|
So I was having a discussion in multiple thread about season 5, 6 and what we've seen of 7 so far of "Doctor Who".
In these threads I mentioned my affection with the RTD years and my dislike of the Moffat years. The responses I got were uniform – people seemed to think my bad attitude towards how the show is today is based on some sort of raving, mindless fan rage that people dare change the show I like.
So I have decided to open this thread, in which I discuss in rather great depth (considering the source material :P) how the show changed in the last 3 years, for better and for worse, and why the bottom line is that I liked the older seasons better.
This is all about opinion – I am not attempting to offend anyone or claim someone is "wrong" here, but it seemed to me the discussion of Doctor Who was extremely one sided, so this here is an attempt to broaden it a bit.
My approach to the task at hand is to detail some of the traits of seasons 1 -4, as opposed to the counterpart traits of season 5,6 and half of 7. I don’t see a need for any further introduction to the concept of this post, so let's dive right in:
Positive Traits of the RTD years in Doctor Who:
1) The Doctor is a wholeheartedly positive character. He is a godlike being who travels space and time not only to do good and save people, but because he *enjoys* it. He is passionate, adventurous inhumanly smart. He finds everything around him literally "fantastic" (as he is fond of saying) – he is charmed and fascinated by everything from human curiosity to breathtaking views. He takes human companions with him not only to overcome his loneliness, but to always have besides him someone to remind him that he should be more like a human and never forget that he is not an *actual* god.
2) Good characters. You may like or dislike any of the companions and their families, but you can't argue that a lot of time was spent developing these characters and making each of them unique. Dona (even though I find her behavior somewhat annoying) was an amazing example of this. Characters grew and evolved from episode to episode, and it was fun to watch them grow.
3) The focus of the story was exploration. Most episodes were about finding someplace new, or visiting a new period in England's past or future. Every once in a while an episode would be about saving modern day earth but the overall feel was that the show was about the travels of The Doctor.
4) The actors of both doctor 9 and doctor 10 were very good.
Negative traits of the RTD years in doctor who:
1) Repetitive, predictable story patterns. It seems like nearly every single story in the RTD years had the same basic structure. Some sort of menace is presented at the start of the episode, usually in a death scene (that is, usually the menace is presented by killing someone). Later in the episode the Doctor would go investigating and find clues to provide a rational, scientific (sort of :P) explanation to the situation, confront whoever's responsible, the end. It got tiresome at a certain point.
2) The "meta plot" of a season was usually delivered by hiding small "easter eggs" throughout the season that gave very vague hints as to what was coming, and then 95% of the meta plot happened in the last 2 or 3 episodes – see "Bad Wolf", for example. That's not really foreshadowing and the meta plots themselves were not very interesting for the most part.
3) The first half of most of the two+ story arcs were usually slow and not very good.
Positive Traits of the Moffat years in Doctor Who:
1) Matt Smith is a fine actor. I may not like at all the way he is representing the Doctor, but his acting skills are not to be questioned.
2) I really like the new designs of the Tardis
3) A lot of great story concepts that feel like they should have been done a long time ago – a pirates episode, or dinosaurs on a spaceship.
4) Meta plots got more detailed and more significant – not really my preferences with Doctor Who but previous seasons were trying to do the same thing, just not as successfully.
Negative traits of the Moffat years in Doctor Who:
1) The Doctor is a rather negative character. This is frankly what's troubled me most, I think. Unlike the previous two doctors, doctor 11 is aggressive, unpleasant and a little bit stupid in his own special way. He constantly tells other people to shut up, he is often angry (not in the "now I have to defeat you" way the previous two doctors were, but in a "how dare you try to trap *me*, weeping angels!" sort of way) and nearly always impatient. For example, in the second episode of season 5 he was about to kill the space whale, a magnificent creature, just because he didn't have the patience to think things through. The previous doctors would never have done that. He also acts in a way that makes him look a little dumb. Licking things he examines, for example, and more importantly being VERY socialy ignorant. The previous doctors were diplomatic, charismatic, and there was a sense that they were familiar with many customs of many times and places in the universe. Doctor 11 goes around saying "bunk beds are cool" when Amy and Rory request to have a bed they could both sleep on, and ocassionaly acts in a very silly way and then ask, "Is this how you say hello in your time?" or something like that.
2) Inconsistent character development and problematic episode structure. It seems like more than ever, in the last two and a half years each episode of Doctor Who attempts to be a complete short story, with it's very own beginning and end for each character. That leads to characters reaching emotional peaks in episode x, only to completely forget about them in episode (x+1). A great example of this is the way Amy and Rory had a tendency to die ALL THE TIME, sometimes multiple times per episode. In the first half of season 5, Amy had already managed to prove her love for Rory by committing suicide, knowing it would either lead to being reunited with Rory or she'll stay dead, which she is fine with if Rory is already dead. That's a sign of love, and a strong one at that. Next episode? Amy is still flirting with The Doctor and just generally abusing and disregarding Rory. Amy and Rory had very broad lines which remained constant from episode to episode, but generally they changed as the plot of each individual story demanded it. The story structure is also problematic, I think, as expositions tend to be way to long and always try to hard to be cool.
