<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Doctor In Distress</title>
	<atom:link href="http://littlestorping.co.uk/2011/11/14/doctor-in-distress/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://littlestorping.co.uk/2011/11/14/doctor-in-distress/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 22:37:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Simon Wood</title>
		<link>http://littlestorping.co.uk/2011/11/14/doctor-in-distress/comment-page-1/#comment-63956</link>
		<dc:creator>Simon Wood</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2011 18:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://littlestorping.co.uk/?p=1563#comment-63956</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I try to resist the negativity. I was certainly delighted at the news of the 2005 series. And I love David Yates&#039; work, so I&#039;m excited at the prospect of anything from him. But that would be true, of course, even if it wasn&#039;t Doctor Who.

The show does seem to have less influence, but it&#039;s hard to put my finger on why it seems so. Perhaps it&#039;s the Private Eye stories. I find it hard to believe the BBC (unlike the Daily Fail) place too much importance on the overnight ratings (I presume it&#039;s these that you refer to as declining - the consolidated ratings are holding up, aren&#039;t they?) And the only two-part Christmas special was in the year of specials, and it wasn&#039;t very Christmassey, the four previous Christmas episodes were one parters of around the same length as The Doctor, The Widow and The Wardrobe. Yet I share your feeling that the show has less influence at the BBC. My theory is that it&#039;s not actually a decline in influence, but that the turmoil in the production team means it&#039;s being weilded less effectively. Without Julie Gardner there isn&#039;t the same powerful advocate for the show, with Piers Wenger and Beth Willis leaving Steven Moffatt is having to provide the continuity. But he&#039;s got to find time to write the thing, as well.

Regarding smart shows, I have an alternate theory that it is possible for a smart show to achieve popularity, the televisual equivalent to President Bartlett beating guvn&#039;or Ritchie. But that may be wishful thinking, owing a lot to the fact that I&#039;m enjoying Doctor Who more than ever before: I thought the last series was the most consistent in its history and it contained one of my favourite epsiodes. Still, it is unashamed about getting complex and yet the ratings are holding up, so maybe it is possible? Certainly, like every Doctor Who fan, I&#039;m wary of a break. It didn&#039;t do the show much good in the &#039;80s, merely postponing the inevitable as well as prompting that terrible single...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I try to resist the negativity. I was certainly delighted at the news of the 2005 series. And I love David Yates&#8217; work, so I&#8217;m excited at the prospect of anything from him. But that would be true, of course, even if it wasn&#8217;t Doctor Who.</p>
<p>The show does seem to have less influence, but it&#8217;s hard to put my finger on why it seems so. Perhaps it&#8217;s the Private Eye stories. I find it hard to believe the BBC (unlike the Daily Fail) place too much importance on the overnight ratings (I presume it&#8217;s these that you refer to as declining &#8211; the consolidated ratings are holding up, aren&#8217;t they?) And the only two-part Christmas special was in the year of specials, and it wasn&#8217;t very Christmassey, the four previous Christmas episodes were one parters of around the same length as The Doctor, The Widow and The Wardrobe. Yet I share your feeling that the show has less influence at the BBC. My theory is that it&#8217;s not actually a decline in influence, but that the turmoil in the production team means it&#8217;s being weilded less effectively. Without Julie Gardner there isn&#8217;t the same powerful advocate for the show, with Piers Wenger and Beth Willis leaving Steven Moffatt is having to provide the continuity. But he&#8217;s got to find time to write the thing, as well.</p>
<p>Regarding smart shows, I have an alternate theory that it is possible for a smart show to achieve popularity, the televisual equivalent to President Bartlett beating guvn&#8217;or Ritchie. But that may be wishful thinking, owing a lot to the fact that I&#8217;m enjoying Doctor Who more than ever before: I thought the last series was the most consistent in its history and it contained one of my favourite epsiodes. Still, it is unashamed about getting complex and yet the ratings are holding up, so maybe it is possible? Certainly, like every Doctor Who fan, I&#8217;m wary of a break. It didn&#8217;t do the show much good in the &#8217;80s, merely postponing the inevitable as well as prompting that terrible single&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Foomandoonian</title>
		<link>http://littlestorping.co.uk/2011/11/14/doctor-in-distress/comment-page-1/#comment-63955</link>
		<dc:creator>Foomandoonian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2011 23:43:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://littlestorping.co.uk/?p=1563#comment-63955</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I seem to remember that there was a lot of fear and negativity surrounding the news of what would become the 2005 series. My &#039;fear&#039; about this new movie is that a rebooted Doctor Who could be an amazing thing to behold, but there are countless ways it could be done badly. Of course, even if it&#039;s truly excellent, there will still be those who hate it.

Putting the BBC show on pause strikes me as a distinct possibility. I have no insider knowledge on this, but I think ratings may be in decline. Certainly, the show doesn&#039;t seem to have the influence it once did: The Christmas specials used to be epic two-parters, but now they are single episodes; the Children in Need specials were magnificent little stories in their own right, but the last one was reduced to a raffle. My theory is that the show has become too smart for a mass audience. A break may be a good thing.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I seem to remember that there was a lot of fear and negativity surrounding the news of what would become the 2005 series. My &#8216;fear&#8217; about this new movie is that a rebooted Doctor Who could be an amazing thing to behold, but there are countless ways it could be done badly. Of course, even if it&#8217;s truly excellent, there will still be those who hate it.</p>
<p>Putting the BBC show on pause strikes me as a distinct possibility. I have no insider knowledge on this, but I think ratings may be in decline. Certainly, the show doesn&#8217;t seem to have the influence it once did: The Christmas specials used to be epic two-parters, but now they are single episodes; the Children in Need specials were magnificent little stories in their own right, but the last one was reduced to a raffle. My theory is that the show has become too smart for a mass audience. A break may be a good thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
