Not in the slightest. Doctor Who is fantasy, through and through, and that's not going to change. And the individual stories, especially when written by other writers, are broadly the same. But in terms of plot structure, character development and themes, Steven's work is far closer to modern sci-fi than Russell's more adventure-themed work.

ME!!

I tell you a way that idea could work is if the 11th Doctor went back along his timestream and find his past selves history has changed and they are not Timelords any longer and are something different, but that would involve a storyline very close to Human Nature and that wouldn't work twice.

Plus, in the event of such an idea, I'd still want to see those Doctors back as they were by the end of the story.


And just on a different note, I see another thread has developed into yet another RTD V SM debate..........

I equate sci-fi with some sort of semi- or pseudo-science method of reaching the dénouement, or sorting out the baddies.

Reversing the polarity of the neutron flow is sci-fi.

A bomb convincing itself it is in fact human is not sci-fi.

Surprise, surprise!!

You need to Google it - there's loads online about the critcisms against his overly complicated story arcs.

Moffatt's also confirmed changes to the upcoming season off the back of those criticisms.

The point I'm making is that Its the sort of backlash RTD never had (outside of forums like this, of course).

I understand. What I'm saying in response is that RTD had his own backlash and compromises.


I've tried Googling, but I'm not sure what I should be looking for. I get plenty of references to Moffat criticising the BBC for axing Confidential, but nothing about the BBC criticising Moffat, either internally or externally.


No, it is technobabble. It is used precisely to cover up the fact that there is not good reason for the change in events that are about to occur. It could as easily be flicking a switch, or waving a magic wand.


I would disagree. One major theme in sci-fi is what it means to be human, and to assert one's humanity.

Moffat, although it annoys people as appearing overly-complicated, always tries to set up the reasons and whys and wherefores of the silliness he ends up doing. Other writers will tend to sweep that under the carpet with a bit of technobabble that we just have to accept. Although it's worth nothing that both these ends of the spectrum have existed in all incarnations of Who.

To me the difference between sci-fi and fantasy is precisely that sci-fi uses technobabble, whereas fantasy uses a magic wand. Each genre has it's clichés, and I like both, but I think Moffat has gone down the fantasy route over much with his version of DW.

I really don't see Moffat as carefully setting up his situations with background explanation. To me it seems as if he suddenly introduces something to explain the inexplicable, and it's a bit unsatisfactory.

No, don't agree with you there. Lots of anti-RTD stuff in this forum but not in the press. It was a golden age for Who as far as the public and media were concerned and he didn't make any changes in response to negative feedback.

Here's an example of the cricisms in the press from The Sun. Here's also one of the stories of him announcing a move to stand alone episodes, which was the big story earlier in the year. This was a complete change from what he said when he first took over the show three years ago.

I think the problem isn't that Moffat makes his stories overly complicated, it's that they're unnecessarily complicated; rather than going from A-B to tell a story, he goes from A-E-P-A-B, which just isn't needed...

But hey, we've gone off-topic again! So about a multi-Doctor story, as many people (including Moffat) have said, I think it should only be be done if it's a story and not for the sake of a nostalgia party.

I think you're reading between the lines to think that Steven has changed any of his plans in response to media criticism. The second link you posted definitely doesn't indicate that. And you also said that he had received criticism internally at the BBC that forced him to change his plans. I see no evidence of this.

As for "Golden Age", I think we both know how controversial such a statement is, which should tell you something.

As long as it is a good story who cares?

Given that the original series only lasted 1963-89 = 26 years, and that the recent series commenced in 2005, from basic maths, the 50th anniversary should arrive in 2029, assuming that you consider the original series the same to be the same as the new series. However, given that the new series bears no comparison the original, perhaps 2055 should be the time to celebrate the 50th anniversary.

Where would you put the Movie, then? Original or recent?

I think any comments Moffat made in public were never going to be an admission he was getting it wrong. But it is a clear change in direction which would not have come out of the blue.

I also used to work at the BBC and have lots of former colleagues still working there. So I do know some of the feedback that's been given internally.

My point, over all, is that I'm hoping for something special for the 50th rather than something like the past 2 years. It is all down to personal taste at the end of the day.

It's going to have at least two Doctors in, although 12 is probably only in it for five minutes at the end...


Not necessarily. it'd only be too close if they were human. They could be something entirely new, or he could find out that the Time Lords actually became the Silents and now his previous self is becoming one as well...or is that a bit, you know?


Agree

Agree with this more. No more Disney endings though please, they are twee.

I wouldn't bother responding to DariaM, Granny. She's had it explained on more than one occasion that she's completely wrong, by myself and others. She completely ignores it, then posts exactly the same thing again a bit further down the line.

Clearly just a troll.

I am an old codger who remembers the 1st episode and have stood (now stooped) shoulder to shoulder with all the Doctors. I'd love to see as many cram into the Tardis as can fit - but please no waxwork stand-ins this time.....

Oh, that bloody waxwork! Very strange that the Five Doctors was - in reality - just The Three Doctors plus a stand in for 1st and and some edited footage for the 4th.

I have no problem with some Doctors coming back. Would have loved Sarah Jane to be in the story, of course.

Thanks for the tip. It just seemed such an odd post. I thought she would expand on it, but as you say, she has disappeared, apparently

What I should have said it too close to when Human Nature was shown, even if it is next year. It's fresh in the mind still, so even anything remotely close to that idea will draw comparisons I'm sure.

Don't say you weren't warned!

Technically it is a multi-Doctor episode because Tennant is in it, but unfortunately no others are.

This.

This is going to be more like Skyfall and I couldnt be happier for it. There will be lots of affectionate nods to the past, but the story will be contemporary and set up fresh ideas for the future.

No past-it actors hamming it up and clogging up the plot for me thanks, you want that elongated rubbish go listen to an audio...