..but I'd say Series 6 was the most adult of all the series .....hence why there were lots of people moaning it was too complex and too scary...
...sadly I think they went the other way in season 7 to appease those complainers but got a whole new set of complaints because of it.
I'd say 7a was more childish than 7b to be honest (although I've not seen one episode since Matt Smith arrived that's as childish as some of the episodes that RTD made).
RTD, for the most part wrote Doctor Who so that everyone could enjoy it. Moffat on the other hand, only seems to write what he thinks is enjoyable. That's the difference.
From the episodes he has wrote, from when he took over, I can count the number of episodes that for me had the wow factor, on one hand.
Nothing against Matt Smith, as he only does what he is told to and apart from that, I think he makes an excellent Doctor. But I do think that if RTD were still in control, or better yet, Gatiss then Doctor Who would be back being enjoyed by everyone, be they young, old, fans or casual viewers.
Yes I know people can quote me viewing figures that state, just as many people are watching it now, but I just don't believe it. For the simple reason is, Doctor Who is not the 'must see' programme it once was.
Too many people I know personally, will watch if it's on, but are not bothered either way. Whereas when the story's appealed to a wider audience, most if not all of those same said people would purposely stay in to watch.
Three things:
Firstly, Moffat does not write every episode. I wish people would stop making out that he does. He's written 3 so far this series: Asylum of the Daleks which was very well received, The Angels Take Manhattan which was also very well received (and one of the best Who episodes ever IMO) and The Bells of Saint John which was fairly well received.
Secondly, the writing for everyone thing is total bollocks considering everyone likes something different so writing something which everyone will enjoy is pretty much impossible. Whether you liked an episode or whether it had "the wow factor" (whatever the hell that is) is entirely subjective. Therefore, the argument that less people are excited for Doctor Who nowadays is completely groundless. A sample consisting of the people you know is not a reliable source. Most of the people I know still like the programme and the nearly all the ones who don't stopped watching for the reason that they don't find Matt Smith attractive. This is just my personal experience. I don't claim that it is the norm.
Thirdly, you must be the only person I have ever seen who would like to see Mark Gatiss as showrunner! :eek:
I must admit I still find it difficult to see the gravitas in the TARDIS towing the earth back to its' place, if anything was ever done solely for kids, surely that was?
Why is it, when someone states Doctor Who is getting too childish. You always get that ^^ in response.
It's a tired come back that has been said countless times, and it doesn't hold any more truth now, than it did the first time it was said. RTD, for the most part wrote Doctor Who so that everyone could enjoy it. Moffat on the other hand, only seems to write what he thinks is enjoyable. That's the difference.
From the episodes he has wrote, from when he took over, I can count the number of episodes that for me had the wow factor, on one hand.
Nothing against Matt Smith, as he only does what he is told to and apart from that, I think he makes an excellent Doctor. But I do think that if RTD were still in control, or better yet, Gatiss then Doctor Who would be back being enjoyed by everyone, be they young, old, fans or casual viewers.
Yes I know people can quote me viewing figures that state, just as many people are watching it now, but I just don't believe it. For the simple reason is, Doctor Who is not the 'must see' programme it once was.
Too many people I know personally, will watch if it's on, but are not bothered either way. Whereas when the story's appealed to a wider audience, most if not all of those same said people would purposely stay in to watch.
I agree - call me thick, but I didn't enjoy the Amy Pond story Arc and gave up on it by the end of the series.
I thought I'd give it another go this year, but having watched half the Christmas one and lost interest and the first one of this series, I've decided to give it a rest for now and cancelled the recording schedule. I just find it more frustrating than entertaining these days.
I have found series 7b of Who to be very childish. The episodes are like something you would see on CBBC.
I wish they would be more grown up like they were from series 1/5.
Doctor Who is for kids of all ages. It always has been. Therefore your assertion is pointless.
Harry Saltzman and Cubby Broccoli, first producers of the James Bond movies, always said the films were "sadism for the family". That's why they've remained successful for 50 years because it's a winning formula. That's exactly what Doctor Who should be and is.
