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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Television Sci-Fi

'Doctor Who' Showrunner Russell T. Davies To Return For Next Season (bbc.com) 162

spaceman375 shares a report from the BBC: Screenwriter Russell T Davies is to take charge again of Doctor Who, the sci-fi show he helped revive in 2005. Davies, who was the fantasy drama's showrunner until 2009, will take over when Chris Chibnall departs next year. "I'm beyond excited to be back on my favourite show," said Davies, who resumes his role as the show prepares to mark its 60th anniversary in 2023. One of his first responsibilities will be to decide who takes over the Tardis following Jodie Whittaker's exit. The actress is set to hang up her Sonic Screwdriver after one more six-part series and three 2022 specials.

Davies revived Doctor Who in its current incarnation with Christopher Eccleston as the Doctor and remained for David Tennant's time as the Doctor. Steven Moffatt took over when Matt Smith took on the role, staying to supervise Peter Capaldi's stint as TV's indefatigable Time Lord. The success of Doctor Who's relaunch led Davies to create two spin-off shows, Torchwood and The Sarah Jane Adventures.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

'Doctor Who' Showrunner Russell T. Davies To Return For Next Season

Comments Filter:
  • by bobstreo ( 1320787 ) on Saturday September 25, 2021 @02:05AM (#61830681)

    They pretty much wasted Jodie Whittaker, while a decent actress, didn't appear to have much of a chance to show it.

    • by CaptQuark ( 2706165 ) on Saturday September 25, 2021 @02:28AM (#61830709)

      I might actually start watching again now that Chris Chibnall is leaving. The series went downhill when Peter Capaldi was the Doctor and went over a cliff with Jodie Whittaker.

      Yeah, I understand the actors can only do so much with what the writers give them, but the episodes seemed so much more engaging when David Tennant and Matt Smith were portraying the Doctor.

      • Oh yeah? And I liked Capaldi.
        The general pattern for me is probably Moffat. I like what he does.
        I'll still watch it though.

        • Me too, I like Capaldi. The closest to Jon Pertwee from the classic era, who was also my favourite.

          The niggle I had with Capaldi Doctor, was the Clara infatuation. While not a bad companion, she should have died much, much earlier. Somewhere around Dark Water/Death in Heaven. That being said, final penultimate episode of Season 9 was outstanding and would not have been possible without the influence of Clara.

          Also agree that Whittaker has been wasted. Hopefully she will come back in a crossover episode or tw

          • Clara died of old age in Last Christmas. Then in a twist ending, it was all a dream.

            Honestly, get stuffed BBC! that is a dreadful cop out of storytelling.

          • Yes, he did channel his inner Pertwee. Isn't it time we had another actor with the surname Baker, though?
          • You could argue it's time for a Welsh Doctor (Michael Sheen?) or a Northern Irish one (Liam Neeson might only do it if he got to shoot some Cybermen). There has been representatives from the other nations of the UK: England, Scotland, Yorkshire.
          • I hardly remember the classic era. I found it scary though. The Zygons were nightmare stuff. at the time And then later you see some of it again and fail to connect with the nightmarishness.
            I thought the doctor worked well with Clara.
            What do you mean crossover episode, Whitaker is going to stay for season 13.

        • Oh yeah? And I liked Capaldi. The general pattern for me is probably Moffat. I like what he does. I'll still watch it though.

          I liked Capaldi as well.

          I didn't dislike Whittaker. I think she was handed such bad stories that no one could have worked with them.

          • Call me a pretentious punk kid but I liked the longer story arcs of the Matt Smith seasons more than the one-offs with Eccleston or Capaldi and (sometimes) Tennant. I lost interest during the last Capaldi season when it was one-off after one-off after one-off with no bigger story to tell.

            In retrospect that was also my gripe with some of the star trek series too. When there was some structure of a story, like DS9 it was good. When there wasn't it was hit or miss. Sometimes it made you think interesting thoug

            • Call me a pretentious punk kid but I liked the longer story arcs of the Matt Smith seasons more than the one-offs with Eccleston or Capaldi and (sometimes) Tennant. I lost interest during the last Capaldi season when it was one-off after one-off after one-off with no bigger story to tell.

