What amuses me every week about all these Dr Who threads is that about 90 percent of the people who post on them say: "this week's Dr Who, like every other episode since 2005, was utter rubbish, and Russell T. Davies is a total retard and should be banned form ever writing another one." Then the next week they watch it again. And as soon as it finishes they rush to their computers to discuss it.
Every week. For three years.
And somehow you just know that the guy on the other thread who said Dr Who "jumped the shark" this year will still watch every episode next year (and the year after that).
Now, if I watch a program and I don't like it, I stop watching it. I might bear with it for a couple of weeks in case it gets better, but if it doesn't then I soon stop. I don't persevere with it for three years and then religiously post my in-depth analysis of everything that was wrong with the script, plot, acting, continuity etc..
This all leads me to the inescapable conclusion that secretly, in the darkest recesses of your souls where you don't want to look, you actually (albeit perhaps masochistically) LOVE Dr Who and couldn't bear to miss a minute of it. Not in a nostalgic "it was good until the 1980's" sort of love, but in a "I can't get enough of the new series, it's like crack" sort of love. And you are living in denial.
I want no excuses now. None of your "well the kids watch it, so I have to," or "the BBC will thank me for my comments one day," or any of that unconvincing flannel. They say the first step on the road to recovery is to admit you have a problem. So take a deep breath and make a clean breast of it: for all its faults, all its niggling little plot holes or cheesy bit of dialogue, you can't get enough of the Ecclestone/Tennant series.
As therapy to help you get into the spirit of the exercise, I propose that all those afflicted by this strange new mental illness list their favourite three Dr Who episodes/stories sine 2005. The alternative is daily medication and a straitjacket. I'll get the ball rolling:
1) That Satan story.
2) The one with the stone angel statues.
3) The one with the werewolf.
I know it's a long, tough struggle at first, but you'll thank me one day.
I love New Who.
I watch it every week and enjoy it. Indeed, I find myself commenting or thinking many times during an episode 'This'll annoy them on the board'.
But for what it's worth, Richard, I agree with you. If you like it watch it, if you don't then don't.
I tried that dinosaur thing ITV did for an episode and hated it, so I stopped watching. What I didn't do was continue to watch every week and explain why I did not enjoy continuing to view it.
Favourite three episodes..?
1) Dalek
2) Tooth and Claw
3) School Reunion
I enjoy most of Doctor Who. I've only ever disliked 1 whole episode, Fear Her.
But I do find odd bits in it that just bug me.
I do enjoy it though.
Yeah, you're right. Sort of.
There have been some really good episodes over the last three series. I'll opt for "Dalek", "The Satan Pit" and "The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances". There have been others Lots of good stuff.
But then to balance it out, you've got some really shit stuff, like "Boom Town", "Fear Her" and "Evolution Of The Daleks".
More common are the "pretty good with irksome clunky moments" episodes - the ones that make you wish there had been someone in place to edit out the wanky bits.
It's just not as black & white as you'd like to think it is. Maybe next series, eh?
Was never a big Who fan, couldn't understand what the fuss was about the (poor) first series and the only one I've seen since (with Peter Kay) was on a par with Blood of Satanus.
I think people still watch it because there are good episodes occasionally.
Blink
Dalek
The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances were the best ones for me.
I think it's best when it's not so panto as some of the RTD episodes tend to be, but I'm not the target audience.
- Steve
the beauty of Sky+, recoed it, hit play when you have some time, if its a bit slow hit fast forward, if you're falling asleep hit stop and save it for another time or if its really dire just hit delete.
Over half this eries ive hit delete after less than 10 minutes, skipping towards the end and then giving up.
One thing this series has shown and thats Paul Cornell needs to be asked to write more episodes.
i think its magic, occasionally theres those bits that people anyalse in great depth as being offensive to them, which i briefly laugh at as being really silly or just pure daft, however this only lasts seconds as the entertainment coasts swiftly on.
i think it helps that i utterly lack the nostalgia gene, & take stuff here & now for what it is, and its great, i've programmed my legs to stand up & walk off if something gets boring for half a second, so i never have to watch or listen to anything i don't like, certainly not to sit & write lengthy reviews about why i hated it.
...if only this worked for comics & i didnt have to read some god awful written by retarded monkeys shit in the prog every week recently...
"This all leads me to the inescapable conclusion that secretly, in the darkest recesses of your souls where you don't want to look, you actually (albeit perhaps masochistically) LOVE Dr Who and couldn't bear to miss a minute of it. Not in a nostalgic "it was good until the 1980's" sort of love, but in a "I can't get enough of the new series, it's like crack" sort of love. And you are living in denial."
I've watched tv shows and movies, and read comics and books for years that are clearly awful, yet I derive pleasure from their sheer badness - Sunset Beach, Smallville, Hercules: the Legendary Journeys, Loeb and Liefeld's Onslaught, the books of Clive Cussler, etcetera. Or what about Escape To Victory, Krull, and Flash Gordon? Are these now 'good' because people revel in their badness, or are they just plain bad films that people like despite them being bad movies, *because* they're bad movies - or, as you'd have it, despite themselves?
Without accepting the notion that many viewers can enjoy watching Who just to laugh at how shit and ham-fisted they find it IN THEIR OPINION, your arguement seems just as flawed as you claim the Who-bashers' is.
