This is complete rubbish. As reviewed by "You have been watching" on Channel 4 tonight as "The Magic Roundabout with some dark tones". RTD isn't capable of thought-provoking writing, he's only capable of seeing how many gay scenes he can fit in, ones that won't upset kids too much when they ask Mummy why "the hero" of the show is snogging another bloke.
You can be pretty sure the lad in the Sarah Jane Chronicles will get a boyfriend sometime soon thanks to Russell. Oh and isn't that shown on CBebbies...more the stable for his content.
Case, rested.
This pantomine isn't fit to lick the boots of BSG.
TBH I thought the fact that he has some gay scenes to be the only redeeming factor of RTD's writing, haven't really watched much Torchwood other that the CoE so don't really know if it is overdone in the series.
In regards to Dr Who, which I've watched far more extensively, I always find my self sighing at the opening credits when I find RTD has written the episode, he relies far too much on borrowing iconic imagery and ideas from other S-fi, which he then proceeds to butcher with amateur dramatics. He seems to have his little pet plot devices which ends up in far too many of his stories, such as over use of repetition, running scenes and shouting to try and ramp up the tension. The difference in quality between Moffat episodes like Blink and RTD badly written marathons like the 3 part finale with the Master is staggering imo.
Sadly the BBC also has awful film direction when it comes to s-fi and their pulp shows, they have uninspired wide shots of scenes where everything takes place as if we were watching a stage, which is fine in a theater but lack luster on TV. It all just whiffs a little too much of your local towns dramatic society putting on a showing.
I wasn't a huge fan of BSG but I have to agree that any comparisons should end after discussing what RTD pilfered from the show.
TBH I thought the fact that he has some gay scenes to be the only redeeming factor of RTD's writing, haven't really watched much Torchwood other that the CoE so don't really know if it is overdone in the series.
In regards to Dr Who, which I've watched far more extensively, I always find my self sighing at the opening credits when I find RTD has written the episode, he relies far too much on borrowing iconic imagery and ideas from other S-fi, which he then proceeds to butcher with amateur dramatics. He seems to have his little pet plot devices which ends up in far too many of his stories, such as over use of repetition, running scenes and shouting to try and ramp up the tension. The difference in quality between Moffat episodes like Blink and RTD badly written marathons like the 3 part finale with the Master is staggering imo.
Sadly the BBC also has awful film direction when it comes to s-fi and their pulp shows, they have uninspired wide shots of scenes where everything takes place as if we were watching a stage, which is fine in a theater but lack luster on TV. It all just whiffs a little too much of your local towns dramatic society putting on a showing.
I wasn't a huge fan of BSG but I have to agree that any comparisons should end after discussing what RTD pilfered from the show.
For goodness sake, if people are going to criticise RTD, why can't they pick on things that they then easily seem to ignore of other witters....IE....the so called Perfect Moffat!!!!
Because his scripts are never borrowed from other Sci-fi shows...no they are original as originality gets!!!! I can't remember the name of the book, but someone on DS, once pointed out about a book that was very similar to what the Angel were like in Blink.....if I find that thread I will definitely point it out....And the last library two parter was not only a mish mash of all his own previous work, but had elements of things like the TIme Traveller's wife....
In all Moff's scripts you have use of repitition...or have you forgotten "Are you my Mummy"..."She is compatible" "Don't Blink" and the worst of the lot "hey who turned out the lights" oh and "Donna Noble has been Saved"....or does that just pass over your head as you don't see the name RTD at the beginning????
All of Moff's stories have the Doctor or someone shouting and everyone runs at least once....more so in the library two parter!!! In fact in this very story the way the Vashta Nerada were defeated as such was because the Doctor told them to go away!!!!:rolleyes:
And the same go fro those who criticise RTD for all the romantic tosh, and gay cr*p....when Moff has had two women in four stories swoon over the Doctor, with heavy suggestions of kinky stuff going on....and has had Capt Jack slap another soldiers bum, and openly suggest that the Master is gay in Time Crash...oh funny enough which also has a repeat of the so called Timey Wimey plot......
All in all if you don't like what RTD has written fair enough....but if you want to compare him with another writer to prove how rubbish he is, please don't point out the very things that the other so called perfect writer has also a record for doing!
Well said Crazzy....Moffat loves to reuse his previous work 'everybody lives' being an example (Doctor Dances and Forest of the Dead).
But nobody complains about that do they?
I'd suggest (as someone who much prefers Moffat's writing style to Davis's) it's simply because Moffat's writing and tone are better (sorry for using such a vague term - I'm sure it can be put down to just personal taste), and so people are more forgiving of such things.
Maybe not.
Any suggestions (if it's not a thread hijack to pull it this direction)?
I'd suggest (as someone who much prefers Moffat's writing style to Davis's) it's simply because Moffat's writing and tone are better (sorry for using such a vague term - I'm sure it can be put down to just personal taste), and so people are more forgiving of such things.
Maybe not.
