Doctor Who - coming to a movie theatre near you soon...?

[Awesome Wells]

...or so Variety claims.

"Harry Potter" director David Yates is teaming up with the BBC to turn its iconic sci-fi TV series "Doctor Who" into a bigscreen franchise.
Yates, who directed the last four Potter films, told Daily Variety that he is about to start work on developing a "Doctor Who" movie with Jane Tranter, BBC Worldwide's L.A.-based exec VP of programming and production.

"We're looking at writers now. We're going to spend two to three years to get it right," he said. "It needs quite a radical transformation to take it into the bigger arena."

"Doctor Who" follows the adventures across space and time of a super-intelligent alien in human form, who battles a variety of cosmic bad guys aided by plucky human companions.

"The notion of the time-travelling Time Lord is such a strong one, because you can express story and drama in any dimension or time," Yates said.

The series ran from 1963 to 1989, and then was successfully rebooted in 2005 by writer Russell T. Davies and subsequently by Steven Moffat ("The Adventures of Tintin"). Tranter oversaw the revival when she was the BBC's drama topper in London.

"Doctor Who," starring Matt Smith as the 11th incarnation of the Doctor, is now one of the pubcaster's most lucrative global TV franchises.

The series airs Stateside on BBC America.

Yates made clear that his movie adaptation would not follow on from the current TV series, but would take a completely fresh approach to the material.

"Russell T. Davies and then Steven Moffat have done their own transformations, which were fantastic, but we have to put that aside and start from scratch," he said.

Yates and Tranter are looking for writers on both sides of the Atlantic.

"We want a British sensibility, but having said that, Steve Kloves wrote the Potter films and captured that British sensibility perfectly, so we are looking at American writers too," he explained.

There are two previous films, based on the TV series: "Doctor Who and the Daleks" (1965) and "Doctor Who: Daleks' Invasion Earth 2150 A.D." (1966), both starring Peter Cushing.

The BBC has since made a few unsuccessful attempts to develop a "Doctor Who" feature, and shot a one-off telepic in 1996 at a time when the TV series was dormant.

But the combination of Yates and Tranter means this is the most high-powered effort to date to launch "Doctor Who" onto the bigscreen.

Before directing "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix," "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" and both parts of "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows," Yates worked with Tranter on several BBC TV series, including "The Way We Live Now" and "State of Play."

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118046098

[SiHart]

Yates made clear that his movie adaptation would not follow on from the current TV series, but would take a completely fresh approach to the material.

"Russell T. Davies and then Steven Moffat have done their own transformations, which were fantastic, but we have to put that aside and start from scratch," he said.

Oh god no.

[Alex]

...Though Variety have reported upon it, so I guess it could plausibly be true.

Yates to direct bigscreen 'Doctor Who'
'Potter' helmer, BBC working on pic of sci-fi TV series
By ADAM DAWTREY

LONDON -- "Harry Potter" director David Yates is teaming up with the BBC to turn its iconic sci-fi TV series "Doctor Who" into a bigscreen franchise.
Yates, who directed the last four Potter films, told Daily Variety that he is about to start work on developing a "Doctor Who" movie with Jane Tranter, BBC Worldwide's L.A.-based exec VP of programming and production.

"We're looking at writers now. We're going to spend two to three years to get it right," he said. "It needs quite a radical transformation to take it into the bigger arena."

"Doctor Who" follows the adventures across space and time of a super-intelligent alien in human form, who battles a variety of cosmic bad guys aided by plucky human companions...The notion of the time-travelling Time Lord is such a strong one, because you can express story and drama in any dimension or time," Yates said.

The series ran from 1963 to 1989, and then was successfully rebooted in 2005 by writer Russell T. Davies and subsequently by Steven Moffat ("The Adventures of Tintin"). Tranter oversaw the revival when she was the BBC's drama topper in London.

"Doctor Who," starring Matt Smith as the 11th incarnation of the Doctor, is now one of the pubcaster's most lucrative global TV franchises. The series airs Stateside on BBC America.

Yates made clear that his movie adaptation would not follow on from the current TV series, but would take a completely fresh approach to the material.

