Russell T Davies confirms he's through with Doctor Who

News Simon Brew 29 Oct 2012 - 06:28
Russell T Davies: cheers, Mr D

Don't expect another Doctor Who episode from Russell T Davies. He's firmly a happy viewer, and has no plans to change that...

With Wizards Vs Aliens finally bursting onto our screens today, its co-creator, Russell T Davies, has given a new interview, and inevitably, the question of Doctor Who has come up. It's fair to say that Davies doesn't leave much doubt as to his current position.

"Don't ask me about the 50th anniversary", he told The Telegraph, "because it's nothing to do with me. I'm just a happy viewer now". This re-enforces his previously-stated adamant position that he has no plans at all to go back to the show. Internet rumours had occasionally linked Davies with returning to write an episode for Doctor Who, but it seems clear that isn't going to happen.

As it happens, there may have been one slight exception to Davies' refusal to go back to Doctor Who. He did reveal that "I did ask BBC Books if they fancied a graphic novel, and they went 'no'". And that appears to be it where Russell T Davies and Doctor Who are concerned.

Most important of all, though, is Davies' partner's continued fight against cancer, which is also touches on in the interview. We wish them both all the best in that battle. We really, really hate cancer a lot.

Wizards Vs Aliens starts on CBBC today. Do check it out. It's really very good.

The Telegraph.

Disqus - noscript

I'd like to think we're all a little happier in life knowing this.

Hurray!
*does the happy dance*

I'm rather sad about that. Sure, he wrote some terrible season finales and made some pretty bad choices, but overall he was a great showrunner who had the vision to bring back Doctor Who for the masses where no-one else could, and could write brilliantly when he hit the target.

If this doesn't get one excited I don't know what does.

Yay it's the RTD haters out in force! This news is sad and for all the haters let me remind you....

1. He brought the show back !
2. Midnight, waters of Mars, utopia and Doomsday are just brilliant!
3. His charectors were all different and 3 dimensional. Donna, Wilfred, Rose, Gwen,
Mickey, Martha.... Stephen charectors are very similar with little substance ( I love the MOffat era btw)

Then again I even enjoyed all the series finales.... Well apart from series 3 *shudders*

what about torchwood ?

While I very grateful that Russell Davis rebooted Doctor Who, I think it was time for him to go. The first year and a half was great. Then he started taking it dark…then darker. He even admitted he did not like having to do a “kiddies show”. He wanted to go darker, kill more people, and have more adult (sex type) themes. That’s when Torchwood was invented. He brought his adult themes to that. Torchwood was another series that was excellent in the first two years and then went off the deep end. He started killing all the people we had come to know and then that stupid “full season in five days” was the last straw.

So I am glad Russell T. Davis has nothing to with Doctor Who any more. Stephen Moffett is the MAN! Although I was NOT found of the way he (Moffett) did away with the Ponds. Now come on, was that necessary? No.

I agree with most of what you said....especially Midnight (Brilliant). Russell actually co-wrote Waters of Mars with Phil Ford....he didn't write it solo.
I actually liked a lot of his characters as well....but Mickey???? Are you kidding?? Gotta disagree with you there. Most of the time I found him to be very, very annoying. With the possible exception of Girl in the Fireplace, where he was put in the background.

I believe that's on indefinite pause, he couldn't pursue it in the US because of his partner's cancer bringing him back to the UK. So sad :(

Yup he was a good showrunner, but a bad writer of Doctor Who. Frankly if he said "I'm coming back to run the show and let Steven focus on writing" I'd be very happy. But if he announced he was coming back as a *writer* my heart would sink.
Although yes, as others have said, Midnight and Waters of Mars were both awesome.

Why did BBC books say no to a graphic novel?! That would have sold loads, plus it could have been the time war!

From the quote it doesn't sound like he was denying ever coming back, just that he has nothing to do with the 50th anniversary. Either way, Russell has been known to blatantly lie to the press before in order to keep a secret, so while he may indeed be completely done with Who, and has no intention of coming back, you never know what may happen in the future.

"Russell T Davies confirms he's through with Doctor Who"

Thank f*ck for that.

I love how this comment garners practically a 50/50 split in votes. Typical...

1. He didn't bring the show back by himself. You give him too much credit. There were several people responsible. He was just the one who took the reins. I give him credit for being part of the team with Julie Gardner and a lot of other people who brought the show back. I give him credit but not sole credit and I give the most credit to Jane Tranter who did most of the legwork to sell idea to the BBC after they had given up Doctor who for dead.

