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
Nail on head. Agree with absolutwely everytthing in the post.
The dumbing down only appears to have kicked in with this season... perhaps now they are feeling a little more cocky and not putting the same attention to detail into the scripts as before - for the record the first season of New Who beat the socks off majority of the Pertwee/Baker era I remember as a child.
For the record the first season of New Who beat the socks off majority of the Pertwee/Baker era I remember as a child.
Wholeheartedly agree. With a couple of minor exceptions, the rebooted first season was superb. The second, with a couple of exceptions, was pretty duff. I hoped to see an upturn in Season 3, but alas have not. It's a shame, as I really like Tennant as a Doctor, but with a couple of notable exceptions (e.g. GITF) he's had practically no chance to shine.
Frankly, I can't fathom what went so wrong in such a short space of time.
Compare Hartnell's first Dalek story or "Marco Polo" to "The Chase" and it's dumbed down
Compare Troughton's early stories to later ones like "The Krotons" or "he Donminators" and it's dumbed down
Pertwees first very adult themed season to stories in his last season such as "The Monster of Peladon" and it's dumbed down
I could go on and on. I don't think it's so much dumbing down as a case of a series of good tightly written stories in oen series with weaker stories in a latter series.
Plus after a gap of almost 16 years there was plenty of time to come up with new ideas and a fresh approach. That newness has worn off and the writers are possibly finding it hard to come up with good fresh stories
Wholeheartedly agree. With a couple of minor exceptions, the rebooted first season was superb. The second, with a couple of exceptions, was pretty duff. I hoped to see an upturn in Season 3, but alas have not. It's a shame, as I really like Tennant as a Doctor, but with a couple of notable exceptions (e.g. GITF) he's had practically no chance to shine.
Frankly, I can't fathom what went so wrong in such a short space of time.
I like it for what it is - a TV show, with a time machine, villains, heroes, and fun. Just like the old show.
The kids accept today's episodes in exactly the same way. They don't look at the stories from a Production/Critic's point of you which sadly almost everyone is doing here. If The Doctor uses the Sonic Screwdriver 3 times a minute in an episode, kids don't think "Ooohh, bad episode, the writers made him use the sonic too much ", they think "Oooh, he needs that a lot this time! Lucky he has it! ".
If only more people could look at it from the character's point of view, and let the TV Critic sleep for at least 45 measly minutes.
I like it for what it is - a TV show, with a time machine, villains, heroes, and fun. Just like the old show.
The kids accept today's episodes in exactly the same way. They don't look at the stories from a Production/Critic's point of you which sadly almost everyone is doing here. If The Doctor uses the Sonic Screwdriver 3 times a minute in an episode, kids don't think "Ooohh, bad episode, the writers made him use the sonic too much ", they think "Oooh, he needs that a lot this time! Lucky he has it! ".
If only more people could look at it from the character's point of view, and let the TV Critic sleep for at least 45 measly minutes.
have you ever criticised the series yourself Eagle?
I dont know how anyone can say its 'dumbed down'. Surley its the oposite
Well, the first series of 'New Who' took the existing Blueprint and then expanded a lot of 'what if' ideas that explored what would happen if this time travelling alien character was meeting up with travelling companions from our real world and what affect that coming and going would have on their families and friends. This kind of insight and wit appears to be strangely absent so far in this current series.
I don't think the show has been 'dumbed down' (whatever that means) as such, I suspect that people have become too analytical, too expectant and have 'lost' the trick of being entertained.
I can only (obviously) speak from my own experiences but Saturday evening at 6:35, 7:00, 7:40 (whatever time they put it on - I don't even care about that) is THE highlight of the week.
May be it's because I've got a family, I don't know, but it's a time when I can just leave my brain on the coffee table (out of the reach of the dog) and relax.
Yes, there is the occasional episode I don't much care for, but show me a program that has 'perfect' episodes week in/week out.
The kids accept today's episodes in exactly the same way. They don't look at the stories from a Production/Critic's point of you which sadly almost everyone is doing here. If The Doctor uses the Sonic Screwdriver 3 times a minute in an episode, kids don't think "Ooohh, bad episode, the writers made him use the sonic too much ", they think "Oooh, he needs that a lot this time! Lucky he has it! ".
When those kids grow up, do you think they'll appreciate the new series on a different level or just see it as a kids show. I ask because I loved the original show as a child but as an adult I appreciate it on a whole different level. I have blurry memories of watching "City of Death" as a child and I loved it. But I love that story even more now as an adult. That's a true mix of appealing to children and adults alike, you don't need to talk down and patronise kids. If the new series used "City of Death" as it's template then I'd definitely start watching again. (That story is, to me at least, hit every single note that makes perfect Doctor Who. Nothing's come close to that greatness again)
have you ever criticised the series yourself Eagle?
