:2, Informative)

    by JoshRoss ( 88988 )
    The only place that I have ever seen the name Dr. who has been on slashdot.
    Are any of these posters from America?
    When is the last time any of these shows aired?
    Or, if they are any good, is there a Dr. who bittorrent site, since the BBC open-sourced their content [bbc.co.uk].
    • Are any of these posters from America?

      When is the last time any of these shows aired?

      I'm one.

      Tonight, and I hope it won't be the last!

      I love the picture [bbc.co.uk]. The caption says "The Previous Time Lords" and the picture is of three Daleks.

    • I'm in my 30's, in the US, and recall Dr. Who being extremely popular with the "geeks" when I was in high school (84-87). The fans were as into Dr. Who as Star Trek and Star Wars fans are into those shows, but there was somewhat fewer Dr. Who fans. Dr. Who has never really found it's way into the mainstream - at least not in the US. Dr. Who episodes were shown on PBS stations then. At the time I wasn't really interested, but I've since taken quite a liking to them.

    • Re:Am I the only one? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Fred Or Alive ( 738779 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @12:05PM (#8621313)

      Are any of these posters from America?
      Quite a few I would guess. Not me though.

      When is the last time any of these shows aired?
      Last new episode was broadcast 06/12/89 (DD/MM/YY dates), a TV Movie coproduced by the BBC and Universal was broadcast 27/05/96 in the UK (earlier in the US). Repeats continue on UKTV Gold in the UK (early weekend mornings, set a video / PVR unless you want to get up a 7:30am on a Saturday), and some US PBS stations (but not many). Various other channels show it, like BBC Kids in Canada, UK TV and ABC[1] in Australia.)

      Or, if they are any good, is there a Dr. who bittorrent site, since the BBC open-sourced their content.
      Note "announced plans" and "in the future" etc. in that news article. It doesn't mean you can just share BBC material freely, it's still copyright and so on. Plus Drama series are probably going to be the last stuff the BBC will make available online, I think the early stuff they're going to have available is stuff like documentaries. You can get DVDs, audio CDs and VHSs of stories.

      Now I'll just do a quick "WTF is Doctor Who" bit...

      Doctor Who was a Sci-Fi series predominately aimed at children (although it's exact target audience varied over the course of the series, it gradually shifted to older audiences as time went on) that ran between 1963 and 1989 on BBC TV. It concerned the adventures of a mysterious time traveller called The Doctor (not Doctor Who), with the ability to regenerate and change his body to cheat death, and who travel through time and space in a Police Box[1]. The Police Box is actually called the TARDIS (Time And Relative Dimension(s) In Space), and a broken chameleon circuit (which should make the ship blend in with any environment, not just 1950/60's British city streets[2]) was not it's only problem, as the ship appeared to be very unpredictable, often catapulting the Doctor and his travelling companions[3] into dangerous situations, often against evil aliens like the Daleks, Cybermen, Ice Warriors, or The Doctor's nemesis The Master. The series was at it's most popular during the mid-late 1970's, when Tom Baker took the lead role.

      [1] Basically a big blue phone box so police officers could contact their station before the advent of portable radios, they also had a phone on the outside for the use of the public in emergencies (behind the panel with text on it.)

      [2] Naturally the TARDIS was first seen in a junkyard, not exactly a common location for Police Boxes at the time. A junkyard did become common in the 1970's, as police forces began scrapping the boxes in there numbers, only a handful of real boxes still exist.

      [3] Quite often young women.

      • There's oodles of police boxes around the city of Edinburgh, Scotland. Slightly different design to the London one and many now used for other things (one on Rose Street that's been converted to a coffee bar).
      • > Basically a big blue phone box so police officers
        > could contact their station before the advent of
        > portable radios, they also had a phone on the
        > outside for the use of the public in emergencies
        >(behind the panel with text on it.)

        I made a discovery recently... I always thought that the real Police Boxes were rather like normal telephone boxes: simple, light, wooden.

