Well the problem with that is that the Time Lords are around and if you don't want the idea diluted I suggest your contact Moffat ASAP to stop the Doctor looking for Gallifrey.
Looking for Time Lords is very different from Time Lords actually turning up.
With regards to your final point can be said for anything. I could create a Purple blob doing exactly the same thing as the Weeping Angels and could argue there is no need for the Weeping Angels.
You could drop a purple blob into Blink, or Flesh and Stone and it would have exactly the same effect? I don't think so.
Also the Rani is not the same as the Master or Davros she is considered to be more interested in Science and not dominating life forms or being master of the Universe.
Ostensibly. She wasn't given enough to establish that as anything other than lip service - in every other respect she was just another villain of the week. Davros has a unique relationship with the Daleks, the Master has a unique relationship with the Doctor. The Rani has nothing like this.
So are you suggesting that Moffat has changed the Master's gender - a massive change in the whole fabric of Dr Who, bound to cause controversy, shock, ill-feeling, more ill-feeling directed at the first ill-feelers - just to keep viewers guessing (wrongly) right up to the point of revelation?
If that isn't playing with us, then what is?
Concealing the details of a central mystery, while making it clear there is one, is not playing. Agatha Christie is not 'playing' with her readers simply by not revealing who the murderer is when - gasp - it was the character you didn't suspect all along! If you feel that the reveal is somehow shocking, perhaps it's because you didn't consider the options.
Concealing the details of a central mystery, while making it clear there is one, is not playing.
Concealing the details of a central mystery, while making it clear there is one, by casually yet fundamentally changing one of the lead villains in a manner designed to cause a furore, jolly well is.
Concealing the details of a central mystery, while making it clear there is one, by casually yet fundamentally changing one of the lead villains in a manner designed to cause a furore, jolly well is.
I disagree. Moffat hasn't done anything that breaks with canon (references to the Corsair having been both male and female in The Doctor's Wife) and hasn't used any silly sleight-of-hand trickery to deliberately mislead us. In fact, he's done the opposite. The Missy = Mistress = Master answer has always been hidden in plain sight, but many fans (me included) chose to write off that possibility because it was so obvious.
That's not playing with us - it's just a writer building slowly to a big reveal.
Not many people knew who the Macra were but they got brought back....
Hardly anyone knew what the Macra was - but that's exactly the point. Bringing back a trivial one-off monster is no big deal - it pleases the fans and has no impact on those who aren't aware. Bringing back someone who is constantly talked about in the diehard fan community (but who the average or casual viewer has no investment in at all) is a different kettle of poissons.
Hardly anyone knew what the Macra was - but that's exactly the point. Bringing back a trivial one-off monster is no big deal - it pleases the fans and has no impact on those who aren't aware. Bringing back someone who is constantly talked about in the diehard fan community (but who the average or casual viewer has no investment in at all) is a different kettle of poissons.
I guess so, it would be nice to have a new recurring villain other than the Daleks, the Cybermen and The master being used in rotation though.
Do people not want to see her return because she was a somewhat lackluster villain in Classic Who, or because she is too similar to the Master?
I think if its done in a way that makes her a unique villain or one that people would enjoy seeing pop up every once in a while, it shouldn't matter, should it? Acknowledge her presence in the past and develop her as a fresh character going forward and I don't see the issue in bringing her back.
This time last week I was somewhat eager to see her return but now I think i'd like to see it eventually but there is now no rush with a female Master and it should be done well, like the Masters first re-introduction into 21st Century Doctor Who.
I guess so, it would be nice to have a new recurring villain other than the Daleks, the Cybermen and The master being used in rotation though.
Do people not want to see her return because she was a somewhat lackluster villain in Classic Who, or because she is too similar to the Master?
I think if its done in a way that makes her a unique villain or one that people would enjoy seeing pop up every once in a while, it shouldn't matter, should it? Acknowledge her presence in the past and develop her as a fresh character going forward and I don't see the issue in bringing her back.
This time last week I was somewhat eager to see her return but now I think i'd like to see it eventually but there is now no rush with a female Master and it should be done well, like the Masters first re-introduction into 21st Century Doctor Who.
My personal opinion? There is nothing the Rani can do that could not be easily attributed to the Master, who has a stronger and more direct bond to the Doctor (as childhood friends) and, now that 'Missy' has taken female form, removes the single biggest differentiating characteristic between the two.
