Thank you all for your enthusiastic and gregarious responses to my latest update! Most of you accurately divined that I was rather anxious about how this one would be received, and though I'm sure that not everyone has made their opinion known
just yet, I feel obliged to begin responding now in any event, as you so richly deserve.
Hmm, I wonder if the production team on the show being forced to bend over backwards to accommodate American sensibilities might build some resentment between US and UK sci-fi fans. On the plus side, as has doubtlessly been pointed out before, Americans are at least going to be aware of the show by today.
This is my thinking. I've hinted at it before, but the notion has met with resistance in certain corners. Now I've unveiled the Scrappy-Doo of
Doctor Who: Claire Barnett, played by Angela Bowie. Kept on
solely to appeal to the American audiences (she stayed on after NBC cancelled the show because their decision came late enough that the BBC had reluctantly extended Bowie's contract for a third season). That said, I award the No-Prize to whomever correctly guesses the reason I gave her character that first name!
vultan said:
If I had to peg the popularity of the franchises in America in this timeline's 2012, I'd imagine Doctor Who would be about as popular as the Star Trek franchise (very popular, but still holding something of a lingering social stigma), while Star Trek in this world is as popular as Star Wars is in our world (everyone and his brother digs it).
Excellent comparison, though 2012 is perhaps a bit
too distant a vantage point for my liking. But it's
definitely true for the late 1970s ITTL!
vultan said:
And congratz on your 200th post, Brainbin! Keep up the good work!
And thank
you very much, vultan, for all of
your help in keeping this timeline going
Congratulations on your Viewing Figures, Brainbin. More importantly, I wonder what the demographics are like.
For those who aren't aware, I've actually asked this question before, though quite some time ago. I think I might try to conduct a proper survey as we approach the first anniversary of this thread in November, but I was inspired to do some preliminary checking. I have 23 data points, based on everyone who has commented to this thread, whose age is either visible on their profile or has been provided to me within this thread (or elsewhere). The mean year of birth is 1975, the median is 1974, and there are
three modes: 1969, 1971, and 1990, though they each have a frequency of only two (as opposed to zero or one). The oldest known commenter was born in 1950; the
youngest was born in 1991. Three were born in the 1950s, six in the 1960s, four in the 1970s, seven in the 1980s, and three in the 1990s.
Falkenburg said:
Jim Dale is an intriguing choice for the Fourth Doctor.
Despite being identified in the public mind (at least on this side of the Atlantic) with the Carry On films, Dale has quite a few more strings to his bow than looking gormless.
I can imagine him making a very good fist of things. Especially with Seymour to bounce off. Now there's a Companion I may have paid attention to.
(And not just because her 'real' name is remarkably close to mine, kind of, sort of, not really.)
I'm glad you like my casting choices. Dale was quite easy, as he was on the OTL shortlist; but Seymour was trickier, and I was
very lucky to stumble on her as early as I did.
Interesting developments and a number I wasn't expecting. I'm in the opposite position to Falkenburg as while I'm not greatly bothered over Tom Baker, Sarah Jane is a serious loss
. However as you say we had her in real life while Jane Seymour makes an interesting alternative. Can imagine Angie Bowie going down like that and possibly being an additional factor in the ending of the 'Yank years'.
Thank you, Steve
Angela Bowie will definitely be remembered ITTL as a disastrous case of stunt-casting. With regards to her unpopularity as a companion... I believe "Adric" is a reasonable point of comparison IOTL? And remember,
she's only there to appeal to those Yanks. There
will be some bad blood as a result. Note also that some of her run will overlap with the tail-end of first-run
Star Trek in the United Kingdom (throughout the year 1973). The fifth season of
Star Trek may be the weakest overall, but at least it still features a group of familiar faces that everybody loves. No ruddy awful new companions on
that show!
stevep said:
Would never have thought of Jim Dale and as you mention he's chiefly thought of for the Carry On films. But then he's just replaced Jon Pertwee who was probably more famous prior to being the Doctor for his role in the Navy Lack so even some continuity there.