I have, but since the foundation of the series has set dry after say Episode 2, I have adapted to it and don't really fret if there are slight/severe episode faults, so I try to avoid critiscising it just for a comparitively minor niggle that the majority of other people probably wouldn't even notice or care about (e.g the Intelligence Scan, the not-seeing the Doctor down the sewers/ in the base)
When those kids grow up, do you think they'll appreciate the new series on a different level or just see it as a kids show. I ask because I loved the original show as a child but as an adult I appreciate it on a whole different level. I have blurry memories of watching "City of Death" as a child and I loved it. But I love that story even more now as an adult. That's a true mix of appealing to children and adults alike, you don't need to talk down and patronise kids. If the new series used "City of Death" as it's template then I'd definitely start watching again. (That story is, to me at least, hit every single note that makes perfect Doctor Who. Nothing's come close to that greatness again)
When those kids grow up, a lot of them would probably sigh nostalgically in memory of the show (that is if it finishes run withing the next 10 years). They'd think of some of the plot lines and think "Yeah, that was silly" then think of some of the horrors they encountered in the show and think "Yeah, that was creepy!".
I was frightened by The Leisure Hive, mostly by the cliffhanger of Episode 1 where the Doctor's limbs were ripped off. I look back at that story now and think "That was an odd story. But I still love that story for entertaining me and frightening me when I was a kid.
I have, but since the foundation of the series has set dry after say Episode 2, I have adapted to it and don't really fret if there are slight/severe episode faults, so I try to avoid critiscising it just for a comparitively minor niggle that the majority of other people probably wouldn't even notice or care about (e.g the Intelligence Scan, the not-seeing the Doctor down the sewers/ in the base)
wasn't having a go asking that question but I don't think it makes either side of the debate right or wrong..as viewers we all have different needs and expectations so will respond differently to that too. so stuff that might not niggle at you, will someone else and vice versa.
When those kids grow up, a lot of them would probably sigh nostalgically in memory of the show (that is if it finishes run withing the next 10 years). They'd think of some of the plot lines and think "Yeah, that was silly" then think of some of the horrors they encountered in the show and think "Yeah, that was creepy!".
But will those kids, as adults, watch the show on a second level? For example, I recently brought a few DVDs for shows from my childhood, namely Willo The Wisp and Button Moon. Button Moon has only one level and thats purely for young kids and whilst I get all nostalgic over it I couldn't watch the whole series now. But Willo the Wisp does have that second level that allows it to be enjoyed by adults too. Tom Baker's Doctor Who years largely have that quality which allows children to enjoy it but can be equally appreciated by adults. Much of the mid 80s Doctor Who didn't have that and isn't remembered as positively. I enjoyed Doctor Who as a child but became a fan as an adult because I found a new appreciation of the show because it did have layers that were aimed at different ages.
I can see that some of new who could be seen in this light. Girl in the Fireplace could be seen by children and enjoyed because of the clockwork robots but re-enjoyed in 10 years because it's a damn good story too. But does that apply to that many other episodes? I rarely felt the old series was patronising or talking down to the audience yet I do get that feeling with the new series. That's why I'm wondering how todays younger fans will feel about the show when they are older. Will they become fans, like I did, as adults or will they just look on the series as something they enjoyed as kids. I guess ultimately it doesn't matter but it'll be interesting to see how that pans out over the next 10 years.
I haven't seen anything of the old Who before I got hooked on the new one. Since then I've only seen Genesis of the Daleks, which was nice, but is generally regarded as one of the best here. I am sure not everything was on that level. There's a lot of nice episodes in the new Who that can be rewatched again. A rule of thumb - anything by Steven Moffat, he writes his stories as multilayered where anybody can find something there. I think that RTD can write a decent episode, too, but I like relationships which is looked upon by some. I generally dislike episodes that are heavy handed and cliche ridden, like let's say the first Cybermen twoparter. But the appreciation of episodes will differ as we all expect something else. I even liked the unfamous Love and Monsters episode
i think that a lot of people are over analytical and expect too much from doctor who, most of them are members of this forum.
what these people fail to remember is that doctor who in particular is pure escapism it's not meant to be taken seriously it's just for entertainment purposes only.
it is after all a kids show which happens to work on different levels, so that the adults watching with the kids can get something out of it aswell.
doctor who is not a documentry, it's not a soap trying to portray real life, in a nut shell it's about a 900+ year old alien travelling around time and space in a blue box saving the universe! if you want to still pick it apart and find faults then i would suggest getting out more. if you actually watched the show for what it is rather than what YOU want it to be, you might actually enjoy it. what makes me laugh is the people on here who build the show up each week, and how they can't wait to watch it and then when it's on they're busy posting all the way through it, then complain the episode was crap! when in actual fact they couldn't tell you what happened 'cause they weren't watching it.
t.v. programmes are chosen by the viewer i.e. if you want something factual try the discovery channel, so if it's science fiction adventure you want watch bbc 1 13 weeks a year on a saturday evening. the key word there folks is FICTION!
so lets just keep that in mind when discussing doctor who?
