Talk:Doctor Who (TV story)

Move to Doctor Who: The Movie
The DVD releases have named this is as Doctor Who: The Movie. Should we move it in deference to the most recent official title?The Traveller 09:04, February 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * No. Doctor Who (1996) or, even better, Doctor Who (TV story) are the best choices. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 00:46, November 14, 2012 (UTC)

I have question about Gareth. When the Doctor saw Gareth at the party, he told him to answer the 2nd question on his test. He mention that Gareth will save the world. Could this be an indirect reference to Gareth Jenkins from the In A Fix with the Sontarans bit done on the BBC show Jim'll Fix It? Just wondering. (Also, I thought the "title" to this show was "The Enemy Within", at least according to other references). Hope you can help out. Hotshot70 ☎  11:31, December 31, 2012 (UTC)


 * That's speculation, and that title has been identified as a nickname invented by a director or something. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 20:38, December 31, 2012 (UTC)


 * Producer Phil Segal suggested it at a convention. 24.61.9.32talk to me 02:48, June 26, 2014 (UTC)

Production section
Given how in depth it is, along with how there doesn't seem to be that many production sections in general that I can think of, should there be citations given for all that information? -- Tybort (talk page) 01:47, November 1, 2013 (UTC)

Behind the Scenes info largely copied from "A Brief History of Time (Travel)"
Some minor changes, but essentially cut-and-pasted from here:

http://www.shannonsullivan.com/doctorwho/serials/tvm.html

Under Copyright and Disclaimer, SS says that people interested in reproducing his work can contact him, though.

http://www.shannonsullivan.com/doctorwho/siteinfo.html

Has anyone done so already? Perhaps he gave his permission? 24.61.9.32talk to me 00:20, June 26, 2014 (UTC)


 * This was actually addressed once, as can be seen in the archives of this talk page. However, there doesn't seem to have been any action taken.


 * If you could give the specific section title(s) that are copied, that would make it a bit easier to look into it. Thanks! Shambala108 ☎  03:02, June 26, 2014 (UTC)

20 20 Hindsight
A large period of time is implied to have passed since Survival, as the Seventh Doctor has parted with his companion Ace, is visibly older, is dressed differently and is travelling alone. The narration by the Eighth Doctor also states that at this time, he was "nearing the end of [his] Seventh..." life."

The sentence about nearing the end of his seventh life is nothing to do with how much time has passed since Survival. The Eighth doctor is narrating with hindsight, knowing he was soon to be shot.165.225.76.55talk to me 14:53, December 11, 2018 (UTC)

Infobox image 2021
The infobox image was changed without discussion last May. We should probably discuss this. Here are the three images that have recently been in the infobox here.

The current image is just of the Eighth Doctor. #1 is the climax, at least, and #2 is a notable moment with a secondary character. There are probably some other candidates already uploaded that present the main action in some way. In the meantime, I've temporarily changed the image back to #1, as it had been. 23:17, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Feel free to add more suggestions below. I'm thinking an image of Eight post-regen could also work. There's a few shots in the scene where he knocks down the steel door you can see in the video to the right. (Dunno if the "Who! Am! I!" scene has any decent shots?) 23:22, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Rename? 2023 discussion
Inspired by this tweet, and discussion beneath it, I thought I'd bring up the idea of changing the name of this page to (arguably) better suit its story/content.


 * a. Doctor Who can be quite confusing, given it's the name of the TV show as a whole.
 * b. Unconventional naming conventions shouldn't be alien to the Wiki where suitable.
 * c. It's only a small pool, but this poll here has approx. 750 votes at the time of writing and a large portion is skewed towards "The Movie".
 * d. "The TV Movie" is the title of the official novelisation and its reprint.
 * e. "The Movie" is used on the official DVD release.
 * f. "Doctor Who" arguably isn't the on screen title - that's the logo, which shows up in 99% of title sequences. As such, the product is untitled.
 * g. For newcomers and the not-we, "the Movie" is just a more efficient term which can be easily recognised and understood.
 * h. The screenshot seen in this tweet highlights that using "Doctor Who" can just read quite unusually on some articles, since it's the name of the entire series.

Fractal Doctor ☎  09:48, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

I would also like to add that the on-screen title for Season 23 is "The Trial of a Time Lord", but this Wiki uses individual titles such as "The Mysterious Planet". I feel this is a similar case and example of the Wiki deviating from the on-screen title. "TMP" (et al) also appear on the official releases and DVDs, etc. like "The Movie" does for the 1996 story. Fractal Doctor ☎  09:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Also, "The TV Movie" is used here. Fractal Doctor ☎  19:59, 11 March 2023 (UTC)


