Standing offer

Well, there's this:

"And I’m not a hack, I’m not a new boy, I’m a very, very experienced and successful TV writer and there’s no way I could have got there without understanding character."

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/tv_and_radio/article603379.ece

Fair enough - I'll pay that one!

Dunno if you'd count this one as sufficiently boastful or merely self-aware, but:

[On what he changes about other people's scripts] "It’s pacing mostly, and dialogue. I’m good at dialogue. Give me a script and I can zhuzzh up the dialogue." (From SFX, here

Hmm, that is kind of borderline... do you consider it boastful?

On second thoughts, if I'm gonna shell for RTD's self-deprecatory remarks about The Grand, I ought to shell for that one as well. :-) Besides, I'd rather count one that I maybe shouldn't than look as though I'm trying to save face (or money :-).

Well there's this as well:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2007/03/11/svdrwho11.xml&page=3

"There's a lot of work for good television writers. And I'm one of those."

He does leaven this by saying that in this industry you have to be a substance abuser to really miss out on work. The problem is that he almost immediately follows up with, "It's about time someone had the nerve to rewrite Dickens," and opines that the plot of The Old Curiosity Shop is a mess. He may well be right (not read tOCS so I've no idea what its failings may be), but asserting that he could troubleshoot one of the English language's greatest writers smacks of arrogance to me.

dave

Well, to be honest, someone really does need to troubleshoot Dickens if they want to adapt his books for television - it's not like the guy's work hasn't dated in the last 100+ years.

The rubbishness of Dickens' plots is too much commented on for RTD's remarks to count as boasting, IMHO. :-)

Agreed.

I'll pay that first one!

The opening of The Old Curiousity shop was written within a framing text 'Master Humphrey's Clock' as a story told by an aged narrator. RTD is rightly pointing out that the switch to a different narrative form after a couple of chapters is awkward, its awkward because the periodical running Master Humphrey's clock went basically bust and he had to lift TOC into another venue. Like rewriting for a different Doctor!

Simon Bucher-Jones

Obviously because I'm worried about Comic Relief running out of money (and not nearly as worried about Kate's finances as perhaps I should be ;-)), I got these from Big Russ' DWM ints. The interesting thing is that Ben Cook actually highlights the fact that RTD "lacks the nauseating false modesty that besets all too many writers". Make of that what you will.

All the following are from DWM 360.

When asked to describe his writing style: "Fast. Cheeky. Colourful. Good laughs. Proper drama, proper emotion in it. And specifically--this is the thing that enticed me to do Doctor Who--big pictures. Television doesn't do that enough; most television is people sitting there talking."

"I'm lively and funny... and you've got to get that into the show."

On the Fans of Death sequence in "End of the World": "It's a big wink at the audience--but, crucially, it's still exciting. It's *very* exciting. It's a wonderful sequence--just relax, don't suffer." He then goes on to say that when the Doctor "feels the force" and walks through the fans that "I would seriously argue that he's never been so heroic," and follows up with praise for the coward/killer moment in Parting of the Ways. I realise these bits may be construed as praising the show which you've disallowed (otherwise you'd be clad in ash and sackcloth very quickly :-)), but as he's written these moments, I'd argue they count.

(He praises a lot of his other scripts too--Love and Monsters, Tooth and Claw, Doomsday, etc, but I can't be arsed typing all that out--particularly as they might be disallowed.)

On his supposed "gay agenda": "It seems odd that anyone would criticise a writer for following their own agenda. I'll say what I want. That's what good writers do."

From DWM 359...

"To be honest if the series had failed, I'd have carried on and written the next thing, and those doors that have opened for me wouldn't have closed. Maybe if you have six failures in a row, doors start to close, but to be honest, and this is a terrible thing to say, there are so few people out there who *can* write, so few, that the doors don't close easily."

"Of course, I'm lucky that the BBC wasn't telling me what to do: they were waiting for me to tell them. That's the status I have in the industry."

From DWM 374...

"I think what throws a lot of people is that 'New Earth' is funny. If you don't find it funny, then tough. Frankly it was."

"A big thing of mine is to keep making this series funny; not witty--every programme can do witty, sharp, clever dialogue--but we go beyond that, into funny, and I'm the person that puts that in."

