Bio not provided
@BazHood @Typo42 "Magic Carrots" @OAOHAYF unexpected item in the bagging area You can also link up stand-alone episodes WITH the arc episodes without it interfering or the story suffering. A good example of this is the classic series Tom Baker 'The Key of Time' story arc, where the Doctor and Romana are tasked with finding the 4 pieces of a key that a scattered across time and space. The arc lasted 5 episodes, each of the first 4 would take them to a new time and location, they would get involved with a completely self-contained story, and they would simply discover the key fragment along the way. You could watch each individual episode without really knowing there was a bigger overarching story going on. The 5th episode was specifically about the 'Key of Time' itself.
Another example is the 'Divergent Universe' arc in the Big Finish 8th Doctor audios. Each of those episodes has a self contained story, but it is all part of a single bigger story - and what's great about that one is that the final episode manages to link up each previous story in a relevant and believable way, so you literally get the best of both worlds.
Overarching stories are brilliant when they're done WELL, and to be honest a TV series shouldn't really not have one.
1 month, 2 weeks ago on Moffat on the Doctor/Companion Relationship for Series 9
I would really like to have a 'Leela-esque' companion in the new series, and by that I mean physical, someone who can fight. And properly fight, not this cheesy, CBBC type of 'fighting'. A character whose actress knows some form of martial arts would be good.
I'm not saying I want the show to become violent or glorify violence or anything like that, but would be nice to have a companion who doesn't scream helplessly when cornered by a monster, but actually FIGHTS BACK for once....Someone who can handle themselves. It would make sense at the moment, too, seen as how Peter Capaldi is an older gentlemen. I like the idea of the companion-as-bodyguard thing.
1 month, 2 weeks ago on Moffat Mulls Future Companion Not Being Another Earth Girl
@Mickie_Newton I despise the character 'Captain Jack', so no, I would not be thrilled about his return. And again, this has nothing to do with it being John Barrowman, I just think it's a terrible, terrible character.
@BazHood @OAOHAYF unexpected item in the bagging area "I'd also like a companion who'll just STAY on board the Tardis for a bit
and forget their (other) life. After all, the Doctor can, usually, get
them back just after they left in the first place so......there's no
reason to be juggling 2 lives :D "
I agree with you on this completely. I DESPISE the way the companions, and therefore, the Doctor, keep returning to present day Earth to see her faaaaamily......ugh. Do they WANT to see all of time and space or not?! And yes, I've been saying since 2005 that there's no reason for them to, as I always assumed in the classic series that he would just drop them off the moment after they left.
And yes, McGann to return in a 2 Doctor thing, that is a must. I believe Paul McGann is actually friends with Peter Capaldi, so that would make it even more interesting.
@dewyjns I agree with you. The 'romance' thing is a complete misunderstanding of Doctor Who and the writers of 'new who' have been doing it to death....Peter Capaldi is by far the best of the revival series Doctors, in my opinion, because he actually plays it as an ALIEN rather than some 'eccentric human'. And he's nailing the 'darker side' of the Doctor perfectly.
I actually didn't like Clara at all in her first season with Matt Smith, but with Capaldi's Doctor she works a lot better.
@OAOHAYF unexpected item in the bagging area If you don't like themes then you shouldn't be watching science fiction, period. That's entirely what science fiction is supposed to be about; allegorical stories that make us think about various subjects in ways we normally wouldn't, such as morality, politics, prejudice, what it means to be human etc. That's what sci fi is about - GOOD sci fi, anyway.
There's also a low-brow form of sci fi, too; silly, nonsense stories that are only 'science fiction' so they can have lasers and spaceships and monsters in them. This, I feel, is what YOU people would prefer Doctor Who to be, and I hope to god the writers don't listen to you...
@BazHood @Typo42 "Magic Carrots" @OAOHAYF unexpected item in the bagging area See, I agree with you lot that the whole 'teaser' thing at the end of the episode is NOT the way to do it. But I disagree with you lot when you say that the problem is 'story arcs' themselves.
How I would do it, is I'd have the first episode in a season setting up a continuing story arc, and then episodes 2,3 and 4 would be stand-alone, self contained episodes with little to nothing to do with each other. Then episode 5 would be a continuation of episode 1, and then 6, 7 and 8 would be stand-alone episodes again. 9 would be an arc episode, 10 and 11 stand-alone, and then 12/13 a two-part finale concluding the arc.
