BBC investigates Doctor Who Episode leak

[Cole]

Whatever you think of dowloads from the net; this is just mean spirited as the writer Russell T Davies, is publicly trying so hard to keep a tight lid on as many spoiler leaks as he can. This was so that (like the old days of television) the surprises happen as we watch them when broadcast.

The BBC is investigating how an episode of the new Doctor Who series ended up on the internet three weeks before the show is due to begin on BBC One.

A show spokesperson said the leak was a "significant breach of copyright".

"We would urge viewers not to spoil their enjoyment and to wait for the finished version, which airs at the end of the month," a statement said.

Christopher Eccleston plays the Doctor in the first new series since the sci-fi favourite was cancelled in 1989.

A 45-minute episode called Rose appeared on the internet on Monday. Rose is the name of the Doctor's assistant, played by pop singer Billie Piper.

"The source of it appears to be connected to our co-production partner," the BBC statement said. The co-production partner is the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). They were currently unavailable for comment.

The episode appears to be the series' first instalment. The new series is hotly anticipated by fans, who have remained avid followers since the end of the last series more than 15 years ago.

The show has since been resurrected for a one-off TV movie and in the form of animated online adventures. In 2003, it was voted the show people would most like to see back on TV.

It has also been revealed that Eccleston, who appeared in the film Shallow Grave and TV's Cracker, e-mailed writer and executive producer Russell T Davies to ask for the lead role.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/4328329.stm

[BJ_M]

those pirate Canadians !

[State Of Mind]

Uhm, BJ_M, just because a person is Canadian doesn't mean they are a pirate. Regardless of nationality, anyone has the ability to download TV shows. Your comment really pissed me off. Just goes to show how people generalize illegal actions done by people simply by race/nation. Real mature...

[BJ_M]

Uhm, BJ_M, just because a person is Canadian doesn't mean they are a pirate. Regardless of nationality, anyone has the ability to download TV shows. Your comment really pissed me off. Just goes to show how people generalize illegal actions done by people simply by race/nation. Real mature...

look at my location --- it was joke

[Noahtuck]

Uhm, BJ_M, just because a person is Canadian doesn't mean they are a pirate. Regardless of nationality, anyone has the ability to download TV shows. Your comment really pissed me off. Just goes to show how people generalize illegal actions done by people simply by race/nation. Real mature...

look at my location --- it was joke

B_JM, how dare you insult yourself like that!!!
& you thought i was jumpy 8)
LMAO!!

But that is pretty crappy that something like that would be leaked out before being broadcast

[BJ_M]

well - we ARE all pirates or growing dope or have mad cow disease

[Noahtuck]

well - we ARE all pirates or growing dope or have mad cow disease

Well hell!!!! I'm moving to canada!!!!!!!

[Xylob the Destroyer]

mad cow dope pirates who talk funny....
what's this world coming to, eh? what's that all aboot?
sure didn't take long for this thread to go off topic

[dcsos]

Especially for DR. WHO that champion of off-topic investigations!

[RottenFoxBreath]

ive seen this one,and IMO,its pretty poor.
i liked it when tom baker and jon pertwee were the doctors,but the later ones,especially sylvester mccoy were absolute guff.
i cant see this sticking around for long,and i believe rightly so,this has sullied my memories and fondness for a childhood great.
from the first episode,the special effects arent realy "special",and well,the acting is bad,not camp and hammy like it used to be,its just bad.

[Cole]

I want to wait until it is broadcast, so thanks for not posting any spoilers RFB.

ive seen this one,and IMO,its pretty poor.

It is alwasy dangerous to make judgements like that after one episode. The amount of times I have heard that and then hear the phrase "...maybe I was a bit hastey because I have started to warm to it..."

especially sylvester mccoy were absolute guff.

Apart from one or two stories, I can't disagree there...

i cant see this sticking around for long,and i believe rightly so,this has sullied my memories and fondness for a childhood great.

From the ones who couldn't wait and have posted opinions on other forums, most to have received this pretty well. However, as far as I can tell, the ones who have complained are the die hards who are nit picking on things: the logo, this theme version, the roundals etc (not for one moment suggesting that you are like that, but an opinion that I have formed by what I have read elsewhere).

Bottom line for me is that my favourite programme is back and I just want to sit back on my big leather sofa and be entertained (and also enjoy the buildup). If it does that then that is good enough for me.

After all, it makes a nice change from all the Reality, house makeover and Police shows.