God forbid the show should become "grown up" or "significant". Where's the fun in that?
I can't see any factual basis for the assertion, whether it be presented as fact or opinion.
Doctor Who has always had dark moments, silly moments, and moments that children wouldn't necessarily think about but that will resonate with adults. That's the whole reason that it has such broad appeal.
On the whole, I might guess that recent series are more likely to mix them up, whereas in my head the earlier episodes are more likely to clearly delineate them, but that might be nonsense.
Just think if we'd had the internet in the 1970's during the shift from Pertwee to T Baker, if people complain about what they perceive as a significant change in the show between RTD and Moffat what would they have thought then.
I have found series 7b of Who to be very childish. The episodes are like something you would see on CBBC.
I wish they would be more grown up like they were from series 1/5.
Possibly becauses it's a children's programme that can also be enjoyed by adults?
Just think if we'd had the internet in the 1970's during the shift from Pertwee to T Baker, if people complain about what they perceive as a significant change in the show between RTD and Moffat what would they have thought then.
At the time I would have been complaining like Hell online! Pertwee was MY Doctor and I initially hated Tom Baker when he took over. He was an imposter. An interloper! The Pretender! Of course, as I've grown older, I've come to appreciate Tom Baker a lot more - although I only like his first three series, to be honest, before the self-indulgence took over. And I've never indulged in the fan-w*nkery over the Fourth Doctor.
I have found series 7b of Who to be very childish. The episodes are like something you would see on CBBC.
I wish they would be more grown up like they were from series 1/5.
..but I'd say Series 6 was the most adult of all the series .....hence why there were lots of people moaning it was too complex and too scary...
...sadly I think they went the other way in season 7 to appease those complainers but got a whole new set of complaints because of it.
I'd say 7a was more childish than 7b to be honest (although I've not seen one episode since Matt Smith arrived that's as childish as some of the episodes that RTD made).
I'd say that although the early series weren't always childish, they had many moments where they did go far too CBBC. Not all the time as there was also intelligent drama as well.
I think that the Moffat era has struck a better balance in tone and feel, pace too I'd say.
People also tend to forget even CBBC shows are of a very good quality and have engaging drama shows like Sparticle Mystery, Young Dracula, Sarah Jane Adventures, and Wizards vs Aliens, so saying it's CBBC quality isnt even a put-down.
The funny thing about this argument is that a show not being childish dosen't mean it'll be better.
Torchwood often dealt with more mature subject, but with exception of Children of Earth, it was always hit and miss for me. Either an episode was good, or it wasn't.
The Sarah Jane Adventures on the other hand was better on the whole, despite the younger target audeince. I enjoyed every episode, and even at its weakest, I thought it was better than most of Torchwood.
It has nothing to do with being childish or mature, it's about writing a good story. This is something that Doctor Who has done rather well with for the most part.
The funny thing about this argument is that a show not being childish dosen't mean it'll be better.
Torchwood often dealt with more mature subject, but with exception of Children of Earth, it was always hit and miss for me. Either an episode was good, or it wasn't.
The Sarah Jane Adventures on the other hand was better on the whole, despite the younger target audeince. I enjoyed every episode, and even at its weakest, I thought it was better than most of Torchwood.
It has nothing to do with being childish or mature, it's about writing a good story. This is something that Doctor Who has done rather well with for the most part.
When I first heard about Torchwood I thought great, they're going to deal with some of the concepts of science fiction raised in Doctor Who in a more mature way but that didn't really happen for me until Children of Earth. The first series in particular just seemed to involve people bonking and swearing a lot. Not quite what I was hoping for...
When people find themselves drifting away from a TV series they formally liked there is a desire to figure out why.
But it's often really difficult to work out why.
I mean, I used to like The Simpsons; but the episodes made in the last 7 years I think are terrible. I might throw something out there as to why I don't like the show any more... but will my reason make any sense?
