Poll: American doctor who?

Recommended Videos

Spaz91

New member
Oct 7, 2008
180
0
0
Fallen-Angel Risen-Demon said:
Should the Doctor stay British?
There's no Britain on Gallifrey.
antigodoflife said:
As The Eighth Doctor was already American and that nearly killed the franchise, I say it's best to keep The Doctor British... and for the love of God... the TARDIS can go EVERYWHERE.... stop going to 2005 - 2010 UK... it's boring.
The Eighth Doctor was a scouser.

interspark said:
look, we let them have captain jack harkness, what more do they want!? they can bugger off and watch friends and leave our doctor alone! (no offence anyone ;) )
Jack Harkness is from the Boeshane Peninsula and the actor is Scottish.

dastardly said:
We don't "steal." We incorporate things from as wide a variety of cultures as possible. In the end, each is less "pure" and "true to its original," but that's how we keep our bank on influences from growing as stale as some other nations (who foolishly believe that the exact same jokes the exact same way over and over is "tradition" instead of "stagnation.")
Using other cultures as the butt of your jokes is not incorporating.


dastardly said:
REGARDING DOCTOR WHO:

It's called localization, folks. One of the things that makes Doctor Who so cool to the BBC's loyal viewers is the, "Hey! I can relate to that!" factor. Also the "Hey! I've been to that place!" factor. People might not realize it all of the time, but it always plays a role in how easily someone relates to a show.
Oh yes, I'm British so I watch Dr Who because I can relate to it. I remember watching the Cave of the Androzani and going "Yeah, I just hate when I get Spectrox Toximia!". And I loved seeing Krop Tor, I went there on holiday when I were a lad. Also, you know, the whole Time Travel thing that we Brits are all so fond of using.



I think they should try and make their own version of Doctor Who. Its a win-win situation, either they unsurprisingly fuck it up and give us some comic value or they make a good programme.
 

Vohn_exel

Residential Idiot
Oct 24, 2008
1,357
0
0
oktalist said:
Sougo said:
Yes, the British have their own distinct charm.
Ughh... patronise much?

I know what you mean in the context of DW though, America could no more make Doctor Who than Britain could make Firefly.

Vohn_exel said:
an American version would give people like me the chance to view it fresh and from the start.
But you wouldn't be viewing DW fresh and from the start, you'd be viewing something completely different fresh and from the start.

Fallen-Angel Risen-Demon said:
The_root_of_all_evil said:
England has more in common with France than America.
Never ever say that near any of us british...
Root is British.

hcig said:
i love how the brits here are getting all defensive and insulting americans for no damn reason.
I think we have some pretty good damn reasons. ;)
Like I said, I don't think America should do a remake. However, that would be one of the reasons that it could be supported. I personally would prefer they just air the current show over here instead.
 

Booze Zombie

New member
Dec 8, 2007
7,416
0
0
Pararaptor said:
That was actually the idea behind the third Doctor Who film, a doctor more palatable for Americans.

And it failed fucking miserably.
Diluting something already popular to try and make it more popular?

Now, how could a great plan like that have possibly failed...
 

Booze Zombie

New member
Dec 8, 2007
7,416
0
0
Onyx Oblivion said:
We can try.

I mean, we ended up improving "The Office" and "Whose Line?"

But I doubt Doctor Who would be improved. Or even be good at all.
I swear that every episode of the American Whose Line, the host had this look on his face like he wanted to tell the audience to shut the fuck up, those people just kept screaming and clapping and sometimes it's before the joke is even finished...

Plus, the jokes seem a lot more plastic on the American version.

Both versions of The Office are unwatchable, in my opinion.
It's inexplicable to me how people enjoy that show.

"Hur, hur, hur! I'm awkward! I'M AWKWARD, LOOK AT ME!"
The show just runs with this painfully awkward character and beats you over the head with it.
 