I haven't watched new Who since 'The Shakespeare Code'. And unless he's been watching on the sly, PVS gave up after Season 2. Infuriatingly, most of new Who would be quite palatable but for RTD's mistaken belief that his trite soap operatics constitute good (melo)drama.
Favourite episodes? Although not without their niggles, I'd plump for:
1) Dalek
2) The Idiot's Lantern
3) The Girl in the Fireplace
And because I'm feeeling charitable, my favourite RTD episodes are:
1) Tooth and Claw
2) Uh . . .
3) That's it.
I watch the doc every week with my three kids and absolutely love it. It is just entertaining TV. Sure there's bits where I think "ooh, that could've been done better if..." but I love it and will miss it till December!
Bolt-01
i liked the first year with christopher eccleston, but i thought the second year was rubbish. david tennant could be a good doctor, but i dont think the writers did a very good job of seperating his doctor from eccleston. there were times in his first bunch of episodes where i could hear eccleston saying tennants lines, like they had written it with him in mind, then couldn't be arsed changing it when they got a new doctor. i always thought the idea of the cybermen and the daleks in the same episode together would be really cool, but when it actually came i realised i didn't give a toss and i haven't watched it since. despite hearing that this year has been really good i feel totally unmotivated to watch it.
i'm also a little surprised to find that everyone is listen 'dalek' as one of their favorite episodes. it's probably a sentemental thing/excitement at seeing the daleks return. i thought that episode was lame as hell. sure the killing spree it goes on was cool and all, but at the end where it goes all 'woe is me' and kills itself, are we suppose to feel sorry for it? w.t.f? Humanising the daleks? piss off!
So no, i don't really like new who all that much. but having said that, except for a few sixties ones i have on dvd i haven't watched the old ones in years and am not that bothered about them either.
The humanising of the daleks thing has a precedent in the old series, so it's not something that bothered me as much as it did others.
I'm sure the sentimental aspect of seeing the daleks had something to do with it though.
I dont watch Doctor Who at all now but i think the latest Doctor [someone Tennant ?] is fine indeed. He has the right charisma for the job. My time watching Dr.Who began and ended with Tom Baker. I did catch an animated Dr.Who on saturday morning kids tv that was quite watchable yesterday.
>> i'm also a little surprised to find that everyone is listen 'dalek' as one of their favorite episodes.
Time-travellers' DNA and mawkish sentimentality aside, 'Dalek' is great fun taken to another level by Ecclestone's "I MADE IT HAPPEN", a delivery so chilling that Tennant's inability to play against RTD's macho-posturing dialogue is even more embarrassing in comparison.
could only hope to aspire to.
BLINK was magnifique
Well, as a kid, I had the sense to stop watching Who when it went down the pan.
As an adult, I stopped watching Torchwood because it was irredeemably shit
As for new Who, I thought the first series showed promise, but the second series was a real unexpected nosedive. The second series lulled me intoa false sense of security, with some decentish episodes and some signs of recovery - then we had the car crash that was last nights. Honestly, if the best defence for RTDs plot holes and nonsense is "its just entertainment" then... well, its no wonder Hollywood (and pretty much everyone else) churns out miss after miss nowadays. Its just entertainment - a fine sentiment, but dont you ever get the feeling you've been cheated?
I am very tired of "its just entertainment" .
A perfect example of this was Terminator 3.
It more or less starts with a ridiculous truck chase with a load of destruction involved.
that was probably most of the budget gone in just that scene. Also the plot was rubbish or lack of plot would have been more like it. One glimpse into how the machines actually took over plus more chase scenes etc. not that different to T2 you might think but without james Cameron it was a disaster.
Like an inferior copy. Its almost like the film studio cobbled together a plot of sorts and a cynical " give the audience some car chases and some explosions and they will be happy " . Its like fast food films. I felt cheated alright.
Peter, why do you feel cheated? Is it to do with Who- or Terminator?
I'm asking because you said you don't watch Who but you seem to be giving the impression that you feel cheated by it's shortcomings.
As for the entertainment- I personally enjoy it, however, I think it could be better, but my two youngest are genuine fans and it has encouraged them to read comics, draw pictures and generally get as involved with something as I am with 2000ad. For that alone I would forgive it being not perfect.
Bolt-01
It was Terminator 3 not Dr.Who. I have only ever seen bits of the new Dr.Who so i cant really judge it. I do have strong opinions about things but i only talk for myself. If someone else enjoys something i wouldnt judge them for liking it and i wouldnt want to ruin it for them either. I dont mind entertainment either . Its just a case of comparing what a film is against what it could have been . I will go and see Die Hard 4 as well. That will be entertainment. I am not a snob about it.
The animated Dr.Who was good by the way !
hope this explains.
I enjoy it a lot of the time, but the stuff that annoys me REALLY annoys me. For example, why the fuck do McFly and Sharon Osbourne need to be wheeled in?
If, as Richard claims, I am only pretending to dislike the show, then I can only assume that this comes as a kneejerk reaction to the tidal wave of hype that the Beeb subjects us to. There are at least two "Isn't Doctor Who great" shows, one for grown ups and one for da kidz, is this really necessary? I don't buy the family entertainment argument, as there always seems to be a pervading air around the show that this must be Important Stuff and not just something to enjoy at the end of the week.