This is the 'X Files' approach. The X Files would have stand-alone episodes about various things - ghosts, mutants, demons, curses etc - and then an overall story arc about aliens and a government conspiracy to cover them up. The X Files was the first TV show to do this, and it did it perfectly (well, for the first 6 seasons, anyway).
This I feel is what Doctor Who should be doing, and should have been doing since it returned in 2005. It's the perfect formula for this show. Instead, they keep doing these ridiculous and contrived 'teasers', like 'bad wolf', 'torchwood' and yes, even the 'Missy' scenes (though if I had to choose I prefer the Missy teasers simply because they were directly shown to the audience, and not a god awful 'hidden' thing like secret words).
@OAOHAYF unexpected item in the bagging area @Typo42 "Magic Carrots" @BazHood @OAOHAYF unexpected item in the bagging area "it might be nice to try something different for a change and just let
the show waft about the place and see where you end up......"
In other words, just sit back and knock out some rubbish without any skill or effort going into the writing? Yeah, sounds great...0o.
You're talking out of your rear end. When you have a season long story arc, you have about 3 or 4 (5 maximum) episodes that are about the arc, the rest are stand alone stories. So, in other words, there are always stand alone stories whichever way you do it - you for some reason would just prefer if EVERY single episode was stand alone. I for one would despise this. As it is, people like me get our overarching story arcs, and you people get your stand-alone episodes - but you want it ALL tailor made to you, with us left out in the cold. Yeah, that's fair.
@Ian Chatterton See, I am the complete opposite of you; leaving all the 'Missy' scenes out of each episode and just having it in the finale, would be the absolute worst thing they could have done.
Because it's CHEAP. It's called Deus Ex Machina, and it's the hallmark of terrible writing. Anyone can just make stuff up as the go along, shoe-horning in contrived nonsense every step of the way with no link or thread or logic to any of it. It takes SKILL as a writer to have a consistent, logical through-line that keeps people guessing until the end, where everything clicks.
I am actually stunned that there are people like you who PREFER the awful approach. I don't see how you can enjoy that more. In other words, you want to go back to being how Russel T Davies would do it.....That is absolutely bizarre to me. When I watched those season finales I just felt like my intelligence was being insulted, and couldn't believe how hackneyed the writing was. But you PREFER this? Wow.
I, by the way, PREFER the classic series. And there are tons of classic seasons with long story arcs - and those are my favorite ones.
@OAOHAYF unexpected item in the bagging area
@OAOHAYF unexpected item in the bagging area No. I am in VIOLENT disagreement with you.
themes and season long story arcs are exactly what's needed. They're
also harder to write and more interesting to watch.
only becomes a problem when EVERY episode is about the season long
story arc. Then it would get tedious. But having every 4th or 5th
episode about an overall arc works perfectly.
also a difference between an arc, and a theme. You could have a season
of completely self-contained stories that all have a common 'theme'
running throughout. Again, this is good, and is the mark of a GOOD
And I don't know how you can say a season story arc is 'limiting'. I'm sorry but I just find that bizarre.
Season long story arcs were always a part of classic (real) Doctor Who, and the eras that had them were usually the best.
problem with Doctor Who at the moment is not that it has season story
arcs, but that none of them have really been any good. If they had GOOD
story arcs, then that would be fantastic - but you'd rather they just
jettisoned the whole concept, and went with dull, repetitive,
meaningless, throw-away episodes for the entire thing - an entire show
of the 'filler' episodes, in other words. Ugh....
get the feeling that people like you simply don't appreciate good
writing. You're dazzled by cheap gimmicks and shallow, meaningless
stories that don't require any level of THOUGHT on your part. This is
why you prefer Russel T Davies's first few seasons, which were nothing
more than a CBBC show that went out at prime time.
first few seasons actually did an incredibly poor and cheap thing of
having completely separate, self-contained episodes, and then trying to
shoe-horn in a contrived link between every episode in the season finale
- 'bad wolf', 'torchwood', 'Saxon' etc - I personally found this
tortuous. If you want it to go back to that then be my guest, but I for
one will stop watching.
Stevan Moffet actually
attempts to bring that arc to the forefront, so it's no longer a cheap
gimmick, which is good. My problem with Moffet is that none of his story
arcs are really any good, and he has NO idea what to do with them once
they get going.
