To further my pondering... Will Moffat be remembered as the Tony Blair of Doctor Who, in the sense that he was swept into the job with an almost universal love and praise, and the highest of (unreasonable) expectations by fevered fans, only for it all to somehow unravel as the years went on, and ultimately become hated, not least by his formerly most vehement supporters as a criminal who ought to answer for his crimes (moon egg dragons, fireproof forests, new paradigm Daleks, empty rhetoric, etc)?
They never forgave K9 for going into attack mode in 1996.
Longleat was also notable for its 2003 attempt to assemble "every Dalek ever", setting a record that would eventually be surpassed, albeit rhetorically, by Steven Moffat in 2012.
I did go to the exhibition at Madame Tussauds in London in 1980/81. I remember that was very exciting.
Remember it well, and still have the theme tune on 7" to prove it.
And as I already mentioned, Madame Tussauds moved from Baker Street when running costs became too high relative to its turnover. Rather than closing down, like BHS.
I still think making it a part of Radio 2's Live in Hyde Park would be a good option in principle, though I have no idea what the cost to the BBC would be or whether it would be a good environment for merchandise sales.
It's a shame the exhibition is closing. I do think that DW isn't as popular as it was. I don't know if that is Moffat's fault or not. Everything that is massively popular, as Who was, will suffer a downturn as people get tired of it.
Oh, and all the squabbling children - remember that the 'perfect' Hinchcliffe era was detested by fandom at the time! ;-)
Another point for the squabbling children - I was a fan in the late '80s and I remember when a producer really ruined Who. The whole idea that Moffat, no matter what his problems, has 'ruined' Who is on a rolling-on-the-floor-hooting level of side-splitting hilarity.
It's a shame the exhibition is closing. I do think that DW isn't as popular as it was. I don't know if that is Moffat's fault or not. Everything that is massively popular, as Who was, will suffer a downturn as people get tired of it.
Oh, and all the squabbling children - remember that the 'perfect' Hinchcliffe era was detested by fandom at the time! ;-)
Another point for the squabbling children - I was a fan in the late '80s and I remember when a producer really ruined Who. The whole idea that Moffat, no matter what his problems, has 'ruined' Who is on a rolling-on-the-floor-hooting level of side-splitting hilarity.
:D:D:D:D:D:D
Hilarious! Funniest thing I've read in ages!
Or maybe you're right.....
Genesis of the Daleks not a patch on Victory of the Daleks
Why waste time watching Terror of the Zygons when there's The Zygon Invasion / Inversion
What were they thinking of with Robots of Death, Robots of Sherwood showed them how it should be done.
Pyramids of Mars? Pah! Kill the Moon with all the excitement of the moon being a giant egg.
Genesis of the Daleks not a patch on Victory of the Daleks
Why waste time watching Terror of the Zygons when there's The Zygon Invasion / Inversion
What were they thinking of with Robots of Death, Robots of Sherwood showed them how it should be done.
Pyramids of Mars? Pah! Kill the Moon with all the excitement of the moon being a giant egg.
Thanks for the laugh!
My friend, unfortunately this comment comes across as obnoxious rather than funny.
Actually I think Moffat has got a fairly decent record at Christmas. A Christmas Carol is, for me, one of the best, if not the best episode he has written, and I found the last two (Last Christmas and The Husbands or River Song) both hugely enjoyable with good rewatch potential (especially since the latter actually gave the fitting prophesied ending to river's story that was always needed to make it feel complete).
I Don't rate Time of the Doctor quite so highly as those 3, but it's good enough that i've watched it a few times and would be happy to watch it again in future. Not to mention it has the obvious advent of being a regeneration episode.
The only one's I have no particular interest in are the doctor, the widow, and the wardrobe and the snowmen. the first because it is just terrible, and the snowmen because it just feels average with nothing particularly special about it.
So yeah, for me, 4 out of 6 is pretty good going.
P.s Your making a jokey jibe at an aspect of Moffats work and I'm defending it. What is going on with this thread?? :D
Actually I think Moffat has got a fairly decent record at Christmas. A Christmas Carol is, for me, one of the best, if not the best episode he has written, and I found the last two (Last Christmas and The Husbands or River Song) both hugely enjoyable with good rewatch potential (especially since the latter actually gave the fitting prophesied ending to river's story that was always needed to make it feel complete).
I Don't rate Time of the Doctor quite so highly as those 3, but it's good enough that i've watched it a few times and would be happy to watch it again in future. Not to mention it has the obvious advent of being a regeneration episode.
The only one's I have no particular interest in are the doctor, the widow, and the wardrobe and the snowmen. the first because it is just terrible, and the snowmen because it just feels average with nothing particularly special about it.