Strangely, for the person who stopped watching Torchwood, just like Robin Hood, a good show did eventually turn up out of the dross that began.
If you give the last 3 episodes of both shows a watch, you will se a vast improvement over the beginning.
"the only one I've seen since (with Peter Kay) was on a par with Blood of Satanus"
I actually rather liked that episode, even though the monster looked a bit rubbish (well, it was the winning entry in a Blue Peter competition). I've a lot of time for anyone who can get away with sneaking an oral sex joke into a primetime family entertainment show.
Regards
Robin
i thought t3 had a good ending though. i would like to see another one coz pressumably that would be the actual war with the machines....
Its alright if you dont analyze or compare this film too much but it doesnt stand up to much scrutiny. the ending looks set for a sequal though.
Of course, the same argument runs that if reading negative comments about new Who annoys you so much, why not stop reading them? :)
Frankly, I've yet to see anyone come up with a convincing counter argument against naysayers beyond "its just for kids" or "stop watching" or "the ratings prove you wrong".
I'd be open to being convinced that RTDs take is actually much more than I'm giving it credit for (I had high hopes after season 1 and bit sof season 3 had me coming back around to the show), but I've yet to see a convincing argument tackling the specifics of the common criticisms of RTD Who, and suspect I never will
I'd also be more convinced with the "its jsut a bit of fluff for Saturday tea time" if we didnt see RTD and co telling us how its so much more than that
RTD Doctor Who has great ideas, but little follow through.
Yet it still manages to be the most entertaining bit of British TV in any given week.
How's that?
Because British TV isnt very enteraining nowadays?
Pretty much.
like most folk love the good doctor but was put off AT FIRST by the new format and chris ecclescake but got into it around the end of seaon one.
fave THREE? stories: parting of the ways,doomsday and the last of the time lords.
(big dalek fan obviously but had "issues" with the new york dalek story)
...and people,don't be ashamed,EMBRACE your geekdom we all buy a comic every week!!! get the Dr Who ringtone!
...aww hell!gonna get my dalek issues off my chest,daleks can make "proper" daleks out of humans so why did we get the zombie dalek people?
sec and co were supposed to be clever after all.
why did dalek caan wait for the zombie dalek people to exterminate his mates BEFORE he "switched " them off??
russel t should have intervened in helen raynor's script before she ruined what should have been a good story.Now at the end we have one "last dalek" de'ja vu anyone?
I stopped watching because it was a fairly poor children's show. Whereas I'll carry on watching Primeval because so far it seems to be a pretty well-made children's show.
I stopped watching Doctor Who/Torchwood with episode 7 of Torchwood (and I watched the Christmas special last year purely because my brother was about, gawd that was tedious), but the show had been really annoying me for some time.
With the very first episode of Rose, I knew the show wasn't for me. Nice to see Who back, and sure I'd probably watch it, but it wasn't going to be great. I got my hopes up with the Dickens story, which I thought had its problems, but to me was what I thought Doctor Who should be. What an ending!
I'm glad it's back, I'm glad kids like it, it has a lot of good ideas, but it has a lot of just plain shabby execution.
Old Doctor Who is a show from more than one different time, so it's almost pointless comparing. I love the good and the bad from the first four Doctors. This isn't nostalgia as I only ever saw a handful of Tom Baker episodes as a kid, the rest was all new to me. Of its time, Dcotor Who was a great show.
I have watched and enjoyed some of the eighties stuff, but I stopped watching eventually as it just got too painful. There are fans who'll watch it whether they like it or not, but not me. I don't want the old Doctor Who back, I just want to be able to enjoy the new one.
I still maintain an interest because it's a show and a concept I love. I can't watch it any more as I get too annoyed. There's a few gems amidst the shite, it's nicely packaged shite and sometimes the wind blows the other way so it doesn't stink so bad, but it's still shite.
I think Russel T Davies is one of the worst writers I have ever come across. I still remember my anger at the ending of Second Coming, when he reveals he has fuck all up his sleeve. His realm of expertise is obviously relationships and emotion, he has some good ideas, and he knows how to make a spectacle and garner interest in something. If he was part of a double act with someone who thought more logically and coldly, or he had a good script editor, he could do it. Sadly teamed with his ego, there isn't really room for anyone else.
With the second series of Doctor Who, I found myself thinking that the Doctor was an arsehole and I wanted to punch him in the face. That in the end was probably the deciding factor in me switching off. I think the whole show, not just the Doctor, will have to regenerate before I change my mind.
Do I hate Doctor Who? No. But it is shite.
I've never particularly been a fan of Doctor Who (frankly I think it's pants, the old and the new, although I love the theme tune but anyhoo) I found a list called British TV shows every American needs to watch (http://www.tubewad.com/tw-feature-modern-british-tv-shows-every-american-needs-to-watch-1808-p.html) , and Doctor Who was on the top, and the descrption just made me want to put my fist though the screen (for the record I'm neither American nor British, so I have no national pride stake in this, but seriously, Doctor Who better than Heroes, Lost, Firely or Battlestar? Bollocks!):
If youâ??re a sci-fi fan and you havenâ??t seen the new series of Doctor Who, stop. Right now. Get your hands on the first two complete series, then download the current episodes of season three. Iâ??m not exaggerating when I say that the new seasons of Doctor Who, under the guidance of Russell T. Davies, may very well be the best science fiction show in history. Firefly and Battlestar Galactica come close, but Firefly didnâ??t have enough time to get where it wanted to go, and Battlestar doesnâ??t handle characterization quite as well as Who.
