Season 15: A Stormy Sea Change?

Season 15 is often pinpointed by a lot of fandom as where the original series started to go wrong with Graham Williams taking over from Phillip Hinchcliffe and a more lighter comic tone forced upon the BBC by Mary Whitehouse as well as the lead actor himself starting to become a prima donna.

So now lets hear your verdict on Season 15....


My ratings

Horror Of Fang Rock: 5/5
The Invisible Enemy: 2.5/5
Image Of The Fendahl: 4/5
The Sunmakers: 4/5
Underworld: 2/5
The Invasion Of Time: 2.5/5

It's clear something *definitely* went wrong with the show that season. At least by its ending.

Part of what that something was though, was that Hinchcliffe, miffed that he was being shit-canned from the show over Mary Whitehouse's complaints, did a scorched Earth with the budget on Talons before leaving. It's largely why the show began to look so cheap suddenly, and why sometimes mediocre scripts got commissioned because the better scripts required effects that were on the unaffordable side.

Despite which, the first four stories feel like they may as well have been Hinchcliffe stories. Horror of Fang Rock being particularly exemplary. The Invisible Enemy was a bit silly and overlit, and K9 was a bit of annoyance from the start, but it was overall passable entertainment even if it never quite reached for brilliance. Image of the Fendahl was okay from what I remember but a little bit on the patchy side. The Sunmakers had a pretty solid script with bite and strong characters, although Pennant Roberts' direction was a bit lacklustre, and there have been better examples of Holmes' stories hitting the right peaks and valleys.

Underworld is where things go seriously wrong, resulting in a murky, barely coherent or comprehensible mess. One could sit through this story and be amazed that the show's golden run was only a year ago, and the longer they watch this, the more it feels like a depressing eternity ago.

The Invasion of Time is sadly little better, and somehow manages to make the potentially thrilling idea of a Gallifrey invaded and the Doctor betraying his people, into something lethargic and lifeless that it's near impossible to maintain interest in. I think this was when it became clear that the planning for the show's seasons was shoddier now and no longer what it used to be, and was based on scrambling things together under budget, and the show had indeed been derailed by the forced changeover.

It still baffles me that the BBC did this to the show during its most successful period of increasing ratings and popularity. The possibilities that come to mind are that either Whitehouse was able to utilize some very useful contacts in the BBC against the show, or that the BBC did it with one eye on overseas sales of the show. They had not been able to sell the Tom Baker stories in Europe as the were deemed 'too frightening'. So perhaps the BBC thought they needed to tame the content under a producer they could control, in order to sell the show (and Tom Baker's star power) abroad.

I sense that fans who don't like the Williams years still tend to treat this season as a keeper for the sake of the last remnants of Hinchcliffe/Holmes in Fang Rock, Fendahl and Sunmakers, and for bringing Leela's story to a close. I suppose in that regard The Invasion of Time makes a neat cut-off point.

Overall I would probably say it's a season that starts so promisingly but gradually just becomes indigestible and leaden, to the point the early promise feels almost a bit of a sham and false dawn for what was a very shoddy, unstable season that was far from the solidness the show used to have.

The tone certainly starts to shift into the more whimsical and humorous vibe of the Williams era towards the end, and it is certainly a season which suffers due to the budget cuts at the BBC. Though I like the Williams era more than quite a few, I don’t think its tone truly settled coherently until later on, and the weak stories of this season are especially weak.

Fang Rock is superb, and I regard The Invisible Enemy as rather underrated on the whole. It’s not brilliant, but far from being as awful as many claim. Fendahl is pretty good, if a little underdeveloped in places and featuring a rushed resolution, and a sense of the Hinchcliffe gothic atmosphere slowly dissipating and becoming more watered down. The Sun Makers is rather good too- a very well written satirical script typical of Holmes coupled with some great dialogue, if only hindered by some crap direction and visible budgetary cuts.

Underworld is just awful- four episodes completely lacking in substance, excitement or narrative cohesion. I can see why fans would have been so fucked off with stories such as this, following a period where the likes of The Deadly Assassin, Robots of Death and Talons of Weng-Chiang were essentially the norm in terms of quality, and this becomes especially clear when watching the stories in order. Invasion of Time is a very similar case, where a real cheapness undermines proceedings, coupled with a rushed narrative inclusion where the Sontarans are shoehorned in. Add to this the uninspired depiction of Gallifrey, the staid direction and tin-foil aliens, and you have a rather disappointing and crap conclusion to the season.

