|
Sydney Bottocks posted:So according to this Deadline article, current DW writers will basically no longer be receiving residuals from repeats of the DW episodes they wrote. Instead of receiving a smaller initial fee plus residuals for repeats, they will receive a larger fee up front (but won't get any residuals for repeats). This apparently was part of the deal the BBC and/or Bad Wolf made to get Disney+ as the international streaming partner. How would residuals even work with a streaming service? Do you get money based on individual views of an episode? Minutes watched?
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 20:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 17:42 |
|
|
Ooof that is definitely a rough deal for doctor who writers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 20:53
|
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:Not quite sure how I feel about this, but my gut reaction is that it's not a good thing. Definitely bad and totally tied up with many of the main problems of the laws relevant here. It's sick a company like Disney that had nothing to do with Doctor Who besides buying it later get to sit back and take credit and profit from it. Bad enough the writers are already splitting it up with so many others who did not contribute in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 20:54
|
|
|
Vinylshadow posted:How would residuals even work with a streaming service? Welcome to the WGA strike of 2023.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 20:56
|
|
|
Vinylshadow posted:How would residuals even work with a streaming service? The new deal struck by the WGA seems to be basing residuals on "number of hours" watched/streamed but part of the problem to date is that the streaming services have not been the tiniest bit forthcoming about their real numbers. The deal requires them to be more transparent but I'm not sure it has any sort of robust mechanism for ensuring the streamers are anywhere close to honest. Also, the WGA deal also got writers better upfront pay in addition to residuals -- without specifics, it's hard to say how DW's "better upfront pay" stacks up to that (and makes up for lack of residuals) but given that it's Disney I'd guess it's a worse deal overall.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 20:59
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Logopolis is a story about a planet of mathematicians who essentially have turned themselves into a giant computer where each is a vital component in running through the mathematical equations needed to hold entropy at bay. The Master starts randomly killing mathematicians because of course he does, so entropy starts taking hold of the universe so the Doctor and the Master work together to use a back-up system (conveniently located on Earth!) to stop hold entropy at bay again... at which point of course The Master tries to blackmail the universe with it because of course he does. Some of my favourite TARDIS stuff in this as well, the recursive ever darker TARDIS is genuinely a bit creepy. Story's got a great sense of impending doom about it, which is entirely appropriate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 21:01
|
|
|
The Disney deal sounds awful, though I'm wondering if there's some kind of distinction between TV reruns and streams. Even after the WGA strike I expect streaming companies to be extremely cagey and sneaky with their stream numbers, so even if the terms are bad the writers still probably aren't losing out on much money. If they're also not getting any residuals from reruns, though, that's really bad. On the subject of Doctor Who as pure sci-fi, as someone who's not watched much Star Trek I always thought The Mutants was a very Trek-esque story in terms of feeling more like golden-age SF.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 21:50
|
|
|
The WGA strike wouldn't do anything for Who staff anyway, would it? As a BBC production they'd be under the British unions, which didn't decide to strike in solidarity with WGA/SAG-AFTRA.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 22:08
|
|
|
Bloody Pom posted:The WGA strike wouldn't do anything for Who staff anyway, would it? As a BBC production they'd be under the British unions, which didn't decide to strike in solidarity with WGA/SAG-AFTRA. I think you mean which werent legally allowed to strike in solidarity with WGA/SAG-AFTRA.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 22:13
|
|
|
Bloody Pom posted:The WGA strike wouldn't do anything for Who staff anyway, would it? As a BBC production they'd be under the British unions, which didn't decide to strike in solidarity with WGA/SAG-AFTRA. That's correct. In addition, I think the deal with Disney was struck in advance of the WGA settlement (which, I think, only applies to new works going forward). If it was struck afterward, Bad Wolf/BBC might have had a bit more leverage, but in any case probably still couldn't swing as good a deal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 22:13
|
|
|
The article mentions that the terms aren't related to the strike per the reasons that you said, but I would have thought that since Disney's beholden to the new WGA contract that they would have had to share streaming data regardless. It's a moot point though if they're cut out of residuals though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 22:14
|
|
|
Gaz-L posted:2 more the next 2 Saturdays, then Ncuti takes over at Xmas. Ah cool. Class3KillStorm posted:"Beep the Meat" sounds way too much like a euphemism... Yea that's why it was weird to hear the whole time. I could only think that maybe that's not a saying in the UK?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 22:34
|
|
|
I rewatched the special just now, and I loved it even more.Sydney Bottocks posted:So according to this Deadline article, current DW writers will basically no longer be receiving residuals from repeats of the DW episodes they wrote. Instead of receiving a smaller initial fee plus residuals for repeats, they will receive a larger fee up front (but won't get any residuals for repeats). This apparently was part of the deal the BBC and/or Bad Wolf made to get Disney+ as the international streaming partner. loving Disney. Clouseau posted:It's absolutely a ripoff for the writers, I have to imagine writing a script for a show that has as long legs as Who can be a nice little residuals bump. Now Disney gets the benefit over time. Yeah, I think Doctor Who has more rewatch value than a lot of other shows, so this is bullshit. (Like...see above, I've already watched the latest episode twice in 3 days. But I go back and watch old episodes of Who more than most other shows out there, even Star Wars shows, which, given who I am, is really saying something.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 22:36
|
|
|
Phy posted:Also would like to see more of the polite nonlethal space lobsters They're very rubber monster but in a way that works on the show. Warthur posted:Yes, two more then Gatwa time. Unless more shenanigans happen... I'm kind of hoping we get a multi-Doc episode with the two of them since they are both cast, but it would be unfair to Gatwa to have to share the spotlight on his first episode...