Doctor Who follows an alien Time Lord (known as the Doctor) as he jets around space and time in his TARDIS (Time And Relative Dimension In Space) machine. He saves the world, fights aliens, and all that good stuff -- but most interestingly, he does so without ever using violence.
If you were disappointed with the finale for Heroes, then Doctor Who will feel like a breath of fresh air â?? unlike other sci-fi shows, Davies plans out every aspect of the seriesâ?? story arc before it even begins. Everything, in every series, builds up to a definite and predetermined climax. Being able to experience a series whose ending is actually planned is kind of nice (LOST is still throwing shit at the audience with no point or purpose, and Heroes obviously didnâ??t know where the hell it was going after the middle of the season), but it also doesnâ??t hurt that these finales are incredibly epic, climactic, and emotional.
You donâ??t have to be a fan of the classic, extremely campy series in order to enjoy the new one â?? I certainly wasnâ??t. The first season of the new series (available here, so thereâ??s no confusion as to what the "first" season is) is specifically tailored for people with no knowledge of the Doctor or his adventures. Yet be warned: the first series will feel sort of unusual to an adult.
Technically, the show is aimed toward both kids and adults, like Star Wars. As a result, the Doctor may seem unusually optimistic and upbeat about everything, the aliens may seem a little goofy, and the situations may occasionally seem a big lighthearted, but thatâ??s part of the charm: assumedly childish, dorky looking things like Daleks or Weeping Angels are somehow made terrifying, and the Doctorâ??s upbeat attitude is more than welcome in a time where every other superhero sits around brooding and bitching about life. One of the producers called the Doctor the least cynical man in a cynical age, and itâ??s an appropriate title. Still, this doesnâ??t mean that all the episodes are happy-go-lucky crap: many, many people die in an average Doctor Who episode, and character-wise, the Doctor is often taken to some very dark places. Even if you don't like the first few episodes of Doctor Who, stick with it: the finale to season two is the single best television finale I have ever seen. Ever. And even having said that, this current season's finale looks to be even better.
Basically, I canâ??t recommend Doctor Who enough. If you want immersive, exciting, emotional, well-written science fiction, itâ??s the single best show on television today.
*Both are purely cosmetic: the Archbishop was deaf in his left ear, and if Adam was the first human on Earth, he wouldnâ??t have had a belly button because he wouldnâ??t have come from an umbilical cord.
I said it jumped the shark. It did.
I love Dr Who and have never criticised a "new" episode until Saturday. That episode, however, was amatuerish pantomime of the worst sort. You can't say, "you still like it and you still watch it" (I said I would) as an attempt to invalidate the suggestion that Saturdays epidose was shite.
PVS summed it up well on the other thread. This was written by a guy out of his depth in the genre. He didn't know if he was doing a children's show (lots of bad guy gurning), a serious apocalyptic tale (the ravaged world, with a population of slaves), or family (ie soap opera family elements) or adult (sexual tension) drama. He wasn't sure whether to play it straight (the monstrous reality of the Toclafane) or for laughs (CD tracks accompanying moments of annihalation).
As a result, the episode was a schizophrenic mess.
Thats before you look at the production and a few specic plot holes, all of which jar:-
* the Doctor jerking about when aged. Why? It looked fucking stupid.
* the Benny HIll music during said aging. Why? Playing it straight or for laughs?
the disregarding of continuity (The Dobbie Doctor - I thought they could die of old age? The Master shunning regeneration - no Time Lord had that control before). The music in general has been inappropriate, but this took the biscuit.
* The Doctor as Jesus. Quite how does everyone thinking "Doctor" help him?
* The Master's pyre and ring. Cliches, and bloody poor one at that. Not to mention the fact that the world has just seen mad PM Harry Saxon kill the US President, and no one seems to want to know what happened to him - how else did the Doctor get his body to a beach?
You are quite, quite wrong to sneer at anyone saying the show has jumped the shark. It most defnitely has, through a combination of inept and lazy writing (see PVS post for more on that) and a fuzzy sense of identity (is it for kids or not? Is it serious or not?).
The crime here is that Doctor Who can be all things to all men. It can be for children and for adults, serious and light, but in different epidsodes. Not at the same time.
RTD is not the genius he thinks he is. It makes my heart bleed to see what he has done to the show. To be honest, I think that it is standing on a precipice. It could fall into oblivion, or be pulled back by someone who is willing to ignore their own hype a little more in the interests of making good telivision.
Has Doctor Who jumped the shark? I don't think so. Saturday's was a disappointing episode, to be sure, but let's not use it as evidence of the whole show's demise. Any series that can produce episodes as brilliant as Human Nature/The Family of Blood cannot be written off so easily.
There are unquestionably problems with RTD's writing - all of which seemed to surface on Saturday. I find myself particularly irritated by his putting his own pop cultural references into his characters' mouths (any character) which robs them of individuality. The speech about Countdown delivered by the Professor in this episode was a case in point.
Also the Peter Pan - 'I do believe in fairies' device to return the Doctor to normality was somewhat overwrought.
