Post by burrunjor on Oct 13, 2023 13:49:26 GMT
This is the biggest myth in DW fandom. Sadly they weren't having me question it on Gallifrey Reddit. (Just to be clear they're okay over there. They haven't banned me or anything so that's a plus, and some of my posts are well regarded, but yeah not surprisingly any about the Fitzroy Crowd sink like the Titanic.)
Still I feel this myth should be debunked, as it does harm the show. As the guy who keeps changing his name, Monster X, Uncle Deadly, Rob, Brian, Iank, Maxil, Bernard have all said the show isn't able to move on from Tennant because the accepted attitude, even among most classic fans, even on anti new who forums is. "Tennant represented the only time that DW was mainstream and popular. You can't deny that. Therefore his is the model we must follow from now on, to the point where every Doctor eventually becomes a Tennant clone like Smith and Capaldi, or starts as one like Jodie, and eventually we have to bring Tennant himself back."
Ultimately however that's bollocks. Leaving aside the fact that tastes change and what was popular almost 20 years ago is not going to be popular today. Tennant doesn't even represent the pinnacle of popularity for the show. In fact as a whole New Who is arguably less successful than the original. Now obviously it's hard to measure the popularity of both because again the tv landscape has changed dramatically even from Hartnell to Pertwee. Still looking at the viewers, which is the only real data we have beyond just "oh in my social group this was when DW was popular" that's entirely anecdotal. Then no Tennant and New Who doesn't represent the peak of popularity.
Here are the statistics to back it up. These include the fiddled I Player viewers, which I think help balance out there being fewer channels in classic who's time which in all fairness is a HUGE advantage.
guide.doctorwhonews.net/info.php
Now if you can't be arsed looking at that then basically this is how it goes.
The only Doctors to get higher viewers every single year are William Hartnell, Jon Pertwee and David Tennant.
Of the three of them however Pertwee and Hartnell reached higher viewers for their highest seasons than Ten Inch, whilst Pertwe had the added struggle of getting higher viewers for 5 years, not just 3. These are the viewers on average for a year, not individual stories to be clear which could fluctuate for all kinds of reasons across old and new who.
Hartnell
1/ 6.15m
2/ 8.88m
3/ 9.95m
Pertwee
7/ 7.17m
8/ 7.96m
9/ 8.35m
10/ 8.71m
11/ 9.04m
Tennant
2/ 7.83m
3/ 7.96m
4/ 8.41m
Now to be fair Tennant's last year did get viewers on average in the 10 millions, BUT that was only 4 specials. I don't think you can really compare that to a full series. By that logic Paul McGann would be one of the most popular Doctors, Peter Cushing too as his first movie was a big success. In terms of maintaining them across a full series, then NO, Tennant didn't do it for as long a period, nor did he reach the heights of either Hartnell or Pertwee.
In actual fact the most remarkable period of popularity for DW is Pertwee's first season to Tom's third. That represents a period where the shows viewers go up every single year for 7 years! Neither the 60s nor New Who came close to managing that. There is a quite a large drop in viewers from Eccelston's first season to Tennant's first, and Matt also enjoyed a big drop for his second, whilst there was a similar drop from Hartnell to Troughton.
Meanwhile what's even more incredible is that Peter Davison actually got higher viewers on average for one season than Tennant ever did.
Here is the Davison era.
19/ 9.23m
20/ 7.06m
21/ 7.18m
No Tennant series, or Matt or Eccelston series reached 9 millions on average for the viewers. However unlike Tennant, Davison did have a big drop for his second year, though it picked up again for his third. Overall Tennant is actually closer to Davison in terms of popularity than he is to Jon or Hartnell or Tom. All of those three classic Doctors had multiple series above the 7 millions, whilst Tennant and Davison only had one each above the 7 millions, and whilst Tennant's went up ever year, Davison did have a bigger high in the 9 millions, so yeah overall Tennant is not the modern day Tom. He's the modern day Davison.
Meanwhile the only Doctor to get fewer viewers every year out of classic who is sadly Colin (who had a hiatus to deal with and was there for just two years.)
Meanwhile in New Who, the last two Doctors, Capaldi and Jodie both got lower viewers every year.