Any suggestions (if it's not a thread hijack to pull it this direction)?
For me that seems to suggest that...."oh Moffat has done that again, oh well never mind, I forgive him because at least I liked that or that" or in other words....it's not by RTD....
Because if you look at the poster to whom I replied to, started off by saying that they sigh the moment they see the name RTD. That suggest's that they already expecting RTD to have some running, shouting, plot devices he has used before and so on.....so basically, instead of sitting down and just watching, then deciding if it worked for them or not, they already have the checklist out.....while they do sit back and just watch the moffat ones...even though I have found Moff's repeating patterns less subtle compared to RTD, and I don't have a checklist out.....the Everybody' lives!" is a great example of that.....I don't need a checklist to know that it has been used before.....
Like I said, if you prefer Moffat style over RTD, fair enough, and they are different, for example, Moff's stories tend to be a puzzle type mystery, with childhood nightmare monsters, with answers being given at the end, while RTD tends to write stories that have so many different layers to them, from a nice play on fandon, to an outright romp, to a thriller like Midnight, ....it's the whole one person is allowed to make those mistakes while another isn't is what annoys me....
For goodness sake, if people are going to criticise RTD, why can't they pick on things that they then easily seem to ignore of other witters....IE....the so called Perfect Moffat!!!!
Because his scripts are never borrowed from other Sci-fi shows...no they are original as originality gets!!!! I can't remember the name of the book, but someone on DS, once pointed out about a book that was very similar to what the Angel were like in Blink.....if I find that thread I will definitely point it out....And the last library two parter was not only a mish mash of all his own previous work, but had elements of things like the TIme Traveller's wife....
In all Moff's scripts you have use of repitition...or have you forgotten "Are you my Mummy"..."She is compatible" "Don't Blink" and the worst of the lot "hey who turned out the lights" oh and "Donna Noble has been Saved"....or does that just pass over your head as you don't see the name RTD at the beginning????
All of Moff's stories have the Doctor or someone shouting and everyone runs at least once....more so in the library two parter!!! In fact in this very story the way the Vashta Nerada were defeated as such was because the Doctor told them to go away!!!!:rolleyes:
And the same go fro those who criticise RTD for all the romantic tosh, and gay cr*p....when Moff has had two women in four stories swoon over the Doctor, with heavy suggestions of kinky stuff going on....and has had Capt Jack slap another soldiers bum, and openly suggest that the Master is gay in Time Crash...oh funny enough which also has a repeat of the so called Timey Wimey plot......
All in all if you don't like what RTD has written fair enough....but if you want to compare him with another writer to prove how rubbish he is, please don't point out the very things that the other so called perfect writer has also a record for doing!
You'll notice I said over use of repetition, CoE was a good example, he consitently cuts from scene to scene of children in different locations saying the same thing. You only have to do it once to establish the fact they are controlling all the children and then each subsequent time the aliens take control of the children you only need one scene and the viewer will assume that all the children are doing the same. Anything more just becomes a poor attempt at creating tension.
Yes yes originality is a somewhat spurious concept as no one can be exempt from influnence of others work, the point is to take inspiration and use the idea in a new and different way, RTD on the other hand just transplants then ham fistedly tries to dress a story around it.
I've no issue with the relationships in the shows, in fact I find his interpersonal characterisation his most compelling writing and think maybe he should go back to writing stuff like 'Queer as folk' as he is quite good at modern drama, at the same time I still think he is awful at s-fi.
Also I never said Moffat was some kind of writing god his stories are just more compelling.
, instead of sitting down and just watching, then deciding if it worked for them or not, they already have the checklist out.
To come up with a checklist, I've had to sit down and watch a lot and after a couple of series come to the conclusion it doesn't work for me most of the time.
I knew you'd word it much better than I could. But yeah what Crazzy said.
I watch an episode for what it is, I try not to see who its written by-which is easier said than done, I've loved some of moffats stuff (series 1) I've not been so keen on some of his stuff (series 3-sorry) and the same goes for RTD, but thats personal taste.
while RTD tends to write stories that have so many different layers to them, from a nice play on fandon, to an outright romp, to a thriller like Midnight, ....it's the whole one person is allowed to make those mistakes while another isn't is what annoys me....
Well I think that as RTD is the main writer/creative force, he probably had the freedom to do that. I would certainly hope that Moffat does different stories and in different styles. From the 'action/adventure/scary' stuff to more lighthearted stuff etc.
I think that Moffats stories have been fairly different. Lets not forget it was him which introduced Captain Jack after all.
You'll notice I said over use of repetition, CoE was a good example, he consitently cuts from scene to scene of children in different locations saying the same thing. You only have to do it once to establish the fact they are controlling all the children and then each subsequent time the aliens take control of the children you only need one scene and the viewer will assume that all the children are doing the same. Anything more just becomes a poor attempt at creating tension.
Yes yes originality is a somewhat spurious concept as no one can be exempt from influnence of others work, the point is to take inspiration and use the idea in a new and different way, RTD on the other hand just transplants then ham fistedly tries to dress a story around it.
