Re: [article] Doctor Who: Has the Disney Gamble Paid Off?

On 20/07/2024 15:15, Daniel70 wrote:

Blueshirt wrote on 20/7/24 7:32 am:

To keep some Doctor Who content here on RADY
(rec.arts.dave.yadallee) here's an article from "Deadline"
about Doctor Who and Disney... for those interested in the
opinions of others about such things.
>
https://deadline.com/2024/07/doctor-who-analysis-disney-deal-ncuti-gatwa-russell-t-davies-bbc-1236008287/
>

Tidbits that I took out of the artical ....
 1.    "well-connected sources have estimated more than doubled the

Made up nonsense akin to most of the output of Doomcock.

show’s per-ep investment to around the £10M ($13M) mark, with the deal valued by some at around £100M." .... are 'they' suggesting there will only be 10 Eps??

Wrong. What Disney paid $100 million for was the right to show all the previous series since 2005. At best no more than £1 million is being spent on each episode. No big salaried actors are anchoring this series. It's been done on the cheep by the BBC as it always has been. The effects are not better than you can get on a computer game rendered by Unreal Engine, which is now the industry standard, and anyone with £2000 to spend on an RTX 4090 can render effects to the same standard as source CGI models from any online library for minimal outlay.
These woketards need to learn how the industry actually works.
Doctor Who failed on the SyFy channel (whatever the fuck they're calling it these days, WWF channel?). They dropped it. It failed on Netflix, so they dropped it too. It failed on Amazon so they dropped it as well. And it failed on HBO Max and just as with the others, since they price for screening everything from 2005 onwards wasn't dropped by the BBC, HBO Max dropped it too. See the pattern?
Doctor Whoke has failed on Disney+. It could only manage 200 viewers who watched each episode all the way through, which is no better than most YouTube channels get based on views. No one is watching the series from 2005 onwards. Why would they? Most people interested have already seen it and why would they want to watch it again when a woman written as a man played by a totally incompetent actress, and an effeminate male homosexual written as a women that does nothing but mince around and cries like a baby girl, and can't keep her accent consistant is what they have to look forward too?
That's what you get for deliberately alienating and disenfranchising your audience because they're mostly white heterosexual men, and telling them to go out and fuck grass, so that the racist bigot of a show runner can make the show all about himself.

 2.    "Making stars of iconic Doctors such as Tom Baker, William Hartnell, Jon Pertwee and, more recently, Matt Smith, it has been airing on and off for more than 60 years" .... Interesting that, after listing three Classic Doctors, the ONLY NewWho Doctor they list is DoctorMatt .... not the most popular incarnation.

Matt Smith was the most popular incarnation in the US. Tennant is nothing in comparison. Smith had triple or quadruple the ratings. Why do you think he's earning more than Tennant ever did on House of the Dragon?
Hartnell was already as star before Doctor Who. Remember Carry on Sergeant? Can't these woketards get any of their facts right?
At least Sutekh is out so he ain't bringing back compulsory National Service.
--
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it stands for." -William Shatner