PDA

View Full Version : Torchwood to be Doctor Who replacement?



Sealurk
July 19th, 2008, 06:30 AM
Anybody else heard that Torchwood may be dumbed down and cleaned up so it can function as a Saturday night, prime time, family friendly replacement for when any given series of Who finishes its run?

If yes (or no, for that matter)...what's your reaction to the idea?

Personally, whether it's just the internet doing its usual or it is actually planned, I'd say it's a very bad idea. Torchwood thrives because it can do things Who can't.

Reefgirl
July 19th, 2008, 06:33 AM
:rolleyes: Where on Earth do you get these rumours from?

Sealurk
July 19th, 2008, 06:48 AM
Can't remember where I heard it, and trust me, I'm still looking, and really, really hoping I imagined it! But series 3 is apparently going to be a 5 episode arc shown on BBC1, which doesn't bode well.

Pitry
July 19th, 2008, 07:10 AM
It's apparently going to be toned down in order to fit a BBC1 audience. It's still going to be past-watershed and I don't think it's gonna be family friendly, but I suppose we'll all find out next spring...

Sealurk
July 19th, 2008, 07:17 AM
It's apparently going to be toned down in order to fit a BBC1 audience. It's still going to be past-watershed and I don't think it's gonna be family friendly, but I suppose we'll all find out next spring...

I may have heard an exaggerated version of the rumour then. That won't be too bad then, if that is the case. Of course, I'd still prefer more than five episodes, but at least it's Torchwood. And thanks for confirming I hadn't entirely imagined it!

P-90_177
July 19th, 2008, 07:21 AM
I suspect it's going to be 5 episodes because now:

They've replaced Tosh and Owen with Mickey and Martha...

So my guess is the BBC is a tad concerned that such a big change will bring their ratings down. Having only 5 episodes allows them to see how well the changes will do.

Sealurk
July 19th, 2008, 07:30 AM
I've got to admit, I'm still not sure about Mickey being in Torchwood (if indeed he definitely is going to be in it...but I can't see many other options given the end of Journey's End), but then, I also wasn't keen on Donna Noble becoming a full-time companion in Who - until the end of 'Partners in Crime'. Could Mickey be in line for a serious character upgrade?

Martha, however, has already been in Torchwood, and while I haven't looked, I haven't seen any huge adverse reaction to her presence (although at the time, she wasn't replacing another character), so essentially Mickey is the only unknown quantity - or it's because of that AND the potentially risky move to BBC1.

Where series 1 was slightly over the top, I personally thought series 2 of TW hit the nail on the head, finding the perfect balance of adult themes and content and Who-ness. I'm still a little apprehensive about the idea of toning it down further.

Reefgirl
July 19th, 2008, 08:32 AM
I suspect it's going to be 5 episodes because now:

They've replaced Tosh and Owen with Mickey and Martha...

So my guess is the BBC is a tad concerned that such a big change will bring their ratings down. Having only 5 episodes allows them to see how well the changes will do.
has that bit in the spoilers been confirmed, as far as I know it's only a rumour

The last series of Torchwood was edited for family viewing and shown a week later than the full fat version, like the BBC used to do with Buffy, if the BBC do this again it does not mean they are going to dumb down Torchwood for the kiddies

Do us all a favour and wait until the BBC confirm or deny a rumour before going into major over-reation alert http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m274/Reefgirl3/Smileys/overreacting.gif

nx01a
July 19th, 2008, 12:03 PM
I read the same version of the rumour and was quite disturbed. S2 Torchwood was what it should have been since the beginning: no excessive sex or language, but sci-fi themes handled in an adult way.

I'm not a huge Martha fan, but the Mickey from the Who finale has definite potential.

The edited versions of TW are distasteful to say the least.

ecchi
July 20th, 2008, 02:15 AM
It's apparently going to be toned down in order to fit a BBC1 audience.
Toned down in order to fit a BBC1 audience???? Have you seen some of the stuff they show on BBC1 after the watershed? Compare, for example, the gay material in Torchwood and the way Jonathan Ross introduces his house band, some of his stronger introductions put an image in your head that they could never use in Torchwood!

Pitry
July 20th, 2008, 03:01 AM
LoL! I admit I'm using wording I saw elsewhere. And we don't get BBC1, only BBCPrime... and besides, that's in my parents' house, I don't even have a television. So, erm... no :D

ecchi
July 20th, 2008, 03:19 AM
we don't get BBC1, only BBCPrime
From that I assume you are not living in Britain. In which case you may end up with a sanitised version anyway, because a lot of British TV shows often have to be edited to conform with local decency laws (especially in USA but in most non European countries to a certain extent).