I've no issue with the relationships in the shows, in fact I find his interpersonal characterisation his most compelling writing and think maybe he should go back to writing stuff like 'Queer as folk' as he is quite good at modern drama, at the same time I still think he is awful at s-fi.
Also I never said Moffat was some kind of writing god his stories are just more compelling.
To come up with a checklist, I've had to sit down and watch a lot and after a couple of series come to the conclusion it doesn't work for me most of the time.
Um, I did, hence why I pointed out all four stories that Moffat has done, and used all those example as over use....at least RTD has the excuse for overusing after writing over 20 stories, and not including TW.....although like I said, RTD has written very different stories, and more daring than anything Moffat has done, like Midnight, and Love and Monsters.....
As for the relationship, I was talking generally rather than you, as usually people tend to moan about him making the Doctor a cassanova, while Moffat has equally done that....and less subtly....
Like I said, if you prefer Moff's style, fair enough, if you find them more compelling, fair enough...as that is down to personal taste, because I have found RTD's stories more compelling.....but the things you pointed out as things that are used, and not being new, are the same as Moffat....the whole River Song thing is a lot like the Time Traveller's wife with library surrounding built around it!!!! And you may not have a literal checklist, but you definitely have one in your mind, as you wrote that down here....I didn't have a checlist in my mind, I didn't see the overuse of children being taken away, in fact some have complianed, that by only showing one street, and not showing mothers chasing the soldiers and buses in the cars as a way that RTD didn't show it realistically enough....also you have to think that the director also plays a part in the tension building, in RTD's scripts, it's most likely to say shots of kids being taken with Mother's screamin....the director than goes to choose how to show that.....and the fact that COE was director lead....the blame should be even less on RTD, in terms of things used to build the tension.....
EDIT BTW.....you were the one to make the comparison of Blink, which is why I talked about how some see Moff as perfect, because they do.....i remember being told how can I like Journey's End, when it is full of plot holes, and then that person went to tell me about how Blink is the pefect story....in order to proove that I shouldn't really like Journey's end....since then then I can only see plot holes in Blink, and it has gone down and down in my eyes from my top five....shame really....
Well I think that as RTD is the main writer/creative force, he probably had the freedom to do that. I would certainly hope that Moffat does different stories and in different styles. From the 'action/adventure/scary' stuff to more lighthearted stuff etc.
I think that Moffats stories have been fairly different. Lets not forget it was him which introduced Captain Jack after all.
But Moff is the only one that gives his ideas to RTD, and he doesn't even change a line of his....in fact I remember Moff saying that he didn't put the TW reference in TGITF because RTD hadn't even asked him too, while every other story did...so even after that freedom, the man doesn't give us completely different stories...
The main diference is that they all have different settings....and the first three have elements of difference....although in the first one you have moments of the Doctor feeling a little jealous of Cpt Jack, and Jack flirting with Rose, in the GITP you have Rose feeling jealous, and Reinette flirting with the Doctor.....Blink has it's answer to all the questions' given at the end, just like TGITF, and all of them consist of monsters that are under the bed type....so basically in some form or another the same ideas are always there.....
Don't get me wrong I don't hate Moffat, I love his stories too....the only reason i am pointing it out is because I am being fair....if RTD is going to be criticised for things Moffat does too...well I am going to bring him into it...a
Um, I did, hence why I pointed out all four stories that Moffat has done, and used all those example as over use....at least RTD has the excuse for overusing after writing over 20 stories, and not including TW.....although like I said, RTD has written very different stories, and more daring than anything Moffat has done, like Midnight, and Love and Monsters.....
As for the relationship, I was talking generally rather than you, as usually people tend to moan about him making the Doctor a cassanova, while Moffat has equally done that....and less subtly....
Like I said, if you prefer Moff's style, fair enough, if you find them more compelling, fair enough...as that is down to personal taste, because I have found RTD's stories more compelling.....but the things you pointed out as things that are used, and not being new, are the same as Moffat....the whole River Song thing is a lot like the Time Traveller's wife with library surrounding built around it!!!! And youmay not have a literal checklist, but you definitely have one in your mind, as you wrote that down here....I didn't have a checlist in my mind, I didn't see the overuse of children being taken away, in fact some have complianed, that by only showing one street, and not showing mothers chasing the soldiers and buses in the cars as a way that RTD didn't show it realistically enough....also you have to think that the director also plays a part in the tension building, in RTD's scripts, it's most likely to say shots of kids being taken with Mother's screamin....the director than goes to choose how to show that.....and the fact that COE was director lead....the blame should be even less on RTD, in terms of things used to build the tension.....
When it comes down to between choice between 2 different writers I admit personal taste is most likely the deciding factor.
