Bio not provided
@The Lazy Cat Has Stowed Away on the TARDIS Her boyfriend was converted into a Cyberman and then gave his one shot at a life with Clara to a young boy, surely she's allowed to be a little bit angsty?
2 days, 12 hours ago on Last Christmas: Short Synopsis
I understand why some people have disliked this episode and I do have some qualms myself. But can we at least acknowledge. Fans asked for a darker Doctor and we now have a darker Doctor, fans asked for Clara to become a more complete character rather than a plot point - Series 8 delivered this, Fans asked for permanent deaths which meant something which we got, Fans asked for a menacing villain who the Doctor can stand off against which we got, Fans asked for less timey-wimey resolutions to stories which we got. Can we at least admit that Doctor Who delivered on some of its promises and fans desires this series?
2 weeks, 5 days ago on Rate & Discuss Death in Heaven
@DrWhoisevery1 'unexplained post it notes' they were a way for Clara to remember all the things she had not told Danny/lied to him about. Sometimes things shouldn't be spelled out for the viewer!
@Bored of Clara Who The truth is that 'twist' reveals are not designed to be 'unguessable' because 'unguessable' often actually equals uninteresting. Why would it annoy Classic fans to make the Master female? Did it annoy fans of the James Bond franchise when M suddenly turned into Judi Dench?
3 weeks, 4 days ago on Poll: The Missy Reveal
@The Gray Box Half of your issues are really too soon to call issues - e.g. 1. 'There was no explanation for the Master's presence' It's part of a two-parter dear, that's what Part 2 is for. 2. 'Instead of the Master in a new form at the end of the universe, we now have the Master in a new form at the end of life' well firstly those are actually two very different things and secondly - how do you know that is the story as we haven't found out yet what is happening with the Master/Missy. 'Predictable' I think the idea that twists are supposed to be unguessable is perhaps an unfair one - twists are supposed to pull the rug from underneath characters which the Missy reveal did, it put the plot in an interesting place for Part 2. Unclear purpose - Did you complain the same way in Stolen Earth because Davros' plan wasn't revealed any more than Missy's. 'A "cool" twist, if one wants to see one, but no substitute for good dramatic writing' Are you telling me you found no good dramatic writing in the volcano scene? Or the scenes of Danny's death? Or the horrible 3 words reveal?
@RieruM I am confused how was the reveal lazy?
3 weeks, 5 days ago on Rate & Discuss Dark Water
@captainjohnnyreb I'm sorry but this argument makes no sense because the majority of the writers on Doctor Who since 2005 have NOT been experienced science fiction writers. Steven Moffat is known primarily as a sitcom writer, Russell T Davies had written practically no on screen science fiction before his role as showrunner, even Mark Gatiss and Neil Gaiman can hardly be described as experienced in writing 'sci fi' specifically. Of the very successful new entries to Doctor Who writers this series only one has ever written sci fi. What these writers have in common is that they are fans of Doctor Who and are keen to write in that world. I am certain there are plenty of female writers out there who are fans of Doctor Who and keen to write for the show.
1 month ago on Neil Gaiman on Hopes for Capaldi Episode
@PCAriza @tealeaves @kainanite Essentially what I'm saying is that we accept that it is possible for lightsabres to exist because they come from a galaxy far far away in a long distant future. Why should we not accept that in the galaxy this creature is from it is possible for the mass of a creature to change? What reason is there for an alien from a far away galaxy to adhere to our conceptions of mass? To use a different example during The Beast Below no one complained that the Star Whale was able to exist in space when there would be no oxygen to sustain it apparently because they accepted it was an alien creature which could function in a way different to earth creatures.
1 month, 2 weeks ago on Kill The Moon Review
@PCAriza @tealeaves @kainanite Only it doesn't, in any way. Nobody watches Star Wars and complains that there is no explanation of how lightsabres work, they just accept that it is a story set in the future where people have space swords. The idea that the viewers should make some connections or explanations for themselves is perfectly acceptable from a plot point of view. The need to explain everything often leads to far less satisfying writing e.g. The epilogue of Harry Potter.
@kainanite 1. It is well known that paleontology can never tell us
exactly what creatures existed in the past because bones of every creature in
the past have not survived to present day. It doesn't seem that implausible
that a dinosaur the size of Big Ben COULD have existed.
2. Myth and reality
often get blurred through time - for example many people believed Richard III
had been demonised by subsequent rulers depicting him as being hunchbacked and
murderous, studies of his recently discovered bones have shown portraits of him
were actually VERY accurate. Again we don’t exactly have loads of historical
records from this period.
