He WHAT???

[caz963]

DO. NOT. WANT.



I mean, serioualy, WHAT. THE. FUCK.?

We get 13 episodes plus a Christmas special per year. I'm happy with that, because I think that once you start getting series that are longer than 12 or 13 episodes, it gets difficult to maintain a decent story, the standards of scriptwriting and production values. (The only show that, IMO has ever managed to sustain incredibly high quality over a 22 episode season was S2 of The West Wing.)

But splitting a series of DW in half, airing six months (ish) apart? No thanks.

Moffat says it's to serve the storytelling because he wants to put in a massive "game-changing" cliffhanger. Well, okay, I'm all for something like that. But having to wait MONTHS rather than DAYS for the resolution? Is he stupid, or what? I know people who got fed up with all the twisty-turny, timey-wimey plotty stuff in S5, who couldn't get invested in the new characters and stopped watching as a result. What makes him think that the audience will want to wait months for the resolution of this "game-changing" twist? ^**

I keep banging on about this, but the DW audience is not just made up of fans. There's a large contingent of casual viewers and that makes up the majority of the viewing numbers. I haven't seen a detailed analysis recently, but I remember reading something a while ago in which the numbers of casual viewers vs. fans was actually rather surprising. If anyone's got any info on that, I'd be interested to read it.

But my Spidey PR-bullshit sense is also tingling, because I can't help wondering if what Moffat's saying is really putting a brave face on the fact that he's been told that he has to do this for some reason. I can't see how splitting a series in two would mean they could make financial savings - if anything I'd think it would be more expensive if the filming and production has to be split into two. On the other hand though, if they film everything in the same way as now, splitting the season could save money in post-production as there will be more time to work on some things. Rush jobs always mean overtime.

Whatever the reason, I'm certainly one very uhnappy bunny about this news. Has anyone started a campaign to bombard the BBC with protests yet?

^**I do realise that many complete series/seasons of many shows end on cliffhangers - but I'm going to dig my heels in and whine "but that's different!". I also know that most episodes of Classic Who ended on cliffhangers - but we usually only had to wait a week for their resolution.

So yeah. I'm pissed off.



ETA: There is some spoilery speculation in the comments.

Comments

[caz963.livejournal.com]

I don't mind paying my licence fee. But I'd be glad to pay it if the Beeb stopped trying to beat the commercial channels at their own game. An argument that comes up time and again whenever I hear a discussion about the LF is that the BBC, as a public broadcaster, should be making programmes that aren't made elsewhere, NOT aping ITV and Sky. Let ITV have bloody Lloyd Webber and Brucie - I don't want 'em on the Beeb!

Also - I never quite understand why the BBC has to look at ratings. They don't depend on advertising, which DOES depend on viewing figures. So why should it matter whether DW pulls in 6 million or 10 million viewers?