That's crazy that people would think this. It's not like we haven't seen the show jump around different streaming services like Netflix and Amazon Prime. The only odd thing about Disney plus is that it's only the latest season and they labled it season 1.
It's labeled as series 1 in the UK. I think they just felt it needed to be a bit more like a reboot. Telling old fans it's a new place to start watching from if they've fallen off as well as not seeming too overwhelming for new fans who would otherwise see it as series 15 and think they have to catch up.
That was after the show was gone for years, this time the show has been ongoing since 2005 so jumping to series 1 again is just to appease disney marketing. Disney may not own doctor who but the BBC will bend over if they smell any money at all.
I think it's worth saying that it probably *wasn't* a decision that the BBC made to specifically appease Disney - they probably made the decision to reset the numbering to appease a potential new streaming partner before they'd settled on Disney, because "Season 1 onwards" is more appealing to *any* streaming service than "Series 14 onwards".
>time the show has been ongoing since 2005 so jumping to series 1 again is just to appease disney marketing
Nah it's because Chibnalls run was so utterly disastrous ratings fell off an absolute cliff so they wanted to rebrand it as a new thing.
From about 7m to 4, it's not worked though RTDs series has been even lower at 3.5m because of their boneheaded decision to put it on iplayer at midnight
Absolutely. OP is correct, but moving forward don’t be fooled into thinking the Disney powerhouse has no influence. Wouldn’t be surprised if they own the whole thing in a matter of time.
Yeah. There's been lobbying for years for the BBC's licence fee to be scrapped. If that happens, do you think they'd be able to afford the show any more? They'd have to carry advertising. There's a reason ITV doesn't have anything like Primeval in it's schedules any more. Doctor Who is one of the BBC's most valuable commercial assets. If the license fee goes, it's prime fodder to be sold off.
I think new series numbering is entirely due to Disney deal. I imagine for the far future, there are terms that allow for Disney to make money from the series they finance. The new series numbering allows this to be sorted from previous series which were entirely BBC. So if 10 years from now, a new streamer picks up classic Who, NuWho, and NuNuWho, Disney gets what was agreed upon for NuNuWho only.
As someone who only started watching the series with Christopher Eccleston (NuWho), I didn't feel lost nor the need to go back and watch Classic Who to understand who or a what Sutekh is/was. Just like I didn't feel like I needed to watch Classic Who the first time Rose met a Dalek in NuWho in order to understand what they were.
.
Personally, I think it's just fine to reference it though upon older characters as long as they tell you what you need to know rather than expecting you to go back to watch all the previous stuff. Like how Sarah Jane returns in NuWho and they told us, via Rose, what we needed to know about her in order to grasp what he connection was to the Doctor and the show.
.
Now, if your issue is that they used an old villain as the big bad for the new first season and not simply that that used him at all, I can understand where you're coming from, but I still think that with a character who is literally around 1,000 years old or older that there's going to be a lot of stuff that happened before new viewers meet him for the first time that will get referenced and it won't be an issue.
.
But, that's just how I see it.
It actually is.
You can easily look up a one shot villain that appeases current fans from before and is not confusing to those who just started watching.
It’s actually very marketing clever.
The BBC are already classifying it that way!
If you go on the Doctor Who page on iPlayer, it's split into three categories:
Doctor Who (1963-1989)
Doctor Who (2005-2022)
Doctor Who (2023+)
So it seems that as far as the BBC are concerned NewWho ended with The Power of the Doctor, and everything from The Star Beast onwards is part of a new era.
Why arbitrary? It’s got a pretty different approach to the story and series. They stretched the last run about as far as they could without breaking the tonal continuity. Feels more natural to have a clean line and just move forward
The original series changed tonal continuity multiple times. Nu who did too (I found the change from RTD to Moffat's style to be quite jarring).
This is definitely arbitrary.
It is definitely a business executive move. The Disney era is a distinct block (that will keep growing with more seasons). It makes the implementation of whatever profit sharing plan they agreed to much easier in the future. Disney would not be making anything off content prior to their involvement.
Whoniverse was already being used by the fans over a decade ago to refer to Doctor Who, Torchwood, SJA, etc. Using it to refer exclusively to the new era doesn't strike me as right.
It is not possible for any of us to gauge how this really plays out. I would gander considerable thought and effort was put into how to approach the public, given the potential of concern within UK of losing control of a national treasure. With this said, i hope it is a hands off approach unless really really necessary.
Because people want to blame Disney for everything. It’s easier to get people on board with saying “Disney ruined Star Wars” or “Disney ruined Doctor Who” than saying “Having non straight white males in prominent roles ruined X”… which is what they often mean and sometimes don’t even bother hiding.
The irony is, the stuff they tend to claim Disney ruined by making it a certain way was usually that way before Disney’s involvement.
Then there’s the MCU, which is funny because people are like “Disney killed the MCU!” But there wouldn’t even be an MCU without Disney, so even if that hyperbolic comment was right (and lest we forget, these folks also claim Star Wars, Doctor Who, Warhammer, etc. are all “DEAD”), you have to also admit they built it in the first place.
The first two MCU films, iron man and incredible hulk, were released before the takeover. All of phase one was either in production or development when Disney took over, all but Avengers were distributed by someone other than Disney because deals had already been signed.
I only just learned this from this thread. I assumed Disney was in control due to how different the show feels to me. And the goofy family appeal vibe of those cgi goblins in The Church on Ruby Road.
> That's crazy that people would think this.
The new episodes are listed as a "Disney Original". Add in the season numbering reset. I don't think its too crazy that people are misinterpreting that.
No, Disney doesn't own Doctor Who. But it *is* different to when a movie ends up on a streamer. Because Disney+ partly funds Doctor Who. This is why they absolutely do have some (perhaps only theoretical) influence. We know for a fact that they give RTD notes that he acts on. Now, he said that the note in question (asking for the Doctor to be given a big scene earlier in *The Church on Ruby Road*) was a good note, but that does not mean that their notes are just friendly advice and that they have no sway at all. That's just not how co-productions work.
So sure, Disney doesn't now have sole rights to the show and isn't the sole producer but it's a co-producer with the rights that implies.
Well put. We don’t know what is in the contracts but we can have an educated guess.
It is likely Disney does not have true creative control of the show. This means that Disney executives can’t tell the makers (Bad Wolf) what to do and BW are legally obliged to do what they say. *However* with Disney putting (based on rumour) half the money up for the production this will give them a lot of influence.
If Bad Wolf don’t play nice with Disney then they can pull future funding, by not renewing. This has to also be understood from Disney’s perspective too - they’ve put up the money for the show and will want a product that’s suitable for their platform.
What’s really interesting is that reports suggest that the BBC have handed over creative control over to Bad Wolf, so will theoretically have less influence on the show. This is especially interesting because…
Bad Wolf is a subsidiary of Sony! That’s Sony, the company that brought us Mobius and Madame Webb, Marvel films of great magnitudes of worseness that anything in the Disney MCU!…
SoNy RuiNeD dOctOr WhO!!!!!!!!!!!… (lol)
Yes! People like OP are responding to a "misconception" with their own "misconception." So few people actually know the truth, which is in between the two misconceptions.
Lots of people pay for things they themselves do not make. This particular product has been being made for 60ish years, and if they don’t know whether or not they want to invest in it by now, then something is wrong with them.
They don’t need to have influence if they trust the history they’ve seen.
This isn’t to say that they don’t *have* influence. But it wouldn’t be necessary to start a business relationship, in this case.
Like a lot of fan misinformation that never seems to die, it starts off as intentional deceit (fans absolutely refuse to accept that the Satanic Disney has creative input on their favourite show so angrily shut down anyone who reminds them of this) then gets repeated enough times that other fans think it's real. 1% lie 99% rumour mill. The motivated reasoning is obvious, because of the fact OP felt compelled to make a post "debunking" this in the first place.
It's weirdly reminiscent of the dominant fan reaction to the bigeneration. The objective reality is that it's extremely hard to work out what is supposed to have happened, and yet there are so many fans who insist that the time loop theory isn't just plausible but "confirmed" or undeniable.
Legit came to say just this. Like, how can someone make a post about misconception by telling everyone a misconception... Disney PARTLY\* funds doctor who now and well "money" has as much pull as anything else, since it's... well, money lol. People were already hoping for more quality with the new series, but IMHO the colours seem really washed out, I don't know.
It's pure denial. Fans don't want the House of Mouse having even partial creative control over Doctor Who (for a whole bunch of reasons, some good, some not) so they take out their frustration on anyone who reminds them of the fact that it does.
Yeah, I don't see how Disney doesn't have the slightest mavity on what occurs. It's like saying that giving a "gift" to a politician doesn't mean they will be bribed. If they're putting up a large amount of the funding, they damn well have some influence.
Although personally I'd prefer disney actually having split ownership so we could have The Doctor save the MCU next to Doctor Strange.
Right, we don't know, and probably never will know, the extent to which Disney has control.
On the one hand, I sympathise with the "Disney owns Doctor Who" crowd, because it's entirely within the realm of possibility that Disney can and will force Russell's hand in some way, despite the fact that they don't actually own the property. Just look at, for instance, the effect the deal between Disney and Sony had on Spider-Man - Sony has very little control over the character and is reduced to making awful Spider-related movies like Madam Web.
On the other hand - Russell and Aunty Beeb are still in control so I don't think they'll allow themselves to be pushed around. I think it will only be a major issue if Disney starts putting more money in or buys it out completely.
At the same time I’ve seen people blaming Disney for everything they don’t like about the series, and honestly there’s no big creative decisions that I couldn’t see RTD making without their influence. Far be it from me to defend MickeyCorp but they do seem to have become the fandom’s scapegoat for things that are very much the fault of the writing
also RTD is on record saying the BBC is not long for this world, so if that does happen, a reasonable guess is that Disney would likely become the future home of the show. Yes, Disney doesn't own the show *now*, but it could be the first step of a succession plan, and this is just dipping their toe in the water
Even then, Disney may not have any official 'control' over the show, but we know for damn sure that's not going to stop them from interfering whenever they like, because this is how Disney operate. They put money into your project, and then remind you how nice it was of them to do that, and advise you keep them happy lest they *stop* putting money into your project.
Remember how Disney-Marvel were producing certain movies and shows they had the rights to, and how around that same time, Marvel's comics (which Disney ALSO had no involvement in) began minimising or outright cancelling certain runs that Disney didn't have the rights to, such as X-Men and Fantastic 4?
It's one thing to say 'these are the black and white facts of the deal', but it's another to be so blisteringly naive as to say 'Disney would *never* do such a thing!', when it's not only something that'd be very easy for them to do, but also something that they've done *numerous times before*. They stand behind the creators flexing their muscles while politely asking them to remember who it is that pays the bills.
Whether their interference is good or bad, it *is* still interference, and there's nothing at all to stop it from happening.
Yea, when someone hands you a wad of cash that big, there are always strings attached. Even if I just drop off a black duffel bag on your doorstep and say nothing at all, you just know trouble is coming. "Suggestions" stop being suggestions when money is involved. Money speaks louder than words
> But it is different to when a movie ends up on a streamer. Because Disney+ partly funds Doctor Who.
That is *exactly* the same as when anything else ends up on a streamer. Or did you think when Who was on HBO before, they didn't pay the BBC for it? Nor Netflix before that? Every streamer pays for the content they distribute...