3. The monster under the bed is never explained because in
life often things are not explained, I'm sure everyone has had an experience
where they saw or heard something which scared them and never found out what it
really was. It's more artificial for us to be given all the answers all the
4. I’m not going to lie I have no explanation for this,
although I’m sure there is one.
5. My understanding was that he felt that removing Skovak
Blitzer would be easy to do after dark when the school was empty using his plan
and had no real need initially for Clara’s help. I also honestly think he just
liked messing with Clara by turning up at her place of work and trolling her.
As for Danny deactivating the devices all the device was, was essentially a
trail of breadcrumbs to lure a rat. If you remove the breadcrumbs the rat will
lose the trail. He didn’t have to do anything sciencey.
6. The truth is that no one in the episode ever said that
nuking the Moon was a good plan or that it would work, it was the last resort
of a desperate planet. They had a choice between nuking the moon and the
possibility it would fall from its orbit or at least reduce the damage to Earth
OR letting a potentially vicious space creature ravage the Earth. As for the
science of the moon being an egg or the shell of that egg harming the earth or
the possibility of a newly born space creature laying another egg. IT’S A GIANT
SPACE CREATURE! It’s from another galaxy at least, why should it adhere to our
laws of physics or biology?
It just feels to me less like Doctor Who ‘jumping the shark’
and more like it just….BEING a science FICTION show. Personally having the
Doctor rattle out some explanation for every extraordinary thing which happens
in the show feels stranger and less realistic to me.
I understand you not warming to the Twelfth Doctor but I
really do think that by the end of this series they will really warm him up. I
also wonder, does a character need to be likeable for you to enjoy a show.
Personally House MD, one of my favourite shows, has a character at the centre
who is rude, narcissistic and callous – but I still watch it.
@Typo42 @tealeaves Yes I agree that understanding why something happens or exists can make something even more beautiful. I mean the Doctor's comments in the Rings of Akhaten about the beauty of the science of creation being as great as that of the Akhaten creation story is testament to this. But I also sometimes thing ambiguity and uncertainty can be good things because the truth is that in real life rarely do we ever get all the answers given to us. I also feel that sometimes there is value in the viewer being allowed to fill the gaps with their own ideas.
'When he states blatantly wrong science “facts” because the writer couldn’t be bothered to think rationally, or consult a scientist, well, that makes the Doctor look like an idiot, and it hurts his character because, ironically, it ruins part of the believability of the show.' Did we really NEED 6 whole paragraphs on why the episode was scientifically accurate? Can we not just accept that sometimes character moments, beauty, and art should trump scientific accuracy? Can we not agree that watching the Doctor stand watching in ecstasy up at the sky as a giant beast above hatches from the moon and flies away is more beautiful than watching the Doctor stand on the beach explaining to his companions that sound doesn't travel through the vacuum of space?
If it is shown in the programme that the roar of a space insect can be heard from space then it can be within the reality of that television programme, the Doctor is therefore not an idiot for suggesting this because it IS possible.
1 month, 3 weeks ago on Kill The Moon Review
@Ottoman14 As I was watching Into The Dalek and Ross' death I imagined the really defining scene for 11 when the Angel Bob spoke to the Doctor and said that the Doctor had been responsible for Bob dying alone, scared and in pain and it made me fascinated to see how 12 would react in the same situation.
2 months, 1 week ago on DWM: Things will never be the same again after Kill the Moon
I honestly don't understand the criticism 'Clara on the other hand has a moment that is incredibly stupid and totally out of character' or that it is 'jarring' even the cleverest people forget people's names or say the wrong thing sometimes. Clara calling Danny, Rupert isn't 'jarring' it's human.
2 months, 1 week ago on 12 Great Moments From Listen
@Gustaff @Rani Nose Actually the Doctor's mistakes and fallibility have been explored by Moffat long before Clara's appearance. See: The Beast Below, The Time of Angels/Flesh and Stone, The Hungry Earth, The Pandorica Opens etc.
2 months, 2 weeks ago on 2nd Opinion: Robot of Sherwood
' therefore I begin to question the point in having the ‘fun’ episode so early in the series.' I think the argument that somehow there is a 'right place' in a series for a 'fun' episode which Robot of Sherwood did not fit is a tad odd seeing as 'fun' episodes have regularly come at the beginning of series since Doctor Who's return e.g. Aliens of London (Episode 4), Shakespeare Code (Episode 2), Partner's in Crime (Episode 1), Dinosaurs on a Spaceship (Episode 2) if we stretch the definition of 'fun' to more general romp style adventure episodes then Beast Below was also at the beginning of Series 5 (Episode 2).