Pitry
July 20th, 2008, 04:29 AM
From that I assume you are not living in Britain. In which case you may end up with a sanitised version anyway, because a lot of British TV shows often have to be edited to conform with local decency laws (especially in USA but in most non European countries to a certain extent).

You assume correctly :)
Well, the several Torchwood episodes I caught when they were transmitted here on the local channels were not cut at all (not even for time even though they're longer than the regular slot) - but then again that was a local chanel, BBCPrime broadcast through all of Europe and the Middle East (where I am) and I'm pretty sure it's the same broadcast throughout... The mysteries of television!

Sealurk
July 20th, 2008, 04:40 AM
This is pure speculation, but is it likely that the BBC is trying to prep Torchwood for bigger international sales / exposure, i.e. as a package with Doctor Who, and they're worried it might be a little too adult to seal the deal?

ecchi
July 20th, 2008, 05:30 AM
You assume correctly :)
BBCPrime broadcast through all of Europe and the Middle East (where I am) and I'm pretty sure it's the same broadcast throughout... The mysteries of television!
Much of Europe (with a few exceptions) is as liberal as British TV, or more liberal in some cases, so you should have no problem there. Middle East TV I know nothing about, but I thought in general the area was a little tight arsed about these things.

But how can you tell if it is edited? For example in episode 2 of season 1 most of the world lost the scene of the security guard masturbating while watching the two people having sex in the toilet on his CCTV monitor. It did not detract from the plot, so you would not have realised there was something missing, and it was only about 15 seconds long, so the running time would have been the same since they round it to the nearest minute. And there are no doubt plenty of other scenes like that, that have gone but are unnoticeable by their absence!

ecchi
July 20th, 2008, 05:37 AM
This is pure speculation, but is it likely that the BBC is trying to prep Torchwood for bigger international sales / exposure, i.e. as a package with Doctor Who, and they're worried it might be a little too adult to seal the deal?

They could easily A/B/C it (shoot questionable scenes three times, one version "full on" one suitable for more restrictive areas, and one for very restrictive areas). That used to be very popular in the 1970's in the British film industry. Although back then Britain got the B reel (slightly censored, but not extremely censored). As a collector of old Z grade British movies you have no idea what a struggle it is to track down a video or DVD of the A reel (full version).

It is a bit more expensive to do things this way, but there are only a few scenes in Torchwood where they would have to do it, so it should not be too much of a problem.

Pitry
July 20th, 2008, 05:40 AM
Much of Europe (with a few exceptions) is as liberal as British TV, or more liberal in some cases, so you should have no problem there. Middle East TV I know nothing about, but I thought in general the area was a little tight arsed about these things.

But how can you tell if it is edited? For example in episode 2 of season 1 most of the world lost the scene of the security guard masturbating while watching the two people having sex in the toilet on his CCTV monitor. It did not detract from the plot, so you would not have realised there was something missing, and it was only about 15 seconds long, so the running time would have been the same since they round it to the nearest minute. And there are no doubt plenty of other scenes like that, that have gone but are unnoticeable by their absence!

Well, peopleare tight arsed here, btu the television doesn't seem to have noticed. :)
As for knowing they didn't cut anything... erm... I'm a very impatient girl. Very. :cool:

Reefgirl
July 20th, 2008, 05:54 AM
The only editing that is done to make Torchwood family friendly is to tone down the violence, I'm assuming here I've never seen an edited version but it's not like Jack and Ianto are at 'it' every episode so I doubt they're editing it for gay sex either, most kids don't turn a hair over a gay kiss, I know my daughter doesn't freak over it, neither do I or my mum. On average I'm guessing that the Family Friendly version is only a couple of minutes shorter than the Full Fat version. IMO all this http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m274/Reefgirl3/Smileys/overreacting.gif about Torchwood being 'dumbed down for the kiddies' is a complete waste of energy as I've said before, wait until the BBC confirm or deny a rumour before you start panicking. Again As far as I know the BBC send out the Full Fat version of Dr Who and Torchwood and let the individual countries do the editing, one country may be ok with Gay kissing and another may be a bit funny about it