"I think I'm a good enough judge--in fact I'm a very good judge--of drama. Just as I'll stop myself getting too into hard sci-fi, I will stop myself making other mistakes of extremes. I will pull back on some gags; I will push other gags further. I'm in a constant state of assessment, every page, every day, all the way through filming and editing..." DWM 374

That should be enough for me to never get work in Cardiff!

dave

"Fast. Cheeky..." and "Lively and funny" are part of his answer to the same question, so I'm going to count them as one example.

Given the context, I'm going to pass on his comments on End of the World - they're so much about people and things other than Russell himself.

The "gay agenda" comment interests me enormously, because I see an emerging pattern; someone makes a stupid criticism of the show, RTD hits back, confident in his own abilities and decisions. As a writer who's seen every imaginable idiot remark about writing, I actually love that; but it certainly counts here.

I'm going to pass on the self-deprecatory comment about there being "very few people out there who *can* write".

Although there's ameliorating context, I think I do have to count the remark about "status". The same is true for "very good judge of drama".

The comments about "funny" are part of one answer, so I'm going to count them as one example.

*adds up* I make that five individual examples, for $25 to Comic Relief. Nice work Dave!

359 has Russell cuddling up to that Slitheen! Ah ahahahahaha! And it has this terrific quote, which explains much: "... I had to proceed with an absolute confidence... you have to have confidence - not arrogance, but enough confidence to say, 'I know what I'm doing.' So yes, I did believe that I could do it. Hooray! And I was right." An arrogant man would be putting down the old show and its makers, rather than lavishing praise on (for example) writers past and present. But I think for many fans (not necessarily anyone in this thread!) saying "I'm good" automatically means "I'm the best, everyone else sucks."

But he's so reasonable about the polishing! Saying it boils down to UK writers doing a generally US genre, he's still learning himself, and sometimes it just boils down to knowing the budget and limitations.

Admittedly though, I tend to avoid anything where he's talking, for fear of headdesk... and I'm one of the minions. It's like the populism becomes harsher and more simplistic when he's talking off the top of his head; not so much boasting as just... media-wank.

In one of the DWM interviews, he says he'd as soon as not do all those interviews and say the same thing over and over - but it brings in viewers.

Out of interest were you merely trying to prove a point or actively trying to raise money for Comic Relief? :)

From what I've read, he seems confident in his abilities as a writer - but given that he's managed to revive a show most people thought was dead, that's one hell of a neat trick in my book...

I'm actually surprised at the number of examples people have brought to my attention (curse you paula_moore! :-) In fact, I've made this bet before somewhere online, and got no takers at all.

What I've learned, I think, is that some fans (understandably) find it off-putting when RTD says point blank: I am a good writer, so there (especially if they don't like what he's doing!). But this arrogant character who blows his own trumpet, puts down other writers, and is personally responsible for every fannish quibble? Doesn't exist. He's just a large and convenient target. The worst thing about his rather mild boasts is that they happen to be true. >:-)

Re: cursing--heheheh.

I think RTD suffers a certain amount from JNT syndrome--he's the behind the scenes person who does most of the media (I notice that he says he's good at that too! ;-)), and therefore whenever we seem him he tends to be in huckster mode. This means that he often can't be too self-deprecatory even if he wanted to, and thus it's understandable that some always see him as bigging up his work*. Just as JNT was basically snookered by The Twin Dilemma (are you going to go out and say that your new leading man's debut is a pile or arse, or are you going to put a brave face on?), sometimes I feel that RTD has been snookered by his own less successful stories.

I can confirm that as someone who's a bit agnostic about his work on Doctor Who (I think a lot of it's good, but it's not a patch on his other series) it does make you shake your head when he carries on so. My best analogy is that an RTD interview will often read a lot like one with Noel Gallagher. Both men are clearly talented, both aren't afraid to tell everyone how good they are, and both are quite happy to slag the opposition (RTD's habit of knocking "niche" shows like Trek, Stargate and Charmed brings to mind Noel's pithy opinions on Franz Ferdinand, Blur, etc). Certainly the result of this is that neither man ever gives a dull interview, but if you happen to think they're not all they're cracked up to be, it's very easy to want to give them a slap.

*I have heard that Russell is more scathing in private, particularly about a certain spinoff, but you'd never know that from his public persona.

dave

*I have heard that Russell is more scathing in private, particularly about a certain spinoff, but you'd never know that from his public persona.