3) Inconsistent story logic. I know, I know, this was always a problem in Doctor Who, but I never felt it as acutely as I do know. Nothing seems to be making even the slightest bit of sense. For example, in the episode "let's go kill Hitler", we see River Song regenerating into her body which we know, and she didn't recognize the Doctor, meaning it was the first time she ever met him. Also meaning, according to the story that was being built over the last 2 seasons, that it's the last time he should see her. Needless to say, he meets her again soon after, in "Angels Take Manhattan." Speaking of angels, their inconsistent nature is annoying as well. Nothing makes anything near sense in their episodes in seasons 5 and 7. Nothing. An image of an Angel becomes itself an angel? Wat? But we saw pictures of angels in "blink" and nothing happened with them! And since when do angels giggle, or make any other sound (the baby angels)? And the statue of liberty is an angel that somehow sneaked halfway through Manhattan without being seen by anyone? Really? There's also the white light that erases things from existence in season 5 which doesn't work in any sort of logical way either. For example, when the soldiers enter the light and get erased, doesn't that mean they never existed? But if the specific soldier who went into the light never existed, why didn't the leader of the expedition take another soldier with him? The disappeared soldiers should have been replaced immediately by the people who would have been part of the expedition if they hadn't taken the spot.
Perhaps worse of all is the Dalek episode, "Asylum of the Dalek". It was a great short story, really, but… it doesn't make any sort of sense. Why would Dalek's have a parliament? They are all about perfect obedience to their leader, meaning they should have an emperor or a king or something along these lines. And why are daleks treated like machines? They are organic beings inside a powerful shell, not actual robots. Their memory is not supposed to be stored in some sort of internet connection, and certainly placing a human inside a Dalek shell is not supposed to make the human in a dalek (we could also see the Oswin had a human body), so what's up?
4) The story is focused much more on personal adventure than about travel, and I find that annoying. Let's examine (very shortly) the plots of episodes from season 6 of Doctor Who:
a)The impossible Astronaut/Day of the Moon – all about the doctor and his tangle with The Silence, no focus at all on travel
b) Curse of the Black Spot – certainly an exploration episode about meeting pirates
c) The Doctor's Wife – I'd call this an exploration episode because the Tardis is explored, but the plot is not about just arriving somewhere and exploring it, it's about a trap set for the Tardis.
d) The Rebel Flesh and the Almost people – exploration. The doctor gets to a new place and solved a mystery there
e) "A good man goes to war" and "Let's kill Hitler", plot episodes, the environment is nearly meaningless in them
f) Night Terrors, The Girl Who waited and the God Complex are all technicaly explorations, but of a very personal dimension – that is, they are very small scoped stories about a small number of people, in one case it's ONLY about the Doctor and his companions. I'll still call them exploration though.
g) closing time and the wedding of river song are both plot episodes with little to nothing to do with their environment.
All in all, less than half the season is about just randomly going to a place and saving people there. In season 5 it is even more radical as many of the plotlines are about River Song calling the Doctor, so really he is barely traveling anymore. At least not nearly as much as he used to in seasons 1-4.
From my perspective, the negatives of Moffat's writing far outweight the positives. I wanted to get this written here because people seem to think nothing is wrong with the way the show is now, which I guess means they don't care about the same things as I do. However, hopefuly this stops people from assuming any sort of probem with the show as it is now stems from mindless fandom.
Disclaimers time!
1) I think Moffat is a very talented scripter and I love some of his episodes from the RTD period, and also LOVE his Sherlock mini series. As Freehold DM would be delighted to tell you though, the fact someone does somethings right dosen't mean he is perfect and I think that with Moffat as cheif writer the show has a lot of problems.
2) I never watched the old Doctor Who show (except for one story arc, "The Planet of Evil" I think it was called) so all of my comments are relvent exclusivley to 2005 and onwards.
re: Oswin in Asylum of the Daleks:placing a human inside a Dalek shell is not supposed to make the human in a dalek (we could also see the Oswin had a human body), so what's up?
It's quite hard to respond to a thread like this because it is mostly about likes and dislikes rather than facts. However, I think that there is something that you have missed about Asylum of the Daleks. It doesn't invalidate your other points about the story but it may make this element make more sense.