I like good writing. I like
interesting, ongoing stories, I like stories that have a point to them,
that make you think, and require you to think, with metaphors and
allegories and themes. This is what proper science fiction is meant to
be about. I do not want silly, mindless, madcap nonsense adventures,
where the science fiction is just an excuse to have lasers and
spaceships and monsters.
It actually depresses me that there are
people like you out there, and I hope to god TV writers don't start
pandering to you lot.
Oh, and STOP MAKING 'GOOD' DALEKS!!!
I am so sick to death of the writers of the revived series being OBSESSED with turning Daleks 'good'. It's sickening.
That first Dalek episode in 2005, simply called 'Dalek' was obscene. I couldn't actually believe that when I saw it; they gave the Dalek a CONSCIENCE.....Has to be one of the stupidest ideas I've ever seen, especially for a show that's just been revived. I mean, you take over a show that's been dead for nearly 20 years, you are given the chance to write a modern day episode featuring the show's most iconic villain, famous for being uncompromisingly and pathologically 'evil', and the first thing you do is give them a conscience, and have them crying about the nasty things they've done........please. Anyone who thinks Russel T Davies is a genius needs to watch that episode and have their head examined.....
Then that god awful episode in Manhattan. Human-Dalek hybrids, is actually not a bad idea - the point being we get to see the Daleks' personality in human bodies, NOT that we get see 'human' personalities in DALEK form....ugh.
I am also sick of this idea that the TV series seems so fond of, of 'human' = 'good'. This idea that, simply by having some human DNA, will turn an immoral alien lifeform 'good', is so arrogant, not to mention childish.....have the writers of Doctor Who never heard of the Nazis? Stalin? Pol Pot?
A 'Human Dalek' would not be 'good', a 'Human-Dalek' would be Joseph Mengler! Or a serial killer! Or some other kind of murderous nutjob.
Then there was that horrendous episode with the 'Dalek Khan' (another stupid idea of Daleks having names...) that had some sort of epiphany and 'saw' the Daleks for what they really are (which just happens to be the same as the human perspective? Wtf?).
Then recently the 'Into the Dalek' episode, which actually ended on there being a 'good Dalek' hidden in the ranks of the Dalek empire.....I mean, for god's sake. What IS this obsession the writers have? Are they incapable of writing an enemy that's just plain bad? At least from a human perspective?
3 months ago on 51 Years Later: 5 Ways to Make the Daleks Menacing Again
Also, Big Finish handled the Daleks much better (like they do most things in Doctor Who) in my opinion.
There's a Big Finish audio series simply called 'Dalek Empire', which, while not being perfect in some respects, its depiction of the Daleks themselves is probably one of the best I've seen (or should that be heard).
In that, the Daleks are genuinely sinister. They're not the fun, comic-book villains they are in the revived TV series. Part of this is achieved simply by SHUTTING THEM UP a lot; there are really long silences from the Daleks during conversations with human prisoners - which is funny, when you consider that this is an audio-only format, you'd expect them to talk MORE than they do in the TV series - and this makes them a lot scarier. To not know what's actually going on in their heads, and what they're thinking, is far scarier than having them blurt out every single thought they're having for everyone around them to hear.
And that's another thing - why do the Daleks talk out loud to EACH OTHER? I've never understood this; you're telling me they've got these incredibly advanced, weaponised, armoured personal vehicles that can fly, have energy shields, sensor equipment - but the concept of the internal radio slipped them by?!
They should only ever talk out loud when they're communicating with other life forms. When Daleks are talking to other Daleks they should remain completely silent. Yes, I know this would making writing very difficult, as we the audience would not know when they're communicating to each other, or what they're communicating, but that's kind of my point - I think it'd be a lot more effective if we DIDN'T know!
Everyone focuses on how the Daleks need to be made 'scary' again. I'm actually concerned with them appearing INTELLIGENT again - so far on the revived TV series (and some of the classics, to be fair) they've been reduced to idiots. They come across as phenomenally stupid. In my opinion they need to be made intelligent again, and then 'scary' will follow naturally from that.
I agree with the last suggestion, and this is something I've been saying myself for ages; have an episode where the Daleks actually WIN for a change....
