That Wacky Redhead

[Glen]

A couple other general comments I was remiss in not making earlier -

First off, I loved Mama's Family (I know, I am weird), and I am even more stoked about the TTL version showing up earlier and with Eunice and Carol Burnett in the mix more.

Also, I loved the idea of WMTM! Clever alt call sign, and again, WKRP was an OTL favorite of mine, so I am glad to see a parallel develop here. However, I can't recall - does TTL have Disco for a Fevernate to rail against?

 

[JSmith]

First off, I loved Mama's Family (I know, I am weird), and I am even more stoked about the TTL version showing up earlier and with Eunice and Carol Burnett in the mix more.

You are not alone-I loved it as well

 

[PW MAX]

I always liked Mama's Family myself. I grew up watching re-runs of it... on TBS? I think. Some channel anyway. Also, very glad to see someone take proper care of the copyright issues. Bet that made for happier customers whenever Complete Season DVDs finally came to town.

Dampens the mood a little when some generic tune chimes in, ya know?

 

[THE OBSERVER]

Hold your jets, man. It'll happen when it happens. If it's not posted, then it isn't ready, and asking for it faster is only apt to make him either A) rush and do work that's not up to his usual levels or B) not want to bother because you seem a little ungrateful or unappreciative of the work that goes into these when you start demanding the next update the day after the last one and then never let up.

I am not ungrateful. I just love the posts. That's all. I'll try not to be impatient. This TL is very good.

 

[NCW8]

Or complaining that a certain recent reboot film doesn't fit the continuity of a decades-older original series?

Actually, I think that film was a little too consistant with the tv series. Especially the way that Kirk and Co ended the film in the same jobs that they occupied during the tv series.

Being neither a fan of the original Doctor Who nor the revival, and not having seen the 1996 telefilm, I can't offer my own input on the issue, though I will say that you're probably cutting it too much slack (and, conversely, piling too hard on the Peter Cushing films). But I'm not one to judge; that would be the pot calling the kettle black.

I'd agree with that. In a time and place without reruns or videos, the films did at least offer the chance to see a version of two of the classic early Who stories.

Cheers,
Nigel.

 

[Glen]

Actually, I think that film was a little too consistant with the tv series. Especially the way that Kirk and Co ended the film in the same jobs that they occupied during the tv series.

Oh, I agree, though there was a way they could have rectified this (spoiler alert) - Have old Spock escape Nero earlier, just before we start to see adult Kirk - have him advising Star Fleet in hiding, trying to repair the damage done to the timeline by Nero's first appearance. And it is only when things really hit the fan that Spock advises the desperate move of bringing together early the best starship crew and captain Starfleet has ever known to combat the threat. An active agent with knowledge of the original timeline and the skills to convince others of his vision would easily explain why things are starting to converge in the new timeline.

I'd agree with that. In a time and place without reruns or videos, the films did at least offer the chance to see a version of two of the classic early Who stories.

Cheers,
Nigel.

I have no problem with the concept of having movie versions of Doctor Who - quite the opposite. However, it was the unnecessary liberties taken with the original series that I object to so vociferously. The problems that I have are twofold.

1) Don't Change the Nature of the Main Cast! Making the Doctor a human named Dr. Who - this is an utter change to the heart of the story, and it weakens the story. Some campy eccentric inventor with a silly name is just boring. An enigmatic alien would have been much cooler, and of course would be true to the series. Similiarly, there is no good reason to make Susan a little kid, especially just to replace her with a now teenaged (and still a granddaughter) Barbara! Just keep Susan the teen granddaughter, and Barbara and Ian her schoolteachers. If they MUST put in some romance, they can have some tension between Barbara and Ian. The second movie was even worse, replacing Barbara and Ian with a niece Louis and a cop, Tom (though played by the delightful Bernard Cribbins - hmmm, he could be cast as David in a truer adaptation of the series).

2) Keep True to The TARDIS! Maybe this should come under don't change the main cast, but basically the interior of the television TARDIS was brilliant, whereas the Movie version is a mess. And please, can we refer to it as the TARDIS rather than TARDIS (this last is a minor quibble).

These changes jarred regular viewers in the UK, I suspect, and did nothing in my opinion to make the movies more marketable to the US - that may have been the thought, but it is ridiculous. And yes, you can argue reboot or the needs of movies, but face it, those two movies were other then the beginning and end bits straight up edited adaptations of the two stories from the series. If they were going to be that close anyway, why not go full force?

Speaking of which, I think it would have been good if they kept the original main characters to splice onto the first movie the opening of An Unearthly Child - one scene in the school saying how odd Susan is, and then the scene in Foreman's Junkyard finding the TARDIS and having the Doctor reveal their true nature. When they travel, they travel to the world of the Daleks (later named Skaro). And at the end of the second movie, have Susan left behind with David (Cribbins version?) and the Doctor give his famous goodbye speech on the big screen.