People choosing to die is an aspect of Steven Moffat stories that some people I know have problems with.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
@Lord snow
Actually the weeping angels being an image makes sense... how did the Angels get the jump on the Doctor in 'Blink'? Because he turned his back on a photo. (speculation I know)
It's hard for me to argue some of your points, as I come from a different frame of reference (having watched Who since I was 10, except for the hiatus.)
Three, for example, had a lot of the same traits I see in Eleven, and those crept up in most of his incarnations (Four could get insulting, as could Six, and Seven had the entire level of manipulation down to a science.) One and Two were pretty condescending towards humanity as well. In fact, it is kind of scary how the Pertwee/Delgato Doctor/Master relationship was. Kind of a...
MAster: I will use these toys in my experiment.
Doctor: These are my toys.
*fight* Master is captured/imprisoned, escapes etc.
Doctor: *chuckles* What an impressive fellow Time Lord, I do hope we meet again.
*Companion looks at the number of people the Master killed, and wonders what the hell is wrong with the Doctor*
Likewise, Rose (and Amy, and maybe Clara) were so plot point driven, that they seem to be symptomatic of 'NuWho' as a whole. Most of the companions from 1-7 were there for audience exposition. Rose annoyed me because she just won't go away. The Doctor fell for an Aztec woman in 'The Aztecs' but didn't spend three incarnations getting over her, for example.
(Old series)
Doctor: Well it appears to be a grue.
Companion: What's a grue, Doctor?
*Doctor then explains for the companion and the audience*
In fact, As far as I recall, Ace was the only other one who had plots revolve around her (Curse of Fenric, Ghost Light, Icefire)
So 11 reminds me of 1, 3, and 7 a lot. He seems to have some of the obsessive trauma of 9 as well, but Eccleston left the part too soon (idiot!) so we couldn't get into his head.
|
|
I have the same conclusion but some of my reasons are a little different. Moffat still has Dr. feel but its not knocking my socks off. Loved how 1oth went out. I even loved how 11 came in and I usually hate the transition period. 11th has had the opposite effect. I loved him right away but as time went on grew a bit weary. Companions play a bit into it I suppose.
I've been contending that part of the reason that 11 acts the way he does is because the first person he had contact with (and thus more or less imprinted on) was the juvenile Amelia Pond. Now, this would make the regeneration from 10 to 11 completely different in how it was handled in that regard, but it does make a strange sort of sense - the first human mind he came into contact with was that of a child - and children see the world completely differently.
11 has a lot of characteristics of an adolescent. He can be full of wonder, he can be petulant, and he tends to do things in an all-or-nothing fashion, whereas a more mature mind would find a way to compromise on an acceptable outcome.
There's definitely a lot of the first three Doctors in him, though, I gotta say. Feels that way, at least.
I wonder if the individual story writers are much of the source of the complaints though? I have yet to actually research this though...
|
|
@Lord snow
Actually the weeping angels being an image makes sense... how did the Angels get the jump on the Doctor in 'Blink'? Because he turned his back on a photo. (speculation I know)
It's hard for me to argue some of your points, as I come from a different frame of reference (having watched Who since I was 10, except for the hiatus.)
Three, for example, had a lot of the same traits I see in Eleven, and those crept up in most of his incarnations (Four could get insulting, as could Six, and Seven had the entire level of manipulation down to a science.) One and Two were pretty condescending towards humanity as well. In fact, it is kind of scary how the Pertwee/Delgato Doctor/Master relationship was. Kind of a...
MAster: I will use these toys in my experiment.
Doctor: These are my toys.
*fight* Master is captured/imprisoned, escapes etc.
Doctor: *chuckles* What an impressive fellow Time Lord, I do hope we meet again.
*Companion looks at the number of people the Master killed, and wonders what the hell is wrong with the Doctor*Likewise, Rose (and Amy, and maybe Clara) were so plot point driven, that they seem to be symptomatic of 'NuWho' as a whole. Most of the companions from 1-7 were there for audience exposition. Rose annoyed me because she just won't go away. The Doctor fell for an Aztec woman in 'The Aztecs' but didn't spend three incarnations getting over her, for example.
(Old series)
Doctor: Well it appears to be a grue.
Companion: What's a grue, Doctor?
*Doctor then explains for the companion and the audience*In fact, As far as I recall, Ace was the only other one who had plots revolve around her (Curse of Fenric, Ghost Light, Icefire)
So 11 reminds me of 1, 3, and 7 a lot. He seems to have some of the obsessive trauma of 9 as well, but Eccleston left the part too soon (idiot!) so we couldn't get into his head.
Thank you for this interesting perspective - I wouldn't normally have access to opinions about the old Doctor Who show.
However interesting I find your thoughts though, they are not really relevent to how Doctor Who is now. The failings of the 11th doctor are not less acute because similar failings were performed earlier in the show's exsitance - 50 years are a long, long time to learn from old mistakes and move on!|
|
I wonder if the individual story writers are much of the source of the complaints though? I have yet to actually research this though...
