"The Wilderness Years": memories, discussions, videos and opinions.

[Timewalker]

You're being disingenuous. I never said it was plausible. And thats because the premise is fantastical, doesn't mean the episode is actually bad.

Mm, nope. Your defense of this ridiculous crappy writing suggests that you do think it's plausible. And yes, it does mean the episode is bad.

Yeah, and NuWho was mostly better at handling those said social issues.

The Ninth Doctor's stories included themes of genocide and single parenting. I don't remember any others.

Gosh, they sure made an impression, didn't they?

Season 24 is when the show became a kids' show. Dragonfire was when they started veering off, but the whole of it is almost unmistakeably an '80's kids show starring the Doctor.

I'll concede that most of the McCoy stories were abominably bad. There were a couple of good ones, though.

That's on you, not me.

It's hardly a sin to reckon this series by the Doctor and companion(s) and the actors who played them, rather than the friggin' producer.

 

[JD]

There's a difference between merely implausible and "we know this story is full of shit, but the audience won't know any better, so let's roll with it."

I really dislike the sense that the production team thinks the audience is stupid, and I don't forgive that.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with putting crazy over the top stuff like that in a sci-fi story, it doesn't mean they think people are stupid. All it means is that they're just having fun with it, and not worrying about being 100% realisitic.
But then again, I enjoyed Moonfall, so maybe I just enjoy stories about crazy alien shit being hidden inside the Moon.

 

[Timewalker]

There are times when writers or producers don't care if something is inaccurate or implausible or impossible, because their attitude is "Who cares? The audience won't know the difference."

That's what was said about Star Trek: The Motion Picture when one of the ideas floated was something along the line of Aztecs in South America, at a time when there were no Aztecs, and in any case they never lived in South America. When the historical inaccuracy was pointed out, the response was a shrug and dismissal of what "the audience" would know. It was the attitude that ancient aliens would be okay because "the audience won't know the difference." In other words, they thought the audience (Star Trek fans) was stupid.

I don't like to be assumed to be stupid. And the Moon being an egg when we know what it's actually made of, how it was formed, and so on, smacks of the assumption that the audience knows nothing about astronomy or planetary science and would be willing to swallow just any drivel and find it entertaining - it's science fiction, right? So it doesn't have to make sense. That's how some producers think. And any production of a TV show or movie or book that makes that assumption is not something I grant any credibility or slack.

It doesn't have to be a documentary. It just has to be plausible. And the Moon being an egg is not plausible.

 

[JD]

Who said it has to be plausible? As long as it's a good story, and it's produced well, I couldn't care less about how plausible it is, at least when it comes to stuff like Doctor Who.
When it comes down to it, from a straight science perspective there's a lot of stuff in Star Trek that at least as implausible as Kill the Moon.

 

[Timewalker]

I guess it shouldn't surprise me that you've managed to COMPLETELY MISS MY POINT.

 

[Steve Roby]

We don't know anything about Gallifrey or Time Lords or Daleks or Cybermen or Tardises or time wars or any of Doctor Who's other creations in the real world. We do know about the moon. There's a difference between "Time Lords can regenerate" and "the moon is an egg." In the first case, you're setting the rules for something you made up. Saying the moon is an egg is more like saying that the UK is in the middle of Africa, somewhere around Uganda, and it always has been, and all British people have their eyes on the back of their heads.

 

[Emperor-Tiberius]

We don't know anything about Gallifrey or Time Lords or Daleks or Cybermen or Tardises or time wars or any of Doctor Who's other creations in the real world. We do know about the moon. There's a difference between "Time Lords can regenerate" and "the moon is an egg." In the first case, you're setting the rules for something you made up. Saying the moon is an egg is more like saying that the UK is in the middle of Africa, somewhere around Uganda, and it always has been, and all British people have their eyes on the back of their heads.

I disagree with the analogy, whatsoever.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

The idea that the Moon is an egg is a dumb idea but it's nothing worth getting angry about. There are so many episodes of the show and not all of them can be winners or even merely enjoyable. It's one of those episodes I just ignore and don't bother rewatching. Life's too short for anything more than that.

