Special Feature - The Budget - Doctor Who - Planet of Giants - BBC
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 08. 2012
- Doctor Who producer Verity Lambert discusses the benefits to receiving a small budget. With as little as £2000 per half hour, the small budget enabled imagination and ingenuity to take centre stage....
Subscribe to the BBC Classic Doctor Who channel: bit.ly/yxnAim
BBC Classic Doctor Who Channel: / bbcclassicdoctorwho
Classic Doctor Who Twitter: / classicdw
Doctor Who Facebook: / doctorwho
This is a commercial channel from BBC Studios. Service & Feedback www.bbcstudios.com/contact/co... - Zábava
She's confirming what I've always believed, that they created magic with so little.
Now they create crap with a lot.
You should see BLAKE'S 7 too.
the less you have to work with, the more your brain has to work. it might not be flash and amazing, but it's still awesome.
I think they do what they can. After all, most of the Weeping Angels are either actors or clever camera tricks of actual statues, and the Daleks and Cybermen are still actors. I think what CGI does for you, is allow you to create monsters that no actor could possibly wear the costume. Like the Krillitanes in "School Reunion" or the Reapers from "Father's Day".
The Gas Mask Zombies were mostly costumes, apart from the ones that were making the transitions... And most of the time Vincent's monster was completely invisible. They try to cut down on the effects shots as much as possible. Even with the million dollar budgets of today, they still cut a few corners...
This is why I prefer the classic series to the newer series, because they made fantastic television with small amounts of money.
New Who - crap television made with fantastic amounts of money.
@@fjccommish Well said! ... Couldn't agree more!
The old series used to pad the numbers with cardboard cutouts of Daleks in the background, or they used to use a model shot with toys. I don't see how using CGI is any different than that, except that it looks better.
xD that lift effect is convincing... The walls move down.
Actually it wasn't done that way at all! It's a technique called inlay whereby two images are combined. In this case, a camera shoots the actors on a life platform and pans downwards, and the image is superimposed over a static shot of the sides of the set. Inlay was used many times in the 1960s, almost always to great effect. It was a forerunner of CSO and greenscreen.
RIP Variety Lambert
Verity Lambert hit the nail on the head there! ... I've always said that Classic Who was BETTER than fancy big budget New Who, because they relied on creativity, imagination, and great stories, rather than big budgets and CGI!
Exactly.
A good story will be good without relying on special effects.
@@jamesline5103 I'm glad you agree! Some of the BEST Who ever, was made on a shoestring budget, and was all the better for it!
In the space of one minute the late Ms. Lambert has hit it right on the head. No matter what anyone says, it took a lot of imagination and skill to make a show like Doctor Who back in the 60's. We can whinge about the new series all we want, but I would imagine it takes as much imagination today as it did back then- they just have more technology to play with. Long live Doctor Who!
Because the show still has to adhere to the BBC budget, which can only give out so much money for any of their shows. The only reason the "Doctor Who" budget has increased is because the BBC knows that it's their major hit not just in Britain but also in the U.S. and across the world.
You makes good point.
Of course. The CGI is great (apart from some of scenes of the Dalek fleet, they looked rather fake)To compare old Doctor Who with its two thousand pound per episode budget with New Doctor Who which can cost a million pounds per episode is completely unfair. Hell, they could not even compete for budget and special effects with old Star Trek. (it did not help that they needed new sets or locations every week)
Agreed. New Who is crap, while Classic Who is terrific. There's no comparison.
@@fjccommish There are horrendous episodes of Old Who. Particularly in the 80s.
@@dangerouslytalented Even the worst of Classic Who is better than the best of crap New Who.
Old who is more often than not let down by the budget and the limitations of the technology of the time. For that reason, it survived on the merits of the ideas, writing, characters and acting. New Who is let down by precisely those virtues which made old Who what it was, and kept afloat by technology.
That's £40k in today's money
😊
and why did the tripods recieve a bigger budget the doctor who
Doctor Who was in a difficult state at that point. The ratings were down and the writing was getting worse. I reckon the BBC wanted to wow people as much as possible with their new show (Tripods) and rake in the viewership. Possibly to also make a point about the bad rep BBC Sci fi shows got.
There are only a handful of actual life sized Daleks, and ther rest of their numbers are padded out with CGI.
There's not really that many CGI monsters in the new series...
You're just nit picking. Do you honestly think they can afford to go out and hire 10,000 actors to play Daleks?
in actual fact the show recieved in increase in budget when it moved over to colour.