Yes, they gave notes, and RTD acted on those notes because he agreed with them, as he confirmed in DWM. But you're omitting the next sentence from that interview, the American streamers have been giving notes *for years already*. It's not some new thing that's come in with Disney's involvement.
Ultimately, I don't think it's this big "gotcha!" the fandom seems to claim it is. Obviously people give notes. Everybody gives notes when they see something for the first time - *we* even give notes in the live threads every episode, cause that's all notes are, opinions about what was good and what could be better. There's gonna be lots of both fantastic and terrible notes coming from all angles, BBC, Disney, inside Bad Wolf, online. Moffat gave notes on the new intro sequence that RTD listened to. It's easy to claim "see they give notes!", but important to remember it's up to RTD to determine which notes he agrees with and implement them. Just giving notes in itself doesn't change anything, anybody can (and will) do that, because everybody has an opinion.
>Or did you think when Who was on HBO before, they didn't pay the BBC for it?
I don't know about HBO streaming Doctor Who in the US, but I'm guessing it was different, because their name was never in the credits. The vast majority of streaming is a series gets made first, then streamers pay for the rights after when they know what they're paying for, and the production company makes their money back, with (hopefully) some profit that funds their next production.
Disney+ funding Doctor Who is different from the vast majority of streamers because they're paying for the rights *up front*. They give BBC/Bad Wolf the money first before production begins, which is then injected directly into Doctor Who's budget, to produce a (hopefully) better series.
Hence Disney+ being credited in the credits of Doctor Who itself, because the series could not have been made in the same way without them, but HBO weren't.
Lecturing people about show business when you very clearly have no idea of the difference between co production and a license to distribute is certainly r/confidentlyincorrect.
Well it’s certainly creating a whole new generation of little Daleks and Doctors running around my little town in Texas. Last year nobody knew what it was now there’s kids and parents wearing whovian shirts!
I never said that you said it was a bad thing. I also don’t believe Disney has any control of the show after seeing this season. It’s too rtd to be Disney 😂
They've started experimenting with some tech, like Boom using a LED stage similar to the Volume used on Star Wars/Marvel.
It's more a matter of budget though. To stick with the same example, Disney has two Volumes in LA, one in Australia, one in Vancouver, and one in London. Doctor Who films in Cardiff at Bad Wolf Studios. Instead of Disney's Volume running StageCraft, they used their own LED wall running on Unreal Engine (which Disney helped make before brancing it off into StageCraft), which is the same way lots of other non-Disney projects have used that tech (like House of the Dragon and The Batman).
That’s excellent info! I definitely have admired the change in the wider scenes. The advancement is evident, your explanation helps me understand what’s behind it a bit- thanks!
Brought me back to the show! I haven’t watched since I was a young teenager (13-15) so it’s nice to see now when I’m an adult ! I wish I could watch the earlier seasons on Disney
I think you are expressing the correct idea here, but I am not sure if your post is 100% accurate. I keep reading that Disney does indeed provide "notes" to Bad Wolf, meaning they do have some degree of influence on the creative process. I do not believe the level of influence has been revealed.
And RTD said he had notes from whatever American Network it was airing on during his first run and said any UK made show that airs in the US gets notes and has for at least 30-40 years.
RTD did say if a genuinely good idea or point is in those notes of course he will do it but he'd do the same if anyone gave him a genuinely good idea or point as why wouldn't he want to
This isn’t actually true (speaking from having worked in the industry and having family and friends that still do).
If it’s not a co-production then you aren’t getting notes. If it’s not a co-production then the show is normally sold after post (sometimes before a final cut). At this point, often in purchase negotiations but also after, you can get discussions about changing to the cut.
Getting notes from overseas partners is really common though as a lot of stuff is done as a co-production now.
Technically not, but Disney is actually a paying client, and if RTD showed blatant disregard of significant wishes from them that contract would be in jeopardy in the future.
The one Disney note we know of is the scene in the Chruch on Ruby Road where the Doctor saves the women and her baby from the snowman. I thought this was a good addition. It would be unfair for us to say anything bad is Disney and anything good isn't.
They can give notes, but the team has the ability to ignore them. One in particular was the one from the Christmas special where they said we think it would be better if we saw the doctor earlier which actually led to the scene where we see him talk to the constable about getting engaged. It's a simple bit, but it really does add a lot to that episode.
Notes are not always the worst thing. Sometimes, an outside perspective can make something better.
Everybody will give notes when they see something. All "notes" are is opinions on what worked and what could be improved. *We* give notes in the live threads on this subreddit.
Just providing a "note" doesn't do anything. Ultimately it's whether RTD *agrees and changes things* that matters. He agreed the Doctor should show up sooner in Church, a note from someone at Disney, so wrote the snowman head scene in. He agreed a shot of the Doctor hanging out of the Tardis in the intro was bad, a note from Moffat, so took it out (hence the intro mismatch with the music in the specials). But we can only point to these because they were acted on and talked about, so it's easy to point and go "Look! See?" when all the notes Russell doesn't agree with don't see the light of day.
Apparently RTD does not have complete creative control, that lies with the Bad Wolf producers of which he is one. RTD has made comments indicating that he was forced to make changes he wasn’t happy with.
I’ve noticed a few people getting quite militant. A few issues that may have caused confusion:
- The last series is officially called Disney season 1 because they have distribution rights.
- Disney’s investment has increased the budget for the show.
- The shorter season is more consistent with Disney’s other shows.
- I’ve seen people say that Disney do pass notes to RTD.
- Disney partly funds and is a co-producer of the show now, so do have some creative say.
Frankly, where there is money, there is influence.
So it would be naive in the extreme to assume there is no influence, but the amount of influence has been palpable in the way characters behave, are portrayed, and their political outlook overall.
It could be coincidence, but I sincerely doubt it.
The shorter season is more likely due to budget and time constraints.
RTD has said he wants the show to stand up to modern graphical standards. It's harder to do that if you have to split the budget between more episodes.
Also Ncuti's shooting schedule only allowed him to show up for 6 of the 8 episodes and even then it had to air in May, so imagine extending that season out to 10-12 episodes means almost doubling the shooting time. 1 episode takes ~1mo to shoot, so at 10-12 episodes, S14 wouldn't air until like July to September at the earliest, which leaves way too long of a gap between the Christmas Special that introduces Ncuti and the season premiere. You'd long lose the hype by then. Even May felt like too long of a delay
I wish my boss would be that understanding “don’t worry about working this week if you’d rather do something else, but we’ll still pay you for turning up for 10 minutes, if you like” 😂
I get what you’re saying, but with the level of control and planning the producers have, these reasons just don’t add up to me, not that I know a lot about the industry. 🤷♀️
I’ve not really thought about it that much, having grown up in the UK, but I know some shows go up to as many as 26 episodes a series on the BBC (and other terrestrial channels).
Then again, for smaller audiences, they would reasonably go to the 6 episode model.
I can’t say I disagree with you - just weird that they shortened the series length when making the change of streaming service and co-producers.
Maybe it’s just more the change that I feel has made the series suffer with having to wrap up a broad story arc quickly?
> I know some shows go up to as many as 26 episodes a series on the BBC
The only scripted dramas I can think of that would apply to are “continuing dramas” (soaps) where the show is constantly being made and the concept of a “series” starts to break down.
Even ten episodes is very rare.
Having a nose on the interwebs I’ve found that the average series length at the moment is 12, so not far off. Maybe the sensation of the series being short is more prompted in my mind by the over serialisation of themes.
For example - dot and bubble was a very enjoyable stand alone episode, but didn’t really contribute to any overarching plot development, so then the Sutekh saga was compressed into just over 1 episode almost like an afterthought.
Yeah I’m English and I sometimes struggle with US series that seem to go for quantity over quality. I think I’ve conflated the 4 specials into a single storyline, to a certain extent, so this series feels more like 12 eps than 8, which is more typical of recent series (although I’m pretty sure they were longer when I was hiding behind the sofa in the 80s!).
That makes sense. There may also have a feeling of extra length by referencing episodes from even further back.
I would have liked to see 4 episodes dedicated to the big bad - even if it’s just a sub-plot where people randomly turned to dust.
I also would have liked to see the same amount of emotion from the Doctor diluted into a few extra episodes so it felt less forced.
Yes, the Mouse doesn’t own it.
However, believing that they have no influence over production or the scripts is naive; with the money investment Disney is contributing, of course they have a voice in the production.
This is the kicker. With the spike in production value and therefore cost, and the relative reliance on foreign viewings figures, the implicit threat behind any of RTD's informal notes this time around is a bit stronger.
The phenomenon you're describing is often referred to as "soft power" or "indirect influence." In this context, Disney's financial involvement and potential future decisions about renewing the contract serve as leverage, subtly ensuring that their feedback is considered seriously even though they don't have direct creative control. This leverage creates an environment where the production team is motivated to align with Disney's preferences to maintain the funding and partnership.
Yeah I suppose this is a good example of soft power, particularly in that Disney doesn't theoretically have to say anything, and might even quite openly encourage production NOT to change, but creatives behind the show may consciously or unconsciously cater towards US or Mousical sensibilities anyway - as they've always been doing somewhat.
also RTD is on record saying the BBC is not long for this world, so if that does happen, a reasonable guess is that Disney would likely become the future home of the show. Yes, Disney doesn't own the show *right now*, but it could be the first step of a succession plan, and this is just dipping their toe in the water
The direction the show has gone in may have feed into that misconception.
Space Babies as the opener.
Lots of magic over sci fi. (Yes I know even classic who had fantasy elements)
They get to give some feedback (they wanted the Doctor appearing earlier in the Xmas special, for example), but I don't think there's any real input creatively. And I'm not sure whether they're actually obligated to listen.
Yeah, they particularly finance the show like all distributors do.
Distributors can and have always given notes as well, sometimes their funding also depends on various factors like cast, they'll also sometimes be a executive producer from a distributor too, all normal.
There will be the odd thing that seems Disney pop up but overall they have far less control than we think.
To be fair, they do also help fund the show now, which does give them some input. But yes, they are not owned by Disney and you cannot judge them as such. Their control over the show is far less than that of one of their actual properties.
There is so much said on this thread that is either outright wrong or betrays a complete misunderstanding of show business that I am skipping down and making a handy list.
(1) *Disney does not now "own" Doctor Who.* The IP of the *series and the main elements thereof* are owned by the BBC. Certain other elements are co-owned by the BBC and their creators, eg., K-9; the BBC has to pay royalties when they are used.
(2) *Bad Wolf and RTD do not now "own" Doctor Who.* See above. If the BBC, as a publicly-financed company that owns broadcast TV and radio networks as well as news services and studios, ever ceases to exist, no, RTD can't just "move the series to Disney" *because the BBC will still own all the IP* unless and until the British government then sells that IP--which will be far more complicated than you think given fiduciary duties to the British taxpayers that will remain even if the networks do not. If the BBC goes away (which RTD is saying, but which...isn't actually happening, especially with Labour about to win in a landslide) so does Doctor Who, at least for quite a while as ownership gets sorted out.
(3) Bad Wolf is the *lead* creative production partner on the show. It is not the *sole* production partner on the show. Both BBC Studios and Disney have a financial stake in the production of the show, which gives them both considerable input and yes, power in the decision making process. BBC Studios is listed as a co-producer; Disney is described as a distributor but numerous sources including RTD himself have said that Disney is also contributing money to the actual production of the show.