I like seasons 16 and 17 much more than the lesser two stories of the season, frankly. Even if some disapprove of the era’s tone, there’s an increased playfulness to those seasons, and less lethargy, as was the case with this season’s final two instalments. The first four stories range from acceptable to excellent, yet the final two are, in retrospect, just crap. Overall, a fine season on the whole, though it is very clear that the tone of the new era isn’t settling in brilliantly well during its first year, as it clashes so badly with the Hinchcliffe-lite stories and lacks confidence during the final two stories.

It's the weakest of the Williams seasons, but it's still largely pretty good. Underworld is shite, Invisible Enemy goes downhill in the second half and I seem to have gone right off Invasion of Time too of late, but Fang Rock, Fendahl and Sun Makers are all great.
Still better than season 18.

Could have been a solid season if it wasn't for the two smelly turds in it.
Horror Of Fang Rock: 9/10
The Invisible Enemy: 6/10
Image Of The Fendahl: 6/10
The Sunmakers: 7/10
Underworld: 3/10
The Invasion Of Time: 2/10

It was Baker's worst season to date I reckon but, apart from the relatively poor quality of Underworld and Invasion of Time, it was still pretty good on balance. Definitely ended up as a harbinger of worse to come though.

I'm fine with most of S15, for the most part. Fang Rock and Fendahl are particular highlights. The Invisible Enemy is still good. Apart from the introduction of the tin dog, it's no worse than some of the lesser stories of the Hinchliffe era. Similarly, The Sunmakers may not be Holmes' greatest story, but again it's still fine. I still class it as a good story.
Obviously Underworld is dreadfully dull and probably the weakest of the season.
Which leaves us with The Invasion of Time, which I always find such a let down and a bigger sign of worse to come. I'll save a proper critique of the story, because this discussion is kind of prompting me to re-evaluate it, as it's been a long time. But were it not for Underworld being particularly boring, then I'd have no hesitation in nominating it worst of the season.

Image of the Fendhal - 8/10
Horror of Fang Rock - 8/10
The Sunmakers - 7/10
The Invisible Enemy - 7/10
The Invasion of Time - 4/10
Underworld - 3/10

I’ve been undergoing a re-watch of this season of late, and it’s generally better than I initially thought it was. Fang Rock and Fendahl are excellent (the latter being much better than I initially thought), and The Invisible Enemy was also fairly entertaining all things considered (with some excellent modelwork in part 1). Although I recognise why The Sun Makers doesn’t work for everyone, I still think it’s a very intelligent script that’s only really hindered by some crap direction. Underworld was mostly as crap as I’d remembered, although episode 1 wasn’t actually too bad on this latest viewing as it actually boasts some intrigue and some rather good modelwork for the time period. The following 3 episodes are inconceivably boring in every way, and have absolutely nothing to them whatsoever. It wasn’t easy to get through that pile of shite at all.

I’ll be re-watching Invasion of Time next. I do not look forward to this one, personally, although it should be interesting to re-assess it.

The Horror of Fang Rock - 8/10
The Invisible Enemy - 7.5/10
Image of the Fendahl - 10/10
The Sun Makers - 8.5/10
Underworld - 7.5/10
The Invasion of Time - 8/10

Beginning of the end, an end the show would not have avoided had it not been by the inspired appointment of JNT.

Horror of Fang Rock was excellent with very good performances by Louise, Tom and Colin Douglas (Reuben).

After that it was all downhill for me, gathering speed as it stumbled from story to story and shading from a once great family drama to the mind numbing boredom-cum-tedium of Invasion of Time. There were moments of minor brilliance (mainly in Fendahl and, to a much lesser extent, Invisible Enemy) but the sum of the parts in each story never added up to anything particularly good. Not for me anyway.

stengos wrote:Beginning of the end, an end the show would not have avoided had it not been by the inspired appointment of JNT.

Horror of Fang Rock was excellent with very good performances by Louise, Tom and Colin Douglas (Reuben).

After that it was all downhill for me, gathering speed as it stumbled from story to story and shading from a once great family drama to the mind numbing boredom-cum-tedium of Invasion of Time. There were moments of minor brilliance (mainly in Fendahl and, to a much lesser extent, Invisible Enemy) but the sum of the parts in each story never added up to anything particularly good. Not for me anyway.