"Russell T. Davies and then Steven Moffat have done their own transformations, which were fantastic, but we have to put that aside and start from scratch," he said. Yates and Tranter are looking for writers on both sides of the Atlantic. "We want a British sensibility, but having said that, Steve Kloves wrote the Potter films and captured that British sensibility perfectly, so we are looking at American writers too," he explained.

There are two previous films, based on the TV series: "Doctor Who and the Daleks" (1965) and "Doctor Who: Daleks' Invasion Earth 2150 A.D." (1966), both starring Peter Cushing. The BBC has since made a few unsuccessful attempts to develop a "Doctor Who" feature, and shot a one-off telepic in 1996 at a time when the TV series was dormant. But the combination of Yates and Tranter means this is the most high-powered effort to date to launch "Doctor Who" onto the bigscreen.

Before directing "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix," "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" and both parts of "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows," Yates worked with Tranter on several BBC TV series, including "The Way We Live Now" and "State of Play."

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118046098

I'll believe it when I see it, obviously, but I'm not against such a project, especially if it is completely independent of the tv series and thus can be ignored if it turns out to be rubbish!

[Andrew Curnow]

I know they happily co-existed in the 60s, but that was perhaps a more innocent time... Nowadays, I think it would be a bit odd to have Doctor Who on TV, and then a completely different & separate Who in the cinema. I'm still not convinced that Doctor Who is really a 'big screen' show anyway.

[SiHart]

While I'm not keen on the idea, there are ways it could work.

However, my first thought when I read this was that they'd do the origin story, explain why the Doctor left Gallifrey, because movie execs seem to favour the origin story. I'd like them to do anything but that.

If they're going to do it,why not make it a huge story, full of time travel, other planets and times? If you've got the budget do a story that can't be told anywhere else.

[Andrew Curnow]

Too broad and too deep for the SMALL screen perhaps...

[Alex]

Oops, I didn't see Dave's original post before. But as mentioned, I don't really mind the idea - in a way I kind of prefer that it's going to be completely separate from the tv series, that way if it is a disaster it can be ignored and the regular show won't be affected.

I'd prefer a more exciting director to be honest, and the whoever they cast as the Doctor could make or break it, but hey, it could be of interest...

[Rob McCow]

I've been suspecting that RTD's move to Los Angeles was to push for a Doctor Who movie for years.

So far my suspicions haven't born any fruit or been slightly justified, but here's hoping.

[Dino]

I'm amongst the "Believe it when I see it" brigade. (we have the coolest uniforms and have excellent toilet facilities)
An origin story? Where's the smilie for *headsdesk?
If ever there was a good reason for the world ending in 2012 (which isn't going to happen) then surely it's to save us from this film?

[Awesome Wells]

Some of the response online has already made me ashamed to be a human being. Good old Doctor Who fans, calling for David Yates to die in a fire and threatening to kill him if he doesn't cast Matt Smith. I despair.

BBC now running the story (about the film, not the knee-jerk bullshit):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15730665

[Richard Brinck-Johnsen]

Some of the response online has already made me ashamed to be a human being. Good old Doctor Who fans, calling for David Yates to die in a fire and threatening to kill him if he doesn't cast Matt Smith. I despair.

BBC now running the story (about the film, not the knee-jerk bullshit):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15730665

You should've been around when the Eccleston departure was announced in 2005. Sheesh those were embarassing times to be a fan. If this film isn't happening for another couple of years at least then it won't necessarily be appropriate for Matt or David to be in it (although despite the fact I like Matt and I like most of the episodes we're currently getting I'd like to see David Tennant to do it if we did have a returning Doctor).

[Si Hunt]

In isolation, in a perfect world, it could be great - as well as Doctor Who the TV series we get Doctor Who the movie, with an unlimited budget. Imagine sitting in a Cineworld and on a gigantic cinema screen in front of you the TARDIS tumbles through space and visuals and scale unprecedented in the series history unfold. And we've still got the TV Series. Great!

But we're Doctor Who fans, and we know how these things work. We've already had our series cancelled ONCE when someone from America who didn't understand it waved the "US big bucks" at the BBC, spent eight years in Script Development Hell and then left us with no Big Budget Remake and a long dead series as well.