Why introduce a new Time Lady when we already have one? New Who has played the 'Last of the Time Lords' angle a lot, so introducing yet another one would dilute it. Plus you then have the whole thing about having to spend time introducing a new big bad to the 95% of viewers who don't know who the Rani is.
I don't know if you watched Heroes, but it's like what happened there where we started out with a few characters with special abilitie, but by the end seemingly everyone was, which kind of defeated the point. Or Syndrome's line in The Incredibles about how he will give everyone the ability to be super, because once everyone is special no-one is.
It's not that I disliked the Rani as a character - I'm utterly indifferent one way or the other - it's just that I find the idea of bringing her back pointless. It might happen one day, but honestly I doubt it.
(BTYW, I'm okay with introducing a new recurring villain - but why not make it a completely new one with no baggage? Moffat managed that successfully enough with the Weeping Angels.)
My personal opinion? There is nothing the Rani can do that could not be easily attributed to the Master, who has a stronger and more direct bond to the Doctor (as childhood friends) and, now that 'Missy' has taken female form, removes the single biggest differentiating characteristic between the two.
Why introduce a new Time Lady when we already have one? New Who has played the 'Last of the Time Lords' angle a lot, so introducing yet another one would dilute it. Plus you then have the whole thing about having to spend time introducing a new big bad to the 95% of viewers who don't know who the Rani is.
I don't know if you watched Heroes, but it's like what happened there where we started out with a few characters with special abilitie, but by the end seemingly everyone was, which kind of defeated the point. Or Syndrome's line in The Incredibles about how he will give everyone the ability to be super, because once everyone is special no-one is.
It's not that I disliked the Rani as a character - I'm utterly indifferent one way or the other - it's just that I find the idea of bringing her back pointless. It might happen one day, but honestly I doubt it.
(BTYW, I'm okay with introducing a new recurring villain - but why not make it a completely new one with no baggage? Moffat managed that successfully enough with the Weeping Angels.)
Although I still think they could differentiate her from the Master if they focused on her immorality and the 'Mad Scientist' aspect of her character instead of Universal Domination, it could make for a different and interesting character in general.
To be fair though, I think I shall have to concede this argument, I like to think I know when I'm beat :')
Moffat's probably already brought her back as Danny Pink, on the basis that he couldn't be bothered to write him a decent back story. Give the Rani a sex change, and that'll do instead.
Although I still think they could differentiate her from the Master if they focused on her immorality and the 'Mad Scientist' aspect of her character instead of Universal Domination, it could make for a different and interesting character in general.
To be fair though, I think I shall have to concede this argument, I like to think I know when I'm beat :')
I don't think it's a case of 'winning' an argument - it's just that I have a particular opinion on it that I'm always happy to argue the toss about ... :-)
My personal opinion? There is nothing the Rani can do that could not be easily attributed to the Master, who has a stronger and more direct bond to the Doctor (as childhood friends) and, now that 'Missy' has taken female form, removes the single biggest differentiating characteristic between the two.
See I think now we have a female 'Master' we can now get away from the focus of the Rani as 'female villain' and concentrate more on how the other (more interesting) key differentiating aspect of the Rani, which from a conceptual point of view has potential that was never really realised in her stories.
You've in fact gone some way in explaining that key difference. The interesting aspect about the Rani was she was conceived as this amoral, apolitical creature lacking in any empathy, only really focused on her drive for scientific discovery and advancement. This is something that couldn't be be attributed to the Master at all. As you mention the Master is a more emotional creature with a strong bond to the Doctor. The point of the Doctor/Master relationship is that they are both these great minds driven by opposing emotions, the Doctor for the most part driven by the positive and the Master by the negative emotions. The Master possesses the empathy to know how to hurt the Doctor and his/her actions are driven by that.
The Rani however if delivered properly is the sort of middle women. A Timelord with the great minds of the Doctor and Master but totally devoid of the emotions that drive them. I think this can provide great scope for stories that explore scientific themes and themes of ends justifying the means. It also creates a villain who isn't a villain so to speak, if you know what I mean. Someone who in some instances can be the destroyer of worlds but at other times the saviour.
