"Dumbed down" Doctor Who

[Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 752
Forum Member
✭✭
I've read several threads on this forum from Whovians who feel the revival of Doctor Who has been dumbed down or lost the spirit of the original series.

My thoughts are this:

Doctor Who is a family show with emphasis on the kids, always has been, always will be.

You are watching the new series as adults who were fans of the original series when you were kids (whichever Doctor you had). You remember these fondly and when you rewatch them you love them as you did. But you have to see the new series as aimed at today's youth - and they've done well, very well. Today's children are hooked on Doctor Who, they play Doctor Who games in the playground and talk about it with their friends, like we did when we were kids.

Kids of today haven't had continuous Doctor Who since they were small, there was a gap of 20 years between McCoy and Eccleston (with only an American tv film between), they have to reintroduce elements like the Cybermen and the Daleks in a way that isn't too confusing to new viewers and have storylines that are relevant to today's youth.

All I'm trying to say is, when you think that the writing's poor or they've made a change you don't like, try looking at the episode from a young fan's point-of-view, and maybe, just maybe, you'll see where they're coming from...

thoughts?
«13456

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 6
    Forum Member
    I agree fully with you here - as i have stated in a number of other posts my four year old has re-introduced me to Dr Who.

    He loves it and i suspect he always will. Which of course means Dr Who will live on in this new generations hearts and even if the series goes the way of the past ones it may well re-emerge in twenty more years as strong and memorable as ever.

    With the Kids in mind any idea when the Sarah Jane Smith Adventures are due to start??
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 752
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sarah_Jane_Adventures#Series

    Apparently production will start (or has started) this month with a look to broadcast in the autumn.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 6
    Forum Member
    Thanks for that xx
  • Biffo the BearBiffo the Bear Posts: 25,859
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The difference is that with the 'old' Doctor Who, the scripts were written in that lovely way that adults and kids could take different things out of it. Not many shows manage to successfully do this, but it used to generally succeed.

    With the 'new' Doctor Who, there's still the clear 'kiddish' content, but it is not tempered by anything which would appeal to adults on an engaging level.

    Perhaps it's the difference between what used to be considered 'niche' programming compared to the generalised style that we have now. One for all and all for one as opposed to one for few. There could also be the generational difference. In the 80s kids were a lot smarter, and things prepared for them had to have a little more depth. Kids now are just dumb and so probably wouldn't understand half the concepts that were presented to us at a similar age.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,193
    Forum Member
    With the 'new' Doctor Who, there's still the clear 'kiddish' content, but it is not tempered by anything which would appeal to adults on an engaging level.
    There is - but it's more like panto lines
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 273
    Forum Member
    Science Fiction / Fantasy / Comic book culture is mainstream now and probably the main bread winner for film studios (franchises, merchandising and video games). It has affected what a 'mainstream audience' expects and this is what studio execs expect.

    We need more small, darker and intimate Sci Fi that isn't dominated by what software packages are available. In the good old days, technology was created to be filmed in front of the camera and composited now every design solution is CGI.

    Having said that, Doctor Who has consistently delivered on the dramatic front and has a lot of moral issues (post Iraq war, 9-11, etc) which has been brilliant to watch. I hated what they did with the Cybermen, but the drama was there and the kids love it.

    Star wars is dumbed down. Even with Tom Stoppard brushing up Revenge Of The Sith - it was still inconsequential and stale. The emotional core of the RTD series will make them watchable (or at least interesting) in the years to come whilst the effects will be dated.
  • CAMERA OBSCURACAMERA OBSCURA Posts: 8,002
    Forum Member
    Biffo The Bear The difference is that with the 'old' Doctor Who, the scripts were written in that lovely way that adults and kids could take different things out of it. Not many shows manage to successfully do this, but it used to generally succeed.

    The older Dr Who for the most were not 'lovely' scripts but down right atrocious at times, the worst of new who comes nowhere near to the worst of the old.

    Biffo The Bear With the 'new' Doctor Who, there's still the clear 'kiddish' content, but it is not tempered by anything which would appeal to adults on an engaging level.

    Are the 6-8 million that watch it every week only 'dumb children'? many many adults watch and enjoy the show, so where is your evidence that it is not tempered by anything which would appeal to adults on an engaging level.



