Beasts_a_Snarling - Servant of the Union of Three!
I am no longer merely the Kandyman's Apprentice, but the servant of the Union of Three - The Kandyman, Chloe Webber, and the Abzorbalof! Bow to your new masters!
I don't think we should assume too much.
1 day, 16 hours ago on Eccleston: I Have No Ill Feeling Towards Doctor Who
I don't really trust Sony with it to be honest....
4 days ago on Leaked Sony Emails Reveals Doctor Who Movie Plans
Sounds like a lack of communication between all the relative parties....
This idea is very risky, but if it works, IT REALLY WILL WORK. Now, do I think Moffat is capable of getting across such a complicated issue? Well, that's hard to say: He did in a great job with Dark Water's topic, but not so much with Death in Heaven. I'd like this to happen, but I'm wary of Moffat doing it. But, if this does turn out to be true, I do admire that Moffat is pushing the boundaries in terms of Doctor Who's range.
5 days, 19 hours ago on Series 9 To Open With “Darkest ever plot”?
Eccleston took a lot of risks in choosing to play the Doctor. I highly doubt that he didn't care.
6 days, 12 hours ago on Eccleston: I Have No Ill Feeling Towards Doctor Who
Maybe because they were at the receiving end of the criticism directed at the show's mismanagement?
Never enough Capaldi! 10!
1 week, 2 days ago on Doctor of the Decade: Rate the Twelfth Doctor
I'm not lumping them. I'm simply stating that they are all similiar, and I'd like something radically different. Is that a problem?
1 week, 3 days ago on Should Series 9 Be Moffat’s Last?
The fact that you're making an assumption about a person who's arguement you deem to be an assumption makes you look like a total hypocrite.
Yes. They are all detailed to a degree, but that doesn't justify the prospect of not changing the form.
Just because an alien companion didn't work on e doesn't mean we should suddenly be xenephobic of alien characters. But with the Doctor, he is more than that. He is an alien hobo. It is when he is illustrated as a sort of Space Jesus when he is bland.
But saving the universe doesn't neccesarily make an interesting character or satisfy an arc. It's not neccessary. Look at Ace.
No, I just want something different. What you suggested at the end was simply going back to a previous formula that didn't work either. The one in use currently has been working for a while, but now it needs to change perhaps by getting an alien companion. By having companions save the universe every single time as the benchmark for a character makes them just as bland.
Character means nothing, if where they end up is mostly the same place. All that developement means nothing if they end up in a place the last one did.
Not so much Amy, but the others certainly are. Martha - an ordinary Londoner who falls in love with the Doctor and ends up saving the world.
Donna - an ordinary Londoner who ends up saving the universe through destiny.
Clara - an ordinary Londoner who ends up saving the Doctor through destiny.
The formula is practically the same, even if their characters are different.
Everyone is biased. What makes this case different from any other?
Then why do they mostly stick to the same formula that Rose began back in 2005?
I was trying to be sarcastic, but I guess it isn't clear in writing. Anyways, you said that writers weren't required to give variety to audiences meaning that every episode might as well be the same....
Can you please clarify with examples. Singular simple words are not explanations.
They don't have to provide variety..... Then there should have been a totally dark series without Robot of Sherwood or The Caretaker..... Nothing wrong with that?
What unique Moffat way are you speaking of? The fact that it had a bit of timey-wimey in it... ? I don't see it....
So, we can't stray from the formula then? All well.... Back to the same thing then....
Indeed. And yet we stay with one formula. Usually from London and they all save the universe some how.
Well, it went for a more RTD-esque approach. Not so different.....
Well, that's all opinion in the end. I don't believe so. The actors are just the surface. What matters is the writing. To me, Clara is just another 21st Century girl from Earth. We had that last time. Who's to say it won't happen again?
I'm skeptical. Things change and trends end.
People get tired after a while though. Popularity doesn't keep rising. Eventually, it has to stop because it isn't fresh anymore. Things are popular because they're new. Doctor Who has to stay new to be popular.
Personally, as much as admire Moffat's ideas typfied most recently by Dark Water I think it's time to get some fresh ideas into the show. The showrunner is the face of the show, and like the Doctor it needs to change.
Fair enough. I'm just thinking about the future, which is what this article concerns.
How so? People don't stay in their prime forever.
Indeed. But that's only because JNT had lost interest. Technically, Andrew Cartmel was in charge.
But a bubble doesn't keep getting bigger, it pops. As time increases so will his critics.
