|
Post by Cyggy on Jun 22, 2022 11:13:36 GMT
See also:The Sacking of Colin Baker (Your Viewpoint)JN-TEric SawardIan Levine & "Who""DWB" Fanzine & It's Impact On the Classic Show (& On JN-T)Other Shows They Affected:The Tripods (1984)Star Cops (1987) Colin went to see them to ask why he was being sacked.
They wanted Ken Campbell instead of Sylvester McCoy.
They wouldn't let JN-T move on - or put him on another show.
They decided to put the show up against "Coronation Street".
They tried to cancel it in 1985 - and finally did in 1989.
Were they "Who" villains out to destroy the Doctor?
Or just BBC folk making the best decisions they could - and doing their job?
Did some of their actions actually make sense in retrospect?
And must the 'Who' production team take at least some of the blame in leaving itself so open to attack through arguably bad decisions on the part of JN-T?
What are your views on "The Sixth Floor" of the BBC?
|
|
|
Post by Cyggy on Jun 22, 2022 11:15:55 GMT
Room 101 Michael Grade Doctor WhoTo be fair, at 4:30, the Cybermen agree with him.
|
|
|
Post by Cyggy on Jun 22, 2022 17:04:01 GMT
1989 cuttings....
|
|
|
Post by Cyggy on Jun 22, 2022 19:46:23 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Cyggy on Jun 22, 2022 20:58:21 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sadako on Jun 23, 2022 15:38:05 GMT
I'm afraid my position is that the BBC probably gave the show a lot of good will in the beginning of the 80's (greenlighting both a spin-off pilot, and a 20th Anniversary feature special), only to find their good will thrown back in their face with mean-spirited stories like Warriors of the Deep and Twin Dilemma that didn't quite entertain the public so much as yell at them to get out the fanboy's playpen.
A move that gradually made the show more vulnerable than ever to its institutional enemies.
It was completely self-inflicted. JNT listened to all the wrong people (chiefly Ian Levine) and did his best to exclude old guard writers like Robert Holmes and Terrance Dicks who actually knew how the show worked best.
Grade was a particularly nasty and spiteful accelerant of the BBC attitude, and once he was controller, everyone had to suck up to him, leaving very few willing to defend the show. But as I see it, JNT's production team weren't much better in terms of their own pettiness and power-plays.
But they were certainly the underdog, and it just might be that at a point where maybe they'd begun to finally figure it out with this show (Revelation of the Daleks).... that was the exact moment the BBC decided to make it impossible for them to perform well.
|
|
|
Post by Cyggy on Jul 4, 2022 15:30:24 GMT
DOCTOR WHO AT 40 UK GOLD The Cancellation Crisis
|
|
|
Post by sadako on Jul 4, 2022 21:59:52 GMT
I must say I find K9 a really annoying presenter of this.
I find a lot of the soundbites to be the usual cliched bordering on insipid fan takes on the era, but fortunately Terrance Dicks has the best words of wisdom on it.
|
|
|
Post by Cyggy on Jul 6, 2022 22:58:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Cyggy on Jul 6, 2022 23:00:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Cyggy on Apr 22, 2023 10:13:51 GMT
Sydney Newman has a bit of a moan (circa 1986-1987).. (Rough transcript)
|
|
|
Post by sadako on Apr 22, 2023 20:20:58 GMT
I think Newman was probably both right, and wrong.
I largely disdain the 80's era of the show, but probably not for the same reasons Newman did. Infact some of Newman's ideas to 'rejuvenate' the show were as daft as Chibnall's.
I don't have much problem with making the show as purely escapist entertainment. The Daemons, Seeds of Doom, Destiny of the Daleks could probably be described as that, and I love them. Infact I would argue the problem with the 80's was often that it was bleak, nasty and far from entertaining. Terminus, Warriors of the Deep, Resurrection of the Daleks were certainly attempts to be more serious and have something to say, and they're utterly horrid viewing for it.
I get that there was often a plastic panto razzmatazz to the era too (in stories like Four to Doomsday, Timelash, Trial of a Time Lord) that could be off-putting, but the main problem is no-one seemed able to agree on a direction for the show so it seemed prone to go from one extreme to the other with soulless abandon.
As for his personal remarks on John, it does sound like John had alienated quite a number of people by then (Peter Grimwade, Christopher Priest, Terrance Dicks, PJ Hammond, Eric Saward). I get the image of John as someone who could be very pleasant and gifted at the charm offensive, but who could turn unpleasant or unwelcoming if he was paranoid that his authority was being undermined. Which unfortunately meant he didn't like having people around on the show who knew it better than him. He indeed might've had a shorter fuse than usual with interviewers by this point because of the pressure he was under.
I can't say I ever myself saw this repulsive side to John (I never really knew or met him), but I've certainly heard unsettling anecdotes about it. I do unfortunately think under him it had become a repulsive show with a repulsive Doctor. Certainly if I was Newman, I'd feel the name was tainted too.
|
|
|
Post by GC on Oct 14, 2023 4:18:57 GMT
Article on the 1989 Cancellation by James Cooray Smith. Worth a read. Psychic Paper: “The End Has No End”
|
|