Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 

Author Topic: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan  (Read 11846 times)

Taryn Tailz

  • Member
  • Prog Stacking Droid
  • ***
  • Posts: 747
  • "Goth N Roll"
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #45 on: 30 September, 2012, 06:05:51 PM »
Personally I think that the Producer and the Head Writer should be two different jobs filled by two different people. Both RTD and Steven Moffat have done both at the same time and I can't help but feel that having a seperate Head Writer would make for better scripts, as they wouldn't have to be doing everything a Producer has to do as well.

Although as I said earlier in the thread I did really enjoy this particular episode. But on the whole this half series we've had has been pretty underwhelming.

IndigoPrime

  • Administrator
  • CALL-ME-KENNETH!
  • *****
  • Posts: 11374
    • View Profile
    • http://www.craiggrannell.com
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #46 on: 30 September, 2012, 06:07:59 PM »
I think the writing's mostly fine. The problem is a lack of emotional heft and a person to say "erm, that doesn't work". In RTD's run, he had the emotional bit sorted, but went for crazy epics and a bit of his own "erm, that doesn't work". What both of these things showcases—and this isn't a Who thing, but a modern TV thing—is that there's no script editor with some power working on the show.

JamesC

  • Member
  • Battle Hardened War Robot
  • ****
  • Posts: 4248
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #47 on: 30 September, 2012, 06:15:21 PM »
Personally I think that the Producer and the Head Writer should be two different jobs filled by two different people. Both RTD and Steven Moffat have done both at the same time and I can't help but feel that having a seperate Head Writer would make for better scripts, as they wouldn't have to be doing everything a Producer has to do as well.

I agree completely. I think an experiment of working in the American system may be worth a shot actually - where you have a 'show-runner' and a staff of writers who sit around and brainstorm together.
As the show is getting a bit stale, even a few golden rules like 'every episode has to feature a setting we've never seen before' or 'no established baddies allowed' would aid originality and creativity.

For a show that was once so original and groundbreaking it really has been stale for a while.

Grant Goggans

  • Member
  • Battle Hardened War Robot
  • ****
  • Posts: 3391
  • About that Revolution Robotique, Mr Tharg...
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #48 on: 30 September, 2012, 06:17:05 PM »
One thing that I really did enjoy, and this may just be the way that Smith and Kingston chose to play it, was that this was the first time that we saw the Doctor and River interact and the Doctor really did act as though he was smitten and in love with her.  This could mean a really fun series of episodes as we revisit River getting younger and, eventually, to a point where she doesn't know him and his heart gets really stomped upon.

I do hope that Moffat starts writing one or two male-female relationships that are not defined by constant flirting.

Grant Goggans

  • Member
  • Battle Hardened War Robot
  • ****
  • Posts: 3391
  • About that Revolution Robotique, Mr Tharg...
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #49 on: 30 September, 2012, 06:18:47 PM »
I like 'every episode has to feature a setting we've never seen before'.  Getting away from Earth completely for a series would be a really nice thing.

Charlie boy

  • Member
  • Prog Stacking Droid
  • ***
  • Posts: 634
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #50 on: 30 September, 2012, 08:58:06 PM »
I think Moffat's fault with this series was he didn't surround himself with enough heavy hitters. Sure, it was only 5 episodes long but such a small run could be a great opportunity to give Richard Curtis or Simon Nye another crack at writing an episode. On the back of Human Nature alone, Paul Cornell is always welcome at the writing desk as far as I'm concerned. If just 2 of the 5 episodes had been offered to either of those three writers, it could have been a lot better. Another writer who I think Moffat should really, really get around to approaching (be it for Who or Sherlock) is Kim Newman. Newman is a talented yet overlooked writer with much love and knowledge for both subjects.

Taryn Tailz

  • Member
  • Prog Stacking Droid
  • ***
  • Posts: 747
  • "Goth N Roll"
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #51 on: 30 September, 2012, 11:00:51 PM »
I feel I should point out to everyone saying that this series was only five episodes, that this is only the first half of the series. The second half will air early next year as far as I know.

Colin YNWA

  • Member
  • CALL-ME-KENNETH!
  • *****
  • Posts: 20454
  • testing testing...
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #52 on: 01 October, 2012, 08:18:21 AM »

Tiplodocus

  • Member
  • Bionic Fingers
  • *****
  • Posts: 7972
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #53 on: 01 October, 2012, 09:15:46 AM »
I felt most of it hung together liked the twistiness at the end and as a send off for the Ponds was pretty darned good.

I was really getting to like Rory and I'll also miss the chemistry between The Doctor and Amy. Really good that she sacrificed herself for Rory and not the Doctor.   Agree River is getting a bit tired now though Matt Smith's reactions to her get better and better.