Irony's Acolyte

Back from the Depths
Mar 9, 2010
3,636
0
0
I'm with practically everyone else here. I'd rather not see Doctor Who get Americanized. Leave it the way it is, because I'm sure us Americans would somehow screw it up. I'm fine with watching Doctor Who as a British show. Even if I get the new episodes on BBC America several days late. Plus if other Americans don't like it in its current form (British) then just don't watch it. No need to make a crappy version of it just to pull in viewers.
 

Dastardly

Imaginary Friend
Apr 19, 2010
2,420
0
0
Axolotl said:
You should have specified you were talking about national pop-culture and a general zeitgeist. Now how does that draw me to the show? I watch lots of programs not made in Britain and the different idiosyncrasies don't put me off, infact it helps increase the appeal. What's the point in simply rehashing another culture's work? It rarely ends up with a superior product and the time and effot could have gone into something original.
Congratualtions, Mr. Exception. It would behoove you to learn that exceptions don't defeat rules--they uphold them. The fact remains (and you can consult all of the TV ratings, and psychology studies, and sociology studies, etc., that you want) that populations (which are made of people) tend to tune in more dependably and in larger numbers to things that they can in some way directly relate to.

More folks who like pop music watch American Idol, while more people who like country music tuned in for Nashville Star. More people who enjoy cars watch "Pimp My Ride," while there are probably more science fans watching Mythbusters. It works on a small scale, and it works on a large scale. (Perhaps this is why so many American game shows and reality shows have been re-done overseas--because *gasp* those people would prefer to relate to folks from their OWN CULTURE, if given the choice)

None of this changes the fact that I don't see anyone over here begging for an American Doctor Who. It's not an idea that appears to have ANY origins on this side of the pond, but instead stinks of folks in other countries that THINK they understand Americans and American culture--or rather, they operate under the belief that Americans have no culture of their own and are always chomping at the bit to have some injected.

Now you see what you're saying here, this is just insulting and detrimental to your arguement. If Americans are so much more multicultural then why do British TV shows need to be redone for the US? Plenty of American TV shows are shown over here and the programs that are remade are generally game or quiz shows.
This is called "begging the question," and it's a classic logical fallacy. Your logic leads in a loop that circles back around to assume the premise. You are assuming that people re-make these shows because America is saying "We won't watch it otherwise!"

In order to prove that its true, you would have to OFFER all of those shows on network TV and see if folks watch. They don't get offered, though (and not everyone can afford the cable packages that include BBC America). The bigwigs that MAKE the shows don't trust the product enough to just send it to ABC, NBC, CBS, or FOX.

But it goes further than that. Many shows originated in other countries, but the folks that created the show wanted more. So, they tailored the show for a larger audience (and it just so happens that America is geographically and numerically a larger audience--wanna fight about it?) and sent it over. And then what happened?

THEY MADE MORE MONEY. Not only from Americans watching the show, but then because our companies turn around and distribute it GLOBALLY. You see, in entertainment, we export far more than we import (and we export far more than anyone else).

Other countries want a piece of that pie, so THEY CHOOSE to send their stuff over here. THAT'S when mainstream America is FINALLY asked "Hey, what do you think of this show?" Up to that point, no one is asking them--so for you to just assume they'd say "No" is just as ignorant as the folks that re-package the show for "our tastes."

Oh and before you start saying the British people do these thing looking for US money. No that's not what happens, for a start anyone with that mentality should not be allowed to work at the BBC. Secondly the majority of US remakes are proposed and funded by US studios.
No. Someone offers it TO a US studio, who then goes, "Well, let's see the pitch." Because that's how it even works with OUR shows. Studios don't throw ads in the paper saying, "HEY! Anyone out there want to write a comedy about a guy who's allergic to animals, but inherits a bunny shelter?" People approach THEM with the idea.

