Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Doctor Who - Steven Moffat to be Replaced by Anthony Horowitz? [CONFIRMED - FALSE]


    Enable Dark Mode!

  • What's HOT
  • Premiere Calendar
  • Ratings News
  • Movies
  • YouTube Channel
  • Submit Scoop
  • Contact Us
  • Search
  • Privacy Policy
Support SpoilerTV
SpoilerTV.com is now available ad-free to for all premium subscribers. Thank you for considering becoming a SpoilerTV premium member!

SpoilerTV - TV Spoilers

Doctor Who - Steven Moffat to be Replaced by Anthony Horowitz? [CONFIRMED - FALSE]

2 Sept 2014

Share on Reddit
Thanks to Calvin Hobbes in the comments for the link to Bleeding Cool who have debunked this rumour, Anthony Horowitz has denied it on Twitter.





Doctor Who Producer Steven Moffat could be on his way out of the show to be replaced by Anthony Horowitz, author of the Alex Rider series of novels and the second Tintin film.

Philip Morris, the well connected missing episode hunter who returned The Enemy of the World and The Web of Fear to the BBC archive in 2013, has stated publicly that Horowitz’s name is the one seemingly in the frame and being talked about, a claim that has to be taken seriously thanks to Mr Morris’ connections made during his service to the show.

Rumours have stated for some time that Series 8 could be Moffat’s last, particularly with likely increasing demand for his services in the United States following Sherlock‘s immense success at the Emmys, yet he also hinted in the July edition of Doctor Who Magazine that he was planning the finale of Series 9.

32 comments:

  1. Can't see it happening myself, though I do think it's about time he passed the mantle on!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm sure this guy's a talented writer, but why would they recruit him, as opposed to someone who's actually worked on the show before.

    ReplyDelete
  3. He hasn't written for the show before and doesn't have any showrunning experience, I really don't think this is true. It would be a huge risk by the BBC, you need someone with experience and not just writing.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Exactly what I'm thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  5. As much as I`m for a new showunner I`d rather have them hire someone that has actually had some experience with writing and/or directing this show.
    Personally I`m sick of Moffats writing and stamp he forced onto the show so I`d welcome that change

    ReplyDelete
  6. I enjoy Moffat's vision of the Doctor so much more than Davies. And one major improvement the show has undergone is in look... season 1-4 might be good entertainment yet the show was hideous, visually speaking. When watching older episodes it always takes me a minute to get used to how ugly it is. Season 5 onwards though has that dark fairytale fantasy/sci-fi blended look to it that I love. And also I have always felt like Davies was a bit too pretentious with the Doctor (esp at the end of Tennant's run)... although one of the great things about this show is that it's ever-changing. So I'm open-minded to a new showrunner but I hope they keep a similar aesthetic.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Granted, visually the show has improved from looking like a classic sh*tty sci-fi show to a Disney-esque art-feast. That said, this isn`t on Moffat. The visual style may have been influenced by him but this is more on the BBCs decision to up the budget and attempt to properly translate DW to a international norm.


    Ironic, I actually consider Moffats writing INCREDIBLY pretentious, constant reminders of how clever he`s laying plot pieces and quoting his own writing. And yet forgetting whole story arcs. Moffat considers himself WAY too clever and has turned DW from a fun sci-fi show to something I can't categorize. Something that has it`s head up its arse coming to mind at first.
    I DID enjoy the first two episodes of Capaldis era though, given the fact that I couldn't sit through season 6 and 7 without cringing this is a giant improvement.
    Although I might be actor biased (I`ve been a long time Capaldia fan (thank you Thick of It) while I disliked Matt Smiths constant over acting) so I don't know how much the writing actually has improved.


    I have nothing against a little easter eff referencing itself or a show making you think to connect the dots throughout a season but the last two seasons took the fun out of that by making itself SO ambigious and having the conclusion be, forgive the language, turd.


    Pretty much everytime Moffat solves his mysteries they`re...absolutely idiotic and couldn't have been forseen by ANYONE.


    I am glad that we don`t have to sit through more River 'Moffat-in-a-dress' Song though


    I agree, DW is something that evolves from something a person likes into something that person might dislike but anoher might enjoy. That's why I always get angry whenever a 'Tennant should return as the regular doctor' comes up, despite his era being my favourite of NuWho. This show is about change, if we like it or not.