The big (really big) problems for me were
- STATUE OF LIBERTY which made absolutely no sense. Absolutely none. And you could see it coming a mile away.
-  and maybe I missed a line explaining why Rory got dragged back to 38 the first time and then only shunted in space when the cherubs in the cellar got him
Be excellent to each other. And party on!

bluemeanie

  • Member
  • Evil Cyborg
  • ****
  • Posts: 2211
  • Richard in the real world... hello and that
    • View Profile
    • http://2000ad.wordpress.com/
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #54 on: 01 October, 2012, 10:08:52 AM »
Do we really have to put stuff in spoilers? GAH!

Ok...

Statue of Liberty - yup, made NO sense. If there was only one person in all of New York they'd hear the fucking thing and go look. But I like to think the script meeting ended with "Yeah, but if you were a 10 year old kid watching the episode, how COOL would it be?". Job done. The LAST thing I want from Doctor Who is for them to come up with something fun or cool and leave it out because the internet will complain about the logic. Wibbly-wobbly-timey-wimey-fuckey-offey. As long as it's entertaining, which is subjective obviously, that's all I care about. I knew they'd have to do it. Still made me smile when they did.

River Song? Had to be in this one really. It's her parents send off. Liked how the Doctor was so involved in how HE couldnt see them again that he forgot how it would be for her. Nice character moment. And I like the character anyway so glad she'll still be a recurring one. Always good to see the Doctor sparring against someone on his level and I can see how the flirting annoys people but I grew up loving Moonlighting so I dont mind it.

The Pond's send off? I liked it more than I thought I would. Firstly the timing of it was really cool. We went in knowing this was the end for them but they still managed to catch me at least offguard for the Rory part. I'd almost forgotten that's what this episode was all about. Also, and this is VERY girlie of me, I loved how Amy's departure was due to her choosing Rory over The Doctor. They didnt milk it too long either which some of the RTD character ends were guilty of.

Oh yeah, and on the roof the "If it was me. Could you do it if it was me?" bit when you thought he'd fold because he's always seemed weak compared to her but he came back with "For you I could do anything" was REALLY cool. Go Rory!

And cherubs. Real babies freak me the fuck out so yeah...  :o
« Last Edit: 01 October, 2012, 10:13:12 AM by bluemeanie »

Buddy

  • Member
  • Bionic Fingers
  • *****
  • Posts: 5148
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #55 on: 01 October, 2012, 11:02:34 AM »
Is that the end of the series... seemed very short... is there more in the new year?

Dandontdare

  • Member
  • CALL-ME-KENNETH!
  • *****
  • Posts: 10940
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #56 on: 01 October, 2012, 11:15:10 AM »
yes, this series has been split into two parts, either side of the christmas special.

I thought the statue of liberty thing could've been a great shock moment (however implausible), if they hadn't telegraphed it so obviously in the opening sequence. And does this mean that the angels are some kind of deismbodied spirits that posses existing statues, rather than beings who just happen to look a bit like stone angels?

IndigoPrime

  • Administrator
  • CALL-ME-KENNETH!
  • *****
  • Posts: 11374
    • View Profile
    • http://www.craiggrannell.com
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #57 on: 01 October, 2012, 11:20:02 AM »
This could mean a really fun series of episodes as we revisit River getting younger and, eventually, to a point where she doesn't know him and his heart gets really stomped upon.
Well, we already saw where they met in her timeline. So we have the start and the end (in the library). Still, if they do want more episodes with a younger River, they should probably get on with it, given that Alex Kingston's not getting any younger.

bluemeanie

  • Member
  • Evil Cyborg
  • ****
  • Posts: 2211
  • Richard in the real world... hello and that
    • View Profile
    • http://2000ad.wordpress.com/
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #58 on: 01 October, 2012, 11:36:42 AM »
I wouldnt put it past them to regenerate her.... even though they already said she cant.

wibbly wobbly etc

Could see them do it as a replacement for the Sarah Jane Adventures

Spaceghost

  • Member
  • Battle Hardened War Robot
  • ****
  • Posts: 2655
  • A bastard with no manners.
    • View Profile
Re: Doctor Who - The Angels Take Manhattan
« Reply #59 on: 01 October, 2012, 12:08:22 PM »
As usual with Doctor Who, I enjoyed it whilst watching it with the kids and going "Oooh! Look! A massive weeping angel!" and getting into the scares and excitement.

The problems start the minute I apply even the tiniest amount of scrutiny to the plot, at which point it crumbles to messy pieces like a wet cake.

I simply don't understand why the Doctor can't see Amy and Rory again. There's no reason at all why that would have to be the case. Once you've realised that, it sucks all the emotion and power out of the episode.

Also, it occured to me and the lad that Moffat got the idea for the Weeping Angels from playing Mario. Think about it, Weeping Angels = the 'Boo' ghosts.
Raised in the wild by sarcastic wolves.

Previously known as L*e B*tes. Sshhh, going undercover...