But no... you seem to think that the BBC somehow exists to what? Further the entertainment medium by taking a high-brow moral stance on what is or isn't good TV? No. They're in it for the money. And you make MORE money if you sell to MORE people--or, by extension, if you sell to someone ELSE that sells to even MORE people.

We have so many shows and movies on so many channels over here, we don't go looking across the world in large numbers begging for YOU to give us something worth watching. Those that like Doctor Who WATCH IT on BBC America or SyFy. That's right--they already watch it.

And you know what? I'm sure those people would ALSO watch an American version--either of just the Doctor, or the entire show. And they wouldn't automatically assume it's going to suck just because there was a change in the target culture, either. (That is, if it's written by people who UNDERSTAND American culture, not people who are parodying it from a state of ignorance).
 

Axolotl

New member
Feb 17, 2008
2,401
0
0
dastardly said:
But no... you seem to think that the BBC somehow exists to what? Further the entertainment medium by taking a high-brow moral stance on what is or isn't good TV? No. They're in it for the money. And you make MORE money if you sell to MORE people--or, by extension, if you sell to someone ELSE that sells to even MORE people.
And here is where I realised you don't have any fucking idea what you're talking about. This paragraph is so wrong. You just have no idea what you're talking about.
 

Dastardly

Imaginary Friend
Apr 19, 2010
2,420
0
0
Axolotl said:
=INSERT BULLSHIT DISMISSAL=
You're right. It's silly of me to think that businesses (and make no mistake that governments are businesses, and so government-run businesses are just departments of that business) are out to make money.

The BBC is a benevolent organization dedicated to the artists whose craft it disseminates to the art-hungry masses. It does so without regard for how those properties--nay, those ARTIFACTS--could be used to subsequently generate any form of income.

Actually, they're allergic to money. I forgot to mention this. I googled it, and it's completely true. There is, thus, no possible way that:

1) Anything they do could be motivated by the desire for more money.
2) Conversely, that anything that results in more money could be the product of their desires.
 

Spaz91

New member
Oct 7, 2008
180
0
0
^ The BBC gets its money from TV licensing. The BBC is the best thing to happen to television. They won't make more or less money if they make shitty programming as their fees are law so they simply broadcast what is best or most popular.

dastardly said:
The BBC is a benevolent organization dedicated to the artists whose craft it disseminates to the art-hungry masses.
Pretty much, its in their charter.
 

R3dF41c0n

New member
Feb 11, 2009
268
0
0
No, he needs to stay British. Seriously, what American hero would not use a gun (other than MacGyver)? Now that's a thought, MacGyver in a time machine with a Sonic Swiss Army Knife (why not, the Sonic Screwdriver only does everything!).

Now an American Torchwood would be a different story. Jack is suppose to be an American anyway so it wouldn't be too much of a stretch.
 

Axolotl

New member
Feb 17, 2008
2,401
0
0
dastardly said:
You're right. It's silly of me to think that businesses (and make no mistake that governments are businesses, and so government-run businesses are just departments of that business) are out to make money.
You really don't have a clue what you're talking about do you?

The purpose of the BBC is to Inform, Educate and Entertain. Thus anyoe who thinks it's primary goal is to make money should not be allowed to work for them. It's very simple and it's one of the reasons it produces such high quality work.
 

Dastardly

Imaginary Friend
Apr 19, 2010
2,420
0
0
Axolotl said:
The purpose of the BBC is to Inform, Educate and Entertain. Thus anyoe who thinks it's primary goal is to make money should not be allowed to work for them. It's very simple and it's one of the reasons it produces such high quality work.
Someone chugged the Kool-Aid.
 

Spaz91

New member
Oct 7, 2008
180
0
0
dastardly said:
Axolotl said:
The purpose of the BBC is to Inform, Educate and Entertain. Thus anyoe who thinks it's primary goal is to make money should not be allowed to work for them. It's very simple and it's one of the reasons it produces such high quality work.
Someone chugged the Kool-Aid.
Now that's a real bullshit dismissal.
 