To a certain extent, yes, individual story writers have a great impact. However, I would say that the creative director (RTD in his time and now Moffat) has a much greater one. For example, I think Moffats' episodes in the RTD period were among the very best - "the unearthley child" (which was just about the only good story arc in the first season), "blink" and "silence in the library" were really good. But now that there's no one to edit him? yeah, that's problematic.
There's also this story writer, Chris Chinball or something like that, who is just plain terrible. All of his episodes are boering to near death.
Chief Technical Officer
|
So 11 reminds me of 1, 3, and 7 a lot.
It's funny you said that, because after I read this:
The Doctor is a rather negative character. This is frankly what's troubled me most, I think. Unlike the previous two doctors, doctor 11 is aggressive, unpleasant and a little bit stupid in his own special way. He constantly tells other people to shut up, he is often angry (not in the "now I have to defeat you" way the previous two doctors were, but in a "how dare you try to trap *me*, weeping angels!" sort of way) and nearly always impatient. For example, in the second episode of season 5 he was about to kill the space whale, a magnificent creature, just because he didn't have the patience to think things through. The previous doctors would never have done that. He also acts in a way that makes him look a little dumb. Licking things he examines, for example, and more importantly being VERY socialy ignorant. The previous doctors were diplomatic, charismatic, and there was a sense that they were familiar with many customs of many times and places in the universe.
...my response is that 1, 3, and 7 were often aggressive; 1 and 3 were often unpleasant; and I could easily see 1, 3, or 7 killing the space whale.
Jo would have stopped 3 from killing the space whale, number 4's Leela on the other hand.....
I could write a book (really, I could just write a book about being a Doctor Who geek, if that somehow could be viable subject matter, which I don't think it is) in response in what I both agree or disagree about the OP...
But frankly, it's all just a matter of taste and personal preference. I was having a similar conversation with my sister. She prefers the RTD years and I prefer Moffatt's (although both have their merits and flaws, and just as I dislike many of RTD's creative decisions, I also do not like some of Moffatt's, and quite strongly so). I think largely it's a matter of preferred tone. Some of it simply has to do with what we identify with in other characters, and what kind of plots we enjoy. My sister enjoys grand adventures with big over the top events, I prefer things a little more subtle and horrific, and that largely explains (though amongst some other things) the differences right there, and no amount of arguing can really change that inclination, just for example. ((Also I have a grudge against RTD for what happened to Donna. As a sarky loudmouth secretary who tends to miss out on all the adventure everyone else has, I irrationally take it personally. ;) ))
And this conversation ain't no different than it's been for the last 50 years. I'm sure in 1965 some folks sat in the pub arguing about the direction Doctor Who was taking now that John Wiles had taken over from Verity Lambert. And amongst certain groups of Doctor Who fans, all you have to do is say the three magic words "John Nathan Turner" and then just watch everything go up in flames. :)
FWIW, I like 11, and I think he is my favorite of the three 21st century Doctors. I like the blend of harshness and whimsy--he reminds me a lot of Two, clownish on the outside but that demeanor is masking a pretty hard core and clever individual (and Matt Smith has said he took a lot of inspiration from him--and it's where the bow tie came from). I disliked how 10 tried to change everyone else's fates and made decisions for other people without their consent, and I never liked 9s "stupid apes" attitude -- interestingly, I think 11 is the absolutely and by far the kindest of the new Doctors, so I'll have to disagree on some things said (even if he is still ruthless in some accounts, but no less so than Mr. "No Second Chances, that's the Kind of Man I am" and Mr. "Ready to Murder the lone Dalek").
Jo would have stopped 3 from killing the space whale, number 4's Leela on the other hand.....
Well, if she thought it was right to kill the space whale, it would have been to put it out of its misery. Leela was compassionate--a warrior, and ready to kill a legitimate threat--but compassionate. She still would have been outraged to hear what had been done to it, and anything she would have decided to do in relation to its fate would have been with regards to what she felt was the right thing. And she too would have asked if there was a way to save it and everyone else, unless she truly thought killing it would end its suffering. I know that its death was to save others, but that's not why I think she'd agree to its death, if she would at all. Leela's actually a very nice lady as long as you don't attack her or piss her off.
(really, I could just write a book about being a Doctor Who geek, if that somehow could be viable subject matter, which I don't think it is)
Seen this?
(really, I could just write a book about being a Doctor Who geek, if that somehow could be viable subject matter, which I don't think it is)Seen this?
No. (I have seen the anthology from female Doctor Who fans though.) But see, I'm not actually interested in reading someone's memoirs of being a Doctor Who fan, which is I personally don't think it would be viable subject matter. I wouldn't inflict on others something I personally wouldn't want to read. Others' mileage may vary, obviously, and I hope Mr. Griffith's book does well.