              In retrospect that was also my gripe with some of the star trek series too. When there was some structure of a story, like DS9 it was good. When there wasn't it was hit or miss. Sometimes it made you think interesting thoughts but sometimes it was just filler material.

              Well they had to enact those subspace distortion fields with temporal shifted tachyon subduction effects yaknow. 8^)

              I think Capaldi was given pretty weak material as well.

          • It's not just about bad stories. There are general decisions about which direction to take.
            Judging from the frequency of excited panting in the doctor's speech there was a deliberate choice to reach a younger audience. The ethnic choices in cast also point to reaching a wider range of companions people can associate with.

            The appearance of wokeness can be misleading. There is political correctness in order to be liked by critical peers but his could be more about marketing setting out directions and storywri

            • It's not just about bad stories. There are general decisions about which direction to take. Judging from the frequency of excited panting in the doctor's speech there was a deliberate choice to reach a younger audience. The ethnic choices in cast also point to reaching a wider range of companions people can associate with.

              The appearance of wokeness can be misleading. There is political correctness in order to be liked by critical peers but his could be more about marketing setting out directions and storywriters and actors trying to fill it in.

              I give the example of Star Trek, That was a very liberal series. But they weren't heavy handed.

              My favorite of the whole ST world was Voyager. Lady Captain Janeway, put in a horrid situation, and works her way out of it without being a victim or blaming some patriarchy. A crew, may of who were women, who were competent, and comfortable in their sexuality. Interracial couples without making any deal about it.

              And one big thing is that the Janeway character was allowed to make mistakes, and grow as a per

      • I might actually start watching again now that Chris Chibnall is leaving. The series went downhill when Peter Capaldi was the Doctor and went over a cliff with Jodie Whittaker.

        Yeah, I understand the actors can only do so much with what the writers give them, but the episodes seemed so much more engaging when David Tennant and Matt Smith were portraying the Doctor.

        Before Chibnall, every new Doctor became my new favourite five or six episodes in, even though initially I didn't much like them and was clinging to the last Doctor.

        I thought Capaldi was an outstanding Doctor hobbled by mostly bad and terribly uneven writing. Ditto for Jodi Whittaker, and that's perhaps more of a shame. There really needed to be a female Doctor, and Whittaker was an outstanding fit. She really shone in a few episodes; not coincidentally, they were the best written ones. But the whole "three

    • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Saturday September 25, 2021 @02:33AM (#61830717)

      The characters were mostly badly written and designed. Not really engaging and most of all, inconsistent. Whittaker is a great actress, but the material she was handed didn't allow her to "settle" into the character properly since she had to change direction so often that the average person would've gotten whiplash from the jerking around.

      • The characters were mostly badly written and designed. Not really engaging and most of all, inconsistent.

        Sounds almost like real people!

        • You may be joking, but people are usually consistent. If they are introduced with certain features and limitations, they usually apply to every situation, not just when it's convenient, while suddenly being totally absent when the writer would like them to be able (or unable) to do something.

        • Which is why we seek out something else in out entertainment. Otherwise, every living room in the world would have a mirror where the TV is.

      • by nagora ( 177841 )

        The characters were mostly badly written and designed. Not really engaging and most of all, inconsistent. Whittaker is a great actress, but the material she was handed didn't allow her to "settle" into the character properly since she had to change direction so often that the average person would've gotten whiplash from the jerking around.

        Wittaker did talk complete shite about the series from the start, however. To some extent it's her own fault for defending the terrible writing and direction.

        • What should she say? "The writer is a complete tool who doesn't know how to create consistent and credible characters or story lines that match the "vibe" of the show, the doctor's sidekicks are cardbord cutouts without personality and I can't play off them because I don't get anything from them but cues to deliver my infodump for the audience, so fire that dork and get me someone who can write a line that doesn't suck"?