It doesn't have to be Earth they're invading all the time, for god's sake. There's a whole universe out there. Have a story where the Daleks are invading some alien planet, or a human colony world, where the Doctor spends the episode attempting to thwart them, only to fail at the last moment, and watch as the entire planet gets 'exterminated'.
They used to do this in Stargate. The antagonists (the Goa'ould) would begin to seem too easy to defeat, so they'd throw in an episode where they succeeded, and suddenly they were back to being threatening again.
And in Farscape....hell, in Farscape the various bad guys won more times than they lost, lol. It was actually a novelty when the heroes won. Now that was a show with real tension.
@Maiden_Ty_One I have to say, since the new Capaldi season started, my opinion of Clara has changed somewhat. Someone I know said "It's not that she's a bad companion, she's just the wrong kind of companion for Matt Smith's Doctor" - and I'm beginning to think they might be right.
As each episode has gone on she's become more and more likeable. So maybe I was wrong.
5 months ago on Popular / Unpopular Opinion: Clara Oswald
To me it's just arrogance on the part of Steven Moffat, going back and re-writing the entire show's mythology in some areas, and completely making up his own backstory in previously unknown areas in others.
I think Moffat needs to get it through his head that this show does not BELONG to him, he didn't invent it, and he is simply the current torch-holder, instead of trying to stamp his name all over the entire show's 50+years of history, like it is, and always has bee, ALL his.
And if you're _going_ to butcher up the show's 50+ years of history, rewrite its entire mythology and haphazardly 'insert' your own contributions into every facet of the show as though they're fundemental aspects of the entire show, then at least do it WELL! At least make some effort to make it genuinely good - as opposed to these half a***d, contrived, convoluted nonsense plots that's currently being churned out....
6 months, 2 weeks ago on Open Discussion: Is There More to Clara Than We Think?
It all looks good to me apart from the T-Rex in London. I don't know why they keep insisting on doing these 'giant monster' stories as they're always awful. Still, the rest looks great though.
7 months, 3 weeks ago on Deep Breath TV Trailer
I look forward to Paul McGann, Matt Smith, David Tennant and Peter Capaldi all coming face to face as their respective Doctors.
7 months, 3 weeks ago on Smith Eager for Another Multi-Doctor Story
I honestly cannot fathom why anyone could possibly be 'against' such a thing; if you don't like the idea of seeing it in a cinema, then don't go see it in a cinema. Simple. It's not like the people seeing it in cinemas are getting it any earlier, it's going out at the same time as the BBC showing.
As for it cheapening the 50th.....ugh. How? How does it 'cheapen' the 50th? Was it 'being shown in cinemas' that made the 50th the achievement it was? Or was that a side effect OF it being the achievement it was? Any moron can work out the correct answer to that.
Plus, the 50th wasn't THAT good anyway...
7 months, 3 weeks ago on Does Deep Breath Really Deserve a Theatrical Release?
Double casting is no big deal, The X Files and Stargate did it all the time. In fact The X Files triple-cast the actor Colin Cunningham in three different roles. I only noticed when I did a marathon run of the entire show.
7 months, 3 weeks ago on Capaldi’s Familiar Face Addressed in a Low-key Way
I have absolutely nothing against overaching story arcs, even if they take up the bulk of a season - if they're GOOD story arcs....That's really all that's important to me, whether an episode is stand-alone or part of a story-arc - call me crazy, but it's whether it's GOOD or not that concerns me....
7 months, 3 weeks ago on Moffat on Series 8’s Smaller Story Arc
@LGwalchmai95 You might like Paul McGann's 8th Doctor. IMO he nails the 'sarcastic Doctor' perfectly. Not in the '96 movie though, in that they didn't let him play it the way he wanted to, I'm talking about the audio series. In that he's incredibly dry and sarcastic.
7 months, 3 weeks ago on BBC News Series 8 Preview Featuring Into the Dalek Clips
Everything's looking pretty good so far; Capaldi's shaping up to be the best Doctor of the revival yet. :)
I don't like Clara. I've got nothing against the actress - she's alright. I just don't like the character, or the way she plays her. I don't find her funny or endearing, I just find her annoying and even slightly arrogant. And this whole 'impossible girl' storyline is absolutely insufferable. I look forward to a time when she departs and 12 gets a more grounded companion with attitude.
