Rumour: Chibnall's Successor Already Hired/Working Alongside Him On Series 13

Moderators: _liam_, Mike

User avatar
MistressRani
Reactions:
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2015 10:11 am

Re: Rumour: Chibnall's Successor Already Hired/Working Alongside Him On Series 13

Post by MistressRani »

Rob Filth wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 10:39 pm
MistressRani wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 9:41 pm
They aren't my figures but from the user provided. And of course there are different ways of calculating them. I found these figures which aren't by season but by year which certainly indicate average figures well above 2 million: https://guide.doctorwhonews.net/info.php
More accurate, but infuriatingly not a season by season average, but an annual one.

However, it DOES still show that Jodies last series was the poorest performing one and her first series did not as perform as well as the Tennant era or Matt Smith's first series.

It's infuriating that it's by yearly average however, because Ecclestons one series does not perform at high as stated in this chart without Tennants first episode lumped in(as they have done here), it performs far less well than any Tennant series, it's possibly only a smidgen above Jodies first year which was very similar in ratings terms.(Huge audience for the first episode, audience drop off throughout the series)

Interesting that McGanns year outperforms every single year of NuWho bar 2009, don't you think?

The TVMovie was a "ratings disaster" and "failure" I think you once told me, didn't you Rani?

Well, if that's your measure of failure then what does that make the vast majority of NuWho then?
Oh I agree with you that the RTD era was incredibly successful as was Moffatt's with Smith. Looks like 'Fathead' knew what he was doing eh?

Statistically it's dodgy to compare a year with just a one off episode with those with 13 or 14 episodes. Similarly 2009 isn't a reliable year as these were only specials I believe and so like the McGone movie (which was a ratings disaster in the US) attracted a lot of casual viewers that can't be sustained over many weeks.
Rebutting Rob's ridiculous rantings since 2004
User avatar
Rawkus
Reactions:
Posts: 880
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2015 12:14 am

Re: Rumour: Chibnall's Successor Already Hired/Working Alongside Him On Series 13

Post by Rawkus »

RTD's era was able to sustain two successful spin-offs, Moffat gave us the ironically titled Class. Chibnall is just trying to turn the series into a spin-off of itself, weirdly.
User avatar
Rob Filth
Reactions:
Posts: 5046
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 11:28 pm

Re: Rumour: Chibnall's Successor Already Hired/Working Alongside Him On Series 13

Post by Rob Filth »

MistressRani wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 7:33 am
Oh I agree with you that the RTD era was incredibly successful as was Moffatt's with Smith. Looks like 'Fathead' knew what he was doing eh?

Statistically it's dodgy to compare a year with just a one off episode with those with 13 or 14 episodes. Similarly 2009 isn't a reliable year as these were only specials I believe and so like the McGone movie (which was a ratings disaster in the US) attracted a lot of casual viewers that can't be sustained over many weeks.
I'm not quite sure how you've made this evaluation when McGanns year was more successful in ratings terms than every single year of NuWho bar 2009?

If McGann was a "ratings disaster" then this surely means Fathead and Muppet are a ratings catastrophe which has leapt completely off the meter such is it's sheer level of cataclysmic failure?

Interesting that you're now waffling insensibly about viewing figures being "sustained" when your previously fiddled chart with dodgy figured made no such allowances or accountability of such factors.

Only when it suits your argument, eh?

You twist and turn and squirm and wriggle like a twisty turny squirmy wriggly thing Rani.
Rallying Against Rani's Repetitive Rhubarb and Rubbish.

Image
User avatar
MistressRani
Reactions:
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2015 10:11 am

Re: Rumour: Chibnall's Successor Already Hired/Working Alongside Him On Series 13

Post by MistressRani »

Rob Filth wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:07 am
MistressRani wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 7:33 am
Oh I agree with you that the RTD era was incredibly successful as was Moffatt's with Smith. Looks like 'Fathead' knew what he was doing eh?