ecchi
July 20th, 2008, 06:19 AM
The only editing that is done to make Torchwood family friendly is to tone down the violence, I'm assuming here I've never seen an edited version but it's not like Jack and Ianto are at 'it' every episode so I doubt they're editing it for gay sex either, most kids don't turn a hair over a gay kiss, I know my daughter doesn't freak over it, neither do I or my mum. On average I'm guessing that the Family Friendly version is only a couple of minutes shorter than the Full Fat version. IMO all this http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m274/Reefgirl3/Smileys/overreacting.gif about Torchwood being 'dumbed down for the kiddies' is a complete waste of energy as I've said before, wait until the BBC confirm or deny a rumour before you start panicking. Again As far as I know the BBC send out the Full Fat version of Dr Who and Torchwood and let the individual countries do the editing, one country may be ok with Gay kissing and another may be a bit funny about it

Actually there is little editing for violence, mostly it is sex and gay content. The sex I can survive without, but to satisfy some markets they would have to have no overt mention of homosexuality, even the scene in Dr Who where Jack kisses Gwen and Ianto would have to go (he could kiss Gwen, but not another man), and that would basically change the background story of the plot.

Also if you edit out gay kisses but leave in the hetero ones, you are pandering to homophobia.

As to your comment "most kids don't turn a hair over a gay kiss" I'm afraid you need to talk to more kids. You have been lucky with your daughter. A large percentage of kids think homosexuality is wrong, and a good few of those consider it evil. However it is not the kids that matter, it is the parents. And to give you an example of how parents think, I was caught in the middle of an argument about allowing gay men into the Army, and I thought I had the perfect answer with a point (which I won't bore you with now) that finished by showing that we would be easy to invade if we stopped all gay men from signing up. Every single person in the room agreed with the person I was talking to when he said "They would rather Britain be ruled by Hitler than have gays in the army." That is the sort of arsehole thinking that will get Torchwood edited.

Remember, when it was first announced that RTD was bringing back Dr Who, a lot of papers said "Great that Dr Who is back, but don't let a gay man run it".

And Don't forget that when Queer As Folk was first broadcast, most newspapers called for the disenfranchisement of Channel 4, and the Sun (Britain's most read paper, which gets it's readers by printing what they wanted to hear) called for RTD to be executed !!!!!

Sealurk
July 20th, 2008, 06:24 AM
I don't think it's panicking, exactly, just speculation. I started the thread because I'd heard the rumour, and wondered if others had...and they have, and now we're discussing the potential implications and reasons - IF it's true. Nobody here has actually done any OMG OMG OMG OMG!!!! The Beeb are neutering Torchwood!! How can they do this? I love Gwen!! We need to start a petition!!!

Ahem. Sorry, got a bit carried away - no offence intended to anybody. Besides, I'm English and proud of it - stiff upper lip and all that, what?

Reefgirl
July 20th, 2008, 09:49 AM
Actually there is little editing for violence, mostly it is sex and gay content. The sex I can survive without, but to satisfy some markets they would have to have no overt mention of homosexuality, even the scene in Dr Who where Jack kisses Gwen and Ianto would have to go (he could kiss Gwen, but not another man), and that would basically change the background story of the plot.

Also if you edit out gay kisses but leave in the hetero ones, you are pandering to homophobia. are you talking about here or the foreign market?


As to your comment "most kids don't turn a hair over a gay kiss" I'm afraid you need to talk to more kids. You have been lucky with your daughter. A large percentage of kids think homosexuality is wrong, and a good few of those consider it evil. However it is not the kids that matter, it is the parents. And to give you an example of how parents think, I was caught in the middle of an argument about allowing gay men into the Army, and I thought I had the perfect answer with a point (which I won't bore you with now) that finished by showing that we would be easy to invade if we stopped all gay men from signing up. Every single person in the room agreed with the person I was talking to when he said "They would rather Britain be ruled by Hitler than have gays in the army." That is the sort of arsehole thinking that will get Torchwood edited.
Ah the "Disgusted of Tumbridge Wells" Daily Mail readers


Remember, when it was first announced that RTD was bringing back Dr Who, a lot of papers said "Great that Dr Who is back, but don't let a gay man run it".
Really?? Where did you hear that?


And Don't forget that when Queer As Folk was first broadcast, most newspapers called for the disenfranchisement of Channel 4, and the Sun (Britain's most read paper, which gets it's readers by printing what they wanted to hear) called for RTD to be executed !!!!!
Ah, that explains why they do their utmost to spoil and generally 'Diss' Dr Who. No-one reads the The Sun, they only look at the pictures :lol:


I don't think it's panicking, exactly, just speculation. I started the thread because I'd heard the rumour, and wondered if others had...and they have, and now we're discussing the potential implications and reasons - IF it's true. Nobody here has actually done any OMG OMG OMG OMG!!!! The Beeb are neutering Torchwood!! How can they do this? I love Gwen!! We need to start a petition!!!

