Download it! | Open Player in New Window

I know some folks who are going to be unhappy about the BBC's plans to renumber Team Moffat's first year as "Series One" (per DWM #411). But I don't think that's just a marketing decision. It says something about what's going to happen in 2010….

Share:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Tumblr
Tagged with:
 

3 Responses to 2MTL 51: Doctor Who's Third "Series One"

  1. Bruyere_75 says:

    I think it will come down to whether Steven Moffat and crew are going to keep the continuity of Doctor Who intact. One of the wonderful things about this show is the goldmine of backstory that you just don't find on other shows (except maybe Star Trek). I personally love the Doctor's new costume, and I'm not particularly bothered by the smaller changes that have been made. If Moffat keeps the continuity, I think I will be absolutely fine with everything else. And given the particular changes that have been made, it looks like this show is going to hold on to its modernity at the same time as it honours its rich past.

  2. Trevor Gensch says:

    I suppose I am coming down on the side of "why start the numbering again"?

    Doctor Who has always been about reinvention – it constantly changed what it was doing, either as an experiment or as a reaction to society. From changing to earth bound UNIT-focused stories of the seventies to the more family based show of the eighties with its TARDIS-bulging crew, Doctor Who always reinvents.

    So what makes the Moffatt reinvention worthy of a resetting of the numbering? I accepted the RTD did the 2005 series as Series 1, not 27 – 16 years had passed – and the show we got was very different in many respects.

    So are we going to get that with Moffatt? Or more correctly – if we do, why not just make it Series 5? Are the attention spans of the watchers that short that they consider 2009 and its plethora of short-run specials some similar to the 16 year gap from old to new Who? I hope not.

  3. Chip says:

    Certainly "Series 5" would make more sense to me as well, Trev — so much so that I figure SOMEONE's trying to make a statement of some kind. Interestingly, Chris at RFS pointed to their interview with Rob Shearman who claimed that Moffat really thinks the 2005 series really is a continuation from 1989. And yet here we are…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>