          You'll always find that actors will call a show great, even if they know that it stinks.

          • by Mitreya ( 579078 )

            You'll always find that actors will call a show great, even if they know that it stinks.

            No, no. Of course she is obligated to say good things about the show. The GP is referring to something else. https://www.deviantart.com/tim... [deviantart.com]

            • Same deal. She wants to keep that engagement. What do you think happens if she craps all over it? People don't watch it and she gets the blame for the whole mess, too.

          • by nagora ( 177841 ) on Saturday September 25, 2021 @11:38AM (#61831413)

            What should she say? "The writer is a complete tool who doesn't know how to create consistent and credible characters or story lines that match the "vibe" of the show,

            Well, she didn't have to say

            "Very often, we’re only seeing stories being told through the white male gaze. That’s what Doctor Who always celebrated."

            Which is just bollocks. What exactly is a black woman's view of the Daleks? Or of the Silurians? How does this sort of bullshit relate to the way in which the Ice Warriors are depicted as developing through time? It's inane and shallow deflection.

            Dr Who has certainly always been patriarchal in the literal sense of the word, but the Dr Who universe included things like the Sarah Jane Adventures, and several strong Time Ladies who could (should IMO) have been used as central characters of spin-offs.

            Well, anyway. When the main actor and the head writer are proud of not knowing anything about a series they've taken up the lead of, it's hardly surprising that they fail to deliver anything worthwhile.

        • Wittaker did talk complete shite about the series from the start, however. To some extent it's her own fault for defending the terrible writing and direction.

          She was probably doing what she was told to do. I heard some of the stuff she said. Sounded like boilerplate empowerment talk.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        The RTD era wasn't really any better though. His characters were 2D and extremely cheezy. The dialogue was terrible and many episodes were so cringe inducing I couldn't watch them. The good ones were the ones he didn't write.

        It seems like the BBC just can't get anyone good to do it.

        • Well, aside of his urge to always put everything at stake (lots of "end of the world if we don't succeed" plots), and my problem with this trope as something where I can't just suspend the disbelief that they have to fully succeed or else the show is over, I liked most of his ideas. Donna was a character I could enjoy for the most part, especially that her "saving the world" came at a pretty huge price. Torchwood was a bit cheesy, but I guess it has its right to exist, as does Jack. The "Bad Wolf" arc was a

      • by Mitreya ( 579078 )

        Whittaker is a great actress, but the material she was handed

        Whittaker also didn't necessarily help with some of her interviews: https://www.deviantart.com/tim... [deviantart.com]

        • Like I said before, actors aren't always free to say what they really think about a subject if they're under contract. It can well be that she was required to push the agenda.

          • by Mitreya ( 579078 )

            It can well be that she was required to push the agenda.

            Well, if so, I sympathize with her situation. But it is not just that
            For example:

            Q: If someone actually came up to you and said, "I'm not watching the show anymore because the Doctor is a woman," how would you respond?
            A: I suppose I'd say, I think you have some internal issues that need addressing. I wonder if their mothers would be proud of that comment. [Laughs.] Some people are capable of change, but it isn't worth engaging with, necessarily.

            Is it no longer fashionable to respond "I'd say -- Give it a chance, and I'll do my best to make the show good"?
            Particularly in a show where it has been long established that time lords can change genders.

            • My answer would probably be that this isn't a reason to not watch the show. The gender of the Doctor doesn't really matter. I mean, the Master was female first, and some of those shows were absolutely great.

    • by emag ( 4640 )

      I have to agree... Jodie Whittaker seemed to get a rather raw deal in this. I really liked her in Broadchurch, but I can't help but feel the scripts she's been given, overall, for Doctor Who, have been mediocre at best, with all the brow-beating most of them seem to embrace. Somewhat like while I loved both the Moffatt and Chibnall scripts when they *weren't* showrunners, I pretty much hated their seasons *as* showrunners, maybe aside from Capaldi's run. I'm cautiously optimistic that any more NuWho under D

    • by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 ) on Saturday September 25, 2021 @10:41AM (#61831299)

      They pretty much wasted Jodie Whittaker, while a decent actress, didn't appear to have much of a chance to show it.