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 22:44
|
|
|
Is it worth doing a big effort post from the perspective of a trans doctor who fan with a really unfortunate deadname? I don't wanna be preachy or venty but after my viewing of Star Beast yesterday I'm full of thoughts
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 22:45
|
|
|
Most of my TV watching is actually just rewatches of stuff in the background. I appreciate the art the creators made and want them compensated. One of many hosed up bizarre features of contemporary capitalism is Disney getting to twist the arm so they get all the rights and revenues for themselves despite doing nothing except being a profoundly lovely company every single day of its history.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 22:45
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Is it worth doing a big effort post from the perspective of a trans doctor who fan with a really unfortunate deadname? I don't wanna be preachy or venty but after my viewing of Star Beast yesterday I'm full of thoughts I would read it, if you feel like writing it. But certainly don't feel obligated. I actually don't know your deadname (and don't need to), I just know your name, which is awesome.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 22:46
|
|
|
I liked it quite a bit, but regarding the ending: "She had a kid so the power is spread out now" was a good solution, and the "binary/non-binary" thing was on the nose but sufficiently clever that I still liked it. But holy poo poo "oh you can just give the power up whenever, it's actually not a problem at all" was a cop-out. First off, why didn't Donna just do that right away then, and second, why do it at all? Donna and Rose sharing the bond and a bunch of technobabble knowledge was a cool dynamic and we got, like, five minutes of it. You could've just decided it was spread out enough to be non-fatal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 22:55
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:I liked it quite a bit, but regarding the ending: "She had a kid so the power is spread out now" was a good solution, and the "binary/non-binary" thing was on the nose but sufficiently clever that I still liked it. But holy poo poo "oh you can just give the power up whenever, it's actually not a problem at all" was a cop-out. First off, why didn't Donna just do that right away then, and second, why do it at all? Donna and Rose sharing the bond and a bunch of technobabble knowledge was a cool dynamic and we got, like, five minutes of it. You could've just decided it was spread out enough to be non-fatal. I mean, it's definitely a *dusts hands* whatever "and we fixed it!" solution so they can have Donna back for the three specials. But if I could try to do the same thing, maybe it only worked now because it was split between two of them? Maybe Donna didn't think of it the last time because her brain was overloaded with the metacrisis on her own? I'm not spoilering, because no one else has been. We've all seen it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 23:03
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:I liked it quite a bit, but regarding the ending: "She had a kid so the power is spread out now" was a good solution, and the "binary/non-binary" thing was on the nose but sufficiently clever that I still liked it. But holy poo poo "oh you can just give the power up whenever, it's actually not a problem at all" was a cop-out. First off, why didn't Donna just do that right away then, and second, why do it at all? Donna and Rose sharing the bond and a bunch of technobabble knowledge was a cool dynamic and we got, like, five minutes of it. You could've just decided it was spread out enough to be non-fatal. Agreed there, don't see the harm in letting em be a lil time-lord. Guess they didn't want to introduce essentially a new subspecies of human with diminishing time-lord genetics? They demonstrated immediately how useful these new perspectives were, and the "oops u die" thing could've easily been changed too. Also really nobody ever has to die, just do a Clara and freeze em in a moment of time trick, freeing them to live infinite life however they want. Just this forever, everybody lives!
