Hey Fellow Whovians… I have a question for someone that knows the Doctor as well as I do / or better..
I am doing a major Bachelor projekt at the university about the show in which I am trying to make a recipe for a general episode. Some formula that almost every new episode follows… :


*Introduction – life on the TARDIS.
*TARDIS Materializes somewhere
*Doctor and his companions get separated
*intergalactic hijinks ensures
*usually a lot of running (through corridors)
*The Doctor and his companions are reunited just in time to face imminent doom
*Doctor uses intelligence to figure out problem. Sometimes gives ‘monster’ a chance.
*back in TARDIS, on to next adventure

What do you think – what am I missing?
Last edited by WhovianDK : 24-04-2014 at 15:55

I wouldn't normally comment on anyone's spelling, but if this project is for a University then I respectfully suggest you correct the spelling of Recipe

Other than that I think you've got some of the basic formula correct, though you are generalising enormously and I'd take issue with the phrase 'intergalactic hi-jinks'!

Hello and welcome!
You more or less have it in a nutshell WhovianDK! Well, for the original series anyway!
Latest series is a bit more complicated with timey-wimey crap and all that, and romances thrown in along the way!
But I think you've got the right idea....that's the way I liked it!

(oh yes - sorry to be fussy - but it's RECIPE!) (We are fastidious about those things)
* Did I spell fastidious right???

Thanks for the heads up - I am not native English, but this is more a typo than a regular spelling mistake (I do know how to spell recipe) - anyhow, it is fixed now :P

I am generalising a LOT < as I am supposed to do. Not all episodes follow this plan, but to some extent something general like this is able to be said?
Gah.. I am not making much sense right now.

The phrase "intergalactic-hijinks" is copied from some author, < I will rephrase it

Hi.. and thank you

Funny you should mention the romance issue, - a Whole part of my projekt is about that, -I am aware of differences between Davies and Moffat( he likes to play with time-paradoxes, and more complex overall storylines).

I noticed when watching all the new episodes that the TARDIS always at some points disappears/malfunctions so that they cannot use it to escape. < but thats not in all episodes..

Hi, you'v pretty much got it down to a T, although I would say that whether he lets them live or not, he almost always lectures them.

Also, while we are criticising your spellings, project is spelt with a c not a k

haha @JackMShep -- I can tell you that in Danish it is spelled with a K :P projekt.. but I see now that I should have checked for all mistakes and typos :P

Often he gives them a chance to regret/ - survive. By suggesting that he could find them a new planet or something, a different sollution. But yeah, he lectures too ofcourse.
- And then I think he sometimes shows off with a lot of 'technobabble" : Scientific Words just to sound smart :P

Not sure if you're familiar with narrative theory, but the most common reference is Todorov's stages of narrative which might be handy:
-Equilibrium
-Disruption of the equilibrium
-Recognition of the disruption
-An attempt to repair the damage
-New equilibrium

Applies generally to most narratives, although in the case of Doctor Who not necessarily in that order!

Woah.. that was a lot of difficult Words - I am not familiar with that theory, but I will look into it - Thank you very much.

Uh.. I just added some myself:
*(sometimes short intro to previous episodes, to catch up)
*Cliffhanger – intro

instead of just 'everyday life on the TARDIS' it is sometimes an intro without the doctor, where the 'problem' (that the doctor need to 'fix') is presented

and at the end there is a teaser for NeXT episode

Also, if you thinking of new who, you've got the cold open as well

I AM thinking of NewWho - but i dont understand what you mean with 'Cold open'?