As to what was is the point of having these episodes at the beginning of the series? Well you answered your own question, to examine a facet of the Doctor's personality which a darker episode cannot.
I must admit I find it frustrating that people write off certain forms of writing as being 'aimed at children' because they take on a lighter, more comedic, romp-style tone. For one it perpetuates this idea that somehow there is something deeper and more complicated in programmes targeted at adults which is simply not true. Secondly there's something oddly patronising in phrases such as 'childish humour'. Making a funny episode is every bit as difficult as making a dark episode, or an action packed episode - What Gatiss did here was actually very clever the episode was packed with references, in jokes, out jokes, and some nice dark moments. I am not saying the episode was perfect, far from it, but the idea of saying "I didn't really like this episode because it was aimed at eight year olds" just doesn't really feel right to me. Doctor Who is supposed to be a show which can transverse genres and appeal across generations and that was what I felt Robot of Sherwood did rather than shamelessly targeting the shows youngest demographic because lets face in our childhood we've ALL been that eight year old pretending to be Robin Hood or a knight or a king or queen haven't we?
Also didn't the Doctor say in the episode that the radiation leaking from the ship was improving not only the greeness and weather of the area but creating an atmosphere of benevolence. My understanding was that Robin Hood was a product of this radiation leak creating a man so benevolent he would risk his own life to feed the impoverished. As such the robots unintentionally created the very man who would destroy them. Is that not right?
2 months, 2 weeks ago on Robot of Sherwood Review
@JacobHaggerty In fairness flesh Amy, the War Doctor, the 8th Doctor minisode. Is it really such a disingenuous claim for Moffat of all people to keep making?
2 months, 3 weeks ago on Horowitz on Showrunner Rumours
I mean this in no way maliciously and I know he is a valued member of this community....but I am not really a fan of Clint Halsall's reviews. It's a running theme that I noticed in his review of Time of the Doctor that he tends to focus a large amount of his reviews on supposed 'plot holes' or how he believes the writers could (or should) have written the story differently. But neglects to really talk about anything beyond plotting e.g. The fantastic visuals of the episode which nailed the 'blockbuster' feel Moffat has been trying to achieve for two series, Murray Gold being truly back on form with a new score and twelfth doctor's theme, Ben Wheatley's directing, the tone of the episode, the underuse of key actors. I understand that there is only so much you can fit in a review and you can't cover everything but when you are devoting whole paragraphs to how implausible it is that a teacher who sheds a tear in a lesson would get through a job interview (incidentally I work as a teacher and staff crying during the day whether through stress, anxiety or home life problems is NOT that uncommon or a sign of inability to do their job) I do wonder why other aspects of the show are missed out.
2 months, 3 weeks ago on Into the Dalek Review
@JamieJones723 You might be right, if you watch the Daleks' first appearance on the show what is scary is that all you can see is a terrified woman and a Dalek 'sucker' and something about that lack of visibility is very scary. I do wonder if another problem is that we know too much about the Daleks. Something Steven Moffat has emphasised when making his own creatures is that he only gives small amounts of information on them because something is scarier when you don't know where it came from or what it's capable of e.g. we know nothing about the origins of the Weeping Angels, until TotD we knew very little about The Silence (the creatures - not the religious order)
3 months ago on Into the Dalek Spoiler-Free Review
@JamesStroud Captain Jack lives in the 51st century and the modern period where homosexuality is generally accepted (or indeed pansexuality in the 51st century). Jenny and Vastra live in Victorian London where their sexuality is looked upon as wrong so it has become a larger part of the way they define themselves e.g. Fighting against Dr Simeon and his Victorian values.
But I would also say chalk up the number of times in episodes they actually honestly mention their marriage. In A Good Man Goes to War they mention it once in way of introducing themselves. In The Snowmen they mention it once when fighting a close minded psychopath who clearly disapproves of their sexual identity. Crimson Horror it is not mentioned once. Name of the Doctor their marriage is not mentioned once bar the expression of love for one another (understandable when a Whisperman has just stopped your loved ones heart!). Deep Breath their marriage is mentioned in the context of the society they live in and we hear how it affects their lives + there are a few flirty jokes. It's really mentioned far less than people seem to think.