Oh, I so hope that's true. It's been delayed a year too!

when RTD says point blank: I am a good writer, so there

I like that he's not falsely modest. If he thinks he's good, then he should say so. I admire that in a person; and he has to put up with a lot of haters. I don't think it's always true, that he's a good writer, and have quite thoroughly argued about some of his decisions before, but more often than not he is, and I admire his guts, basically.

this arrogant character who blows his own trumpet, puts down other writers, and is personally responsible for every fannish quibble? Doesn't exist.

Too, too true. And so no money will be donated via me, cos I don't think I have any examples of that. (For example, one of the ones you're paying for above has him saying that one of the ways he reined in one of the other writers was just because the ending was far too expensive. That's not putting down either writers, that's being a show-runner). But this is a very interesting exercise, and kudos to you for doing it. :)

How about this exchange from the interview at Quickstop entertainment (see URL http://www.quickstopentertainment.com/?p=438) [QS: It seems, with a 13 episode run, that there's so much you want to do that things get a bit rushed towards the end. DAVIES: Yeah, do you think? QS: The last season, the Bad Wolf reveal didn't strike me as wholly satisfying. DAVIES: Well, that's tough, Ken. QS: I'm not saying it in an accusatory fashion... DAVIES: No, I have to say, we loved it.] It seems a tad self-congratulatory, or at least a bit overly-defensive in the face of constructive criticism.

It does seem needlessly defensive, although the overall tone of the interview ameliorates this. I'm going to pass on this one as an example of boasting because of the "we" - throughout the interview RTD is giving credit to his whole team (the interview asks what he achieved, RTD talks about "what we achieved").

Hullo there, faintly sinister lurker lead here by link :) Hope no-one minds :)

I agree that the man isn't incredibly or falsely boastful, and being proud of yourself when you have reason is "quite right, too". For me, it's only when his logic makes you gape at its holes that I tire of him (sadly something that happens very, very often) as he then has a tendancy, which surfaces on other occasions, to laugh at or put himself above any criticism, which is quite a blunt way to dismiss people without thinking. An ugly habit, especially when applied to people the interviewer is inclined to look down at anyway.... (Who fans, though his attitude to such seems to include a lot of affection)

Having said that, he's a hugely likeable man in general, and one of the show's best ambassadors (it's only the above that gets to me!) And I'm not looking to tick anyone off or start a debate :) Ta ta!

Best, Tim

I saw this snarky reaction to a newspaper article and, even though it has absolutely nothing to do with Rusty or Doctor Who or writers or anything, but it reminded me of your request:

"People always come up to me and ask me why I'm so awesome and how come I kick so much ass. Yeah, it gets old after awhile, but ya know, people are just curious about why I rule. So, I'm nice, and I tell them. I don't get upset or anything, but maybe that is just because of my awesomitude."

I hope you do another "Make Kate write Doctor who for charity donations!" again some day.

That would be uber. 'Cause I missed out on the first one.

Gods, I seriously want to do that. But there's no TIIIIMMMMMEEEE

Disappointing, but I know how it is. Wish I had been around for the last one though- I had a neat idea that I was willing to toss $50 at.

And now for some random comments:

You mentioned that you had a hard time understanding the accents in "Brokeback Mountain"... I wonder if that means I'd have a hard time understanding your accent? Granted, I have no trouble reading your _typing_ at least.

Also... I'd like to reply to posts on BackInBlue... but I can't... *bats eyelashes*

Y'need to join it to post.

(What the heck was worth $50?)

Oh poop- I thought I had requested to join it, when I was just watching it. Piddle sticks.


Anyway, the idea was not a story idea, but a logistics idea- I thought it would be fun to do a round-robin like this: You write the first 500 words, then I'd right 500 words in the story, then you could write 500 more, then I'd write 500 more, then we'd toss the whole thing at Jon to finish.

Just to read the results would be worth the $50 to me.

... remind me of this in about a month, would you?

(Also, you have to write the first installment. I'll follow your lead. :-)

I _will_ remind you in a month... of course, it will probably take me that long to come up with the first 500 words. I'm tempted to re-do my story about the dog trapped in the TARDIS that inadvertantly saves the world while the Doctor is trying to catch him, but I'll come up with something fresh.

I'm not sure I even have a copy of that one any more... it used to be on the BBC website as part of some contest they were running... maybe I can still find it there.