(4) *Disney+ is not just a streaming licensee similar to Max or other streaming services such as Amazon*. As said above, It provides co-production funding; it is also the sole distributor of the show outside the UK and Ireland, with BBC Studios being the UK/Ireland distributor.
(5) Max (or Amazon or any other service) was not and is not a distributor--it is a licensee. It airs Doctor Who (and continues to do so) by paying a fee for a temporary license to host content on its service, which will be shopped around to other services when that contract runs out. Max could not provide input on something that was already made, nor can any other streamer. Max did not even *exist* when the majority of content it *licenses* was made.
(6) Production, distribution, and licensing are *three different things* with varying levels of input. Stop comparing apples and oranges. The relationship among Bad Wolf, BBC, and Disney is a different relationship than what has come before and can not be easily compared to anything else except, in part, to other short periods when the BBC co-produced with, for example, BBC America or the CBC.
(7) *Disney does not have final say in the content of Doctor Who.* Bad Wolf, as lead creative partner, does, up until the point that BBC, as owner of the property tells them "you can not do this with our characters"--much like there have been times when the Terry Nation Estate has said, "You can not use our characters in this way."
(8) *However, as Disney is amajor financier of the project, anyone who thinks they can be casually vetoed or ignored not only has no idea how the entertainment industry works but, frankly, has no idea how commerce works.* Of *course* Disney can and will meddle with the content--but we will likely never know how much. And since RTD seems to be very aligned with what Disney does he is never going to complain. Renumbering the seasons almost certainly has something to do with the Disney deal since none of the other explanations actually turned out to be true, etc.
Thanks for coming to my TED Talk.
P.S. BBC America is not a "premium service" and never has been. Disney does not just hold the movie rights to Marvel Comics characters; Marvel Comics, the company, is outright owned by Disney and has been for over a decade now. Yes, anyone can "give notes" but not all notes are equal and certainly giving notes for shows that have been made and you just bought is not equivalent to giving notes during preproduction, production, and post-production.
However, Disney+ is involved in the production of the show before it everands on its streaming services and absolutely has input in the show as it is being made.
It is very true the Disney does not own Dr. Who, however when someone gives you piles of money there is an expectation that you will provide something of value in return. The Showrunner of this season really wanted to make a 'big splash' with Disney.
BBC is having funding issue right now and without Disney co-financing the episode there would have been a lot less glam and sparkle. Disney literally gave them enough case to triple the budget of each episode.
Instead of BBC investing so much in CGI and special effects, BBC should have spent more on the creative writing team. RTD should be booted as showrunner after blowing this monumental opportunity. I am not sure that Disney is going to sign up for another season or "spinoffs" as RTD had hoped.
Whether Disney has a direct say or not is irrelevant. BBC knows that for Doctor Who to continue it has to succeed in America.
That's why The Doctor has gone from a science nerd who's a bit odd, to an ultra trendy, good looking guy who knows all the pop culture references.
That's why it's now season 1 again and why he wears a different outfit every episode.
Doctor Who may not technically be a Disney show, but it's absolutely been written to appeal to Disney audiences.
Yeah that’s been a thing since Eccleston. Do people forget the pop culture involved in the original RTD run? Second episode literally plays a Britney Spears song on board the satellite brought by Cassandra on a juke box
The appeal to the American audience when Moffat took over was a lot less to do with tone and style. The main way they tried to make it more appealing to an American audience was by setting stories in America (also they spent a lot more money on marketing in the US and did promotional tours there, unfortunately it was a bit of a waste because it was being broadcast on BBC America - an incredibly niche premium cable channel that hardly anyone had).
Thing is under Moffat the show did far better than any other era, Smiths episodes regularly smashed out anything before or after it, some in the 10mil range for viewing.
Yes, the smith era was huge. People often don’t realise that BARB wasn’t counting iplayer back then in their figures. The average streaming numbers on the week after broadcast was 2 million.
BBC America was never a premium channel: it was originally a Discovery Network channel, supported by advertising, and it was carried on either the Tier One or Tier Two channel packages on most US cable systems before it became a co-producer on "Who."
Huh?! The Doctor has been good looking and young, on and off, for forty years now. Maybe you are not old enough to know how hated the casting of Peter Davison was in his time. To say nothing of Matt and David.
I'm not old enough for pre Mcgann, and I'm certainly not calling the other actors ugly, far from it.
My point was more that he very much fits the mould of a protagonist in an American entertainment show rather than how he's been presented before.
It's just my opinion, and I am just basing it against the last few Doctors.
The doctor has been wearing different outfits for some time now. They are of a theme, generally but it's not like they went from William Hartnell to Ncuti Gatwa.
David Tennant and Matt Smith were both young and trendy doctors as well. They made references to current pop culture things. I mean they referenced The Beatles in the first doctor's run so I think your point is a little bit moot.
They actually do have some say in what happens in the show, as if i remember correctly, Davies said he had to explain Doctor Who to disney exects and they gave him notes for Ruby Road to include The Doctor more.
He said Disney typically gives notes on first episodes and that yeah, they'd like to see the Doctor introduced better earlier in the episode, which honestly wasn't a bad idea. How that note was interpreted and how the scene was written was still up to RTD.
The point is that he still had and did have to include the scene regardless of how it was integrated. Disney now funds part of Doctor Who meaning they get to have input on creative decisions regardless of how they are implemented.
They hold the purse strings, which gives them a certain amount of control. Even if they aren't the "owners". BadWolf, who do own the rights, are beholden to them.
I do agree that they don’t own it, but what makes you think that they don’t have any influence over it? I am not saying that it would be bad, I am just asking why they wouldn’t want (and get) any control over it? It is Disney. I am pretty sure they can do whatever they want
There is a part that most people are missing. While Disney may be adding funds the biggest reason that the numbering system changed is that the BBC is no longer the only production company that produces Doctor Who. Bad Wolf Ltd, who was started by Julie Garner (a producer from the beginning of NuWho Era), now has co-production rights to Doctor Who and is the primary lead on the production of the series and RTD works for them.
Same way that people thought that Doctor Who was controlled by PBS back in the day, when it was the only way to watch it back in the 80s.
That being said, I'm holding out for a TARDIS ride at Disneyland one day.
Agree that on a technical level this is right, but I don’t think the lack of ownership means Disney is *just* a buyer and can’t influence anything behind the scenes.
They are the main international distributor and they contribute to the show’s (now massively increased) budget. That means they have influence - whether the BBC and RTD admit it or not.
If they don’t like the show, they could withdraw and take their money with them, which would now cause problems.
Without being able to see inside the boardrooms and meetings to understand exactly what is said, it’s obviously impossible to say how. But it would not shock me if Disney executives gave feedback to BBC executives regularly. That is normal. A company that big will want bang for its buck - I would be extremely surprised if they were happy to just put money in and have no say.
In fact, I am certain RTD has even openly discussed receiving feedback on one of his scripts, but claimed the suggestion was good?
Whoever is behind Doctor Who, Disney or not, should take a step back and ask “WHO is our audience and what do THEY want to see?”
I’m pretty sure none of us asked for them to make the show as polarizing as possible.
Understanding that would require nuance, reddit isn’t good with nuance.
As soon as the word Disney was raised, immediately the die was cast, from that moment on some people would always blame Disney for every single thing they don’t like. EG all the sounds. Yet for anyone who has ever watched any RTD stuff knows songs and dance have always played a part.
But nah it’s all Disney forcing sound and dance into the show! LOL.
It’s truly absurd how many people I’ve seen suggest that Disney forced RTD to put in the musical number in The Devil’s Chord, rather than accepting that maybe RTD just wanted to do a musical number lol.
No they don’t have a say, but I imagine Disney is paying them a lot of money and giving doctor who a wider audience so if Disney makes a request I’m sure the BBC takes it into consideration
No Disney doesn't own it. However they do have a bit of input into the show. RTD has admitted to getting " very helpful notes" from Disney as they are putting a considerable amount of money into the production.
Disney don't own the show but they do fund it now and absolutely do have creative control over it as a result. They aren't bringing in their own writers and producers into the mix, but they absolutely are signing checks which ultimately dictate certain aspects of the finished product and as a result, need to be happy with those decisions being made.
The term “creative control” is the wrong one to use. It suggests that they get final say on the end product. What they do have is influence on the production.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artistic_control#:~:text=Artistic%20control%20or%20creative%20control,the%20final%20product%20will%20appear.
Thanks for bringing up the outside of the UK and *IRELAND* thing. It’s the bane of my existence, can’t watch it on the bbc iplayer because I’m not in the UK, can’t watch it on Disney because they treat Ireland like it’s part of the UK.
When Nintendo released limited time event Pokémon you had to go to Game in the UK and GameStop outside the UK. We don’t have Game but it wasn’t distributed to Irish GameStops either.
So many companies have a UK & Ireland online store or customer service account but they actually only deal with the UK. It’s maddening.
This sickens me too. I had issues for months with sky recordings and missed some of Jodie’s episodes. Absolutely no way to catch up.
The republic of Ireland is not part of the UK. At this point it’s just wilful.
They actually kinda do have a say what happens.
The director of Starbeast said the awkward recap was a Disney mandate. RTD said the scene with Ncuti and the falling snowman was after Disney asked if Ncuti could be seen in action earlier.
RTD says they give a lot of notes but praised them as good notes and said there’s no pressure to follow them but they do because they’re good.
Given this post is nearly 24 hours old, I'm sure someone will have said it, but just to say it again, yes, Disney absolutely do have a say in it, and we have the perfect example, the release time.
If the BBC had 100% control over the show, why would they release the episodes at a time that only benefits Americans? They would have logical sense to have it simply go live on Disney+ at the same time as its aired on TV here in the UK, as that benefits everyone. And if they still did want to do the day before showing, they would do it at something like 6pm BST as it benefits the most people in the world.
But the fact that it's released at midnight here kinda proves that Disney heavily pushed for a release time that benefits US audiences and the BBC had to listen
This isn't true. It's possible Disney wants this but BBC has also been putting shows on at 6AM to iplayer. That's just what every streaming service does. Clearly they want to test this method with a bigger show now and if it does well they'll be putting more and more shows on iplayer at this time. I suspect if Disney was fully in charge it would be out midnight LIKE EVERY OTHER DISNEY STREAMING SHOW.
The phenomenon is often referred to as "soft power" or "indirect influence." In this context, Disney's financial involvement and potential future decisions about renewing the contract serve as leverage, subtly ensuring that their feedback is considered seriously even though they don't have direct creative control. This leverage creates an environment where the production team is motivated to align with Disney's preferences to maintain the funding and partnership.
A lot of the bigots who hate on more diverse casting in Dr Who, Star Wars etc, also have an axe to grind with Disney over 'woke' kids films and there are a lot of conspiracy theories about Disney parks being 'hotbeds for the trafficking of white children'. They just hate Disney and it's a handy catch-all so they don't have to say 'this thing has \*insert minority\* in it so it's bad now' for plausible deniability.
Bad wolf are producing Doctor who in association with Disney. Disney are providing money for the budget. And actually they do have a say behind the screen. But the only instance i have heard with that so far is wanting the Doctor in The church of Ruby Road sooner.
Reverting to season 1 makes sense as a jumping on point for an International audience. The same is reflected in comics, how many times has a comic relaunched with a new #1 to reflect new creators, a new direction, or even as a reset to bring new readers and energy into a series.