3 months ago on Addressing the Deep Breath Kiss
@AztecsDaleksAndCavemen @TheOncomingHurricane Their marriage was mentioned once in A
Good Man Goes to War in establishing the characters, then briefly (as far as I
can tell) in The Snowmen as a symbolic opposition to Dr Simeon a man who openly
celebrated 'Victorian values' ie. the appearance of propriety, privilege and
purity which often was a façade hiding darkness and corruption. By emphasising
their status as lesbians in a Victorian world they were not only showing their
bravery and power in openly admitting something which could have caused them to
be arrested or imprisoned. They were also showing that they stood for the
opposite of Simeon’s values, for modern values of acceptance, openness and
In The Crimson Horror their marriage is
not referenced at all bar a passing remark from Vastra on Jenny’s
attractiveness. In the Name of the Doctor their marriage is not mentioned but Vastra
shows her fiery passion for Jenny by demanding that Strax bring her back to
life “Get her back for me. Get her back for me now or I will cut you into
pieces” which I would argue is very similar to Amy’s line to the Doctor
when Rory dies in Amy’s Choice “Save him. You save everyone. You always do.
It's what you do…Well what is the point of you!”
The next time they appear is Deep Breath where they discuss
their sexuality in the context of the Victorian society they live in where it
is not accepted which is used as a counter for Clara’s potential prejudices
about the Doctor. Bar this the only reference to their being married were a
flirty jokes around the house which, if you were staying at most heterosexual
or homosexual couples houses I’m sure it would be quite normal to encounter.
I really don’t think their marriage has been mentioned ‘over
and over’ again or is not necessarily ‘normalised’ except that they live in
Victorian London where homosexuality was not considered normal and Vastra is a
@microbat98 I've heard this
complaint several times but from a character perspective their tendency to
emphasise their marriage makes sense. Jack Harkness was born into the 51st
Century where humans go out into the universe and...well 'dance' with every
alien species they meet. Jenny and Vastra live in a time when homosexuality is
a criminal offence in such an environment you would regard your sexuality in a
different way and perhaps cling more tightly to it.
I am also interested you
say 'Vastra and Jenny rely too heavily on innuendos' but beyond the Moffat-style
verbal table tennis Jenny and Vastra have expressed their feelings more
romantically than Jack was ever able to (on Doctor Who) before Jenny was resuscitated
in The Name of the Doctor you could feel Vastra's pain for her lost wife and
when Jenny said, in Deep Breath, ‘I don’t like her mam, I love her’ there was a
real moment of tenderness. Whereas I find on Doctor Who Jack tends to only get
'I met a guy in a bar' style innuendo.
I understand of course
that whether or not their relationship feels forced is really dependent on
personal opinion. But it is factually wrong to say their relationship is ‘bestiality’.
Bestiality is defined as humans having intercourse with animals (Animals in the
sense of creatures of subhuman intelligence). Vastra has been shown several
times to be of human intelligence or greater. As another commenter cleverly put
it if Vastra and Jenny is bestiality so is the Doctor and anyone not Timelord.
1. 'We want science, or even pseudo science' to do pseudo science (or science fiction as it is sometimes known) you really need cgi to make it look in anyway plausible. Criticising a science fiction show for merely using cgi is like criticising a runner for wearing shoes.
2. 'We want a science fiction story, not a love story' bar the inclusion of Jenny and Vastra romance played a very small part in this episode. What's more this episode established a relationship between Clara and the Doctor which was less romantic than anything we have seen since 2005. When you measure how much time is devoted to romance (even in a romance heavy episode like 'The Wedding of River Song' it is still tiny in comparison to the time spent travelling through space, fighting monsters and running down corridors!) Finally you don't talk for every fan of the show I personally quite like a bit of romance and really enjoy episodes like 'The Angels Take Manhattan' 'The Girl in the Fire Place' and 'Doomsday'. It would seem quite a few people agree with me since the Badwolf Bay scene was recently voted the best sci if scene of all time.
3. 'The Daleks are gone. The last one died under Christopher Ecclestone' I'm assuming you're being ironic rather than literally ignoring the many Dalek stories under RTD? Whilst I agree that the Daleks have been overused you have to also acknowledge that Steven Moffat has put more emphasis on new monsters and until 2012 had never written a Dalek episode. It does make sense for a new Doctor to face their arch nemesis in their first series and read the synopsis Into Dalek is doing this in a clever way!
4. 'Gay/bi intrigue is boring' the relationship between Jenny and Vastra is not an 'intrigue' it's a marriage. So it worries me as to what you are trying to say?
3 months ago on Rate & Discuss Deep Breath
It always interests me that often when people criticise Moffat they depict him as being this kind of arrogant egotist doesn't listen to the fandom. But actually he's very aware of his tropes, weaknesses and of the opinion of the fandom and does react to it in his actions as showrunner, even if he doesn't always hit the mark.