    For the original poster, the answer you are looking for is down to three words, ADULT sci-fi fans. It's as simple as that. We dont have that stereotypical image of ourselves for nothing you know. :D
  • CAMERA OBSCURACAMERA OBSCURA Posts: 8,002
    Forum Member
    Me. the answer you are looking for is down to three words, ADULT sci-fi fans


    Opps, bit of a 'Spanish Inquisition' moment there, make that FOUR words..Adult sci-fi fans, or is it three :confused::)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 13,767
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The older Dr Who for the most were not 'lovely' scripts but down right atrocious at times, the worst of new who comes nowhere near to the worst of the old.



    Are the 6-8 million that watch it every week only 'dumb children'? many many adults watch and enjoy the show, so where is your evidence that it is not tempered by anything which would appeal to adults on an engaging level.



    For the original poster, the answer you are looking for is down to three words, ADULT sci-fi fans. It's as simple as that. We dont have that stereotypical image of ourselves for nothing you know. :D

    I refer my learned friend to the evidence presented in Love & Monsters. shocking! :D
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,126
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I was introduced (properly) to the old series by my girlfriend. I was around 30. The writing did indeed seem much more sophisticated and less childish than the current stuff. However, she may well have been selective with which stories show showed me/has on VHS.

    However, I think it's not something directly attributed to Dr Who - as "family entertainment" does indeed seem more childish these days. Just compare the old Star Wars movies from the 70-s/80s and the prequels - which rely on cartoonish creatures and slapstick jokes. I'm not sure if the audience is just less sophisticated now, or if producers and writers have a tendency to underestimate a family audience compared to past years.
  • IvanIVIvanIV Posts: 30,302
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    We moved on since then, not necessarily forward. The CGI was very primitive back then so the writers relied more on the story and imagination of the viewer. Now it's often all in your face and in extreme cases CGI is the hero of the film and actors are just jumping up and down in front of the green screen :rolleyes:
  • CAMERA OBSCURACAMERA OBSCURA Posts: 8,002
    Forum Member
    I refer my learned friend to the evidence presented in Love & Monsters. shocking! :D

    :D

    But nowhere near as bad as 'the Happiness Patrol' or 'Paradise Towers' two Mcoy episodes by chance. Im sure there are many many others
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 13,767
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    :D

    But nowhere near as bad as 'the Happiness Patrol' or 'Paradise Towers' two Mcoy episodes by chance. Im sure there are many many others

    I would say they are on a par with each other. imo.
  • SystemSystem Posts: 2,096,970
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    IvanIV wrote:
    We moved on since then, not necessarily forward. The CGI was very primitive back then so the writers relied more on the story and imagination of the viewer. Now it's often all in your face and in extreme cases CGI is the hero of the film and actors are just jumping up and down in front of the green screen :rolleyes:

    This is exactly what JMS said: that British Sci-fi had less money for effects than US Sci-fi and therefore went for the character development and plot. JMS cites Blakes 7 as a huge influence over the way he wrote Babylon 5 with the character interactions and developments.

    The 'new' Dr Who relies heavily on CGI and far less on character development and strong story lines. Both Buffy and Babylon 5 knocks it into a cocked hat on both those counts, which, personally, is why I am a liitle disappointed with Dr Who. It has the potential to be as strong as the latter two series but just is not getting there.
  • claire2281claire2281 Posts: 17,283
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Alfster wrote:
    The 'new' Dr Who relies heavily on CGI and far less on character development and strong story lines. Both Buffy and Babylon 5 knocks it into a cocked hat on both those counts...

    Unfair comparison really as neither of those shows is directed at such a young audience. Buffy was essentially a teen show. Babylon 5 was certainly aimed more at the adults. But is there another sci-fi show out there aimed at the same group DW, namely around 6 upwards?

    And to be fair DW does cover a number of issues considering that a fair chunk of its audience is pre-teen - just look at the stuff it was doing on The Great Depression this week.

    If you consider that Shrek is considered almost the perfect family film then DW compares quite favourably in quality and content. Shrek isn't overly complicated but it has certain depths and manages to appeal to the widest age range possible. DW does the same.
  • IvanIVIvanIV Posts: 30,302
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Alfster wrote:
    The 'new' Dr Who relies heavily on CGI and far less on character development and strong story lines. Both Buffy and Babylon 5 knocks it into a cocked hat on both those counts, which, personally, is why I am a liitle disappointed with Dr Who. It has the potential to be as strong as the latter two series but just is not getting there.
    But if you have it less than perfect, you get people crying that CGI was dodgy and enough with a character development already. And that's often coming from people who grew up on the old DW. It's hard to please people now, we are unshockable, we saw everything. But I'm really enjoying 3rd series of DW. OK Daleks in Manhattan is a bit of let down for me, but the other 3 episodes were very strong IMO.
  • plateletplatelet Posts: 26,363
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It's an interesting supposition and probably held up by the general level of contempt that has been leveled at Torchwood's "adult" offering.