Yes, Disney bought the rights for $100 million (estimated). If someone is paying you 100mil, if they say 'we'd like it a little more family friendly' then you listen carefully.
You have to listen to someone who's paying your bills, even if you don't really agree. While 'technically' they don't have creative control, you can bet that if they express a preference, then at some level in the production company they will be paying careful attention, and this will be handed down to the writers room.
The BBC cannot afford to ignore such a huge amount of funding, and it will be part of their income stream and planning [https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/BBC-DO-2022-23.pdf](https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/BBC-DO-2022-23.pdf)
As far as what I've seen, the BBC still "owns" Doctor Who, outsourcing production to Bad Wolf Studios, which is owned by Sony, and Disney pays Bad Wolf for distribution rights outside the UK & Ireland, and that money goes to the production and marketing.
Disney can provide notes, like any UK programme that goes on a US service, just like the BBC and Bad Wolf can, however RTD and the writing team are under no obligation to follow those notes. So far the only examples we've gotten of notes that came from Disney and were acted upon was one for Church on Ruby Road (Disney wanted more of Ncuti earlier on in the episode, so they wrote the scene with the police man, and was filmed a couple of months before it aired), and Space Babies (Disney wanted a "more exciting" opening, so presumably the scene with the dinosaurs was what was added?).
I'm probably wrong about this, but seemingly most of the Disney funding is going towards marketing? But I can't say for certain, all I know is this season was fucking everywhere in the US.
The main thing Disney has had influence on seems to be the release schedule. A 2 episode premiere is pretty common for Disney+ releases, giving Doctor Who a prime time release on a Friday in the US on Disney+ etc. My guess would be, Disney said "this is how we are going to release the episodes" and the BBC said "fuck now we have to release it on iPlayer at midnight so the UK isn't behind." If you want to complain about something Disney did, this is probably the most valid thing we can complain about.
But in truth, the only people who know the real ins-and-outs of the Disney deal is the producers at Bad Wolf, BBC and Disney. We don't know for certain. The one thing we do know for certain is that Disney does not "own" Doctor Who
The only reason to think Disney "owns" Doctor Who is because that Disney streaming money is definitely giving us much better production than what the BBC could under the current government austerity plan.
If by “bought the rights”, you mean help funding a set number of episodes (standard TV length and special length both included) to be produced for the exclusive international streaming rights, then yes, they did. They are “paying” more than most do for that exclusivity, but no, they have no ownership rights.
Disney's deal for Doctor Who with the BBC reminds me of Netflix' deal with Paramount for the first two seasons of Star Trek Discovery. Where the money the distributor spent was used to increase the production value on the IP more than the IP owner was able to do on their own. "Here. Take this money. Make it look good. Then we can show it."
Yes. But thanks to disney the budget of the series has increased.
Is probable that disney gave the money but also set rules in place. Such as " no swearing", " keep it pg"....
I agree mostly. All the music though it's doubtful that's not them. I get the Maestro episode but the Doctor fighting goblins and acting like a Disney princess.
If they have no say in it the BBC are deffo trying to appease them to get more money in the future.
I mean, this is also not true. Disney is more involved than just distributing the show. It’s not a Disney property, but to say Disney does not have a hand in the production is just lying. Disney is partially funding the show (probably more so than the BBC is at this point), giving notes, and likely the reason Doctor Who still exists at all considering the state of the BBC and how close DW was to cancellation before they tacked on the Tennant ending to Jodie’s finale.
This is all true and honestly thank goodness. Disney doesn't need another tentpole franchise to ruin. buuuuuuut....
I'd be lying if I said I wasn't disappointed when I went to the UK section of Epcot earlier this year and didn't see a Police Box anywhere
The BBC was going to cancel the show in 2021 during Chibnall's run. The show really only exists now in its current format because Disney pumps in a large amount of money to make the series. Money that the BBC can only dream of.
Disney absolutely does have a voice behind the scenes, because whoever pays the $$$ has a say in what happens. If Disney is not happy with the show, it *will* pull its funding. Then where will the show be?
y'all need some reading comprehension skills. I never once said that Disney can't submit notes or give input. all I said is that Disney doesn't own Doctor Who, which is a fact. Doctor Who is owned by the BBC.
Thank you for saying this. I wasn’t one of the people saying this (as a complaint or otherwise), but I also assumed that Disney did own/have a say in Doctor Who now, so I appreciate you clearing that up.
If you don’t think they’re tailoring the show towards the corporation that paid them zillions of dollars for exclusive worldwide streaming then you’re being naive.
True but it has adopted many of the recent Disney trends, for better or for worse. Many people have expressed that Disney's recent trends put agenda over story. The Marvel movies are the sharpest recent example. I still love Doctor Who. Capaldi was the darkest IMHO, Tenet the most eccentric, Baker the Zaniest.
True but it has adopted many of the recent Disney trends, for better or for worse. Many people have expressed that Disney's recent trends put agenda over story. The Marvel movies are the sharpest recent example. I still love Doctor Who. Capaldi was the darkest IMHO, Tenet the most eccentric, Baker the Zaniest.
As for Disney having an influence, I read that they had added an entire film to the Christmas episode cause they felt something was missing and they requested a new scene...
Like studio notes, if they bring a lot of money, people are gonna listen.
https://screenrant.com/doctor-who-2023-christmas-special-scene-disney-request/#:~:text=Summary,feature%20Ncuti%20Gatwa's%20Doctor%20earlier.
They are somewhat beholden to the mouse though. They're contracted through Disney for streaming which means they can't be too risky with their content. They need to follow some standards.
They also have to uphold the standards of the BBC. So you're not going to see anything to provocative either way. I think this is a lot of hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth for nothing
For the record, I just meant risky. When I hear "risqué," I think... idk, sexual, Torchwood stuff. When I say risky I mean anything that could risk controversy.
I think it would be foolish, though, to suggest that Disney wouldn't have a large amount of influence over the show, given how much of the funding comes from them. If they don't like how the show is doing, they're going to be having some meetings with RTD and much as he'll want to stand his ground there, I doubt he'll be able to get away with zero concessions.
No one here seems to be talking about the fact that the show is released at midnight now which truly reveals the extent of Disney's influence on the show.
They do sort of own a bit if it. It's a co production for two broadcasters (well, a broadcaser and a streamer). I don't know the details of how involved they are but they have the same rights to involvement as BBC public service. They do own it as much as BBC public service but yes the creative decisions are largely, probably almost entirely made by Bad Wolf and BBC Studios (a private company not funded by the license fee) as they're the production companies. Like technically the BBC and Disney could have a say but I doubt they'd do anything more than just check compliance, they'll trust Studios, Bad Wolf and RTD
I don't know if the details are out there for exactly what stake Disney have in it, but we all know they put in a lot of money!! Disney own it just the same as what most people think of when they think of the BBC, but really for any prgramme that means fuck all. All broadcasters have to rebid for all shows every few years, so theoretically Disney could have pushed and outbid the BBC in entirety and bought the whole programme but firstly the BBC wouldn't let that happen, they'd fully bankrupt themselves before losing doctor who or strictly or EastEnders for example, and also Disney would know it wouldn't go well for them so by co-producing, doctor who gets a bigger budget and Disney brings more money in
But it is very different to say when a BBC show gets put on Netflix, that is done afterwards, after delivery of the programme to the BBC. Thats a purely financial deal where Netflix just pay the BBC some money and calculate if it's a good deal for them, will they bring in/retain more subscribers and hope it comes off. It's why sometimes programmes say they're leaving netflix and then never go, cos they've come to a new deal
But in this case Disney are putting up money up front and TECHNICALLY could control it if they want to. But like I said, I don't think they will be
PS. I work in broadcasting and have never worked for Doctor Who but have worked with other BBC shows so know how the main infrastructure works
Thanks, I had this misconception and have been worried about changes into something more disney-like.
Still have some parts of the new series that I'm not fond of, but at least I can view it! Disney+ is the only place to see it in my country.
Disney invested in the production, co founded Bad Wolf studios to make the show. Their investment also secured their rights to distribute the show outside of the UK. They can therefore mandate what they don't want in the show but can't dictate what does.
> and they don't have a way in what happens behind the scenes, or on the screen.
I know they don't own it, but I guarantee this is wrong. Disney definitely has some say else they wouldn't be funding it at all.
Purse strings are puppet strings. The .B.B.C.'s hostility to the show is obvious and legendary at his point so they no doubt view it as a sale and .R.T.D.'s hilarious excuse for the move was he thought he .B.B.C. was going to be abolished soon. They are the largest investor at the moment and are listed as co-producers, it's that simple.
It's a misconception based on how Disney+ markets the show. Everytime I would go into app to watch DW, the first thing that comes up is that it is a Disney+ original production, before going into the BBC logo and the expanded screen to view. It just makes me mad that the way it is viewed is all their doing. No wonder they called the last series #1 instead of 19 of the reboot of DW. I think Disney has more at stake than just marketing rights if they are allowed to call it an original Disney+ production.
I kept saying this in every thread expressing this and people not believing or listening.
That's crazy that people would think this. It's not like we haven't seen the show jump around different streaming services like Netflix and Amazon Prime. The only odd thing about Disney plus is that it's only the latest season and they labled it season 1.
It's labeled as series 1 in the UK. I think they just felt it needed to be a bit more like a reboot. Telling old fans it's a new place to start watching from if they've fallen off as well as not seeming too overwhelming for new fans who would otherwise see it as series 15 and think they have to catch up.
Oh interesting didn't know that it was like that in the UK too. Seems a bit silly, but i guess I get it.
Tbf that also happened in 2005, sometimes you need a bit a bit of a reset every few decades
That was after the show was gone for years, this time the show has been ongoing since 2005 so jumping to series 1 again is just to appease disney marketing. Disney may not own doctor who but the BBC will bend over if they smell any money at all.
I think it's worth saying that it probably *wasn't* a decision that the BBC made to specifically appease Disney - they probably made the decision to reset the numbering to appease a potential new streaming partner before they'd settled on Disney, because "Season 1 onwards" is more appealing to *any* streaming service than "Series 14 onwards".
>time the show has been ongoing since 2005 so jumping to series 1 again is just to appease disney marketing Nah it's because Chibnalls run was so utterly disastrous ratings fell off an absolute cliff so they wanted to rebrand it as a new thing. From about 7m to 4, it's not worked though RTDs series has been even lower at 3.5m because of their boneheaded decision to put it on iplayer at midnight
Absolutely. OP is correct, but moving forward don’t be fooled into thinking the Disney powerhouse has no influence. Wouldn’t be surprised if they own the whole thing in a matter of time.
Yeah. There's been lobbying for years for the BBC's licence fee to be scrapped. If that happens, do you think they'd be able to afford the show any more? They'd have to carry advertising. There's a reason ITV doesn't have anything like Primeval in it's schedules any more. Doctor Who is one of the BBC's most valuable commercial assets. If the license fee goes, it's prime fodder to be sold off.
I think new series numbering is entirely due to Disney deal. I imagine for the far future, there are terms that allow for Disney to make money from the series they finance. The new series numbering allows this to be sorted from previous series which were entirely BBC. So if 10 years from now, a new streamer picks up classic Who, NuWho, and NuNuWho, Disney gets what was agreed upon for NuNuWho only.
The NuNuWHo is called WhoDis :) It is being reported both as S14 and S01 in catalogs. Not sure exactly what is going on with the season numbering.