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 23:04
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:I liked it quite a bit, but regarding the ending: "She had a kid so the power is spread out now" was a good solution, and the "binary/non-binary" thing was on the nose but sufficiently clever that I still liked it. But holy poo poo "oh you can just give the power up whenever, it's actually not a problem at all" was a cop-out. First off, why didn't Donna just do that right away then, and second, why do it at all? Donna and Rose sharing the bond and a bunch of technobabble knowledge was a cool dynamic and we got, like, five minutes of it. You could've just decided it was spread out enough to be non-fatal. Would she have known she could back in the day? Why did the Doctor kill himself with time vortex/radiation if he can just let it go of stored energy at any time? (Heck, doesn't he do the latter at the start of Series 3 by shaking it out of his foot or something?)
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 23:05
|
|
|
Khanstant posted:Agreed there, don't see the harm in letting em be a lil time-lord. Guess they didn't want to introduce essentially a new subspecies of human with diminishing time-lord genetics? I think it's this. They didn't want people wondering why, when things got bad in the future, they didn't go pick up Rose and Donna to help out, since they're part Time Lord and all. Just wipe that out and stop people asking questions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 23:07
|
|
|
Khanstant posted:Agreed there, don't see the harm in letting em be a lil time-lord. Guess they didn't want to introduce essentially a new subspecies of human with diminishing time-lord genetics?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 23:45
|
|
|
SiKboy posted:I think you mean which werent legally allowed to strike in solidarity with WGA/SAG-AFTRA. They did, however, have a day of solidarity (or whatever it was called) with their striking US brethren, as a show of support for them. At which, one RTD was present: RTD posted:Davies added that he turned up today to show solidarity with the WGA and predicted that the issues writers face in the U.S. will eventually plague the UK industry. Going to guess that was after the Disney+ was struck, which is, uh, not a great look considering today's news.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 23:49
|
|
|
Musings on a Name Like a bunch of other people, I tuned in to see the new Doctor Who special. Like a bunch of other people, I knew in advance that Donna's daughter, Rose Noble, is trans, I knew the actress is trans, and I knew it was gonna come up textually. I, broadly speaking, trust RTD to have his heart in the right place, and trust that he was not trying to be harmful. But watching The Star Beast sent me into a spiraling panic attack, and it honestly could have been so much worse and I just wanna...talk about it for a minute. I was spoiled ahead of time that Rose's deadname is spoken in the show. I had no context for it, just that it happens. I roll my eyes and check the TARDIS wikia, cause apparently there was discourse about how and where to list the deadname in Rose's article. This was when I learned just what Rose's deadname is. And I'm not going to type it. We all heard it in the episode. But Rose Noble and I share the same deadname. I'm honestly glad that I read it in advance, because the context of the scene, Rose having the name shouted at her (along with some sexist remarks), would have messed me up even worse had I not known it was coming at some point in the episode. I had to pause the episode and take medication for a panic attack even with the foreknowledge. Is this probably a relatively extreme reaction that not many others would have? Probably! An interview clip from an offical roundtable podcast discussion has RTD launching into the historical greek/biblical origins of Rose's deadname, pointing out that Donna named her child in honor of a healer and then when Rose chose her own name, she named herself after the (modern) Doctor's first full-time companion. I'd be more on board with this if it was part of the episode itself, like, if that's the point being made, cool and great, I'm still not a fan of it, but at least that would make it part of the show rather than some word origin trivia you need to be independently aware of. By having her deadname be Out Of Universe Unconfirmed Trivia, now its forever gonna show up in imdb trivia and the TARDIS wikia page and just be everywhere Dickhead transphobes (both the kids on bikes in the story and out of universe haters) are going to keep on calling her a bloke and making posts on X or whatever that they're so proud of about her having a "sonic screwdriver" or whatever -- giving them ammo to just deadname her the entire time too feels...irresponsible. Plus that interview clip alone has RTD saying (this is paraphrase, not a direct quote) "Well, I'm a cis male so I'm privileged, so I'm willing to be told I'm wrong" and Rusty, mate, if you feel that way then this conversation needed to happen in the writers room before a single frame was shot, not in a BBC-approved puff piece of post-episode roundtabling. While I'm sure that Juno Dawson is not directly in RTD's org chart, I can't imagine she would have had the freedom to say "yeah this was probably a bad call" to him. (Not to speak for her or anything, just my impression) In contrast, the scene with Sylvia was amazing - to her face, she was kind, gave an appropriate compliment, and acted like the perfect grandmother. She's really trying. But then behind her back, oops she slipped in a couple "he"s that are immediately corrected with a brief apology. THAT sequence I think is fine to show that there's some friction with Rose being trans without having to depict some targeted harassment on screen. I fully recognize that I have the bad luck of being more personally affected by this one than most other random viewers...and its a minor miracle that the BBC of all stations allowed a character's transness to not only be depicted positively but also in a plot important way...but I really do believe that RTD missed the mark on this one. EDIT: Coda -- Tania in the Stranded audio dramas is handled way better. Her transness came up in the context of starting an intimate relationship with someone, and we have no clue at all what her deadname is. jivjov fucked around with this message at 00:05 on Nov 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 00:02