So yeah, for me, 4 out of 6 is pretty good going.
P.s Your making a jokey jibe at an aspect of Moffats work and I'm defending it. What is going on with this thread?? :D
I'm confused. Should I be calling you a Moffat acolyte?
But yeah, I agree with The Christmas Carol being a good one. I often find myself rewatching that one come December, as opposed to most Christmas specials I don't usually rewatch.
But yeah, I agree with The Christmas Carol being a good one. I often find myself rewatching that one come December, as opposed to most Christmas specials I don't usually rewatch.
I genuinely think that A Christmas Carol may be my favourite Moffat episode since he's been showrunner. I thing the stretch of episodes from Vincent and the Doctor to Day of the Moon may be the strongest consecutive run of episodes from his era - granted I don't much care for the Series 6 two-parter in there but it looked cinematically stunning, and it had a high level of ambition at the time. I think this is where Matt Smith's Doctor was truly 'found', but ahead of how much of a caricature of himself he became later on due to more sloppy writing. A Christmas Carol is in the middle of all of that. It's self-contained, it's a great take on the Christmas Carol story whilst also being superbly original, it's wonderfully paced, it's totally daft in places but in a way fitting for Doctor Who, and I think it also managed to feel like it had a lot of heart whilst Series 5 had felt quite cold prior to it. For me it's the go-to Christmas special of Doctor Who.
I don't believe there's a connection between the current political climate and loss of popularity, though it's an interesting correlation.
..
It's not interesting at all imo (as a politics grad, a viewer of Who since Tom, and an interested follower of this forum). It's a complete coincidence that the slight loss of popularity (and imo quality) preceeded the recent electoral surprises, unless you're suggesting that, conversely, a declining Doctor Who influenced those results?!!
It's not interesting at all imo (as a politics grad, a viewer of Who since Tom, and an interested follower of this forum). It's a complete coincidence that the slight loss of popularity (and imo quality) preceeded the recent electoral surprises, unless you're suggesting that, conversely, a declining Doctor Who influenced those results?!!
M
Blimey what are some of you on about
I did say correlation rather than causal. And I suggested nothing of the sort. Straw man?
It's interesting for the following reason.
There is the popular notion that successful TV and film entertainment tends to reflect, in part, the society and culture it exists in. E.g in the 50s movies tended to reflect the paranoia and fear of loss of identity due to the fear of the Soviets (Invasion of the Bodysnatchers) and in the 60s Star Trek reflected the more positive view of the future and developing technologies.
But to be fair you could probably assemble a moderate case for almost anything by cherry picking the movies and TV series that fit the proposition.
Agree with your comments on size of the decline though. Some prefer to exaggerate.
There is the popular notion that successful TV and film entertainment tends to reflect, in part, the society and culture it exists in. E.g in the 50s movies tended to reflect the paranoia and fear of loss of identity due to the fear of the Soviets (Invasion of the Bodysnatchers) and in the 60s Star Trek reflected the more positive view of the future and developing technologies.
I think you can make similar (admittedly generalised) interpretations about the here and now as well. In the present day there is a trend towards superhero films because we all feel we need saving - whereas a decade ago there was a surge in disaster movies that seemed to pre-empt the chaos that was ahead. There is a tendency to deliver sequels and reboots because people turn to reliable brands from a time when things seemed easier - capitalising on a thirst for nostalgia. There is success in the cinematic universe because people enjoy continuity and routine.
Whilst I don't want to give credit to the ridiculous and bitter derailment of this thread, I do find these ideas about media reflection to be interesting. Doctor Who could arguably be doing the same - Series 9 was a rather nostalgic series, the next Christmas special features a superhero, whilst the last featured a robot that was likened to a character seen in a recent superhero movie (namely Baymax in Big Hero 6). It also has Class, which was promoted as being 'part of the Doctor Who universe'.
What a great exhibition and when they have included the TARDIS set tour it is a must see.
Ive been there twice, and on both occasions was able to get the TARDIS set tour tickets.
My immediate thought was... 'another casualty of the general waning interest in Dr Who'? Im sure its just a coincidence as Cardiff Council want the land back.
Has attendance gone down lately? Is the exhibition not as popular as it once was?
The set tour is amazing - but without the Dr Who Experience next door - I guess that it then? No more TARDIS tours again?
I only take issue with your use of "massive and rapid collapse" as it's an exaggeration.
I don't think so. The last of the BBC3 repeats were axed mid-season and the ratings for them posted here were appalling. Years ago, there were multiple repeats, at least one of which got over a million viewers per week. Even the Friday night repeat got hundreds of thousands.
