Yes Matt is great....


I loved the last one....but I do love this one more....I love the blueness to it!!!


Ahh forget it...was going to repeat the whole "having families does't make something soapy!" but I have already said I what I needed on the subject....and the fact that they were as much as part of the plot or character arcs as much Rory is or the villagers were in this series, or even the invisible aunty, and the dead parents to invoke some emotional connection with Amelia....

As for how more sci-fi this show is compared to the last five years is equally debatable...for example the use of emotional logic to solve the plot of at least two stories, a virus the Doctor made out of nowhere to catch Prisoner zero, telling Atraxi to run, a dream worlds with no actual scientific stuff going on....just technobabble to explain the reason they had those dreams...a switch to turn off a weather machine....Its as sci-fi as the last five years....with a more fairytale/gothic feel to it....

For, as unexpected as it was I thin Matt Smith is better than DT. The stories seem better thought out, but everything will hang on the season finale. RTD's biggest weakness I always felt was the finales, in my opinion the final episode of each season has been the finale (except season 2) due to the "magic switch" nature of how everything was solved (this was always doubly annoying as I always felt the setup episode leading up to the finale were excellent). If Moffat can give a satisfactory conclusion to this season that doesn't annoy me than I'd say the batton has well and truly passed.

The Guardian review of Cold Blood states that "the storyline ends on a downer, with moving finale that owes more to an Eastenders Christmas special than Saturday night sci-fi".
So the soap feel hasn't been totally abandoned.
I personally think the DW logo is the best, Matt is growing as the Doctor and putting his own stamp on it. This series is growing on me and has improved with each episode. Yes some niggles but that is fine. Most of the dislikes put down by posters in the first four series I've liked and some may return so never say never again!
Last edited by BibaNova : 29-05-2010 at 15:20

This + 1


I'm not so keen on Amy but Rory's great. It's so much better having two people for the Doctor to play off/rescue/keep an eye on...though it used to work better when episodes weren't rushed through in 40+ minutes.

[quote=crazzyaz7;40555796]Yes Matt is great....
Ahh forget it...was going to repeat the whole "having families does't make something soapy!" but I have already said I what I needed on the subject....and the fact that they were as much as part of the plot or character arcs as much Rory is or the villagers were in this series, or even the invisible aunty, and the dead parents to invoke some emotional connection with Amelia....QUOTE]

Were we told her parents are dead? Wasn't it just mentioned that they're 'gone'? Which could mean 'dead' or could mean 'not here'. And as said before, companions familes took up time that could have been better used, especially when you only have about 40 minutes to play with.




Me too. It does help not watching much TV and not knowing who most of these 'famous' people are.

Those who haven't heard or seen James Corden count your blessings. I can't stand him, thankfully never got to see his 'comedy' show.

lol....but that is the thing... alot of things like emotion or feelings, and family being there is dismissed as being soapy...and I am sure that is what the Guardian are doing too....the hsow is as sentimental as it was in the last five years, but that doesn't make it soapy....




No your right we weren't told that they were dead as such....but what I mean is getting the emotional conetent there by Amelia saying that she doesn't have any parents...and then later showing an apple to the Doctor that is her one sign of her mum, which then the Doctor uses to gain her trust....its all part of an emotional development, and buliding relationships. It doesn't matter how important her parents are to the arc, the fact is in the Eleventh Hour, they are used as an emotional backbone to the story....

For me I don't feel that the families did take up a lot of time....as I said the Jones appeared less than most of the families, but I remember someone on DS saying that they appeared the most....maybe they felt like that was because they didn't like them, so even a seconds worth of appearance is too much, no matter how important they are to the plot or character arc. Still doesn't make it soapy though.....

As for James Corden, yeah he is pretty much famous....don't hate him or anything, but nothing too special...he is a good actor though, really liked him in History Boys.

Yes, but if true, we've waited, what, eight episodes before the aleged 'soapy' elements made an appearance. When we used to get angst and heavy emotion nearly every episode, it becomes blase and repetitive - used sparingly, like this, I have a feeling it will be more effective - a plus, rather than a negative.
I love the way the stories themselves have been put first this series, and the personal lives/feelings of The Doctor and his companions has been scaled back somewhat.