It just amazes me how these rumours get started and how much they get twisted, I mean, someone out there could be reading the last couple of posts, get it into their heads that the BBC have given into the Anti Gay brigade and, to quote you, 'neutered Torchwood' and the next thing we know there's a rumour going round that in a bid to 'Straighten Torchwood' Ianto's getting killed off and Jack's going to marry Martha, then all hell breaks lose and the BBC have to break cover, I bet the producers are having a right laugh at all the rumours flying.

Ahem. Sorry, got a bit carried away - no offence intended to anybody. Besides, I'm English and proud of it - stiff upper lip and all that, what?
Absolutly, :D Tea? what about some crumpets?

ecchi
July 20th, 2008, 10:34 AM
are you talking about here or the foreign market?
Somewhere way way back in this thread someone suggested that the BBC may begin censoring the British version so that it can be sold to the foreign market uncut. It is that post that I am talking about (so in answer to your question "sort of both").


Really?? Where did you hear that?
I read newspapers. :)
I also subscribe to a service that sends me an email about any reference to Dr Who in a newspaper (and now also Torchwood).


, that explains why they do their utmost to spoil and generally 'Diss' Dr Who.
Never seen them actually diss' Dr Who, and the reason they print spoilers is that a lot of people watch Dr Who, and are stupid enough to read spoilers (and also believe a lot of the fake ones the paper makes up when there are no genuine ones). The Sun has no agenda except to sell as many papers as possible. The anti RTD stuff was to pander to the large number of homophobic people in the country, but if those people suddenly became gay, the same paper would be publishing articles on the joys of buggery!


It just amazes me how these rumours get started and how much they get twisted
And bloody RTD does not help, spreading "misinformation", and sometimes just saying rubbish for the fun of it.

Sealurk
July 20th, 2008, 10:37 AM
It just amazes me how these rumours get started and how much they get twisted, I mean, someone out there could be reading the last couple of posts, get it into their heads that the BBC have given into the Anti Gay brigade and, to quote you, 'neutered Torchwood' and the next thing we know there's a rumour going round that in a bid to 'Straighten Torchwood' Ianto's getting killed off and Jack's going to marry Martha, then all hell breaks lose and the BBC have to break cover, I bet the producers are having a right laugh at all the rumours flying.

Absolutly, :D Tea? what about some crumpets?

I say, rather! Spiffing! (You know, that word just doesn't get used enough these days. Sigh.)

You have a point about somebody catching the forum title or scanning a few posts and going off on one, but to be honest, that can't be helped.

Fact is, there are just people out there who will leap on something you say and run with it without checking it up, re-reading it to make sure they've got the right idea...nobody can help that, and I'm not going to let fear of some hysterical, reactionary fans screaming about the end of Torchwood stop me starting a (calm) discussion about what is unlikely to be the end of Torchwood as we know it!!!!

Sorry, couldn't help myself. Sometimes I'm so evil System Lords and Daleks alike cower from me.

Sealurk
July 20th, 2008, 10:39 AM
The anti RTD stuff was to pander to the large number of homophobic people in the country, but if those people suddenly became gay, the same paper would be publishing articles on the joys of buggery!

Well...Page 3 would change dramatically.

Reefgirl
July 20th, 2008, 01:23 PM
Somewhere way way back in this thread someone suggested that the BBC may begin censoring the British version so that it can be sold to the foreign market uncut. It is that post that I am talking about (so in answer to your question "sort of both").
I think that is highly unlikely, what may offend one country's moral code maybe perfectly acceptable to another, if the BBC did that Torchwood wouldn't geet beyond Ianto (in a chastity belt) serving coffee



I read newspapers. :)
I also subscribe to a service that sends me an email about any reference to Dr Who in a newspaper (and now also Torchwood).
Ah, that explains a lot


Never seen them actually diss' Dr Who, and the reason they print spoilers is that a lot of people watch Dr Who, and are stupid enough to read spoilers (and also believe a lot of the fake ones the paper makes up when there are no genuine ones). The Sun has no agenda except to sell as many papers as possible. The anti RTD stuff was to pander to the large number of homophobic people in the country, but if those people suddenly became gay, the same paper would be publishing articles on the joys of buggery!
If I get my hands on a copy of The Sun (usually out of bordem at work) I'll do the crossword and that's it, as someone said before, if The sun print's the truth about Dr Who it's usually by accident



