News Categories
Archives

Does Time Travel Work on the Big Screen?

Mark McCullough and Connor Johnston team up to investigate.

Time-Travel-On-The-Big-Screen-

Time Travel and the Big Screen. Are they truly a match made in heaven? Almost since the very early beginnings of cinema writers and directors have striven to make bolder, braver and better films appealing to audiences around the globe in different and popular ways. It’s a favourite cinematic device: time travel. It’s been done in comedies and dramas, sci-fi and action movies, on budgets giant and miniscule, in spaceships and in DeLoreans, found in Wizarding Worlds and Far-off Galaxies – but does time travel truly have a valid place in the cinema?

Today, we’ve chosen four of the most successful time travel films of the last decade to compare with Doctor Who’s one and only cinematic outing to date, in the form of the 50th Special “The Day of The Doctor”, and investigate if time travel really does work on the big screen and more importantly is there evidence to suggest that “Doctor Who” can successfully dive into the sea of potential and secure a presence in the world of feature films. Please have your tickets ready, your popcorn buttered (remember they can feel pain), and your mobile phones switched off…. The show is about to begin.

Spoilerphobes and time travellers from the past may relax as the two sections addressing films released this year (2014) will remain spoiler free.

The Day of the Doctor (2013)

“You’re not actually suggesting that we change our own personal history?“

50th-posterThe Day of the Doctor” marked uncharted territory for Doctor Who, its first outing on the big screen. Not only did it have to deliver a satisfactory story to pay tribute to the fifty years of time travel which preceded it, but also had the pressure of being a success on the big screen. It’s safe to say that it gained the nod of approval on both counts and has gone down as one of the highlights of the shows history. Unfortunately, I (Mark) didn’t have the pleasure of witnessing the episode on the big screen, but I am reliably informed that it was a wonderful experience made better by the atmosphere generated by congregations of Whovians. It would seem that critics agree as the episode fared extremely well and despite its short duration in cinemas, managed to bring in a hefty crowd. Naturally this lead to talk of the special being designed to test the waters for potential future cinema outings for the Doctor. I’ll leave that thought there as I want to come back to it in the conclusion.

There is no denying that Day offered something new to the ever increasingly popular sci-fi genre, anything with three different versions of the protagonists (each played by a fantastic actor) is always going to be unique. The narrative itself is easy to follow for those who are not regular viewers of the series meaning that it readily accessible and required no previous investment. Perhaps one valid complaint would be that as a film, it was a little short compared to most. This isn’t a major problem to the plot which is told and paced perfectly; perhaps where more time could have been spent though was on the Zygon subplot. Perhaps it’s just me, but it feels like it was a little abandoned in favour of the Gallifrey storyline. Obviously as a Doctor Who fan I’m going to be slightly biased in my opinion of how good the episode/film was.

The focus of this article is on the ime Travel genre of films. I don’t need to explain how the Doctor travels in time, that should be a given by now. What Day does however is take past present and future and have them come together to sort out a major event within the Doctor’s life. Interestingly whilst watching the episode it was extremely easy to follow and understand who was who and what they were doing, yet afterwards the narrative and time travel aspect provided lots of food for discussion and fuel for debate, which is no bad thing.

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)

“Mysterious thing, time. Powerful, and when meddled with, dangerous.”

Harry-Potter-and-the-Prisoner-of-Azkaban-posterOne of (if not the best) additions to one of the greatest film series of all time, “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban”, introduced a new layer of mystery and madness to the Wizarding World in the form of time travel. The way time travelled is handled in the film can be most brilliantly defined as “basic and simple” – though this in no way takes away from the quality of the plot. By this I mean it’s easy to understand and is presented with a lot of clarity catering for the younger and older members of the audience alike in the same fashion Doctor Who prides itself for. The premise is simple – Harry and Hermione travel backwards in time under the cryptic request of Albus Dumbledore to save the lives of both Sirius Black and Buckbeak. This is made possible by a piece of magical equipment known as a Time-Turner that immediately casts a parallel to our own Vortex Manipulator. “Cheap and nasty time travel – bad for you, I’m trying to give it up”.