Unfortunately the Doctor Who team already get only two months holiday each year, so you couldn't physically have a TV Series AND a movie with the same cast. It'd either be a different cast or the same cast and the TV Series would have to be shelved to make way for it - which means effectively sacrificing our 13 episodes each year for... two hours of screen time and then nothing if that didn't take off. If it was a different cast... well, movies cost millions, and those millions are usually provided by rich backers all sticking their oar in. And would they really want their movie being promoted and sold with a different "branch" of the same franchise starring different actors being made at the same time? Again, we've been here before.

So in practise, a movie means nothing but trouble; we've learned this. It would be ok if the TV show had been cancelled already, or was winding down. A Movie Franchise of Doctor Who could, in dream scenario, be the New Harry Potter.

But what it means is conflicts, false starts, people who haven't a frigging clue about Doctor Who getting involved, different "Studios" getting involved, things getting "picked up" and then shelved, years and years of production, and our lovely little TV Show getting washed away in the process. Yes, it's cynical, but that's what happens! We've had Lumiere, we've had Amblin, we've had the TV Movie and we've had Green Light. We all remember Doctor Who and his Brother the Master searching for Ullyses and powering up the crystals, Cardinal. The project's only been murmured about and already some twit has decided it needs to be restarted "from scratch". That's the thing with films. Despite 50 years of perfecting a formula, someone always comes along and thinks it's being done wrong. HIS way will be best. NOW, we're doing it properly! Because, in a nutshell, these people think that film is television "done properly" - and that says it's all, doesn't it?

So let's frankly hope it doesn't happen.

Si.

[Anthony Williams]

Basically, Si said it perfectly.

I wonder how long it'll be before we have some sort of statement from the Doctor Who production team about the whole thing? If they ARE developing a movie while the tv show is still going on, separately from the tv show, then I can't imagine that Moffat is particularly happy...

[WhiteCrowNZ]

Despite 50 years of perfecting a formula, someone always comes along and thinks it's being done wrong. HIS way will be best. NOW, we're doing it properly!

Bravo, on the nose!

There are some things which just make your blood curdle. Just look how they ruined Thunderbirds.

All I need say is the terrifying words "Gallifrey High". Yes a teen version of Doctor Who with a pre-beard Master and hot babe Rani. And maybe the Meddling Monk could be their overweight comic best friend.

[Rob McCow]

The movie is an exciting idea really. There are so many possibilities!

[Awesome Wells]

The movie is an exciting idea really. There are so many possibilities!

+1

[SiHart]

Good article here about it: http://io9.com/5859483/

[Si Hunt]

Steve, I agree with you totally if you read my first paragraph. The movie itself is an awesome idea. Doctor Who done with unlimited money!

It's all the other crap that threatens to ruin it - networks and production times and politics. And our TV series is on the roulette table really isn't it? No, it really is! Are we happy to gamble?

Si.

[duncan]

The TV series has only to moot an idea for a decent storyline and the Movie producers will stamp their authority and tell them they can't do it as it's too close to something they are planning. The big bucks will win and the TV show will suffer as a result.

As keen as I am of seeing a movie, I don't think it will be of benefit to the show we have all loved most of our lives.

[Rob McCow]

It's not up to us though, is it? They'll do a movie because it's an established brand and potentially profitable.

The only comparison from this century that springs to mind is The Simpsons Movie.* There, a long-running show had a movie that came out at the same time. I don't think the Movie did the TV show any harm in that case. There are obvious differences, mainly because it's animation, but the principle is similar.

Doctor Who is so far from where it was in the late 80's, in terms of popularity and weight of BBC support behind it, that I don't think it would make a huge difference to have a movie come out.

And they could have Gary Oldman or Johnny Depp in the title role - how great would that be?


*Aside - wouldn't it be great if they binned the Simpsons TV series and just did movies? We've had enough of our yellow friends on TV now.

[SiHart]

The Simpsons movie was somewhat different in that the same team oversaw the movie as oversees the TV show. The Doctor Who movie would be totally separate to the TV show.

[Si Hunt]

profitable.

Indeed. I think we all understand the motivation.