Statistically it's dodgy to compare a year with just a one off episode with those with 13 or 14 episodes. Similarly 2009 isn't a reliable year as these were only specials I believe and so like the McGone movie (which was a ratings disaster in the US) attracted a lot of casual viewers that can't be sustained over many weeks.
I'm not quite sure how you've made this evaluation when McGanns year was more successful in ratings terms than every single year of NuWho bar 2009?

If McGann was a "ratings disaster" then this surely means Fathead and Muppet are a ratings catastrophe which has leapt completely off the meter such is it's sheer level of cataclysmic failure?

Interesting that you're now waffling insensibly about viewing figures being "sustained" when your previously fiddled chart with dodgy figured made no such allowances or accountability of such factors.

Only when it suits your argument, eh?

You twist and turn and squirm and wriggle like a twisty turny squirmy wriggly thing Rani.
McGann's year? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: You mean McGann's night!!!

It wasn't a ratings disaster in the UK but was in the US, that's the acknowledged reason why it wasn't picked up as a series.

You well know a one off event like McGone or The Specials get extra viewers, just like the first episode of the series. Much more difficult to keep viewers over 13 weeks.
Rebutting Rob's ridiculous rantings since 2004
User avatar
Rob Filth
Reactions:
Posts: 5046
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 11:28 pm

Re: Rumour: Chibnall's Successor Already Hired/Working Alongside Him On Series 13

Post by Rob Filth »

MistressRani wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 12:13 pm
McGann's year? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: You mean McGann's night!!!
Nonsense, 1996 was THE year of McGann and his huge ratings smash story which as your own figures have proven, obliterated the average rating of EVERY NuWho and Fathead year bar 2009 which featured some quickly cobbled together specials nobody really liked because Fathead was too lazy to make any episodes that year.

Small wonder the BBC gave him the push the following year, the bone idle shirker.
Rallying Against Rani's Repetitive Rhubarb and Rubbish.

Image
User avatar
MistressRani
Reactions:
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2015 10:11 am

Re: Rumour: Chibnall's Successor Already Hired/Working Alongside Him On Series 13

Post by MistressRani »

Rob Filth wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 1:06 pm
MistressRani wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 12:13 pm
McGann's year? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: You mean McGann's night!!!
Nonsense, 1996 was THE year of McGann and his huge ratings smash story which as your own figures have proven, obliterated the average rating of EVERY NuWho and Fathead year bar 2009 which featured some quickly cobbled together specials nobody really liked because Fathead was too lazy to make any episodes that year.

Small wonder the BBC gave him the push the following year, the bone idle shirker.
No, it was the night of McGann. They could only be bothered to make that one episode with the Doctor being a sexual snogging braggart. And of course you say no-one liked the 2009 specials and yet, by your own admission, more people tuned in to them than to McGone's one night stand.
Rebutting Rob's ridiculous rantings since 2004
User avatar
Rob Filth
Reactions:
Posts: 5046
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 11:28 pm

Re: Rumour: Chibnall's Successor Already Hired/Working Alongside Him On Series 13

Post by Rob Filth »

MistressRani wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 3:22 pm
No, it was the night of McGann. They could only be bothered to make that one episode with the Doctor being a sexual snogging braggart. And of course you say no-one liked the 2009 specials and yet, by your own admission, more people tuned in to them than to McGone's one night stand.
If McGann really was a sexual braggart as you claim, then that makes the Bradley First Doctor Faketor practically a dangerous serial rapist(in more ways than one!), and just because lots of people tune in to something does not necessarily mean they enjoyed it.

In McGanns case they evidently did however, because that's why he beat every single NuWho year bar one and produced the most spin-off merchandised story since Hartnells "The Daleks"
Rallying Against Rani's Repetitive Rhubarb and Rubbish.

Image
User avatar
MistressRani
Reactions:
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2015 10:11 am

Re: Rumour: Chibnall's Successor Already Hired/Working Alongside Him On Series 13

Post by MistressRani »

Rob Filth wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 5:34 pm
MistressRani wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 3:22 pm
No, it was the night of McGann. They could only be bothered to make that one episode with the Doctor being a sexual snogging braggart. And of course you say no-one liked the 2009 specials and yet, by your own admission, more people tuned in to them than to McGone's one night stand.
If McGann really was a sexual braggart as you claim, then that makes the Bradley First Doctor Faketor practically a dangerous serial rapist(in more ways than one!), and just because lots of people tune in to something does not necessarily mean they enjoyed it.