The main connection to ‘Day’ that Prisoner of Azkaban entails is the principle of time travel it uses. The possibility of time travel within the Harry Potter universe may seem to allow many plot holes, but characters appear to use them for trivial tasks that have no effect on existence as a whole. The one notable use of a Time-Turner in the film, obeys the Novikov Self-Consistency Principle. This theory of time-travel, stating that “Nothing can be changed because anything a traveller does merely produces the circumstances they had noted before travelling,” is used in both examples with Gallifrey appearing to the universe as being destroyed and the Doctor’s forgetting saving it due to the corruption of the timelines (therefore not ret-coning or cancelling out any of the events of Seasons 1-7), and in Prisoner by having the events such as the stones being thrown into Hagrid’s hut and the Stag patronus rescuing Harry not only in sync during both timelines à but also made possible by Harry and Hermione’s time travels. It’s the one theory that if used correctly not only rids the plot of any holes, but also (judging by its track record) ensures a success on the big screen.

Star Trek (2009)

“You know, coming back in time, changing history… that’s cheating.”

star-trek-2009-artI may find myself alienated for including “Star Trek “ in this article, but I feel it is an apt comparison to draw. In fact the time travel element is logistically similar to Day in that someone with knowledge from the future is able to go back in time and alter things so as that particular future never happened.

Something else Star Trek shares with Doctor Who is the fact that it made its name as a TV series. From that it has gone on to have two blockbuster films in the last five years, something Doctor Who could potentially follow suit with. Star Trek also managed to complement itself into the canon of the TV show establishing itself as a parallel universe to the stories fans had become accustomed to.

For Doctor Who this may be a bigger problem as any cinematic progress would not be wanted at the cost of the show, yet many would still insist that it conforms to the canon of the current series of the TV show. Therein lies the problem which is potentially the main barrier between the Doctor and the big screen. Although there are several ways around this, if the BBC were prepared to take a gamble.

Edge of Tomorrow (2014)

“What I am about to tell you sounds crazy but the longer I talk the more rational it’s going to appear”

edge-of-tomorrow-posterHaving recently seen the latest sci-fi/time travel offering, “Edge of Tomorrow, it was clear to me again that there is a huge potential market for a Doctor Who film. The latest Tom Cruise action film features a simple yet intriguing tagline: Live. Die. Repeat. That concept becomes the focus of the film and its use of time travel; the same day repeated over and over with a different outcome. I can’t reveal anything more for risk of spoilers, but the film reminded me in many ways of Doctor Who. You can read my full thoughts on the film here.

The concept of a Time Loop is one which has yet to be properly touched upon within the revived series of Doctor Who. Given Moffat’s passion for timey-wimey stories though, I’d suspect it is only a matter of time before we see one. Personally I feel it would be an amazing potential set up for a Doctor-lite episode where he has limited interaction with someone stuck in a Time Loop. There’s a wonderful quote from the film which could so easily be applied to the Time Lords. This in turned my thoughts to the potential of a Doctor Who film set within the Time War, because as proven by Edge of Tomorrow, war and time travel can come together to produce a fantastic film.

X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)

“The past: a new and uncertain world. A world of endless possibilities and infinite outcomes. Countless choices define our fate: each choice, each moment – a moment in the ripple of time. Enough ripple, and you change the tide… for the future is never truly set.”

xmen-days-of-future-posterArguably, no movie involving time travel can ever actually seem right in the realm of continuity. “X-Men: Days of Future Past” was a film that had all the potential to not make sense at all, the potential to completely botch-up the whole film series as well as destroy any chances of future additions to the franchise. Where did all this danger and evil potential stem from? Time travel. Ah, time travel: the ingenious storytelling (and franchise-housekeeping) device that allows these characters to seem relevant and vital long after their first generations of fans are dead. And did the film, against all odd’s present time travel in a successful way? Very much so.