      Chibnall went way too woke. And yes, Whittaker was wasted in it.

      Clumsy storytelling seems to be a thing these days. I have zero problems if a liberal storyline is on tap, but the Chibnall years were shite as they say.

  • by suss ( 158993 ) on Saturday September 25, 2021 @02:37AM (#61830719)

    The last few seasons never happened, and will be removed from canon.

    We can only hope...

  • Screenwriter Russell T Davies is to take charge again of Doctor Who, the sci-fi show he helped revive in 2005.
    Davies, who was the fantasy drama's showrunner until 2009, will take over when Chris Chibnall departs next year.

    Dr Who is science fiction, not fantasy. Get it right consistently, BBC!

    • Dr Who is science fiction, not fantasy.

      As a rule there's not a lot of science in the fiction. As such, it's more fantasy in a sciencey setting.

    • It was supposed to be. Pretty cheesy science fiction with a very tenuous grasp on the 'science' part, but science fiction nonetheless.

      However, Moffat disagreed on that and a half dozen other things that were pretty obvious about Doctor Who, and when given the reins he went and changed them. To him, the sonic screwdriver was a wand and the Doctor a wizard, and the companions were the stars of the show.

      It's been fantasy ever since.

  • Fan of DW (Score:4, Insightful)

    by oloutt ( 5251563 ) on Saturday September 25, 2021 @08:15AM (#61831087)
    I used to be a massive fan of Doctor Who (I used it to watch here https://lookmovie.io/ [lookmovie.io] ), so much so that years later after graduating I got to work on it for a short time. The timeless child arc broke my heart. I've met Russell T Davies in person, we sat together in a library. I'm glad the show is back in his hands again.
  • I need a male doctor so he can have a pretty companion.

    A female doctor with a bunch of Adrics running around doesn't work.

  • and stopped watching. What a dumpster fire of a show. The companions are boring and the heavy handed PC messaging too much.

    Hopefully Davies can get it back on track.

    • The companions were no characters but cardboard cutout cue cards. Their "job" was to basically ask the Doctor for an infodump whenever something new and confusing happened. I mean, in the first (or second... I forgot) episode they get implanted some kind of bomb and they quite calmly ask the Doctor what's going on. There isn't confusion, nobody panics or tells the Doctor to get that damn thing out. All they do is stand around in a circle and calmly quiz the Doctor for information so she can spoonfeed the st

  • by Revek ( 133289 ) on Saturday September 25, 2021 @11:02AM (#61831361)
    They had good actors but terrible writing and its just a damn shame.
  • This is a good move, the problem has not been Jodie Whittaker, it was the lacklustre stories.

  • Not a TV show.

    I was watching Doctor Who for a while and more and more it reminded me of really, really bad Pen and Paper RPG sessions. The characters were like right out of a RPG game. They have traits, we get introduced to their features and limitations, they even have a background story ... which instantly moves where its name suggests, into the background, whenever it gets inconvenient. The same is true for their abilities and disabilities. Instead of trying to act what the character would do in this mom

  • there is only so many times you can see the current Doctor scrunch her nose in a 'stinky cheese' expression before it gets old.

    and the writing is unimaginative. how many times must you go back to the pool of old monsters to fight.

  • ... we get the best writing.

    Doctor Who was always a family show and I'd go so far as to say, the primary audience in that family, would be the youngsters.
    However, it was also capable of operating on different levels - the adults (or super smart kids), would get the overall message, the cultural nods and clever in-jokes, the younger kids would get scared and hide behind the sofa.

    Like many in the UK, I grew up watching Doctor Who and I have my favourite Doctor just pinned in time, as it were. Tom Baker.
    When I

MS-DOS must die!

Working...