Chris Chibnall (lead writer on Torchwood) writes stuff that is so straight down the line it is almost painful, but that Who episode of his was not at all bad. I worry it was rather forgettable though.
Human Nature next. For those of you who do not know, this is an adaption by Paul Cornell of his book of the same name.
This is quite a big deal. The books make up their own franchise- after Who was originally cancelled- first extending the adventures of thr Seventh Doctor, and then taking up the cause of the Eighth after the first abortive attempt to restart the series in the mid 90s. The books also had a huge run at writing new stories for the older Doctors.
The amount of books available is vast, almost as large as the series itself. The books themselves have a broader remit than Doctor Who, try out new things, tend to be darkier, edgier, more adult and, some might say, entirely shite.
There is in fact a huge argument between the pro-tv and pro-book factions, if you can label them so. The main conflict is over how canon the books are- unlike in Star Wars, there is no central authority for Who whocan really make a judgment here.
Several writers have graduated from books to tv, and Paul Cornell (who famously wrote the first 'Past Doctor' book, a story for Doctor 5 called Goth opera about Vampires... which I thought was rubbish) is one, having written Father's Day in series one, of new Who, which I quite liked.
Other spin-offs have already been adapted- for example, the audio play 'Jubilee' was re-made by its author into 'Dalek', and elements of 'Spare Parts' were used in 'Rise of the Cybermen' (note the credit given in the end credits of that story).
But never yet has one of the books been made into a tv episode- with all the continuity/canon nightmare implied by the same story happening twice. Not to mention all the arguments about whether a book can actually be made into Who like this. And so on. Huge fan argument.
Nonetheless, 'Human Nature' is one of the most famous books written- but originally for the mysterious, godlike seventh Doctor, the entire plot being how he had become detached from the Humanity he associates with. The current Doctor couldn't be LESS like that, so the basic premise is a little more odd.
Anyway. It's been done now, and it could be an amazing slice of innovative tv Who, or a two-part pile of shite. We'll soon see.
I thought that worked out very well.
In fact, it seems elements coindiced well. The change of the plot away from "Unhumanlike Seventh Doctor wanting to experience humanity" to "Humanlike Tenth Doctor FORCED to adopt humanity in order to avoid hunting aliens" actually works much better for tv than the original plotline would have done.
It's all an adaption should be- kept the base ideas (Doctor as Human, aliens taking the chance to nab a Time Lord) and junked everything that wouldn't work on screen.
The only problem with what I said above, btw...
... is that in the original, the Doctor becomes Human for his own reasons, and bad guys take the opportunity to try and take his Time Lord nature. It's a separate plot to give the story more oomf- but basically, there would not have been any bad guys had he not become Human. He wasn't expecting them.
In THIS one, he becomes Human precisely BECAUSE of the bad guys- presumably on the idea that he cannot stop them in the way he wou,ld, say, stop the Daleks, no reason for which we have been given yet. Fair enough. But as it is entirely inevitable that this plan will fail, and he's going to have to stop them some other way, one does wonder what the whole point of the darn thing was- may as well have not bothered with this 'becoming Human' nonsense.
A minor quibble for a good episode- but I just thought it was worth mentioning how the plot change, though much easier to do on tv, leaves the set-up slightly odd.
That's crazily advanced talk.
Who has its fourth series commisisoned and ready to go.
Who won't hear about a fifth series until next year. That's not even slightly odd- not even Eastenders knows if it will still be running in 2009. You don't get the final say so until a year ahead.
But some things are pretty obvious- as with Eastenders. Now, nothing is for certain, but Who is one of the BBC's most poopular programmes- by a considerable margin- and has dominated the Saturday evening schedules for three years, slaughtered the competition- more than that, it has completely changed and re-invigorated the whole idea of Saturday evening television.
It's a stellar hit, the BBC gets a lot of cash out of overseas sales and merchandising, not to mention publicity, and it would be very surprising if it is not renewed with all that in mind.
EDIT- Looked into this. It looks like people are confusing Russell T Davies leaving- which has been on the cards for a while- with the show being axed.
RTD wants to do other things. But no reason to think Who will not continue to thrive.
RTD leaving???
HALLELUJAH!!!
Hes done a great job getting Who back where it belongs but HURRAH!!!
new blood
heres to a Irwin Kershener of Who to come and take the probably lubed up batton from RTD and give it a revamp
last weeks episode was top but weve had a few duff ones this series
i love Tennant but its pretty clear that the first Eccleston season was the one
any truth in Martha/Freema being sacked???