(In trying to stay as spoiler-free as possible) The reason DOFP was so successful is because it used a principle of time travel that hasn’t really been used that much before. The idea that one person can go back in time, completely change history in such a drastic way “rewriting” the future totally without any consequences for the timeline. X-Men breaks the rules of time travel that Doctor Who so closely follows and in fact during one of the earliest scenes defines its own principle to follow in terms of the device:

“Whatever you do won’t change anything, not until you wake up. And then everything will be different, and you’ll be the only one who knew what happened before.”

The Doctor Who fan within me wants to scream out “Paradox!” – if Logan succeeds in changing the future how will his future self ever be in a position to know to go back and change the future *cue headache*. It’s a plot that if used in Doctor Who would summon Reapers of unknown multitude – but the crucial point is that it’s not. It’s not inDoctor Who! In setting up their own rules when it comes to time travel and taking away any chances of a paradox – It just works. It creates a film that focuses less on the timey-wimey aspects of time travel, and more on the opportunity for evolution time travel presents. It’s undoubtedly one of the greatest time travel movies of all time, if not one of the greatest sci-fi movies of all time.

In this case study, it’s difficult to decide if DOFP’s successful use of time travel is a point for or against Doctor Who on the big screen. Yes it shows that time travel does work well in the box office – yet it’s been this successful by breaking the rules and principles Doctor Who follows to the tee. It seems we have a production paradox on our hands.

Conclusion

The answer to the question posed by this is article is an obvious one. Hopefully the films we have chosen act as a true testament to the pure quality time travel films can deliver. Perhaps then a more appropriate question is; how can our beloved Doctor Who capitalise on this? Again the answer doesn’t place too much strain on the grey matter. We need Doctor Who in the cinema again, there is so much potential in terms of both finances and narrative. What’s more, there is no better time to try as recently there have been several fan bases that have witnessed/ will witness their show make a jump across visual media. We have had both Marvel and DC releasing TV series over the course of the last few years, whilst “The Inbetweeners”, and “Mrs Brown’s Boys” have made a move in the opposite direction.

As mentioned earlier there are a few barriers to this, namely the effect it would have on the televised series and the impact on continuity. However, there is a simple conclusion to this, as fans we have been crying out for a spin-off. The way I see it the best way for Doctor Who to take advantage of the big screen is to create a spin-off specifically for it. Looking again at Marvel, a similar set-up to the “Marvel Cinematic Universe” could be utilised with several spin-off films from the TV series over the course of a few years. This of course would require a considerable gamble from the BBC to either invest in these films or release enough of the rights to let someone else make them. We suspect however that it would certainly be a gamble which pays off.

Step back in time...

COMMENT GUIDELINES

Please be civil and keep article comments relevant and on topic. Flag and report any offensive/trolling behavior, or contact us with details.
Please do not post SPOILERS including anything from leaked episodes! Your account could be banned. For complete details on our comment policy please read.
95 comments
TheDoctorIsInDaHouse
TheDoctorIsInDaHouse

Let me say that in the day of the doctor cinema screening my cinema was PACKED! I never knew how many doctor who fans would be there, it was AWESOME! For the first time the entire audience had an experiance together in the cinema. We all laughed together, screamed together. What I'm trying to say is- dr who works on the big screen if whovians react together!

SirTrey
SirTrey

The biggest "issue" with a potential Doctor Who film in my eyes is that there's an active series to work around.  With Star Trek and The Inbetweeners the series was done, and even with Star Trek's case they used a reboot of sorts.  There are two ways I could see it happening entirely within canon: as another multi-Doctor story with a giant memory wipe at the end, or potentially at the end of a Doctor's run - think The End of Time.  