7 months, 3 weeks ago on Popular / Unpopular Opinion: Clara Oswald
The Night of the Doctor was possibly the best thing they've done since they revived the show in 2005. I don't just mean for online content, I mean for the entire show itself.
7 months, 3 weeks ago on Moffat: Big Plans For Future Online Episodes
@JakeGreen1 That's exactly why she and the storyline are so infuriating; the arrogance of Stevan Moffat to go back and rewrite the entire show's history, from 50 years ago, even pulling a George Lucas and inserting new footage into old episodes - other writer's episodes - from the last 50 years, in order to make the ENTIRE 50 year old show to be about HIS silly little storyline, and HIS current 'companion' character....I mean seriously, that's such arrogance it's unbelievable.
He's essentially saying that anyone who considers themselves a Doctor Who fan can't dislike HIS run of the show; the entire show from the 1960's onwards is now about HIS storyline, so he 'owns' the entire show now, in other words.
It's just arrogance, and shows no respect for either the show or its fans.
And I'm not some Russel T Davies fan - I actually think RTD was even worse - and Moffat does score some points with me for giving us 7 mins of Paul McGann's excellent 8th Doctor on screen for the first time in 17 years - but I just really cannot stand arrogant writing.
"I think the whole “Impossible Girl” arc was simply genius beyond words."
I can only deduce that you don't watch a lot of movies/tv or don't read a lot of books.
As for it 'paying off' in the final episodes, the part where they digitally inserted Clara into past episodes from Doctor Who's history was one of the worst things I've seen in the revival so far. Seriously, that was terrible.
And the arrogance of Steven Moffat to rewrite the ENTIRE SHOW'S history - not just his version of it, but the ENTIRE THING going back 50 years - so that the whole show is actually about HIS silly little storyline.....ugh. No thought went into that 'writing' whatsoever.
"In the RTD era the companions were companions, not the storyline. Moffat
makes the companions have too much involvement with the plot."
Ok, are you serious? Rose? The companion that absorbed some sort of 'time energy' and became a god that then went back and controlled the entire first series? Who the Doctor then fell IN LOVE with (for god's sake) and spent the next two seasons pining over her until she returned and SAVED THE UNIVERSE? (After appearing in every episode of season 4, again, as the main overaching story arc of that series)
Or Donna Noble, the 'most special' woman in the universe? Who was destined to become half-timelord and save the universe (in possibly the most hackneyed and badly-written way imaginable)?
I'm not a fan of Moffat's writing either, but to imply that Russel T Davies was somehow 'better'? I can't even fathom the thought-process that comes up with that conclusion.
Oh, and Amy was a consistent companion from season two and half seasons, only Rory was intermittent, and neither of them were the 'main storyline' of any season.
Amy Pond is my favourite character of the entire revival, and I find it hilarious the way so many people hate her; she fits the bill of the 'companion' character of the classic series more than any of the revival so far.
I can't believe they never did anything with Amy's house. You know, the fact that it had 2 floors on the outside, but 3 on the inside? It now looks like that was a simple accident of filming between location and set and a simple error being made - but damn, they could've used that to great effect what with the whole Silence Tardises storyline...
7 months, 3 weeks ago on When Doctor Who Addresses Its Past
Double-casting is no big deal, TV shows do it all the time. The X Files and Stargate would double cast all over the place - in fact The X Files even cast the actor Colin Cunningham 3 times as 3 different people - triple casting, in other words.
7 months, 3 weeks ago on Doctor Who and the Doppelganger Dilemma
@JeffBrewer Really? You sure he's not too different from your beloved David 'let me just grit my teeth some more' Tennant, who no one can possibly top in your mind as the Doctor?
I personally found David Tennant insufferable, Matt Smith I liked 'more' but still could take or leave, but I cannot stand this asinine attitude of Tennant-lovers who have this irrational hatred of Matt Smith PURELY because he's the actor who replaced Tennant - as though somehow it was Smith's fault Tennant left the show.....Saying he can't act is just ridiculous. Clearly he can, you just didn't like HIS version of the Doctor.
7 months, 3 weeks ago on Capaldi Doesn’t Expect to be a Heartthrob Doctor
I think he's worrying about nothing, I'm actually pretty certain Capaldi is gonna be my favourite Doctor since the 2005 revival.