All that said, there's still much to love about Doctor Who. The classic series had good stories and rubbish stories, yet it's always held dear. 2000 AD has good stories and bad stories. Let's not write it off just yet ...
I think ultimately, that's my problem. To enjoy it you can't have high expectations or you have to turn off your quality control.
Shark jumping aside, the good of New Who (and IMHO there's lots of that) does get swamped by UNNECESSARY sloppiness and silliness in episodes like these. SHIELD Command, Dobby Who and Doctor Jesus (telepathic satellite network and feedback loop thereof being a reasonable extrapolation of the Master's mesmeric MO) may have been embarrassing to the 'more mature' audience, but not really fatal to the quite-interesting plot - I'm not mad about any of those elements, but I'll overlook them as a taste issue.
Instead it's the stupid plotholes that piss me off - why are they feeding Jack, and why is the rather-important paradox machine vulnerable to machine gun fire when the Tocklophane are not? Who staffs his flying fortress with an entire family of mortal enemies plus an unkillable man (let's see him walk out of the heart of the sun, eh?) for an entire year, why can the Tocklophane kill that Journalist (sorta their own great great grandmother) without creating a 'paradox' . Smilarly, why are there no repercussions in the timeline from the televised assassination of the US President by an alien? Why do the Joneses remember what happened at all? After improbably walking around the earth for a year, why does Martha look like she's just popped back from a ramble in the country? Are 200,000 spaceships really enough to conquer the universe? Seems like a very small number to me. After coming up with a pretty cool three-part story with some great casting, why not spend another five minutes asking yourself if all this stuff makes sense? It's like Lucas demanding umpteen million designs for Padme's costumes from his talented art department, and then not bothering to work out how or why she dies, or even getting someone to check over the woeful dialogue surrounding that scene. It's annoying, but it won't stop me watching, because I still think the good outweighs the bad - it's jyust that there's no need for most of the bad.
Very sorry to see the yummy Martha go. Ah well, still have more of Hannah Spearrit's pants to look forward to.
"The Master shunning regeneration - no Time Lord had that control before"
At the start of the first episode of Destiny of the Daleks, Romana voluntarily undergoes half a dozen different regenerations, trying out different bodies. Clearly, they do have a measure of control.
"Quite how does everyone thinking "Doctor" help him?"
The same way that reversing the polarity of the neutron flow solved so many problems for the third Doctor - it's a fudge, like most of the science in the series, old and new. In this case, the Doctor was able to use the focused mass of psychic energy generated by thousands if not millions of humans to fuel his restoration.
"how else did the Doctor get his body to a beach? "
The TARDIS, I imagine.
Regards
Robin
"why are they feeding Jack,"
The Master enjoys seeing Jack suffering, and knows that the Doctor suffers from Jack's suffering, too.
"and why is the rather-important paradox machine ulnerable to machine gun fire when the Tocklophane are not?"
The Tocklaphane have to go out into the world and into space, and so are heavily protected and armoured. The paradox machine is locked in the TARDIS, which is normally pretty secure.
"Who staffs his flying fortress with an entire family of mortal enemies plus an unkillable man"
Three mortal enemies, and rather a lot of mind-controlled soldiers. And if one of Martha's family did kill him, he could regnerate. Pretty low risk.
"why can the Tocklophane kill that Journalist (sorta their own great great grandmother) without creating a 'paradox' ."
Your complaining about paradoxes in Doctor Who?
"Smilarly, why are there no repercussions in the timeline from the televised assassination of the US President by an alien?"
There's no reason why there should be. The president was killed by aliens and that's that. Time moves on from that point.
"Why do the Joneses remember what happened at all?"
This was explained in the episode: they were at the eye of the storm when the paradox was reversed.
"After improbably walking around the earth for a year, why does Martha look like she's just popped back from a ramble in the country?"
Actresses are skinny enough without getting them to slim down even more. I'm sure her Martha's muscle tone had improved enormously though.
"Are 200,000 spaceships really enough to conquer the universe? Seems like a very small number to me."
I don't think it was said they were planning on doing it all at once.
Regards
Robin
I think the problem with RTDs cheap resolutions is exactly that - Pertwee may have reversed the polarity every now and then, but how often did he do it to resolve the whole situation? and even if he did do it, surely we've moved on from that.
Compare the effort Moffatt puts into having his plots comparatively seamless. The resolution of creatures that only move when not observed? Have them look at each other. Simple, but logical and smart.
The resolution of a telepathic network keeping the world subdued and a paradox machine allowing the Toclafane to exist? Well, first we'll use the telepathic network to grant someone the power to reverse aging and to fly and stuff, a bit like Jesus, but with super powers. Then we'll shoot the paradox machine, handily unguarded a short distance away from his most dangerous foes. Theres no logic - with the Moffatt example, its the sort of thing you think "well of course thats how you defeat them". With the RTD one you go... but Telepathy isnt an anti-aging cream...just thinking "Doctor"... so he's aligned himself to the psychic matrix has he? Its out of the blue and therefore feels like a massive copout. And its not the first time he's had to pull the superpowered card to unravel a hiopeless situation.
'Dobby Who'. For those of us that haven't seen the season finale, please explain.