When i mention repetition I meant more in terms of dialogue, probably wasn't to clear about that. It's some thing of a staple in DW since the daleks rolled around screaming exterminate but I feel the fine line between being useful to the story and becoming tiresome is far to often over stepped by RTD scripts, and I often do wonder how much that is down to scripting or directing and that is also why I said I've never been that impressed with the directors they employ. That said I think the script the directors work with has a major effect on this.
Anyway I doubt we are going to change each others views on this so I'll probably leave this discussion at that.
When it comes down to between choice between 2 different writers I admit personal taste is most likely the deciding factor.
When i mention repetition I meant more in terms of dialogue, probably wasn't to clear about that. It's some thing of a staple in DW since the daleks rolled around screaming exterminate but I feel the fine line between being useful to the story and becoming tiresome is far to often over stepped by RTD scripts, and I often do wonder how much that is down to scripting or directing and that is also why I said I've never been that impressed with the directors they employ. That said I think the script the directors work with has a major effect on this.
Anyway I doubt we are going to change each others views on this so I'll probably leave this discussion at that.
Even if that wasn't clear, it was definitely something I mentioned....."Don't Blink" "Mummy" " "She is compatible" and the worst of all "Hey who turned out the lights" oh and don't forget "Wibbly Wobbly Timey Wimey"
Seriously though....every writer does it....and Mr Moffat was less than subtle in his last two parter.....which worked fantastic for the Empty child, and funny for Blink, but tiresome for the library parter....in which you also get the annoying but apt "spoilers"........
In the end if anything is going to be liked or disliked, it is down to personal taste as you say.....but not the factors you point out ie running, repetition, as they seem to be ignored/forgiven by yourself and others in Moffat stories.....
Is RTD influenced by BSG ? Frankly I have no idea. But is BSG inspired by something else ? I'd bet my money on it.
And you know why ? Because there isn't a single story wich is not influenced somehow by another story, whether consciously or unconsciously.
That is a whole branch of fiction studies : it's called intertextuality and comparative studies. Basically all stories are inspired from each other, and it's not possible to find a story at the origins, not even the Bible which is in part a rip off the saga of Gilgamesh or other indo-europeans myths.
Sorry, if I offend anyone's belief in saying so, but I consider that you can separate the stories in the Bible from the revelation itself if you are a believer.
Of course inspiring and copying is as old as writing itself.
Think about Shakespeare's era for instance. There was no less than 5 different plays about Hamlet at the time, and unless I'm very much mistaken, his was not even the first.
There is a very very interesting short story on the subject written by Borges which is called "The Library of Babel". I find it mind blowing and it is a good read if you're interested in that.
In short, you can create, you can invent, you can reconstruct or whatever.
But our stories all link back to some fundamental myths because our stories are all, basically, about us. And myths more or less covered it all since the dawn of time.
Science-fiction does not escape it : Star Wars is the myth of Oedipus and the myth of Mithra, Star Trek takes its basis in the myth of Arcadia, Tolkien uses the medieval folklore and stories, the myth of Odysseus is the basis for countless quest stories in fantasy, same thing goes for the myth of Prometheus both in fantasy and science-fiction.
The most interesting sci-fi/fantasy/literature writer currently is a Japanese called Haruki Murakami, who succeeds in linking past myths with the modern world which he recreates to the rank of myth itself. His two most striking novels are The End of Days, which links medieval myths with computer age, and Kafka on the Shore which links the myth of Oedipus with consumerism figures elevated to the rank of allegorical figures.
Is RTD influenced by BSG ? Frankly I have no idea. But is BSG inspired by something else ? I'd bet my money on it.
And you know why ? Because there isn't a single story wich is not influenced somehow by another story, whether consciously or unconsciously.
That is a whole branch of fiction studies : it's called intertextuality and comparative studies. Basically all stories are inspired from each other, and it's not possible to find a story at the origins, not even the Bible which is in part a rip off the saga of Gilgamesh or other indo-europeans myths.
Sorry, if I offend anyone's belief in saying so, but I consider that you can separate the stories in the Bible from the revelation itself if you are a believer.
Of course inspiring and copying is as old as writing itself.
Think about Shakespeare's era for instance. There was no less than 5 different plays about Hamlet at the time, and unless I'm very much mistaken, his was not even the first.
There is a very very interesting short story on the subject written by Borges which is called "The Library of Babel". I find it mind blowing and it is a good read if you're interested in that.
In short, you can create, you can invent, you can reconstruct or whatever.
But our stories all link back to some fundamental myths because our stories are all, basically, about us. And myths more or less covered it all since the dawn of time.
Science-fiction does not escape it : Star Wars is the myth of Oedipus and the myth of Mithra, Star Trek takes its basis in the myth of Arcadia, Tolkien uses the medieval folklore and stories, the myth of Odysseus is the basis for countless quest stories in fantasy, same thing goes for the myth of Prometheus both in fantasy and science-fiction.
The most interesting sci-fi/fantasy/literature writer currently is a Japanese called Haruki Murakami, who succeeds in linking past myths with the modern world which he recreates to the rank of myth itself. His two most striking novels are The End of Days, which links medieval myths with computer age, and Kafka on the Shore which links the myth of Oedipus with consumerism figures elevated to the rank of allegorical figures.
