"Dumbed down" Doctor Who

1246

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,126
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Rooks wrote:
    Don't worry, I'll convince you yet. At some point, maybe not today, maybe not tommorrow but soon.. and for the rest of your life you'll be evangelizing the Sly McCoy era.. honest :D
    The late McCoy was amongst the best stories. The early McCoy amongst the worst. There's no unified "McCoy era", IMO.
  • RooksRooks Posts: 9,081
    Forum Member
    Histeria wrote:
    The late McCoy was amongst the best stories. The early McCoy amongst the worst. There's no unified "McCoy era", IMO.

    Aye thats true. Season 24 was a bit on the panto side (and I'll still argue that it bears a striking resembelance to the new series) whilst Season 26 was quite dark. Season 25 was a weird mix of the two :)
  • dodradedodrade Posts: 23,703
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Rooks wrote:
    Who is Keri Russell?

    Keri Russell is an american actress who was the star of a show called Felicity. The bloke who plays the policeman in Heroes was also in it. It was quite popular until Russell cut off her long curly locks. They eventually grew back but the ratings never recovered. Turning the Doctor into a woman would have a similar effect.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,952
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    dervish wrote:
    The key to understanding how 'childish' or 'dumbed down' Dr Who is, is NOT to conside the timeslot.

    Eastenders & Corrie are usually on at about the time Dr Who is on - these soaps are anything but childish featuring VERY mature and adult themes. They get away with it REAGRDLESS of the time broadcasted.

    Just becuase a TV show is on at 7pm doesnt mean it has to be childish like so much of modern Dr Who is. The timing SHOULDNT constrain the writing.

    It is obvious that it is deliberately dumbed down to get even younger viweres (6, 7 , 8 year olds) to watch.
    I don't really understand what you mean by "dumbed down", nor why you are comparing such different programmes. Doctor Who is aimed squarely at a Saturday evening family audience, with a nod to the older fans, and in that respect it hits the target beautifully. Kids love it, and yet there is also enough in it to keep most adults happy. That's why it's consistently the top-rating non-soap programme on British TV (and in the most recent week for which figures are available it out-rated Emmerdale and all but one episode of Eastenders too).
  • dervishdervish Posts: 1,107
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ^ Simple.

    BBC suits have said that they cannot include more adult themed material becuase of the time it is on (think about the stupid decision to postpone DW if the football ran half an hour late!).

    This is nonsesne.

    DR WHO should be a family show but that doesnt mean it should be childish.
    Monarch of the Glen wasnt for kids yet had elements all the family could enjoy and was done with aplomb even though it was on a at a similar at a simlirar time.
  • SystemSystem Posts: 2,096,970
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Dr Who was a great programme for teaching kids to be scared and enjoy it. I was always behind the sofa at home. My sis who was 3 years younger never seemed to be bothered...I am the one with the more rampant imagination though!

    It is ironic that the prgamme now contains less scary stuff(which kids like) and more innuendo and kissy lovey stuff that they defintely think is 'urrrrghh'.
  • RooksRooks Posts: 9,081
    Forum Member
    dervish wrote:
    DR WHO should be a family show but that doesnt mean it should be childish.

    I sort of agree with what you say here. I remember a show called "Press Gang" written, oddly enough, by Steven Moffat. It was firmly aimed at kids but never talked down to them, never patronised the audience and gave it credit for having a bit of common sense. I think the "dumbing down" is not something specific to Doctor Who but to British TV in general. I remember another kids show called "Century Falls", written by a certain RTD. Again it didn't talk down to the audience and didn't treat kids like idiots. It's why I'm so baffled that the man that wrote a quality show like "Century Falls" now writes down to the audience.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 13,767
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Mickey S wrote:
    I don't really understand what you mean by "dumbed down", nor why you are comparing such different programmes. Doctor Who is aimed squarely at a Saturday evening family audience, with a nod to the older fans, and in that respect it hits the target beautifully. Kids love it, and yet there is also enough in it to keep most adults happy. That's why it's consistently the top-rating non-soap programme on British TV (and in the most recent week for which figures are available it out-rated Emmerdale and all but one episode of Eastenders too).