All I can say with absolute certainty is that I don't like The Simpsons any more. No one can tell me I'm wrong because it's a matter of personal taste.
I don't see any childishness in this season of Dr Who, but I'm not very keen on it.
When I first heard about Torchwood I thought great, they're going to deal with some of the concepts of science fiction raised in Doctor Who in a more mature way but that didn't really happen for me until Children of Earth. The first series in particular just seemed to involve people bonking and swearing a lot. Not quite what I was hoping for...
Exactly what I thought...apart from not agreeing with you on Children of Earth...a stretched out story that was STILL resolved in a few minutes at the end. I did say before it started that resolution should be at least 30minutes of the final show with an obvious plan from the characters but it just turned out to be a quick in the moment resolve that disappointed after such a build up.
The Sarah Jane Adventures on the other hand was better on the whole, despite the younger target audeince. I enjoyed every episode, and even at its weakest, I thought it was better than most of Torchwood.
It has nothing to do with being childish or mature, it's about writing a good story. This is something that Doctor Who has done rather well with for the most part.
The Sarah Jane Adventures were everything Dr Who used to be when I was a kid...I enjoyed them more than the RTD Dr Who which is strange as SJA was created by RTD and he did a great job.
They still feel more Dr than any of the new ones. I think due to them being short multi-episode stories. Not overly CGI heavy or run aroundy with some slower bits in them...because of the smaller budget the stories had to be stronger.
This is something JM Straczynski said years ago: US TV sci-fi could get away with thinner story lines because they could 'hide behind' lots of SFX, UK based sci-fi (esp. BBC) had to rely more on story due to the smaller budgets and hence more basic SFX...now Dr Who (and most TV) has access to a lot of CGI then the stories suffer sometimes.
Cold War and Hide were very SFX light and were claustophobic and worked superbly well.
I will probably get eaten alive here for quoting Moffat, but: 'Although it is watched by far more adults than children, there's something fundamental in its DNA that makes it a children's programme and it makes children of everyone who watches it. If you're still a grown up by the end of that opening music, you've not been paying attention.'
Doctor Who is for kids of all ages. It always has been. Therefore your assertion is pointless.
Harry Saltzman and Cubby Broccoli, first producers of the James Bond movies, always said the films were "sadism for the family". That's why they've remained successful for 50 years because it's a winning formula. That's exactly what Doctor Who should be and is.
God forbid the show should become "grown up" or "significant". Where's the fun in that?
If Doctor Who is for children, then why does Moffat keep making incredibly complex storylines that kids will never figure out?
Don't underestimate children: some figured out River was Melody before the reveal in A Good Man Goes To War. Jon Pertwee was my first Doctor and it was as much a reveal to me as to Amy and Rory.
Comments
..but I'd say Series 6 was the most adult of all the series .....hence why there were lots of people moaning it was too complex and too scary...
...sadly I think they went the other way in season 7 to appease those complainers but got a whole new set of complaints because of it.
I'd say 7a was more childish than 7b to be honest (although I've not seen one episode since Matt Smith arrived that's as childish as some of the episodes that RTD made).
Three things:
Firstly, Moffat does not write every episode. I wish people would stop making out that he does. He's written 3 so far this series: Asylum of the Daleks which was very well received, The Angels Take Manhattan which was also very well received (and one of the best Who episodes ever IMO) and The Bells of Saint John which was fairly well received.
Secondly, the writing for everyone thing is total bollocks considering everyone likes something different so writing something which everyone will enjoy is pretty much impossible. Whether you liked an episode or whether it had "the wow factor" (whatever the hell that is) is entirely subjective. Therefore, the argument that less people are excited for Doctor Who nowadays is completely groundless. A sample consisting of the people you know is not a reliable source. Most of the people I know still like the programme and the nearly all the ones who don't stopped watching for the reason that they don't find Matt Smith attractive. This is just my personal experience. I don't claim that it is the norm.