I do think a lot of the stories have been dumbed down.
As for Dr Who being pushed towards children, many children believe it or not like a good story. Children books are back in fashion. What about the computer games that many children buy most of them have a story that can be quite mind taxing - LOL I know I have played some of them.
I do believe the stories should be better, children are more clever than what many people realise. I myself was reading War of Worlds between the ages of 7 and 9.
I was deeply disappointed that Helen Raynor twice referred to Dr Who as a kid's show in this week's radio times. Dr Who has always been a FAMILY SHOW yes appealing to and suitable for children but the bedrock of its success is its appeal to all ages.
It was Dr Who's adult fanbase who never gave up on the show and whose perseverance brought the show back from the dead after 16 years, in which time a whole generation grew up which never saw Dr Who.
The ironic thing is despite her attitude Dr Who remains a much more mature show than the supposedly "adult" Torchwood, which with its false and awkward sex and swearing displays all the maturity of a bunch of 13 year old boys sniggering behind a bike shed at a copy of Playboy.
It was Dr Who's adult fanbase who never gave up on the show and whose perseverance brought the show back from the dead after 16 years, in which time a whole generation grew up which never saw Dr Who..
Sorry but that isnt so, it wasnt recomissioned because of it's adult fanbase but because the premise of the show is a great idea and the new direction of the show was thought good enough to make to be a ratings winner.
Sorry but that isnt so, it wasnt recomissioned because of it's adult fanbase but because the premise of the show is a great idea and the new direction of the show was thought good enough to make to be a ratings winner.
Pull the other one. Do you honestly think it would be on today were it not for the huge pre-existing fanbase which kept the flame alive all these years? You sound like a BBC exec trying to justify its 16 year (McGann excepted) absence.
Comments
Nail on head. Agree with absolutwely everytthing in the post.
The dumbing down only appears to have kicked in with this season... perhaps now they are feeling a little more cocky and not putting the same attention to detail into the scripts as before - for the record the first season of New Who beat the socks off majority of the Pertwee/Baker era I remember as a child.
Frankly, I can't fathom what went so wrong in such a short space of time.
Compare Hartnell's first Dalek story or "Marco Polo" to "The Chase" and it's dumbed down
Compare Troughton's early stories to later ones like "The Krotons" or "he Donminators" and it's dumbed down
Pertwees first very adult themed season to stories in his last season such as "The Monster of Peladon" and it's dumbed down
I could go on and on. I don't think it's so much dumbing down as a case of a series of good tightly written stories in oen series with weaker stories in a latter series.
Plus after a gap of almost 16 years there was plenty of time to come up with new ideas and a fresh approach. That newness has worn off and the writers are possibly finding it hard to come up with good fresh stories
did you not like the Tom Baker era?
The kids accept today's episodes in exactly the same way. They don't look at the stories from a Production/Critic's point of you which sadly almost everyone is doing here. If The Doctor uses the Sonic Screwdriver 3 times a minute in an episode, kids don't think "Ooohh, bad episode, the writers made him use the sonic too much ", they think "Oooh, he needs that a lot this time! Lucky he has it! ".
If only more people could look at it from the character's point of view, and let the TV Critic sleep for at least 45 measly minutes.
dumbed up?
Hahaha yeah, anyway it should have been smartened up.
have you ever criticised the series yourself Eagle?
Well, the first series of 'New Who' took the existing Blueprint and then expanded a lot of 'what if' ideas that explored what would happen if this time travelling alien character was meeting up with travelling companions from our real world and what affect that coming and going would have on their families and friends. This kind of insight and wit appears to be strangely absent so far in this current series.
I can only (obviously) speak from my own experiences but Saturday evening at 6:35, 7:00, 7:40 (whatever time they put it on - I don't even care about that) is THE highlight of the week.
May be it's because I've got a family, I don't know, but it's a time when I can just leave my brain on the coffee table (out of the reach of the dog) and relax.
Yes, there is the occasional episode I don't much care for, but show me a program that has 'perfect' episodes week in/week out.
