Doctor Who >> View Thread
1 2  >> All
Author
Ancient One 

Manager

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,541


With the recent serious allegations against John Barrowman and (Especially) Noel Clarke surfacing, it looks like there's more trouble ahead for Series 13 of Doctor Who.

It's been taken for granted that the character of Jack Harkness would be turning up again for the regeneration episode. That is now almost certainly not going to happen. However, with filming on series 13 due to continue for several months it's unlikely that Jodie's final episode has been filmed yet, so there's still time for rewriting to take place.

More concerning is the fact that Barrowman was seen in Cardiff a couple of months ago, leading to speculation that he's appearing in more than one episode in the new series.

If that IS the case, and if Barrowman is 'cancelled' (As looks extremely likely), what does that mean for Series 13? Perhaps he's only filmed cameos that can be easily edited out. But if his contributions to that episode - or episodes - are greater, will the BBC opt to drop them from the series? Will they allow them to be released on the dvd's?

Season 13, an already critical year for Doctor Who, may end up comprising of only six or seven episodes.

Stay tuned.


Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.93 on Windows 10
Grey Gargoyle


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


I think that Noel Clarke's career is over. 20 testimonies: that's too big.

In the case of John Barrowman, so far, it sounds like exhibitionism, naturism, histrionics & immature pranks... Certainly, it is not a correct behaviour but Clarke threatened some of the women that he harassed. That's bigger.

Also, in the case of Barrowman, it would have happened in 2005, 15 years ago. In 2008, he had already apologised for a similar incident:“I apologise for any offence I have caused. I was joining in the light-hearted and fun banter of the show and went too far. I was wrong to do this and it will never happen again.”

Everybody remembers what happened to Hugh Grant. It didn't end his career.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 88.0 on Windows NT 4.0
Daveym

Moderator

Location: Lancashire
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008




    Quote:
    With the recent serious allegations against John Barrowman and (Especially) Noel Clarke surfacing, it looks like there's more trouble ahead for Series 13 of Doctor Who.

I thought on this and it came to me that a simple barometer to answer your question could be - "Is Barrowman trending on Twitter?"

Twitter isn't real, not for normal people on the street, But it *is* powerful and deadly if you live on it and post there. It has dawned on me recently that when you consider all the spats, the 'cancellations', the witchhunts, they all stem (and are fuelled by) the fact that the people they target are fellow Twitter users... if it is someone who doesn't post to Twitter and is ignorant of it then they are safe. They are safe because these packs who chase Rabbits can't chase a Rabbit that isn't there on their field to chase.

So if Barrowman is trending on Twitter and being chased down he may have a problem, but as Grey Gargoyle put it down below I agree that Barrowman is a character who is beyond that sort of 'cancelling', all the attention is on Noel Clarke at the moment. Whereas Barrowman is just doing what he always does, fooling around, being a big kid, and generally being over-the-top.




Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.93 on Windows 10
Daveym

Moderator

Location: Lancashire
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008




    Quote:
    Also, in the case of Barrowman, it would have happened in 2005, 15 years ago. In 2008, he had already apologised for a similar incident:“I apologise for any offence I have caused. I was joining in the light-hearted and fun banter of the show and went too far. I was wrong to do this and it will never happen again.”


I think he is likely very aware today that that sort of behaviour wouldn't fly. In 2005 things were a little less histrionic than they are today, notably with the arrival of social media and witch-hunts becoming more prevailant, and Barrowman has always been a reflection of his Captain Jack persona in that both are larger than life figures who have 'licence' to be a little outrageous and, well, be who they are...



Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.93 on Windows 10
Ancient One 

Manager

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,541



    Quote:
    I think that Noel Clarke's career is over. 20 testimonies: that's too big.


Oh yes. Clarke's dead in the water.


    Quote:
    In the case of John Barrowman, so far, it sounds like exhibitionism, naturism, histrionics & immature pranks...


I agree with that. I don't think he meant any harm by his antics. His intentions are irrelevant though. He exposed himself many times on various sets and... well, there are laws against it. As Clarke says in the convention video, 'Don't try doing it in your workplace guys. You'll lose your job and land in jail', or words to that effect.