And the Simpsons only used voiceover actors. The point is that it's doubtful you'd have the same team at the same time, or that two teams of lead actors would be allowed to make Doctor Who simultaneously. Maybe in 1965, but not today when everything is "branded". So one of them will have to give, no?

Si.

[Paul Monk]

From SFX's Dave Golder.

So. Doctor Who movie, eh? Maybe. Maybe not. There’s a long way to go before cameras could even start rolling, and a lot can happen to scupper plans before then (as anyone who remembers the Tom Baker Scratchman project, or Paul WS Anderson’s attempts at a Who movie, or – shudder – “The Dark Dimension” will recall).

But as the internet goes into a meltdown that makes the pre-release controversy over JJ Abrams’s Trek reboot look feeble in comparison, and sources at the BBC and Doctor Who magazine issue statements that we shouldn’t get too excited, let’s take a step back and look at what the story actually is. As of this moment. Going on all the evidence we have at our disposal. And assuming nobody issues any more statements before I’ve finished writing this (which is a possibility).

A major movie director, David (Harry Potter) Yates, has expressed an interest in developing a Doctor Who movie, which hasn’t been written yet (which hasn’t even had any writers assigned yet) and probably won’t tie in to TV continuity if it does happen.

Anything else?

Well, BBC Doctor Who brand licence controller Edward Russell tweeted, “Off Twitter for a few hours and the Doctor Who world explodes. There’s always talk of a movie. Perhaps? Maybe one day. But not right now!”

Which doesn’t exactly dispute anything Yates said in his statement to Variety, to be honest. Then Doctor Who Magazine tweeted:

“To those hearing Doctor Who movie rumours, it’s just the same rumours which have been going round for years. Nothing’s currently happening!”

Well, sure, nothing is currently happening. But, DWM, no, it’s not “the same rumours which have been going round for years”. This is a David Yates, the director of four of the biggest movies of all time, saying he’s interested in making a Doctor Who movie. That’s definitely not “the same”. Admittedly, it’s unclear whether he’s actually bought the rights, or is even in discussion about acquiring the rights, or has even phoned the BBC to say, “Let’s do lunch”, but the sheer fact that THE DIRECTOR OF FOUR HARRY POTTER MOVIES is talking about wanting to make a Doctor Who movie is significantly more than “the same rumours”. It’s news. Big news. Whether you like the idea or not.

Maybe to the BBC it is no big deal, because presumably over the last few years, since Doctor Who returned and became a bona fide cultural phenomenon, they’ve been dealing with a long list of potential directors (and we’d assume a lot of directors and production companies would have been expressing an interest). But it seems unlikely that a director of Yates’s calibre would announce something like this to the world’s leading entertainment industry magazine unless he had something more than a pipe dream to go on. Believe me, I’ve met the guy. He’s very unassuming, and not the kind of media player who would do something like this for tactical reasons. It’s more likely he’s just jumped the gun massively.

Yeah, I’m bordering on a no-smoke-without-fire argument, but I’m certainly not accusing the BBC of hiding anything – I don’t believe they are. Neither am I suggesting that Yates is any nearer making a Who movie than Tom Baker was, or Paul WS Anderson was. But it is a big story. Hell, we should be proud that a director of such clout as Yates would even think about making a Doctor Who movie, let alone announce his plans (pie-in-the-sky or otherwise). It shows how important the series has become.

At the moment, until further statements are issued, all we really know is that Yates would like to make it. We don’t even know if he’s currently allowed to. But with even the BBC news reporting the announcement, you can bet someone in BBC publicity is trying to work out what the next step should be. Because ignoring it and hoping it goes away may not work.

And David Yates? Boy, is he going to get fed up with answering questions about Doctor Who over the next few weeks. That, rather than internet petitions, is more likely to make him abandon the project…

[Paul Monk]

I would agree with that!

[Si Hunt]

I do too, especially the bit about showing how big DW has become. One would hope that at the very least the BBC take note about how many people care about this.

But it's odd that Dave Golder keeps saying Yates has "only expressed an interest" in a movie, when he clearly states he is making it. "We are going to spend 2-3 getting it right". The tense is pretty clear. He seems to think it's happening.

Si.