====
Kthulhu, you speak the truth. :D
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
11 does seem to be throwing back to 2 in a lot of ways.
I do think this is intentional.
Aside: Am I the only one who gets chills when I hear the cloister bell?
(Second aside, the single piano key being repeated at the end of 'Mad Man With A Box' is the same note as the bell, as far as my ears can tell.)
So, I haven't watched any of season 7 yet, or pre 9th, but I have to say that Tennant is my favorite. I love the way that he switches from whimsey to serious, and there is always a sadness behind him. Eccleston was too much a broken man. Tennant felt more like someone who thought he was recovering, but then the madness slowyly slipped in as he lost those he cared about again. Smith is much more carefree, but he also seems less determined to find the best path but more the best path for him and his friends. Then again, the 11th is the only one of the 3 being personally attacked, while the other 2 were responding to attacks on others. I do love the relationship that 11 has with his companions more than the previous doctors though. They play off eachother really well.
In the end, I feel like the Ponds are my favorite companions but Tennant is my favorite Dr.
|
I favor just about all of Classic Who over the tone of the new series... too much soap opera, not enough outer-space adventures of a wandering scientist.
(Tip for new fans: The Doctor used to be first and foremost a scientist, rather than a romantic lead! Amazing, isn't it?)
This right here is exactly why I stopped watching the show. I enjoy exciting tales of science and discovery (even cheesy special effects are great) but the whole soap opera who do we want to sleep with today thing is just annoying... and bad.
Falling in love with something was a reason to LEAVE the show not the reason FOR the show.You'd think after nearly a thousand years of life you'd learn to keep your hormones under control.
I could write a book (really, I could just write a book about being a Doctor Who geek, if that somehow could be viable subject matter, which I don't think it is) in response in what I both agree or disagree about the OP...Oh, you'd be surprised....
This right here is exactly why I stopped watching the show. I enjoy exciting tales of science and discovery (even cheesy special effects are great) but the whole soap opera who do we want to sleep with today thing is just annoying... and bad.
Falling in love with something was a reason to LEAVE the show not the reason FOR the show.
Yeah, I hated it when the Doctor flirted with Cameca in "The Aztecs." Entirely inappropriate. They should have stuck to the OLD ways of doing things. Oh, wait, that happened in 1964.
And him running down the streets of Paris with Romana holding hands? Terrible. They never would have done that in 1978! Oh wait, that DID happen in 1978, never mind.
OMG and don't get me started on the UST with Tegan...
The Doctor is always a scientist and explorer (I actually LOVE that Matt Smith's Doctor really plays up his scientific curiosity in fact). He is also a sentient being with emotions and feelings. You can in fact be both! Often, even! Now, I don't want to see him be a romantic character ALL the time, and I admit I struggle with the idea of the Doctor openly falling in love with one of his companions because it sort of "elevates" that companion or sets them apart from the others in a way that rubs me the wrong way. But he is, was, a father and a grandfather, I'd like to think the mother of his children was someone he loved romantically, and I'd like to think he's capable of loving (and lusting) in general, even if he acts on it only (and preferably, in my personal opinion) rarely. If he gets the occasional snog in, though, that's fine. He is, as Barbara Wright once said, an "old rogue" after all.
And he has never slept with anyone that we know of so I don't get the "who do we want to sleep with" comment at ALL.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
@DQ,
Showing my age again... Sarah Jane was my First, and the good bye between her and Four struck me very much in the manner they portrayed in School Reunion. I just didn't see why Rose. I mean if this had been a reboot, Rose was his 'first', but it wasn't. Which means he's survived all the above you mentioned.
And yes, I liked the Cameca bit (and if you watched the special, Moffet's little dig on River was funny too)
Strangely, I think I like a Doctor who enjoys humanity (and other races), but is a part from it. In the sense that a human likes watching dogs play together and enjoying it, but stepping in when that turns to violence. Except in his case it's more 'stepping in when one wants to wipe out the other'. The occasional mass death is fine. (again, look at Three's relationship with the Master, Four (The first Leelah episode, he didn't really worry much about what the computer had done to the two peoples or fix it.) Five (Even when he officially had Presidental powers, he just made the one Time Lady in charge, and didn't say "By the way, destroy the time scoop and all this" before he left)And Seven (Lots of times, but Battlefield comes to mind. Battlefield's a bonus, because 11+ could have left Seven a less enigmatic message.)