Here are the viewers for their eras.
Capaldi
8/ 7.34m
9/ 6.16m
10/ 5.64m
Jodie
11/ 7.96m
12/ 5.40m
Flux/ 5.16m
I might add if you include Jodie years where there were only one or two episodes, her era STILL drops every single year, with her last being in the four millions. Also these include the I player figures too which add two million over the course of a week (or a month in Jodie's case) so some could argue you could shed two million off of these, but again for the sake of fairness I'll play their game.
Finally the era that had the highest viewers on average is Tom's.
Here is his era.
9.95m
10.69m
9.63m
9.10m
10.52m
5.62m
6.80m
As you can see until his last season in 1980, Tom never got fewer than 9 million on average, a truly incredible feat for any show to maintain for 6 years and one that very, very few genre series since, including the revival have ever been able to replicate. In fact no British genre show has ever been able to manage that, though to be fair the second last series benefited from a strike.
Meanwhile when it comes to international popularity, again the official word is that DW was an obscure oddity in America until Matt Smith who enjoyed massive mainstream popularity. Not true at all. Classic Who pulled in over 9 million viewers in America in the 80s on average. During the peak of New Who's popularity in America in the Matt Smith era, it got 2 million at its highest. Also in America in the 80s the DW fan club of America was the largest in the world. Arguably that represented the only period in the shows history when DW was more popular stateside than in the UK. Sadly its popularity in America ended when Michael Grade raised prices of the stories to the point where no one could buy them anymore.
All from the 80s and why sadly its American following ended.
Yet people like Nerdrotic claim that the revival was the only time it was popular stateside, again based on their own social groups.
Now to be fair there are some ways in which New Who has enjoyed success the likes of which Classic Who never did. Obviously fandom is more of a thing now than during the 60s, 70s or even the 80s. Furthermore New Who does tend to rank higher in the weekly rankings, and Tennant was the only Doctor to get a single episode of his the number 1 most watched show the week it aired. (Journey's End.)
Still that said as you can see overall in terms of viewers then NO, New Who is not DW finally being accepted as mainstream. It shows you how big the hype machine is for new who, as there are fans, even those who dislike the revival, who hold this mindset to such an extent they actually think that Peter Capaldi's era was a bigger mainstream hit than Jon Pertwee's!
Here look at this comment from a guy on youtube. Now I'm not trying to make out he's an idiot, or "oh poor me" he was abusive or anything, obviously not. He agreed with me about Jodie, but when I dared to suggest my alternate sequel idea he got angry and went on about how we can never get rid of New Who, because it is the most popular era of the show. See here.
Doctor Who has continued (9-12.) Deal with it. It was the biggest show of the 2000s. It has a MUCH BIGGER fanbase than "True Who." Don't get me wrong I ADORE old who. But Old who is what gave birth to Chibnall's writing. He still uses outdated plots and monsters of that style in New Who.
And Bruh. don't get started on the viewers of the Legendary Capaldi. Colin Baker had the WORST episodes under the lead writers and producers and got fired over not being liked by them. Sylvester McCoy redeemed it but was canned under that writer.
Doctor Who was brought back and is loved universally. It is huge! Can't believe You missed out on that hype and excitement mate. Your going off on New Whovians for liking it because you missed your chance at the golden stages of New Who. Sorry mate. Your nothing but a speck atm trying to have a go at the indestructible early years of New Who. Now look. Doctors 1-12 are BEAST MODE. 13 is failing hard.
See what I mean? The idea that Capaldi is more mainstream than Hartnell, Pertwee or Troughton or Davison is insane. Why is his era not held as a we lost the viewers, the same way that McCoy and Colin's and Davison's all are?
At the end of the day I'd say that overall New Who and Classic Who probably have about the same levels of popularity. Neither were ever the most popular shows of their respective eras, which is okay as the shows that were, like Black and White Minstrils Show, and X-Factor are all deemed unwatchable trash nowadays. Both on average are fairly mainstream shows that had their ups and downs like any other, but having said that they most successful series, for whatever reason are still in Classic Who, and Classic Who maintained consistently strong viewers over a longer period of time, had fewer hiatuses and was in a much healthier stage at this point.
