A fascinating read. Apologies if a re post

2»

Comments

  • Lord SmexyLord Smexy Posts: 2,842
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It's a shame Moffat didn't at least ask him to collaborate on it with him. Especially since it involved RTD's 10th doctor, and with all the problems Moffat was having, it would have probably helped to have someone else in it with him.

    He probably did for all we know, but RTD would have refused. He simply doesn't want to do Doctor Who anymore since leaving, and the only reason we even had any specials for 2009 was as a compromise for the BBC's insistance, because he never intended to do a fifth series.. At most, he wrote for the Eleventh Doctor in the Death of the Doctor storyline for SJA, but I don't think his heart was in it.
  • GDKGDK Posts: 9,467
    Forum Member
    As someone said earlier in this thread, RTD was asked and he declined, saying he'd feel like the ghost at the wedding.

    Apparently doctor blue box's anti SM rhetoric got the better of him, conveniently forgetting what is known.
  • Sam_Gee1Sam_Gee1 Posts: 1,873
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Lord Smexy wrote: »
    Wasn't the 7th Doctor's era already a little contradictory though, with the not-so-subtle hints of the Doctor being the Other?

    Its proof enough that it wasn't his greatest secret, that is the issue for me, not another Doctor. But the fact they went along that line for Hurt.
  • sebbie3000sebbie3000 Posts: 5,188
    Forum Member
    Nozze02 wrote: »
    The fiftieth anniversary year was such a disappointment. Firstly, there was no full series. Surely for the big year, the fans should have been given thirteen episodes for the series at the start of the year.

    Secondly, classic Who was not celebrated as much as it should have been in the main show. Apart from the brilliant An Adventure in Time and Space, the The Five(ish) Doctors Reboot and the Night of the Doctor were not enough for the classic series. Also, Tom Baker's cameo was out of place because non of the other classic doctors had appeared.

    Also, the storyline was not strong enough for the fiftieth and the Zygon storyline was left dangling. The Zygon storyline just stopped and never ended or even got a conclusion to it so we were left wondering what happened and I put that down to Moffat and his writing skills and ability.

    Finally, I thought Moffat's creation of a doctor was not a good idea. He just wanted to put his mark on the show by randomly making up a missing doctor, how ridiculous. If he wanted three doctors and he could not get Eccleston, why not bring McGaan in instead of making up a doctor.

    And randomly turning the Doctor into an alien who regenerates was also silly. So was getting rid of the Timelords in an unseen war to leave the Doctor the sole one wandering around Time and Space...

    Or is it only silly if Moff wants to add something to the mythos of the Doctor and his life?

    As for the Zygon ending - the whole point (and was pretty much the whole point of the Zygon Two-parter) was that it was intentionally left ambiguous. You can't wage a war on one ise or the other if you're unsure who is who.
  • Boz_LowdownlBoz_Lowdownl Posts: 3,232
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    sebbie3000 wrote: »
    And randomly turning the Doctor into an alien who regenerates was also silly. So was getting rid of the Timelords in an unseen war to leave the Doctor the sole one wandering around Time and Space...

    Or is it only silly if Moff wants to add something to the mythos of the Doctor and his life?

    As for the Zygon ending - the whole point (and was pretty much the whole point of the Zygon Two-parter) was that it was intentionally left ambiguous. You can't wage a war on one ise or the other if you're unsure who is who.

    Of course introducing regeneration wasn't silly, it allowed the programme to continue. What a bizarre comment.
  • Sam_Gee1Sam_Gee1 Posts: 1,873
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    sebbie3000 wrote: »
    And randomly turning the Doctor into an alien who regenerates was also silly. So was getting rid of the Timelords in an unseen war to leave the Doctor the sole one wandering around Time and Space...

    Or is it only silly if Moff wants to add something to the mythos of the Doctor and his life?

    As for the Zygon ending - the whole point (and was pretty much the whole point of the Zygon Two-parter) was that it was intentionally left ambiguous. You can't wage a war on one ise or the other if you're unsure who is who.

    Moffat changed the mythos, or simply put his mark on something which had already been done. Not creating something new. That is the issue.

    And the Zygon two parter was literally filler, the story had no substance, there would be something about Zygons maybe every 10 minutes, and the story ended so suddenly. It was filler to what was happening with The Doctor's.
  • MulettMulett Posts: 9,055
    Forum Member
    I don't mind the idea of a 'missing' incarnation.