Amusingly, one of the more famous moments from Four is when he *didn't* wipe out a race, and that was something of an Actor's saving throw, as Tom Baker is the one who argued for the change.
|
|
interestingly, I think 11 is the absolutely and by far the kindest of the new Doctors, so I'll have to disagree on some things said (even if he is still ruthless in some accounts, but no less so than Mr. "No Second Chances, that's the Kind of Man I am" and Mr. "Ready to Murder the lone Dalek"
Did you even watch the episode where 11 set the human race to destroy the Silence without even knowing who exactly the Silence were, what is their agenda and their motives? he literaly enslaved an entire species (humans, which are his favourite) to use it as a weapon of mass destruction against a race of alien he knows NOTHING about. 10 or 9 would have at least been curious.
Did you watch the episode where 11 gathered an army of his allies to make an actual frontal assault against another army? (a good man goes to war)
Or maybe the one where the Doctor was actualy *provoking Daleks to violance just to prove a point*? (victory of the daleks)
When 9 or 10 allowed themselves to become to big, to let some violent urge that's in the base of every Doctor to guide them (like in your example of 9 wanting to kill the harmless Dalek), it was usualy in a sudden, nearly uncontrolable fit of rage. And they always got called out for it.
Also, I have written a detailed explenation of why 10's statement of "no second chances" actualy came after he did give his enemies several chances (tried to talk them out of violance and also spared the life of the leader after the duel), and he did only kill the leader and intended to let the rest of the Syocorax go. That's much more forgiving than 11's attitude.
|
|
in a more general note, I notice that those who have been watching the show for longer than me are not as upset about 11 as I am - I suppose this comes from having different expectations, based on the fast that I have less experience with The Doctor. The transation from 10 to 11 was VERY jarring to me, but I suppose the good thing about doctor who as a show is that it never dies, only regenerates. Meaning, I suppose, that 10 years from now there will be a show called "Doctor Who" with a different doctor and a different writing crew, which hopefuly I'd like better.
Till that day come, my the gods grant me wisdom to figure out what was going on in "Rings of Akahtan".
|
|
This right here is exactly why I stopped watching the show. I enjoy exciting tales of science and discovery (even cheesy special effects are great) but the whole soap opera who do we want to sleep with today thing is just annoying... and bad.
Falling in love with something was a reason to LEAVE the show not the reason FOR the show.Yeah, I hated it when the Doctor flirted with Cameca in "The Aztecs." Entirely inappropriate. They should have stuck to the OLD ways of doing things. Oh, wait, that happened in 1964.
And him running down the streets of Paris with Romana holding hands? Terrible. They never would have done that in 1978! Oh wait, that DID happen in 1978, never mind.
OMG and don't get me started on the UST with Tegan...
The Doctor is always a scientist and explorer (I actually LOVE that Matt Smith's Doctor really plays up his scientific curiosity in fact). He is also a sentient being with emotions and feelings. You can in fact be both! Often, even! Now, I don't want to see him be a romantic character ALL the time, and I admit I struggle with the idea of the Doctor openly falling in love with one of his companions because it sort of "elevates" that companion or sets them apart from the others in a way that rubs me the wrong way. But he is, was, a father and a grandfather, I'd like to think the mother of his children was someone he loved romantically, and I'd like to think he's capable of loving (and lusting) in general, even if he acts on it only (and preferably, in my personal opinion) rarely. If he gets the occasional snog in, though, that's fine. He is, as Barbara Wright once said, an "old rogue" after all.
And he has never slept with anyone that we know of so I don't get the "who do we want to sleep with" comment at ALL.
Why thank you for proving my point for me. once every oh 14 years is much easier to swallow then the current every episode.
Also, "who do we WANT to sleep with" does not equal "who ARE we going to sleep with".
Overall my initial comment has been, like the OP, that the story lines for this show have drastically changed focus from the explorer/scientist who travels around to the current love-starved Lothario who occasional travels around.
We don't care what the characters do off-screen (have as many romantic conquests as you want even hint about it on-screen if you choose) just keep the stories to what we have watched this series for the last 30 years for, high adventure and quirky science.
When we want to see someone pining for (or chasing after) the love interest of the week we'll turn on days of our lives.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
The Doctor's sexiness may also have something to do with the actor cast for the part. Stick someone like Billie Piper alongside, say, Jon Pertwee during his run and see if romantic sparks fly.
Ewwwww.
That's not to say that Peter Davison's Doctor couldn't have attracted a demographic fan base interested in his exploits ...
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
The Doctor's sexiness may also have something to do with the actor cast for the part. Stick someone like Billie Piper alongside, say, Jon Pertwee during his run and see if romantic sparks fly.
Ewwwww.
That's not to say that Peter Davison's Doctor couldn't have attracted a demographic fan base interested in his exploits ...
Actually that's pretty funny. I don't know much about Jon Pertwee, but the impression I got from Lis Sladden's bio was that he loved his wife, but enjoyed being seen as a ladies man.
I could be wrong, but that was my impression.