3 months, 1 week ago on Moffat on Death: “There are dark times ahead”
@stargazer0118 @Exalos Can you please clarify what you actually mean? There are many complaints made about Moffat in differing degrees of validity. In this article he has openly admitted one of the complaints about his writing which is that he often brings characters back from the dead and has announced he will change this in the future. - Surely that should make you like him more?
@ Notsosmartguy the dalek of Jersey I'm confused, are you being sarcastic? Lets face it the Doctor Who team don't have a huge budget each episode is allowed something like 10 minutes of CGI (of 45 minutes!) which is why Gaiman's 'The Doctor's Wife' was originally cut from the run in favour of Earth story The Lodger. We just have to face that Earth stories are easier and cheaper to film and if there was a whole series of sprawling alien worlds there wouldn't be the same quality of production values that we have now come to expect. It sounds like we're getting potentially 5 off Earth stories this year if you include the Nethersphere episodes, which is pretty cool!
3 months, 1 week ago on Moffat Previews Series 8 in Radio Times
Great theory I definately think this could prove to be true. I really like Moffat's approach to a Doctor's first season the idea that the Doctor is still on a learning curve, still learning how to be the Doctor again. This was showcased really well in Series 5 (in which incidentally Moffat wrote the first 4 episodes with one from Gatiss) the Doctor makes mistakes (e.g. almost killing the starwhale, leaving Eliot behind, falling for the Dalek trap), misjudges people (e.g. Father Octavian) and was generally quite rude and abrasive at times which was really shown in the Doctor leaving Amy on the edge or dying or worse simply saying "Amy - later" but when he returns in The Big Bang he is softer, calmer, kinder.
3 months, 1 week ago on The Moffat Co-writing Conundrum
Whilst I completely respect everyone who takes the time to write articles for DoctorWhoTV and do understand and agree with some criticisms of Clara's character I don't think Aidan Gula argued this in a convincing way. For example as Toby Hankin has already proved however much people dislike Clara she was far from 'useless' in Series 7 several times providing important solutions.
His criticisms of Time of the Doctor are also a little odd - I think we all (Clara included) know that a relationship with a man who is over 1000 years old wouldn't work and there is a difference between someone admitting in a truth field that they 'fancy' someone and actually honestly wanting a relationship with them. I'm sure everyone has, at one point or another, had a crush on someone who they had no intent on dating...or even telling! Whilst the 'boyfriend' scene is all a subterfuge to keep her stepmother happy!
The 'too much involvement in the storyline' is also an odd criticism seeing as both Rose (bad wolf) and Donna (the doctor Donna) were both highly involved in the story lines of their corresponding series.
The idea of the 'underused family' is hardly a fair criticism. Clara has only appeared in half a series of which two episodes included her family (Rings of Akhaten and Nightmare in Silver) these might not have been AMAZING episodes but again she has only had half a series and moffat has expressed his intention to focus more on home life in Series 8.
Other criticisms such as Clara's Theme or the 'romance' in Doctor Who have no real explanation WHY these things are bad except that the article writer doesn't like them. Meanwhile what I would say are more valid criticisms such as the fact Clara has not really been given the character development she deserves and is written differently by different writers, aren't even mentioned.
3 months, 3 weeks ago on Popular / Unpopular Opinion: Clara Oswald
This might just be me but when you dig under all the hyperbole Capaldi's Doctor actually sounds a lot like Eleven in Series 5.
The nature of the Eleventh Doctor was that he very much developed as a character through his tenure. Because by Series 7 Eleven was describing humans as 'the only mystery worth solving' and declaring happy tears to be 'humany wumany' people forget that when he first came regenerated he was actually very alien, dark and even a bit abrasive.
I always remember Time of Angels/Flesh and Stone the Doctor declares humans as breeding like rabbits and knocks heads with Father Octavian. When Amy is seconds away he runs off leaving her blind in the middle of the forest with only a "Later Pond" in the way of goodbye. In The Hungry Earth he leaves a young boy outside in the knowledge the whole area is surrounded by angry Silurians without even thinking. In the Beast Below he rages at the rulers of Starship UK for "Only being human".
I'm sure Capaldi's Doctor will be brilliant and different and everything but sometimes I feel that all this talk of how 'accessible' and 'human friendly' Eleven was makes him seem a little bit safe and placid when he really wasn't.