I must say that when I first saw Invasion of Time back in 2005 (I'd had dim memories of reading the novelization when I was 11), when my enthusiasm and interest in the series had been resparked by the revival and I was tracking down every library copy of the show's videos I could find....

.... it was a bit of a shocker, and definitely shattered my high impressions of the show. At that point I'd revisited Seeds of Doom and Talons and been blown away, and had come to think of Tom's era as the peak pinnacle where the show's craft had been fully nailed.

Watching this was a real blow to that high impression and my suspension of disbelief, and I can certainly imagine it leaving that impression with most viewers at the time. It was like in a way reliving that fan sense of being let down by the show again.

(although oddly the season's ratings appear to be an inverse of what we'd expect, with lull ratings for the early diamonds and then increasing massively for the runt of the litter at the end)

I think Williams at least tried to prevent it ever getting quite that bad again (though The Armageddon Factor demonstrates he couldn't always succeed). Even in Season 17, it did look like City of Death might have done some good to rekindle the show's good will, even if the rest of the season was below par.

Did JNT save and revitalize the show initially?

Maybe. For Seasons 18 and 19 I suppose it was back to an encouraging good run again. But I think he soon undid that salvaging after by listening to Ian Levine too much and making the show more and more fan-aimed with scant quality control.

Whereas in Tom Baker's early era, Doctor Who had probably been the easiest show for a newcomer to become a fan of, with no demands or requirements, by Season 21 it seemed the opposite was true. And I think the ratings at least show that lost chance of a new groundswell that might've made all the difference in 1985.

Fang Rock 10/10
Invisible Enemy 5/10
Fendahl 8/10
Sunmakers 8/10
Underworld 1/10
Invasion - 5/10

Still better than season 12.

Tanmann wrote:I must say that when I first saw Invasion of Time back in 2005 (I'd had dim memories of reading the novelization when I was 11), when my enthusiasm and interest in the series had been resparked by the revival and I was tracking down every library copy of the show's videos I could find....

.... it was a bit of a shocker, and definitely shattered my high impressions of the show. At that point I'd revisited Seeds of Doom and Talons and been blown away, and had come to think of Tom's era as the peak pinnacle where the show's craft had been fully nailed.

Watching this was a real blow to that high impression and my suspension of disbelief, and I can certainly imagine it leaving that impression with most viewers at the time. It was like in a way reliving that fan sense of being let down by the show again.

(although oddly the season's ratings appear to be an inverse of what we'd expect, with lull ratings for the early diamonds and then increasing massively for the runt of the litter at the end)

I think Williams at least tried to prevent it ever getting quite that bad again (though The Armageddon Factor demonstrates he couldn't always succeed). Even in Season 17, it did look like City of Death might have done some good to rekindle the show's good will, even if the rest of the season was below par.

Did JNT save and revitalize the show initially?

Maybe. For Seasons 18 and 19 I suppose it was back to an encouraging good run again. But I think he soon undid that salvaging after by listening to Ian Levine too much and making the show more and more fan-aimed with scant quality control.

Whereas in Tom Baker's early era, Doctor Who had probably been the easiest show for a newcomer to become a fan of, with no demands or requirements, by Season 21 it seemed the opposite was true. And I think the ratings at least show that lost chance of a new groundswell that might've made all the difference in 1985.

Yes from Nimon to Hive the ratings dropped by a huge amount. However, I dont believe that was due to a negative audience reaction to JNT's opening story. Rather Dr Who found itself up against the newer much bigger budget Amercan show Buck Rogers in the 25th Century which I assume pulled in viewers like a vacuum cleaner. I would add I don't have access to the ITV show's viewing figures though.

The ITV strike of 1979 distorts the viewing figures for City so i don't see how it is reasonable to assume that City may have rekindled audience good will for the show. Whats the evidence? The 12-16m it got was because there was nothing else on tv those weekends at that time (i.e., no ITV, Channel 4 didn't exist and so only BBC2 as an alternative) so nowhere near as impressive as the viewing figures for season 12 and stories like the mega classic Ark in Space (despite the much maligned preponderance of bubble wrap in the latter).