 

[Brainbin]

I apologize for not getting back to everyone sooner! Yesterday was a very busy day for me, so I decided to delay my responses until this morning.

Sorry, are you being sarky here or are we at cross purposes? I was pointing out why it is probably more likely that the new series would be set in the same ST universe. Or did you mean a vote for a Federation setting but not using Enterprise or the original crew characters?

Just a little playful teasing It amuses me that so many of you are calling for it one way or the other, though I've already decided which way I'm going on that issue (and I will explain why in-story, of course). And I used that particular quote because it's a direct quote from Captain Kirk in a particular episode ("The Corbomite Maneuver"), which I always enjoyed, and seized the opportunity to use in-context here. (I'm never so lucky when I try to quote Khan from Star Trek II - not that it ever stops me.)

First off, I loved Mama's Family (I know, I am weird), and I am even more stoked about the TTL version showing up earlier and with Eunice and Carol Burnett in the mix more.

When I found out about the one-off Eunice special and the tack it took to the characters, I knew I had to approach "The Family" from that angle ITTL.

Also, I loved the idea of WMTM! Clever alt call sign, and again, WKRP was an OTL favorite of mine, so I am glad to see a parallel develop here. However, I can't recall - does TTL have Disco for a Fevernate to rail against?

As it was apparently a favourite of many of my readers, so I'm glad to have brought it to life ITTL. And I'm glad you liked the call sign - I couldn't let the letters "MTM" go to waste ITTL. As for disco, you don't recall because I never mentioned it - you can consider disco a big genre in this era ITTL, but not the big genre.

You are not alone-I loved it as well

Obviously, the show had more than its share of fans for it to stage a successful comeback in first-run syndication.

I always liked Mama's Family myself. I grew up watching re-runs of it... on TBS? I think. Some channel anyway.

Yes, it was TBS. Fun fact: most Canadians received TBS on their cable packages - but it wasn't the national feed, it was the original WTBS feed in Atlanta. Which meant that when WTBS rebranded itself some years ago as "Peachtree TV", that channel, and not the national TBS, was what became available to Canadian viewers. For some reason, that status quo has held, because it doesn't appear likely that the CRTC (the Canadian version of the FCC) will approve TBS for basic cable, the original WTBS having been "grandfathered" all those years ago. For those of you Americans who disdain the FCC, I assure you that the CRTC is far more of a bureaucratic nightmare.

Also, very glad to see someone take proper care of the copyright issues. Bet that made for happier customers whenever Complete Season DVDs finally came to town.

You mean Complete Season CEDs

Dampens the mood a little when some generic tune chimes in, ya know?

Of course. I think I've made very clear how greatly I disdain unnecessary modifications to original material, and changing the soundtrack is likewise truly appalling.

I am not ungrateful. I just love the posts. That's all. I'll try not to be impatient. This TL is very good.

Thank you for the compliment. Something that you should bear in mind for next time is that authors usually appreciate, less than two hours after having written a new update, for any responses to the thread to be about that new update. Likewise, I have no problem with your asking when the next update might be when it has been, say, three weeks since the last one; but when it's been just three days, that's somewhat premature. Thanks for your understanding, and I do appreciate your enthusiasm.

Actually, I think that film was a little too consistant with the tv series. Especially the way that Kirk and Co ended the film in the same jobs that they occupied during the tv series.

You see, I don't object to that at all. These are iconic characters and the positions they held on the Enterprise are a big part of that. The notion of there being a sort of cosmic "rightness" to their serving as the command crew aboard the USS Enterprise does tickle me; but then I've made clear that I became a fan of Star Trek through my appreciation of its contributions to popular culture. In that meta-context, they do indeed "belong" in those same positions on the bridge of the Enterprise. That may be part of why I liked the reboot film more than some of you did. It affirmed the supremacy of the Captain of the Enterprise, James T. Kirk, and his crew, the greatest ever to serve Starfleet.

With regards to this update, I hope to break some major ground on it this weekend - which is a long one for me, so here's to some progress on that front

 

[Time slip]

I'm a bit curious about how The Questor Tapes developed over its run, seeing how it lasted five seasons.

 

[PW MAX]

You mean Complete Season CEDs

Oops, my bad. A slip of the... typing finger.

Oh, and I too loved the Star Trek reboot, but then, I'm such a Trekkie that you'd be hard pressed to find something star Trek-related that I don't like.

 

[Brainbin]

I'm a bit curious about how The Questor Tapes developed over its run, seeing how it lasted five seasons.