4 months ago on Capaldi’s Doctor More Alien, Less “human-friendly”
@YaelMoise @sontaran17 I think part of the problem is context and miscommunication. This extract is a response to a question in a magazine article about what Capaldi's Doctor will call himself not Moffat randomly making a blog post to annoy everyone. He's not saying everyone is 'WRONG' to refer to the Doctors with numbers he's just saying that he has no interest in referring to the numbering in the show, it would be like meeting someone and saying "Hi I'm 33 year old John!" "What?" "Well three years ago I was 30 year old John who wore a purple blazer and liked Pizza." "I'm 33 year old John who is much darker and more serious...and wears a beret!" You wouldn't do it...or would only do it very rarely. He's not peeing on anyone's numbering bonfire. The same with the running away with the Doctor thing, he's not saying "If people want to run away with the Doctor THEY ARE WRONG" he's saying "This series we are going to show some of the negative impacts the Doctor has on his companion's lives" Moffat has a talent for not conveying himself well combined with a need as a showrunner to be a bit controversial and keep Doctor Who in the news and hype people up. It was the same under RTD who openly admitted in 'A Writer's Tale' that when in interviews he would suddenly become a different person throwing out hyperbole.
4 months ago on Moffat Questions “Twelfth Doctor” Title
Good point well made.
4 months, 2 weeks ago on How Far Into Darkness will the 12th Doctor Take Us?
It's interesting that people talk about wanting 12 to be darker, more calculating and manipulative but for me Matt Smith's Doctor was all of those things. Unlike Ten the Eleventh Doctor didn't meet people he liked and invite them to travel with him his companions were instead puzzles to be solved eg. The girl with the crack in her wall or the impossible girl.
He often lied to or didn't tell his companions the whole story e.g. Amy being the flesh or having met Clara before. For me the fact that Eleven gave the impression of being a warm, eccentric buffoon whilst really working on his own agenda actually makes him darker.
Finally he did some pretty dark and calculating things - he organised the genocide of a whole race, he ordered a general/priest to humiliate himself by telling his men to run away, he killed Solomon, his influence on Amy's life led to her having a child who she was never allowed to see grow up. It's all quite dark to me...
@Amy is Hannibal Hmmm yes that would fit with the fact the TARDIS light seems slightly green the colour of House, maybe just pointless speculation but who knows!
4 months, 2 weeks ago on Doctor Who Series 8 TV Launch Trailer
Is the corridor at 0.05 the Tesseract also it might be just an effect but 0.47 looks like they have travelled through a 'crack' in time.
I don't think you can condemn the episode's ending as being implausible in terms of cyberman science as we don't really have any manual for how that works. We don't know how much power a cyber leader with human emotions would have to override their suit. We know that the leader of torchwood in Doomsday was able to maintain at least part of her identity inside her suit enough to attack other cybermen. We know that miss hartigan was able to override a whole army of cybermen why should craig not be able to use his powers as cyber leader to break out of a suit.
Also on the asylum of the Daleks thing. Nano genes, whilst hardly accurate science are based on real science. Although we talk about them 'infecting' what they really are is tiny robots that essentially re-engineer you from the inside out. Not infecting you as such.
Matt Smith is good with children was clearly a reference to his on screen presence with children not that he's just nice! He does act well against young cast members eg. Teh, acc, tdtwatw etc etc.
4 months, 3 weeks ago on The Common Criticisms of Closing Time
I think this article did a great job of bringing balance to the Torchwood Miracle Day debate and highlighting some unfair criticism but for me it misses out perhaps the largest criticism of the story. Ultimately the premise of the show was 'Miracle Day' which was, I thought, a truly inspired idea by Russell T. Davies and a way to explore some really interesting topical questions about population growth and Malthusian crisis.
However the big reveal of WHY Miracle Day had happened was ultimately just a huge deux ex machina and very unsatisfying. What was great about RTD's story arcs in Doctor Who was that everything came together at the end, all the hints of missing planets and mysterious appearances of Rose suddenly made complete sense. There was no sense of a big reveal in Miracle Day's finale and this made the rest of the series (however good or bad that was) feel like a waste of time.
5 months, 1 week ago on Is Torchwood: Miracle Day Unfairly Criticised?
@Iris Wildthyme Surely the point of the Clara arc was that despite the mystery around her she is 'genuine'. Ultimately her splintering is not really about timelines or rips in the fabric of space and time, it is the act of a girl so brave she is willing to sacrifice her being to save her best friend's life over and over again. Throughout Series 7 we are reminded Clara is as the Doctor says, "just a girl". Her big sisterly conversation with Merrie and her discussion with the War Doctor in DotD immediately stand out as examples of Clara being actually far more 'genuine' than perhaps more brash characters such as Rose or Martha.