 * I support renaming the page as "The TV Movie (TV story)" or at least "Doctor Who (TV movie)". BananaClownMan ☎  09:57, 22 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Regardless on whether or not we do this rename for x y or z reasons, some options could be Doctor Who: The Movie (TV story) or Doctor Who (feature film). 14:33, 22 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Honestly, any of those suggested by BananaClownMan and Epsilon work, except for "The TV Movie (TV story)" which I feel sounds clunky with the double use of "TV". Arguably the most efficient move would simply to keep what we have but change "story" to "movie"? Or if not, my vote would go to Doctor Who: The Movie (TV story). Fractal Doctor ☎  16:47, 24 March 2023 (UTC)


 * I think that "Doctor Who: The Movie (TV story)" works best. That's the title that is predominantly used in marketing and on releases of the movie, so it's not without precedent. Pluto2 ☎ 18:20, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Just giving this a nudge - anyone else have opinions on this? I still think the page should be renamed to one of the variants suggested above. — Fractal Doctor @  18:44, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * My preference would be Doctor Who: The Movie (TV story), I think it makes the most sense, and as User:Pluto2 says, has a degree of precedent in marketing, official releases etc. Aquanafrahudy   📢   18:55, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I'll also vote for "Doctor Who: The Movie (TV story)" — Fractal Doctor @  18:57, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I think Czech's arguments in 2008 that its title at the time was merely "Doctor Who" are quite persuasive. (As such, point f is simply false in the strong sense.) Whether or not we wish to keep this title is another matter. Czech argues we should because we care about accuracy. Which Scrooge re-affirms to some extent at Forum:Relaxing T:HONOUR. It's different enough that I'm not sure it's binding here. But we at least need to consider the 2008 discussion and these factors. Najawin ☎  19:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Well, there's arguably precedent, in that our pages for Hartnell TV stories are all named after the DVD releases. And it would certainly be a much more intuitive name for it. Aquanafrahudy   📢   19:29, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * The Hartnell serials is something I've been meaning to review, really. Certainly things seem to be turning at Talk:The Massacre (TV story) (I'll likely close in favour of that rename in the coming days unless there's significant new arguments against, now I've been reminded of it). But on the flipside, I didn't mean for Forum:Relaxing T:HONOUR to have any particular bearing on story titles, no. And really all the ambiguity about the TVM relies on the extent to which Doctor Who was really a story title in any meaningful sense. Sure, it was the legal title of the work, but that doesn't mean it's artistically the same thing, necessarily. Talk:Scorpio's Sting (comic story) may make for interesting comparison; isn't the fact that it's legally called just Doctor Who rather more like Scorpio's Sting having originally been registered as Devil's End 1a than anything else? I don't believe our preference for original titles would extend as far as insisting on Devil's End 1a. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 20:30, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Tbh I'd be completely in favour of splitting the Hartnell serials to bring them more in line with how we cover other multipart stories. (And whatever we rename the Massacre, it'll still spoil it for whoever wants to watch it, because the entire episode is predicated on the premise that you don't know that there's going to be a massacre.) Sorry, off topic. Aquanafrahudy   📢   20:50, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I note also that d is false as well, the novelization is "officially" titled just "Doctor Who", but has the alternative title "Doctor Who - The Novel of the Film". Can someone source the claim that marketing used "Doctor Who: The Movie" extensively? I glanced at a pictures of the VHS release, soundtrack, and script, Czech is correct, they're all just "Doctor Who". (Well, the script has "The Script of the Film" attached. But it's not called "The Movie".)


 * If anything, if we insist on changing it, it seems like it should be "Doctor Who: The Film", based on this. But it's entirely possible that there was marketing around the time that's relevant. (I also think it's difficult even to hold the weak form of f. The soundtrack is literally called "Doctor Who", both on its front and spine. Is this untitled as well? I find this hard to believe.) Najawin ☎  21:13, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

The newest reprint of the Target novelisation is called "The TV Movie". In any case, I think the main point here is that "Doctor Who (TV Story)" is just potentially confusing, especially to newcomers. At the very least, could we not break the norms just this once and put "1996" in there somewhere to make it somewhat clearer? "Doctor Who (1996 TV story)" for example. If not, well, fine, but I'd still say "Doctor Who: The Movie (TV Story)" would be a better title, for search reasons and because it's at the very least emblazened on the official DVD release.