There was a full year and a half between the final regular Tennant episode and his 2+ hour finale, which I'd think could be enough to work in a film.  We'd "know" a regeneration is coming but knowing part of an ending doesn't dissuade people from adaptations...and if they could somehow keep the next Doctor's identity a secret the film could be HUGE, both in terms of exciting old fans and getting new ones interested in watching the series with the new Doctor.   I also love the idea that The Last Son of Gallifrey mentioned and The Living Angel elaborated on of having old-Doctor stories with some kind of through line connecting all of them.  Would have to be made by a separate team but that could potentially be a very interesting Netflix series (since 13 films would take FOREVER) consisting of 60 minute mini-movies.  Hell I wouldn't mind that being a season in and of itself but the BBC would likely never approve.



Dave8001
Dave8001

How can there possibly be a Doctor Who based article on whether or not time travel works on the big screen without drawing reference to Back To The Future?

grabate
grabate

It's not a question if Time Travel movies work, it's if a decent Doctor Who script can be written. The anniversary should have been a chance to get new viewers, instead those I watched it with who didn't watch the show were completely confused and didn't understand what was going on. The Christmas special was the same thing. As a fan I had no problem keeping up but a movie will have to be the beginners guide to Doctor Who to get a wide audience, something which will annoy fans. A spin off is a good idea but what is Doctor Who without the Doctor.

The_Eternal_Dalek
The_Eternal_Dalek

The thing working in the X-Men films favour is that it has decades worth of comic book time travel rules which back up exactly what happened on screen, which is a bit of a miracle given some of the things 20th Century Fox have produced over the years.

AlexanderofAlzarius
AlexanderofAlzarius

Firstly, great article. A few issues though. The Day of the Doctor was not the first and only (to date) Doctor Who film there were the Peter Cushing films and some episodes have been shown in cinemas. With regard to your comparison of Doctor Who and Days of Future Past you state that Doctor Who consistently avoids paradoxes, following it's own rules "to the t", but this is simply not true. The laws of time appear to be much more flexible. In The Aztecs the Doctor states that history cannot be rewritten, "not one line" while in The Time Meddler that appears to be a real possibility, Adric cannot be saved after the events of Earthshock but Grace Holloway and Chang Lee can UN the TV movie, in Father's Day altering time causes the Travers to manifest (admittedly pre-Time War they would not appear with plenty of Time Lords to take care of things, but this does not explain why they so not subsequently appear when time is altered) in The Waters if Mars time is partially restored by Adelaide Brooke's death in A Christmas Carol someone's life is rewritten, etc. Keep up the good work!

MJJ
MJJ

????? What, no mention, at all, about the Back To The Future trilogy? How young are these writers?

Polyphase
Polyphase

Time travel movies have been working since at least 1960 but I don't think much of those choices. I mean....X Men?

thelonelycenturion
thelonelycenturion

I think Star Trek IV or First Contact would have been better choices of Trek films for this type of analysis.

Ollie Walton Harrod
Ollie Walton Harrod

Firstly, just to say, the question is a silly one. Because it clearly does work.

'The Day of the Doctor' didn't introduce something new, in terms of multiple versions of the protagonist. That has been done before, in films, and in Doctor Who.

The plot being told and paced perfectly. - That is certainly a debatable point. The whole Zygon plot was just completely forgotten about half way through. I've also been told that non-regular viewers didn't understand it at all. So many people liked it because it was hyped up so much. I thought it's only appeal was its good CGI and humour. Other than that, little was actually explained, there were many plot holes, and I didn't think it was that good at all.

There's a big difference in the time travel of 'Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban' and 'The Day of the Doctor'. 'The Prisoner of Azkaban' shows that what is changed was always the case (though Buckbeak is saved, which wasn't what originally happened). Whereas in 'The Day of the Doctor', Moffat actually had to come up with an excuse as not to contradict what previously happened (and manages to cause a number of plot holes).