|
|
|
Now I can't remember where I saw this, but a 'double dagger' is another name for a diesis, or ‡ The Radio Times used to use that symbol to denote a TV listing was a repeat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 01:03
|
|
|
Wolfechu posted:Now I can't remember where I saw this, but a 'double dagger' is another name for a diesis, or ‡ I think I saw that in this very thread
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 01:18
|
|
|
Thanks for the musings jivjov, it's a really valuable perspective to get to see. In regards to the writers residuals, nothing much more to add than that it is bullshit and shouldn't be allowed to happen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 01:23
|
|
|
Personally I don't have much sensitivity to my old name - I mean I never get called it really now, but it doesn't make me wince. With that caveat for me personally what they did with Rose in that regard actually worked for me quite well. I hadn't considered this issue with it being Trivia, though. Frankly I'm very ill-humoured at the thought of that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 01:45
|
|
|
Tbh I'm gonna blame some of my reaction on it being The Holidays. My family is not what one might call supportive, so seeing a trans person harassed with a much too familiar deadname followed by seeing mom of the millennium Donna threaten to throw hands I think made it feel even more bittersweet. Like....I would trade a great many things for my dad to say pretty much any of Shaun's lines from this special (concerning his daughter) to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 01:51
|
|
|
My sympathies for you, that's a horrible experience to have and it's completely understandable. It's a bad inclusion, there's no need for that word to know how cruel some people are to her. Making it part of trivia is also really bad taste. Saying the actual hateful words that lovely people are gonna say before they say them, to show that only bad people say that thing is not necessary, and it can hurt the wrong people.CapnAndy posted:I mean, call me crazy, but "the human race are slowly becoming Time Lords 2.0" seems like it would be an actually pretty cool idea to introduce, especially because it's happening not as a result of natural evolution, but because this is the planet the the Doctor just can't seem to stop directly meddling with. Maybe there should be consequences for the dude spending all of space and time grabbing random humans and exposing them to the infinite? And he could wrestle with if they're good consequences or not? They've introduced tons of variant humans and evolutions in the series, and I honestly wouldn't blink if the Timelords were always meant or will be said or have already been said to be evolved humans. Like how sometimes krypton/superman is actually just far future Earth and a time-displaced future earth baby. I don't know if it would be from the Doctor's obsession and meddlings though, and could pivot, obsessed BECAUSE that was the origin. Functionally it might just end up too much like other properties Disney has plundered, X-men and superheroes. I would love for him to deal with some of his children or for any of them to stick around. Yeah, lots of found families, very sweet, but what of his 14+ children? Seems like a subject that's got more to it than one or two brief vacant glances and vague dismissal. thrawn527 posted:I think it's this. They didn't want people wondering why, when things got bad in the future, they didn't go pick up Rose and Donna to help out, since they're part Time Lord and all. Just wipe that out and stop people asking questions. Yeah, as the kind of person always wondering why they don't do thing I know they can do, best to nip it in the bud. Even with their best effort there, part of me is gonna wonder if they could just un-let it go and get it back. Khanstant fucked around with this message at 01:56 on Nov 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 01:51
|
|
|
lines posted:Personally I don't have much sensitivity to my old name - I mean I never get called it really now, but it doesn't make me wince. With that caveat for me personally what they did with Rose in that regard actually worked for me quite well. I hadn't considered this issue with it being Trivia, though. Frankly I'm very ill-humoured at the thought of that. Yeah, if anything Rose and Donna's response actually read as very realistic; Donna actually gets upset and tries to comfort Rose, but Rose is more just modestly annoyed at it. Those guys and that name don't really hold any power over her, but her mother doesn't quite recognize that. I can definitely see someone's relationship to their deadname not working in the same way, if there's trauma or emotional abuse related to it, but for someone like Rose it makes sense that it doesn't. What I do think, though, and why I'm ultimately not surprised in that trivia point, is that a trans person's deadname or previous life/appearance is something only interesting to the cis people around them. It's ultimately voyeurism, wanting to see something you're 'not supposed to', and even if that scene was handled well, I have confidence that if a trans person actually wrote the story, they wouldn't have included it. (They probably would've included the misgendering scene between Donna and Sylvia, though, that was very good.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 02:10
|
|
|
Voyeuristic is a very good word for it and helps sum up why the scene rubs me the wrong way. Like, some trans folks are fine with their deadname, some have works published under it or whatever and use it as a professional handle, some people changed their name A Lot and the old one is extremely distant. And Rose's reaction as a character is totally fine and honestly how I shrug off most transphobic BS I run into in my day to day life and I don't want to take anything away from that reaction (or Yasmin as the actress or any other trans person who was similarly affected like I was). But it overall just hit me as Unnecessary
