Wasn't keen. I'm a firm believer that seeing the Tardis "in flight" is rarely of any value and tends to look tacky. The rest of the episode was decent enough, though I think 45 minutes feels rushed for Moffat.
As to the mention of Planet of the Dead and Waters of Mars as self contained stories: yes to some degree they were, but both suffered from interminable shouting and gurning. Not to mention cheapo pointless boiler suit aliens and a gimmicky robot.
I didn't think much of the Smilers either, for balance, but that didn't really detract from my enjoyment.

The reason asking that question is pointless is because unlike yourself, not all can be consistant in their criticism of RTD and SM....many a times some of those people are happey to crucify RTD for something that they would happily forgive Moff for...for example, take the fact that if RTD does a thought provoking story...then what some fans actaully want is Doctor Who to be about Spaceships and creepy monsters...but when Moff does the same, and that on a much thinly based over all plot that leads to too many questions that those very fans patronise others for "not getting it"


For me the greatest example of the differences that some fans have is the trap door that appears in Forest of the Dead....I can imagine to hoo haa that would have sorrounded such a plot device if it had appeared in an RTD story.

In what way is this:


ridiculous or silly?
These are my genuine opinions, and, I may add, the opinions shared by millions of other proper fans.

That is what makes it ridiculous! the fact that you somehow think that your view is of the majority.....just like you once somehow managed to count that 40 people in a group of hundred moaned at the gay reference in Midnight! Just stick to your opinions....don't sweep us all into it!

40 people in a public screening of "Midniight" were angered and disgusted by the agenda references. It was obvious and is true. You dont need to be mind-readers to know when people are upset or frustrated. It is obvious and tangible.

There's a force-field that extends from the Tardis doors and takes atmosphere with it. The Fourth Doctor and Romana used it, in 'The Horns of Nimon', if I remember correctlly.

No but you had said that 40 people in a group of hundred.....you would have to be either a mind reader, or you carried some survey round to ask people if they felt upset and angerd and disguested and fustrated (I doubt it was becauseof the gay reference)......


And anyway...now I know your making it up....as before you had said that all they did was groaned! as in you know the "" type of thing...like I tend to fel when reading your posts..although your posts are the ones that tend to be the offensive ones! You didn't mention any thing about anger or upset....and what can be said about those who get upset over one little word?????




The question is the plausibilty of it scientifically speaking....all it is is made up science, which is explained away with a few technobabale....and in all fairness so was the Earth towing as well, we were told that the Force field was still intact....and the Tardis itself has pulled a rocket away from a blackhole.....so it was established within new Who that the Tardis could tow heavy objects through space....just like it had been established in previous stories that the Tardis could increase it oxygen level in space so Amy could fly about...but it still is made up science as it is with the Earth Towing stuff....

And also in 'The Parting Of The Ways'...

Regards,

Cypher

Give it up poppycock - you spoke to 40 separate people in a screening that only you say you attended and discovered they were "angered and disgusted" - and what "agenda" exactly were they "angered and disgusted" by? Were they all aware of the existence of an agenda? No, you don't HAVE to be a MIND-READER to know when people are upset or frustrated: but you do have to be literate to be a writer and you do have to be objective to be a critic - sadly, you are neither.

Quite the most self deluded and ridiculously exaggerated post I've ever read on this forum, and that's saying something.

Stands up and applauds


The voices in your head do not count as "other proper fans"
-------

Although we used to watch Doctor who as a family when i was a kid, I really got hooked from Dragonfire onwards. At that time very few of my schoolfriends watched but I didnt care, i LOVED it. I was heartbroken when it finished in 89. Then I heard about the film, bored my friends to tears talking about it until it finally aired. And personally I enjoyed it. I was a bit upset in 2004 when i heard it was coming back, because i remembered all to well the disappointment of hearing that there wouldnt be a full series after the movie. I didnt want this to be a one off series. Besides over the years i felt a kind of ownership to Doctor Who. I didnt want to share it with the kids. It was MINE!!!

All that changed when I managed to see a bit of the filming of "Rose" - it felt magical. And even though I did not really connect to Ecclestone I immediately connected with the series.

After Rose aired my nieces and nephews told me about this new and exciting series that they were watching and it took me right back to when i was going through the same thing.

For me the series is still growing strong. As long as it is engaging the young fans thats all that matters.

Apart from the bit with Ecclestone (I loved CE), I completely agree with you. We are so lucky, that Dr Who is still popular and that we still have Dr Who. If they cancel it, I will be sadder than about any other cancellation before (bar the cancellation of Dr Who in 89 of course).