And that will conclude our lesson for today
Absolutly Fantastic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Round of applause people!!!!!!!!!!!:D
Is RTD influenced by BSG ? Frankly I have no idea. But is BSG inspired by something else ? I'd bet my money on it.
And you know why ? Because there isn't a single story wich is not influenced somehow by another story, whether consciously or unconsciously.
That is a whole branch of fiction studies : it's called intertextuality and comparative studies. Basically all stories are inspired from each other, and it's not possible to find a story at the origins, not even the Bible which is in part a rip off the saga of Gilgamesh or other indo-europeans myths.
Sorry, if I offend anyone's belief in saying so, but I consider that you can separate the stories in the Bible from the revelation itself if you are a believer.
Of course inspiring and copying is as old as writing itself.
Think about Shakespeare's era for instance. There was no less than 5 different plays about Hamlet at the time, and unless I'm very much mistaken, his was not even the first.
There is a very very interesting short story on the subject written by Borges which is called "The Library of Babel". I find it mind blowing and it is a good read if you're interested in that.
In short, you can create, you can invent, you can reconstruct or whatever.
But our stories all link back to some fundamental myths because our stories are all, basically, about us. And myths more or less covered it all since the dawn of time.
Science-fiction does not escape it : Star Wars is the myth of Oedipus and the myth of Mithra, Star Trek takes its basis in the myth of Arcadia, Tolkien uses the medieval folklore and stories, the myth of Odysseus is the basis for countless quest stories in fantasy, same thing goes for the myth of Prometheus both in fantasy and science-fiction.
The most interesting sci-fi/fantasy/literature writer currently is a Japanese called Haruki Murakami, who succeeds in linking past myths with the modern world which he recreates to the rank of myth itself. His two most striking novels are The End of Days, which links medieval myths with computer age, and Kafka on the Shore which links the myth of Oedipus with consumerism figures elevated to the rank of allegorical figures.
And that will conclude our lesson for today
Interesting (if not directly relevant*) post. Lose one point for not mentioning Joseph Campbell.
Lose another for posting exactly the same thing in two threads.
(*The question asked if there was a direct relation between 'a' and 'b' - not whether 'a' and 'b' have a common ancestor).
EDIT:
Star Wars is the myth of Oedipus and the myth of Mithra
Oh - and I strongly contest this. Although probably not here on a DW forum.
I'd be glad to have your views on Star Wars, by PM maybe.
Sorry for posting it in two threads though
Star Wars has been overcontextualised to death. Theres lots of competing theorys including a few very dodgy ones......
I'm not saying that RTD ripped off anything fro BSG directly. But it did seem to take a darker route and expanded the drama away from the Sci-fi element. In essence making the story not about the Sci-fi at all, but the drama when put in that position. Which is similar to what RDM did and the things he was trying to explore.
I'm not saying that RTD ripped off anything fro BSG directly. But it did seem to take a darker route and expanded the drama away from the Sci-fi element. In essence making the story not about the Sci-fi at all, but the drama when put in that position. Which is similar to what RDM did and the things he was trying to explore.
And countless others before him, including HG Wells and Jules Vernes.
Good sci-fi is sci-fi that talks about humanity.
The rest is just the amount of spaceships and aliens or dwarfs and magical rings you can include in that
Don't pick on that last sentence, I'm just exaggerating to prove my point
I'd be glad to have your views on Star Wars, by PM maybe.
I suspect that one is another thread for another day in another section of DS. It's best not to view the Star Wars saga as a single classical epic structure. When you look at it as a series of ideas bolted onto one another and retrofitted where appropriate, it doesn't wear such influences comfortably. Oedipal elements were tacked on a few years later - Mithraic elements a few decades later. The genesis of the core story is somewhere quite different.
And countless others before him, including HG Wells and Jules Vernes.
Good sci-fi is sci-fi that talks about humanity.
The rest is just the amount of spaceships and aliens or dwarfs and magical rings you can include in that
Don't pick on that last sentence, I'm just exaggerating to prove my point
Oh I can accept that. Star Trek (certainly the orginal series) was full of that. Just look at 'City on the Edge of Forever' where Kirk has to let a woman he's fallen in love with die in order for the timeline to continue the way it has. Very similar to Jack's sacrifice of his grandson in order to stop the 456.
I mean I could go on about episodes like 'Let that be your last battlefield' being an anti racism message etc etc, but I would just bore most people.
Oh I can accept that. Star Trek (certainly the orginal series) was full of that. Just look at 'City on the Edge of Forever' where Kirk has to let a woman he's fallen in love with die in order for the timeline to continue the way it has. Very similar to Jack's sacrifice of his grandson in order to stop the 456.
I mean I could go on about episodes like 'Let that be your last battlefield' being an anti racism message etc etc, but I would just bore most people.
Fellow Trekker :cool:
Another very good example is also Arena.