Indeed,
everyone deserves a chance to break type casting. (Will the crew of the
Enterprise be so lucky ITTL? We shall see...)
I'm glad that what Doctor Who is IOTL remains the same. I was hoping that you've casted Tom Baker and Elisabeth Sladen and kept her on the show a lot longer, at least until when Romana came aboard IOTL. But, should you feel necessary to edit the post to change things closer to reality, but different, I welcome it. Other than that, this changes everything.
I'm afraid my casting decisions are final. But if it leaves a sour taste in your mouth, might I suggest watching the twelfth and thirteenth seasons of OTL
Doctor Who? "Genesis of the Daleks" has Baker's Fourth Doctor, Sarah Jane Smith,
and the Daleks. Apparently it's one of the most popular serials of all time, for whatever reason
It shows you how close Doctor Who is to a religion when people act like it's blasphemy for you to change thngs, even though that's, you know, the point of AH
Making my decision to include
Doctor Who as part of this timeline in hopes of drawing a larger audience was definitely a double-edged sword! One amusing anecdote in the eternal
Star Trek vs.
Doctor Who wars is that the good number of
Star Trek fans who have been following this thread were
far more receptive to the show's development ITTL. I'm not sure whether it's because of my
very precisely chosen POD (all that's good and familiar about the OTL show, with virtually all changes made for the better, in as close a sense to objective as is possible), or whether it's because there's some intrinsic difference to the culture of
Star Trek fandom.
Thande said:
Good update. It strikes me that, because of the factors Vultan mentioned, Doctor Who in TTL will be be regarded a bit like James Bond in OTL--still British, but viewed as presenting an exaggerated cartoon version of British sensibilities to appeal to the American market, with obvious pandering like working American characters (Felix Leiter in Bond's case) into stories even if their presence is superfluous.
Thank you, Thande. You make an excellent analysis - I love the comparison to Bond especially. It really creates a sense of "
is there anything that's really our own anymore?".
Interesting post about the Doctor. Glad to see that you resisted the pressure to cast Baker and Sladen in the roles.
Thank you, Nigel! I'm glad that you support my decision. As I was deliberating, only one person really spoke out against the chorus of going with the OTL
status quo (who knows who he is). Fortunately, I was also able to resist
his calls for senseless trolling. These are the eternal challenges of the writing process
NCW8 said:
Presumably Pertwee and Delgado left the show in a Holmes and Moriarty style battle (hopefully leaving the possibility that the Master could return after a regeneration).
Yes, definitely. The Master will probably fall off a cliff or down a chasm or what have you.
Nobody ever dies for good in fiction.
NCW8 said:
Edit: It's also good to see that Troughton's Doctor is better known in the US. While not "my" Doctor, I do enjoy his performance in the role.
Well, I couldn't imply that the good people at Desilu were
bad at their jobs, now could I?
NCW8 said:
I wonder what effect the 5 episode story restriction is going to have. IOTL, stories were generally either 4 or 6 episodes ( The Daemons was the only 5 episode third Doctor story OTL). TTL could see some stories padded out while others are heavily cut compared to OTL.
A reasonable assessment. Although I think that, with practice, the writers would be able to master a "five-act structure", to the point that I think five-episode serials would remain the standard even
after their affiliation with Desilu ends - formatting like that can sometimes be hard to shake off, and even British viewers would be used to it.
NCW8 said:
Presumably nothing happened with Terry Nation's Dalek spin-off series ? Have the Daleks made a return to Dr Who ? IOTL, they returned in 1972 in The Day of the Daleks having been absent for five years. They had been retired from the show in 1967 to allow Nation to produce his spin-off.
No, it never went anywhere. No real market for the Daleks in the US, because they're obviously unfamiliar with those salt-and-pepper-shakers.
Great idea. I, for one, would love to see a Blake's 7 with a decent budget, perhaps enough to muster a proper Star Wars-style space battle once a season.