    perhaps they should go the whole hog and rename the series as well.....SpaceEnders or Doctor 'Enders' (ooer a bit of RTD innuendo for you there!) :D
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,952
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    perhaps they should go the whole hog and rename the series as well.....SpaceEnders or Doctor 'Enders' (ooer a bit of RTD innuendo for you there!) :D
    I really don't know why you continue to watch Doctor Who, as you clearly detest everything about it.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,952
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Alfster wrote:
    It is ironic that the prgamme now contains less scary stuff(which kids like) and more innuendo and kissy lovey stuff that they defintely think is 'urrrrghh'.
    Not true. There have been some very scary episodes - my youngest nieces were scared out of their wits (and loved it) by the Shakespeare episode, and the occasional mild innuendo goes right over their head. As for the "kissy lovey stuff" - are we watching the same programme? :confused:
  • RooksRooks Posts: 9,081
    Forum Member
    Mickey S wrote:
    I really don't know why you continue to watch Doctor Who, as you clearly detest everything about it.

    Its not that black and white. It is possible to hate elements of a show without hating the entire show.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 13,767
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Mickey S wrote:
    I really don't know why you continue to watch Doctor Who, as you clearly detest everything about it.

    there you go again Mickey doing what you do best..making assumptions/judgements about someone who a. you don't know b. you don't know how I think/feel and c. such an easy option to throw at someone when their arguement is so weak..tell don't watch.

    you never fail to disappoint. :)
  • Tegan JovankaTegan Jovanka Posts: 1,606
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Mickey S wrote:
    I really don't know why you continue to watch Doctor Who, as you clearly detest everything about it.

    Mickey you are naughty, really, you know thats not true. BG is very vocal in his opinions of bad episodes that's true but remember Girl in the Fireplace. He was raving for weeks about that one. He sounded like .... well you :D
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 13,767
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Mickey you are naughty, really, you know thats not true. BG is very vocal in his opinions of bad episodes that's true but remember Girl in the Fireplace. He was raving for weeks about that one. He sounded like .... well you :D

    I have praised a number of episodes, even ones that I found to be distinctly average. I might find fault with the weak scripts but I will always praise the actors, make up, fx, direction if I believe it merits it. In fact I even said nice things about Gridlock I believe. Thought the scenes between Novice Hame and The Doctor were well scripted!
  • Gutted GirlGutted Girl Posts: 3,285
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Rooks wrote:
    I sort of agree with what you say here. I remember a show called "Press Gang" written, oddly enough, by Steven Moffat. It was firmly aimed at kids but never talked down to them, never patronised the audience and gave it credit for having a bit of common sense. I think the "dumbing down" is not something specific to Doctor Who but to British TV in general. I remember another kids show called "Century Falls", written by a certain RTD. Again it didn't talk down to the audience and didn't treat kids like idiots. It's why I'm so baffled that the man that wrote a quality show like "Century Falls" now writes down to the audience.

    I think that Century Falls might be part of the reason that Doctor Who tends not to go too scary. Though both The Empty Child and The Impossible Planet scared me. Century Falls was never repeated because it was deemed to be too scary. I remember being an adult, rushing to get back from work to see it and being creeped out by it.
  • Red-EyeRed-Eye Posts: 8,509
    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.

    I'm sorry but find this part quite offensive.

    My 6 year old and 11 year old brothers watch and LOVE "New Who" to bits and they are far from dumb.

    In fact, my 6 year old brother some how always manges to recite EVERYTHING from "Doctor Who" even from the old ones :eek: ! And you should see what they're like at maths :eek: :eek: !

    Beleive me the newer generation are alot more smarter than your givng them credit for.

    And besides, why can't people love both Who's :confused: ?

    And even if you don't like "New Who" (fair enough if you don't, not everyone loves the same things) why go as far as to say the new generation are "dumb" just becuase the new ones doesn't fit your standared? Just say why you hate it and don't insult those who love it.

    Hope I've made sense :) !

    BTW if this Post does come across as an arguement than I'm sorry, I didn't mean it :o !
  • RooksRooks Posts: 9,081
    Forum Member
    Red-Eye wrote:
    Beleive me the newer generation are alot more smarter than your givng them credit for.