[Nilfennasion]

i liked it when tom baker and jon pertwee were the doctors,but the later ones,especially sylvester mccoy were absolute guff.

Rubbish. Sylvester McCoy and Sophie Aldred were two of the best actors to grace the series. The real problem was the quality of the scripts. John Nathan-Turner would allow any old crap, so long as it was on paper, to (dis)grace the series. Not having seen any of the new material, I will reserve judgement, but the Five Doctors special pretty much confirms that so long as JNT was involved, nothing was going to gel. DW should have been placed on hiatus the very second Graham Williams called it a day.

Can you tell I am not fond of John Nathan-Turner?

[JohnnyCNote]

I wonder if their production quality has improved over the old days. The lasting image I have of Dr. Who is of some guy in a large cloth sack writhing on the floor, trying to be some sort of monster.....

[junkmalle]

I wonder if their production quality has improved over the old days. The lasting image I have of Dr. Who is of some guy in a large cloth sack writhing on the floor, trying to be some sort of monster.....

Yes, now it's a computer generated guy in plastic writhing about...

[Cole]

i liked it when tom baker and jon pertwee were the doctors,but the later ones,especially sylvester mccoy were absolute guff.

Rubbish. Sylvester McCoy and Sophie Aldred were two of the best actors to grace the series. The real problem was the quality of the scripts. John Nathan-Turner would allow any old crap, so long as it was on paper, to (dis)grace the series. Not having seen any of the new material, I will reserve judgement, but the Five Doctors special pretty much confirms that so long as JNT was involved, nothing was going to gel. DW should have been placed on hiatus the very second Graham Williams called it a day.

Can you tell I am not fond of John Nathan-Turner?

If RottenFoxBreath is talking about the era (as I understood he was), then you are in agreement

I wonder if their production quality has improved over the old days. The lasting image I have of Dr. Who is of some guy in a large cloth sack writhing on the floor, trying to be some sort of monster.....

Nothing could get away with that these days, but back in those days most BBC television special effects were much the same about that time - blue screen in its infancy, papier mache heads, using shop window dummies as bodies... BUT some of the model work was quite good.

The BBC has moved on since the last BBC produced episode in 1989, but even back then the visuals were improving. Having said that, Doctor Who was always a cash strapped series; by all accounts money is something that this new series seems to have been given more of...

[Nilfennasion]

In 1989, producing monster effects was still relatively expensive. On the audio commentary for Rembrance Of The Daleks, Sophie Aldred and Sylvester McCoy mention that the lightning-ball thing that little girl plays with during the latter episodes cost the BBC props department thousands of dollars, then five years later, you could pick one up for about twenty pounds.

HDTV has had a similar effect with CGI. It used to be that a single serial (four half-hour episodes) of Doctor Who cost tens of thousands of pounds to make. Now, with CGI and HD video, you can probably make an entire season for that much.

The real challenge, as some of my fellows from the review field have mentioned, is that now that it is cheaper to make these effects, the temptation is there to overload the serials with effects. In the old days, it was necessary to rely on storytelling. Now, the challenge is to strike a balance between storytelling and effects like they had in the first X-Men film.

[RottenFoxBreath]

when it was broadcast first time around,man i used to be shit scared of the monsters,hiding when they came on screen,but that was it,amazing eyecandy to me,an 8 year old.as i got older and it was shown on uk gold,i used to get up and watch them on saturday morning,remembering how much i enjoyed the episodes,and the poor special effects.annoying my wife with a whos who of the doctors,assistants and plots.*anyone remember the lighthouse,or the master come to think of it.mmmm.....teela...*
but now,in my 30s,it just doesnt seem to me to be "dr.who".i will watch it,and i still am hoping its going to turn good,but who knows,not everything is like it used to be,but it would be good if it could capture the "magic" from the past.

and if it doesnt,then i think the production team need a sonic screwdriver shoved where screwdrivers shouldnt go!