    Moffat outstayed his welcome. 5 years is enough, especially with a fairly messed up anniversary on his hands I'm surprised that he hasn't been replaced yet.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "fairly messed up anniversary"

    Are you INSANE????

    ReplyDelete
  9. Eh, nope.

    If we have a DW anniversary special episode celebrating 50 years of Doctor Who at least a guest appearance from actors like Peter Davison, Colin Baker and Sylvester McCoy is mandatory. All we got was Tom Baker.
    Not inventing a new doctor just to press more Moffat stamps onto the show
    The anniversary had pleasant surprises ("Time Of The Doctor" and the documentary) but was mostly overshadowed with dissapointment.
    Hell,I enjoyed the short film McCoy, Davison, Baker and Barrowman A LOT more than everything they did for the anniversary. Because that actually felt like them honouring the show instead of honouring themselves

    ReplyDelete
  10. Well, sucks for you, I guess. Everyone else liked it.

    ReplyDelete
  11. So you`re fine with speaking for everyone else? Because there's quite a bunch of people out there that despised the anniversary. Sure it might have gathered people that are fine with what they got but the anniversary did in no instance celebrate a show that ran for 50+ years.

    It celebrated NuWho while pretty much ignoring the shows history, wich to me felt disrespectful

    ReplyDelete
  12. Look up the statistics. The 50th Anniversary was universally praised by both fans and critics. Again LOOK IT UP.



    It's all there black and white clear as crystal! So you get NOTHING. YOU LOSE. GOOD DAY, SIR.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Please direct me towards your statistics, because obviously numbers speak for people.

    ReplyDelete
  14. You can start with IMDB.

    ReplyDelete
  15. http://www.doctorwhomagazine.com/the-top-10-doctor-who-stories-of-all-time/

    Quote from article:

    The most recent issue of Doctor Who Magazine revealed the results of the biggest fan survey ever conducted – announcing what DWM readers think are the best stories of the first 50 years!

    The full results, featuring the chart placings of all 241 stories, can be found inside issue 474. The Top 10 Doctor Who stories of all time were revealed as…

    1 THE DAY OF THE DOCTOR (2013)

    2 BLINK (2007)

    3 GENESIS OF THE DALEKS (1975)

    4 THE CAVES OF ANDROZANI (1984)

    5 CITY OF DEATH (1979)

    6 THE TALONS OF WENG-CHIANG (1977)

    7 THE EMPTY CHILD/THE DOCTOR DANCES (2005)

    8 PYRAMIDS OF MARS (1975)

    9 HUMAN NATURE/THE FAMILY OF BLOOD (2007)

    10 REMEMBRANCE OF THE DALEKS (1988)

    ReplyDelete
  16. I shall give in, the people seem to have liked it. I just didn`t.


    That being said I'm confused that Pyramids of Mars is SO LOW on the list

    ReplyDelete
  17. Oh I hope so. I don't even know this guy, but he has to be better than Moffat. The show had so much heart and depth when Davie's was running it and then Moffat took over turning it into some overly complex, convoluted crap fest. It is so complicated that Moffat himself seems to have an issue keeping track of his storylines, as can be seen by all the continuity errors. A show like Sherlock is fine for Moffat as it is MEANT to be overly complicated and yet is easier to keep track of since the mechanics are that of the real world and there are far less opportunities for deus ex machina plot devices. When someone like Moffat is given a show with 50 years of history to keep track of and essentially unlimited opportunities to rewrite history, use of deus ex machina to excess and pretty much twist the laws of the universe to your liking....you end up with a show that is impossible to follow that lacks an ability to be related to. Used to be the Doctor was mysterious and unknowable yet lovable and his companion was normal and relatable...but now even the companions are instilled with powers that make them hard to relate to and as unknowable as the Doctor himself. Screwing with the formula like that ruins the show for me, and quite a few others.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Apologies when I had a look at his wiki page I didn't notice those credits but I see on IMDB he does have credentials

    ReplyDelete
  19. Every showrunner on the show knows that a tiny, yet vocal, amount of fans will forever bleat on about how they have ruined the show for them. Doctor Who under Moffat has become more successful than ever before worldwide, it doesn't matter if you like his take on it or not. Some people just don't get what it takes for a show to last for 50 years, it can't stay the same and appeal to just them alone, it has to change, evolve and attract others in order to survive. Unfortunately that means there will be periods that you won't enjoy so much as others, even more unfortunately some get very bitter and hyperbolic about that :(

    ReplyDelete
  20. He also did Crime Traveller too, though I think I'm in the very small minority that enjoyed that show, lol.