This is complete rubbish. As reviewed by "You have been watching" on Channel 4 tonight as "The Magic Roundabout with some dark tones". RTD isn't capable of thought-provoking writing, he's only capable of seeing how many gay scenes he can fit in, ones that won't upset kids too much when they ask Mummy why "the hero" of the show is snogging another bloke.
You can be pretty sure the lad in the Sarah Jane Chronicles will get a boyfriend sometime soon thanks to Russell. Oh and isn't that shown on CBebbies...more the stable for his content.
Case, rested.
This pantomine isn't fit to lick the boots of BSG.
There's a lot of subtext in RTD's Doctor Who stuff.
It may not be obvious due to the surface story, but seriously, there's often ideas crammed in there that I don't see anybody really speak about on here. Or at least I don't think many see the significance of.
There's a lot of subtext in RTD's Doctor Who stuff.
It may not be obvious due to the surface story, but seriously, there's often ideas crammed in there that I don't see anybody really speak about on here. Or at least I don't think many see the significance of.
I do....all the bl**dy time.......every single RTD episode...I always find layers upon layers....and that is why, on every repeat watch I find something new, or different...that makes me go "oh yeah"....but with Moff, I get what I see...nothing wrong with that either....all though he does that quite fantastically on Coupling, but not much on DW....here is hoping that in his own era...Moff does the same, the occasional you get what you see great episodes like Blink....and different/controversial multi-layerd stories like Love and Monsters.....
Comments
TBH I thought the fact that he has some gay scenes to be the only redeeming factor of RTD's writing, haven't really watched much Torchwood other that the CoE so don't really know if it is overdone in the series.
In regards to Dr Who, which I've watched far more extensively, I always find my self sighing at the opening credits when I find RTD has written the episode, he relies far too much on borrowing iconic imagery and ideas from other S-fi, which he then proceeds to butcher with amateur dramatics. He seems to have his little pet plot devices which ends up in far too many of his stories, such as over use of repetition, running scenes and shouting to try and ramp up the tension. The difference in quality between Moffat episodes like Blink and RTD badly written marathons like the 3 part finale with the Master is staggering imo.
Sadly the BBC also has awful film direction when it comes to s-fi and their pulp shows, they have uninspired wide shots of scenes where everything takes place as if we were watching a stage, which is fine in a theater but lack luster on TV. It all just whiffs a little too much of your local towns dramatic society putting on a showing.
I wasn't a huge fan of BSG but I have to agree that any comparisons should end after discussing what RTD pilfered from the show.
For goodness sake, if people are going to criticise RTD, why can't they pick on things that they then easily seem to ignore of other witters....IE....the so called Perfect Moffat!!!!
Because his scripts are never borrowed from other Sci-fi shows...no they are original as originality gets!!!! I can't remember the name of the book, but someone on DS, once pointed out about a book that was very similar to what the Angel were like in Blink.....if I find that thread I will definitely point it out....And the last library two parter was not only a mish mash of all his own previous work, but had elements of things like the TIme Traveller's wife....
In all Moff's scripts you have use of repitition...or have you forgotten "Are you my Mummy"..."She is compatible" "Don't Blink" and the worst of the lot "hey who turned out the lights" oh and "Donna Noble has been Saved"....or does that just pass over your head as you don't see the name RTD at the beginning????
All of Moff's stories have the Doctor or someone shouting and everyone runs at least once....more so in the library two parter!!! In fact in this very story the way the Vashta Nerada were defeated as such was because the Doctor told them to go away!!!!:rolleyes:
And the same go fro those who criticise RTD for all the romantic tosh, and gay cr*p....when Moff has had two women in four stories swoon over the Doctor, with heavy suggestions of kinky stuff going on....and has had Capt Jack slap another soldiers bum, and openly suggest that the Master is gay in Time Crash...oh funny enough which also has a repeat of the so called Timey Wimey plot......
All in all if you don't like what RTD has written fair enough....but if you want to compare him with another writer to prove how rubbish he is, please don't point out the very things that the other so called perfect writer has also a record for doing!
But nobody complains about that do they?
I'd suggest (as someone who much prefers Moffat's writing style to Davis's) it's simply because Moffat's writing and tone are better (sorry for using such a vague term - I'm sure it can be put down to just personal taste), and so people are more forgiving of such things.
Maybe not.
Any suggestions (if it's not a thread hijack to pull it this direction)?
For me that seems to suggest that...."oh Moffat has done that again, oh well never mind, I forgive him because at least I liked that or that" or in other words....it's not by RTD....
Because if you look at the poster to whom I replied to, started off by saying that they sigh the moment they see the name RTD. That suggest's that they already expecting RTD to have some running, shouting, plot devices he has used before and so on.....so basically, instead of sitting down and just watching, then deciding if it worked for them or not, they already have the checklist out.....while they do sit back and just watch the moffat ones...even though I have found Moff's repeating patterns less subtle compared to RTD, and I don't have a checklist out.....the Everybody' lives!" is a great example of that.....I don't need a checklist to know that it has been used before.....