    Quote:
    Also, in the case of Barrowman, it would have happened in 2005, 15 years ago. In 2008, he had already apologised for a similar incident:“I apologise for any offence I have caused. I was joining in the light-hearted and fun banter of the show and went too far. I was wrong to do this and it will never happen again.”


It's happened since. One absolutely confirmed case in 2008, and even as recently as 2018 the producers of a reality show he appeared on had to warn him against exposing himself. They'd heard of his behaviour on other shows. I think there'll be more revelations (No pun intended) about Barrowman from other production teams in the weeks ahead.


    Quote:
    Everybody remembers what happened to Hugh Grant. It didn't end his career.


There's a big difference. What Grant did was consensual between both parties.

There's also a big difference in the people running the BBC between 2008 and today. They're absolutely rabid about showing they mean business when it comes to female and minority rights. One actor means nothing to them. They'll throw Barrowman under the bus in a heartbeat if it means protecting their reputation.



Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.93 on Windows 10
Ancient One 

Manager

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,541



    Quote:


      Quote:
      With the recent serious allegations against John Barrowman and (Especially) Noel Clarke surfacing, it looks like there's more trouble ahead for Series 13 of Doctor Who.

    I thought on this and it came to me that a simple barometer to answer your question could be - "Is Barrowman trending on Twitter?"


Yes. He trended for two days solid.


    Quote:
    So if Barrowman is trending on Twitter and being chased down he may have a problem, but as Grey Gargoyle put it down below I agree that Barrowman is a character who is beyond that sort of 'cancelling', all the attention is on Noel Clarke at the moment. Whereas Barrowman is just doing what he always does, fooling around, being a big kid, and generally being over-the-top.


Ah. That 'Barrowman is immune' is something that was mentioned time and time again. Tweet after tweet with variations on 'Let's see just how meaningful the #metoo movement is. Let's see if they go after an actor who's gay, and an actor who's black'.

The politically correct BBC are certainly not going to want that kind of pressure.




Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.93 on Windows 10
Daveym

Moderator

Location: Lancashire
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008




    Quote:
    Ah. That 'Barrowman is immune' is something that was mentioned time and time again. Tweet after tweet with variations on 'Let's see just how meaningful the #metoo movement is. Let's see if they go after an actor who's gay, and an actor who's black'.



    Quote:
    The politically correct BBC are certainly not going to want that kind of pressure.

I should make it clear that I would see Barrowman immune to a lot of things, but not everything.
The substance, the momentum, isn't there to 'cancel' John Barrowman. With Noel Clarke the charges are more serious and with a lot of people (women) coming forward to directly accuse him of inappropriate behaviour. Whether he actually did anything that crossed the law is up to the police to decide, but if he didn't break the law, if the charges end up not having much real substance to them, then he should be allowed to get back to work and on with his life. "Should". The reality is he may be finished in the UK as a respected force, and so be forced to look elsewhere for work.....
-----------

Series 13 on the other hand, well it looks like it is intended as an autumn transmission again. In the same timeslot too I would think. And all things considered I don't see the ratings improving any. If anything this season is probobly going to scrape the bottom and we may well see 3m or less by the time it ends... people have made their minds up and there isn't anything I can see that will change their views.



Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.93 on Windows 10
Ancient One 

Manager

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,541



    Quote:


      Quote:
      Ah. That 'Barrowman is immune' is something that was mentioned time and time again. Tweet after tweet with variations on 'Let's see just how meaningful the #metoo movement is. Let's see if they go after an actor who's gay, and an actor who's black'.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        The politically correct BBC are certainly not going to want that kind of pressure.

      I should make it clear that I would see Barrowman immune to a lot of things, but not everything.
      The substance, the momentum, isn't there to 'cancel' John Barrowman. With Noel Clarke the charges are more serious and with a lot of people (women) coming forward to directly accuse him of inappropriate behaviour. Whether he actually did anything that crossed the law is up to the police to decide, but if he didn't break the law, if the charges end up not having much real substance to them, then he should be allowed to get back to work and on with his life. "Should". The reality is he may be finished in the UK as a respected force, and so be forced to look elsewhere for work.....
      -----------


On Clarke: It's now up to 26 women, and some of the allegations are quite serious.

https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/apr/30/noel-clarke-shows-dropped-as-allegations-shake-tv-industry

UPDATE: it's now 27 women.

https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/apr/29/actor-noel-clarke-accused-of-groping-harassment-and-bullying-by-20-women

On Barrowman: Cancel culture is an unforgiving and un-nuanced beast. Hartley Sawyer was cancelled for some mildly offensive jokes he'd made over a decade earlier. And he's far from being alone.

