Forum:2entertain Shada

Ian Levine twittered last week that 2 entertain had finished their animated reconstruction of the incomplete Shada, and they've now showed it to a handful of people (without the final audio track) to review. (See the first review here.) I think it would be good to get some consensus on how to handle this before it comes out; otherwise, someone's going to tear apart the Shada (TV story) article and someone else will creates a new article under an incorrect name and it'll be a lot of work to get it all back to where we want it.

The first question is, is this a new story, or just a new release of an old story? Obviously, the BBC wants us to think of this as the official DVD of the TV episode, if only because it will sell more copies if they refer to it that way, but we don't have to agree. Unlike The Invasion, where the Cosgrove animation just restored a story that had been broadcast and was now missing, they're effectively creating a new story here: scenes have been storyboarded, directed, and (voice-)acted (by different actors) for the first time ever, without the involvement of Graham Williams, Pennant Roberts, Douglas Adams, and the rest of the production team. Also, is the VHS release of the incomplete Shada a story in its own right, even if part of it is told by Tom Baker (mostly out-of-character)?

So, leave Shada (TV story) as it is, and add a Shada (DVD), Shada (DVD story) or Shada (2 entertain) or something like that (and if so, under what name?), or change Shada (TV story) to be about the reconstruction, and treat the unproduced episodes much like missing episodes? If it does get a separate article, does it get a DW prefix, or something different? And is Gareth Roberts' upcoming novelization the novelization of the incomplete TV story, the animated DVD reconstruction, or both?

Finally, rumors have it that the "without the final audio track" bit is there because Tom Baker is coming in to replace all of Paul Jones' work as the 4th Doctor, but the DVD will have the Paul Jones version as an alternate audio track. That hasn't been confirmed, but if it turns out to be true, how could we credit Paul Jones? Or does that depend on how he's credited on the DVD itself? --70.36.140.19 14:40, September 17, 2011 (UTC)


 * You're getting the cart wayyyy ahead of the horse. Lots of "ifs" in your post.  Spoiler policy doesn't even allow the creation of an artilce about a story prior to its release.  And release is a way off yet.


 * We also need to firmly establish whether the thing is even BBC licensed. This can only be absolutely confirmed by having the packaging in our hands.  I've heard that whatever Ian Levine is up to is nothing to do with the BBC at all.  We need to wait until release to settle any of these questions.  So I'm kinda confused by the conflation of Levine's project and 2|entertain's ostensibly official DVD.  In any case, time will reveal all.


 * As for the only televisual thing currently released as Shada by the BBC — the construction with Tom Baker linking narration — it is what thsi wiki calls Shada (TV story). We'd really have to take some time and look at the final product of whatever these new efforts are to how it will impact our current disambiguation of Shada. Personally, I would think if it's declared a faithful completion of the 1979 shooting script, then it doesn't actually deserve its own page.  Shada (TV story) would effectively be the sum of both the VHS and official DVD releases.


 * The reason there's currently Shada (audio) is because it's obviously materially different, since it features another Doctor entirely, as well as significant scenes not present in the original scripts. The reason that there's [[Shada (webcast) is because it's a different medium, and I'm pretty sure that it's a different cut of the material from the webcast.  I'm not certain, but I have a memory that it's not just "the soundtrack of the webcast".  It just mostly is.


 * Point is, there would have to be something materially different about th4e DVD version for it to get its own page. By that, I don't just mean "additional scenes completed".  There would have to be a known variance from the shooting scripts used in 1979.  Otherwise, it is merely the televisual completion of the work intended for broadcast, and is thus Shada (TV story).


 * 05:21: Sun 18 Sep 2011