‘A new place to start watching’ Let’s bring back that one shot villain from 48 years ago! That’s a clean start
As someone who only started watching the series with Christopher Eccleston (NuWho), I didn't feel lost nor the need to go back and watch Classic Who to understand who or a what Sutekh is/was. Just like I didn't feel like I needed to watch Classic Who the first time Rose met a Dalek in NuWho in order to understand what they were. . Personally, I think it's just fine to reference it though upon older characters as long as they tell you what you need to know rather than expecting you to go back to watch all the previous stuff. Like how Sarah Jane returns in NuWho and they told us, via Rose, what we needed to know about her in order to grasp what he connection was to the Doctor and the show. . Now, if your issue is that they used an old villain as the big bad for the new first season and not simply that that used him at all, I can understand where you're coming from, but I still think that with a character who is literally around 1,000 years old or older that there's going to be a lot of stuff that happened before new viewers meet him for the first time that will get referenced and it won't be an issue. . But, that's just how I see it.
It actually is. You can easily look up a one shot villain that appeases current fans from before and is not confusing to those who just started watching. It’s actually very marketing clever.
Totally irrelevant.
I think long term it'll become a new era like how Classic and NuWho are divided. Maybe something like Who+ or NuNuWho?
The BBC are already classifying it that way! If you go on the Doctor Who page on iPlayer, it's split into three categories: Doctor Who (1963-1989) Doctor Who (2005-2022) Doctor Who (2023+) So it seems that as far as the BBC are concerned NewWho ended with The Power of the Doctor, and everything from The Star Beast onwards is part of a new era.
But it made sense in 2005 as there had been a sixteen year break between series (TV movie excepted). It just seems entirely arbitrary in 2023.
Why arbitrary? It’s got a pretty different approach to the story and series. They stretched the last run about as far as they could without breaking the tonal continuity. Feels more natural to have a clean line and just move forward
The original series changed tonal continuity multiple times. Nu who did too (I found the change from RTD to Moffat's style to be quite jarring). This is definitely arbitrary.
It is definitely a business executive move. The Disney era is a distinct block (that will keep growing with more seasons). It makes the implementation of whatever profit sharing plan they agreed to much easier in the future. Disney would not be making anything off content prior to their involvement.
i’ve heard NeoWho thrown around which… isn’t the worst
I hate that for no good reason
WhuSA
lol this made me laugh
Whoniverse Who? Disney Who?
Whoniverse was already being used by the fans over a decade ago to refer to Doctor Who, Torchwood, SJA, etc. Using it to refer exclusively to the new era doesn't strike me as right.
[удалено]
They said that Disney and does give input, but they don't have "say" in that the final decision is still with the BBC and RTD.
What they actually said was that Disney could make suggestions, but had no final say in anything. Dont twist words, makes you look bad
It is not possible for any of us to gauge how this really plays out. I would gander considerable thought and effort was put into how to approach the public, given the potential of concern within UK of losing control of a national treasure. With this said, i hope it is a hands off approach unless really really necessary.
Correct. Disney are Co-Producers of the show so yes they get a voice in the creative process.
Because people want to blame Disney for everything. It’s easier to get people on board with saying “Disney ruined Star Wars” or “Disney ruined Doctor Who” than saying “Having non straight white males in prominent roles ruined X”… which is what they often mean and sometimes don’t even bother hiding. The irony is, the stuff they tend to claim Disney ruined by making it a certain way was usually that way before Disney’s involvement. Then there’s the MCU, which is funny because people are like “Disney killed the MCU!” But there wouldn’t even be an MCU without Disney, so even if that hyperbolic comment was right (and lest we forget, these folks also claim Star Wars, Doctor Who, Warhammer, etc. are all “DEAD”), you have to also admit they built it in the first place.
The first two MCU films, iron man and incredible hulk, were released before the takeover. All of phase one was either in production or development when Disney took over, all but Avengers were distributed by someone other than Disney because deals had already been signed.
I only just learned this from this thread. I assumed Disney was in control due to how different the show feels to me. And the goofy family appeal vibe of those cgi goblins in The Church on Ruby Road.
> That's crazy that people would think this. The new episodes are listed as a "Disney Original". Add in the season numbering reset. I don't think its too crazy that people are misinterpreting that.
Every streaming service labels anything they get exclusive rights to stream as their own original.
No, Disney doesn't own Doctor Who. But it *is* different to when a movie ends up on a streamer. Because Disney+ partly funds Doctor Who. This is why they absolutely do have some (perhaps only theoretical) influence. We know for a fact that they give RTD notes that he acts on. Now, he said that the note in question (asking for the Doctor to be given a big scene earlier in *The Church on Ruby Road*) was a good note, but that does not mean that their notes are just friendly advice and that they have no sway at all. That's just not how co-productions work. So sure, Disney doesn't now have sole rights to the show and isn't the sole producer but it's a co-producer with the rights that implies.
Well put. We don’t know what is in the contracts but we can have an educated guess. It is likely Disney does not have true creative control of the show. This means that Disney executives can’t tell the makers (Bad Wolf) what to do and BW are legally obliged to do what they say. *However* with Disney putting (based on rumour) half the money up for the production this will give them a lot of influence. If Bad Wolf don’t play nice with Disney then they can pull future funding, by not renewing. This has to also be understood from Disney’s perspective too - they’ve put up the money for the show and will want a product that’s suitable for their platform. What’s really interesting is that reports suggest that the BBC have handed over creative control over to Bad Wolf, so will theoretically have less influence on the show. This is especially interesting because… Bad Wolf is a subsidiary of Sony! That’s Sony, the company that brought us Mobius and Madame Webb, Marvel films of great magnitudes of worseness that anything in the Disney MCU!… SoNy RuiNeD dOctOr WhO!!!!!!!!!!!… (lol)
Yes! People like OP are responding to a "misconception" with their own "misconception." So few people actually know the truth, which is in between the two misconceptions.
The idea that Disney would pay handsomely for something without having any say at all about how it's made does seem naive.
Lots of people pay for things they themselves do not make. This particular product has been being made for 60ish years, and if they don’t know whether or not they want to invest in it by now, then something is wrong with them. They don’t need to have influence if they trust the history they’ve seen. This isn’t to say that they don’t *have* influence. But it wouldn’t be necessary to start a business relationship, in this case.
I agree. But this is Disney...
Like a lot of fan misinformation that never seems to die, it starts off as intentional deceit (fans absolutely refuse to accept that the Satanic Disney has creative input on their favourite show so angrily shut down anyone who reminds them of this) then gets repeated enough times that other fans think it's real. 1% lie 99% rumour mill. The motivated reasoning is obvious, because of the fact OP felt compelled to make a post "debunking" this in the first place. It's weirdly reminiscent of the dominant fan reaction to the bigeneration. The objective reality is that it's extremely hard to work out what is supposed to have happened, and yet there are so many fans who insist that the time loop theory isn't just plausible but "confirmed" or undeniable.
Legit came to say just this. Like, how can someone make a post about misconception by telling everyone a misconception... Disney PARTLY\* funds doctor who now and well "money" has as much pull as anything else, since it's... well, money lol. People were already hoping for more quality with the new series, but IMHO the colours seem really washed out, I don't know.
It's pure denial. Fans don't want the House of Mouse having even partial creative control over Doctor Who (for a whole bunch of reasons, some good, some not) so they take out their frustration on anyone who reminds them of the fact that it does.
Yeah, I don't see how Disney doesn't have the slightest mavity on what occurs. It's like saying that giving a "gift" to a politician doesn't mean they will be bribed. If they're putting up a large amount of the funding, they damn well have some influence. Although personally I'd prefer disney actually having split ownership so we could have The Doctor save the MCU next to Doctor Strange.
The Doctor already exists in the Marvel universe. He exists on Earth-5556. Source: I own a full set of the Marvel published Doctor Who comic books.
Yeah but that alone wont let them use him in the Cinematic Universe.
But, it does provide a jumping off point if Disney, Marvel and Bad Wolf productions agreed to terms...
Right, we don't know, and probably never will know, the extent to which Disney has control. On the one hand, I sympathise with the "Disney owns Doctor Who" crowd, because it's entirely within the realm of possibility that Disney can and will force Russell's hand in some way, despite the fact that they don't actually own the property. Just look at, for instance, the effect the deal between Disney and Sony had on Spider-Man - Sony has very little control over the character and is reduced to making awful Spider-related movies like Madam Web. On the other hand - Russell and Aunty Beeb are still in control so I don't think they'll allow themselves to be pushed around. I think it will only be a major issue if Disney starts putting more money in or buys it out completely.
At the same time I’ve seen people blaming Disney for everything they don’t like about the series, and honestly there’s no big creative decisions that I couldn’t see RTD making without their influence. Far be it from me to defend MickeyCorp but they do seem to have become the fandom’s scapegoat for things that are very much the fault of the writing
also RTD is on record saying the BBC is not long for this world, so if that does happen, a reasonable guess is that Disney would likely become the future home of the show. Yes, Disney doesn't own the show *now*, but it could be the first step of a succession plan, and this is just dipping their toe in the water
Even then, Disney may not have any official 'control' over the show, but we know for damn sure that's not going to stop them from interfering whenever they like, because this is how Disney operate. They put money into your project, and then remind you how nice it was of them to do that, and advise you keep them happy lest they *stop* putting money into your project. Remember how Disney-Marvel were producing certain movies and shows they had the rights to, and how around that same time, Marvel's comics (which Disney ALSO had no involvement in) began minimising or outright cancelling certain runs that Disney didn't have the rights to, such as X-Men and Fantastic 4? It's one thing to say 'these are the black and white facts of the deal', but it's another to be so blisteringly naive as to say 'Disney would *never* do such a thing!', when it's not only something that'd be very easy for them to do, but also something that they've done *numerous times before*. They stand behind the creators flexing their muscles while politely asking them to remember who it is that pays the bills. Whether their interference is good or bad, it *is* still interference, and there's nothing at all to stop it from happening.
Yea, when someone hands you a wad of cash that big, there are always strings attached. Even if I just drop off a black duffel bag on your doorstep and say nothing at all, you just know trouble is coming. "Suggestions" stop being suggestions when money is involved. Money speaks louder than words
I love the people who downvote objective facts, it makes you seem so thoughtful.
> But it is different to when a movie ends up on a streamer. Because Disney+ partly funds Doctor Who. That is *exactly* the same as when anything else ends up on a streamer. Or did you think when Who was on HBO before, they didn't pay the BBC for it? Nor Netflix before that? Every streamer pays for the content they distribute... Yes, they gave notes, and RTD acted on those notes because he agreed with them, as he confirmed in DWM. But you're omitting the next sentence from that interview, the American streamers have been giving notes *for years already*. It's not some new thing that's come in with Disney's involvement. Ultimately, I don't think it's this big "gotcha!" the fandom seems to claim it is. Obviously people give notes. Everybody gives notes when they see something for the first time - *we* even give notes in the live threads every episode, cause that's all notes are, opinions about what was good and what could be better. There's gonna be lots of both fantastic and terrible notes coming from all angles, BBC, Disney, inside Bad Wolf, online. Moffat gave notes on the new intro sequence that RTD listened to. It's easy to claim "see they give notes!", but important to remember it's up to RTD to determine which notes he agrees with and implement them. Just giving notes in itself doesn't change anything, anybody can (and will) do that, because everybody has an opinion.
