XPost: rec.arts.drwho, rec.arts.tv   
   From: blueshirt@indigo.news   
      
   Daniel70 wrote:   
      
   > On 31/10/2025 2:51 pm, Your Name wrote:   
   >   
   > > The financial implications of losing Disney's funding are   
   > > significant. A former Disney executive estimated that the   
   > > BBC will now be able to spend "at most £2.5 million to £3   
   > > million per episode," compared with up to £8 million   
   > > under Disney. "Once you've gone up, it's always difficult   
   > > to go back down," the source said. "You can cut budgets   
   > > to a certain degree but not by so much."   
   >   
   > Cutting the Budget can certainly effect quality .... but   
   > reading here, it seems the quality IS fairly abysmal already.   
      
   No, the last couple of seasons actually looked quite good, with   
   [probably] very expensive special effects. So in that way the   
   quality was quite good. There was a distinct lack of serious   
   plotting to some of the episodes though, and as I have said   
   before, it was more style over substance.   
      
   The characterisations were all over the place (Belinda Chandra   
   is a good example of this) and the reason for doing a lot of   
   the things in the episodes were simply because they could. In   
   the 1960's/1970's the show's producers made up for the lack of   
   a big budget by concentrating on the story. In 2023-25 RTD just   
   blew the money on big FX and big plans but ultimately dished up   
   sloppy episodes that seemed to be more about suiting his agenda   
   than entertaining the masses.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)