In terms of your thoughts on 'Edge of Tomorrow and its potential future links to Doctor Who, I would prefer it if Moffat  didn't take ideas from other things. I think it would get criticised a lot. Firstly, it sounds a bit like 'Blink'. Secondly: 'A Christmas Carol' and 'The Doctor, the Widow and the Wardrobe' - both copies, both bad.

'X-Men: Days of Future Past' - I thought the film was okay. But you are the first person I've seen to think it was that good. The majority of people I've spoken to really didn't like it, or also thought it was okay.

And really, calling it 'one of the greatest time travel movies of all time' . No. That is just so.. there are no words to describe how wrong that is. And then you say 'if not one of the greatest sci-fi movies of all time'. ...#'!"$&^$&&(brain meltdown)... (reboot)... Of course it is just down to opinion. But that is a very very grand statement, and considering the amount of people who didn't like it. And the amount of amazing sci-fi films out there. That stement is just way way way way way out. When making a statement like that, always write 'in my opinion' or 'for me' alongside it. Otherwise you're just bluntly saying it, and its so disagreeable with.

TV series' will always be being made into movies, and vice versa. But making it a regular thing for Doctor Who, I think, is a terrible idea. 2 part stories are already 1 and a half hours (longer than 'The Day of the Doctor' - around 1 hour, 15 minutes). And there are/have been 3 parters at an even longer length. It is therefore unnecessary, and money grabbing, to make more Doctor Who films.

Richy Woo
Richy Woo

My rule of thumb with all forms of fiction has always been, if you take time travel seriously, your kinda missing the point.

The Outer Space K9
The Outer Space K9

I think J.K.Rowling did a great job in Prisoner of Azkaban, it reminds me of Blink a little. And it's the only film I've seen where time travel isn't used badly as a method to fix things.

supermoff is on the Orient Express...in space!
supermoff is on the Orient Express...in space!

Instead of films, I'd prefer just a few feature length episodes now and again. Maybe a feature length Easter special to break up the gap between series. As long its shown on TV.

MrRazza, WANTED: A Lord of Thyme
MrRazza, WANTED: A Lord of Thyme

I think Time Travel always has been and will continue to be very effective on the big screen, but I don't feel that's the main issue for a possible DW venture into the cinema. As the article describes, it is ensuring continuity and not overshadowing the series.

To be honest, I think it is best avoided. Venturing into the world of film often leads to commercialisation, cliches or cheesiness, and we've seen it happen to DW once before (by the way everyone, the Doctor said he was half human... isn't that BRILLIANT!?!?!?! [HINT: No, it isn't]). Personally, I find that generally (not all the time, but generally), TV shows translate very badly into film, and can often feel weak, laboured and even a sellout of their inspiration. 

I have to say though, I do love Mr Cushing's fine Dr Who films, though that may be down primarily to the man himself, the fact that it was my only Doctor Who source for 9 years of my life and consequential nostalgia, and (of course) Bernard Cribbins.

MetamorphmagusWho
MetamorphmagusWho

I love the idea of time travel, and when it's in films I enjoy figuring out which theory of it they follow (e.g Blinovich Limitation Effect, Novikov self-consistency principle etc). By the way has anyone here seen The Amazing Mr Blunden? It's basically where two children (from 1918) time travel into the past (1818) and try and save the lives of two other children, however only a select few people can see them in the past. It's one of those family films where it's so good that you don't care that there are a few errors regarding the time travel.


The Living Angel / is Regenerating
The Living Angel / is Regenerating

Thinking about it, a lot of people say that it wouldn't work because not enough people would go and see it, but I have to say that I live in Birmingham so England's 2nd biggest city, and I went to see Day if the Doctor in our biggest screen, and it was so busy that they opened up a second screen, and showed it for the rest of the week, because of the demand. It was shown at four separate cinemas and all were busy. So my guess is that it could and would work.


The Living Angel / is Regenerating
The Living Angel / is Regenerating

Time  travel has always fascinated me, but I never really give too much thought to the mechanics of time travel in film or television. I ignore any plot holes I may see, because I console myself with the fact that know one knows how time travel,paradox's and general timely whimeyness would work in reality, for know time travel is just a story, so I just accept the story as it is told.