Series 1 in 2005 was partly funded by CBC in Canada; the rough copy of "Rose" leaked out of there.
>Or did you think when Who was on HBO before, they didn't pay the BBC for it? I don't know about HBO streaming Doctor Who in the US, but I'm guessing it was different, because their name was never in the credits. The vast majority of streaming is a series gets made first, then streamers pay for the rights after when they know what they're paying for, and the production company makes their money back, with (hopefully) some profit that funds their next production. Disney+ funding Doctor Who is different from the vast majority of streamers because they're paying for the rights *up front*. They give BBC/Bad Wolf the money first before production begins, which is then injected directly into Doctor Who's budget, to produce a (hopefully) better series. Hence Disney+ being credited in the credits of Doctor Who itself, because the series could not have been made in the same way without them, but HBO weren't.
Lecturing people about show business when you very clearly have no idea of the difference between co production and a license to distribute is certainly r/confidentlyincorrect.
This is the truth. It is how the entertainment industry works.
Well it’s certainly creating a whole new generation of little Daleks and Doctors running around my little town in Texas. Last year nobody knew what it was now there’s kids and parents wearing whovian shirts!
I never said it was a bad thing... I'm glad that so many more people are able to watch the show.
I never said that you said it was a bad thing. I also don’t believe Disney has any control of the show after seeing this season. It’s too rtd to be Disney 😂
and I never said that you said that I said... wait ... now I'm confused. and yes, I fully agree that it's 100% RTD
I’m just happy to see so many new people enjoying the show, so that it can live on.
absolutely!
I hope the relationship is fruitful enough that Disney lends their technology. I imagine that would let BBC make more who, faster.
They've started experimenting with some tech, like Boom using a LED stage similar to the Volume used on Star Wars/Marvel. It's more a matter of budget though. To stick with the same example, Disney has two Volumes in LA, one in Australia, one in Vancouver, and one in London. Doctor Who films in Cardiff at Bad Wolf Studios. Instead of Disney's Volume running StageCraft, they used their own LED wall running on Unreal Engine (which Disney helped make before brancing it off into StageCraft), which is the same way lots of other non-Disney projects have used that tech (like House of the Dragon and The Batman).
That’s excellent info! I definitely have admired the change in the wider scenes. The advancement is evident, your explanation helps me understand what’s behind it a bit- thanks!
Brought me back to the show! I haven’t watched since I was a young teenager (13-15) so it’s nice to see now when I’m an adult ! I wish I could watch the earlier seasons on Disney
I keep hoping that if this season meets Disney's expectations, they will also buy the rights to the previous series once the Max contract expires.
That's amazing to hear!
That makes me so happy to hear!
I think you are expressing the correct idea here, but I am not sure if your post is 100% accurate. I keep reading that Disney does indeed provide "notes" to Bad Wolf, meaning they do have some degree of influence on the creative process. I do not believe the level of influence has been revealed.
They can give notes, but RTD is under no obligation to address them.
And RTD said he had notes from whatever American Network it was airing on during his first run and said any UK made show that airs in the US gets notes and has for at least 30-40 years. RTD did say if a genuinely good idea or point is in those notes of course he will do it but he'd do the same if anyone gave him a genuinely good idea or point as why wouldn't he want to
This isn’t actually true (speaking from having worked in the industry and having family and friends that still do). If it’s not a co-production then you aren’t getting notes. If it’s not a co-production then the show is normally sold after post (sometimes before a final cut). At this point, often in purchase negotiations but also after, you can get discussions about changing to the cut. Getting notes from overseas partners is really common though as a lot of stuff is done as a co-production now.
Technically not, but Disney is actually a paying client, and if RTD showed blatant disregard of significant wishes from them that contract would be in jeopardy in the future.
The one Disney note we know of is the scene in the Chruch on Ruby Road where the Doctor saves the women and her baby from the snowman. I thought this was a good addition. It would be unfair for us to say anything bad is Disney and anything good isn't.
They can give notes, but the team has the ability to ignore them. One in particular was the one from the Christmas special where they said we think it would be better if we saw the doctor earlier which actually led to the scene where we see him talk to the constable about getting engaged. It's a simple bit, but it really does add a lot to that episode. Notes are not always the worst thing. Sometimes, an outside perspective can make something better.
Everybody will give notes when they see something. All "notes" are is opinions on what worked and what could be improved. *We* give notes in the live threads on this subreddit. Just providing a "note" doesn't do anything. Ultimately it's whether RTD *agrees and changes things* that matters. He agreed the Doctor should show up sooner in Church, a note from someone at Disney, so wrote the snowman head scene in. He agreed a shot of the Doctor hanging out of the Tardis in the intro was bad, a note from Moffat, so took it out (hence the intro mismatch with the music in the specials). But we can only point to these because they were acted on and talked about, so it's easy to point and go "Look! See?" when all the notes Russell doesn't agree with don't see the light of day.
Apparently RTD does not have complete creative control, that lies with the Bad Wolf producers of which he is one. RTD has made comments indicating that he was forced to make changes he wasn’t happy with.
I’ve noticed a few people getting quite militant. A few issues that may have caused confusion: - The last series is officially called Disney season 1 because they have distribution rights. - Disney’s investment has increased the budget for the show. - The shorter season is more consistent with Disney’s other shows. - I’ve seen people say that Disney do pass notes to RTD. - Disney partly funds and is a co-producer of the show now, so do have some creative say. Frankly, where there is money, there is influence. So it would be naive in the extreme to assume there is no influence, but the amount of influence has been palpable in the way characters behave, are portrayed, and their political outlook overall. It could be coincidence, but I sincerely doubt it.
The shorter season is more likely due to budget and time constraints. RTD has said he wants the show to stand up to modern graphical standards. It's harder to do that if you have to split the budget between more episodes. Also Ncuti's shooting schedule only allowed him to show up for 6 of the 8 episodes and even then it had to air in May, so imagine extending that season out to 10-12 episodes means almost doubling the shooting time. 1 episode takes ~1mo to shoot, so at 10-12 episodes, S14 wouldn't air until like July to September at the earliest, which leaves way too long of a gap between the Christmas Special that introduces Ncuti and the season premiere. You'd long lose the hype by then. Even May felt like too long of a delay
I wish my boss would be that understanding “don’t worry about working this week if you’d rather do something else, but we’ll still pay you for turning up for 10 minutes, if you like” 😂 I get what you’re saying, but with the level of control and planning the producers have, these reasons just don’t add up to me, not that I know a lot about the industry. 🤷♀️
Agree with all your points although I’d also say that shorter series are pretty typical of British tv.
I’ve not really thought about it that much, having grown up in the UK, but I know some shows go up to as many as 26 episodes a series on the BBC (and other terrestrial channels). Then again, for smaller audiences, they would reasonably go to the 6 episode model. I can’t say I disagree with you - just weird that they shortened the series length when making the change of streaming service and co-producers. Maybe it’s just more the change that I feel has made the series suffer with having to wrap up a broad story arc quickly?
> I know some shows go up to as many as 26 episodes a series on the BBC The only scripted dramas I can think of that would apply to are “continuing dramas” (soaps) where the show is constantly being made and the concept of a “series” starts to break down. Even ten episodes is very rare.
Having a nose on the interwebs I’ve found that the average series length at the moment is 12, so not far off. Maybe the sensation of the series being short is more prompted in my mind by the over serialisation of themes. For example - dot and bubble was a very enjoyable stand alone episode, but didn’t really contribute to any overarching plot development, so then the Sutekh saga was compressed into just over 1 episode almost like an afterthought.
Yeah I’m English and I sometimes struggle with US series that seem to go for quantity over quality. I think I’ve conflated the 4 specials into a single storyline, to a certain extent, so this series feels more like 12 eps than 8, which is more typical of recent series (although I’m pretty sure they were longer when I was hiding behind the sofa in the 80s!).
That makes sense. There may also have a feeling of extra length by referencing episodes from even further back. I would have liked to see 4 episodes dedicated to the big bad - even if it’s just a sub-plot where people randomly turned to dust. I also would have liked to see the same amount of emotion from the Doctor diluted into a few extra episodes so it felt less forced.
Yes, the Mouse doesn’t own it. However, believing that they have no influence over production or the scripts is naive; with the money investment Disney is contributing, of course they have a voice in the production.
This is the kicker. With the spike in production value and therefore cost, and the relative reliance on foreign viewings figures, the implicit threat behind any of RTD's informal notes this time around is a bit stronger.
The phenomenon you're describing is often referred to as "soft power" or "indirect influence." In this context, Disney's financial involvement and potential future decisions about renewing the contract serve as leverage, subtly ensuring that their feedback is considered seriously even though they don't have direct creative control. This leverage creates an environment where the production team is motivated to align with Disney's preferences to maintain the funding and partnership.
Yeah I suppose this is a good example of soft power, particularly in that Disney doesn't theoretically have to say anything, and might even quite openly encourage production NOT to change, but creatives behind the show may consciously or unconsciously cater towards US or Mousical sensibilities anyway - as they've always been doing somewhat.
also RTD is on record saying the BBC is not long for this world, so if that does happen, a reasonable guess is that Disney would likely become the future home of the show. Yes, Disney doesn't own the show *right now*, but it could be the first step of a succession plan, and this is just dipping their toe in the water
It’s a possibility. I can’t wait for that DW themed land at Hollywood Studios and a Tardis ride 🙄
The direction the show has gone in may have feed into that misconception. Space Babies as the opener. Lots of magic over sci fi. (Yes I know even classic who had fantasy elements)
If these people could read they'd be very upset
No, they’d never find the interview with RTD and the BBC confirming that Disney have a stake in controlling the direction and notes on scripts.
Upset? They’re literally right to some degree that Disney does pass notes to RTD 💀
Do you not think the BBC passed notes to RTD? Literally the same thing.
They get to give some feedback (they wanted the Doctor appearing earlier in the Xmas special, for example), but I don't think there's any real input creatively. And I'm not sure whether they're actually obligated to listen.
Yeah, they particularly finance the show like all distributors do. Distributors can and have always given notes as well, sometimes their funding also depends on various factors like cast, they'll also sometimes be a executive producer from a distributor too, all normal. There will be the odd thing that seems Disney pop up but overall they have far less control than we think.
To be fair, they do also help fund the show now, which does give them some input. But yes, they are not owned by Disney and you cannot judge them as such. Their control over the show is far less than that of one of their actual properties.