    I always thought (long before Day of the Doctor) that would have been an interesting twist if the Valeyard had been revealed as a forgotten past incarnation rather than a future one (somewhere between 2 and 3).

    I guess my frustration with the 'War Doctor' is, as others have mentioned, that it feels unnecessary and more about Steven Moffat trying to put his own mark on Doctor Who's history. It feels like it's more about Moffat than the show.

    We now have a missing incarnation (John Hurt), a different explanation for why the Doctor first fled Gallifrey (the hybrid), a new version of events showing why he picked which TARDIS to steal (one of the Claras) and a Doctor who is now at least twice as old as he was when the show started, if not several billion years old (depending on whether or not you pay any attention to Heaven Sent).

    It just feels as though the show's continuity is changed too easily nowadays and I guess that makes great events seem less important.
  • Lord SmexyLord Smexy Posts: 2,842
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I guess it depends on what you see as "putting their own mark" on the show as opposed to just trying to tell a story. It doesn't seem any different to me than Robert Holmes reinventing the Time Lords, RTD writing in the Time War that killed them all off, the Master being created as somebody the Doctor grew up with, etc.
  • Michael_EveMichael_Eve Posts: 14,424
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Lord Smexy wrote: »
    I guess it depends on what you see as "putting their own mark" on the show as opposed to just trying to tell a story. It doesn't seem any different to me than Robert Holmes reinventing the Time Lords, RTD writing in the Time War that killed them all off, the Master being created as somebody the Doctor grew up with, etc.

    And the sound of drums in his/her head. Delgado always seemed too delightfully urbane for that to fit, even though it would explain some of his stupid "Ooh, I haven't thought it through" plans! (love Delgado.) Ainley's incarnation mind......barking. The drums must've been particularly loud circa 'Time-Flight'....
  • sebbie3000sebbie3000 Posts: 5,188
    Forum Member
    Of course introducing regeneration wasn't silly, it allowed the programme to continue. What a bizarre comment.

    Clearly you didn't get my point - the show's creators have been adding their stamp to Doctor Who from the very beginning.

    And clearly, you missed the sarcasm.
  • sebbie3000sebbie3000 Posts: 5,188
    Forum Member
    Sam_Gee1 wrote: »
    Moffat changed the mythos, or simply put his mark on something which had already been done. Not creating something new. That is the issue.

    And the Zygon two parter was literally filler, the story had no substance, there would be something about Zygons maybe every 10 minutes, and the story ended so suddenly. It was filler to what was happening with The Doctor's.

    He literally created a new type of Doctor. Which changed the mythos of the show. Just like others have done before, and those to come will carry on.

    I think you're mixing the Zygon stuff up. The Zygon two-parter I was referring to was in series 9. Not the Zygon story itself in the special - which I agree was very much filler. But in my mind, enjoyable filler.
  • Lord SmexyLord Smexy Posts: 2,842
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    And the sound of drums in his/her head. Delgado always seemed too delightfully urbane for that to fit, even though it would explain some of his stupid "Ooh, I haven't thought it through" plans! (love Delgado.) Ainley's incarnation mind......barking. The drums must've been particularly loud circa 'Time-Flight'....

    I forgot about that one, but true. Just part of writing for a show that's half a century old, I think. Some writers will want to twiggle things here and there. The same happens for characters like Sherlock Holmes, Superman, etc. Doctor Who just has the monumentous task of trying to keep it all in the same continuity.
  • Boz_LowdownlBoz_Lowdownl Posts: 3,232
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    sebbie3000 wrote: »
    Clearly you didn't get my point - the show's creators have been adding their stamp to Doctor Who from the very beginning.

    And clearly, you missed the sarcasm.

    Clearly to both.
  • MulettMulett Posts: 9,055
    Forum Member
    I don't personally feel RTD killing off the Time Lords as part of the 2005 relaunch of the show is the same as Moffat changing the Doctor's personal history since 2010.
  • GDKGDK Posts: 9,467
    Forum Member
    It's really, really simple. If you happen to like the mythos change introduced by showrunner X or showrunner Y, it's OK. If you don't like the change in mythos, then it's not OK.

    For some people of course, it's apparently the other way round.
  • MulettMulett Posts: 9,055
    Forum Member
    I don't think RTD changed the 'mythos' by killing off the Time Lords. He simply created a new situation for the Doctor.