        But most of them were actually serious concrete affairs, weighing over two tons (which became somewhat of a problem when th
  • If I remember my Dr. Who rules (though since when have the rules been a problem for the Dr.) This will be the ninth and there for last Dr. Who.
    Of course they could go back and fill in the early life of the first Dr. or something like that.
    • No, according to the cannon books, its possible for the Gallifreyian Time Lord council to permit a second set of 9 regenerations, so its not fixed at 9. I cant remember from which set of books I got this from, but its definately main stream (It may have been the Master who had 18 regenerations, but Im not sure). God, Im so going to be labeled as a nerd for this.

      • Re:Last Dr. Who? (Score:5, Informative)

        by NulDevice ( 186369 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @11:05AM (#8620970) Homepage
        12. Gallifreyans get 12 regens by default. The master used up all his, did all sorts of mojo to stay alive on Gallifrey, stole Councillor Wossisname's body on Traken, and in the 5 docs was offered a full set of regens in exchange for help locating the Doctor.

        The Valeyard from Trial of a Time Lord was supposedly the doc's 12th regen. The eeeeeevil one.

        Oh my god. I'm a huge nerd.

        • Re:Last Dr. Who? (Score:4, Funny)

          by whovian ( 107062 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @11:13AM (#8621036)
          Yep, 12. Before that he was able to siphon off some of the energy(?) from the Eye of Harmony in the Panoptican on Gallifrey in order to stay alive a bit longer, even in his vegetative form.

          That's Councillor Tremas you are thinking of.

          Then there's that pneumesmiton(sp?) gas stuff in that cave during Peter Davison's character. Can't recall any more than that.

          OMG! I'm a huge nerd, too. There's a pair of us!

        • Re:Last Dr. Who? (Score:3, Interesting)

          by TomV ( 138637 )
          Unless you buy the "Brain Of Morbius" version of Time Lord lifecycles, in which case there were eight other Doctors prior to William Hartnell (this was flatly contradicted in other scripts later in the series, but was very much the intention of the production team at the time) whose faces appear on the screen of the mind-wrestling machine.

          SO looking forward to this new series. We have another tall, intense, slightly alien-looking insanely charismatic actor in the role, the best Drama writer in the UK, a b
          • It does look interesting doesn't it?

            I am slightly worried that we're running out of regenerations, as one of the future ones has to be Merlin as well (Battlefield established that quite clearly).

            However, right near the end of the Slyvester McCoy era, in stories such as The Curse of Fenric, they started to hint that the Doctor might not be just a Time Lord after all. Maybe they'll expand on that a bit, but hopefully in a good, positive kind of way and not a 'change direction of the series' kind of way, bec

        • The master used up all his, did all sorts of mojo to stay alive on Gallifrey, stole Councillor Wossisname's body on Traken

          Its Tremas - easy to remember since its an anagram of Master

    • If I remember my Dr. Who rules (though since when have the rules been a problem for the Dr.) This will be the ninth and there for last Dr. Who.

      You misremember. It's thirteen lives; the Trial of a Time Lord story (which constituted the majority of Colin Baker's tenure aboard the Tardis) featured the Thirteenth Doctor, who'd turned rather nasty in his closing days.

    • Re:Last Dr. Who? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by mark-t ( 151149 )
      For someone who has seen enough Doctor Who to have such an accurate count of the number of incarnations the Doctor has had so far, it is suprising that you don't know that the number of regenerations that a timelord has is twelve, not nine.

      Also, that's only by default... in "The 5 Doctors", it was alluded to that it was possible for a Timelord to get a completely new life cycle, which could apparently be granted by the high council. It wasn't explicitly stated in that story, but the implication was that

  • He's got 'the look' (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jarich ( 733129 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:58AM (#8620930) Homepage Journal
    check him out Google images

    http://images.google.com/images?q=%22Christopher+E ccleston%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en

    He just 'looks' like a Doctor Who to me.... maybe it's the nose?