Like I said, if you prefer Moffat style over RTD, fair enough, and they are different, for example, Moff's stories tend to be a puzzle type mystery, with childhood nightmare monsters, with answers being given at the end, while RTD tends to write stories that have so many different layers to them, from a nice play on fandon, to an outright romp, to a thriller like Midnight, ....it's the whole one person is allowed to make those mistakes while another isn't is what annoys me....
You'll notice I said over use of repetition, CoE was a good example, he consitently cuts from scene to scene of children in different locations saying the same thing. You only have to do it once to establish the fact they are controlling all the children and then each subsequent time the aliens take control of the children you only need one scene and the viewer will assume that all the children are doing the same. Anything more just becomes a poor attempt at creating tension.
Yes yes originality is a somewhat spurious concept as no one can be exempt from influnence of others work, the point is to take inspiration and use the idea in a new and different way, RTD on the other hand just transplants then ham fistedly tries to dress a story around it.
I've no issue with the relationships in the shows, in fact I find his interpersonal characterisation his most compelling writing and think maybe he should go back to writing stuff like 'Queer as folk' as he is quite good at modern drama, at the same time I still think he is awful at s-fi.
Also I never said Moffat was some kind of writing god his stories are just more compelling.
To come up with a checklist, I've had to sit down and watch a lot and after a couple of series come to the conclusion it doesn't work for me most of the time.
I watch an episode for what it is, I try not to see who its written by-which is easier said than done, I've loved some of moffats stuff (series 1) I've not been so keen on some of his stuff (series 3-sorry) and the same goes for RTD, but thats personal taste.
Well I think that as RTD is the main writer/creative force, he probably had the freedom to do that. I would certainly hope that Moffat does different stories and in different styles. From the 'action/adventure/scary' stuff to more lighthearted stuff etc.
I think that Moffats stories have been fairly different. Lets not forget it was him which introduced Captain Jack after all.
Um, I did, hence why I pointed out all four stories that Moffat has done, and used all those example as over use....at least RTD has the excuse for overusing after writing over 20 stories, and not including TW.....although like I said, RTD has written very different stories, and more daring than anything Moffat has done, like Midnight, and Love and Monsters.....
As for the relationship, I was talking generally rather than you, as usually people tend to moan about him making the Doctor a cassanova, while Moffat has equally done that....and less subtly....
Like I said, if you prefer Moff's style, fair enough, if you find them more compelling, fair enough...as that is down to personal taste, because I have found RTD's stories more compelling.....but the things you pointed out as things that are used, and not being new, are the same as Moffat....the whole River Song thing is a lot like the Time Traveller's wife with library surrounding built around it!!!! And you may not have a literal checklist, but you definitely have one in your mind, as you wrote that down here....I didn't have a checlist in my mind, I didn't see the overuse of children being taken away, in fact some have complianed, that by only showing one street, and not showing mothers chasing the soldiers and buses in the cars as a way that RTD didn't show it realistically enough....also you have to think that the director also plays a part in the tension building, in RTD's scripts, it's most likely to say shots of kids being taken with Mother's screamin....the director than goes to choose how to show that.....and the fact that COE was director lead....the blame should be even less on RTD, in terms of things used to build the tension.....
EDIT BTW.....you were the one to make the comparison of Blink, which is why I talked about how some see Moff as perfect, because they do.....i remember being told how can I like Journey's End, when it is full of plot holes, and then that person went to tell me about how Blink is the pefect story....in order to proove that I shouldn't really like Journey's end....since then then I can only see plot holes in Blink, and it has gone down and down in my eyes from my top five....shame really....
But Moff is the only one that gives his ideas to RTD, and he doesn't even change a line of his....in fact I remember Moff saying that he didn't put the TW reference in TGITF because RTD hadn't even asked him too, while every other story did...so even after that freedom, the man doesn't give us completely different stories...
The main diference is that they all have different settings....and the first three have elements of difference....although in the first one you have moments of the Doctor feeling a little jealous of Cpt Jack, and Jack flirting with Rose, in the GITP you have Rose feeling jealous, and Reinette flirting with the Doctor.....Blink has it's answer to all the questions' given at the end, just like TGITF, and all of them consist of monsters that are under the bed type....so basically in some form or another the same ideas are always there.....
Don't get me wrong I don't hate Moffat, I love his stories too....the only reason i am pointing it out is because I am being fair....if RTD is going to be criticised for things Moffat does too...well I am going to bring him into it...a
When it comes down to between choice between 2 different writers I admit personal taste is most likely the deciding factor.
When i mention repetition I meant more in terms of dialogue, probably wasn't to clear about that. It's some thing of a staple in DW since the daleks rolled around screaming exterminate but I feel the fine line between being useful to the story and becoming tiresome is far to often over stepped by RTD scripts, and I often do wonder how much that is down to scripting or directing and that is also why I said I've never been that impressed with the directors they employ. That said I think the script the directors work with has a major effect on this.