I mean the one or two minute clip before the opening titles, usually sets the scene before we see the Doctor, although occasionally it is just the Doctor in the TARDIS. Nevertheless, it is part of 95% of new who episodes

yeah thats what i meant as well.. - without the doctor OR Doctor + companion in Tardis - "everyday life"

"“as usual the opening has assured us that there is a crisis of which the Doctor is unaware, and in which he will have to intervene”.. < Jim Leach in "TV Milestones : Doctor WHO"

I think you forgot the bit in each episode that lasts about 20 seconds - i. E. Subtle hint relating to the end of season finale

the hint to the overall story plot that MUST be in every episode.
at first mention of "bad wolf"
then erh.. yeah, Saxon? -- and Doctor-Donna..
then later crack in the wall + silence etc... - and the impossible girl.
-- I have that - although not on my list for general episode formula..
^^ there are some episodes in which this does not occur?

You forgot the part where the female companion does something which the doctor didn't think of which saves him and/or the world.

Example: In The Time of The Doctor, when, after 800 years or so, The Doctor hasn't convinced the crack in the wall/ the time lords to give him a new set of regenerations, Clara just needs thirty seconds in order to do exactly that.

It is not always the female companion. But definately something 'human', that the Doctor hasn't thought of, yeah. And okay, often the female companion as they are the 'emotional.' -- I just noticed how very often its a silly human thing that can save the day (the love between the couple in The Lodger - - erh that man in Victory of the Daleks, that created the 'ironsides' - WHO just have to think of his loved one. or something like that).
But you're right- there is often a sollution from the companion that the Doctor didn't think of (like Amy in the Beast Below or Rose in the very first episode ? < < possible much more)

Hmm.. So I just found a link that sort of answers my question - or at least agrees with me in the repetition of several Things..

but.. according to this site "The doctors kliches" - its a bad thing?
I know that there is a pattern for the episodes, and it sometimes makes it easier to 'guess' what will happen, - but I don't think the repetition gets boring. - it is nice to see the doctor "save the World" time after time..
Again: what do you think?

What is the link? I would be curious to see it.

I don't think he necessarily wanted the regenerations - I think his idea was - if he dies, the threat to the universe posed by the re-eruption of the Time War goes away.

As I understand it - and it's been a while and my memory is quite fuzzy - if the Doctor speaks into the crack, he'll be forced to answer their question because of the truth field. And if he does that, the whole thing kicks off. Clara can talk to them because she doesn't know the answer.

Perhaps the question should be, why couldn't the Doctor have given a message to, say, Barnaby or whatever his name was? Why would Clara be the only one able to persuade them to step away?

While I don't want to hijack this (thus far interesting) thread, I think that in 800 or so years time, The Doctor would have said, just once, to the crack in the wall "Hey, it's me, The Doctor. You are causing great tension over here. Could you please go away so that this town will not be destroyed and so that I won't have to defend it forever? Thanks." He might even add in "And by the way, I could use a new set of regenerations. Thanks again."

But, no. Apparently in 800 or so years, he never once thinks of this. Or, he thinks of it but is never able to convince the crack in the wall to leave. Instead, it is up to Clara, who in thirty seconds comes up with the solution to everything which The Doctor cannot do in 800 years.

Sigh. It's just very, very lazy writing.

As I said above, it doesn't matter if he thinks of it, he's the one person that can't put it into practice. And from his point, the universe is safer without him.

sorry - I thought I posted it

here you go: http://www.superdoomedplanet.com/who/cliches.html

If you want to broaden your scope beyond Doctor Who, I recommend J Michael Straczinski's "Complete Book of Scriptwriting". It lays out the structure and format of TV shows and other media. And gives a potted history of each media as well.

The TV stuff is relevant for commercial TV and talks about teasers (usually short pre-credits "hook") and the 3 or 4 act structure to fit the requirements for commercial breaks. For example, you have to structure the narrative to have some sort of hook (or mini cliffhanger) at the end of each part as you head into the advert break, to get the audience to stay with the story and not switch channels.

If you want to broaden even further, there's lots of stuff on the web about how all narratives conform to one of the 7 (sometimes 8) basic story archetypes.

There's also stuff on how much of episodic TV is not really drama, as normally the principle central characters are exactly the same at the end of the story as they were at the beginning. They haven't learned anything, but maybe the guest star of the week has. Of course much modern TV is not like that any more.

Good luck with the thesis!