And bloody RTD does not help, spreading "misinformation", and sometimes just saying rubbish for the fun of it.
Probably just seeing how gullible some people really are


I say, rather! Spiffing! (You know, that word just doesn't get used enough these days. Sigh.)
That's the truth donchaknow (I love Major Bloodnock from The Goons)


You have a point about somebody catching the forum title or scanning a few posts and going off on one, but to be honest, that can't be helped.
Sometimes I feel like posting something really preposterous just to see how many people will say "OMG they can't do that!!!"


Fact is, there are just people out there who will leap on something you say and run with it without checking it up, re-reading it to make sure they've got the right idea...nobody can help that, and I'm not going to let fear of some hysterical, reactionary fans screaming about the end of Torchwood stop me starting a (calm) discussion about what is unlikely to be the end of Torchwood as we know it!!!!
Me neither, sometimes you can't help but laugh at the OMG!!!! http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m274/Reefgirl3/Smileys/overreacting.gif


Sorry, couldn't help myself. Sometimes I'm so evil System Lords and Daleks alike cower from me.
No worries, we all have a Dark Side

*Evil Cackle*


Well...Page 3 would change dramatically.

Hell, If they put naked men on page 3 I'd buy The Sun

Sealurk
July 20th, 2008, 06:42 PM
That's the truth donchaknow (I love Major Bloodnock from The Goons)

Can't fault that taste. I was raised on The Goons, and Round the Horne. Make of that what you will - it probably explains my warped sense of humour...and reality.


No worries, we all have a Dark Side

*Evil Cackle*

Eeeeexcellent. It's nice to unleash mine every now and then, even if it does petty, childish things.

As far as the latest developments in the topic are concerned, the reaction by the British public (can't comment for any other country) to Torchwood when it was first revealed struck me as ridiculous, childish and quite a damning, revelatory blow as far as our supposed tolerant, open minded nation goes. Or maybe it's just The Sun again.

Just to put this in context, I'm male, I'm heterosexual, I'm in my late twenties and I have no (known) gay friends or family.

Anyway...why is series 3 going to be only five episodes long?

Reefgirl
July 20th, 2008, 11:37 PM
Can't fault that taste. I was raised on The Goons, and Round the Horne. Make of that what you will - it probably explains my warped sense of humour...and reality.
So was I, I can speak Polari, fluently




Eeeeexcellent. It's nice to unleash mine every now and then, even if it does petty, childish things.

As far as the latest developments in the topic are concerned, the reaction by the British public (can't comment for any other country) to Torchwood when it was first revealed struck me as ridiculous, childish and quite a damning, revelatory blow as far as our supposed tolerant, open minded nation goes. Or maybe it's just The Sun again.

Just to put this in context, I'm male, I'm heterosexual, I'm in my late twenties and I have no (known) gay friends or family.

Anyway...why is series 3 going to be only five episodes long?
I didn't see any Anti Gay backlash, about the pilot episode, apart from the fact it was absolute crap, it probably way The Sun. As for series 3, probably a transitional thing

Sealurk
July 21st, 2008, 04:35 AM
I didn't see any Anti Gay backlash, about the pilot episode, apart from the fact it was absolute crap, it probably way The Sun.

Might just be where I live then - very high concentration of Daily Mail and Sun readers here. But I definitely remember there being outrage and disgust at the amount of sex and violence in Torchwood, and even more at the fact that there would be gay characters.

Reefgirl
July 21st, 2008, 04:49 AM
Might just be where I live then - very high concentration of Daily Mail and Sun readers here. But I definitely remember there being outrage and disgust at the amount of sex and violence in Torchwood, and even more at the fact that there would be gay characters.

Oh yes, I forgot about the Daily Mail readers buttoning up their cardigans and reaching for the computer to email their disgust at 'The 'Leftie' BBC corrupting the nations morals' with a gay caracter in a TV show :rolleyes:

Set Julian and Sandy on them :lol:

BritAngie
July 21st, 2008, 02:51 PM
Anybody else heard that Torchwood may be dumbed down and cleaned up so it can function as a Saturday night, prime time, family friendly replacement for when any given series of Who finishes its run?

If yes (or no, for that matter)...what's your reaction to the idea?