5 months, 2 weeks ago on Clara Oswald – A Question of Perspective
@teddybowties @PaddyB @Malohkeh I'm very confused as to where the evidence that Moffat is 'arrogant' comes from. Read some interviews he's given on his own writing he raves about the work of other Who writers and regularly rips into his own. The idea that he is some arrogant egomaniac is just not true.
There are plenty of 'hints' at a backstory. TBoSJ's the Doctor works out that Clara was going to see the world but she can't leave this one family who have lost their mum. Akhaten we see the impact of her mother's death on Clara and how her parents fell in love. In TotD we meet Clara's family. Bare in mind Clara has been a companion for half a series less than any other companion so far - If we compare her with the first half of Martha's series all we found out was that her parents were going through a messy divorce and her sister and brother were barely in it unless the plot required it.
I think the whole point of The Day of the Doctor was that the Doctor committing the genocide of billions of innocent children was an act which was out of character. Personally I loved the Time War as a plot device and the impact it had on the Ninth, Tenth and Eleventh Doctors.
But the Doctor is the man who turned up on Amelia Pond's doorstep and ate fish fingers and custard, he's the man who climbed in through young Kazran Sardick's window to show him a flying fish, he's the man who will stay out of history unless he hears children crying as Amy says in The Beast Below. I understand the point of the Time War that the Doctor has 'no choice' but to commit genocide. But I still find it hard to believe he could.
I understand what you are saying about the threat of the Timelords to the universe but then you have to think about what the Doctor did. He didn't craft a situation where the Timelords can just immediately be released into the world but instead kept them contained in a pocket universe.
I'm also not sure about this idea that being older makes your moral judgements better. Often young people have much stronger and better moral compasses than adults. Being older can be a disadvantage, you can become so caught up in the complexity of your life that you become distanced from your values and loves. What Clara did wasn't to tell the Doctor that his judgement was wrong, it was to tell him his judgement was not HIM. Killing billions of innocent children was against who the Doctor was as a person and everything he values and I think she was right.
5 months, 2 weeks ago on Why Bringing Back Gallifrey is Wrong
@Ollie Walton Harrod 'It is just that there is absolutely no chance that Moffat wouldn't overdo it, as he has been doing thus far, and make that the main point of the season' Isn't there? All of the episodes from Series 7 were stand alone episodes in response to fan complaints that Series 6 was too arc heavy. In episodes 1-5 of Series 7 there was practically no arc at all with the exception of the Pond's Leaving which really made little difference to narrative in anything but ATM. In Series 7 Part 2 the Clara arc can only be said to dramatically have affected the narrative of the first and last episodes. I understand you might not like Moffat's arcs but I think the idea they overwhelm the show or that somehow there is 'absolutely no chance' of change is unfair when Moffat has been far more responsive to fan comment than RTD.
Moffat stated on the whole bringing-back-Jenny-thing that he was talking to RTD about the upcoming series and RTD told him about The Doctor's Daughter and how she would be killed at the end of the episode, to which Moffat in essence responded with "Introducing an important person to a main character and killing them off in the same episode, that's a bit Star Trek isn't it?" Which led to RTD rewriting the ending. I know Rule 1: Moffat lies but I honestly think in this case he has no plans for bringing Jenny back. I imagine if he was going to do this kind of story he would probably go one step further and bring back Susan. Saying that personally I would love to see Jenny back.
5 months, 3 weeks ago on Bring Back… Jenny, the Doctor’s Daughter
@Sir James Bond Lets be honest though there were 3 options for the inclusion of classic Doctors and the Day of the Doctor and Name of the Doctor explored all of them.
1. Using remastered archive footage - Check. It worked reasonably effectively. It gave an opportunity for sadly deceased Doctors to appear and for classic Doctors to appear as they had done in the show. BUT lets be honest the footage was a little dodgy in places.
2. Doubles with facial digital facial reconstruction. Worked ok at the end of the Day of the Doctor but the technology would have been too expensive for moving people really.
3. Bringing back old Doctors as they are now - Cue Tom Baker in a wonderful little cameo. Could other Doctors have been included at this juncture as other curators? Yes perhaps but there wouldn't be time to give each of them the kind of appearance Baker got.
I think the honest truth was that the episode was quite referential and there were lots of winks (many of which I'm sure I missed). The credits, totters lane, unit, neutron flow, the many pictures of the secret unit base, the scarf, the zygons, the changing console room, you've redecorated - I don't like it, etc etc. But ultimately it was referential because it was asking the same question the series has always been asking. Doctor Who? What kind of man is the Doctor? What does he stand for?
