Yates to direct bigscreen 'Doctor Who'

[chaseter]

The only way I would support this, the only way, is if they did a Star Trek reboot/side continuity with Matt Smith or some other incarnation appearing like Spock did.

Lets look at some examples of how stupid so far this sounds by doing some comparisons:

It would be the same as there being LOST movies with different actors playing the same characters and it have nothing to do with the tv show.

It would be like having a Simpsons movie that has none of the voice actors from the tv show in the movie.

It would be like someone making a 3 movie Walking Dead trilogy that is in no way connected to the tv show running at the exact same time.

It would be like someone making a Curb Your Enthusiasm movie without Larry David. It would be like someone making an Arrested Development movie with none of the original cast. It would be like someone making a Breaking Bad threequel with all new actors.


How stupid do those sound? This sounds the same. It could be a great movie no doubt but as a Doctor Who fan this is stupid. Any fans of any of those ideas up there I am sure would feel the same way.

 

[moviedoors]

And how about us non fans who are intrigued by this?

 

[chaseter]

How would you be intrigued by a movie based on a show you haven't seen and have no idea about?

That's like me being excited over The Hunger Games getting made. I haven't even read the books and I have no idea wtf it's about. Why should I be intrigued?

 

[Sawyer]

The only way I would support this, the only way, is if they did a Star Trek reboot/side continuity with Matt Smith or some other incarnation appearing like Spock did.

Lets look at some examples of how stupid so far this sounds by doing some comparisons:

It would be the same as there being LOST movies with different actors playing the same characters and it have nothing to do with the tv show.

It would be like having a Simpsons movie that has none of the voice actors from the tv show in the movie.

It would be like someone making a 3 movie Walking Dead trilogy that is in no way connected to the tv show running at the exact same time.

It would be like someone making a Curb Your Enthusiasm movie without Larry David. It would be like someone making an Arrested Development movie with none of the original cast. It would be like someone making a Breaking Bad threequel with all new actors.


How stupid do those sound? This sounds the same. It could be a great movie no doubt but as a Doctor Who fan this is stupid. Any fans of any of those ideas up there I am sure would feel the same way.

That's the longest post I've ever seen of one person just saying the same thing over and over again.

 

[Silvermoth]

Oh god I hope this won't be a "Doctor Who for Americans". I can see it now...

Starring Tracy Jordan as the Doctor! Also starring Malin Ackerman as Angela Companion!

Oh well, at least it won't have the brat doctor.

If they do it well (and I feel a bit better seeing that the BBC are heavily involved), if they do it really well, it could be incredible though. Imagine the title sequence with all those colours on the great big screen with that tune blasting in surround sound!

 

[Wolfwood]

The only way I would support this, the only way, is if they did a Star Trek reboot/side continuity with Matt Smith or some other incarnation appearing like Spock did.

Lets look at some examples of how stupid so far this sounds by doing some comparisons:

It would be the same as there being LOST movies with different actors playing the same characters and it have nothing to do with the tv show.

It would be like having a Simpsons movie that has none of the voice actors from the tv show in the movie.

It would be like someone making a 3 movie Walking Dead trilogy that is in no way connected to the tv show running at the exact same time.

It would be like someone making a Curb Your Enthusiasm movie without Larry David. It would be like someone making an Arrested Development movie with none of the original cast. It would be like someone making a Breaking Bad threequel with all new actors.


How stupid do those sound? This sounds the same. It could be a great movie no doubt but as a Doctor Who fan this is stupid. Any fans of any of those ideas up there I am sure would feel the same way.

Yeah, but Jack from Lost wasn't played by a dozen different people, so I'm not quite sure I see the analogy you're trying to make here. There are going to be Doctors after Smith, so what's so wrong with a movie Doctor? It doesn't take away anything from the show. If it's a continuity issue, I really don't see the problem since he's a Time Lord. Doesn't that mean the story can take place at any point in time?

Also I don't see why people keep saying it'll be an "Americanized Doctor Who." Were there suddenly Americans in David Yates' Harry Potter? I think Yates has a grasp on the fact that Doctor Who is a uniquely British character and I'm sure he'd like to keep it that way.

 

[Crockett]

There are going to be Doctors after Smith, so what's so wrong with a movie Doctor? It doesn't take away anything from the show. If it's a continuity issue, I really don't see the problem since he's a Time Lord. Doesn't that mean the story can take place at any point in time?

Yates did say for the movie he's going to start from scratch, meaning no connection to the tv-series so they're going to have a new Doctor with perhaps a new background and it makes sense if they want to do that if they want to attract new audience but ignoring the history the tv-series had build takes away part of the charm of the character and since they're free to make their own doctor if they start changing the essence of the character it wouldn't feel the same. A proper movie is a natural path when it comes to growing as a franchise but I don't know, I'm just skeptic about the whole notion.

 

[Rac]

How would you be intrigued by a movie based on a show you haven't seen and have no idea about?

because

time-travelling humanoid alien known as the Doctor who explores the universe in a sentient time machine called the TARDIS that flies through time and space

That's like me being excited over The Hunger Games getting made. I haven't even read the books and I have no idea wtf it's about. Why should I be intrigued?

The Hunger Games is post-apocalyptic which gets my attention immediately, but the series is for kids/young teens, so I'm not really interested in it at all. But just to say, sometimes (or usually) all it takes is the genre to make someone interested in a film.

 

[the amazing fro]

The whole doctor who concept is episodic which of course lends itself far better to TV than film. I'm also sceptical of a film separate from the series' continuity. The continuity is a large part of why I love this show, it's so rich and interesting. Doing what is essentially a "reboot" seems wrong to me.
It might be a great film but it'll never be a true "doctor who" movie to me.