For that reason saying, maybe we should try and updated version of something like classic who, is not condemning the show to a niche audience. I'd say copying a specific style from 20 years ago, that actually wasn't even the peak of this show is.
Still I feel this myth should be debunked, as it does harm the show. As the guy who keeps changing his name, Monster X, Uncle Deadly, Rob, Brian, Iank, Maxil, Bernard have all said the show isn't able to move on from Tennant because the accepted attitude, even among most classic fans, even on anti new who forums is. "Tennant represented the only time that DW was mainstream and popular. You can't deny that. Therefore his is the model we must follow from now on, to the point where every Doctor eventually becomes a Tennant clone like Smith and Capaldi, or starts as one like Jodie, and eventually we have to bring Tennant himself back."
Ultimately however that's bollocks. Leaving aside the fact that tastes change and what was popular almost 20 years ago is not going to be popular today. Tennant doesn't even represent the pinnacle of popularity for the show. In fact as a whole New Who is arguably less successful than the original. Now obviously it's hard to measure the popularity of both because again the tv landscape has changed dramatically even from Hartnell to Pertwee. Still looking at the viewers, which is the only real data we have beyond just "oh in my social group this was when DW was popular" that's entirely anecdotal. Then no Tennant and New Who doesn't represent the peak of popularity.
Here are the statistics to back it up. These include the fiddled I Player viewers, which I think help balance out there being fewer channels in classic who's time which in all fairness is a HUGE advantage.
guide.doctorwhonews.net/info.php
Now if you can't be arsed looking at that then basically this is how it goes.
The only Doctors to get higher viewers every single year are William Hartnell, Jon Pertwee and David Tennant.
Of the three of them however Pertwee and Hartnell reached higher viewers for their highest seasons than Ten Inch, whilst Pertwe had the added struggle of getting higher viewers for 5 years, not just 3. These are the viewers on average for a year, not individual stories to be clear which could fluctuate for all kinds of reasons across old and new who.
Hartnell
1/ 6.15m
2/ 8.88m
3/ 9.95m
Pertwee
7/ 7.17m
8/ 7.96m
9/ 8.35m
10/ 8.71m
11/ 9.04m
Tennant
2/ 7.83m
3/ 7.96m
4/ 8.41m
Now to be fair Tennant's last year did get viewers on average in the 10 millions, BUT that was only 4 specials. I don't think you can really compare that to a full series. By that logic Paul McGann would be one of the most popular Doctors, Peter Cushing too as his first movie was a big success. In terms of maintaining them across a full series, then NO, Tennant didn't do it for as long a period, nor did he reach the heights of either Hartnell or Pertwee.
In actual fact the most remarkable period of popularity for DW is Pertwee's first season to Tom's third. That represents a period where the shows viewers go up every single year for 7 years! Neither the 60s nor New Who came close to managing that. There is a quite a large drop in viewers from Eccelston's first season to Tennant's first, and Matt also enjoyed a big drop for his second, whilst there was a similar drop from Hartnell to Troughton.
Meanwhile what's even more incredible is that Peter Davison actually got higher viewers on average for one season than Tennant ever did.
Here is the Davison era.
19/ 9.23m
20/ 7.06m
21/ 7.18m
No Tennant series, or Matt or Eccelston series reached 9 millions on average for the viewers. However unlike Tennant, Davison did have a big drop for his second year, though it picked up again for his third. Overall Tennant is actually closer to Davison in terms of popularity than he is to Jon or Hartnell or Tom. All of those three classic Doctors had multiple series above the 7 millions, whilst Tennant and Davison only had one each above the 7 millions, and whilst Tennant's went up ever year, Davison did have a bigger high in the 9 millions, so yeah overall Tennant is not the modern day Tom. He's the modern day Davison.
Meanwhile the only Doctor to get fewer viewers every year out of classic who is sadly Colin (who had a hiatus to deal with and was there for just two years.)
Meanwhile in New Who, the last two Doctors, Capaldi and Jodie both got lower viewers every year.
Here are the viewers for their eras.