Welcome aboard, Time slip! You will hear about Questor in a future update. But thanks for asking!

Oh, and I too loved the Star Trek reboot, but then, I'm such a Trekkie that you'd be hard pressed to find something star Trek-related that I don't like.

I would be obliged to ask "Even [insert series here]?", were their very mention not strictly verboten (as spinoffs that will never exist ITTL).

But the movies are in the clear! So I shall ask... even The Motion Picture? Even The Final Frontier?! (I am a staunch defender of The Search for Spock.)

---

On another note, I hope to have the next update ready in the next few days. Thank you all for your patience and understanding!

ETA: I just noticed that this marks my 300th post to this thread!

 

[The Professor]

ETA: I just noticed that this marks my 300th post to this thread!

Woooo!
Looking forward to the next update as always - apologies for the lack of constructive criticism

 

[PW MAX]

I would be obliged to ask "Even [insert series here]?", were their very mention not strictly verboten (as spinoffs that will never exist ITTL).

But the movies are in the clear! So I shall ask... even The Motion Picture? Even The Final Frontier?! (I am a staunch defender of The Search for Spock.)

I'm pretty much a fan of all the Star Trek shows. What can I say?

As for the movies, The Motionless Picture and The Final Frontier...

OK, not nearly so much. Seems I forgot about them when I made that first statement. Haven't seen either of those in quite a while though, so maybe they just... slipped my mind.

My mind is pretty slippery.

 

[Lord Insane]

Just a little playful teasing It amuses me that so many of you are calling for it one way or the other, though I've already decided which way I'm going on that issue (and I will explain why in-story, of course). And I used that particular quote because it's a direct quote from Captain Kirk in a particular episode ("The Corbomite Maneuver"), which I always enjoyed, and seized the opportunity to use in-context here. (I'm never so lucky when I try to quote Khan from Star Trek II - not that it ever stops me.)

To be entirely honest... I didn't actually intend to call for it not being Star Trek. My intent was to note that there's nothing saying it would be Star Trek (although in retrospect saving on models is one reason for it to be) just because it's a Gene Roddenberry space-show (given that he, with The Questor Tapes under his belt, is less associated with Star Trek specifically TTL) - I wouldn't be averse to it being a Star Trek show, but if it isn't, well, as you say it is your choice.

 

[NCW8]

Oh, I agree, though there was a way they could have rectified this

Interesting - you're right, that could have worked.

1) Don't Change the Nature of the Main Cast! Making the Doctor a human named Dr. Who - this is an utter change to the heart of the story, and it weakens the story. Some campy eccentric inventor with a silly name is just boring. An enigmatic alien would have been much cooler, and of course would be true to the series. Similiarly, there is no good reason to make Susan a little kid, especially just to replace her with a now teenaged (and still a granddaughter) Barbara! Just keep Susan the teen granddaughter, and Barbara and Ian her schoolteachers. If they MUST put in some romance, they can have some tension between Barbara and Ian. The second movie was even worse, replacing Barbara and Ian with a niece Louis and a cop, Tom (though played by the delightful Bernard Cribbins - hmmm, he could be cast as David in a truer adaptation of the series).

It's worth remembering that the first of the films was produced before the end of the second season of the tv series, so some of that continuity wasn't so well established. In the tv series at that time it was ambiguous as to whether the Doctor was alien or human. The film producers obviously decided that that ambiguity didn't work so well on film and went with the Eccentric Englishmen interpretation - possibly because they thought that would be popular in the US. The 1996 film tried something similar when Dr Holloway excused the Doctor's eccentric behaviour by exclaiming "He's English".

It was a mistake to call the character "Doctor Who" instead of "The Doctor". However it was a mistake that the press and a lot of the viewers were also making - it took a while for people to notice that there was a distinction between the name of the series and the name of the character. It's hardly surprising that the film-makers didn't notice.

For the rest of the cast changes, I would say that you're probably right. I guess that the film-makers felt that they had to stamp their identity there. However, I can't really see Cribbins as a romantic lead.

2) Keep True to The TARDIS! Maybe this should come under don't change the main cast, but basically the interior of the television TARDIS was brilliant, whereas the Movie version is a mess. And please, can we refer to it as the TARDIS rather than TARDIS (this last is a minor quibble).

Given how much the interior has changed over the years - especially in the 1996 film and the New Who - I don't think that too many complaints can be levelled here.

These changes jarred regular viewers in the UK, I suspect, and did nothing in my opinion to make the movies more marketable to the US - that may have been the thought, but it is ridiculous. And yes, you can argue reboot or the needs of movies, but face it, those two movies were other then the beginning and end bits straight up edited adaptations of the two stories from the series. If they were going to be that close anyway, why not go full force?