And as for politics and Doctor Who, here's Moffat putting words into the Doctor's mouth about Trump:
The Doctor is entirely opposed to Donald Trump as President, because he believes in intelligence and kindness. And Donald Trump appears to stand opposed to both those impulses. So although the Doctor normally takes no part in politics, he is disgusted and turbulent with rage that someone who is a reality television star would contemplate executive power. Executive power is always repellent to the Doctor - unless it's his, of course, but he's funny that way. But he almost has not words to express how fully contemptuous he is of Donald Trump. Having seen a parallel universe in which Donald Trump actually won the election, he knows that certain doom results. He is extremely concerned that we do not find ourselves in that parallel universe.
So much for BBC impartiality. And with a show-runner like that, yes, there is a correlation between the output of the show and the political mood of the time.
I don't think so. The last of the BBC3 repeats were axed mid-season and the ratings for them posted here were appalling. Years ago, there were multiple repeats, at least one of which got over a million viewers per week. Even the Friday night repeat got hundreds of thousands.
And as for politics and Doctor Who, here's Moffat putting words into the Doctor's mouth about Trump:
So much for BBC impartiality. And with a show-runner like that, yes, there is a correlation between the output of the show and the political mood of the time.
Cherry picking. Again.
I'm sure SM would put nothing so overt into a DW story. Most drama, if it has a PoV to put forward at all, and especially SF, uses allegory to make its point. There's a world of difference between what's said in answering an interview question and what he'd actually put into a story.
There's also a world of difference between news coverage and drama. BBC drama isn't expected to be unbiased. I think there was a bias against Trump in most coverage, including the BBC's, stemming from his own extreme, divisive rhetoric.
I'm sure SM would put nothing so overt into a DW story. Most drama, if it has a PoV to put forward at all, and especially SF, uses allegory to make its point. There's a world of difference between what's said in answering an interview question and what he'd actually put into a story.
There's also a world of difference between news coverage and drama. BBC drama isn't expected to be unbiased. I think there was a bias against Trump in most coverage, including the BBC's, stemming from his own extreme, divisive rhetoric.
I've lost count as to how many celebrities have spoken out against Trump. To be fair, he's a controversial figure even by the admission of his own supporters, so it's hardly unexpected.
I've lost count as to how many celebrities have spoken out against Trump. To be fair, he's a controversial figure even by the admission of his own supporters, so it's hardly unexpected.
Exactly. My point was about Isambard attempting to use SM's negative comments on Trump, hardly unusual, as a yet another stick to beat SM with. I guess that's hardly unusual either.
Comments
Yes.
The show's latest hiatus.
I think I made a good point, and reasonably presented my observations as correlations rather than statements of fact.
It's just a shame the usual suspects have to get so emotional and snide about what those with differing opinions share on an Internet forum.
They never forgave K9 for going into attack mode in 1996.
Longleat was also notable for its 2003 attempt to assemble "every Dalek ever", setting a record that would eventually be surpassed, albeit rhetorically, by Steven Moffat in 2012.
But I did go to the exhibition at Madame Tussauds in London in 1980/81. I remember that was very exciting.
Remember it well, and still have the theme tune on 7" to prove it.
And as I already mentioned, Madame Tussauds moved from Baker Street when running costs became too high relative to its turnover. Rather than closing down, like BHS.
I still think making it a part of Radio 2's Live in Hyde Park would be a good option in principle, though I have no idea what the cost to the BBC would be or whether it would be a good environment for merchandise sales.
Oh, and all the squabbling children - remember that the 'perfect' Hinchcliffe era was detested by fandom at the time! ;-)
Another point for the squabbling children - I was a fan in the late '80s and I remember when a producer really ruined Who. The whole idea that Moffat, no matter what his problems, has 'ruined' Who is on a rolling-on-the-floor-hooting level of side-splitting hilarity.
Hilarious! Funniest thing I've read in ages!
Or maybe you're right.....
Genesis of the Daleks not a patch on Victory of the Daleks
Why waste time watching Terror of the Zygons when there's The Zygon Invasion / Inversion
What were they thinking of with Robots of Death, Robots of Sherwood showed them how it should be done.
Pyramids of Mars? Pah! Kill the Moon with all the excitement of the moon being a giant egg.
Thanks for the laugh!
My friend, unfortunately this comment comes across as obnoxious rather than funny.
I Don't rate Time of the Doctor quite so highly as those 3, but it's good enough that i've watched it a few times and would be happy to watch it again in future. Not to mention it has the obvious advent of being a regeneration episode.