Not much to add to this debate except I've learned to just take what I want out of New Who and ignore the rest (a bit like Life really). A agree with some and even a lot of the criticisms but find myself, that there's stll enough in enough episodes to make it something worth watching. Given the shite that comprises most of the rest of the schedules that may not be a great recommendation, but then small mercies and all. Maybe I have just learned to lower my expectations since the 80's (not that I buy the whole 80's Who = shit generalisation in itself).
Some stuff irritates me but I try not to get worked up about it. For the stuff I don't like it helps knowing that there are some other writers involved and RTD won't be around forever (I think he's just doing one more series) although at the risk of inadvertantly pushing people's buttons, I do think he's improved a bit (cf. greatly reduced celeb airtime*) and think people who gave up on Tennant's shouty, arrogant Doctor may have been/be pleasantly surprised as I think Tennant is now turning out to be a pretty good Doctor.
*if rumours are true could change with the Xmas number, but it at the same time might not be that bad...
'Dobby Who'. For those of us that haven't seen the season finale, please explain.
Apparently "Dobby" is a character in Harry Potter (which I've only seen the first film and don't think he was in that; haven't read the books) and the vastly-aged but not-regenerated CGI "homonunculous" Doctor in LoTTL is said to have a passing resemblance to him/it.
"Then we'll shoot the paradox machine, handily unguarded a short distance away from his most dangerous foes. Theres no logic - with the Moffatt example, its the sort of thing you think "well of course thats how you defeat them". With the RTD one you go... but Telepathy isnt an anti-aging cream...just thinking "Doctor"... so he's aligned himself to the psychic matrix has he? Its out of the blue and therefore feels like a massive copout."
Can't disagree much with that, except that the Paradox machine was guarded, but not very heavily (presumably most of the Toclafane hadn't reached it yet or had underestimated Jack's unkill-ability).
"And its not the first time he's had to pull the superpowered card to unravel a hiopeless situation."
The problem with RTD's (and some other writers it has to be said) solutions is he is too cavalier about some convenient solution which he only allows a short space of time for, whereas in old Who a great deal of the show was in finding and making the solution, once the initial threat had been established. In fact my first impression on watching LoTTL was how little action or fighting there was for most of the ep, not that action is everything, but from the first episode the situation looked so dire you'd think it would have taken a lot more to overpower the command deck guards, incapacitate or distract the Master, access and destroy the paradox machine, fight off the toclafane etc... And I can see a hundred other ways it could have gone e.g. using the sonic screwdrier to incapacitate the Master via amplifying the drumming in his ears (think tinnitis!) while Martha and the professor bult an anti-Archangel transmitter etc.
I'm afraid I still managed to enjoy it though...
"Then we'll shoot the paradox machine, handily unguarded a short distance away from his most dangerous foes. Theres no logic - with the Moffatt example, its the sort of thing you think "well of course thats how you defeat them". With the RTD one you go... but Telepathy isnt an anti-aging cream...just thinking "Doctor"... so he's aligned himself to the psychic matrix has he? Its out of the blue and therefore feels like a massive copout."
Can't disagree much with that, except that the Paradox machine was guarded, but not very heavily (presumably most of the Toclafane hadn't reached it yet or had underestimated Jack's unkill-ability).
"And its not the first time he's had to pull the superpowered card to unravel a hiopeless situation."
The problem with RTD's (and some other writers it has to be said) solutions is he is too cavalier about some convenient solution which he only allows a short space of time for, whereas in old Who a great deal of the show was in finding and making the solution, once the initial threat had been established. In fact my first impression on watching LoTTL was how little action or fighting there was for most of the ep, not that action is everything, but from the first episode the situation looked so dire you'd think it would have taken a lot more to overpower the command deck guards, incapacitate or distract the Master, access and destroy the paradox machine, fight off the toclafane etc... And I can see a hundred other ways it could have gone e.g. using the sonic screwdrier to incapacitate the Master via amplifying the drumming in his ears (think tinnitis!) while Martha and the professor bult an anti-Archangel transmitter etc.
I'm afraid I still managed to enjoy it though...
>> Apparently "Dobby" is a character in Harry Potter . . . and the vastly-aged but not-regenerated CGI "homonunculous" Doctor in LoTTL is said to have a passing resemblance to him/it.
So no Tennant excess in which he twats himself continuously saying "Bad Doctor! Doctor needs punishing!"
I'm not sure if I'm disappointed or relieved.
Any ideas on why tampering with the Paradox machine could destroy the Solar System in one episode, but they were quite happy to shoot at it in the next?
- Steve
"Pertwee may have reversed the polarity every now and then, but how often did he do it to resolve the whole situation?"
Probably more often than either of us can remember, but I don't have the energy to get the novelisations out of the attic.
"and even if he did do it, surely we've moved on from that."
Without a doubt a fair point, but at the same time I'm not sure I want Doctor Who to move on. It's never been realistic and it might not be a good idea trying to make it so. It was a kids' show, and I think it should remain a kids' show. A bit like 2000AD should...
"The resolution of creatures that only move when not observed? Have them look at each other. Simple, but logical and smart."
Except that when the light goes out in the cellar, they can't see each other and can move. Or was it stated that could see in the dark?
"With the RTD one you go... but Telepathy isnt an anti-aging cream..."