[Radixmind]

Ah, Doctor Who - the show that cannot win...

we all want to see a new Doctor Who show, cos we all loved it when we were kids. i know i did. i was fortunate enought o be growing up with that most magical of doctors - Tom (i'm a bit mad, you know) Baker. he managed to be an imposing adult and a charming foolish child all at once, which is precisely the combination required when youre dealing with what is essentially a children's program that outgrew it's roots.

the problem is, now that were all grown up, what exactly do we want from Doctor Who? we dont want it to be like it was, because it was cheap, simplistic and often rather poorly acted and directed. but we dont want it to be a full on, adult transformation, with gunplay, drug abuse, bedhopping and complex political debate because that would sully our memories. so what do we want?

the problem is that the BBC are trying desperately to make a show that appeals to younger audiences, but also grabs in the older, more discerning viewer. and this CAN work, but it can also fall on it's arse if it's done poorly. i really hope this new series does it. i'm one of the few people that thought the TV movie with Paul McGann was a fair kick at the ball, and showed a lot of promise. let's hope that they transplanted some of it's charm (and budget) to the new series.

remember, Doctor Who is the UK's Star Wars. we all saw it as kids, we all have special memories, and we are always excited at the idea of new material being made.... but then we get Episode 1, and somehow it isnt as exciting, as clever, as GOOD as we remember it....[/i]

[Cole]

Very well said, Radixmind.

I also hope that it remains an action adventure series as there is a danger of making things like this too chatty and standaround. Who remembers the BBC's Invasion Earth from a few years ago?

[Radixmind]

i remember invasion earth, Cole. i remember it being rather morbid in tone. if i remember right, things didnt go too well for earth at the end.

shame about the show though. something happened to Jed Mercurio's script getting from page to screen. there were plenty of interesting ideas, i recall. but the direction was pretty lacklustre unfortunately.

i also remember wondering at the time - would this show make a good doctor who story? i remember a number of great Jon Pertwee UNIT stories that were similarly themed, with the Doctor helping out the military against a bizarre alien foe.

as for chatty and standaround - i dont have a problem with lots of dialogue if the dialogue is interesting or entertaining to hear. i enjoyed the wordplay in the TV movie a great deal. more so than the action, i'm afraid.

but my greatest fear for the new DW is lack of investment. not just financially, but creatively. good perfomances and good direction can make a slighly ropey 'special' effect seem like so much more.

[RottenFoxBreath]

another flop recently was the attempted project of a new "blakes 7".most of them had been killed off,but it was left up to avon to return,im just glad paul darrow came to his senses and pulled out.
im sure that would have been a complete failure,as well,it wouldnt have been blakes 7,would it.

[Radixmind]

Blakes One???!!!

[Cole]

as for chatty and standaround - i dont have a problem with lots of dialogue if the dialogue is interesting or entertaining to hear. i enjoyed the wordplay in the TV movie a great deal. more so than the action, i'm afraid.

but my greatest fear for the new DW is lack of investment. not just financially, but creatively. good perfomances and good direction can make a slighly ropey 'special' effect seem like so much more.

Make things too chatty and you loose the interest of the younger viewers. Admitedly Invasion Earth was aimed at an older audience, but it was still too slow moving. You have to find the right balance to keep the whole family interested. Make it too Shakespearian and the kids won't watch but make it too Panto and the parents loose interest.

The better regarded Doctor Whos have been the more action/horror orientated, but the more chatty ones tended to be at the bottom of the pile.

I too liked the TV movie and was sorry that McGann didn't make any more - I really liked his Doctor.

Reading up on the new Doctor Who series, it seems that the BBC have thrown some money in its direction - about £800 thousand per episode (think that works out to be about $1.5 million). Arguably one of the most expensive BBC dramas ever!

I also have a bit of faith in Russel T Davies. His track record seems quite strong and his love for the programme is quite evident.

Only two weeks to wait anyway and then we can all find out for ourselves.

another flop recently was the attempted project of a new "blakes 7".most of them had been killed off,but it was left up to avon to return,im just glad paul darrow came to his senses and pulled out.
im sure that would have been a complete failure,as well,it wouldnt have been blakes 7,would it.

At the time I heard about this, I quite looked forward to it, but with hindsight it's true; it would be a monumental failure. Too much time had passed since the original series and no, it just wouldn't be Blake's 7.

I still wonder if the on-off-on-off Red Dwarf film is a good idea.

[Nilfennasion]

I think DW is one of the few shows left that has the potential to bridge the gap between children's and adult programming. The key to doing this is to give the children in the audience proper credit for their intelligence, though. Films like Harry Poopoo And The Dirty Nappy make the mistake of believing a child is a diminished human being. This is especially clear in the way the marketing team renamed the first novel to Sorcerer's Stone in the USA. Even as a boy, I would have taken the time to learn that the Philosopher's Stone is the supreme objective of alchemy (ie it will turn other metals into gold), whereas a Sorcerer's Stone is bugger all.