Mariakitten

New member
Mar 29, 2010
591
0
0
I think it should stay British, it is and has always been a British show and it should stay that way.
 

DMonkey

New member
Nov 29, 2009
333
0
0
Speaking as an american fan of Doctor Who I would have to say no.
My reasons are probably a lil too purist for my liking, as I can't exactly pinpoint just why it would bother me, but it would seem wrong. But I can say that Doctor Who is the brits creation, and I think it would be a bit of a slap in the face if he went american to appeal to us (no need to, he already does). Would like to see more of Jack though. And not in the awful Torchwood BS either. Is it canceled yet? Seemed it would have been by now.
 

Dastardly

Imaginary Friend
Apr 19, 2010
2,420
0
0
Spaz91 said:
^ The BBC gets its money from TV licensing. The BBC is the best thing to happen to television. They won't make more or less money if they make shitty programming as their fees are law so they simply broadcast what is best or most popular.
Sorry, since I was mostly speaking with the other fella, maybe I didn't fully address your particular point as well as you would like. I'll try to do that now.

Inform, Educate, and Entertain...

1) INFORM

I'm assuming here we're talking about the News. The BBC gets its money from the government, however indirectly you try to paint it. As you so aptly stated, the fees are law. That means that the BBC has a responsibility to make Parliament happy, or at least certain members (and their ideologies).

In America, our news is paid for by the advertising media. Now, that means that TV ratings control what the news says and doesn't say... but it also means that the government has a lot less control over what the news feels comfortable saying. All news is slanted, it's just a question of "by whom." At least here, we can have thousands of different influences instead of Parliament. Also, the PEOPLE can voice what we do and do not like, not just the government figures who decide how much money gets put in next year.

To pretend as though BBC has some holy protection from bias and undue influence is to just have a ridiculously closed mind. What a news organization reports, and how they report it, are directly influenced by who signs their paychecks. If it's Pepsi, then they'll probably downplay negative stories about Pepsi. If it's Parliament, they're probably going to shy away from certain issues, or put others up front and in bolder type. Otherwise, they know full well the political wheels turning the whole operation could just as easily grind them under foot.

2) Educate

Everyone has educational programming, and it's all of pretty comparable quality. Of course, I find the "edutainment" on Discovery a lot more fun to watch and still just as informative as many documentaries. But this isn't a particular sticking point for me, so let's move on.

3) Entertain

Maybe, just maybe, no one in the BBC offices makes any money from entertainment-oriented shows ever at all. But the artists who create the shows certainly hope to, I'd bet. And the BBC works with a limited budget (as defined by the fees, as prescribed by law)... so maybe some of the artists wonder, "Hey, I wonder if I could make more money in a more privatized distribution setting?" and maybe some others even wonder, "Hey, could I do an even better job, with more set pieces and special effects and better equipment... if I tried this idea out somewhere I could get a bit more money from the producers?"

Bottom line, here's how shows work in America. Network has the airtime. Guy has the idea. Guy comes to the network and pitches the idea, and the network says "Yes" or "No." If the network says "Yes," they air it... until such time as they decide "No" on renewing the contract. Networks don't put out ads saying, "HEY! Anyone want to get some folks together for us and make a sci-fi action comedy?"

The network doesn't have to. It's got shows. It's up to the pitch-men to show them they've got something better. So, if there are talks about making an American "Doctor Who," those talks--and the whole idea, in fact--started over THERE, not here. Our networks will go for it, if they feel they can make a buck (just like SyFy did with the original).

So, all we're getting at here? Enough with this "evil America" bullshit. We don't go chasing shows nearly as often as people chase us down with them. People all over the world are itching for their own share of the American "entertainment dollar," and they're throwing ideas at it all the time. So quit blaming us for "stealing" your crap when really it might be that you need to complain to your OWN people for "prostituting" out their own ideas for a quick buck in another land.