Doctor Who
- Billie Piper to be in Doctor Who movie, not series?
Film
- Val Kilmer to be a felon
- Serenity 2?
- Bradley Whitford and Neve Campbell to star in global warming mini-series
- Stephen Fry and Lily Allen to star in Jane Austen spoof?
Web TV
- Two new wildlife channels for Joost
British TV
- Sooty's up for sale
- Reunion planned for Grange Hill's 30th anniversary
- Ofcom launches public consultation on Sky's plans for not-FreeView
- Jericho's Lennie James joins C4 knife drama
- ITV to save The Prisoner remake
- Jonas Armstrong's been down the gym, apparently
- Peter Serafinowicz talks about his new show
- Dragon's Den is back on the 15th
- Tribute acts to vie for Las Vegas contract
US TV
- Studio 60's Steven Weber joins Brothers and Sisters
- FX commissions pilot for Tim Robbins' Possible Side Effects
- Ally Sheedy joins Kyle XY. Nice casting!
- More star cameos for 30 Rock
- Jericho's second season is completed
- The Daily Show's Lewis Black gets his own show
- Pushing Daisies gets good ratings
Subscribe to the daily news by RSS or email, or follow me on Twitter for breaking updates
October 5, 2007 | Reply
"Billie Piper to be in Doctor Who movie, not series?"
This makes more sense to me. There's got to be a *reason* for Billie/Rose to come back (big film spectacular!), and there's got to be a *reason* for making a film (Rose is back!). It fits better.
October 5, 2007 | Reply
Also, if they were to put her back into her box... sorry, alternative dimension... at the end of the film, they wouldn't have to worry about repercussions in the TV series.
Still don't think it'll happen, though. I can't imagine it making enough on a US release. I know there are DW fans in the US, but there aren't that many of them. I'm prepared to eat my words, though.
October 5, 2007 | Reply
It is starting to sound almost plausible, isn't it? But unless Billie's been lenient with the truth in her Belle de Jour interviews (not totally impossible), I don't think it's true.
Plus Stu's right about the US market. Although, crazy talk though it is, do you think BBC Films might be thinking about making British films for British people, without worrying about the overseas market?
October 5, 2007 | Reply
How odd - last week I got a Disney Treasures collection of the first five episodes of 'The Mickey Mouse Club' from October, 1955. And in the second episode, Sooty made his American debut. That was my first exposure to the puppet and Mr. Corbett. And now, the next day, a story about him!
As for Billie and the US market, as big a 'Who' fan as I am, I know the realities of the US market. If the project ever makes it to fruition, it'll have a better chance here in the DVD market.
October 5, 2007 | Reply
Do you think BBC Films can afford to make British films for British people, without worrying about the overseas market? Especially when they're science fiction films with lots of effects shots? Cos I don't.
October 5, 2007 | Reply
I've two words to say to you: National Lottery. Have a look at the list of films (eg Circus) that didn't stand a hope in hell of getting more than a few million quid overseas, if that, but the National Lottery backed because they were British and intended for a British audience.
Then remember that filmmakers are far less concerned about theatre releases than they are about DVD sales - many now regard theatre releases as little more than promo spots for the DVD release. (I would refer you to my (somewhat edited for space) excellent recent article on the subject). Chuck in TV rights and you're sorted.
Overseas markets would be nice, but how many British films aimed that really have the overseas markets in mind even manage to get a decent theatrical release.
October 5, 2007 | Reply
Define what you mean by British film. The 2000s have seen a fair few releases which arguably fall into that category and do well, but they often have US involvement on a financial level; eg. Heyday films + Yankee dollar = Harry Potter.
October 5, 2007 | Reply
No. Shan't. If none of the awards ceremonies, etc, can do it to anyone's satisfaction, I don't see why I should. I'd much prefer to wave my hands and say 'British films'.
Besides, those that have US involvement tend to have the overseas market in mind at every part of the foodchain (theatre, rental, sellthrough, cable, TV rights, VoD, etc), so are the complete opposite of the films I'm talking about, surely - those that got lottery funding to create British films for a British audience? Unless you're suggesting the US backers were pleasantly surprised to see how well the Harry Potter films did when they'd only be aiming to please UK multiplex visitors, in which case I'd have to disagree with you.
October 6, 2007 | Reply
Oh, I've missed a step in the conversation, it seems ("British films for British people"). However, it seems to me that certain kinds of British films not especially directed towards overseas success (or connected to popular franchises) can do well if they're the kind of thing those running the US markets will take from us (certain horror films, posh totty like Gosford Park or that which contains Oscar-winners etc). Shaun of the Dead, anyone?