The biggest challenge that the new DW faces lies in the great divide between an increasingly cynical youth audience and adults who, in treating them like their IQ matches their age, have created that divide. You can't even put me in a room with either of my parents anymore without violence ensuing. How do you think audiences raised on this goo-goo-gaa-gaa PG-13 crap are going to respond to their parents when they are in their teens and early twenties? Hence, DW needs to rethink its primary audience. Maybe in 1989, twelve year olds with an IQ of 145 and a crush on Sophie Aldred could sustain the show. I think now the best audience to aim for would be the 15 year olds who have a similar view of modern society as the Doctor himself ("It's about time the people who run this planet of yours realized that to be dependent on a mineral slime just doesn't make sense.").

[Radixmind]

cole,

Make things too chatty and you loose the interest of the younger viewers. Admitedly Invasion Earth was aimed at an older audience, but it was still too slow moving. You have to find the right balance to keep the whole family interested. Make it too Shakespearian and the kids won't watch but make it too Panto and the parents loose interest.

whilst i agree in part with what you're saying, I have to say - look down at your feet, cole. you see that? that's your good intentions paving that road. now look up. see where that road goes to? i can assure you, you wont find a long and happy run of new run of Doctor Who in that place.

they should never TRY to make a show that fits any kind of idea of what a show for kids or a show for adults is like. they should just make a show. if they have conviction in their stories and are commited to their product/art, then that should be enough.

i am of the opinion that NO great TV show was ever made by adhering to a formula.

[Nilfennasion]

see where that road goes to? i can assure you, you wont find a long and happy run of new run of Doctor Who in that place.

John Nathan-Turner might have disagreed. He was somehow able to keep three different Doctors running through that place. Although his rep is pretty much set in stone as the worst producer the show ever had.

DW is very much a legacy of when science fiction was a thoughtful, intelligent genre. When men like Robert Heinlein were still actively writing. It should remain as such. The lowest common denominator already has more than enough shows aimed at it, and that is why the BBC was in a panic about the TV license fee being reviewed. Put simply, the quality of TV without Doctor Who is such that citizens are feeling cheated. The time has come to rise above, so to speak.

[Radixmind]

John Nathan-Turner might have disagreed. He was somehow able to keep three different Doctors running through that place.

i agree, JNT certainly did put DW through hell on more than one occasion.

DW is very much a legacy of when science fiction was a thoughtful, intelligent genre

i think there's a reasonable amount of intelligent sci-fi on TV today, actually. juct that it's all US and Not UK. we have a real problem with producing good smart sci-fi in britain, it's as if we think it's somehow beneath us, and were too embarrased to try and make it serious. a lot of our more recent sci-fi attempts seem to be linked to comedy, and you'll notice a number of (admittedly good) comedy writers lining up to write for DW. i hope they can do it justice. i'm particularly interested in what Steven Moffat can bring to the series.

i'd just like to mention stargate SG-1. it's a series ive enjoyed in it's long run, but recently i've been disappointed in it's paucity of ideas and execution. if i see another alien landscape that looks remarkably like canadian woodland i'm going to scream. and we mock DW's use of old quarries for other worlds? bah.

[Cole]

we have a real problem with producing good smart sci-fi in britain, it's as if we think it's somehow beneath us, and were too embarrased to try and make it serious

The money that British televison would have put into Sci-Fi just could not compete with the lavish US imports that Channel 4 buy in.

Rather than being beneath us, I felt it was more the case, to produce good Sci-Fi in this country deemed too expensive and 'above' us instead - British television just couldn't do it to a high enough standard...

they should never TRY to make a show that fits any kind of idea of what a show for kids or a show for adults is like. they should just make a show. if they have conviction in their stories and are commited to their product/art, then that should be enough.

i am of the opinion that NO great TV show was ever made by adhering to a formula.

Your point is valid for a programme that can go out post watershed; within the realms of decency, a drama can do pretty much what it wants to at that time. However, making a show to be broadcast at 7pm will give the makers restrictions because of a wider audience, especially as drama on the mainstream channels (unless it is a soap) doesn't seem to get broadcast that early anymore; it is all holiday, consumer programmes or the Lottery.

Mind you, some of the Soaps seem to get away with alot lately...

if i see another alien landscape that looks remarkably like canadian woodland i'm going to scream. and we mock DW's use of old quarries for other worlds? bah.