Personally, whether it's just the internet doing its usual or it is actually planned, I'd say it's a very bad idea. Torchwood thrives because it can do things Who can't.

Nope not heard that one. I do know the reduced number of episodes (5 being shown daily over one week) is as a result of the bbc losing a huge chunk of funding recently (due to a legal fight about other channels being entitled to some tv licence money) and coupled with being made to save cash anyway that most shows had to take budget cuts. Apparently David Attenboroughs life on earth team got the worst of the cuts but Torchwood's shows in it's curtailed season.

As BBC three is not available to those with analogue tv here in the uk- and that's probably still alot of peeps -I'd imagine they want to push it onto bbc 1 or 2 to get it out to a wider audience for the licence money they paid. Of course bbc 2 is the normal place for sci fi in beeb's eyes but I guess with doctor who's popularity (and that last years family friendly versions of torchwood appeared one bbc 1 ) they decided to capitalise on the crossover to get more viewers.

As for replacing doctor who-I can't see anything replacing it- and the general british public wouldn't go for it either. That would be like replacing the Queen with Amy Winehouse and hoping that people would find the new hipper queen better... :) Torchwood and SJA are just such different animals and rare ones at that. Spin offs from the show never ever worked in the past but they work because they are so different.

nx01a
July 21st, 2008, 03:11 PM
That would be like replacing the Queen with Amy Winehouse and hoping that people would find the new hipper queen better... :)God save the Queen... some crack!:D
With the relative lack of Who next year due to DT's stage schedule, there should have been extra money for Torchwood if the BBC truly wanted somethiong to fill the huge void left. Then again, these corporations... Torchwood is brilliant in its own right. If you try and change it massively to make it kiddie friendly or dumb it down, these 5 episodes will be its last. Why not just continue showing the kiddie-edited episodes?

ecchi
July 21st, 2008, 03:12 PM
.....as a result of the bbc losing a huge chunk of funding recently (due to a legal fight about other channels being entitled to some tv licence money)
What legal fight?????

ecchi
July 21st, 2008, 03:38 PM
With the relative lack of Who next year due to DT's stage schedule, there should have been extra money for Torchwood
Since they just had to out bid Stephen Spielberg for the new show runner for Dr Who, and Spielberg's offer that they had to beat was two million dollars, I guess there is not a lot of money left anywhere at the Beeb!

nx01a
July 21st, 2008, 04:21 PM
Since they just had to out bid Stephen Spielberg for the new show runner for Dr Who, and Spielberg's offer that they had to beat was two million dollars, I guess there is not a lot of money left anywhere at the Beeb!Tintin?! Oh, for the love of Cthulhu...

Reefgirl
July 22nd, 2008, 01:50 AM
Since they just had to out bid Stephen Spielberg for the new show runner for Dr Who, and Spielberg's offer that they had to beat was two million dollars, I guess there is not a lot of money left anywhere at the Beeb!

:lol: you couldn't make that up

:o

Oh, right, you did :lol:

still funny tho

Sealurk
July 22nd, 2008, 01:59 AM
Since they just had to out bid Stephen Spielberg for the new show runner for Dr Who, and Spielberg's offer that they had to beat was two million dollars, I guess there is not a lot of money left anywhere at the Beeb!

As I understood it, it was only $1 million (1/2 million per film), and the BBC didn't outbid Spielberg, Moffat turned the offer down to do Who - earning about 150,000 a year, or something like that.

As for the Beeb and it's funding...no, no I'm not getting into that just yet!

ecchi
July 22nd, 2008, 02:48 AM
:lol: you couldn't make that up Oh, right, you did
No I did not make it up, Stephen Moffat was offered $2,000,000 to write for Stephen Spielberg and Peter Jackson's TinTin series, the BBC made him a better offer.

ecchi
July 22nd, 2008, 02:55 AM
As I understood it, it was only $1 million (1/2 million per film
It was 1M not $1M. At the moment 1M is about $2M.


Moffat ... earning about 150,000 a year, or something like that.
You have been reading the Sun again. :)


As for the Beeb and it's funding...no, no I'm not getting into that just yet!
I would at least like to know your source (although I suspect it is the same source that gave you the 150,000 "fact"), since last I heard all that was happening was that the other companies were asking for a share, but got refused it. And I think it is extremely unlikely the government would agree to give even a portion of the licence fee to commercial companies, the outcry would finish them.

Sealurk
July 22nd, 2008, 03:20 AM
It was 1M not $1M. At the moment 1M is about $2M.