I think thats a problem with adaptions generally - you're taking something successful and changing it. You can't make the adaption the same as the original, otherwise there would be no point making it at all, but it takes real skill to change a successful series and make it better.

Those two stories were chosen because they were the most successful stories in the series - so much so that they surprised a lot of people. The film-makers probably thought that success would translate to the US as well. One of the reasons they didn't was because the Daleks didn't seem to strike the same cultural chord in the US that they had in the UK. Since the Daleks are archetypal Nazis, that's probably due to the different experiences of the two countries in WWII.

Speaking of which, I think it would have been good if they kept the original main characters to splice onto the first movie the opening of An Unearthly Child - one scene in the school saying how odd Susan is, and then the scene in Foreman's Junkyard finding the TARDIS and having the Doctor reveal their true nature. When they travel, they travel to the world of the Daleks (later named Skaro).

Interestingly that's exactly what the Target novelisation of the story did.

Cheers,
Nigel.

 

[Yvonmukluk]

Well I'm finally caught up with this timeline! It's great so far, but unfortunately Glen pointed out the fatal flaw in this TL:

Sadly, this timeline will not have any version of the Blues Brothers!

I'm sorry, but a world without the Blues Brothers is one too bizarre for me to contemplate.

But I'll keep watching anyway. Keep up the good work, Brainbin!

 

[CaptainCrowbar]

It was a mistake to call the character "Doctor Who" instead of "The Doctor". However it was a mistake that the press and a lot of the viewers were also making - it took a while for people to notice that there was a distinction between the name of the series and the name of the character. It's hardly surprising that the film-makers didn't notice.

It was a reasonable conclusion for viewers to draw, since the character was credited as "Doctor Who" for most of the classic series, up to the end of Tom Baker's run. The name in the credits wasn't changed to "The Doctor" until Peter Davison took over (and later briefly changed back to "Doctor Who" for Chris Eccleston's one season).

 

[stevep]

It was a reasonable conclusion for viewers to draw, since the character was credited as "Doctor Who" for most of the classic series, up to the end of Tom Baker's run. The name in the credits wasn't changed to "The Doctor" until Peter Davison took over (and later briefly changed back to "Doctor Who" for Chris Eccleston's one season).

I must admit I've always thought of him as Doctor Who, but then my early period of watching goes back through the late Troughan to about Davision's period then I picked it up again when the new, more adult series came through.

Steve

 

[Glen]

It was a reasonable conclusion for viewers to draw, since the character was credited as "Doctor Who" for most of the classic series, up to the end of Tom Baker's run. The name in the credits wasn't changed to "The Doctor" until Peter Davison took over (and later briefly changed back to "Doctor Who" for Chris Eccleston's one season).

A fair point, a fair point...

 

[Glen]

I must admit I've always thought of him as Doctor Who, but then my early period of watching goes back through the late Troughan to about Davision's period then I picked it up again when the new, more adult series came through.

Steve

Him who? Tom Baker?

 

[Brainbin]

Woooo!
Looking forward to the next update as always - apologies for the lack of constructive criticism

Thank you, Professor! And you never have to apologize about complimenting my timeline, regardless of whether or not constructive criticism is attached

I'm pretty much a fan of all the Star Trek shows. What can I say?

I won't judge, as long as you recognize that the original is still the best (Then again, if you don't, I can just say "what spinoffs?")

As for the movies, The Motionless Picture and The Final Frontier...

OK, not nearly so much. Seems I forgot about them when I made that first statement. Haven't seen either of those in quite a while though, so maybe they just... slipped my mind.

I guess that's the thing about bad Star Trek movies. They usually aren't as memorable as the good ones. Then again, you tend to re-watch the good ones.

To be entirely honest... I didn't actually intend to call for it not being Star Trek. My intent was to note that there's nothing saying it would be Star Trek (although in retrospect saving on models is one reason for it to be) just because it's a Gene Roddenberry space-show (given that he, with The Questor Tapes under his belt, is less associated with Star Trek specifically TTL) - I wouldn't be averse to it being a Star Trek show, but if it isn't, well, as you say it is your choice.

It's an astute observation, because just how associated Roddenberry remains with Star Trek ITTL will be a topic of discussion in a future update.

Well I'm finally caught up with this timeline! It's great so far, but unfortunately Glen pointed out the fatal flaw in this TL:

I'm sorry, but a world without the Blues Brothers is one too bizarre for me to contemplate.

But I'll keep watching anyway. Keep up the good work, Brainbin!

Thank you, Yvonmukluk, and welcome aboard! I'm sorry about the Blues Brothers, but sometimes there has to be collateral damage, you understand

Now, no firm promises, and fingers firmly crossed, but the next update is looking good for tomorrow! So, until then.