Also, the very fact that one version of the novel had to add a subtitle ("Doctor Who - The Novel of the Film") kind of says to me that "Doctor Who" alone is confusing and awkward for marketing purposes. — Fractal Doctor @  21:51, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * "The soundtrack is literally called "Doctor Who", both on its front and spine. Is this untitled as well? I find this hard to believe.)" Even if it's not untitled, it still sort of ties into my point that for the page on this very Wiki for it, we've gone with "Doctor Who - TV Movie soundtrack" and not just "Doctor Who - Soundtrack." — Fractal Doctor @  21:54, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Sidenote: Could we not follow Wikipedia's lead here and simply go for "Doctor Who (film)" or "Doctor Who (movie)"? (Or just change "TV story" in brackets to "TV movie".) I suggest it because this Wiki has done that for Cushing - "Dr. Who and the Daleks (theatrical film)" and "Daleks' Invasion Earth 2150 A.D. (theatrical film)". We could simply omit "theatrical" and put "film", or "televised film"). — Fractal Doctor @  22:09, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I would also like to note that I’m very against "Doctor Who:" titling because we’d end up with a similar situation as Doctor Who: Legacy and Doctor Who: Lost in Time. There was an old ruling that said anything with that kind of titling should get rid of "Doctor Who:", meaning "Doctor Who: The Film" or "Doctor Who: The Movie" would have to become just "The Film" or "The Movie", and that would be bad titling for this subject. Danniesen ☎  22:27, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * The statement was '"The TV Movie" is the title of the official novelisation and its reprint.' This is strictly not the case. Moreover, I note that the novelization didn't have to say "Doctor Who - The Novel of the Film". Its front cover just says "Doctor Who". On the spine it says both the title and subtitle.


 * As for the soundtrack, I'm not sure why SOTO chose that name for the bot run. I can't speak to someone else's intent when they don't elaborate on it. It wasn't the original page title. It was changed during a bot run to "Standardi[ze] soundtrack names". Prior to that it was some version of "Doctor Who: Original Soundtrack Recording" for 7.5 years. I'm not sure how this is particularly strong evidence for the idea that we should change this page - at best it's a good reason to change that one. And, of course, even if it does establish that on the wiki we've been less than consistent, (which itself is dispositive of nothing) it damns to oblivion your idea that the film itself was untitled. It had a title. It's just one that's a headache for us. Najawin ☎  22:34, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

(Also, the DVD release is actively discussed in the 2008 discussion over the name. So if you're going to keep bringing it up, please engage with why people then didn't find it compelling and explain why we might actually consider it.) Najawin  ☎  22:36, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

I think we should also accept that this singular story is an oddity in amongst the rest of the show. Yes, there are debates about Hartnell era stories but at least they all have titles to debate. This is the only story (that I'm aware of) with no title on screen, hence endless debate about it. As such, I think the fact that most fans and people would simply refer to it as "the Movie" has to hold some weight, even if it's only a contributing factor. In a discussion, people can't just refer to it as "Doctor Who" because that's the title of the whole show - surely nobody would say, for example, "My favourite stories are The War Games, The Deadly Assassin, and Doctor Who." Surely instead they'd refer to it as "the movie" or "the movie with McGann" or "the TV Movie" or "the 1996 film" - whatever and whichever, people will always have to give it some kind of 'subtitle' to indicate what they're referring to. Even the novelisation had to. The newest reprint has "The TV Movie" as its title.

Also, sure, Najawin, its title was "Doctor Who" but the debate is basically that it's a clumsy name when referring to the movie or when you're re/searching it. "Doctor Who (TV Story)" just isn't all that clear or intuitive IMO. — Fractal Doctor @  22:39, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Sidenote: Also wanted to note, obscure but in the 50th Anniversary Collection album, the music from the movie is listed as "Doctor Who: The Television Movie Suite", again presumably to help searchability and because it needs some kind of label to explain what it is beyond "Doctor Who Suite". — Fractal Doctor @  22:52, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * From what I can gather, in 2008, a user said "The TV Movie" is a descriptive term rather than an official title, and only the DVD had that on the cover (well, "The Movie" to be precise). Since then, the reprinted novelisation has also put "The TV Movie" on its cover. And fair enough that's still only 2 official products with that name, but it could be argued that it proves even the BBC feel it's appropriate to 'label' what it is. (They could've just created the reprint with the Doctor Who logo and nothing more, but they opted to put a label/name/title on it, presumably for marketing purposes and searchability.) — Fractal Doctor @  22:47, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I agree with Fractal here. Nobody actually calls that movie Doctor Who. Also, off-topic answer to Aquanafrahudy about Hartnell episodes: I would very much be against splitting those episodes. Not a good idea. You simply can’t hold 60s stories up to today’s standards and ways of doing things. Danniesen ☎  22:51, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Ease of search is also brought up in the 2008 discussion. With the exact same conclusion reached as in Forum:Relaxing T:HONOUR, that the most accurate name should be used, and the less accurate "fan names" used as redirects as this still allows people to adequately search for the article.


 * This is also a rather extreme misunderstanding of how that discussion actually proceeded. It wasn't "oh, only the DVD used it, so we can just ignore the DVD". It was "only the DVD used it, and the DVD was released years later and it's a real headache for The BBC to have this be the official title in retrospect, so they have motivation to try and change it, but we care about accuracy in the context of the time, so we just ignore that, it's not relevant." By the lights of the latter framing, the second novelization is similarly irrelevant. The BBC's changing feelings don't impact our policies. Najawin ☎  22:57, 25 August 2023 (UTC)