Oh yeah...my mistake, sorry. :o


You have been reading the Sun again. :)

Gah! NEVER! How can you suggest such a thing?!? :mad:


I would at least like to know your source (although I suspect it is the same source that gave you the 150,000 "fact")

Quite, quite possibly - truth is, I can't remember where I heard it, and I'd like to know my source. I have a memory like an amnesiac goldfish (and don't tell me new scientific studies have proven goldfish have a six month memory...).

Truth is, this thread has been something of a lesson to me not to ask if people have heard something without checking it out, following it up, interviewing people, taking a course in journalism etc.

It's also highlighted just how unreliable so many forms of the media are.

Sealurk
July 22nd, 2008, 03:23 AM
Ah, yes, I've just read the updated version of Moffat/Spielberg story. Of course, that's assuming the new report is accurate...

Reefgirl
July 22nd, 2008, 04:03 AM
Can someone provide links to all these stories or can I at least join in this game of 'See who can start the most ludicrous rumour'

Pitry
July 22nd, 2008, 04:45 AM
ah, just check the front page of Outpost Gallifrey (www.gallifreyone.com/news.php) every once in a while

And you won't be able to win, anyway, that's either the Sun or the Daily Mail! :D

Reefgirl
July 22nd, 2008, 06:17 AM
Outpost Gallifrey is anouther 'Source' that has to be taken with a large pinch of salt, don't take everything as gospel, rumours are fun but not to be take seriously.

Pitry
July 22nd, 2008, 06:59 AM
Outpost Gallifrey is anouther 'Source' that has to be taken with a large pinch of salt, don't take everything as gospel, rumours are fun but not to be take seriously.

Oh, I'm never taking these things seriously! It's jsut that they do provide them links.
And have the sense of adding stuff like "this is from the Sun". :D

BritAngie
July 22nd, 2008, 10:19 AM
What legal fight?????


This is the gist - coupled with ongoing budget cuts anyway.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7339381.stm

Also remember we are only getting 4 new episodes of doc who next year as opposed to 5 episodes of torchwood-so torchwood is better off. (Rumour being the Torchwood eps will be an hour each too)

Pitry
July 22nd, 2008, 10:40 AM
This is the gist - coupled with ongoing budget cuts anyway.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7339381.stm

Also remember we are only getting 4 new episodes of doc who next year as opposed to 5 episodes of torchwood-so torchwood is better off. (Rumour being the Torchwood eps will be an hour each too)

I thought that was confirmed?

And I'm still hoping that Julie Gardner quote was a mistake and the other people saying 5 were right :)

Madeleine
July 22nd, 2008, 12:27 PM
You have been reading the Sun again. :)



It was in the Daily Mail as well. (You'd never have guessed, what with there being not a line in the piece about house prices, but it was definitely in the Daily Mail) and they being 165% more accurate than the Sun, the story has a 58% probability of being true. Fact.

nich959
July 22nd, 2008, 02:11 PM
I've got to admit, I'm still not sure about Mickey being in Torchwood (if indeed he definitely is going to be in it...but I can't see many other options given the end of Journey's End), but then, I also wasn't keen on Donna Noble becoming a full-time companion in Who - until the end of 'Partners in Crime'. Could Mickey be in line for a serious character upgrade?

Martha, however, has already been in Torchwood, and while I haven't looked, I haven't seen any huge adverse reaction to her presence (although at the time, she wasn't replacing another character), so essentially Mickey is the only unknown quantity - or it's because of that AND the potentially risky move to BBC1.

Where series 1 was slightly over the top, I personally thought series 2 of TW hit the nail on the head, finding the perfect balance of adult themes and content and Who-ness. I'm still a little apprehensive about the idea of toning it down further.

Mickey on TW would be very interesting.

I love your new sig =]

Sealurk
July 22nd, 2008, 03:03 PM
Mickey on TW would be very interesting.

I hope so. I suppose there's potential there - and if I'm fair, more than I saw in the character of Donna Noble before series four of Who aired, mainly given my feeling of 'what can they possibly do with her that won't be annoying?'. The whole series, it turns out.

If he is going to be in TW series 3 and beyond, I just hope he doesn't get reduced to the level of 'Torchwood muscle', that the writers come up with a good role for him in The Hub, and some believable skills and talents. Maybe his time in alternate Torchwood will serve him well.

Same goes for Martha, although she's got a head start I reckon, what with the whole 'when I was in UNIT', qualified medical doctor thing, and having been in TW before.