2. Waters of Mars was David Tennant at his finest not Russell T. Davies. The story was weak and the way he wrote the Doctor was completely OOC. Doomsday is sappy stuff clearly meant for the swooning section of the fans. All it did for me is highlight was a selfish wench Rose was. Utopia was a Jack Harkness episode that did little to showcase the Doctor. I'll give you midnight but that is probably it. All it did for me is highlight was a selfish wench Rose was.

3. Rose was 3 dimensional in some episodes. Her best moments were not written by him. Although he was much more consistent with her in series 1. She had potential and he wasted it to make her the docktuhs wun troo wuv. Ick. He cheapened her and almost all of his female characters.

He made Rose a lovesick woman who gets to have her love requited if unfulfilled and Martha a lovesick woman who gets to have her love unrequited and thus must leave because what's left for a woman if a man doesn't love her back? Surely not a personality or a sense of adventure. Then the pairing of her and Mickey as a pair the spares and hey make it racist to boot was certainly one of the worst moments in his tenure. Donna wasn't lovesick nor was the Doctor in love with her. This was expected thought because as she's over the age of education and not a hot young thing she couldn't possibly be a viable love interest for the Doctor.

Let's always mention how both Rose and Donna had zero going on in their lives before the Doctor came along. Let's not mention the fact they had friends, lovers, and jobs. No, the only way for a woman truly to be fulfilled is by having a man sweep her off her feet and show her how much better her life is by having him in it. Then let's make her life uninteresting the second the man leaves her. Rose working back in the shop and Donna back to presumably being a temp. Then we will go back in the last episodes and have the Doctor fix up their lives once again because they clearly weren't doing just fine on their own. Martha was the only one who seemed to do anything interesting after the Doctor and that was a small mention which was a shortly lived victory for his writing before he ruined it with a racist ending.

Mickey was a horrible doormat and an example of why sexism doesn't just exist against women. He was mistreated from the pilot and it never got much better. The only time he was respectable was when he walked away from the selfish brat that was Rose.

So you don't agree with me then haha! Each to their own.

Best news I have had all year.

Same reason they said no to a 'Red Dwarf' movie about a decade back... stupidity, myopia, lack of imagination... it's the BBC!

For anyone sweeping Davies' good bits aside as 'he didn't write that episode' should read The Writer's Tale in which he shows how extensively he re-writes every SINGLE episode, editing dialogue, characterisation, sometimes nothing about the original writer's work remains. With the exception of Moffat, whose episodes he didn't do much to, he essentially wrote the entire of his tenure and took no credit for a lot of it. I don't like how people choose to hate Davies now we have Moffat, who I find inferior. Sure, he's not perfect, but he was one of the driving forces behind bringing Doctor Who back and he's a damn good writer too.

I was trying to be nice in my post above. I'm not sure why you are replying to my post with this, but yes, you are correct, Russell was a control freak. He didn't know when to stop. He interfered with every single writer coz he thought he was the only one that was good enough. Can you imagine how much better the show would've been if he would just stop interfering with people? A lot of the stories we saw probably would have been better if he left the writing to the writers instead of trying to dominate everything. Why do you think the brilliant Rob Shearman never came back? (This man is 10 times the writer that RTD will ever be, and he was bossed around) Why do you think the best RTD stories were Moffat ones?(because Moffat is the only one he didn't interfere with) Yes, I'm sure Russell is a "damn good writer", but certainly not for sci-fi.
Having said that, he still didn't write Waters of Mars, he CO-WROTE it!! Deal with it.

In Davies own words the *only* writer whose work he didn't edit was Moffats, and who was the writer to whom all the praise was given? Moffat.
Moffat does the same re-writing as Davies, the job hasn't suddenly changed (it's why Moffat only hires writers with TV experience as there isn't time to edit the work of someone new to Television).
They faced the same challenges, Moffat produces a *show* I love, Davies produced a show that contained *episodes* that I loved.

The finale to series four was pretty awful. The joy of Davros and a decent Supreme Dalek, all washed away by a magic wand and some CBBC drama via video link.

It wasn't really a direct response to your opinion, which you're fully entitled to, obviously. I just couldn't really find a place to latch my response to the whole debate onto. Your comment was as good a place as any. No direct attack at you was intended.