    And besides, why can't people love both Who's :confused: ?

    You are right, the new generation isn't dumb but the TV execs think they are. Most mainstream shows treat the audience as though they have a 2 minute attention span or lack the intelligence to follow a plot. This can be observed in shows like Doctor Who where subtlety doesn't exist. They feel the need to tell you whats happening at all stages of the show, just in case you've forgotten :rolleyes: It's not just Doctor Who though as a lot of shows seem to suffer from this. Can you imagine a "West Wing" type of show ever being made in the UK? A show that doesn't signpost everything and that credits the audience with a brain? I can't and that's why I watch a lot more US imports than home-grown British shows.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 393
    Forum Member
    As a non-English and someone who has watched the show only as an adult, I have to say that I watched with great pleasure the season with Chris Ecclestone and the first with David Tennant. I quit watching middle of the last season, because I found it ways too lame in parts and hysterical (I mean in the scripts) in others, and as a whole unwatchable. I really like DT, but I'm irritated by the stories. I did watch Torchwood instead and found it, at least, as an innovative approach to adult sci-fi.
    Just as a by-side note: I have watched something like the 90% of all tv sci-fi/horror tv series, with my favourites being Classical Star Trek, Tom Baker's Who (which I watched AFTER seeing CE's Who), Sapphire&Steel, The X Files and now CSI.
  • Tegan JovankaTegan Jovanka Posts: 1,606
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Rooks wrote:
    I sort of agree with what you say here. I remember a show called "Press Gang" written, oddly enough, by Steven Moffat. It was firmly aimed at kids but never talked down to them, never patronised the audience and gave it credit for having a bit of common sense. I think the "dumbing down" is not something specific to Doctor Who but to British TV in general. I remember another kids show called "Century Falls", written by a certain RTD. Again it didn't talk down to the audience and didn't treat kids like idiots. It's why I'm so baffled that the man that wrote a quality show like "Century Falls" now writes down to the audience.


    I have never seen this but will now rent this out. Thanks Rooks
  • jriojrio Posts: 3,135
    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"
    It's shown at 7pm which is when adult programming generally starts. I'm guessing if it's shown then you shouldn't expect a large part of your audience to be under 10. I don't imagine the BBC counts it among it's children's programming. The kids are probably far more repulsed by companions mooning over the Doctor than by any death that occurs.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 9,690
    Forum Member
    dervish wrote:
    The key to understanding how 'childish' or 'dumbed down' Dr Who is, is NOT to conside the timeslot.
    Eastenders & Corrie are usually on at about the time Dr Who is on - these soaps are anything but childish featuring VERY mature and adult themes. They get away with it REAGRDLESS of the time broadcasted.

    Just becuase a TV show is on at 7pm doesnt mean it has to be childish like so much of modern Dr Who is. The timing SHOULDNT constrain the writing.

    It is obvious that it is deliberately dumbed down to get even younger viweres (6, 7 , 8 year olds) to watch.
    The timeslot has nothing to do with it, but the audience demographic that the programme is aimed at does. 100%!
  • Tegan JovankaTegan Jovanka Posts: 1,606
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    DenWatts wrote:
    The timeslot has nothing to do with it, but the audience demographic that the programme is aimed at does. 100%!

    Ther are certain elements they could change without taking away the family wide agenda
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 13,767
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    DenWatts wrote:
    The timeslot has nothing to do with it, but the audience demographic that the programme is aimed at does. 100%!

    do you not think there is a stark change and feel to Who if you compare series one to the last two?
  • Tegan JovankaTegan Jovanka Posts: 1,606
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    do you not think there is a stark change and feel to Who if you compare series one to the last two?

    There is a difference between one and two. It's to early to say with this series but I would say thus far better than 2 not as good as 1, although 2 did give us at least 3 gems.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 13,767
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    There is a difference between one and two. It's to early to say with this series but I would say thus far better than 2 not as good as 1, although 2 did give us at least 3 gems.

    but 3 out of 13....? :(
Sign In or Register to comment.