Sure, but it's not telepathy that's causing the anti-aging, but rather the Doctor manipulating focused mental energy directed at him, and using it to power his restoration. What it boils down to is a psychic energy conversion by an alien being that we know is capable of regeneration and who has a psychic element to his nature, using a device introduced in the previous episode. It may not be as simple as getting statues to look at one another, but as far as pseudo-science in a kids' sci-fi show goes I think it's fair enough.
"Its out of the blue and therefore feels like a massive copout"
I don't think any of the elements involved were out of the blue.
There are problems with the new Who, but frankly I think the sort of stuff we're arguing over is the least of them. For me, the biggest problem is the fact that the Doctor frequently doesn't behave like the Doctor, which is a bizarre problem when you consider that we've had so many different actors playing him.
I also have a problem with the fact that TARDIS now seems to work properly and goes where and when it's told to, but I can understand the cost implications of a new alien planet every week.
I think the 45 minute, single episode stories format is a problem, not giving room for real character and plot development.
The romance angle has been done to death now, and is getting tiresome, but I've a feeling it's not going to go away.
Regards
Robin
"Any ideas on why tampering with the Paradox machine could destroy the Solar System in one episode, but they were quite happy to shoot at it in the next?"
In the first episode they didn't know what it was doing, in the next they did.
Regards
Robin
Doesn't work for me.
Even given that they knew what it did it just seemed a hamfisted and random way to resolve the problem - especially considering that the Tardis is, more than just that room.
I wonder what those beasties from Father's Day were doing during the finale. It would have been nice to have had a nod towards them.
- Steve
Assumin everyone has seen this -
Doctor Who to get extra companion
Doctor Who is to have a new companion when the drama returns - but there will still be room for his current co-star.
Actress Freema Agyeman is to play Martha Jones in three episodes of spin-off show Torchwood. She said it was a chance to "expand" her character.
She will miss the first half of the fourth series of Doctor Who, but will then return to the BBC One programme.
The new companion will be revealed soon and will appear in the entire 13-week run, which begins filming this month.
Former Crossroads actress Agyeman, 28, impressed producers with a brief appearance in the minor role of alien expert Adeola.
They invited her to try for the part of David Tennant's sidekick when Billie Piper left at the end of the second series. The show is in its fourth series since its revival in 2005, having ended previously in 1989 after 26 years.
The third series of Doctor Who, which concluded in the UK on Saturday, had gained "outstanding reviews", according to Russell T Davies, its executive producer and head writer.
"Freema has been a huge part of that success, gaining rave notices for her portrayal of Martha," he added.
"Now we are taking the character of Martha into brand new territory with a starring role in Torchwood."
In May, Agyeman told BBC News how overwhelming it felt to be constantly recognised in public.
"Everyone's calling my name so it feels surreal," she said, as she walked up the red carpet at the Bafta TV Awards.
Fair enough - I do agree with your list of other issues, and in fairness, they probably are at least as big a deals, especially the 45 minute format and the inconsistency of the Doctors character. That said, they are there in each ep, and it seems pointless talking about them when as you say, they arent going anywhere.
I'm not calling for realism (God Forbid!), just story resolutions that are satisfying - that feel as if they've closed a circle rather than pulled a rabbit out of a hat, even if we've seen the hat and someones made mention of carrots. I still think that having the Doctor able to use the "power of positive thought", no matter how amplified by alien technology and biology is a cop out, and a cop out that you cant really in all honesty predict even with the reams of exposition we got this time around. none of the individual elements are out of the blue arguably (though being able to reverse aging, rather than regenerate seems to me totally unpredictable or signposted... even if you could argue that levitation and erm.. being Jesus are two well established uses of psychic energy) but the way they are put together is.
I agree with you about 2000AD too - it should remain a kids comic and Who should remain a kids show - but just like 2000Ad was aimed at kids but not written down for kids, i expect the same from Doctor Who. 2000Ad was never more adult than when it was a kids comic, and that goes for Doctor Who too.
"...rather than pulled a rabbit out of a hat, even if we've seen the hat and someones made mention of carrots."
heh, that made me chuckle :)
I guess I just enjoy seeing rabbits pulled out of hats, on those terms. I think what depresses me about Who-talk on the internet is what depresses me about all talk on the internet, namely the way it seems so often rapidly to degenerate into polarised ranting rather than reasoned discussion. I know if you and I were to talk about New Who in the pub we'd have a right old laugh about it, just as I have with pvs.
(n.b. - I'm not accusing anyone on this thread of ranting!)
So I won't try and detail my thoughts about it, just say that I know it's flawed, but I like it all the same. Actually, I think it's one of the best things on TV, for all its faults. I think the flaws are more down to the nature of contemporary television than the people making it. But that's a discussion either for a pretentious MA dissertation, or the pub. ;)
Just reported on bbc news, Dr Who will have two assistants next year, one of which will be Martha, the other to be announced.
Also, the christmas episode will feature Kylie.
"Also, the christmas episode will feature Kylie."
But, Kylie isn't an actress.
Best 5 episodes/arcs of the last 3 seasons?
Blink
The Empty Child/Doctor Dances
The Impossible Planet/Satan's Pit
Human Nature/The Family of Blood
Dalek
The Girl in the Fire Place
easily
But, Kylie isn't an actress.