YouveBeenDuplicated
YouveBeenDuplicated

If we were going to have a Doctor Who movie at this point, I'd want it to basically be Night of the Doctor expanded: Eight trying to have his normal, wacky adventures while of time and space is dying around him.

RandalWorkman
RandalWorkman

A dalek stand alone film. The Doctor never shows up. The Nation Estate would love the idea and fans would go in droves to see it. 

The Last Son of Gallifrey
The Last Son of Gallifrey

Hey you forgot the an entire film franchise based on time travel, Terminator.

I think you are spot on about Prisoner of Azkaban.

Meanwhile Star Trek had other problems, they needed to reboot the whole thing while retaining the original continuity. Bearing in mind that they know there won't be  a tv series to pick up where it left off. the way it uses time travel is one-off unlike doctor who which is a regualr basis.

To me edge of tomorrow feels like playing a video game with infinite saves and the time travel in that film was not true time travel in any way.

Meanwhile days of future past follows a comic book story, one which the movie follows quite faithfully I have to say. However comic books are weird, if there wasn't a comic story for it to build its foundation, I don't see how other time travel films can follow this concept.

As for doctor who's place in cinema, i dont think the marvel way is the right way to go, the amount of creative restrictions is huge, just look at agent of shield, all the good stuff had to held off until the release of captain america: winter soldier. I think bbc might be better off doing movies with past doctors where it will not interfere with current TV storyline. It also give us an excuse to see the previous doctors in action again.

sontaran17
sontaran17

@AlexanderofAlzarius -- The Cushing Movies (However fantastic) arnt canon or owned by Doctor Who... so they don't really count unfortunetley! Neither do episodes screened in Cinema's. Doctor Who actually does do its very best to avoid paradoxes - we as a fanbase are told they just don't work in accordance to the laws of time... They do sometimes appear in the plot of many episodes but they are never embraced or deemed without consequence 


sontaran17
sontaran17

@MJJ The Question posed is "Does Time Travel Work on the Big Screen" looking to the future. To find examples chosen particularly to fit the question you'll see it was addressed here: "Today, we’ve chosen four of the most successful time travel films of the last decade"   --- plus an article comparing Back to the Future and DW was written late last year




 Notsosmartguy Will Kill the Moon
Notsosmartguy Will Kill the Moon

@Polyphase with all due respect the X-Men actually have a very rich and confusing history with time travel in the comics. In fact multiple universe in the marvel multiverse were created solely because of the X-Men's time shenanigans. Hell nearly half their roster is made up of time travelling mutants. 

Mark McCullough
Mark McCullough

@Ollie Walton HarrodThe question was used as an introduction into what we wanted to discuss in the article, yes the answer was obvious, but that does not make it a silly question.


I know multiple versions of the protagonists has occurred in Doctor Who before (I am a fan of the show funny enough) but the context of the statement and the article itself is for the big screen. My perception of the situation is that there are only a few, ( If this is wrong my apologies) which does make it rather unique.

If you had read the section on Day properly you will find my comment about perfect pacing applies only to the main Gallifrey plot, I have actually said that Zygon sub plot was neglected most likely due to the gap in run time compared with a normal film.

Moffat's excuse as you call it does the exact same as what HP does, show that events are the same regardless of how they are attempted to be changed. The Doctor's amnesia made him forget he had saved the planet, thus he believed he had destroyed it when he never had. Anything thereafter occurs as normal and is hardly a plot hole.

With Edge, I really don't see the similarities between what I proposed and Blink. As for A Christmas Carol, isn't it a fan favourite? And on the topic of basing it on other peoples work, don't forget about Moffat's Sherlock series.

Connor is far from the first person I have seen say the film is good, if you want to see more take a look at some of the reviews online of you want to see more positive opinions. This article like the vast majority of all articles I have seen on this site are opinion pieces, if you disagree with something fine, but Connor is entitled to describe the film how he sees fit.