What I really prefer was Moffatt writing for RTD—that's the very pinnacle of the 50-year run for me.
That is a very apt way to put it. I enjoy Moffatt's episodes, but his sharpest and best work seemed to be when he was working for RTD, and not while he was in charge.
I do still like him in a general sense.
She prefers the RTD years and I prefer Moffatt's...What I really prefer was Moffatt writing for RTD—that's the very pinnacle of the 50-year run for me.
I think we'd both agree on that score. The combination somehow worked best.
Lord Snow, I could counter with several examples of other Doctors doing equally if not moreso awful things, and your interpretation of some of the events you describe seems rather extreme (the Silence seemed pretty damned clearly unstoppable and terrible, and I think he did the right thing). And I could provide several examples where 11 was more heroic than probably other Doctors would have been. But your tone suggests that you seem really hell-bent on having a hate on for 11, so I doubt even if I constructed the most amazing, well-researched amazing rebuttal ever, you would even WANT to hear it, let alone actually accept my viewpoint as another possibility, even if it's one you disagree with.
So all I'll say is: I get it. You think the Dalek Warrior and Tinkerbell Jesus have never done any wrong, and 11 is universally a terrible person and has never done anything good ever. Thank you for sharing your views with us.
((If you really do want a rebuttal though, give me some time to review past episodes and assemble a proper answer.))
Mathwei: I'm still looking for all the episodes where the Doctor is a "Lothario" and I'm really coming up short. He's a little more flirty? Sometimes? Tennant had a weird run especially with the Girl in the Fireplace, but that was years ago now. I can't help but feel you are exaggerating just a bit.
The Doctor's sexiness may also have something to do with the actor cast for the part. Stick someone like Billie Piper alongside, say, Jon Pertwee during his run and see if romantic sparks fly.
Ewwwww.
While it's not my personal inclination (I agree on the eeeeww), I have seen many fans, article writers, and so on postulate that Three was in love with Jo Grant (especially with his particular sort of melancholy expressed when she left him to marry... marry an adventurous, eccentric professiorial sort, no less...).
Just as a thought.
Although if you're going to put Rose with older Doctors, my vote is with either One or, to be truly cruel, Six. *laughs evilly*
That's not to say that Peter Davison's Doctor couldn't have attracted a demographic fan base interested in his exploits ...
I'm pretty damn sure he did. He is a pretty, pretty man.
Camille Coduri said she had quite the crush on Pertwee back in the day. Fans lusting for Doctors is not new.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I still do, but it's getting close to being overused.
Aside: Am I the only one who gets chills when I hear the cloister bell?
I've not seen Saturday's episode yet. So I take it that it wasn't like the Tardis was going to blow up or something.
I still remember the first time I heard it.
So all I'll say is: I get it. You think the Dalek Warrior and Tinkerbell Jesus have never done any wrong,
Just out of curiosity, who do you mean by "Tinkerbell Jesus"?
|
Publisher, Chief Creative Officer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If it seems like you are insulting another person on a thread about Doctor Who, it's probably best to take a step back and evaluate your demeanor.
Please be respectful toward one another.
Hell, one of my favorite companions is Turlough, but you don't see me baiting people into a fight about it. ;)
|
|
She prefers the RTD years and I prefer Moffatt's...Lord Snow, I could counter with several examples of other Doctors doing equally if not moreso awful things, and your interpretation of some of the events you describe seems rather extreme (the Silence seemed pretty damned clearly unstoppable and terrible, and I think he did the right thing). And I could provide several examples where 11 was more heroic than probably other Doctors would have been. But your tone suggests that you seem really hell-bent on having a hate on for 11, so I doubt even if I constructed the most amazing, well-researched amazing rebuttal ever, you would even WANT to hear it, let alone actually accept my viewpoint as another possibility, even if it's one you disagree with.
So all I'll say is: I get it. You think the Dalek Warrior and Tinkerbell Jesus have never done any wrong, and 11 is universally a terrible person and has never done anything good ever. Thank you for sharing your views with us.
((If you really do want a rebuttal though, give me some time to review past episodes and assemble a proper answer.))
Mrs. (or Mister?) DeathQuaker, you are quick to make insulting assumptions :)
Of course I'd like to hear a proper answer, if I wouldn't have there would be no point in posting my thoughts in a message board devoted to discussions about anything geeky.
My opinion about 11 is a combination of actual important events that happened, like the attempt to drive the Silence to extinction, and from just an all around feel that there is about him. It's not as if I went into season 5-7 determined not to like them, and there are some episodes in them which I like (see, for example, "A Christmas Carol", or that when where there are two Amy Ponds), and sometimes 11 does display redeeming qualities. I still watch Doctor Who, and not out of "loyalty" to a show I used to like, but because it is still a more than watchable sci-fi about a character I generally enjoy adventuring with. I am passionate about Doctor Who, which is why the many failings I do see are all that much more disappointing to me.