Anyway I doubt we are going to change each others views on this so I'll probably leave this discussion at that.
Even if that wasn't clear, it was definitely something I mentioned....."Don't Blink" "Mummy" " "She is compatible" and the worst of all "Hey who turned out the lights" oh and don't forget "Wibbly Wobbly Timey Wimey"
Seriously though....every writer does it....and Mr Moffat was less than subtle in his last two parter.....which worked fantastic for the Empty child, and funny for Blink, but tiresome for the library parter....in which you also get the annoying but apt
In the end if anything is going to be liked or disliked, it is down to personal taste as you say.....but not the factors you point out ie running, repetition, as they seem to be ignored/forgiven by yourself and others in Moffat stories.....
And you know why ? Because there isn't a single story wich is not influenced somehow by another story, whether consciously or unconsciously.
That is a whole branch of fiction studies : it's called intertextuality and comparative studies. Basically all stories are inspired from each other, and it's not possible to find a story at the origins, not even the Bible which is in part a rip off the saga of Gilgamesh or other indo-europeans myths.
Sorry, if I offend anyone's belief in saying so, but I consider that you can separate the stories in the Bible from the revelation itself if you are a believer.
Of course inspiring and copying is as old as writing itself.
Think about Shakespeare's era for instance. There was no less than 5 different plays about Hamlet at the time, and unless I'm very much mistaken, his was not even the first.
There is a very very interesting short story on the subject written by Borges which is called "The Library of Babel". I find it mind blowing and it is a good read if you're interested in that.
In short, you can create, you can invent, you can reconstruct or whatever.
But our stories all link back to some fundamental myths because our stories are all, basically, about us. And myths more or less covered it all since the dawn of time.
Science-fiction does not escape it : Star Wars is the myth of Oedipus and the myth of Mithra, Star Trek takes its basis in the myth of Arcadia, Tolkien uses the medieval folklore and stories, the myth of Odysseus is the basis for countless quest stories in fantasy, same thing goes for the myth of Prometheus both in fantasy and science-fiction.
The most interesting sci-fi/fantasy/literature writer currently is a Japanese called Haruki Murakami, who succeeds in linking past myths with the modern world which he recreates to the rank of myth itself. His two most striking novels are The End of Days, which links medieval myths with computer age, and Kafka on the Shore which links the myth of Oedipus with consumerism figures elevated to the rank of allegorical figures.
And that will conclude our lesson for today
Absolutly Fantastic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Round of applause people!!!!!!!!!!!:D
Interesting (if not directly relevant*) post. Lose one point for not mentioning Joseph Campbell.
Lose another for posting exactly the same thing in two threads.
(*The question asked if there was a direct relation between 'a' and 'b' - not whether 'a' and 'b' have a common ancestor).
EDIT:
Oh - and I strongly contest this. Although probably not here on a DW forum.
I'd be glad to have your views on Star Wars, by PM maybe.
Sorry for posting it in two threads though
Star Wars has been overcontextualised to death. Theres lots of competing theorys including a few very dodgy ones......
I'm not saying that RTD ripped off anything fro BSG directly. But it did seem to take a darker route and expanded the drama away from the Sci-fi element. In essence making the story not about the Sci-fi at all, but the drama when put in that position. Which is similar to what RDM did and the things he was trying to explore.
And countless others before him, including HG Wells and Jules Vernes.
Good sci-fi is sci-fi that talks about humanity.
The rest is just the amount of spaceships and aliens or dwarfs and magical rings you can include in that
Don't pick on that last sentence, I'm just exaggerating to prove my point
It was just teasing you. It's all good.
Oh I can accept that. Star Trek (certainly the orginal series) was full of that. Just look at 'City on the Edge of Forever' where Kirk has to let a woman he's fallen in love with die in order for the timeline to continue the way it has. Very similar to Jack's sacrifice of his grandson in order to stop the 456.
I mean I could go on about episodes like 'Let that be your last battlefield' being an anti racism message etc etc, but I would just bore most people.
Fellow Trekker :cool:
Another very good example is also Arena.
There's a lot of subtext in RTD's Doctor Who stuff.
It may not be obvious due to the surface story, but seriously, there's often ideas crammed in there that I don't see anybody really speak about on here. Or at least I don't think many see the significance of.
Nah....if it were up to me, and i had come up with such intelligent stuff, I'd write it on every thread!!!!!!!!!!!!:D
I do....all the bl**dy time.......every single RTD episode...I always find layers upon layers....and that is why, on every repeat watch I find something new, or different...that makes me go "oh yeah"....but with Moff, I get what I see...nothing wrong with that either....all though he does that quite fantastically on Coupling, but not much on DW....here is hoping that in his own era...Moff does the same, the occasional you get what you see great episodes like Blink....and different/controversial multi-layerd stories like Love and Monsters.....
That may be the case.. but Love and Monsters was still a load of old pony.