Like him or not, RTD has given us Dr Who back. After such a long hiatus, the show had to go in a different direction, but it still kept the magic and wonderment. Yeah, there were some duff episodes, but there were always duff episodes. Long may it all continue.

No, it comes down to suspension of disbelief, and that works on different levels. We accept the TARDIS as being what it is because we're told it's the product of an advanced civilization, and there is a pseudo scientific explanation for what it does which is generally fairly consistent from one story to the next. But actually moving a planet through space would cause all kinds of chaotic effects which were not addressed in the script so suspension of disbelief goes out the window.

Whilst this wasn't my favourite scene ever, you can attribute some of these plot devices to artistic freedom. Any of the Dr Who stories will have plot devices that are neither explained nor possible. That is the magic of Dr Who. Classic Who explained a lot of their plot devices with pseudo science (reversal of the polarity flow etc.). New Who invented the wibbly wobbly tiney whiney bit. We all know that due to the law of physics it is not possible to drag a planet, however, neither is it possible to have a carved apple in your jacket pocket for longer than 1/2 hour without it turning slightly brown (a chemical process). Which it didn't in TEH, so why was that not explained either. I have many more examples from each Dr Who episode.

But pseudo science is at least an explanation, of sorts. The 'timey wimey' line is the laziest and most irritating thing that Moffat has ever written (and I say that as a fan of the man's work) because it doesn't actually mean anything or explain anything, yet people act as though it does! His explanation for the fifth Doctor looking older in Time Crash because proximity to his older self had 'shorted out the time differential' may be scientifically meaningless from our perspective but as a theoretical explanation, it works, it's understandable. Saying 'well, this is because of timey wimey stuff' is just meaningless. The planet towing scene might have been less ridiculous if a explanation had been written into the script for why the consequences you'd reasonably expect were not happening, but no such explanation was provided so it didn't work as a scene.

A pseudo scientific explanation that nobody understands is as meaningless as the tiny whiny bit (IMO, and I'm a researcher). I think as a writer you have several possibilities, either you explain everything (which can get tedious and would take up much time), you come up with some pseudo science (which is meaningless, but takes up less time and sounds good), you come up with a weird phrase, which basically indicates that the doctor doesn't want to go into a long explaination and probably thinks that it is too mind blowing for mere humans to understand (tiny whiney etc.) or some things remain unexplained and up to the viewer's imagination. I love science fiction because things seem possible that are not possible (time travel being one of them). A lot of things in Dr Who are just not possible, you either accept that or you get very frustrated with the whole concept of it.

In using 'wibbly wobbly, timey wimey' he was doing what could probably be called 'subverting the trope'. He could have substituted a techno-babble line about time travel being like 'reconfiguring a t-dimensional manifold spread across an inverted temporal axis', but that would mean just as much. By going the other way, he highlights its inexplicability without sacrificing believability.

Besides, in the scene where it was introduced, he was trying to explain the concept to a non-technical person...

Did you ignore my earlier post about the fact that we were told the force feild protecting the Earth was still intact? That is as lame as the Timey Wimey explanation....but an explanation none the less....and like I said, the Tardis has towed a rocket from a black hole before, so with six pilots this time, chances are that the Doctor would have been that extra careful...and by the way,not everything has to be spoon fed to the audience, just like in TBB where we told how exactly the Doctor and Amy were breathing in the toungue of the space whale, and how the ended up in the overfow pipe, and why the hell there were forget buttons in the overflow pipe despite the fact that adults never survived.......

Please be consistant Ting!! And remember your own words...and maybe you should watch Journey's end again this time paying more attention

It's "Timey Wimey" - tiny whiney is a reference appropriate for some of the more overzealous and narrow-minded forum nitpickers and critics

Eh? I thought that was obvious - overflow pipes are for when things don't work as expected... If, for some reason, an adult did get expelled (perhaps the whale had had a dodgy curry the night before), you would want to be damn sure they didn't remember it.

plus i thought the overflow pipe was also where the children ended up

Being a hardcore fan having all the episodes of the 63 - 89 on video I was extatic on the return hoping it would be like like the original series. Was disapointed the companion had to save the doctor on episode 1. The romance kinda peed me off instead of the faithful original series.

But yet we were told that Amy and the Doctor were the first ever adults to survive......in 300 years!

Ahhh but they didn't go back up to their normal society....they were kept down in the tower....so why would they need to fotget for 20 minutes....they weren't exactly strong and clever enough to revolt anyway.....and even they were rebelious types then if they had been made to forget, the work they would have been made to do, with the evidence of the whale being tortured in the very same room they are in...what is the point of being made to forget that they ended up in a whale?

I am all in favour of resurrecting the classic 'I'll explain later!'