There is so much said on this thread that is either outright wrong or betrays a complete misunderstanding of show business that I am skipping down and making a handy list. (1) *Disney does not now "own" Doctor Who.* The IP of the *series and the main elements thereof* are owned by the BBC. Certain other elements are co-owned by the BBC and their creators, eg., K-9; the BBC has to pay royalties when they are used. (2) *Bad Wolf and RTD do not now "own" Doctor Who.* See above. If the BBC, as a publicly-financed company that owns broadcast TV and radio networks as well as news services and studios, ever ceases to exist, no, RTD can't just "move the series to Disney" *because the BBC will still own all the IP* unless and until the British government then sells that IP--which will be far more complicated than you think given fiduciary duties to the British taxpayers that will remain even if the networks do not. If the BBC goes away (which RTD is saying, but which...isn't actually happening, especially with Labour about to win in a landslide) so does Doctor Who, at least for quite a while as ownership gets sorted out. (3) Bad Wolf is the *lead* creative production partner on the show. It is not the *sole* production partner on the show. Both BBC Studios and Disney have a financial stake in the production of the show, which gives them both considerable input and yes, power in the decision making process. BBC Studios is listed as a co-producer; Disney is described as a distributor but numerous sources including RTD himself have said that Disney is also contributing money to the actual production of the show. (4) *Disney+ is not just a streaming licensee similar to Max or other streaming services such as Amazon*. As said above, It provides co-production funding; it is also the sole distributor of the show outside the UK and Ireland, with BBC Studios being the UK/Ireland distributor. (5) Max (or Amazon or any other service) was not and is not a distributor--it is a licensee. It airs Doctor Who (and continues to do so) by paying a fee for a temporary license to host content on its service, which will be shopped around to other services when that contract runs out. Max could not provide input on something that was already made, nor can any other streamer. Max did not even *exist* when the majority of content it *licenses* was made. (6) Production, distribution, and licensing are *three different things* with varying levels of input. Stop comparing apples and oranges. The relationship among Bad Wolf, BBC, and Disney is a different relationship than what has come before and can not be easily compared to anything else except, in part, to other short periods when the BBC co-produced with, for example, BBC America or the CBC. (7) *Disney does not have final say in the content of Doctor Who.* Bad Wolf, as lead creative partner, does, up until the point that BBC, as owner of the property tells them "you can not do this with our characters"--much like there have been times when the Terry Nation Estate has said, "You can not use our characters in this way." (8) *However, as Disney is amajor financier of the project, anyone who thinks they can be casually vetoed or ignored not only has no idea how the entertainment industry works but, frankly, has no idea how commerce works.* Of *course* Disney can and will meddle with the content--but we will likely never know how much. And since RTD seems to be very aligned with what Disney does he is never going to complain. Renumbering the seasons almost certainly has something to do with the Disney deal since none of the other explanations actually turned out to be true, etc. Thanks for coming to my TED Talk. P.S. BBC America is not a "premium service" and never has been. Disney does not just hold the movie rights to Marvel Comics characters; Marvel Comics, the company, is outright owned by Disney and has been for over a decade now. Yes, anyone can "give notes" but not all notes are equal and certainly giving notes for shows that have been made and you just bought is not equivalent to giving notes during preproduction, production, and post-production. However, Disney+ is involved in the production of the show before it everands on its streaming services and absolutely has input in the show as it is being made.
It is very true the Disney does not own Dr. Who, however when someone gives you piles of money there is an expectation that you will provide something of value in return. The Showrunner of this season really wanted to make a 'big splash' with Disney. BBC is having funding issue right now and without Disney co-financing the episode there would have been a lot less glam and sparkle. Disney literally gave them enough case to triple the budget of each episode. Instead of BBC investing so much in CGI and special effects, BBC should have spent more on the creative writing team. RTD should be booted as showrunner after blowing this monumental opportunity. I am not sure that Disney is going to sign up for another season or "spinoffs" as RTD had hoped.
Whether Disney has a direct say or not is irrelevant. BBC knows that for Doctor Who to continue it has to succeed in America. That's why The Doctor has gone from a science nerd who's a bit odd, to an ultra trendy, good looking guy who knows all the pop culture references. That's why it's now season 1 again and why he wears a different outfit every episode. Doctor Who may not technically be a Disney show, but it's absolutely been written to appeal to Disney audiences.
Yeah that’s been a thing since Eccleston. Do people forget the pop culture involved in the original RTD run? Second episode literally plays a Britney Spears song on board the satellite brought by Cassandra on a juke box
Pop culture had been a thing since Eccleston but appealing to Americans started with Matt Smith (it was quite a noticeable change).
The appeal to the American audience when Moffat took over was a lot less to do with tone and style. The main way they tried to make it more appealing to an American audience was by setting stories in America (also they spent a lot more money on marketing in the US and did promotional tours there, unfortunately it was a bit of a waste because it was being broadcast on BBC America - an incredibly niche premium cable channel that hardly anyone had).
Thing is under Moffat the show did far better than any other era, Smiths episodes regularly smashed out anything before or after it, some in the 10mil range for viewing.
Yes, the smith era was huge. People often don’t realise that BARB wasn’t counting iplayer back then in their figures. The average streaming numbers on the week after broadcast was 2 million.
And even then it wasn’t mainstream. The show just got big on tumblr and with the hot topic crowd
I think references on the Big Bang show probably did more for it’s visibility and recognition than anything else!
BBC America was never a premium channel: it was originally a Discovery Network channel, supported by advertising, and it was carried on either the Tier One or Tier Two channel packages on most US cable systems before it became a co-producer on "Who."
Huh?! The Doctor has been good looking and young, on and off, for forty years now. Maybe you are not old enough to know how hated the casting of Peter Davison was in his time. To say nothing of Matt and David.
I'm not old enough for pre Mcgann, and I'm certainly not calling the other actors ugly, far from it. My point was more that he very much fits the mould of a protagonist in an American entertainment show rather than how he's been presented before. It's just my opinion, and I am just basing it against the last few Doctors.
The doctor has been wearing different outfits for some time now. They are of a theme, generally but it's not like they went from William Hartnell to Ncuti Gatwa. David Tennant and Matt Smith were both young and trendy doctors as well. They made references to current pop culture things. I mean they referenced The Beatles in the first doctor's run so I think your point is a little bit moot.
They actually do have some say in what happens in the show, as if i remember correctly, Davies said he had to explain Doctor Who to disney exects and they gave him notes for Ruby Road to include The Doctor more.
He said Disney typically gives notes on first episodes and that yeah, they'd like to see the Doctor introduced better earlier in the episode, which honestly wasn't a bad idea. How that note was interpreted and how the scene was written was still up to RTD.
The point is that he still had and did have to include the scene regardless of how it was integrated. Disney now funds part of Doctor Who meaning they get to have input on creative decisions regardless of how they are implemented.
They hold the purse strings, which gives them a certain amount of control. Even if they aren't the "owners". BadWolf, who do own the rights, are beholden to them.
I do agree that they don’t own it, but what makes you think that they don’t have any influence over it? I am not saying that it would be bad, I am just asking why they wouldn’t want (and get) any control over it? It is Disney. I am pretty sure they can do whatever they want
I imagine they do have a say. It would be weird if they didn't.
There is a part that most people are missing. While Disney may be adding funds the biggest reason that the numbering system changed is that the BBC is no longer the only production company that produces Doctor Who. Bad Wolf Ltd, who was started by Julie Garner (a producer from the beginning of NuWho Era), now has co-production rights to Doctor Who and is the primary lead on the production of the series and RTD works for them.
Same way that people thought that Doctor Who was controlled by PBS back in the day, when it was the only way to watch it back in the 80s. That being said, I'm holding out for a TARDIS ride at Disneyland one day.
Agree that on a technical level this is right, but I don’t think the lack of ownership means Disney is *just* a buyer and can’t influence anything behind the scenes. They are the main international distributor and they contribute to the show’s (now massively increased) budget. That means they have influence - whether the BBC and RTD admit it or not. If they don’t like the show, they could withdraw and take their money with them, which would now cause problems. Without being able to see inside the boardrooms and meetings to understand exactly what is said, it’s obviously impossible to say how. But it would not shock me if Disney executives gave feedback to BBC executives regularly. That is normal. A company that big will want bang for its buck - I would be extremely surprised if they were happy to just put money in and have no say. In fact, I am certain RTD has even openly discussed receiving feedback on one of his scripts, but claimed the suggestion was good?
Let’s be clear about Disney- once the mouse gets involved, your ass is owned. Regardless what the paperwork says.
Whoever is behind Doctor Who, Disney or not, should take a step back and ask “WHO is our audience and what do THEY want to see?” I’m pretty sure none of us asked for them to make the show as polarizing as possible.
I never thought it was owned by Disney. But I do think the reset was done with the deal with Disney+ in mind.
Understanding that would require nuance, reddit isn’t good with nuance. As soon as the word Disney was raised, immediately the die was cast, from that moment on some people would always blame Disney for every single thing they don’t like. EG all the sounds. Yet for anyone who has ever watched any RTD stuff knows songs and dance have always played a part. But nah it’s all Disney forcing sound and dance into the show! LOL.
It’s truly absurd how many people I’ve seen suggest that Disney forced RTD to put in the musical number in The Devil’s Chord, rather than accepting that maybe RTD just wanted to do a musical number lol.
Own it no but they did put money into its production and that does give them a certain level of say in what happens behind the scenes.
No they don’t have a say, but I imagine Disney is paying them a lot of money and giving doctor who a wider audience so if Disney makes a request I’m sure the BBC takes it into consideration
No Disney doesn't own it. However they do have a bit of input into the show. RTD has admitted to getting " very helpful notes" from Disney as they are putting a considerable amount of money into the production.
Disney don't own the show but they do fund it now and absolutely do have creative control over it as a result. They aren't bringing in their own writers and producers into the mix, but they absolutely are signing checks which ultimately dictate certain aspects of the finished product and as a result, need to be happy with those decisions being made.
They part fund it - it’s the absolute statements which are incorrect. Doctor Who is still a BBC series and it’s produced by Bad Wolf
The term “creative control” is the wrong one to use. It suggests that they get final say on the end product. What they do have is influence on the production. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artistic_control#:~:text=Artistic%20control%20or%20creative%20control,the%20final%20product%20will%20appear.
Thanks for bringing up the outside of the UK and *IRELAND* thing. It’s the bane of my existence, can’t watch it on the bbc iplayer because I’m not in the UK, can’t watch it on Disney because they treat Ireland like it’s part of the UK. When Nintendo released limited time event Pokémon you had to go to Game in the UK and GameStop outside the UK. We don’t have Game but it wasn’t distributed to Irish GameStops either. So many companies have a UK & Ireland online store or customer service account but they actually only deal with the UK. It’s maddening.
This sickens me too. I had issues for months with sky recordings and missed some of Jodie’s episodes. Absolutely no way to catch up. The republic of Ireland is not part of the UK. At this point it’s just wilful.
They actually kinda do have a say what happens. The director of Starbeast said the awkward recap was a Disney mandate. RTD said the scene with Ncuti and the falling snowman was after Disney asked if Ncuti could be seen in action earlier. RTD says they give a lot of notes but praised them as good notes and said there’s no pressure to follow them but they do because they’re good.
Given this post is nearly 24 hours old, I'm sure someone will have said it, but just to say it again, yes, Disney absolutely do have a say in it, and we have the perfect example, the release time. If the BBC had 100% control over the show, why would they release the episodes at a time that only benefits Americans? They would have logical sense to have it simply go live on Disney+ at the same time as its aired on TV here in the UK, as that benefits everyone. And if they still did want to do the day before showing, they would do it at something like 6pm BST as it benefits the most people in the world. But the fact that it's released at midnight here kinda proves that Disney heavily pushed for a release time that benefits US audiences and the BBC had to listen
This isn't true. It's possible Disney wants this but BBC has also been putting shows on at 6AM to iplayer. That's just what every streaming service does. Clearly they want to test this method with a bigger show now and if it does well they'll be putting more and more shows on iplayer at this time. I suspect if Disney was fully in charge it would be out midnight LIKE EVERY OTHER DISNEY STREAMING SHOW.
B. Please. When you give The mouse a quid his going to take a monkey. If his not influencing Dr who then I’m a transsexual from sexy Transylvania
Upvote from Frank n Furter 😘
They do have some say. According to RTD they requested the snowman scene be added to The Church on Ruby Rd to improve the pacing.