 

[JD]

We don't know anything about Gallifrey or Time Lords or Daleks or Cybermen or Tardises or time wars or any of Doctor Who's other creations in the real world. We do know about the moon. There's a difference between "Time Lords can regenerate" and "the moon is an egg." In the first case, you're setting the rules for something you made up. Saying the moon is an egg is more like saying that the UK is in the middle of Africa, somewhere around Uganda, and it always has been, and all British people have their eyes on the back of their heads.

I don't really see it that way. I guess to me it's not contradicting reality like that, I just see it as "revealing" something we didn't know before, like the existence of the Silurians and the Sea Devils,

 

[Turtletrekker]

But you can get the Reeltime videos as well as a lot of other related videos from the publisher in inexpensive downloadable video format through Vimeo or on DVD at their website.

Thanks for that information. I have likewise found the website for BBV and their content.

That just brings up the question, do I actually want to pay money for this stuff?

I might rent Daemos Rising as rental is an option on the product from Reeltime and I would love to see Beverly Cressman return as Kate.

I'm very curious about the PROBE series at BBV mainly because I like Liz Shaw and feel that we didn't get enough of her on the show. Likewise, I feel as if I would like to watch one episode of The Stranger just because of the pure audacity of the project. However, I've read that the man behind BBV is problematic at best, with his borderline copyright infringement on The Stranger (and elsewhere) being just the tip of the iceberg, which gives me another reason to not want to pay actual money to see them.

 

[Emperor-Tiberius]

I don't really see it that way. I guess to me it's not contradicting reality like that, I just see it as "revealing" something we didn't know before, like the existence of the Silurians and the Sea Devils,

Which is equally dumb and implausible, when you think about it.

 

[Steve Roby]

That just brings up the question, do I actually want to pay money for this stuff?

For what it's worth, Reeltime/TimeTravelTV, as far as I know, is a reputable company that's worked with a lot of of people, and I haven't come across anyone complaining about how they were ripped off or otherwise abused by them. On the other hand, very few people seem to be happy about their BBV experiences. People report not being paid for their work, discovering when products are released that their work was drastically changed, and so on. Like it or not, though, both companies produced some historically significant Wilderness Years material. I'm happy to pay for Reeltime, at least.

As to the separate question of whether any of it's worth watching in 2024... well, some of it, and more of it if you're in the right mood for it. It's not necessarily something to show your friends who are just casually interested in Doctor Who. This stuff was always for the devoted fan who really wanted some Who content during the Wilderness Years and was willing to forgive microscopic budgets and limited production values.

Incidentally, Telos Publishing has published novelizations of a few of the semi-official videos, and BBV may have as well. Telos does part of each print run of its novelizations with Target-style covers, which adds a little nostalgic fun.

 

[Turtletrekker]

The legendary Wilderness Era Doctor Who fan film Devious, featuring the "Second and a Half Doctor", is one step closer to completion. The six episode serial began production in 1991 and ran through 1995. Then began near 30 years of post-production work!

The website for the production just dropped episode 5, saying that the final episode, the one with one of Jon Pertwee's final performances as the Doctor, should be ready in about another year. I have actually seen Pertwee's scenes for this before as they were included as bonus features somewhere and they have since made their way to YouTube. I look forward to watching the entire production once it is completed to the creator's satisfaction.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

doctorwhodevious

View episodes of Devious as they are released and see behind the scenes and associated videos regarding the fan homage to Doctor Who entitled "Devious".

youtube.com

 

[Haggis and tatties]

^^That was good, the surprise ending was great.

 

[diankra]

Who said it has to be plausible? As long as it's a good story, and it's produced well, I couldn't care less about how plausible it is, at least when it comes to stuff like Doctor Who.
When it comes down to it, from a straight science perspective there's a lot of stuff in Star Trek that at least as implausible as Kill the Moon.

In New Frontier, an admiral comments that they took Kirk's logs to the pub for a laugh. They reckoned he was trying to see what he could get away with (The TMP novel takes the same line, suggesting that there was a popular series based on Enterprise's missions, not not entirely accurate).

