I'm not criticising RTD. I like about 95% of his stuff. I don't take the series that seriously that I go into he is better then him. Each producer has good things as well as bad things about their work. s does every Director and every actor. McCoy in his first season mostly really bad. McCoy in his last season significantly better once he became more serious and darker.

The point I was making about The Doctor being more in the forefront was in relation to the first episode of the series
As I previously metioned. In DT's first proper episode he spent a lot of it off screen in bed. You saw more of Rose, Jackie, Mickey etc than the Doctor. Not good when it is that actor's first story and he should be trying to establish himself as The New Doctor.

Jump back to CE's first story. You first meet The Doctor when he opens a door and sticks his head out of it. After running about and a few scenes he again drops out the story and it's about Rose and Mickey. You meet Jackie. Rose goes off to seed the person that posted the advert in the paper about The Doctor. Mickey stays outside until he end up eaten by a wheelie bin. It takes a while before CE is back in the story when they are near the Millenium Wheel in London for the big final scenes.

Now compare that to MS's first story. From him hanging out of the door of the TARDIS, to meeting the young Amy to meeting grown up Amy, to the village stuff to the hospital stuff. He was almost an ever present in that episode.
This was putting The Doctor back in the forefront of the show or to be more accurate that story.
Yes the story was about Amy, the passing of time, her waiting for him to return etc, but you can't deny compared to EC and DT, it's MS that got the better deal in screentime and being the focus of the story out of the three of them.

On that topic I would say SM scores the points over RTD. SM:1 RTD: 0

If you wanted to go opening monsters in those stories. The Autons and The Sycorax completely beat Prisoner whatever number it was. So equalising point to RTD. SM: 1 RTD: 1

I'm a big fan of Mark Gatiss, love LOG, got his books and seen him at Drury Lane. I can't wait till next weeks episode. If I think it's not great I will say so doesn't mean I got an agenda against him.

In those stories though, Rose represents the viewer, the new viewer who the series was re-establishing itself to...

You see the Doctor through Rose's eyes and become as amazing and astonished by his greatness as she does.

Through Rose's mundane life we are shown the better way of life of the Doctor and that we all want to be a part of it...

That's how you introduce the new series to a new audience, and it was quite similar with Amy becoming devoted to the Doctor's lore from the age of 9 to the point of being obsessed by it and wishing the raggedy Doctor to return.

And its really lame in the extreme to start keeping score so please drop that immediately!

I understand that you was seeing The Doctor through Rose's eyes, but that works better if she is actually around him to observe him a bit more.
I'm not convinced to the new viewer that really worked and that episode wasn't a success more because of all the media coverage leading up to it built upon it was soemthing a bit different from what was being shown on a Saturday night in that time slot for the last few years.
IMO it was the same with Primeval. You suddenly had dinosaurs on a Saturday tea time. Cool!
It caught the imagination.

I notice you didn't mention DT's first story.
I've not timed it but it would be intersting to find out excluding scenes when he is asleep in bed, how many minutes DT is in that story. I would guess bout 15-20 minutes?

You are right about the scoring and I will gladly drop it.
I only did it as I was accused of being biased towards SM. So I was showing that I'm not. I am able to look at the series or episodes and see things that one of them did better than the other from both perspectives.

Thing is though, those who feel the need to lavish praise on SM are comparing a handful of his stories over a long time against RTD's much heavier involvement and amount of scripts. When SM has had a couple of years in charge and had far more scripts scrutinised by the GBP, see then if he's still able to produce classic episodes on a regular basis.

Though why it should matter who's in charge, as long as they're doing their best to provide entertaining weekend tv, is beyond me - just enjoy it for what it is, a fictional tv show!

Glad to see the two new leads settling in nicely so far!

Absolutely. I totally agree with you.

It is fun comparing episodes for the sake of discussion though. It's just a shame some people get so wound up about it.

As well as these different faces we need one of Michael Winner with the line. "Calm down dear, it's only a TV show!"

Good lord, how do people who are clearly fans of the show get such little pleasure out of discussing it with other fans?

For fans of the show it has been virtually impossible to discuss it for as long as I've been coming here, in fact except for a few recent posts, I all but stopped posting in here. Why? because it became impossible to actually talk about the show with other fans that also enjoy it without the same few loud mouth know it all classic who fans jumping into any thread that even remotely praised the show, or any post that even remotely praised a writer or episode.

If these chosen few, these Who experts don't agree then bloody hell be prepared to hear about it time and time and time again. And as is the nature with internet forums those threads then turn into fans of the show defending it, all discussion about enjoying the show goes out of the window because if the few don't like it it simply inst allowed for others to like and discuss it for to long. Thankfully with the two new Moffat episodes so far these have clearly shown the few posters up for the hypocrites they have been for the last few years, what ever DS name they have been using from their multiple accounts, Im pretty sure one actually has discussions with himself using 2 DS names.

In the Beast Below thread I deliberately nitpicked the episode to a ridiculous extent, quite irritating isn't it when some just bangs on and on about the tiniest thing. Now imagine that for virtually every episode since the show came back by the same few posters and you'll be nearer the truth as to why people who are clearly fans of the show get such little pleasure out of discussing it with other fans. But now it appears that all the things these bastions of classic Who criticised over the last few years have suddenly become acceptable intelligent sci-fi , it is pretty laughable, are we supposed to take these people seriously?