I am not so sure that the continuity emphasis under JNT put viewers off. The viewing figures held up well until the end of Revelation of the Daleks (7.70m). They significantly dived with the start of Trial of a Timleord when they fell to 4.9m and, i would suggest, that that was due to the whole cheap, tacky, pantomimey feel of the show at that point. I thought the most complicated story continuity wise in the Saward / JNT era was Attack, but it seemed to me that the continuity points in that story were clearly explained by the character of the Doctor. Continuity becomes a problem when references to past stories that are key to the current story are made without sufficient explanation. I don't think Eric or JNT were guilty of that.

I do agree with what you say about Invasion of Time. I watched it on DVD a year and a half ago thinking maybe i misjudged it in 1977 when i was only about 12 and maybe now i was older i would enjoy it more. Unfortunately not.

stengos wrote:Yes from Nimon to Hive the ratings dropped by a huge amount. However, I dont believe that was due to a negative audience reaction to JNT's opening story. Rather Dr Who found itself up against the newer much bigger budget Amercan show Buck Rogers in the 25th Century which I assume pulled in viewers like a vacuum cleaner.

I'll be honest. I probably would've skipped out on The Leisure Hive for Buck Rodgers at the time. I found the former baffling, unrecognisable and off-putting when I first saw it on video, and actually struggled to finish it.

Maybe you're right that after Season 17, viewers just started taking the show for granted and got bored with how samey and circular it got by the end, and turned instead to Buck Rodgers because it provided something approximating the Star Wars experience again in a way Doctor Who couldn't anymore.

It's ironic of course that looking back, Season 18 has dated far better of the two shows.

The ITV strike of 1979 distorts the viewing figures for City so i don't see how  it is reasonable to assume that City may have rekindled audience good will for the show. Whats the evidence? The 12-16m it got was because there was nothing else on tv those weekends at that time (i.e., no ITV, Channel 4 didn't exist  and so only BBC2 as an alternative) so nowhere near as impressive as the viewing figures for season 12 and stories like the mega classic Ark in Space (despite the much maligned preponderance of bubble wrap in the latter).

I must admit, I'd love to know how well the 1980 repeat of City of Death did in the ratings, to get some idea of whether after the TV strike, and in the aftermath of Season 17, the audience were still impressed enough.

I think of the Williams stories, City of Death probably functioned best as a primer to the series for new viewers (almost like a second pilot). However, it might be that the rest of Season 17 then blew that bit of serendipity and left the audience uninterested.

I am not so sure that the continuity emphasis under JNT put viewers off. The viewing figures held up well until the end of Revelation of the Daleks (7.70m). They significantly dived with the start of Trial of a Timleord when they fell to 4.9m and, i would suggest, that that was due to the whole cheap, tacky, pantomimey feel of the show at that point.

I think what killed Trial's ratings was that audiences got fed up with the show being moved about in the schedules and so lost the viewing habit with it. But that's probably compounded by the fact the Trial arc was rather thick to get into for late-comers.

The ratings for Season 19-22 were indeed more or less steady enough, (particularly for a post-Channel 4 age). But if you compare it to the later Pertwee era and Hinchcliffe era, the ratings then seemed to be on an ever-growing, expansive rise from one season to next. And I think that's because the show was always welcoming to new viewers, and was a very easy show for a newcomer to become a fan of, without being made to feel you were too much of a late-comer to the current show (Destiny of the Daleks is the only 70's story that I think might).

For Davison and Colin, there was a loyal core viewership throughout but it wasn't doing what Tom Baker at his prime was doing in terms of crossing over and making audience numbers swell.

1982 might've been the last time a newcomer could become a fan on the strength of enjoying The Visitation or Earthshock, and not feel they had to already understand and agree with the significance of Omega, Mondas or misanthropic Silurian politics/grievances in order to be a fan. Certainly back in 1975 they didn't. By 1984 they did. And that I think is why it wasn't as easy a show to become a fan of as ten years prior, and why the ratings never got better than Season 19.

I thought the most complicated story continuity wise in the Saward / JNT era was Attack, but it seemed to me that the continuity points in that story were clearly explained by the character of the Doctor. Continuity becomes a problem when references to past stories that are key to the current story are made without sufficient explanation. I  don't think Eric or JNT were guilty of that.

I'd have to disagree there.