If we had a TARDIS, I'd like to have seen you try say that during the JNT Era.
He meant that he was reborn - he had a clean slate.
1 week, 3 days ago on Doctor of the Decade: Rate the Tenth Doctor
But shouldn't the Doctor - an old man whose lived a long life - not really value his life compared to others? Other hundreds of years, the Doctor wouldn't flinch once in saving people; let alone have a tantrum about it. It may be understandable, but it just doesn't sit right.
1 week, 4 days ago on Doctor of the Decade: Rate the Tenth Doctor
Thank you! I really appreciate it.
I see what you're saying, but it ultimately goes against the show's forward thinking and morals. The Doctor whinning and being all sentimental and clingy does not sit well amongst the traits of the Doctor as a whole.
1 week, 5 days ago on Doctor of the Decade: Rate the Tenth Doctor
What about Day of the Doctor?
1 week, 5 days ago on Whovianism: Doctor Who As A Religion?
He did "dun goof" though. Writers do it all the time. Just because it's as simple as that, doesn't mean it's somehow untrue. At the beginning of RTD's run, he wanted to warm audiences to the Tenth Doctor. At the end of his run, he wanted to keep those audiences on board with the Tenth Doctor even though he was leaving. He has undeniably shot himself in the foot when it comes to credibility. By spreading the message of wanting audiences to embrace the future, he goes and has them get clingy to the past. It just makes him look more like a greedy salesperon than a passionate fan of the show. This isn't about the show's lore; this is about the audience. If the show is about moving with the future then how come he wanted to take the audiences' embrace of that away?
With the Doctor as a God figure? No. That wouldn't work.
Amen to that..... Wait....
It's not a close allegory if you watch the Classic Show. The Doctor isn't a God. He is an ancient alien hobo.
Oh dear..... It seems RTD's portrayal of the Doctor as a God-like figure has had a bigger impact than I thought......
Right. I don't feel guilty about my opinion. I'm going to say that upfront. I don't care if a lot of people disagree and want to pick a fight, I'm going to say it, defend it, and continue to believe it.
To me, the Tenth Doctor is the least consistent portrayal of the Doctor. That's why I rated him a four.
How can I say this?
Well, there are multiple things that make this Doctor both contradictory and distant from the others, but I've narrowed it down to a single example that I believe is the root of the problem and completely typifies RTD's conflicting goals.
In the End of Time, the Doctor likens regeneration to death when in the Christmas Invasion he claims to be the same man as Eccleston. And yes you could argue, "That was at the beginning of his run, people change," and "He meant the same man as in the fact that he has the same memories," but to me these excuses are just that - excuses. While, the Tenth Doctor has arguebly some of the best character developement in the show's history, this little contradiction completely destroys my belief in the Doctor. If he isn't willing to be a part of the Doctor's legacy as one incarnation amongst many, then why should I consider him the Doctor?
But 2 was easily the same man has Hartnell. We could see that in the famous scene in Tomb of the Cybermen. He is so grandfatherly to Victoria. The Doctors can be different, but they still have to carry the aspects of being an ancient space gypsy. I don't believe it otherwise.
1 week, 5 days ago on Doctor of the Decade: Rate the Ninth Doctor
My bets on this poll is either Tennant or Smith. Probably Smith knowing the general attitude on this site.
Personally, I think Capaldi or Eccleston should win it. They brought gravitas, experience, and believability to the role. I can genuinely believe they are the same man as Hartnell. Whereas with Tennant..... I just can't see any of that crotchety old man or even that ancient alien at times. I just see an angsty 12 year old trapped in a body in it's 30s. Smith was definitly closer to it then Tennant. I just wish he had more moments to show it.
1 week, 6 days ago on Doctor of the Decade: Rate the Ninth Doctor
Hmmm.... Well, I suppose it's easy to assume that Mark Gatiss isn't competent enough for showrunner. But, perhaps he'll prove us all wrong. After all, writing and showrunning are two different things. Moffat and RTD are good examples of this. Moffat may be a good writer, but he isn't the best showrunner. RTD may be an excellent showrunner, but his writing on the show was usually quite average. I suspect Gatiss's Doctor Who would be more like RTD's in style, albeit with less well-written characters in it.... I think when we even consider Gatiss when talking about a future showrunner, we usually assume that "Gatiss the Writer" will be taking over rather than "Gatiss the Man." You never really know.
1 week, 6 days ago on Mark Gatiss on Whether He’d Be Up for Next Showrunner