Agree with everything you said. However, at least they are making me watch teh entire episodes so far. Tennant and Davies had me nodding off towards the end of their tenure

Have you actually watched "Resurection"??? If so, if you don't think there are any plot holes, perhaps you would be kind enough to explain what's going on to the rest of us.

What's so important about that? Go back to "An Unearthly Child" and compare the screentime of the Doctor versus his companions. The show's called "Doctor Who" and The Doctor is the linking feature. Doesn't mean he has to be at the forefront all the time.

Three noticable differences for me:

The stories seem more thoughtful, and perhaps require concentration rather than simple "flash-bang" action of old.

Sometimes there has been NO BACKGROUND MUSIC... Shock, horror!!! [!] A real plus for me... and NO AIMLESS RUNNING AROUND!!!

Matt Smith is a great Doctor, and Karen Gillan a brilliant companion

PS: I give no thought as to who is producing the show... (sometimes I will check to see who the director was, if a show is particularly noteworthy) - why should I? As long as it continues to be this entertaining I will watch it no matter who is "in charge"

i think this series has been a good start but there is room for improvement which i think we will get as the series goes on, after all we wouldnt be getting series 6 confirmed this early if the bbc thought it wasnt gonna be worthwhile

I agree with this. Well, I agree that this is the problem people have.

I really liked the episode though, in no way is it the worst nu_who story imo. I think it was actually a bit too transparent (which is ironic given that so many people think it was confusing lol.)

The worst 2 "Nu-Who" stories by far were the appalling episodes 2.11 and 2.12.

I can't remember the names but 2.11 was the one written by Peter Kay which was "Dr Lite" and featured the awful sex implication of Bridget and Elton having a "love life" after she been turned to a face in a paving slab.

2.12 was the God awful episode of the London Olympics where the little girl drew pictures of people and imprisoned them.

The beast below is poetry compared to those abominations.

Awful.

I loved Love & Monsters and Fear Her!

The two episodes of SM's series have been quite ordinary, Very watchable, but very minor. I think a lot of people were expecting SM's scripts to be of the quality of his previous ones; however, they overlook he has written 6 scripts in 4yrs, and is doing at least the same number this year alone PLUS executively producing.

The 2 so far have been nice, watchable, ordinary, meat-and-potatoes DW, and I think fans expected SM to deliver a Blink every week.

As for his showrunningness ... fine so far. Excellent Doctor and companion. Nice repositioning of the Earth based stuff out of London. New monsters. No snot-n-tears. The music was better than ever, this week. Nice fairytale atmosphere to some bits of last week's. No complaints in the Chuff household.

I don't think there's a broad sense of discontent at all-overall, the reaction to the new setup seems to have been overwhelmingly positive except from a comparative handful of individuals who just don't seem to get it. I don't think that's because they're biased against one writer or resenting the departure of another, I just think Moffat is writing for a more sci-fi literate audience and requiring the viewer to pay closer attention to the details of the plot than Davies, who was possibly writing for a more general audience. Moffaat is expecting the audience to do some of the work, that's all. I personally think this approach works far better, but I'd guess that some of the more casual viewers who don't follow the plot that closely because they're just looking for a bit of light early evening entertainment will be dissatisfied and switch off. That's their loss, though.


If you tell me what it was you didn't understand, I'll be happy to give it a shot.


Excuse me, I haven't suggested anything of the kind. I defy you to find anywhere that I have. And why do you keep putting my name in quotes? I'd really like to know what you're implying.

Love & Monsters must be up there with the Bernie Basset episode as the worst. Love & Monsters had a great cast completely wasted on a dire plot. I don't mind Fear Her though.

The Beast Below was okay, at one point I did get confused but my 7 year old told me what was happening!

are these the same people who complain when a series has a sign posted plot and moan that they are being treated like idiots by the writer

Generally, yes.

Good grief. Look, a simple suggestion.

Sit back, watch Dr Who, enjoy (or not) and then flip over to three and watch confidential, again, enjoy (or not)

It is just a TV Light Entertainment/drama programme (one I have enjoyed since 1963) and not just another bloody reality show!

Haven't watched it for a while, so can't be specific, but basically the whole premise of the duplicates and the proposed invasion of Gallifrey didn't make a lot of sense and didn't seem to hang together. And Lytton turning out to be a goodie! (Although, to be fair, that's not "Resurrection"'s fault, but "Attack of the Cybermen")

I loved Love & Monsters too and have never understood the vitriol against it. Seems to be if the Doctor isn't the star of the show then it's not worth watching for some people (although I guess Blink disproves that theory to some extent!). I especially liked the way we saw events that had already happened in other episodes from an ordinary person's point of view.

As for Fear Her, it just seemed average at the time, I haven't watched it since, but surprised it came in the bottom 10 of DWMs 200 poll.

Blimey and here is me thinking i was alone in the Universe thinking these exact things.

Thank you.

Lytton wasn't a 'goodie', he was simply a mercenary who'd ended up working for the Daleks against his will (since no-one in their right mind would work for them willingly). As for the idea of infiltrating Gallifrey with duplicates of the Doctor and his companions, I thought that was quirte a clever idea, though sadly undeveloped.