The will to cancel Barrowman may not appear to be there now, but the vehemence and outrage in many of the tweets I read from groups and individuals suggest otherwise. I'd imagine that complaints have already been arriving at the BBC since the news broke. And these things have a way of escalating quickly. All it takes is for one or two women who were offended by his behaviour to make official complaints, and the BBC will be compelled to act (Assuming they haven't already).

But even without official complaints, I suspect that there'll be a torrent of social media outrage and damning articles in the press if the BBC announce new episodes starring him.


    Quote:
    Series 13 on the other hand, well it looks like it is intended as an autumn transmission again. In the same timeslot too I would think. And all things considered I don't see the ratings improving any. If anything this season is probobly going to scrape the bottom and we may well see 3m or less by the time it ends... people have made their minds up and there isn't anything I can see that will change their views.


The viewing figures are certainly going to make interesting reading this year.


Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.93 on Windows 10
Trent Trueheart


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 1,121



    Quote:

      Quote:
      In the case of John Barrowman, so far, it sounds like exhibitionism, naturism, histrionics & immature pranks...



    Quote:
    I agree with that. I don't think he meant any harm by his antics. His intentions are irrelevant though. He exposed himself many times on various sets and... well, there are laws against it. As Clarke says in the convention video, 'Don't try doing it in your workplace guys. You'll lose your job and land in jail', or words to that effect.


I don't know if I agree that he didn't mean any harm with his antics. I mean, if there was someone he specifically wanted to harass with his penis, showing it to everyone is good cover since then he can play it off as just a gag and everyone else can write it off as "Barrowman being Barrowman." He could also be doing it as a way to gauge people's reaction to it. He might be looking for people who's reactions would suggest they'd be open to a sexual relationship. With everyone else, he can just say it's a joke.

To me it certainly seems like it could be predatory behavior. But I feel like I don't know enough about it to make a definitive conclusion.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 88.0 on Windows 10
Daveym

Moderator

Location: Lancashire
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008




    Quote:
    The will to cancel Barrowman may not appear to be there now, but the vehemence and outrage in many of the tweets I read from groups and individuals suggest otherwise. I'd imagine that complaints have already been arriving at the BBC since the news broke. And these things have a way of escalating quickly. All it takes is for one or two women who were offended by his behaviour to make official complaints, and the BBC will be compelled to act (Assuming they haven't already).


It is a strange and unpredictable chemistry that goes into a witch-hunt and termination. John Leslie was accused of date rape, but eventually cleared, and yet his television career was finished as the taint to his name and reputation remained in place. He simply could not negate the original shock and disgust of the claims against him...
Noel Clarke seems to be a repeat of this, even if the police eventually decide there is not the substance to make charges the gravity of the claims made, the publicity that lingers around Clarke, will likely mean he is still a complete pariah in the British film and television world.

John Barrowman, I am not on Twitter so nearly all of this passes me completely by. As I noted the the truth is that if you are on Twitter, as Barrowman is, you are very vulnerable. If you are NOT on Twitter though, you are of very limited interest, as they can't touch you, and they can't even get your attention....

Really, you contemplate the BBC's potential reaction, while I contemplate Big Finish's.... I contemplate them almost certainly ignoring the issue!
If Barrowman was someone minor, someone like Christopher Naylor, Elliot Chapman, or even Jacob Dudman, then yes, Big Finish would dispense and ostracise him, as they have with James Dreyfuss as one example. They are disposable. But because this is someone 'important', because he is 'John Barrowman', they turn the cheek and will cast a complete blind eye on both the Twitter controversy and his antics....

And I despise that kind of vile Hypocrisy and double-standards.



Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.93 on Windows 10
Grey Gargoyle


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008



    Quote:

    There's a big difference. What Grant did was consensual between both parties.


Yes but in a car, in a public place, with a street hooker & in the USA, lol \:\-D

If it had happened in France instead of Hollywood, back then, the cops would have had a good laugh, Grant's lawyer & agent would have arranged the matter with the French police and it would have been the end of the story.

Nowadays, that would be different (laws have changed even in France).

Back then, he was one of the favorite male actors of the female audience and he was dating Elizabeth Hurley. Even in France, it was the scandal of the year. (^_^')

I was young back then but I didn't understand how he could have been so stupid.

Except if I am mistaken, so far, nobody has said that Barrowman forced himself on someone.

NB: it doesn't mean that I approve his behaviour.
It is just that I don't like what someone on Noel Clarke's side did to divert attention.


    Quote:

    They'll throw Barrowman under the bus in a heartbeat if it means protecting their reputation.

It has been the same everywhere since media are media.
The Weinstein affair was the trigger of the current buzz of sexual abuse allegations because it is a true scandal (over 80 testimonies!!!).
But this kind of scandal has always existed & companies have always protected their reputation.
In the case of Barrowman, it takes more than that to destroy a reputation.
I mean, how many rockers have been known to show their private parts since the 1970s?

In the case of Noel Clarke, it is not the same scope: there are consistent corroborating testimonies of more than 20 witnesses between 2004 and 2019, including allegations of sexual harassment, bullying & threats. It is not just a case of clumsy & heavy-handed courtship or exhibitionism while drunk. He may be innocent but I have a hard time believing that he is. I cannot see how he could be.



Posted with Mozilla Firefox 88.0 on Windows NT 4.0
JesusFan


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


What was he accused of doing?


Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.85 on Windows 10
JesusFan


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


I would much rather have a Capt Jack series then next Dr one!


Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.85 on Windows 10
JesusFan


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


is this series now a "loss leader" for the BBC, as they would be willing to keep running the ratings into the ground just in order to be able to say we are real diversity?


Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.85 on Windows 10
JesusFan


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


What is Barrowman said to have been doing?


Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.85 on Windows 10
JesusFan


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


What was the big bad thing supposed to have been doing?


Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.85 on Windows 10
JesusFan


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


Stuff from that long ago did not derail Trump from becoming elected either!


Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.85 on Windows 10
JesusFan


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


we also have to remember, and not saying to excuse bad behavior, that we have to view this in the context of the times, and not read today views back into it!


Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.85 on Windows 10
Grey Gargoyle


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008




Posted with Mozilla Firefox 88.0 on Windows NT 4.0
Trent Trueheart


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 1,121


Do you know how to use a search engine? It is not difficult to find news articles about what is going on.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 88.0 on Windows 10
Daveym

Moderator

Location: Lancashire
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008



I think it is, yes. \(yes\)

It doesn't seem to me that they recognised just what a colossal risk and gamble they were taking the the 2017 revamp, all there was was the need to have a female Doctor and 'diversity'.

With those boxes ticked it was job done.

********************************

What really does fascinate me at this point though is Chris Chibnall.

There are volumes to be written about this man, but here he is, at this moment, in charge of a show that he, personally, has likely just destroyed.
He doesn't given interviews, he doesn't hold himself to account, he barely has one original idea in his head, and he isn't fit to be a Producer on television, more than that he is the first and only Producer of the television series to not support Doctor Who Magazine.

All of this, and more, reinforces my impression that this is someone who was and is only concerned with his own career and prospects. Just as Jodie Whittaker is.

These two went into it for their careers, possibly thought for a few moments they could rival Russell Davies and David Tennant's success, and once reality kicked their door down hard at the end of the first season they went to ground...

They know full well this series stinks. So do the BBC. But there are careers to protect, reputations to protect, and no one will ever admit it either stinks like manure or that it has probobly finished the series on television.



Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.93 on Windows 10
JesusFan


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


They really needed to have heeded that warning and red flags from the star Trek series, as once you get in charge those who do not really get the intent and concept, the series gets screwed!