  • who will play the Master ? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by snot.dotted ( 627646 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @11:00AM (#8620936)
    Arch villans. The Dr must be pitted against a worthy advisory, the Master. He really was very evil, in fact the Master invented evil. The chaps in the shiny suits and trash cans on wheels never really scared me at all, the Master on the other hand was equipped with a TARDIS that actually worked and all the knowledge of a time lord. The Master was Moriarty to The Doctors Sherlock Holmes, and or course he wanted to rule the known universe.
    • The 1996 film fiasco was a Master story, so I'd expect them to steer clear of him, at least for the first series.
      • I hope so. My favorites were always purely-human stories, or at least ones with new and unique villains. There's no need for a cosmic counterpart -- the Doctor is not a god or a superhero, just an influential and powerful guy doing good. "Face of Evil" comes to mind.

        I think there's a place for an impersonal force threatening the whole galaxy though, like the Daleks or the Cybermen. Of course, if they use the Cybermen, new viewers will assume they stole them from Star Trek. :-)

        I think they need a whole new
    • From watching the reruns of Dr Who on TV, the best actor for the Master would be Deacon in Waterworld (Dennis Hopper), who also played the bomber in Speed (that punchline "it's interactive TV, Jack") was the ultimate in evil.

    • Arch villans. The Dr must be pitted against a worthy advisory, the Master. He really was very evil, in fact the Master invented evil. The chaps in the shiny suits and trash cans on wheels never really scared me at all, the Master on the other hand was equipped with a TARDIS that actually worked and all the knowledge of a time lord. The Master was Moriarty to The Doctors Sherlock Holmes, and or course he wanted to rule the known universe.

      In Scream of the Shalka, the Master was a robot and the Doctor's tra

  • Gotta have decent production values. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Moderation abuser ( 184013 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @03:46PM (#8622585)
    I remember hiding behind the sofa like thousands of other kids in the 70s but Dr. Who is no longer for children and the effects which in those days inflamed childhood imaginations will no longer cut the mustard.

    The production values now have to be good enough to compete with Babylon 5, Andromeda, Stargate SG-1, Farscape for the attention of the now thirtysomethings who want Who back. I'm not convinced the Beeb will give the show the budget it's going to need and disappointment is a powerful emotion.

    • but Dr. Who is no longer for children

      The BBC disagrees with you, insanely enough. The line of New Adventures books was headed in a more adult direction, where "adult" usually meant the way !America means in, in the sense of sophisticated and not childish, but occasionally got into "adult" territory, in the American sense of "adult," meaning pr0n.

      I read a smattering of the NA books before their quality nosedived. When I read, for example, a scene in which one of the incidental extra characters, a pa

    • The BBC's strength has always been in phonic production. Dr. who's video production was a touch B, but phonicly it was always first class... even in the William Hartnell era. This is part of what makes doctor who a cult classic, the fact that most of your budget can go into writers and sound production to create an enjoyable program, one which could be just as enjoyable as a radio show or a simple story board style web animation.

      Babylon 5 and even Stargate SG-1 I feel is in a very diffrent class then And
    • It's 1 million pounds sterling per episode. That's roughly $1.8 million, which should prove to be MORE than adequete.
      • Source? And bear in mind that the BBC can chew through money fast when it gets some decent corporate intertia behind a project.
  • If the 13 part series does well enough, will they make it into a regular TV show again?
    • It is intended to be a regular TV show again. This is the new show: he BBC has previously said that they expect a minimum of five years from the show (Remember, "series" and "season" are basically interchangeable terms when it comes to British TV). Thirteen episodes is actually a more than reasonable number of episodes for a season, given British television, and, at 45 minutes to an hour each, means that the new season will run longer than the last four seasons of the original show (which were 14 episodes a
  • Last time this discussion rolled around here on /., the article mentioned that Alan Davies of Johnathan Creek fame was the fan favorite. What happened?

    For those unlucky Americans who have never been exposed to Johnathan Creek, the show is a mystery series of sorts. Each mystery is, however, completely impossible. A wealthy author is impaled from behind by a samurai sword, whilst alone in his locked study. A musician is accused of kidnapping a girl who was seen entering his house, but all he saw enterin
  • I am NOT eccentric! What you call eccentric is merely the results of having the viewpoint of several time streams to look at.

    Also, look for John Titor in the upcoming series.

Slashdot Top Deals

White dwarf seeks red giant for binary relationship.

Close