BBC Apologizes To Who Star 297
An anonymous reader writes "SciFi Wire is reporting that 'The BBC, which earlier reported that Doctor Who star Christopher Eccleston was leaving the show after the first season, issued an unusual apology to the actor for mischaracterizing his reasons for departing...the network broke an agreement with Eccleston not to reveal that he had planned to film just one season of the hit show all along.'" We covered the announcement of his resignation late last month.
Is it just me (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Is it just me (Score:5, Interesting)
An insightful post. One has to wonder what Eccleson thought, signing on to a series that one must have thought he must have hoped would have been successful? Either he was banking on Dr. Who tanking (doubtful) or simply wasn't thinking ahead.
Now this is just a wild-assed guess, but perhaps he's trying to make the leap off the small screen and Dr. Who was seen as a mechanism for him to make the transition. He certainly has recieved more media attention in light of this move - the initial reports of his departure from the show as well as the reports of the BBC apology?
Suppose that's just free publicity. He did get two appearances on Slashdot however.... and that can't mean nothing can it?!
Re:Is it just me (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, that makes lots of sense. An actor who most people probably associate with movie work doing a TV series to get out of TV.
Re:Is it just me (Score:2)
Re:Is it just me (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:blame the Beeb (Score:5, Funny)
Dear Chris,
Please, please, please star in our new show. We think you are the right man for the job, and we are really committed to making this new show work.
Cheers
Dear BBC,
Okay, but only for one season. I would like to spend the rest of my career taking on new roles in film and on television, rather than being the guest of honor at Sci-Fi conventions for the rest of my life.
Yours, etc.
Re:Is it just me (Score:2)
Re:Is it just me (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Is it just me (Score:2)
Re:Is it just me (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Is it just me (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Is it just me (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Is it just me (Score:2)
Re:Is it just me (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Is it just me (Score:2)
Re:Is it just me (Score:2)
After all, the Peter Curshing movies are not really part of the "canon" of the show either.
Plus, that means we can convieniently ignore all that "half-human" bullshit.
Re:Is it just me (Score:3, Insightful)
So Eccleston was only ever meant to be around for one season - and it was meant to be a huge shocker.
Re:Is it just me (Score:2)
Re:Is it just me (Score:2)
I don't find it too odd, although I realise I seem to be in quite the minority about that.
This new series seems to currently be focussing on introducing the basic concepts, as well as hinting at the backgrounds, for a whole new generation of viewers. The audience, through Rose, is learning all of the essentions - the Doctor not being human, him being alive for a long time, him travelling through time and space in a machine with a "disguise" that makes it rather too conspicuous.
In a way it would follow th
Re:Is it just me (Score:2)
I don't know how the rest of the season will pan out...but given this info I think what could work is if after the next Doctor has had a go there's a series of 'Time War' related material....that way there's a branding thing and the chance to go through some of what is a big event in the Dr Who universe.
Or have the Time Wars been covered previously as well?
Good response (Score:4, Insightful)
Good apology for the BBC. Now, I'd reckon that this is out of fear of a libel [wikipedia.org] case being filed against the BBC. Eccleson should be rightly miffed that the BBC would slag his good name, which of course lead to great consternation and comment on Slashdot.
I guess he just pissed off the BBC management and they gave the green light on a report that just happened to jump the gun.
Re:Good response (Score:3, Informative)
I'm American and I tend to favor the American versions (plural because it varies state by state) of
Who? (Score:4, Funny)
Doctor who?
Doctor who!
Doctor Who?
Not the pronoun, but rather a doctor with the unlikely name of "Who"
Re:Who? (Score:5, Funny)
Were it the former, we'd have a bunch of grammar nazis claiming that the title should read "BBC Apologizes To Whom Star". Not to mention the ensuing thread of replies pointing out how it still isn't correct.
Re:Who? (Score:2)
Re:Who? (Score:2)
Doctor... Who? (Score:2)
And yes, I HAVE seen that episode. And YES, I have gotten laid in the historical past. Astounding...