Finally there is a huge difference between a two part TV story and Movie, the biggest of which being the budget available. The potential of an outside company making a spin-off Doctor Who Movie could only add to the franchise. (Provided it conforms to canon)

I apologise for attacking your comment like this, but it read to me as a negative rant because you aren't a fan of the movies chosen in the article.

sontaran17
sontaran17

@DaftDalek  I dont think "The Inforarium" actually is a time loop... but rather Memory Manipulation but I could be wrong

NewWho2012
NewWho2012

@RhonDOH is getting Six Seasons and a Movie!! Knew this would come up somewhere. Mrs Brown is just funny, I can't explain why I guess it's just the Irish humour and because I'm part Irish I can relate to it, because Father Ted was funny and so is Mrs Brown because it is similar. LotsOfPlanetsHaveANorth is right here because humour is subjective, I mean I like many British comedies such as One Foot in the Grave and The Royle Family and even the Chuckle Brothers, but I can't stand American sitcoms as I barely crack a smile. Sorry if I offend any fans of the Big Bang Theory but I think that's the most unfunny show ever made. There's my opinion and I guess Mrs Brown is appealing because it has verbal and physical comedy, maybe the swearing doesn't appeal to everyone, but I do sure enjoy it.

MrRazza, WANTED: A Lord of Thyme
MrRazza, WANTED: A Lord of Thyme

@RhonDOH is getting Six Seasons and a Movie!! To be honest I often think the same of many American comedies... There may be something a cultural divide here.


I think many people miss the point of Mrs Brown. It isn't meant to be a deep, intelligent comedy, it's some light (and sweary) relief. It's basically the BBC going "Here, have a laugh at something simple". The point isn't really the drag either, it often adds to the bizarreness of it all but it isn't the main source of the jokes. There's a fair bit of sarcasm, unsubtle innuendo and outright rudeness, all of which I find are often particularly British areas of comedy. I think it often serves as something of a guilty pleasure for its viewers, it's certainly one of mine.

Did it deserve to beat Doctor Who? Probably not, but often public opinion can be a bit bemusing 

ProfWimsey
ProfWimsey

@RandalWorkman Fans might, but not audiences.  Remember, even franchises like Harry Potter needed multiple non-readers for every reader to make the audiences big enough to keep the series going.  And only a small fraction of readers were actually "fans" of the sort that would, say, post on Harry Potter discussions analogous to this one.  After all, if fans alone were enough, then Doctor Who wouldn't have been on hiatus from 1989 - 2005.

The Living Angel / is Regenerating
The Living Angel / is Regenerating

@The Last Son of Gallifrey I hadn't thought of that, but yes maybe they could sort of reboot it and have one story from each Doctor, obviously recasting Doctors 1-7, and then 8-13 (including War) could be played McGann,Hurt,Ecclestone,Tennant,Smith and Capaldi. 

It could pick up on any major plot points over the years, but also add a layer that links a hidden story between each film.



ahunter8056
ahunter8056

@ThatGuywiththeBowTie They did at mine. It was truly wonderful. Everyone laughing at every joke, surprise at Tom Baker's appearance. Wonderful.

MrRazza, WANTED: A Lord of Thyme
MrRazza, WANTED: A Lord of Thyme

@The Living Angel @NewWho2012 @RhonDOH is getting Six Seasons and a Movie!! The fact is that comedy will always be subjective, even while I think Mrs Brown is quite typically British/Irish humour (there is a lot of overlap), it does not limit it geographically. There will always be a group of people who doesn't like something.

Personally, I'm in what is apparently a very tiny minority in that I absolutely hate Friends, but that's not just because I'm British.

Mark McCullough
Mark McCullough

I find it's the timing of the jokes, the unexpectedness of some of them. But also the balance of Comedy with what is usually a heart warming story.