Too bad that we cannot get them to just make movies with david tennett, or else do a prequel with that Dr that was sh0wn only on that Fox tv movie!


Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.85 on Windows 10
Daveym

Moderator

Location: Lancashire
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008




    Quote:
    They really needed to have heeded that warning and red flags from the star Trek series, as once you get in charge those who do not really get the intent and concept, the series gets screwed!


In a way what is worse is that American television can turn out average-to-mediocre Star Trek because they have the money to do so. There will in theory always be a station on US television who would order a Star Trek Series of some sort.

With Doctor Who it is a little different, because the money isn't there like it is in the huge American market. Not for nothing has Doctor Who been reduced gradually from 12 episodes to just 8, it is a reflection of its fading popularity and ratings. And yet there is a generation who has known nothing else but fifteen years of this modern series and believe it will never be cancelled - they have never experienced that reality. But with the ratings and audience apathy getting deeper by the season cancellation is an inevitability, the BBC cannot keep putting money into an expensive drama series that is very obviously not earning its place on their television channel...



Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.93 on Windows 10
Trent Trueheart


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 1,121


How much does the BBC make from selling the show to other countries? I would think that alone makes it worth continuing regardless of the UK ratings.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 88.0 on Windows 10
JesusFan


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


Why not just sell it off to say Hbo Max, Att/warners then, in order to have them develop it for either tv shows or movies?


Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.85 on Windows 10
JesusFan


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


Thought Amc had bought a part of BBC, and that Hbo max had bought the exclusive rights to prior seasons?


Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.85 on Windows 10
Ancient One 

Manager

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,541



    Quote:
    Thought Amc had bought a part of BBC, and that Hbo max had bought the exclusive rights to prior seasons?


AMC own a stake in BBC America, which is not the BBC itself, but a commercial operation part owned by the BBC.

As the BBC is basically owned and paid for by the British public, no part of it can be sold into private hands.

Yes, HBO Max have the rights to all 12 series. The deal covers Seasons 13 through 15, but the show will still premiere on BBC America. So really MAX only has exclusive rights to re-runs.




Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.93 on Windows 10
Ancient One 

Manager

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,541




    Quote:
    Except if I am mistaken, so far, nobody has said that Barrowman forced himself on someone.


Well, that's the gist of what the cancel culture mob are saying: Nobody asked Barrowman to get his dick out. What he did was sexual harassment. And multiple occurrences of it.


    Quote:
    NB: it doesn't mean that I approve his behaviour.
    It is just that I don't like what someone on Noel Clarke's side did to divert attention.


I agree completely.

Intent counts for a lot in my opinion, and I really don't see Barrowman as the predator type. Personally, if I was in charge of the BBC I'd just read him the riot act, give him a slap on the wrist and send him back off to work.

However...I'm not in charge, and the BBC are extremely sensitive to charges of this nature.


Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.93 on Windows 10
Ancient One 

Manager

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,541



    Quote:
    we also have to remember, and not saying to excuse bad behavior, that we have to view this in the context of the times, and not read today views back into it!


Unfortunately, the people who are going after Barrowman don't care if the offences are historic. Nor even if they're mild. These are the kind of people who must spend days going over years of twitter posts just to find one or two from ten years ago they can use to hang their victim with.


Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.93 on Windows 10
Trent Trueheart


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 1,121


BBC America airs the show in the United States. In other countries, Doctor Who airs on different channels. No matter who airs the show, they have to pay for the rights to do so. Even though BBC America is co-owned by the BBC, they probably still have to pay a licensing fee, although it might be less than what Sci-Fi would have paid back in the day thanks to corporate synergy.

HBO Max's exclusive rights are probably not worldwide rights. Currently, I think HBO Max is only available in the United States anyway. Plus, I think it is only the streaming rights, so in theory, the BBC could have two different providers (broadcast and streaming) paying for the rights to Doctor Who in every country that wants it. Usually the way these contracts work is that they pay a set amount per episode, so I still think it's probably worth is for the BBC to make the show no matter what the ratings are in the UK.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 88.0 on Windows 10
bd2999

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


I do not know details on such things.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Google Chrome 90.0.4430.93 on Windows 10
1 2  >> All

Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2021 Powermad Software