The BBC seems to apologize a lot (Score:5, Informative)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ifs/hi/newsid_422
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ifs/hi/newsid_427
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ifs/hi/newsid_403
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_r
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/1050290.
http://www.vermontguardian.com/dailies/0904/0322.
http://cbsnews.cbs.com/stories/2003/03/21/iraq/ma
http://www.iht.com/articles/2004/12/03/news/beeb.
http://www.rediff.com/news/2004/jan/28bbc.htm [rediff.com]
Some are serious, some are ridiculous. But in the end, apologies result from improper reporting, much different than a simple correction.
Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot (Score:2, Interesting)
Facts vs. Opinions (Score:3, Insightful)
On the other hand, if you tend to take a stance and build your case with items that make your case, it will eventually cause you trouble.
This isn't something found in one particular media outlet, all media outlets have to be on guard and keep this from occuring. Just seems that some media outlets have had particular trouble with the pr
Re:Facts vs. Opinions (Score:2, Interesting)
This isn't something found in one particular media outlet, all media outlets have to be on guard and keep this from occuring. Just seems that some media outlets have had particular trouble with the problem in the recent past.
There is also another issue especially in the USA.
Many times even if a news organization publishes a true report, corporations have ways & means of silencing them i.e. by expensive lawsuits, by pulling out Advertising etc. Hence sometimes press has to apologize. Because of this
Re:Facts vs. Opinions (Score:3, Insightful)
The only facts that conveniently materialise in front of a reporter are the ones put there by interested (ie biased) parties.
Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot (Score:2)
Or even print fiction... It certainly dosn't help if the media concerned is more interested in producing entertainment.
Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot (Score:5, Insightful)
Too often these days big media are guilty of going the ignore/deny route. That the BBC at least attempts to rectify incidents of bad reporting puts them heads and shoulders above most others, because let's face it, no media outlet is always correct, especially where biases may affect the reporting.
Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot (Score:2)
Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot (Score:2)
So: they "released a quote" without "consulting" the author of the "quote"?
I think what they're trying to say is: "Also, we made up a statement from Christopher that he didn't actually say, but it sounded nice, so we published it
Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot (Score:4, Interesting)
As far as the quotes go, it seems you don't know how journalists work (in the UK anyway, I don't know if it's worldwide).
Step 1: Write your story with likely sounding quotes
Step 2: Secure your quotes
Journalist: "So, would you say you don't want to be typecast as The Doctor?"
Christopher: "Yeah, I suppose so"
Step 3: Print
"I don't want to be typecast as The Doctor," said Christopher.
Someone screwed up and forgot to do Step 2.
Re:The BBC seems to apologize a lot (Score:4, Funny)
-- BBC
For those who do not know who Dr. Who is (Score:3, Informative)
Doctor Who - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia [wikipedia.org]
The doctor is a cylon (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The doctor is a cylon (Score:2)
I got it!
God, I have no life.
Getting smaller. (Score:2, Funny)
Time is, after all, always in flux (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Time is, after all, always in flux (Score:2)
You didn't notice how Eccelston's Doctor was clearly behaving as if he was just recovering from a regeneration? Not that a previous Doctor couldn't have met with Rose, but when you thread your way through time and space, anything like that can happen.
IMO (Score:2, Funny)
Air it in the United States already! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Air it in the United States already! (Score:3, Informative)
Australia? (Score:2)
I think the ABC have bought it [abc.net.au] but it isn't being shown for at least another month...
Re:Australia? (Score:2)
A lot longer than that I'd say. The ABC are currently doing a rerun of old "Dr Who" episodes starting from the beginning. They are currently doing Tom Baker episodes and just finished season #15. By my reckoning there are 11 seasons still to replay before we get to the new ones.
My Tardis is broken, so I can't check what episodes the ABC have shown for the next few months.
Re:Air it in the United States already! (Score:2)
Re:Air it in the United States already! (Score:2)
That's What you get..... (Score:4, Funny)
This isn't terribly surprising. (Score:5, Interesting)
Whereas if a crew member showed up once just a bit inebriated, they'd probably have been sacked. Cogs in the wheel, I suppose.
What are they going to do for next season, though? Ignore the elephant on the sofa, and change characters? Do an episode where Dr. Who wakes up in a different body due to some bizarre transformation gun he gets hit with? Deal with it Ed Wood style and have him killed off-screen?