Capaldi
8/ 7.34m
9/ 6.16m
10/ 5.64m
Jodie
11/ 7.96m
12/ 5.40m
Flux/ 5.16m
I might add if you include Jodie years where there were only one or two episodes, her era STILL drops every single year, with her last being in the four millions. Also these include the I player figures too which add two million over the course of a week (or a month in Jodie's case) so some could argue you could shed two million off of these, but again for the sake of fairness I'll play their game.
Finally the era that had the highest viewers on average is Tom's.
Here is his era.
9.95m
10.69m
9.63m
9.10m
10.52m
5.62m
6.80m
As you can see until his last season in 1980, Tom never got fewer than 9 million on average, a truly incredible feat for any show to maintain for 6 years and one that very, very few genre series since, including the revival have ever been able to replicate. In fact no British genre show has ever been able to manage that, though to be fair the second last series benefited from a strike.
Meanwhile when it comes to international popularity, again the official word is that DW was an obscure oddity in America until Matt Smith who enjoyed massive mainstream popularity. Not true at all. Classic Who pulled in over 9 million viewers in America in the 80s on average. During the peak of New Who's popularity in America in the Matt Smith era, it got 2 million at its highest. Also in America in the 80s the DW fan club of America was the largest in the world. Arguably that represented the only period in the shows history when DW was more popular stateside than in the UK. Sadly its popularity in America ended when Michael Grade raised prices of the stories to the point where no one could buy them anymore.
All from the 80s and why sadly its American following ended.
Yet people like Nerdrotic claim that the revival was the only time it was popular stateside, again based on their own social groups.
Now to be fair there are some ways in which New Who has enjoyed success the likes of which Classic Who never did. Obviously fandom is more of a thing now than during the 60s, 70s or even the 80s. Furthermore New Who does tend to rank higher in the weekly rankings, and Tennant was the only Doctor to get a single episode of his the number 1 most watched show the week it aired. (Journey's End.)
Still that said as you can see overall in terms of viewers then NO, New Who is not DW finally being accepted as mainstream. It shows you how big the hype machine is for new who, as there are fans, even those who dislike the revival, who hold this mindset to such an extent they actually think that Peter Capaldi's era was a bigger mainstream hit than Jon Pertwee's!
Here look at this comment from a guy on youtube. Now I'm not trying to make out he's an idiot, or "oh poor me" he was abusive or anything, obviously not. He agreed with me about Jodie, but when I dared to suggest my alternate sequel idea he got angry and went on about how we can never get rid of New Who, because it is the most popular era of the show. See here.
Doctor Who has continued (9-12.) Deal with it. It was the biggest show of the 2000s. It has a MUCH BIGGER fanbase than "True Who." Don't get me wrong I ADORE old who. But Old who is what gave birth to Chibnall's writing. He still uses outdated plots and monsters of that style in New Who.
And Bruh. don't get started on the viewers of the Legendary Capaldi. Colin Baker had the WORST episodes under the lead writers and producers and got fired over not being liked by them. Sylvester McCoy redeemed it but was canned under that writer.
Doctor Who was brought back and is loved universally. It is huge! Can't believe You missed out on that hype and excitement mate. Your going off on New Whovians for liking it because you missed your chance at the golden stages of New Who. Sorry mate. Your nothing but a speck atm trying to have a go at the indestructible early years of New Who. Now look. Doctors 1-12 are BEAST MODE. 13 is failing hard.
See what I mean? The idea that Capaldi is more mainstream than Hartnell, Pertwee or Troughton or Davison is insane. Why is his era not held as a we lost the viewers, the same way that McCoy and Colin's and Davison's all are?
At the end of the day I'd say that overall New Who and Classic Who probably have about the same levels of popularity. Neither were ever the most popular shows of their respective eras, which is okay as the shows that were, like Black and White Minstrils Show, and X-Factor are all deemed unwatchable trash nowadays. Both on average are fairly mainstream shows that had their ups and downs like any other, but having said that they most successful series, for whatever reason are still in Classic Who, and Classic Who maintained consistently strong viewers over a longer period of time, had fewer hiatuses and was in a much healthier stage at this point.
For that reason saying, maybe we should try and updated version of something like classic who, is not condemning the show to a niche audience. I'd say copying a specific style from 20 years ago, that actually wasn't even the peak of this show is.