Thirdly, you must be the only person I have ever seen who would like to see Mark Gatiss as showrunner! :eek:
I agree - call me thick, but I didn't enjoy the Amy Pond story Arc and gave up on it by the end of the series.
I thought I'd give it another go this year, but having watched half the Christmas one and lost interest and the first one of this series, I've decided to give it a rest for now and cancelled the recording schedule. I just find it more frustrating than entertaining these days.
Doctor Who is for kids of all ages. It always has been. Therefore your assertion is pointless.
Harry Saltzman and Cubby Broccoli, first producers of the James Bond movies, always said the films were "sadism for the family". That's why they've remained successful for 50 years because it's a winning formula. That's exactly what Doctor Who should be and is.
God forbid the show should become "grown up" or "significant". Where's the fun in that?
Doctor Who has always had dark moments, silly moments, and moments that children wouldn't necessarily think about but that will resonate with adults. That's the whole reason that it has such broad appeal.
On the whole, I might guess that recent series are more likely to mix them up, whereas in my head the earlier episodes are more likely to clearly delineate them, but that might be nonsense.
Possibly becauses it's a children's programme that can also be enjoyed by adults?
At the time I would have been complaining like Hell online! Pertwee was MY Doctor and I initially hated Tom Baker when he took over. He was an imposter. An interloper! The Pretender! Of course, as I've grown older, I've come to appreciate Tom Baker a lot more - although I only like his first three series, to be honest, before the self-indulgence took over. And I've never indulged in the fan-w*nkery over the Fourth Doctor.
Series 1?
Are you sure?
I'd say that although the early series weren't always childish, they had many moments where they did go far too CBBC. Not all the time as there was also intelligent drama as well.
I think that the Moffat era has struck a better balance in tone and feel, pace too I'd say.
Torchwood often dealt with more mature subject, but with exception of Children of Earth, it was always hit and miss for me. Either an episode was good, or it wasn't.
The Sarah Jane Adventures on the other hand was better on the whole, despite the younger target audeince. I enjoyed every episode, and even at its weakest, I thought it was better than most of Torchwood.
It has nothing to do with being childish or mature, it's about writing a good story. This is something that Doctor Who has done rather well with for the most part.
When I first heard about Torchwood I thought great, they're going to deal with some of the concepts of science fiction raised in Doctor Who in a more mature way but that didn't really happen for me until Children of Earth. The first series in particular just seemed to involve people bonking and swearing a lot. Not quite what I was hoping for...
But it's often really difficult to work out why.
I mean, I used to like The Simpsons; but the episodes made in the last 7 years I think are terrible. I might throw something out there as to why I don't like the show any more... but will my reason make any sense?
All I can say with absolute certainty is that I don't like The Simpsons any more. No one can tell me I'm wrong because it's a matter of personal taste.
I don't see any childishness in this season of Dr Who, but I'm not very keen on it.
Exactly what I thought...apart from not agreeing with you on Children of Earth...a stretched out story that was STILL resolved in a few minutes at the end. I did say before it started that resolution should be at least 30minutes of the final show with an obvious plan from the characters but it just turned out to be a quick in the moment resolve that disappointed after such a build up.
The Sarah Jane Adventures were everything Dr Who used to be when I was a kid...I enjoyed them more than the RTD Dr Who which is strange as SJA was created by RTD and he did a great job.
They still feel more Dr than any of the new ones. I think due to them being short multi-episode stories. Not overly CGI heavy or run aroundy with some slower bits in them...because of the smaller budget the stories had to be stronger.
This is something JM Straczynski said years ago: US TV sci-fi could get away with thinner story lines because they could 'hide behind' lots of SFX, UK based sci-fi (esp. BBC) had to rely more on story due to the smaller budgets and hence more basic SFX...now Dr Who (and most TV) has access to a lot of CGI then the stories suffer sometimes.
Cold War and Hide were very SFX light and were claustophobic and worked superbly well.
If Doctor Who is for children, then why does Moffat keep making incredibly complex storylines that kids will never figure out?
People could see that coming from space.