I always thought they kind of missed a trick not bringing back the Rani when Gallifrey was officially dead. Especially in the era of Who that focuses on the relationships. It could have been interesting to see a story where the the Doctor finds someone from his race but who just doesn't care and incapable of sharing the grief. That there is this unique relationship where the Doctor feels a bond with the Rani but the Rani feels nothing in return.
I always kind of imagined the Rani as being someone who would have zero interest in the Time War and was just carrying on in her on weird little corner of the universe and when someone said 'btw your race is dead' she shrugged and said 'pass me that test tube would you dear'.
Comments
Concealing the details of a central mystery, while making it clear there is one, is not playing. Agatha Christie is not 'playing' with her readers simply by not revealing who the murderer is when - gasp - it was the character you didn't suspect all along! If you feel that the reveal is somehow shocking, perhaps it's because you didn't consider the options.
Concealing the details of a central mystery, while making it clear there is one, by casually yet fundamentally changing one of the lead villains in a manner designed to cause a furore, jolly well is.
That's not playing with us - it's just a writer building slowly to a big reveal.
... although they did seem to be a pale imitation of the originals. I haven't seen the Macra Terror so i wouldn't know for sure.
I guess so, it would be nice to have a new recurring villain other than the Daleks, the Cybermen and The master being used in rotation though.
Do people not want to see her return because she was a somewhat lackluster villain in Classic Who, or because she is too similar to the Master?
I think if its done in a way that makes her a unique villain or one that people would enjoy seeing pop up every once in a while, it shouldn't matter, should it? Acknowledge her presence in the past and develop her as a fresh character going forward and I don't see the issue in bringing her back.
This time last week I was somewhat eager to see her return but now I think i'd like to see it eventually but there is now no rush with a female Master and it should be done well, like the Masters first re-introduction into 21st Century Doctor Who.
Why introduce a new Time Lady when we already have one? New Who has played the 'Last of the Time Lords' angle a lot, so introducing yet another one would dilute it. Plus you then have the whole thing about having to spend time introducing a new big bad to the 95% of viewers who don't know who the Rani is.
I don't know if you watched Heroes, but it's like what happened there where we started out with a few characters with special abilitie, but by the end seemingly everyone was, which kind of defeated the point. Or Syndrome's line in The Incredibles about how he will give everyone the ability to be super, because once everyone is special no-one is.
It's not that I disliked the Rani as a character - I'm utterly indifferent one way or the other - it's just that I find the idea of bringing her back pointless. It might happen one day, but honestly I doubt it.
(BTYW, I'm okay with introducing a new recurring villain - but why not make it a completely new one with no baggage? Moffat managed that successfully enough with the Weeping Angels.)
Although I still think they could differentiate her from the Master if they focused on her immorality and the 'Mad Scientist' aspect of her character instead of Universal Domination, it could make for a different and interesting character in general.
To be fair though, I think I shall have to concede this argument, I like to think I know when I'm beat :')
You've in fact gone some way in explaining that key difference. The interesting aspect about the Rani was she was conceived as this amoral, apolitical creature lacking in any empathy, only really focused on her drive for scientific discovery and advancement. This is something that couldn't be be attributed to the Master at all. As you mention the Master is a more emotional creature with a strong bond to the Doctor. The point of the Doctor/Master relationship is that they are both these great minds driven by opposing emotions, the Doctor for the most part driven by the positive and the Master by the negative emotions. The Master possesses the empathy to know how to hurt the Doctor and his/her actions are driven by that.
The Rani however if delivered properly is the sort of middle women. A Timelord with the great minds of the Doctor and Master but totally devoid of the emotions that drive them. I think this can provide great scope for stories that explore scientific themes and themes of ends justifying the means. It also creates a villain who isn't a villain so to speak, if you know what I mean. Someone who in some instances can be the destroyer of worlds but at other times the saviour.
I always thought they kind of missed a trick not bringing back the Rani when Gallifrey was officially dead. Especially in the era of Who that focuses on the relationships. It could have been interesting to see a story where the the Doctor finds someone from his race but who just doesn't care and incapable of sharing the grief. That there is this unique relationship where the Doctor feels a bond with the Rani but the Rani feels nothing in return.
I always kind of imagined the Rani as being someone who would have zero interest in the Time War and was just carrying on in her on weird little corner of the universe and when someone said 'btw your race is dead' she shrugged and said 'pass me that test tube would you dear'.