So please, if you have an answer to my points from the opening posts, as well as those you were referring to in the quoted post here (for example, I'd be delighted to hear of a single thing 11 did which was more heroic than the way 10 sacrificed himself to save Wilfred, or tried to save the crew in "Waters of Mars" despite knowing what the consequences might be).
|
I'd be delighted to hear of a single thing 11 did which was more heroic than the way 10 sacrificed himself to save Wilfred
Well, he willingly sacrificed himself at the end of series 5. And he didn't have to tell old man how unimportant he was to do it. He actually went towards what he had reason to believe might be REAL death with dignity. Even after he was aware that it was just going to be regeneration and not an actual death, that's more than Ten managed.
|
If it seems like you are insulting another person on a thread about Doctor Who, it's probably best to take a step back and evaluate your demeanor.
Please be respectful toward one another.
Hell, one of my favorite companions is Turlough, but you don't see me baiting people into a fight about it. ;)
Mona! You Turlough fanboy you!
Just kidding. Timothy Dalton is my favorite Bond. So what do I know?
PS I agree with Vic. Moffat is better as a writer, not a show runner.
|
Just out of curiosity, who do you mean by "Tinkerbell Jesus"?
So all I'll say is: I get it. You think the Dalek Warrior and Tinkerbell Jesus have never done any wrong,
Bahahahahaha!!! Tinkerbell Jesus. good one....
I actually like 9, 10, and 11. and 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Never really watched anything with 1 or 2 and never saw the movie with 8. But it's friggin Dr. Who!!!! Only the best sci-fi show ever! A couple of corny and/or cheesy episodes here and there but overall it's all awesome. And is it just me or do you start wanting to talk with a british accent after a marathon day of watching Dr. Who?
|
|
I'd be delighted to hear of a single thing 11 did which was more heroic than the way 10 sacrificed himself to save WilfredWell, he willingly sacrificed himself at the end of series 5. And he didn't have to tell old man how unimportant he was to do it. He actually went towards what he had reason to believe might be REAL death with dignity. Even after he was aware that it was just going to be regeneration and not an actual death, that's more than Ten managed.
There is quite a gap between being willing to die to save the ENTIRE UNIVERSE from being wiped out as if it never existed, and being willing to die to save one unimportant, old human. I mean, come on, death in order to make sure TIME AND SPACE will still exists is a no brainer. If there would have been a Doctor unwilling to do that, I'd need a VERY compelling reason before I accept it. It is obvious that 11 is never really all that upset on the rare ocassion someone actualy dies in one of his stories - when there IS death, it's usualy ignored (like that explotion in the end of "The Slow invasion", which must have killed dozens, and no one seemed to care). However 10 was always immensly troubled when he failed to save someone. That fraustration is what caused him to cross the line and break the rules in "Waters of Mars", and it's what led him to accept his fate and allow Wilfred to go on living.
I'd be delighted to hear of a single thing 11 did which was more heroic than the way 10 sacrificed himself to save WilfredWell, he willingly sacrificed himself at the end of series 5. And he didn't have to tell old man how unimportant he was to do it. He actually went towards what he had reason to believe might be REAL death with dignity. Even after he was aware that it was just going to be regeneration and not an actual death, that's more than Ten managed.There is quite a gap between being willing to die to save the ENTIRE UNIVERSE from being wiped out as if it never existed, and being willing to die to save one unimportant, old human. I mean, come on, death in order to make sure TIME AND SPACE will still exists is a no brainer. If there would have been a Doctor unwilling to do that, I'd need a VERY compelling reason before I accept it. It is obvious that 11 is never really all that upset on the rare ocassion someone actualy dies in one of his stories - when there IS death, it's usualy ignored (like that explotion in the end of "The Slow invasion", which must have killed dozens, and no one seemed to care). However 10 was always immensly troubled when he failed to save someone. That fraustration is what caused him to cross the line and break the rules in "Waters of Mars", and it's what led him to accept his fate and allow Wilfred to go on living.
This is something I have to agree with. I get the impression that 11 cares more about HIS people than everyone else, while I felt 10 showed concern for everyone, including his enemies. Not to say 10 didn't care about his people as well, but I feel like 11 doesn't show the same concern for others.
|
|
I've got no issues with people disliking the 11th. I personally didn't care much for a few of them myself but I have rather enjoyed most of the episodes with Matt Smith. The first season with him I thought was quite enjoyable and so far this season has recaptured that tone I liked so much.
<rant>
The issue I had was with the albatross of the River Song character dragging down every episode it was ever in. I could not have cared less about that character and it was just annoying to see it popping up so much. It got way too much focus and I am quite happy to see it gone.
</rant>