 

[Qonundrum]

There was, of course, "Doctor Who: The Movie" starring Paul McGann, the first attempt at ending the wilderness years.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

It was okay at the time, but too self-referential, treating the audience as doofuses too often -- yes we get it, the Doctor regeneration scene and the Frankenstein parallel is soooo clever, just like the Master mocking the British accent as another gag. Well, gag is right, especially if the show had been picked up instead of the third season of "Sliders" - you know, the season that sent the show so far downhill...

There was the much reviled Dimensions in Time, a short done for charity and the 30th anniversary.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I'm not as hard on this one as some people are. It wasn't meant to be a serious attempt at Doctor Who, it was meant to raise money for children and it was reportedly very successful at that.

Definitely had good ratings - whether this was due to "Children in Need" or because the TV-viewing public were all, what's the word... "thirsty" (?) for more Doctor Who... can't be entirely the latter as 13 million people should have made a new season a fairly confident and quick decision. Red Dwarf's "Back to Earth" from 2009 wasn't as popular and series 10 was commissioned as a result of its ratings, which were a (spectacular?) 3 million, noting that this was streamed on a digital network and whose 3Mil mark was indeed extremely high. (pt 1 had 4 mil, pt 2 had 3, pt 3 had 2.9mil.)

But there's actually a solid story in there. Trying to cap it as two 6-minute segments, and tied into Eastenders (bait in the trap since the Doctor loves going there), reduces it to cameos with quips took a premise that feels a lot like "Ghost Light" but with the Rani taking Light's place... still, Six meeting the Brigadier is a must-see, and Kate O'Mara could elevate anything with too much ease, she's that good.

Still better than the unproduced script that had fallen through.

 

[Qonundrum]

There are times when writers or producers don't care if something is inaccurate or implausible or impossible, because their attitude is "Who cares? The audience won't know the difference."

That's what was said about Star Trek: The Motion Picture when one of the ideas floated was something along the line of Aztecs in South America, at a time when there were no Aztecs, and in any case they never lived in South America. When the historical inaccuracy was pointed out, the response was a shrug and dismissal of what "the audience" would know. It was the attitude that ancient aliens would be okay because "the audience won't know the difference." In other words, they thought the audience (Star Trek fans) was stupid.

That's one way to edify an audience, I suppose...

I don't like to be assumed to be stupid. And the Moon being an egg when we know what it's actually made of, how it was formed, and so on, smacks of the assumption that the audience knows nothing about astronomy or planetary science and would be willing to swallow just any drivel and find it entertaining - it's science fiction, right? So it doesn't have to make sense. That's how some producers think. And any production of a TV show or movie or book that makes that assumption is not something I grant any credibility or slack.

It doesn't have to be a documentary. It just has to be plausible. And the Moon being an egg is not plausible.

The moon egg story would have worked better a couple hundred years ago. Or four thousand. Even by the 1950s, selling the moon as being anything other than a rock - never mind the dialogue explaining the replacement egg in its place (ugh). That, or do modern audiences simply treat "Doctor Who" as pure jokey fantasy rather than sci-fi/fantasy amalgamation?

The other thing is, a lot of sci-fi, sci-fantasy, and outright fantasy still often put in logic into motivations and plotting. This does go back to how some scriptwriters might perceive portions or the entirety of the audience.

 

[Qonundrum]

I'll concede that most of the McCoy stories were abominably bad. There were a couple of good ones, though.

During original viewing, there were fans who loathed it all and many who defended it incessantly. I was toward the middle but leaning to the "this is crap" side.

Now with DVD and blu-ray, with deleted scenes put back in, the stories start to make a little more sense - or at least flow better. Or it's easier to see what they were trying to say, even if they misfired. Even then, I recall the novelizations of the McCoy stories being a lot better than what was produced on screen. Especially "Remembrance" when Ace spits out how she's going out for a breath of fresh air. Still floored how the same story goofed up so badly as the Dalek between parts one and two even changed voices!

 

[Turtletrekker]

These popped up on my feed after I clicked on the release of the original Dalek Invasion of Earth on the Doctor Who Classic channel, which dropped today.

Shockingly, I still haven't watched the Cushing films. I really need to fix that...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The links still work as long as you're using the YouTube app.