I honestly sensed even the writers and makers were daunted, confused and overwhelmed by all the continuity they were now having to comprehend and be faithful to in order to justify the story or message they were trying to tell whilst running by the seat of their pants in Warriors or Attack.

So I don't think the casual audience stood a chance. Though it does seem from the ratings, like the audience were perhaps fickle enough to still indulge those stories for the action.

I do agree with what you say about Invasion of Time. I watched it on DVD a year and a half ago thinking maybe i misjudged it in 1977 when i was only about 12 and maybe now i was older i would enjoy it more. Unfortunately not.

I did halfway manage to reappraise and appreciate it in my most recent watch. In fits and starts there are elements that could've worked, and even when it doesn't, there's a certain 'Doctor Who unplugged' charm to some of it.

But even then I almost rage-quit at the clumsy mess of an ending, where the writers seem to have genuinely forgotten how many Sontarans the Doctor still had left to vanquish, and thus left the story unfinished.

I think it pissed me off more this time because I'd tried my best to get behind it, and got so close to doing so, only to be kicked in the teeth.

Tanmann wrote:

stengos wrote:Yes from Nimon to Hive the ratings dropped by a huge amount. However, I dont believe that was due to a negative audience reaction to JNT's opening story. Rather Dr Who found itself up against the newer much bigger budget Amercan show Buck Rogers in the 25th Century which I assume pulled in viewers like a vacuum cleaner.

I'll be honest. I probably would've skipped out on The Leisure Hive for Buck Rodgers at the time. I found the former baffling, unrecognisable and off-putting when I first saw it on video, and actually struggled to finish it.

Maybe you're right that after Season 17, viewers just started taking the show for granted and got bored with how samey and circular it got by the end, and turned instead to Buck Rodgers because it provided something approximating the Star Wars experience again in a way Doctor Who couldn't anymore.

It's ironic of course that looking back, Season 18 has dated far better of the two shows.

The ITV strike of 1979 distorts the viewing figures for City so i don't see how  it is reasonable to assume that City may have rekindled audience good will for the show. Whats the evidence? The 12-16m it got was because there was nothing else on tv those weekends at that time (i.e., no ITV, Channel 4 didn't exist  and so only BBC2 as an alternative) so nowhere near as impressive as the viewing figures for season 12 and stories like the mega classic Ark in Space (despite the much maligned preponderance of bubble wrap in the latter).

I must admit, I'd love to know how well the 1980 repeat of City of Death did in the ratings, to get some idea of whether after the TV strike, and in the aftermath of Season 17, the audience were still impressed enough.

I think of the Williams stories, City of Death probably functioned best as a primer to the series for new viewers (almost like a second pilot). However, it might be that the rest of Season 17 then blew that bit of serendipity and left the audience uninterested.

I am not so sure that the continuity emphasis under JNT put viewers off. The viewing figures held up well until the end of Revelation of the Daleks (7.70m). They significantly dived with the start of Trial of a Timleord when they fell to 4.9m and, i would suggest, that that was due to the whole cheap, tacky, pantomimey feel of the show at that point.

I think what killed Trial's ratings was that audiences got fed up with the show being moved about in the schedules and so lost the viewing habit with it. But that's probably compounded by the fact the Trial arc was rather thick to get into for late-comers.

The ratings for Season 19-22 were indeed more or less steady enough, (particularly for a post-Channel 4 age). But if you compare it to the later Pertwee era and Hinchcliffe era, the ratings then seemed to be on an ever-growing, expansive rise from one season to next. And I think that's because the show was always welcoming to new viewers, and was a very easy show for a newcomer to become a fan of, without being made to feel you were too much of a late-comer to the current show (Destiny of the Daleks is the only 70's story that I think might).

For Davison and Colin, there was a loyal core viewership throughout but it wasn't doing what Tom Baker at his prime was doing in terms of crossing over and making audience numbers swell.

1982 might've been the last time a newcomer could become a fan on the strength of enjoying The Visitation or Earthshock, and not feel they had to already understand and agree with the significance of Omega, Mondas or misanthropic Silurian politics/grievances in order to be a fan. Certainly back in 1975 they didn't. By 1984 they did. And that I think is why it wasn't as easy a show to become a fan of as ten years prior, and why the ratings never got better than Season 19.

I thought the most complicated story continuity wise in the Saward / JNT era was Attack, but it seemed to me that the continuity points in that story were clearly explained by the character of the Doctor. Continuity becomes a problem when references to past stories that are key to the current story are made without sufficient explanation. I  don't think Eric or JNT were guilty of that.