Might sound stupid to say that before seeing him in action, but I never liked Eccleston - like him in other stuff, but in Doctor Who he does some of the worst acting I've ever seen, which is bizarre, as he's NOT a bad actor - Tennant got on my nerves from start to finish, I'm sorry but I really don't see what everyone else sees in him. He just plays the Doctor like a slightly eccentric human. Smith I like the most but that's not saying much. He has a 'better' take on what the character of the Doctor should be imo, but he went too far into clown territory and ended up being more annoying than anything.
And both Tennant and Smith were pretty much just pretty boys.
Everything I'm finding out about Capaldi's Doctor makes him sound more and more my cup of tea - un-romantic, sinister, gravitas, and most importantly, he sounds the most 'alien' of the 4 so far. I never liked the idea of the Doctor being this 'hunk' who the girls (and some of the guys) swoon over - he's a 900 (or whatever it is now) year old alien from outerspace. The best Doctors of the classic era were the ones who were sinister and slightly unnerving. Capaldi seems to be fitting that bill perfectly so far.
@JustJordsss I wonder if he'll finally go back and rescue Peri - you know, after just abandoning her on some alien planet with nothing but the shirt on her back....
8 months, 2 weeks ago on Series 8 Launch Trailer Breakdown
I had an idea that since the Twefth Doctor is older than what we've seen in a long time, the new Master should be young. Really young, like a delinquent teen/early twenties. Rather than having two old men going against each other, they could play on the whole dynamic of the respectable 'old man', and the thuggish 'youth'. They could even make ageism a theme of their encounters.
Could be interesting.
8 months, 2 weeks ago on McGann: Charles Dance Would Be a Great Master
John Simm deserves at least one more chance as the Master, mainly because, so far, he hasn't had a chance to play the role how he wants to play it.
Simm says he has and always has had since getting the role, a version of the Master in his head that he wants to play, but for his first appearance Russel T Davies told him no, and made him play specifically how Davies wanted it (another genius move from that flawless showrunner...). That's why his performance in those episodes feels really 'off'. When he came back for the Christmas specials, again he wanted to play the Master in this way he envisions, and again, Davies said no, and made him play it in Davies's way, which this time was completely different from before and if anything even MORE removed from what the Master is supposed to be.
In short, both his appearances so far have been hampered by the 'control' of Russel T Davies. I personally don't think Russel T Davies actually 'gets' or understands the character of the Master (indeed, I don't think Russel T Davies 'gets' a lot of Doctor Who, and just thinks he does). I for one would like to see John Simm's actual take on the Master, at least ONCE before he's replaced forever by an another actor in the role....but that's just me.
@Special Weapons Dalek It gets better. And C'rizz....heh. You'll change your mind about him. It will take a while - after the Divergent Universe arc, in fact - and I'm not gonna spoil it for you, but.....yeah, keep an open mind about him ;)
The Divergent Universe is probably my favourite part of the Eighth Doctor adventures. The Croker is an awesome villain - not an arch-villain, just a sly, devious git, I love him! The Natural History of Fear is probably one of the most impressive Doctor Who stories I've ever 'heard', but it's so unlike standard 'Doctor Who' it's hard to say it's one of the 'best' as it's so different. It took a second listening for me to realise just how great it was.
8 months, 3 weeks ago on Beyond the TV Series: Audio Arcs
@TardisBoy It's another case of the actor being blamed for the EPISODES being bad (or in McGann's case, episode). In all honesty Colin Baker's Doctor is actually quite good, just as good as most of the others, anyway. Or at least his portrayal was. He was let down by the writing, and some of the asinine decisions made about his Doctor on his behalf - the most obvious being the outfit. Baker himself loathed that outfit (of course he did, he had to wear the bloody thing), but it was forced upon him by the show runners, and of course HE got the blame for it.
His Doctor was also surprisingly dark; his regeneration went "wrong" and he was left with mildly psychotic tendancies as I remember rightly, which was something new and interesting.
He also had the smokinest companion EVER; Peri :) . Seriously, his episodes are worth watching for her and her outfits alone....