Let's just hope she's in her hot pants then!
kylie eh ? who would have thought it. stick in Chris cornell for the mums, set it in the wild west & all of our favorite things would come to pass.
there was a great moment yesterday taking 9 kids on a respite trip & listening to their animated passionate enthusiasm "HE KILLED SAXON !!and turned into an alien !! " .."but he is an alien"
they don't give a funt about paradoxes & plot holes, & nor do i.
except in the current Pat Mills stories, how come the same people who worship this work, can't get Dr who ? at least Dr who isnt trying to be deep & meaningful social commentary. but thats for another thread, if i could be bothered.
Well, they obviously werent paying anywhere near enough attention to spot the plot holes if they thought the Doctor killed Saxon! :)
I'm not someone who wants to hate new Who - the first series I defended amongst the best of em. I dont see why the show has to be nonsense to be good? wouldnt it be double plus good if it was able to engage the brain as well as the imagination?
To be honest, i thought the last ep was more convinced of its own self importance than anyhting Pat has done for a good while. I'm not sure theres too many people who worship Mills, but I'll certainly defend it, even with its flaws. I suppose its because the flaws I see in Pats work dont seem to me a product of lazy writing - too much work perhaps, or too much passion. The flaws in new Who seem to me to stem from a self congratulatory, "that'll do" attitude, which is my problem really - nothing is flawless, certainly not old Who - I suppose with new Who, I feel the flaws are a the symptom of a complacent wrongheadedness in Cardiff, and its that which annoys me most.
Robin Low is RTD and I claim my 5 pounds
"The flaws in new Who seem to me to stem from a self congratulatory, "that'll do" attitude, which is my problem really"
Seconded. A lot of the more mediocre episodes were dragged down by plot holes that seemed like they could have been fixed with a few minutes' thought and/or a half-decent editor; the fact that they weren't fixed gives the impression that the powers that be don't think the programme or the audience is worth the effort, and it's hard not to be irritated by that.
We've had a few cracking New Who episodes, and it's annoying to think we could have had a lot more if it weren't for someone's "ah, that's good enough" attitude (admittedly I have no idea if that's actually the case, but it seems like it).
We've had a few cracking New Who episodes, and it's annoying to think we could have had a lot more if it weren't for someone's "ah, that's good enough" attitude
Yup, that about sums it up for me. Great stuff like Blink, The Girl in the Fireplace and The Empty Child, made to the same template as the rest, but just... finished. What really convinces me is how good I've found most of the first parts of two parters - it's usually the lack of care in the resolution that rankles. I even enjoyed the first part of The Daleks Take Manhattan, while I dozed off in the second, ditto the first two parts of the S3 finale were great fun.
I do find certain episodes are growing on me in retrospect, particualrly the silly traffic jam one, which at the remove of a few months now makes me smile rather than grit my teeth. Maybe the cracks are less obvious from a distance.
"Doesn't work for me. Even given that they knew what it did it just seemed a hamfisted and random way to resolve the problem"
It certainly wasn't the most elegant or interesting way of dealing with the problem, but then six billion lethal killing machines were heading straight back to Earth at some speed. Hamfisted, sure, but quick and effective.
"I wonder what those beasties from Father's Day were doing during the finale. It would have been nice to have had a nod towards them."
I'd suggest that one of the things a paradox machine does is keep those buggers at bay, or perhaps render a paradox invisible to them.
Regards
Robin
"Maybe the cracks are less obvious from a distance."
I think this is certainly true of the original series, which I think now relies heavily on nostalgia and an acceptance that it's a product of its time.
Regards
Robin
"Robin Low is RTD and I claim my 5 pounds"
If I can have his salary I'll happily admit to it.
Hmmm, to date I've been accused of being RTD, Darth Vader and Gordon Rennie. Where will it end?
Regards
Robin
"I think this is certainly true of the original series, which I think now relies heavily on nostalgia and an acceptance that it's a product of its time."
I still think it's a good drama, as I watched most of them while I was in my late twenties for the first time and got eally absorbed by the stories and characters. By accepting its a product of the time, what I'm saying is that if I was making Doctor Who now, I wouldn't make it like it was in the 60's, 70's or 80's.
That said, I wouldn't make it like RTD is doing now.
BBC site says the Catherine Tate character is the new companion for series 4. Am I bovvered? No, I couldn't give a fuck.
"Then the next week they watch it again. And as soon as it finishes they rush to their computers to discuss it. "
not as amusing as all my star wars fans friends who'd attend the midnight opening of the prequels, report that it was utter pants, then queue up for the midnight opening of the next one. then buy the dvds. then but them again either special editions or boxsets. the whole time maintaining this volcanic rage whilst happily handing their money over to mr lucas.
or us comics fans who'll continue purchasing a title through grit teeth merely because it had an incindenary creative team 30 years ago.
i've wet my knickers!
"Then the next week they watch it again. And as soon as it finishes they rush to their computers to discuss it. "
not as amusing as all my star wars fans friends who'd attend the midnight opening of the prequels, report that it was utter pants, then queue up for the midnight opening of the next one. then buy the dvds. then but them again either special editions or boxsets. the whole time maintaining this volcanic rage whilst happily handing their money over to mr lucas.
or us comics fans who'll continue purchasing a title through gritted teeth merely because it had an incindenary creative team 30 years ago.
i've wet my knickers!
ooops -- my apples for double posting there.