6 months ago on Could The Eleven Doctors Have Been Achieved Without Overcrowding?
I really think Rita should have been on the list. She was a companion who managed to be simultaneously smart, warm, funny and complex. I feel as though in some ways Rita embodies a lot of what writers have tried to do with the character of Clara - She was a companion who could keep up with the Doctor. In one episode we got a beautiful tantalising insight into the life of Rita who was pressured by her father into doing well in school, who could compartmentalise the strangeness of her life, who still held with her a Muslim faith, the kind of character development writers have failed to give Clara in half a series (Don't get me wrong I love Clara!).
6 months, 1 week ago on 5 Could Have Been Companions
@robohappy @VortexDan He had an impossible task, he could never have made a 50th that pleased everybody. He gave us a story that delivered surprises - regardless of what you felt about the War Doctor reveal it was a big revelation for a big special, plenty of nods to the past not to mention Tom Baker!, a story which was personal and game-changing for the Doctor, great comedic moments with some deeper moral questions. In contrast what did he spoil?
It's been stated the numbers remain the same as the War Doctor rejected the name. Honestly what is the problem? If showrunners never changed the canon then shows would be massively dull. If no one had changed the canon there would be no regeneration in the first place. Moffat has put the show in a position where it can continue for another 13 regenerations even if you don't like the way he did it, surely that has to be a good thing. So how can people defend Moffat after this...quite easily?
6 months, 1 week ago on Smith on 50th Classic Doctor Criticisms
@Oodkind I think Nine struck the right balance on the flirtation front. He was in his 40s so only 10 years younger than Capaldi. But he still had the odd moment of romance with the Forest of Cheem and the talk of 'dancing' with Rose and Jack, but it never felt creepy.
6 months, 2 weeks ago on Moffat: Handsome Actors don’t suit the Doctor
@Beasts_a_Snarling Surely the show has already been doing this for at least the last 8 years: Nine's guilt and rage over his involvement in the Time War, Ten's feelings of responsibility for the his damaging impact on the lives of his companions, Ten's brief moment as the Timelord Victorious and raging against his inevitable fate, Eleven's existential crisis about what he has become and mission to erase himself from the universe, Eleven's crisis over how he can be merciful AND ensure justice, the whole 50th anniversary about the Doctor's feelings about his part in the genocide of millions of children.
As RTD said recently the romance and the flirting makes a tiny percentage of the overall show which has been exploring the 'Darkness of the Time Lord's soul' for years. The flirting is just something the press like to jump on. e.g. Who will Matt Smith snog next?
@dragonsfyre I understand what you are saying. The issue is that it doesn't really make logical sense. If the BBC, production teams, executives, writers etc knew that they could digitally add in Christopher Eccleston's face in and they knew the fan wanted this why wouldn't they do it? The people who make Doctor Who aren't idiots and Steven Moffat certainly isn't
We're talking about the same man who helped to arrange the mini-episode The Night of the Doctor (something he was under not obligation to do and which was pretty much an act of fan service) why would he not have even thought of including in Eccleston's face.
We know from interviews Christopher Eccleston is a man who puts a lot of emphasis on his choices as an actor and respect to his performance. This seems (reading between the lines) part of the reason he left Doctor Who in the first place. It seems to make much more sense that they did this out of respect to him than that the whole Doctor Who production team didn't think to digitally add his face into the regeneration sequence. Bearing in mind this episode was in edit for months before it was shown.
6 months, 3 weeks ago on Moffat on Why Hurt to Eccleston Regeneration Was So Short
@dragonsfyre Could you just clarify what you consider being 'professional and respectful' to be? Being within your rights to do something due to copyright ownership isn't quite the same as being respectful towards an actor or their performance, is it? Surely the only person who can say if they have been disrespected is Christopher Eccleston.
The production team clearly knew they could digitally include Eccleston's face in the regeneration scene with the technology they had and their copyright, but chose not to. It is also safe to assume they knew how much the fans wanted to see this. Surely the most logical explanation is that they had spoken to Eccleston and were respecting his wishes.
6 months, 4 weeks ago on Moffat on Why Hurt to Eccleston Regeneration Was So Short
@dragonsfyre Surely it was clear that in the final shot people had been digitally added in as there were all the classic doctors there too. Moffat discussed through several meetings Chris' involvement in the show and got his blessing for the 50th it seems highly unlikely that this shot would not have been mentioned to him so there's not really any contradiction in what he is saying. Is there?
7 months ago on Moffat on Why Hurt to Eccleston Regeneration Was So Short