Re:This isn't terribly surprising. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:This isn't terribly surprising. (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, it wouldn't be the first sci-fi series [imdb.com] to shoot the canon all to hell, so to speak.
Re:This isn't terribly surprising. (Score:4, Funny)
Are we still on this? Am I the only one that caught the numerous episodes that explained that time was being messed with and First Contact that polluted the time line in the first place?
"You've insulted my thorough command of 21 seasons of Star Trek Trivia!! Bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch..."
Re:This isn't terribly surprising. (Score:2)
Oh. Were you actually interested, or just another Trek weenie slagging off Enterprise?
Re:This isn't terribly surprising. (Score:2)
Re:This isn't terribly surprising. ** SPOILER ** (Score:2)
No Problem Too Daunting for a Good Writer... (Score:3, Interesting)
Look, I don't even pretend to have writing skills popular enough to merit working on a TV series, but this is science fiction: Nothing is out of bounds.
Even I can come up with a number of plot twists or elements which would allow for "extra" lives, so to speak:
The Doctor & Rose visit an ancient alien who seems kind enough, but turns out to be
Re:This isn't terribly surprising. (Score:5, Funny)
Not a big Dr. Who fan I see.
The Doctor What? (Score:2, Funny)
"Oh great, 'cause I have this really nasty rash on my back
"Not that kind of doctor. THE Doctor."
"The Doctor what?"
"That's near enough
Shame.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Billie Piper is "okay" but her tone just ruins it for me, she sounds like she needs to be pregnant and have several kids just to get a free house and some extra (free) money from the government. Now theres no problem with sounding like that in modern stuff, but when you're traveling time and no one notices you've got a weird voice somethings up... ep 3 did... minorly cover this issue, but again very minorly..
Where it really stands out is how Christopher plays the Doctor. He bounces and bounds and generally seems to rather enjoy traveling time, saving the Earth and quite frankly having a bit of a giggle while he's at it. I've not seen him in anything else and don't really desire to, but as the doctor he's perfect.
Hopefully the BBC can get him to do a few more seasons. Everyone saying "he's using it as a stepping stone", the other way could be he's trying to revive Dr. who so it will open up sci fi again beyond "star gate and enterprise" on channel 4 every bloody weekend. While he may "waste" a regeneration he's still managed to win over thousands of fans new and old, maybe even some hated enemies of the show.
So like him or not, or his actions. He deserves all the respect he gets for being a magnificent actor in his current rule and reviving not only Dr. Who, but decent comedy which isn't a parody or steriotyped.
Re:Shame.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Shame.. (Score:2)
Re:Shame.. (Score:2)
Right!
Re:Shame.. (Score:2)
This series is as much Rose's journey as it is the Doctor's.
Re:Shame.. (Score:4, Interesting)
the other way could be he's trying to revive Dr. who so it will open up sci fi again
A-men. I have no idea how popular it is, but my suspicion is that they got a very good, non-genre actor to fill the part, to get people excited about it, and then (as someone posted in the prior thread about The Doctor) regenerate him to someone else, both showing off the ability, as well getting higher ratings.
Doctor Who fanboy comments follow:
All that being said, I'm really curious how they're going to deal with regeneration #12 (especially since 12 merges with 4 to help regenerate into 5). Then again, it took us 10 years to go from 8 to 9, so maybe I shouldn't worry so much.
Re:Shame.. (Score:2)
Maybe he could split or it could be "another" 12. As in he reverts back to say an older one (off screen obviously, just use the voice some how) and then revives from there to a "new-new" one.
But then you have to remember that this is Dr. who and no time frame is permant. What happened in Time frame A may not come to pass in Time frame B. So if the doctor prevented say the darleks shootin his 11th regeneration by killign them off early he could in theory save his own r
Re:Shame.. (Score:3, Funny)
I, for one, would be most willing to help her with that.
Re:Shame.. (Score:2)
Indeed, you'd think she was playing a shop assistant with limited education who lives on a council estate... oh, wait, er, ...
Re:Shame.. (Score:2)
Re:Shame.. (Score:4, Interesting)
The stories of the doctor's side kicks are often, perhaps usually, redemptive. To run a redemptive story arc you have to start with someone who makes you want to beat them around the head with the clue stick.