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 02:21
|
|
|
It's really impressive that absolutely nothing has leaked about Wild Blue Yonder even as we're less than a week away. My baseless speculation/hopes: That it deals with what is, to me, the other major hanging thread from the (first) Tennant era, which is the grim fate of humanity at the end of time. The speculation upthread about humanity now getting a bit of Time Lord in it makes me hopeful that maybe there's a significant divergence at this stage. Also, the "malfunction" at the end of Star Beast, along with the Cloister Bell going off (according to the closed captions anyway -- I'd never have heard it otherwise) somewhat mirrors the circumstances by which the TARDIS reached the end of the universe in Utopia. Plus, Donna was ranting a bit about a clerk "with a goatee" giving her trouble at the beginning, and I absolutely wouldn't put it past Rusty to be too clever with a seeming bit of throwaway dialogue like that. The Meep's reference to the "boss" being interested in a two-hearted creature is most likely a reference to the Toymaker (given that his special comes last), but I can't help thinking of other two-hearted creatures as well. All this to say, I hope "Wild Blue Yonder" refers to a better ending/continuation for humanity beyond the known bounds of the universe. RTD did say it was going to be something completely unprecedented, so even if it's not what I'm thinking, I hope it lives up to his promise at least.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 03:12
|
|
|
I think WBY managed to be kept under wraps by entirely filming in studio. Which is absolutely the right move, and I can’t wait! Even the trailers show absolutely nothing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 03:16
|
|
|
Did the Disney deal happen before or after these new Tennant or Ncuti episodes? Is there any not speculation about what if any sort of say disney has on the actual show? I don't want the show to stop having London as the center of the universe with everything happening there. Or removing English jokes that go over my head till I look it up. Did they give bad wolf studios a Volume?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 04:35
|
|
|
Resdfru posted:Did the Disney deal happen before or after these new Tennant or Ncuti episodes? IIRC, the Disney+ deal was announced shortly after the announcement that RTD was coming back to helm the series again. I forget exactly how much time lapsed between the two but I don't believe it was very much. That's why this particular detail about the writers no longer getting residuals comes across as particularly lovely, because the deal would've had to have been hammered out pretty far in advance. quote:Is there any not speculation about what if any sort of say disney has on the actual show? I don't want the show to stop having London as the center of the universe with everything happening there. Or removing English jokes that go over my head till I look it up. There's no speculation because RTD himself admitted that Disney+ has input into the scripts, he even gave a vague example of them telling him to change a particular scene because it wasn't jolly enough or some such thing. He tried to handwave it away by saying something like "if you're doing a show in the UK these days, you're going to get input from American TV companies all the time", which isn't exactly reassuring.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 04:58
|
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:There's no speculation because RTD himself admitted that Disney+ has input into the scripts, he even gave a vague example of them telling him to change a particular scene because it wasn't jolly enough or some such thing. Oof, that sounds bad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 05:01
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:Oof, that sounds bad. At the time there was a lot of hubbub ITT because people were claiming at first that D+ had no say whatsoever, they were just the international streaming partners and RTD and his production company had full and final say over the entire show. Then it came out that no, they're actually providing part of the show's funding as well, and they'd already asked RTD to change at least one scene, as mentioned previously. Generally, when you contribute to production costs, you have a say in how things are done, and sure enough, D+ is having their say. Like changing a scene because they think it'll be "funnier". Or saying that writers can't receive residuals from repeats of the show.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 05:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 17:42 |
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:There's no speculation because RTD himself admitted that Disney+ has input into the scripts, he even gave a vague example of them telling him to change a particular scene because it wasn't jolly enough or some such thing. He tried to handwave it away by saying something like "if you're doing a show in the UK these days, you're going to get input from American TV companies all the time", which isn't exactly reassuring. Given this is RTD Who we're talking about, changing a scene for 'not being jolly enough' is either concerning, or hilariously baffling. If it's a scene that's supposed to be really dark, that sucks but also doesn't quite make sense... but if they looked at Russell T. Davies doing a 'happy ending' scene and decided it wasn't happy enough, what the gently caress are you expecting? All that said, Rose's treatment is giving me hope. She is exactly the stuff that Disney sands away from their own productions; if that got through, I can't imagine Disney's input is gonna stop much of anything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 05:20
|
|