The only one's I have no particular interest in are the doctor, the widow, and the wardrobe and the snowmen. the first because it is just terrible, and the snowmen because it just feels average with nothing particularly special about it.
So yeah, for me, 4 out of 6 is pretty good going.
P.s Your making a jokey jibe at an aspect of Moffats work and I'm defending it. What is going on with this thread??
Poignant rather than funny, I'd have said.
I'm confused. Should I be calling you a Moffat acolyte?
But yeah, I agree with The Christmas Carol being a good one. I often find myself rewatching that one come December, as opposed to most Christmas specials I don't usually rewatch.
I genuinely think that A Christmas Carol may be my favourite Moffat episode since he's been showrunner. I thing the stretch of episodes from Vincent and the Doctor to Day of the Moon may be the strongest consecutive run of episodes from his era - granted I don't much care for the Series 6 two-parter in there but it looked cinematically stunning, and it had a high level of ambition at the time. I think this is where Matt Smith's Doctor was truly 'found', but ahead of how much of a caricature of himself he became later on due to more sloppy writing. A Christmas Carol is in the middle of all of that. It's self-contained, it's a great take on the Christmas Carol story whilst also being superbly original, it's wonderfully paced, it's totally daft in places but in a way fitting for Doctor Who, and I think it also managed to feel like it had a lot of heart whilst Series 5 had felt quite cold prior to it. For me it's the go-to Christmas special of Doctor Who.
It's not interesting at all imo (as a politics grad, a viewer of Who since Tom, and an interested follower of this forum). It's a complete coincidence that the slight loss of popularity (and imo quality) preceeded the recent electoral surprises, unless you're suggesting that, conversely, a declining Doctor Who influenced those results?!!
Blimey what are some of you on about
I did say correlation rather than causal. And I suggested nothing of the sort. Straw man?
It's interesting for the following reason.
There is the popular notion that successful TV and film entertainment tends to reflect, in part, the society and culture it exists in. E.g in the 50s movies tended to reflect the paranoia and fear of loss of identity due to the fear of the Soviets (Invasion of the Bodysnatchers) and in the 60s Star Trek reflected the more positive view of the future and developing technologies.
But to be fair you could probably assemble a moderate case for almost anything by cherry picking the movies and TV series that fit the proposition.
Agree with your comments on size of the decline though. Some prefer to exaggerate.
I think you can make similar (admittedly generalised) interpretations about the here and now as well. In the present day there is a trend towards superhero films because we all feel we need saving - whereas a decade ago there was a surge in disaster movies that seemed to pre-empt the chaos that was ahead. There is a tendency to deliver sequels and reboots because people turn to reliable brands from a time when things seemed easier - capitalising on a thirst for nostalgia. There is success in the cinematic universe because people enjoy continuity and routine.
Whilst I don't want to give credit to the ridiculous and bitter derailment of this thread, I do find these ideas about media reflection to be interesting. Doctor Who could arguably be doing the same - Series 9 was a rather nostalgic series, the next Christmas special features a superhero, whilst the last featured a robot that was likened to a character seen in a recent superhero movie (namely Baymax in Big Hero 6). It also has Class, which was promoted as being 'part of the Doctor Who universe'.
Not at all obnoxious in the context of the post I was replying to. You need to read the thread as a whole not just selected posts.
I get the context, I just think you're being rather too sarcastic.
Sad news
I don't think so. The last of the BBC3 repeats were axed mid-season and the ratings for them posted here were appalling. Years ago, there were multiple repeats, at least one of which got over a million viewers per week. Even the Friday night repeat got hundreds of thousands.
And as for politics and Doctor Who, here's Moffat putting words into the Doctor's mouth about Trump:
https://www.reddit.com/r/gallifrey/comments/4zik7k/production_notes_steven_moffat_qa_for_doctor_who/
So much for BBC impartiality. And with a show-runner like that, yes, there is a correlation between the output of the show and the political mood of the time.
Cherry picking. Again.
I'm sure SM would put nothing so overt into a DW story. Most drama, if it has a PoV to put forward at all, and especially SF, uses allegory to make its point. There's a world of difference between what's said in answering an interview question and what he'd actually put into a story.
There's also a world of difference between news coverage and drama. BBC drama isn't expected to be unbiased. I think there was a bias against Trump in most coverage, including the BBC's, stemming from his own extreme, divisive rhetoric.
I've lost count as to how many celebrities have spoken out against Trump. To be fair, he's a controversial figure even by the admission of his own supporters, so it's hardly unexpected.
Exactly. My point was about Isambard attempting to use SM's negative comments on Trump, hardly unusual, as a yet another stick to beat SM with. I guess that's hardly unusual either.