So now series five only uses soapy material in a few episodes, I can't see the difference myself. You see what you want to see. I don't believe 'every' episode had a soap storyline. Some excellent stories. The personal /lives feelings are paramout or why would we watch it. I want to see how this Doctor copes in all situations.

For the stories? It's a sci-fi adventure show. I presume we're predominantly watching it, therefore, for sci-fi adventures.

Some storylines in classic who, if you took the sci-fi element out it, resembles a soap. Turlough, for example. Is it not feasible in a soap that someone would be hired to kill someone else or be bribed/blackmailed into killing someone else?

Adric, sacrificing himself to say others?

Susan, leaving the series because she fell in love?

And what about Ace? She had a background throughout her time on the show and Season 26 was based all around mostly.

So yes, I agree we do watch it for the sci-fi. No, it shouldn't become too soaplike either but you can't just have scifi adventures without some elements of soap in it.

post not showing.

In fairness, before he really hit the big time with Gavin and Stacey, Corden was a pretty decent serious actor, anyone that saw him in "History Boys" will tell you he was first rate in that. Obviously the success seems to have gone to his head a bit, but in spite of some reservations about the story outline I have read for "The Lodger" I see no reason to be concerned by Corden's appearance in it just because the man himself might be a bit of a nob.

I wouldn't call that 'soap', more 'drama'. It's the sort of thing you'd get in a crime drama-they aren't soaps.
Again: drama, not soap.
Again, not soap-merely a character moment at the end of an adventure serial. The story didn't dwell hugely on Susan and David.

I think you're confusing any kind of character moments with soap. The constant reliance on the domestic lives of Rose and Martha and their families was 'soap'. Ace meeting the baby that would become her mother was sci-fi that led to character development. There's a difference.

Is Gavin & Stacey the big time, then? I've never really seen it. It seems to be mostly tucked away after the watershed and from what little I've ever seen its just a rather unfunny sit-com. I'm now vaguely aware of who Corden is though-the fat friend, right?

it's certainly critically acclaimed, like it or not, and has made Corden very well known indeed, again like it or not.

What about Ghost Light when she set fire to a house when she was young? Arson doesn't happen in soaps? The whole Fenric thing was a theme that ran over two series. A slow burner storyline if you like. That happens in soaps too.

What about Nick Cotton's constant attempts to kill his mother in Eastenders? Isn't that similar to Turlough trying(not a such a grand scale I agree) to kill The Doctor.

As for Susan, she did grow up during her time in the show, getting more argumentative with The Doctor in shows like The Sensorites. Jo Grant did the same during her time. Character development like this is a part of soaps too.

By the way, I wasn't saying Doctor Who needs to be soaplike. Like you, I watch it for sci-fi as well. I'm just pointing out that there are soap elements there.

Same thing isn't it. Stories encapsulates the past as well, thats why we have stories set in Venice that's not the future is it.

I don't think these are soap elements you're pointing out so much as drama elements. Just because soaps use plots like murder and blackmail, that doesn't make them soap elements. Martha Jones's parents splitting up was a soap element: Ace committing arson was a drama element. That's because marriage break ups happen all the time in real life but most of us don't know that many arsonists.

I actually like Gavin & Stacey great show. JC's part is a bit of a lovable loud mouth which is ok, but when he's 'himself' on TV I find him irritating. He was good in Fat Friends.

No, it's not. Not sure of the relevance though-time travel is still sci-fi.

Hold on-the guy who played Gavin's fat friend was actually in something called 'Fat Friends'?

You haven't been watching Eastenders, Corrie and the rest. Marriage break ups are the norm arsonists every Wednesday!

As I said, The First Doctor and Susan, they argued a lot in the show. It was a sign of Susan growing up.

And as I also said Jo Grant. She left with Prof. Jones, even though it was clear she still had feelings for The Doctor.

Those sort of storylines ARE soap, not just drama.

Only on Wednesdays?! Thought it was every day ending with a 'Y'!!!!!!

Yep! It was actual quite a good show about a diet club like weight watchers. He might be a little type cast.