Rose is being played as someone who has stupidly wasted her opportunities and is being given a chance to try again. She's clearly supposed to be brighter than her initial situation would imply. She's being played as one of the comanions who can hold their own against the Doctor (Liz, Sarah Jane, Leela, Romana) arther than a screaming unit.
As to her accent, her English is no more non-`standard' and low-value than Eccleston's. His is the real departure, all the previous doctors have had high-status accents. Combined with his clearly being deeply fucked up over what has happened in the recent past, he's definitely an interesting doctor.
Re:Shame.. (Score:2)
Absolutely. I was going to post something similar but you saved me the trouble. I'm originally from darn sarf and although my accent isn't quite as lazy as Rose's it'
Re:Shame.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Hm. Translation.
Imagine Rose is speaking white trailer-trash, the Doctor some variety of black English.
Her accent nails her to a social and educational background (she wasn't going anywhere without losing that dialect), his is one which would have traditionally have had been associated with strong, mostly negative, steriotypes, but more recently has become sonewhat cool, especially with younger people.
Here's a theory. Given the translation effects of the tardis, perhaps we hear the doctor as his companions see him/need to see him. Hartnel is the slightly old fashoned schoolmaster two 60s teachers expected, Pertwee had to be the kind of expert who the brigadeer would listen to etc.
Rose, of course, meets a figure she has to instantly respect and listen to -- ``I'm the Doctor, run for your life!'' -- that can't be the kind of authority figure she has clearly rejected from school etc, nor the kind of people she lives amongst (consider that awful boyfriend), so she hears a slightly exotic, slightly cool dialect which is not `them', but distant enough from `us' to carry some weight.
Re:Shame.. (Score:2)
Re:Shame.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Shame.. (Score:2)
Re:Shame.. (Score:2)
Traughton.
Hartnel was great for what he was doing, but it was Traughton who defined the Doctor as we have known him since. By definition tham makes him the perfect doctor.
Also he did it so well he turned an attempt to keep a dying show going into a multi-decade jugganaught which was only stopped by a really heroic decade long campagn of idiocy within the BBC.
Doctor Who - More actors then Ophra Winfrey (Score:4, Insightful)
At this point your asking yourself why am I getting off target. The thing is the the actors playing Ophra have now numbered over 8 and that's threatening the number of people who have played the Doctor. The BBC is trying disparately to regain the title of most actors playing one role in an ongoing series.
They need to add three more doctors to keep up.
If they were really intelligent... (Score:5, Interesting)
This would set off raging discussions online about who the next Doctor will be, who the next Doctor should be, who the best Doctor was, etc.
Built-in buzz. C'mon BBC get with it.
How many lives do Timelords have? (Score:4, Interesting)
*Seriously, if you are, were or ever will be a Dr. Who fan you must see this!
Bring back Paul McGann (Score:3, Insightful)
GJC
Perhaps... (Score:2)
is it just me... (Score:2)
Eddie Izzard for the next Doctor! (Score:3, Interesting)
The thing everyone seems to miss... (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh and actually on the main story - Christopher Ecclestone is well known in the UK, and *he* asked the head writer for the part. That he didn't run to two series is a pity but since it took 8 months and the second series wasn't actually confirmed until after the first episode went out understandable. He is committed to a Christmas special so that's when to expect the next regeneration.
Anyway, it's back, they'll have trouble getting rid of it a second time and the new Chairman of the Governors has been strangely quiet;-)
Re:...sigh (Score:3, Funny)
Re:...sigh (Score:4, Insightful)
A major news site apologizing for being wrong doesn't surprise you?
Re:...sigh (Score:2)
As someone else pointed out before, this isn't the first time for the BBC. And I agree with the GP. It is newsworthy to know there is a new series, maybe even that the actor will only participate for one season. But are these apologies relevant news? They guy IS still leaving afaik.
Re:...sigh (Score:3, Funny)
Obviously you and a dude with a mod-point don't. Whoop-de-fuck.
Re:Off topic but... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Uh What? (Score:2, Informative)
The hit show that recently beat out the Royal Wedding in UK ratings (8.3 million viewers vs. 6.2 million):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/news/drwh.../10/18419
Re:Uh What? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Uh What? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:for the love of god... (Score:2)
Re:David Tennant (Score:3, Informative)