Options
Is Steven Moffatt confusing The Doctor and Sherlock characters .
Artemis1
Posts: 1,310 Forum Member
✭✭✭
This would explain the change in the Doctor's character
OR
Is he preparing us for the final Dr Who - no 12 and the total end of the series.
Here is an interview last year some nuggets of Steven Moffat's thinking.
http://io9.com/could-peter-capaldi-really-be-the-final-face-of-doctor-1185468579
OR
Is he preparing us for the final Dr Who - no 12 and the total end of the series.
Here is an interview last year some nuggets of Steven Moffat's thinking.
http://io9.com/could-peter-capaldi-really-be-the-final-face-of-doctor-1185468579
0
Comments
Yes PC is so like the dotty Patrick Troughton, funny Tom Baker, personable Peter Davison and dashing Paul McGann.
Even the ones who might be slightly similar such as Hartnell and Pertwee were actually quite avuncular.
As for Colin Baker, he went more for unhinged and then mellowing.
So fair enough, PC can do his own thing but lets not pretend it is rooted in the Dark Doctors of the past which are largely a figment of the collective imagination. The whole point about Tom Baker's era was that the Hammer horror edge was undercut by the Doctor. Black on black doesn't suit so much.
Could Peter Capaldi really be the final face of Doctor Who?
.and the very first line of the article (which is from August 2013) is...
"Of course not"
A prime example of the Daily Mail school of journalism - always hide your ignorant drivel behind a question rather than having the balls to spout your garbage outright and face the criticism you deserve.
Who said he was dark or any of them?
It's just that they have gone back to his more get on with the job nature and not let every death get to him.
People seem to think just because he's not crying over every death that's he's gone bad when in the past The Doctor never let each death bother him but rather got on with the mission which is what he's doing now and on occasion was even willing to make sacrifices if it meant more stopping people dying and he knew he really couldn't do anything anyway
Bit pointless giving the Doctor a whole new set of regenerations then if that is the case.
As to the Doctor and Sherlock they've always been similar.
They even gave Tom baker a deerstalker hat when the 4th Doctor was in Victorian London.
My point is if you would had read the article in which Steven Moffatt in answer to questions states that the doctor can ONLY regenerate 12 times.
Considering Moffatt writes the script , I think his opinion is of more value than the author of the piece .
Its a pity you didn't check this fact before your post.
OK, your talking about how the plot functions, I was talking more about the characterisation. Given that the question was about SM's approach you may be rather more on topic than I am. But the point remains that the uniform dourness has fewer Who precedents than the quicksilver mood changes of DT and MS.
That article is outdated and irrelevant on that point and any conclusions drawn from that source material are equally out of touch.
No, he hasn't confused the two characters, and no, he isn't preparing us for the final Dr Who.
Instead, Moffat has given us a naunced and multi-layered characterisation and has cast possibly the best actor ever to play the Doctor. He's also clearly worked on some of the major flaws of his previous Doctor Who series - poor characterisation and shallow dialogue - and has come up with a sharper, mature, more dramatically and emotionally satisfying new series.
All good, in my opinion.
I do like your analysis and hope you are right .I have loved Dr Who for many years but found this doctor so different.
Having watched the Orient Express episode I am happy again.
I wonder will a crossover episode ever happen --- imagine Sherlock trying to fathom the Dr and vice versa.
Overlapping them? Yes.
Short answer - no.
Longer answer - no, not at all
Except that Sherlock Holmes is fictitious and never actually existed... a bit like Robin Hood
I don't watch Sherlock but I believe that has been suggested about him as well??
All this means is that Moffatt had to invent a method to get around this rule. Just because he states its a rule, doesn't mean he has to abide by it. He made a point of it in order to fuel speculation, so that people would be curious as to how he was going to get around it.
We've already been told that in the DWverse Conan Doyle based the character of Sherlock Holmes on Madame Vastra so yes the Doctor does know "Sherlock Holmes" quite well.
Sherlock is very good - definitely worth giving a chance if you've not seen it.
I'm a big Doyle fan and was a bit wary of a modernised Holmes/Watson but it's very well done - new plots but plenty of well handled nods to the original stories - plus a superb cast (the regular supporting cast is as good as it gets).
It's not "heavy duty" stuff but nor is it pure fluff.
Which of course means they could meet, in the Who-niverse, though I don't think we'll ever see it during Moffat's tenure.
As for the Daily Fail's "quality" journalism, it's about as deep and thoughtful as those "critics" who called the acting in various Gerry Anderson's live actions series "wooden". While not always top quality acting, the "wooden" comment was always an obvious and lazy "cheap shot".
If anything, the Doctor has more signs of ADHD:
Sound familiar?
Whether that applies to Time Lords or not is another issue, of course! To my knowledge (I work in Learning Support) it only applies to human beings!
Yeah I've seen some people say they like 12 because he's like House.
There are some pretty obvious similarities between 12 and Sherlock, compounded by the fact Moffat writes both. I don't think he should be at all surprised by the comparison.
NO