10 months, 1 week ago on Analysing The Top Doctor Who Stories (DWM 1998)
@ClaireAbraham Ugh....the whole point of the regeneration - especially when the show itself is changing hands - is that the SECOND the new Doctor comes in, that's it for the previous one. Done. Gone. All the goodbyes, farewells and sorry for their departure, gone the INSTANT the new Doctor shows up. That's the way it always was and that's the way it should be. I DESPISED that regeneration sequence, not because it was "grim" (I actually liked it when he was stumbling in the snow, it all went to hell when the ood showed up and started SINGING for god's sake...) but because it was ridiculous and over the top. I mean they really were saying, as writers "Our Doctor is the greatest ever and no one will ever be able to top him or us!". It was pathetic. The only part of it I liked was the fact that as soon as Matt Smith showed up, the tone completely changed, and it was fast and energetic and positive - that's how it SHOULD be, for god's sake. You don't want the new Doctor to spend half his first episode moping and whining about the loss of the previous one - especially when that makes no sense as it's supposed to be the same person!
And 10 was really, really, not that great.
10 months, 1 week ago on Doctor Who Could Have Ended With Tennant
Oh please! I am so sick of hearing people prostrating themselves
before David Tennant as the most "amazing" Doctor ever - I'm sorry but
he just wasn't. He wasn't! Simple as! He didn't capture the essence of
the character at all, in fact I found him quite incongruent with who
"the Doctor" is supposed to be. Why does everyone think he was so god
damn impressive? He just wasn't.
@VictorWong1 Not really, the "Warrior" would just confirm her sentiments to her, that she was right to mistrust the Doctor and that the Timelords realy are just war hungry monsters.
8 was, ironically, the best Doctor to show her how wrong she was, he just didn't get chance to :(
10 months, 1 week ago on Campbell-Jones Wants McGann Spin-Off
If it means more Paul McGann/Eighth Doctor, I'm all for it! :D
@Sir James Bond
It's another case of the actor being blamed for the EPISODES being bad
(or in McGann's case, episode). In all honesty Colin Baker's Doctor is
actually quite good, just as good as most of the others, anyway. Or at
least his portrayal was. He was let down by the writing, and some of the
asinine decisions made about his Doctor on his behalf - the most
obvious being the outfit. Baker himself loathed that outfit (of course
he did, he had to wear the bloody thing), but it was forced upon him by
the show runners, and of course HE got the blame for it.
Doctor was also surprisingly dark; his regeneration went "wrong" and he
was left with mildly psychotic tendancies as I remember rightly, which
was something new and interesting.
@Liam Thomas You should check out Peep Show.
10 months, 1 week ago on 10 Misused Actors in Doctor Who
@exiledgooner Yeah, they do it other shows all the time. Stargate regularly recycled some of its actors in minor roles between its 3 shows. I do think it's cool that this time they're actually going to make it part of the story, though.
10 months, 1 week ago on Series 8 Filming: Volcano Day
My money's on fob watch.
10 months, 1 week ago on Capaldi’s Previous Appearances: A Theory
@Whovian Look at the chin.
10 months, 1 week ago on Moffat: Handsome Actors don’t suit the Doctor
An end to the firting. Good. I can't be the only one who's gotten sick of that. It's so cheap and easy as a plot device, and something they never, ever did in the original show. It was nice for a while for something new, but it's ALL they've done since they revived it, I'm glad it's gonna stop.
@The_Eternal_Dalek I agree somewhat - though I do think it might be funny if, since the 50th anniversary only contained Doctors from the revival, that if the 10th anniversary of the revival contained Doctors from the original - that might actually serve to shut up a lot of these idiots!
10 months, 1 week ago on Smith Eager for Another Multi-Doctor Story
More Paul McGann, please! Any excuse to for more Eight.
The half-human thing was put in purely because the studio didn't believe American audiences could relate to a non-human protagonist - which is hilarious, given the show's current popularity over there. Paul McGann himself hated the idea, as did almost everyone involved, but was powerless to do anything about it. I personally love how in the Big Finish audios - which are essentially the Eighth Doctors true "series" - they just completely ignore it! If I remember rightly they even firmly establish through dialogue in an early episode that he is 100% alien.
I actually think they could have easily rectified all this in The Night of the Doctor - when he's trying to convince Cass that he's trustworthy despite being a Timelord, Moffat should have had him shout "I'm half human!" through the door. Then when Cass just stares blankly at him, he should have mumbled to himself "Well, that USED to work...."
Eh? EH? How's THAT for good retconning? Damn, I should be writing for this show...
10 months, 1 week ago on RTD: Fans Can’t Ignore “Half-Human” Doctor