When those kids grow up, do you think they'll appreciate the new series on a different level or just see it as a kids show. I ask because I loved the original show as a child but as an adult I appreciate it on a whole different level. I have blurry memories of watching "City of Death" as a child and I loved it. But I love that story even more now as an adult. That's a true mix of appealing to children and adults alike, you don't need to talk down and patronise kids. If the new series used "City of Death" as it's template then I'd definitely start watching again. (That story is, to me at least, hit every single note that makes perfect Doctor Who. Nothing's come close to that greatness again)
I have, but since the foundation of the series has set dry after say Episode 2, I have adapted to it and don't really fret if there are slight/severe episode faults, so I try to avoid critiscising it just for a comparitively minor niggle that the majority of other people probably wouldn't even notice or care about (e.g the Intelligence Scan, the not-seeing the Doctor down the sewers/ in the base)
When those kids grow up, a lot of them would probably sigh nostalgically in memory of the show (that is if it finishes run withing the next 10 years). They'd think of some of the plot lines and think "Yeah, that was silly" then think of some of the horrors they encountered in the show and think "Yeah, that was creepy!".
I was frightened by The Leisure Hive, mostly by the cliffhanger of Episode 1 where the Doctor's limbs were ripped off. I look back at that story now and think "That was an odd story. But I still love that story for entertaining me and frightening me when I was a kid.
wasn't having a go asking that question but I don't think it makes either side of the debate right or wrong..as viewers we all have different needs and expectations so will respond differently to that too. so stuff that might not niggle at you, will someone else and vice versa.
But will those kids, as adults, watch the show on a second level? For example, I recently brought a few DVDs for shows from my childhood, namely Willo The Wisp and Button Moon. Button Moon has only one level and thats purely for young kids and whilst I get all nostalgic over it I couldn't watch the whole series now. But Willo the Wisp does have that second level that allows it to be enjoyed by adults too. Tom Baker's Doctor Who years largely have that quality which allows children to enjoy it but can be equally appreciated by adults. Much of the mid 80s Doctor Who didn't have that and isn't remembered as positively. I enjoyed Doctor Who as a child but became a fan as an adult because I found a new appreciation of the show because it did have layers that were aimed at different ages.
I can see that some of new who could be seen in this light. Girl in the Fireplace could be seen by children and enjoyed because of the clockwork robots but re-enjoyed in 10 years because it's a damn good story too. But does that apply to that many other episodes? I rarely felt the old series was patronising or talking down to the audience yet I do get that feeling with the new series. That's why I'm wondering how todays younger fans will feel about the show when they are older. Will they become fans, like I did, as adults or will they just look on the series as something they enjoyed as kids. I guess ultimately it doesn't matter but it'll be interesting to see how that pans out over the next 10 years.
what these people fail to remember is that doctor who in particular is pure escapism it's not meant to be taken seriously it's just for entertainment purposes only.
it is after all a kids show which happens to work on different levels, so that the adults watching with the kids can get something out of it aswell.
doctor who is not a documentry, it's not a soap trying to portray real life, in a nut shell it's about a 900+ year old alien travelling around time and space in a blue box saving the universe! if you want to still pick it apart and find faults then i would suggest getting out more. if you actually watched the show for what it is rather than what YOU want it to be, you might actually enjoy it. what makes me laugh is the people on here who build the show up each week, and how they can't wait to watch it and then when it's on they're busy posting all the way through it, then complain the episode was crap! when in actual fact they couldn't tell you what happened 'cause they weren't watching it.
t.v. programmes are chosen by the viewer i.e. if you want something factual try the discovery channel, so if it's science fiction adventure you want watch bbc 1 13 weeks a year on a saturday evening. the key word there folks is FICTION!
so lets just keep that in mind when discussing doctor who?
As for Dr Who being pushed towards children, many children believe it or not like a good story. Children books are back in fashion. What about the computer games that many children buy most of them have a story that can be quite mind taxing - LOL I know I have played some of them.
I do believe the stories should be better, children are more clever than what many people realise. I myself was reading War of Worlds between the ages of 7 and 9.
It was Dr Who's adult fanbase who never gave up on the show and whose perseverance brought the show back from the dead after 16 years, in which time a whole generation grew up which never saw Dr Who.
The ironic thing is despite her attitude Dr Who remains a much more mature show than the supposedly "adult" Torchwood, which with its false and awkward sex and swearing displays all the maturity of a bunch of 13 year old boys sniggering behind a bike shed at a copy of Playboy.
Sorry but that isnt so, it wasnt recomissioned because of it's adult fanbase but because the premise of the show is a great idea and the new direction of the show was thought good enough to make to be a ratings winner.
But I can't work out what in my post made you ask me that?
Pull the other one. Do you honestly think it would be on today were it not for the huge pre-existing fanbase which kept the flame alive all these years? You sound like a BBC exec trying to justify its 16 year (McGann excepted) absence.