- I had been doing Doctor Who (1963) for about three months when I was called into Donald's (Donald Wilson) office. I was told that, now I'd done it and it was on air, I was going to go and produce a twice-weekly serial about a council that was being made in Birmingham. I said I wasn't, and Donald said, 'You're under contract to the BBC, not under contract to do Doctor Who (1963). If we say you're going then you're going.' Doctor Who (1963) had barely gone on the air, and I certainly didn't feel confident leaving it then, so I asked why they wanted me to go. The answer was that I wasn't married, so it was easier for me to go and live in Birmingham than it was for any of the other producers!
- [on Russell T. Davies] He's a very inventive writer, and very good. He's never been frightened of controversy, so, if he's allowed to, he might come up with something very interesting.
- Donald Wilson absolutely hated the first Dalek story. The BBC had committed to do the show for a year. But, at the same time, there were various cut-off points, and a feeling that it wouldn't last that long, especially after the first serial, which wasn't an ideal one. After that, we had a bit of a problem, because Marco Polo was our next historical story, but John Lucarotti hadn't finished writing it. The only serial we had that was finished was The Daleks, which David Whitaker had commissioned from Terry Nation. We thought it was great, but Donald called us in and said it was absolutely appalling and we weren't to do it. We said there was a problem, because we didn't have another serial ready, so he said that we should put it on, but that would be the end of Doctor Who (1963). He told David to write a two-parter so they could finish after 13 episodes. We were flabbergasted, because we genuinely thought The Daleks was a good serial. And, when we put it on, it absolutely took over. Donald, to give him his due, called us in and said that we clearly knew a good deal more about this than he did, and he wasn't going to interfere any more.
- I got Waris Hussein, which was hugely lucky. He was young, and a bit po-faced about Doctor Who (1963) at first, but he very quickly saw that there was incredible potential for a director. We didn't have the sort of format that any other running serial had. Every time we changed the serial, we made our own rules. It was very creative for directors; if they wanted to be creative within the £2,000 a week budget we had, they had the opportunity. The costume designers, too, were so creative and clever within a very restrictive budget. Marco Polo was wonderful. It's so sad that it's gone. What we achieved within that ludicrous budget was incredible.
- I had a director called Rex Tucker, who was very 'old' BBC. He would pat me on the head and say, 'don't worry about a thing, dear'. We didn't get on at all. He was quite polite to me, but I knew he couldn't bear me, and the feeling was mutual.
- We were faced with studio D at Lime Grove, which, far from being state of the art, wasn't even contemporary. There were no lighting consoles, and it had old-fashioned cameras where the picture would peel off if you got too close. It was like going back to the Ark. But it was appropriate, seeing as we were doing a story about prehistoric men!
- I loved the Cybermen. And I watched a bit of Jon Pertwee, but it got a bit too establishment at that point for me. I did watch some of Tom Baker, because for me, obviously after William Hartnell, he was the closest. He had that unpredictability and sense of danger. I think that's inherent with Tom Baker as a person, but it was very good for the character as well. I love Peter Davison as an actor, and I liked him as that urbane, cricketer, but, to me, the older ones are better. Tom Baker was quite young, but he's an old soul, somehow. He gave it weight. Peter Davison and Colin Baker were almost too young, too attractive, and too lovely. Then, I'm afraid, it went right down the pan for me. The thing about Doctor Who (1963) is you've got to believe it. You've got to be able to suspend your disbelief, and with Sylvester McCoy it got so camp. It was ridiculous, and I think that's why people stopped watching it.
- [on Doctor Who (2005)] I am very happy to say I think they have done a great job. It's really good. I do think it was a very difficult thing to do and that they have been very brave with it. To start a programme that has such a fan base - everyone has an opinion on what they think it should be like, is not easy, but they have pulled it off. It has a little bit of what it used to be, but is something for today, which is how it should be.
- He (David Tennant) has a huge amount of charm. He is very good at comedy. He was wonderful in Casanova (2005). A great thing about Christopher Eccleston was that I absolutely believed that he believed in it. David Tennant will be able to continue with that, and it is terribly important. The thing about Doctor Who (1963) when it was coming to an end was that somehow it had lost its way and seemed to be a parody of itself, and the audience doesn't like that. You must believe in it and play it for real. If you don't do that how can you expect anyone else to? Doctor Who (2005) is not a joke and you mustn't make it like that.
- [on the Jon Pertwee era] I think the whole thing about Doctor Who (1963) and one of the reasons why kids really responded to him, he was completely anti-establishment. And they could actually relate to the fact that he was anti-authoritarian, he went his own way, and once I think they went on to the fact that people started asking his advice from the government, I just thought it was a mistake, a real mistake.
- [on Doctor Who (2005)] Nowadays they do do a few historical ones which are rather nice and work very well.
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content