    However, compare say Genesis of the Daleks against Daleks in Manhattan, and I think there's a world of difference in the levels of detail being put in the programme. DW did used to appeal to a broad spectrum of viewers, now (as has been previously said) I think the older audience is being short changed. Be fair, they are familiar enough with the Daleks now, to not need it explaining to them again.

    I've also sat with half a dozen 6-8 year olds moaning about how cheated they felt by the cop out "death" of Rose, they may not have understood the word patronised, but they knew they were being.

    I felt a large part of series one was excellent, series two was reasonable, and series three has just failed to deliver (with the exception of Freema)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 13,767
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I quote Helen Raynor from next weeks RT....

    "We do have to be careful what we show-Doctor Who is a children's series"
  • RooksRooks Posts: 9,081
    Forum Member
    :D

    But nowhere near as bad as 'the Happiness Patrol' or 'Paradise Towers' two Mcoy episodes by chance. Im sure there are many many others

    Hmm.. compared to the likes of "Fear Her" those two stories are practically masterpieces ;) Remember the resources available to the new Who team are significantly greater than afforded to the old Who team, especially in the late 80s. Back in 1989 the team really had to stay on Earth due to budget issues, rather than the fear that off-world stories would scare the audience away.

    Timelash or "Time and the Rani" are indefensable though, so I won't even try.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,126
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I quote Helen Raynor from next weeks RT....

    "We do have to be careful what we show-Doctor Who is a children's series"
    Anybody know what the audience demographic actually is?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 13,767
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Rooks wrote:
    Hmm.. compared to the likes of "Fear Her" those two stories are practically masterpieces ;)

    lovely Rooks! got to see you back! :)

    each have their own faults but it seems the old series is fair game whereas the new series is off limits. ;)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 13,767
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Histeria wrote:
    Anybody know what the audience demographic actually is?

    I just wish they would make up their minds who the show is aimed at. first it is a family show, then a children's series but with adult references.

    hm..........
  • ShrikeShrike Posts: 16,593
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I dont think you're being fair there, platelet.
    Genesis of the Daleks is one of the best who stories from the 1st 25 years - there were many Dalek stories from back then that were much weaker (any that had Davros 'revived' yet again for example)
    Also Dr Who never had the zietgeist amonst adults that it has now - Chris Moyles or Jonathon Ross can quote 'are you my mummy' or 'Delete, Delete' safe in the knowledge their listeners will connect with them in a way that wouldnt have happened back in the 'good old days'.
  • RooksRooks Posts: 9,081
    Forum Member
    Shrike wrote:
    Also Dr Who never had the zietgeist amonst adults that it has now - Chris Moyles or Jonathon Ross can quote 'are you my mummy' or 'Delete, Delete' safe in the knowledge their listeners will connect with them in a way that wouldnt have happened back in the 'good old days'.

    I can identify catchphrases such as "Am I bovvered?" from Catherine Tate or "I'm a layddee" from Little Britain yet I never watch either show. Say the word "Exterminate" at any point from 1963 until the early 90s and most people would identify with it. Show an adult a picture of a Dalek and they'll probably recognise it, show that same adult a picture of "Lady Cassandra" and the recognisation will be much less likely to exist ditto if you showed an image of a Sontaran. Certain images, catchphrases permiate through popular culture regardless of the show and it's popularity. In 1977 a typical adult would know what the Tardis was and what a Dalek looked like. In 2007 the same is true. It bears no reflection on the state of either new or old who. They are just memorable images and phrases that the media pick up on.
  • plateletplatelet Posts: 26,363
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Shrike wrote:
    I dont think you're being fair there, platelet.
    Genesis of the Daleks is one of the best who stories from the 1st 25 years - there were many Dalek stories from back then that were much weaker (any that had Davros 'revived' yet again for example)
    ...

    Yeah, I'll agree that Genesis was a stand out, but what I'm saying is that it should be a benchmark that they still aspire to, and D.i.M. was just dumb.

    I'm not after shakespeare, I just want a bit of depth to the stories. It seems like it's painting by numbers with season 3.

    For the record:
    I thought most of season 1 was excellent
    in season 2 I loved Tooth & Claw and The Girl in the Fireplace, and thought the majority of the rest were passable.

    I also don't see why it should be dumbed down just for Chris Moyles :D
Sign In or Register to comment.