Bear in mind that you're
already getting *
Battlestar Galactica, not to mention that you've requested Stanley Kubrick directing
Lord of the Rings
Anyway, what I was trying to say here is that America's more optimistic tone in this timeline could make for some delicious contrast with the general atmosphere in Britain at the time. I don't know what the
exact impetus would be for a "darker-and-edgier" trend starting in Britain, but I feel like if it happened,
Blake's 7 would be the most obvious example of it.
(And some better special effects, creature effects, sets, etc, would go a long way toward helping it being taken more seriously in this timeline.)
Well, I'm going to have to examine where British pop culture is headed in the late 1970s ITTL. We'll get a clearer picture in the coming updates.
Bravo. All satisfied customers, I'm sure.
And looks like I was right: you could hit 200K any time now.
Indeed, you said by August! Though if I hit 200,000 subscribers by the end of the month, I'll eat my hat.
Disclaimer: I will not really eat my hat.
phx1138 said:
I don't suppose it was possible for him to be hit by a UFO?
Or kidnapped by one?
Or he could just go home...
(Not a fan.)
Why do you always advocate such violent solutions to problems?
phx1138 said:
Tho this does deny her some cult status as a Bond Girl.
Which she will get back in spades for being a
Doctor Who companion.
phx1138 said:
It strikes me you've changed how TV will be made in future with this, much as "HSB" did with interlocking & continuing stories. Was that intended? Or am I overestimating the impact?
Now
that would be telling
Nation's idea was that Star Trek is basically Federation Propaganda and that the "reality" was somewhat grimmer. This is something that the Star Trek Franchise itself touched on in DS9 with such things as Section 31.
This seems to tie back to our grimdark/ironic discussion from before, and how the British lead the pack in that arena.
Indeed, but of course that was decades later, Roddenberry would never have allowed it while he lived, which is sort of the point.
Even though I've already promised never to discuss the OTL continuations of
Star Trek on this thread, if only because it might poison the well with regards to my
own future plans, I'll break that vow temporarily to say that I honestly wonder how that show would have developed if Roddenberry had lived to see it, and how he would have reacted.
I was geared up for humphing at the changes to Dr Who but I actually quite like it. All fairly plausible - I can certainly see Alice Evans filling the Sarah Jane Smith role.
Indeed. She'll emerge as one of the most popular companions in
Doctor Who ITTL, though it certainly helps that she immediately follows the
least popular companion.
The Professor said:
And re darker and edgier I can see Jim Dale pulling that off in (deliberate?) contrast to his CarryOn style and certainly not as apparently pompous as Tom Baker. More of a Sylvester McCoy Doctor really without the irritation
All right, I like that. I understand that the Seventh Doctor had a following IOTL (well, he beat the Fourth in a "Best Doctor" poll once). Though Dale is obviously in the opposite situation to Seymour, since he follows the man many people (even in the UK) consider to be
the Doctor (or "their" Doctor, if you will), and will have to live up to that.
But if Jim Dale is the Doctor, will he still do the Harry Potter books?
Will there still be Harry Potter books? You leave Harry alone you monster. Heh.
Ah, yes. Now you can all appreciate why I chose Jim Dale. Widespread recognition on both sides of the Pond, and among all ages. (Also, no comment.)
This is probably why there aren't as many pop cultural timelines: nobody cares if you assassinate a president or nuke a city, but mess around with Doctor Who or Harry Potter and suddenly people are burning you in effigy
Anyone who has
any awareness of Harry Potter fandom would know better than to tangle with it in
any context
And besides, we can't
all have the chance to butterfly the Sony PlayStation and become a folk hero, now can we?
One thing that I forgot to mention yesterday: the
Doctor Who update marks the end of the 1974-75 cycle. There are some upcoming posts that I'm
really looking forward to in the next cycle, and I hope to see you all there! But until then, as always, there will be "More To Come". Expect it tomorrow!