So "meh" from me. Something tells me that this movie will be stuck in development hell and die a painful death but that's probably wishful thinking on my part.

 

[moviedoors]

How would you be intrigued by a movie based on a show you haven't seen and have no idea about?

Because I'm curious about the character and whatever David Yates does next? Don't be obtuse. I'm allowed to go "Oh, Doctor Who movie. Very interesting." I didn't say I have "no idea" I said I'm simple a non-fan, a curious non-fan. Lighten up.

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

I really hope that the movie isn't going to be Americanized. Because if it is, I'm sure it will look something like this:

That actually looks awsome.
Alot of the movies Jason Statham is in, aren't set in America or directed by americans though.

 

[mclay18]

David Tennant should play the Doctor again on the big screen. Nothing against new, relatively unknown actors like Matt Smith now. But Tennant just captured the mischievous aspect of the Time Lord so well... maybe Billie Piper and Freema Agyeman too?

Of course, having past cast members return is a pipe dream. I pray David Yates looks for an unknown to play the big-screen Doctor Who, and not a big U.S. name. I think the reason why BBC Films hasn't announced a U.S. studio to partner with yet is because they want to have more control over the casting.

 

[chaseter]

Because I'm curious about the character and whatever David Yates does next? Don't be obtuse. I'm allowed to go "Oh, Doctor Who movie. Very interesting." I didn't say I have "no idea" I said I'm simple a non-fan, a curious non-fan. Lighten up.

You stop being acute.

Doctor Who like almost all tv shows is niche. To be intrigued by a movie based on a tv show you have no idea about is odd. It's fine you are a fan of Yates, as am I. But, if you really want to learn more about the character then watch the show, it's fantastic. Then, you will see why this is getting some fan friction.

 

[Tanin]

Doctor Who already has multiple continuities anyhow.

The main Television Series

The Movies with the Daleks where he was human (Dr Who and the Daleks, Daleks Invasion)

The Big Finish Audio Productions (fun stuff)

The Book series


Since the Doctor Who franchise has already split quite a bit I see no harm in doing more movies. I just hope they don't do a Time War movie. I would like that we never get to see it.

 

[chaseter]

That's the longest post I've ever seen of one person just saying the same thing over and over again.

Hahaha I wanted to hit home how awful this sounds and what a fan disservice it would be. I am excited for a big budget Who movie but then he has to go and say it is completely separate from the tv show. Wwwwwhhhhhhhhyyyyyyy? Why?

 

[Wesley Dodds]

 

[moviedoors]

Doctor Who like almost all tv shows is niche. To be intrigued by a movie based on a tv show you have no idea about is odd.

Not really. I now it's crazy sci-fi, I like the concept, I like the director. What more do I need to be interested in a movie? I've been sold on plenty of movies based on books I never read, how is this any different? I'm interested and that's that. I'm not sure what your goal is here. To make me not interested?

It's fine you are a fan of Yates, as am I. But, if you really want to learn more about the character then watch the show, it's fantastic. Then, you will see why this is getting some fan friction.

I doubt I'll be such a negative nancy about it like fanboys are about everything. That's where fandom and I, of any series or character, diverge sharply. I would have loved to have seen George Millers JLA or even Tim Burton's Superman. If nothing else, it would have been interesting. I always try and remain optimistic about these sorts of things, and if it doesn't work out in the end, oh well, life moves on. No fits of nerd rage needed. Life's too short for such petty cynicism.

 

[HighFivingMF]

Oh god I hope this won't be a "Doctor Who for Americans". I can see it now...

Starring Tracy Jordan as the Doctor! Also starring Malin Ackerman as Angela Companion!

How the Hell were those names the first two that came to mind when you thought of American movies?

 

[Spider-Fan]

This is a bad idea. Just make something connected to the show loosely. There is a Doctor Who movie to be made, but I am not sure this is it.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Separate from the tv series? Bleh. Matt Smith is King. You are setting yourself up for failure if you don't connect them. Nobody is going to go see this but fans and if you alienate the fans then nobody will see this.

I'm more of a Tennant guy, though I like Matt Smith.

 

[Crockett]

This is a bad idea. Just make something connected to the show loosely. There is a Doctor Who movie to be made, but I am not sure this is it.

Yeah, if they're going to make a movie, one should be thinking of embracing the character's history rather than shying away from it and start from scratch. I guess I don't really like the idea of they making a new Doctor that runs parallel with the show but have its own canon history, although in a way it'll be good if it turns out bad. I think Abrams' Star Trek is the model they should be looking at and trying to do the make the same results. It's embracing the history of the show while targeting new audience and it did worked since most fans does like it and people who are new to the franchise as well.

 

[chaseter]

Yup...just have it be it's own movie in an alternate universe but still loosely connected enough to not poop on the already establised, rich history. It's super easy. Don't burn the fans that make this movie even possible in the first place.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Doctor Who already has multiple continuities anyhow.

The main Television Series

The Movies with the Daleks where he was human (Dr Who and the Daleks, Daleks Invasion)

The Big Finish Audio Productions (fun stuff)

The Book series


Since the Doctor Who franchise has already split quite a bit I see no harm in doing more movies. I just hope they don't do a Time War movie. I would like that we never get to see it.

Well, technically time is in flux except for certain key things, so inconsistancies in the Who universe is acceptable.

 

[RetrogradeOrbit]

^
What about the 1996 made for TV Doctor Who movie with Paul McGann? Whatever you might think of the product it does count, right?

 

[Gold Samurai]

Huge Laurie for "The Doctor"


I heard he can do a pretty good English accent.




HarHarHar