In McGanns case they evidently did however, because that's why he beat every single NuWho year bar one and produced the most spin-off merchandised story since Hartnells "The Daleks"
In that case everyone must have absolutely loved the specials if they beat McGone and the other New Who series.

And he clearly was what you would call a sexual braggart, he snogged Grace within half an hour of meeting her. The absolute bounder.
Rebutting Rob's ridiculous rantings since 2004
Burunman
Reactions:
Posts: 322
Joined: Tue May 26, 2020 12:33 am
Location: Glasgow

Re: Rumour: Chibnall's Successor Already Hired/Working Alongside Him On Series 13

Post by Burunman »

MistressRani wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 12:13 pm
Rob Filth wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:07 am
MistressRani wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 7:33 am
Oh I agree with you that the RTD era was incredibly successful as was Moffatt's with Smith. Looks like 'Fathead' knew what he was doing eh?

Statistically it's dodgy to compare a year with just a one off episode with those with 13 or 14 episodes. Similarly 2009 isn't a reliable year as these were only specials I believe and so like the McGone movie (which was a ratings disaster in the US) attracted a lot of casual viewers that can't be sustained over many weeks.
I'm not quite sure how you've made this evaluation when McGanns year was more successful in ratings terms than every single year of NuWho bar 2009?

If McGann was a "ratings disaster" then this surely means Fathead and Muppet are a ratings catastrophe which has leapt completely off the meter such is it's sheer level of cataclysmic failure?

Interesting that you're now waffling insensibly about viewing figures being "sustained" when your previously fiddled chart with dodgy figured made no such allowances or accountability of such factors.

Only when it suits your argument, eh?

You twist and turn and squirm and wriggle like a twisty turny squirmy wriggly thing Rani.
McGann's year? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: You mean McGann's night!!!

It wasn't a ratings disaster in the UK but was in the US, that's the acknowledged reason why it wasn't picked up as a series.

You well know a one off event like McGone or The Specials get extra viewers, just like the first episode of the series. Much more difficult to keep viewers over 13 weeks.
Whilst the McGann special was not a ratings success in America, it got over 5 times what most Matt Smith stories got in America (which were deemed a success) and almost 3 times what the highest Matt episode got in America and 20 times what Eccelston's series got (I believe Eccelston's series in America got about a quarter of a million stateside.)

It's all how you define success. Matt was popular for a small channel that he was shown on, but wasn't mainstream, yet the mainstream media would make out that DW was mainstream in America in Matt's time, by just writing "it was a success."

Classic Who in the 80s meanwhile got over 9 million in America, but it is often referred to by the bias media s a failure simply because that wasn't as much as a mainstream show like Friends would get.
ImageImage
Burunman
Reactions:
Posts: 322
Joined: Tue May 26, 2020 12:33 am
Location: Glasgow

Re: Rumour: Chibnall's Successor Already Hired/Working Alongside Him On Series 13

Post by Burunman »

Rawkus wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 9:48 am
RTD's era was able to sustain two successful spin-offs, Moffat gave us the ironically titled Class. Chibnall is just trying to turn the series into a spin-off of itself, weirdly.
I honestly think the success of New Who is ridiculously overrated.

It was big in RTD's time due to the insane hype, nostalgia, a hunger for sci and escapist tv and RTD being in with the bricks. The hype started to die off in Matt's second series however, and it was given a bit of a boost in the 50th only to crumble from the beginning of the Capaldi era which eventually saw it sink to record lows. Jodie's era meanwhile has been little better.

New Who hasn't been a successful mainstream series since 2013 and before that it had a bit of a ropey moment in Matt's second series. It was a flash in the pan that lasted about 5 or so years, and has otherwise been kept going artificially due to a political agenda (Jodie and Capaldi) and cashing in on the name of the much more successful original (50th)

KILL IT WITH FIRE!
ImageImage
Post Reply