mikotyk wrote:While it would be interesting to see everyone just speak their minds, wouldn't such an interview become nothing more than a Doctor Who version of Jerry Springer or Maury Povich or any other of those awful daytime TV talk shows? I have great memories of watching Doctor Who and I wouldn't want any "mud" smearing the image of the show. Let's let the skeletons remain in the closet, shall we? In fact, someone get some chains and a padlock and let's put them away forever.
It doesn't have to descend into all-out war, or mud-slinging.
With absolute respect to your preference about leaving skeletons in the past, this isn't one I share myself. For me, the commentaries should provide an honest representation of the creative process involved, as far as possible. While this is definitely
not directed at Tom, I feel that commentaries in general can sound slightly disingenuous at times.
An example of what I'd like to see (or hear): I recently watched the extras interview on State of Decay
, in which Christopher Beadmead and Terence Dicks clearly stated that there was strong disagreement and tension between them about the direction of this story, approach, and subsequent development. This, to me, is a fascinating insight into the creative process, and far more interetesting than 90mins of actors/directors mostly congratulating each other or speculating on info that anyone can look up on IMDB.
"A man's work is nothing but this slow trek to rediscover, through the detours of art, those two or three great and simple images in whose presence his heart first opened."