    By comparison, Moffat actively altered the mythos by changing the Doctor Who story at it's source - the reason he left Gallifrey, the reason he chose that TARDIS to steal.

    I do personally think the two are different.
  • Granny McSmithGranny McSmith Posts: 19,622
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Mulett wrote: »
    I don't mind the idea of a 'missing' incarnation.

    I always thought (long before Day of the Doctor) that would have been an interesting twist if the Valeyard had been revealed as a forgotten past incarnation rather than a future one (somewhere between 2 and 3).

    I guess my frustration with the 'War Doctor' is, as others have mentioned, that it feels unnecessary and more about Steven Moffat trying to put his own mark on Doctor Who's history. It feels like it's more about Moffat than the show.

    We now have a missing incarnation (John Hurt), a different explanation for why the Doctor first fled Gallifrey (the hybrid), a new version of events showing why he picked which TARDIS to steal (one of the Claras) and a Doctor who is now at least twice as old as he was when the show started, if not several billion years old (depending on whether or not you pay any attention to Heaven Sent).

    It just feels as though the show's continuity is changed too easily nowadays and I guess that makes great events seem less important.

    I don't pay any attention to any of that. I just pretend none of it ever happened. :)
  • MulettMulett Posts: 9,055
    Forum Member
    And I think, Granny McSmith, that overall it will be forgotten. I don't think they are changes that are going to stick. I hope not anyway.
  • Lord SmexyLord Smexy Posts: 2,842
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Mulett wrote: »
    I don't think RTD changed the 'mythos' by killing off the Time Lords. He simply created a new situation for the Doctor.

    By comparison, Moffat actively altered the mythos by changing the Doctor Who story at it's source - the reason he left Gallifrey, the reason he chose that TARDIS to steal.

    I do personally think the two are different.

    It depends how you see it. Killing off all the Time Lords seems like a much bigger deal to me, as opposed to adding a missing incarnation which hardly affected the overall status quo at all. It was only three regenerations back at the time, too, but it did provide more perspective as to where those incarnations were coming from and why they were who they were.
  • Michael_EveMichael_Eve Posts: 14,424
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Mulett wrote: »
    And I think, Granny McSmith, that overall it will be forgotten. I don't think they are changes that are going to stick. I hope not anyway.

    Well, who knows what Chibbers will come up with, but am sure Moffat will be fine with it after he's moved on, as I suspect RTD was with the whole Time War stuff.

    I know Robert Holmes got a bit of stick from fans regarding his perception of the Timelords and his portrayal of them in The Deadly Assassin which seemed to go against the whole Mythos of the Timelords as depicted in Troughton's swansong.(although he started going from 'God-like awe' as depicted in The War Games to 'pompous arses' as early as 'Terror of the Autons' with that bowler hatted git who appears at the start!)

    Of course it's whatever floats yer boat, but I was personally fine with the events of the 50th. It's cano.....um, the 'C' word, but yeah thing can change in the future. In fairness, Moffat's said that himself.

    I have got a consignment of Memory Worms knocking about though....5000 Grotzits and they're yours. (Plus P & P) ;-)
  • doctor blue boxdoctor blue box Posts: 7,243
    Forum Member
    allen_who wrote: »
    Moffat did ask RTD to collaborate. RTD declined saying he'd feel like a ghost at the wedding..
    Hmm, I didn't know that. Still a shame he felt that way. For all the RTD vs Moffat stuff I feel a colloboration between the two on a story could have been something extra special even to what we got.
    That was very ambiguous and poorly written by RTD. Remember the bloke with all the photos of Eccleston in his shed, thereby implying that he'd been around for some time.
    That doesn't mean it was poorly written. He had about 3 photo's of the 9th doctor in different places, which in the doctors life could have happened in the last 3 days since he regenerated. Even if it had been longer than that, it still takes the doctor some time to get used to his new face. The 12th doctor was remarking about the new face well into series 8 for example.
    Mulett wrote: »
    And I think, Granny McSmith, that overall it will be forgotten. I don't think they are changes that are going to stick. I hope not anyway.
    I agree. For something to feel 'real' it has to be natural, not shoehorned into the backstory for the singular purpose of making one episode or another feel slightly more interesting just at the time. Can't really see the war doctor, or Moffat's supposed new reason for the doctor fleeing gallifrey getting mentioned after he is gone.
Sign In or Register to comment.