I'd have to disagree there.

I honestly sensed even the writers and makers were daunted, confused and overwhelmed by all the continuity they were now having to comprehend and be faithful to in order to justify the story or message they were trying to tell whilst running by the seat of their pants in Warriors or Attack.

So I don't think the casual audience stood a chance. Though it does seem from the ratings, like the audience were perhaps fickle enough to still indulge those stories for the action.

I do agree with what you say about Invasion of Time. I watched it on DVD a year and a half ago thinking maybe i misjudged it in 1977 when i was only about 12 and maybe now i was older i would enjoy it more. Unfortunately not.

I did halfway manage to reappraise and appreciate it in my most recent watch. In fits and starts there are elements that could've worked, and even when it doesn't, there's a certain 'Doctor Who unplugged' charm to some of it.

But even then I almost rage-quit at the clumsy mess of an ending, where the writers seem to have genuinely forgotten how many Sontarans the Doctor still had left to vanquish, and thus left the story unfinished.

I think it pissed me off more this time because I'd tried my best to get behind it, and got so close to doing so, only to be kicked in the teeth.

Forgive me but i've been busy with some paperwork today but very quickly on the ratings for the repeat of City of Death. It was shown on four consecutive evenings Tuesday 12th to Friday 15th August in 1980 and the ratings were  6.3, 5.5, 5.6 and 5.9 million viewers respectively. The competition was local evening news and Crossroads I think.

In contrast, a week or so later JNT's programme was having to compete with Buck in the 25th Century which had the bigger budgets and flashy sfx. I don't think Dr Who was boring at that point. Its just ITV was offering something more akin to the spectacle of Star Wars rather than a low budget BBC production. In fact, the closest you get at that time to seeing sthg like Star Wars on your telly. I don't see any reason to suppose Williams' Dr Who outpourings would have fared any better than JNT. Even when not facing a blank screen Williams' season 17 was up against sthg like CHIPS which hardly had the pull of dear old Bucky.

I must confess that i am biased though - i love Leisure Hive.

stengos wrote:
Forgive me but i've been busy with some paperwork today but very quickly on the ratings for the repeat of City of Death. It was shown on four consecutive evenings Tuesday 12th to Friday 15th August in 1980 and the ratings were  6.3, 5.5, 5.6 and 5.9 million viewers respectively. The competition was local evening news and Crossroads I think.

In contrast, a week or so later JNT's programme was having to compete with Buck in the 25th Century which had the bigger budgets and flashy sfx. I don't think Dr Who was boring at that point. Its just ITV was offering something more akin to the spectacle of Star Wars rather than a low budget BBC production. In fact, the closest you get at that time to seeing sthg like Star Wars on your telly. I don't see any reason to suppose Williams' Dr Who outpourings would have fared any better than JNT. Even when not facing a blank screen Williams' season 17 was up against sthg like CHIPS which hardly had the pull of dear old Bucky.

I must confess that i am biased though - i love Leisure Hive.

Ah. Thank you for finding those figures. I've always wanted to see them.

I suppose one can't always tell the public reception of the show from repeat ratings. Since by nature, repeats are not watched in the same air of anticipation as the first broadcast was.

But, yes, it is possible to consolidate them with Season 18 and see them as marking a downward trajectory ever since Creature from the Pit.

I suppose if Williams had stayed on into the 80's, there might've been a few advantages. Shada might've been more likely remounted and completed. No Adric, probably no Tegan, and (certainly a plus in my book) probably no involvement from Ian Levine.

The great disadvantage would be that there would probably be no dynamic visual revamp, and the production values would still be as shoddy and lamentable as usual, which means any dwindling interest would've stayed dwindling as nothing would appear to be changing.

And whilst I have my bugbears with Eric Saward as script-editor, it might be that script-editors willing to be tied down to the show were getting harder and harder to find, as the best talents had all moved onto greener pastures. And so under Williams we might've ended up stuck with the same kind of mediocre to poor talent in the job who maybe didn't quite get the show. It's certainly unlikely we would've gotten another maestro on the level of Robert Holmes again.

But in any case, given what hell Seasons 15-17 was for Williams behind the scenes, I certainly wouldn't want to wish another one on him.