    ReplyDelete
  21. his writing is pretentious, not the person. This is not a nab against him as a human being but against his work.
    Some writers tend to put their stamp onto their work forgetting that others worked on it. I`m glad that you enjoy it but Moffats era has taken out a lot of enjoyment for me.
    I'll sit through his era just like I sat throuh RTDs, there is no way he can please everyone.


    Criticism is a sign of respect, unfortunately I don't see Moffat take any of the criticism since he seems to be fine with his work.


    So what if the final shot featured an animated image of every doctor? That is a poor excuse for celebrating something in 3 seconds.


    It's not a personal thing, just a classic case of 'I dislike your work but watch it out of respect for what others have made it'.


    Don't trun me into the bad guy here just because I dislike something you obviously enjoy

    ReplyDelete
  22. no surprise on that one, not sure how these rumors even came up given that he never worked on DW to begin with?

    Chibnall taking over sounds like something that would make sense to me

    ReplyDelete
  23. At this point I'd take anyone over Moffat.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Glad to hear it's been debunked - mostly because I'm in no way eager to hear ANY plans for Moffat's exit. I know it'll happen sooner or later, but since 2010 the show has seriously stepped up it's quality. As I've said elsewhere, the highlights are still just as amazing, but while there are still some missteps, there are no longer episodes that I'd actually cringe at having to watch again, or that I actively try to forget ever happened. Much as I respect Davies and appreciate what he gave us, every series of his run had episodes (and sometimes quite a few) that were basically unwatchable.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Timothy W Dalbeck3 September 2014 at 06:26

    Ugly? I've heard many complaints about the RTD era of Who but that is not one of them. Mind you, I really like Moffat so I'm not bashing you on that point.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Timothy W Dalbeck3 September 2014 at 06:28

    Move City of Death a few spots but that is just me.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Yes, I find it very ugly on a visual level. Ha, dont get me wrong I still loved it and I guess some episodes look better than others but the cinematography was pretty awful. Since season 5 it's filmed differently, the color palette is more pleasing, the atmosphere is different...and on a related note I greatly prefer the new sets, and how they blend sci-fi with more fantastical looks. If I recall correctly Moffat thinks of DW as a fairy tale so I think he is responsible for the look and style more than anyone. I'd be scared and excited to see how those things would change with a new showrunner.

    ReplyDelete
  28. At least two per season that I tend to skip.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Any with the Slitheen in are a definite skip over for me.

    ReplyDelete
  30. "Criticism is a sign of respect, unfortunately I don't see Moffat take any of the criticism since he seems to be fine with his work."
    Yeah well, Series 5 tried the fairy tale thing, removed in Series 6. Christmas Special 2010/2011 were too "standalones", Xmas Special 2012 was part of the story-arc. Series 6 wasn't "adventure of the week, any place in time and space", Series 7 was totally that again. Series 7 was split over two years, it's removed in Series 8. Series 7 tried the blockbuster thing, removed in Series 8.
    So yes, Moffat tries every year to make things different, obviously he still has his flaws and his style and he's not perfect, but he always tries to please most of the fandom even if he knows he can't. And many interviews prove that. If he said once "I'm proud of what I've done" then that's ok, he has the right to be considering how many love him. Russel did the same with his era (but I don't think he tried to change that much). Both take criticisms, that's all.
    But you can dislike everything one has done so far, that's alright of course, your opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Timothy W Dalbeck7 September 2014 at 08:44

    Looking at some of the older episodes, I do see what you mean. There is a harsher color palette that has a washed-out look to it. So yeah, I get what you were saying and yes I agree; Moffat era episodes do have a warmer feel.

    ReplyDelete

NOTE: Name-calling, personal attacks, spamming, excessive self-promotion, condescending pomposity, general assiness, racism, sexism, any-other-ism, homophobia, acrophobia, and destructive (versus constructive) criticism will get you BANNED from the party.