I didn't take it as an attack. No worries there. I was just trying to be politically correct and not attack RTD in my initial post. I guess it came across as that anyway. Oh we'll.

Nah, you were pretty fair in your own argument. I was just contributing to a debate and wasn't sure where to butt in. Sorry about the confusion, friend. :)

NOOOOOOOOO, it was better than when he was there, now he doing crap like wizards VS Aliens :(

Doctor Who was better with davies, I hate Moffats incarnation, not a single evil corpartion in site.. i miss those

As a producer he knows glitz and grab. In terms of content, he was almost always too campy and shallow. But noting what sort of drivel the masses enjoy today, to make the show as rich, intellectual, and daring as it was in 1963 would not be possible.

I didn't always like his style, but "The Waters of Mars" shows how top-notch he can be. All he needed was a good co-writer, and to not play into stereotypes out of cheap ploys to troll for cheap ratings (especially ageism, but it doesn't matter which stereotype is being exploited), but I actually am saddened by the news.

He could do a great wind-up, but the resolution would either be dreadful or insulting. Especially "Stolen Earth" and "Utopia". "Utopia" was a classic. "Stolen Earth" was bad enough, but "Journey's End" took the concept of regeneration and reduced it to a throwaway mockery.

1. he dumbed it down - might have been better off if the show remained dead; its only use is to sell plastic toys.

2. "Doomsday" was worse than the campy fluff Verity Lambert criticized the show from the latter part of the 80s as being. "Waters of Mars" is fantastic. Never saw most of season 4 because of how derivative and worn out it all felt.
3. Rose was hideous. Wifred was okay, made better by the actor's performance. Mickey was a horrid camp stick figure as pathetic "comic relief" until series 2, where he didn't just show how rotten Rose was, but how much of a real character he could be. Mickey had the right stuff for a companion. All Rose did was whine. Even Peri had more character than Rose...

The series finales had great wind-ups (usually) but poor deliveries/follow-throughs.

Series 1 had a lot of potential, but a lot of it was let down by a lot of those rewrites...

Given that "The Unquiet Dead" was an otherwise good story let down by stupid jokes, especially the pre-credits bit that almost wrecks it (thanks, RTD)... and how "Father's Day" puts logic and coherence to the side, deliberately, just for more forced tearjerk moments... it was obvious where RTD got his pencil and eraser out...

Given "Torchwood" is his idea of "adult" television, I'll pass. Gore and sex, when thoughtfully used, can be poignant. All he did was gush blood and have monsters absorb emotions given off during orgasm and try to tell us he was telling adult stories that have something to say about society... without "Confidential" to tell us that, nobody would have noticed... his style is provocative but shallow. I wouldn't call it "adult", but I would call it "juvenile". I wrote the same sort of fluff for "Creative Writing" class decades ago and I was only 15... RTD was 40-something at the time... But I'll admit I am not a creative writer. What's his excuse?

So has The Moff.

And, as with politicians, people in general are getting sick and tired of lies, chicanery, and infantile game playing actions on the parts of these people.

To all those Davies haters out there: you may have your reasons, but let me remind you that the guy is a human being and no human being is perfect. He may not be the best at creating monsters and episode plots (which could be said to fall into the hands of Moffat) but his works in creating series-long plots and keeping them secretive until the finale were a hell of a lot better than Moffat's. And no matter how much you hate his characters, I have to admit he creates a realistic character as a companion much better than Moffat. And finally, after you list your bounty of reasons why he didn't do a good job, let me ask you this: why don't you write for Doctor Who? I'd like to see you work nearly as hard as Russell did, writing, screenplaying, producing, executive producing... If you think Russell didn't do a good job, go to the BBC and make a better job of it yourself, because I doubt you could.

To all those Davies haters out there: you may have your reasons, but let me remind you that the guy is a human being and no human being is perfect. He may not be the best at creating monsters and episode plots (which could be said to fall into the hands of Moffat) but his works in creating series-long plots and keeping them secretive until the finale were a hell of a lot better than Moffat's. And no matter how much you hate his characters, I have to admit he creates a realistic character as a companion much better than Moffat. And finally, after you list your bounty of reasons why he didn't do a good job, let me ask you this: why don't you write for Doctor Who? I'd like to see you work nearly as hard as Russell did, writing, screenplaying, producing, executive producing... If you think Russell didn't do a good job, go to the BBC and make a better job of it yourself, because I doubt you could.

Sponsored Links