I love your new sig =]

Heh, thanks! I made a smarter and larger version of the Ba'al bumper sticker one, added a new one (is that the one you're talking about, the Sheppard one?) and put them on rotation. Glad you like it.

MasySyma
July 22nd, 2008, 04:20 PM
In addition to taking all rumors with a large grain of salt and hoping the best for Season 3 TW, we could also consider that the remark might have a grain of truth no one has considered yet.

Basically, the BBC are seeking a show to be as successful as Who in Who's off season. With Torchwood having a reputation as dark and wonderful but also sometimes overly dark and filled with too much sex, the remark could mean that the writing staff continues to strive to find a balance between Who magic/darkness/sexuality/the magic of Torchwood and a show that will not cause people to turn the channel because Who isn't on.

It sounds like the BBC doesn't want to turn into SciFi.l I know many fans who are like me, when their show ends, they turn off that network. When Who ends, I'm done with SciFi for most of the year. When Who returns, I return. The BBC is simply trying to figure out how to make more Whovian's Torchwood fans, and because of both RTD's and now SM's envolvment, the essence of Torchwood will likely not be sacrificed.

Reefgirl
July 23rd, 2008, 01:45 AM
Oh, I'm never taking these things seriously! It's jsut that they do provide them links.
And have the sense of adding stuff like "this is from the Sun". :D
True, you have to wonder if there's a group of people sitting in a basement somewhere going "I know what we'll do, just for a laugh we'll put out on the internet that Amy Winehouse is going to be the new Doctor and see what happens"
You also have to wonder about these 'Source's from the BBC' The Sun quote from, I bet, in the Dr Who office, whenever The Sun rings up for a story they go "The Sun's on the phone what shall we tell them this time?" "Tell them Jason Donovan is going to be the new companion and we're going to kill him off at the end of the series and he'll meet up with Astrid and skip off in the sunset singing Especially for You, then monitor the Internet to see home many people believe them"

ecchi
July 23rd, 2008, 02:06 AM
True, you have to wonder if there's a group of people sitting in a basement somewhere going "I know what we'll do, just for a laugh we'll put out on the internet that Amy Winehouse is going to be the new Doctor and see what happens"
You also have to wonder about these 'Source's from the BBC' The Sun quote from, I bet, in the Dr Who office, whenever The Sun rings up for a story they go "The Sun's on the phone what shall we tell them this time?" "Tell them Jason Donovan is going to be the new companion and we're going to kill him off at the end of the series and he'll meet up with Astrid and skip off in the sunset singing Especially for You, then monitor the Internet to see home many people believe them"
You are not far wrong in both cases.

When a newspaper disappears and no one cares about it's reputation anymore (most recently the London Evening News) you usually get to hear stories of how they made up articles to sell papers (in the case of the London Evening News they used to have a regular daily editorial session along the lines of "OK that is the serious stuff written, now we need to make up a couple of 'funny' articles of the 'cat chased by mouse' variety").

As to the BBC; they want publicity, but RTD is not too keen on letting out future plot ideas to the press, so mostly Auntie Beeb relies on spreading rumours.

Reefgirl
July 23rd, 2008, 03:45 AM
You are not far wrong in both cases.

When a newspaper disappears and no one cares about it's reputation anymore (most recently the London Evening News) you usually get to hear stories of how they made up articles to sell papers (in the case of the London Evening News they used to have a regular daily editorial session along the lines of "OK that is the serious stuff written, now we need to make up a couple of 'funny' articles of the 'cat chased by mouse' variety").

As to the BBC; they want publicity, but RTD is not too keen on letting out future plot ideas to the press, so mostly Auntie Beeb relies on spreading rumours.
And have a laugh along the way

ecchi
July 23rd, 2008, 10:41 AM
This is the gist -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7339381.stm

Which is basically what I said then. There is no legal battle just a public debate over what might happen in the future.

Admiral Mappalazarou
July 23rd, 2008, 12:09 PM
No no, oh god, oh god, please no...

No.

This is a reaction to the first post of the thread.

nx01a
July 25th, 2008, 01:27 PM
Well, it'll be a Torchwood without Martha... Freema's defected to ITV according to accounts. Rumours, rumours, everywhere and not a drop of truth?

Reefgirl
July 25th, 2008, 02:16 PM
Well, it'll be a Torchwood without Martha... Freema's defected to ITV according to accounts. Rumours, rumours, everywhere and not a drop of truth?
What do you expect from The Sun?