 

[Qonundrum]

I've wanted to watch the Reeltime films for years but never had an opportunity to do so. Like you, I recently had  Downtime pop up in my YouTube feed and I plan to watch it when I have the chance, especially since it's the one I've wanted to watch the most.

I've yet to see any of those. I'd heard of BBV, but the interest wasn't really there, and the "New Adventure" novels were covering any new interest. For a while.

I was a kid/teenager/young adult during the Wilderness Years so my experience is different from older fans. I grew up watching mostly Tom Baker and Sylvester McCoy on PBS and rewatching VHS recordings from the channel. I didn't start watching the others until late in the Wilderness Years, after the McGann film. I didn't even discover Big Finish until 2009, well after the show returned.

Some PBS did keep rerunning the show for a lot longer. Mine only aired the non-Tom Baker incarnations once, twice if lucky. But Tom got reaired umpteen times. Most Americans of the time wanted The Tom Baker Show and not Doctor Who. I can't blame them, Tom could read the recipe for water and make it highly compelling, but the first time I saw "Robot", or "Logopolis", really piqued my curiosity. Who were these other individuals and would be the same? (So glad they were different personalities, despite having the same core value. Something that most modern incarnations oddly seem to lack.)

Dimensions in Time is a weird one and I've mostly ignored it since I just don't have the subcultural connection with EastEnders. But I've always loved and always will love The Curse of the Fatal Death. Pure satirical bliss made out of love for the show.

Ditto, especially for Eastenders. Had no clue what it was about. The Doctor Who part of the plot felt like a 80%condensed version of "Ghost Light" but with the Rani instead. The Rani's an inspired choice, but the pacing is almost choppier than most 21st century WHO stories - gotta give it props for that.

I do distinctly recall watching and variously enjoying the stop-motion animation films, particularly Scream of the Shalka and especially  Shada. For a long time, that version of Shada was the only story I knew of McGann. As a result it's always held a special place in my heart, even after listening to far better Big Finish audios with McGann and after the proper completion of the original serial with new animation.

I should look those up, it's another way to look at the incomplete story.

I recall a VHS where the Shada footage abruptly went to typed text to bridge the scenes together. Episode 4 or 5 was virtually all text... the quality put into the animations of recent is a REAL treat. Glad JNT ordered the Shada footage to be kept; he originally wanted to finish it, but opted to try to liven up the show by deviating from the show's increasingly stale and overly-silly format that critics brought up at the time (1979/80).

I wish we had gotten more of those weird, off-kilter, daring stop-motion animations, but of course the show's return quickly put an end to them, alas. I still hold out onto hope for Doctor Who to delve seriously into animation, like Star Trek and Star Wars, beyond outliers like The Infinite Quest (which I love) and  Dreamland (which i found drab and disappointing). But that's a discussion for another thread.

As for the comics and books, I simply didn't have access or even knowledge of them until well after the fact because I live in America. Besides, I was too busy consuming all of the Star Trek books at the time (at least during the Marco Palmeiri years).

I remember the comics from DWM, with Seven and Ace. Some were really good, if not more "adult" than what was shown on TV in McCoy's era, probably as the novel series was also more adult in tone. I should dig them up and try to find them.

Shockingly, I still haven't watched the Cushing films. I really need to fix that...

IMHO, you should. They're a bit "too kiddy" and are also cloyingly hokey at times, but there's still a lot to genuinely enjoy. A big plus is that Susan is given better treatment in the films as well, which is how the TV Susan should have been treated.

I think of the Who in this manner, the real show is the classic era, done and dusted, from Hartnel to McCoy, set in stone, and i will throw in the 1996 movie into the classic era, so then the 2005 reboot for me is like a spin off, or to put it in todays modern who terms, it's like sideways spin off, where some one hit the side of the classic era and out came the 2005 reboot, and that works for me as i can easily just dodge the spin off totally, or take some bits but leave other bits, without it having any impact on the classic era, and that works for me great.

I used to lump McGann in with Classic. After rewatching some 21st century Who over the years, the 1996TVM just fits in better with the 21st century and not as much the 20th, even if it is an interesting steppingstone that also retroactively helps tie in both far easier than if it hadn't been made.