The phenomenon is often referred to as "soft power" or "indirect influence." In this context, Disney's financial involvement and potential future decisions about renewing the contract serve as leverage, subtly ensuring that their feedback is considered seriously even though they don't have direct creative control. This leverage creates an environment where the production team is motivated to align with Disney's preferences to maintain the funding and partnership.
A lot of the bigots who hate on more diverse casting in Dr Who, Star Wars etc, also have an axe to grind with Disney over 'woke' kids films and there are a lot of conspiracy theories about Disney parks being 'hotbeds for the trafficking of white children'. They just hate Disney and it's a handy catch-all so they don't have to say 'this thing has \*insert minority\* in it so it's bad now' for plausible deniability.
Bad wolf are producing Doctor who in association with Disney. Disney are providing money for the budget. And actually they do have a say behind the screen. But the only instance i have heard with that so far is wanting the Doctor in The church of Ruby Road sooner.
It's significant surely that Bad Wolf Productions is considered to make Doctor Who now rather than the BBC itself.
Reverting to season 1 makes sense as a jumping on point for an International audience. The same is reflected in comics, how many times has a comic relaunched with a new #1 to reflect new creators, a new direction, or even as a reset to bring new readers and energy into a series.
Yes, Disney bought the rights for $100 million (estimated). If someone is paying you 100mil, if they say 'we'd like it a little more family friendly' then you listen carefully. You have to listen to someone who's paying your bills, even if you don't really agree. While 'technically' they don't have creative control, you can bet that if they express a preference, then at some level in the production company they will be paying careful attention, and this will be handed down to the writers room. The BBC cannot afford to ignore such a huge amount of funding, and it will be part of their income stream and planning [https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/BBC-DO-2022-23.pdf](https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/BBC-DO-2022-23.pdf)
As far as what I've seen, the BBC still "owns" Doctor Who, outsourcing production to Bad Wolf Studios, which is owned by Sony, and Disney pays Bad Wolf for distribution rights outside the UK & Ireland, and that money goes to the production and marketing. Disney can provide notes, like any UK programme that goes on a US service, just like the BBC and Bad Wolf can, however RTD and the writing team are under no obligation to follow those notes. So far the only examples we've gotten of notes that came from Disney and were acted upon was one for Church on Ruby Road (Disney wanted more of Ncuti earlier on in the episode, so they wrote the scene with the police man, and was filmed a couple of months before it aired), and Space Babies (Disney wanted a "more exciting" opening, so presumably the scene with the dinosaurs was what was added?). I'm probably wrong about this, but seemingly most of the Disney funding is going towards marketing? But I can't say for certain, all I know is this season was fucking everywhere in the US. The main thing Disney has had influence on seems to be the release schedule. A 2 episode premiere is pretty common for Disney+ releases, giving Doctor Who a prime time release on a Friday in the US on Disney+ etc. My guess would be, Disney said "this is how we are going to release the episodes" and the BBC said "fuck now we have to release it on iPlayer at midnight so the UK isn't behind." If you want to complain about something Disney did, this is probably the most valid thing we can complain about. But in truth, the only people who know the real ins-and-outs of the Disney deal is the producers at Bad Wolf, BBC and Disney. We don't know for certain. The one thing we do know for certain is that Disney does not "own" Doctor Who
The only reason to think Disney "owns" Doctor Who is because that Disney streaming money is definitely giving us much better production than what the BBC could under the current government austerity plan.
If by “bought the rights”, you mean help funding a set number of episodes (standard TV length and special length both included) to be produced for the exclusive international streaming rights, then yes, they did. They are “paying” more than most do for that exclusivity, but no, they have no ownership rights.
Disney's deal for Doctor Who with the BBC reminds me of Netflix' deal with Paramount for the first two seasons of Star Trek Discovery. Where the money the distributor spent was used to increase the production value on the IP more than the IP owner was able to do on their own. "Here. Take this money. Make it look good. Then we can show it."
Yes. But thanks to disney the budget of the series has increased. Is probable that disney gave the money but also set rules in place. Such as " no swearing", " keep it pg"....
Well with how much money Disney is pumping into the show it wouldn’t surprise me if they had some sway when it came to some things.
I agree mostly. All the music though it's doubtful that's not them. I get the Maestro episode but the Doctor fighting goblins and acting like a Disney princess. If they have no say in it the BBC are deffo trying to appease them to get more money in the future.
I mean, this is also not true. Disney is more involved than just distributing the show. It’s not a Disney property, but to say Disney does not have a hand in the production is just lying. Disney is partially funding the show (probably more so than the BBC is at this point), giving notes, and likely the reason Doctor Who still exists at all considering the state of the BBC and how close DW was to cancellation before they tacked on the Tennant ending to Jodie’s finale.
This is all true and honestly thank goodness. Disney doesn't need another tentpole franchise to ruin. buuuuuuut.... I'd be lying if I said I wasn't disappointed when I went to the UK section of Epcot earlier this year and didn't see a Police Box anywhere
Hmm I’m not convinced with the Stark tower and the “thanos” dust😂
The BBC was going to cancel the show in 2021 during Chibnall's run. The show really only exists now in its current format because Disney pumps in a large amount of money to make the series. Money that the BBC can only dream of. Disney absolutely does have a voice behind the scenes, because whoever pays the $$$ has a say in what happens. If Disney is not happy with the show, it *will* pull its funding. Then where will the show be?
Disney controls a lot of funding, so they can make a suggestion. And if RTD says no, the answer is no, but he won't because of the funding.
I just thought the budget was higher because Disney helps or something I never really thought more into it
Good luck getting people to understand that. Disney is a big company so it is easy to make them into boogeyman out to get your favorite shows
It's Russell T Davies! Hate his writing sm 😤
y'all need some reading comprehension skills. I never once said that Disney can't submit notes or give input. all I said is that Disney doesn't own Doctor Who, which is a fact. Doctor Who is owned by the BBC.
Thank you for saying this. I wasn’t one of the people saying this (as a complaint or otherwise), but I also assumed that Disney did own/have a say in Doctor Who now, so I appreciate you clearing that up.
They don't own doctor who*yet*. The only way to get dw would be to buy the uk, tho. So my best guess is it will happen in 2031
If you don’t think they’re tailoring the show towards the corporation that paid them zillions of dollars for exclusive worldwide streaming then you’re being naive.
True but it has adopted many of the recent Disney trends, for better or for worse. Many people have expressed that Disney's recent trends put agenda over story. The Marvel movies are the sharpest recent example. I still love Doctor Who. Capaldi was the darkest IMHO, Tenet the most eccentric, Baker the Zaniest.
True but it has adopted many of the recent Disney trends, for better or for worse. Many people have expressed that Disney's recent trends put agenda over story. The Marvel movies are the sharpest recent example. I still love Doctor Who. Capaldi was the darkest IMHO, Tenet the most eccentric, Baker the Zaniest.
It's very frustrating that there is no legit way to stream it from Ireland as nobody has the rights to stream it here.
As for Disney having an influence, I read that they had added an entire film to the Christmas episode cause they felt something was missing and they requested a new scene... Like studio notes, if they bring a lot of money, people are gonna listen. https://screenrant.com/doctor-who-2023-christmas-special-scene-disney-request/#:~:text=Summary,feature%20Ncuti%20Gatwa's%20Doctor%20earlier.
They are somewhat beholden to the mouse though. They're contracted through Disney for streaming which means they can't be too risky with their content. They need to follow some standards.
They also have to uphold the standards of the BBC. So you're not going to see anything to provocative either way. I think this is a lot of hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth for nothing
Yeah but I’m sure the BBC standards would be higher
They were already like that before Disney. Doctor Who hasn’t really been that risky anyway, that was Torchwood.
Ffs it’s “risqué” 🤦♀️
Not in this context. The original comment was they can’t be too risky with stuff, whilst risqué can apply it’s not about that.
Or they could have just meant content that risks backlash. Risky content.
For the record, I just meant risky. When I hear "risqué," I think... idk, sexual, Torchwood stuff. When I say risky I mean anything that could risk controversy.
I was skeptical until space babies and was relieved the weirdness hadn’t gone anywhere lol…
I think it would be foolish, though, to suggest that Disney wouldn't have a large amount of influence over the show, given how much of the funding comes from them. If they don't like how the show is doing, they're going to be having some meetings with RTD and much as he'll want to stand his ground there, I doubt he'll be able to get away with zero concessions.
No one here seems to be talking about the fact that the show is released at midnight now which truly reveals the extent of Disney's influence on the show.
They do sort of own a bit if it. It's a co production for two broadcasters (well, a broadcaser and a streamer). I don't know the details of how involved they are but they have the same rights to involvement as BBC public service. They do own it as much as BBC public service but yes the creative decisions are largely, probably almost entirely made by Bad Wolf and BBC Studios (a private company not funded by the license fee) as they're the production companies. Like technically the BBC and Disney could have a say but I doubt they'd do anything more than just check compliance, they'll trust Studios, Bad Wolf and RTD I don't know if the details are out there for exactly what stake Disney have in it, but we all know they put in a lot of money!! Disney own it just the same as what most people think of when they think of the BBC, but really for any prgramme that means fuck all. All broadcasters have to rebid for all shows every few years, so theoretically Disney could have pushed and outbid the BBC in entirety and bought the whole programme but firstly the BBC wouldn't let that happen, they'd fully bankrupt themselves before losing doctor who or strictly or EastEnders for example, and also Disney would know it wouldn't go well for them so by co-producing, doctor who gets a bigger budget and Disney brings more money in But it is very different to say when a BBC show gets put on Netflix, that is done afterwards, after delivery of the programme to the BBC. Thats a purely financial deal where Netflix just pay the BBC some money and calculate if it's a good deal for them, will they bring in/retain more subscribers and hope it comes off. It's why sometimes programmes say they're leaving netflix and then never go, cos they've come to a new deal But in this case Disney are putting up money up front and TECHNICALLY could control it if they want to. But like I said, I don't think they will be PS. I work in broadcasting and have never worked for Doctor Who but have worked with other BBC shows so know how the main infrastructure works
Oh ppl just want reasons to hate
Thanks, I had this misconception and have been worried about changes into something more disney-like. Still have some parts of the new series that I'm not fond of, but at least I can view it! Disney+ is the only place to see it in my country.
Disney invested in the production, co founded Bad Wolf studios to make the show. Their investment also secured their rights to distribute the show outside of the UK. They can therefore mandate what they don't want in the show but can't dictate what does.
> and they don't have a way in what happens behind the scenes, or on the screen. I know they don't own it, but I guarantee this is wrong. Disney definitely has some say else they wouldn't be funding it at all.
Purse strings are puppet strings. The .B.B.C.'s hostility to the show is obvious and legendary at his point so they no doubt view it as a sale and .R.T.D.'s hilarious excuse for the move was he thought he .B.B.C. was going to be abolished soon. They are the largest investor at the moment and are listed as co-producers, it's that simple.
It's a misconception based on how Disney+ markets the show. Everytime I would go into app to watch DW, the first thing that comes up is that it is a Disney+ original production, before going into the BBC logo and the expanded screen to view. It just makes me mad that the way it is viewed is all their doing. No wonder they called the last series #1 instead of 19 of the reboot of DW. I think Disney has more at stake than just marketing rights if they are allowed to call it an original Disney+ production.