One thing I have noticed over the last few years, is that, apart from Doctor Who in 2005, the Slitheen haven't played a big part in any of the stories. Yes, we saw a couple of them towards the end of The Big Bang in 2010, as the Doctor was placed in the Pandorica, but that's it really. I'd love to see them back sometime, in a story where they are the main villain.

Before anyone asks, yes, I know we have seen them two or three times in SJA. I know for a fact, that not everyone who watches Doctor Who, has seen any episode of The Sarah Jane Adventures.

Another problem is Moffat is trying to address international viewers too much. An example is with comic con. The 50th trailer was shown there yet we had to wait weeks to view it. With The End of Time the trailer was shown at comic con and an hour later a longer trailer along with the one shown a CC was uploaded to the DW website.

Also increasing amounts of episodes were shot in the US and targeted at an american audience. WHICH DOES MY HEAD IN. The show is funded through UK taxpayers yet Americans get more exclusives. Coming up to the 50th also and american viewers were getting tonnes of who specials airing and the only reason we got to view them was because WATCH bought them.

The End of Time was broadcast here a day before everywhere else as an exclusive to us. Yet now all the simulcast bullshit means we get barely any exclusives.

Which, in truth, has nothing to do with the content or direction of the series. It's just an annoyance to some.


I think that you'll find that many of the US-based episodes received joint funding from BBC America.

As for being targeted at an American audience, how do you mean? In what way?

I think it would have been daft not to take the opportunity to film In the US if possible. It broadens the show's horizons. Same goes for Spain or Lanzarote or Paris or wherever really. Or should they just film in Wales?

Actually, I live in Cardiff and like the fact that they film in my home City, so wouldn't mind that either!

As long as I get to see the programme, I really can't get worked up about which country sees what trailer when tbh.

The simulcast bs works both ways. It means that we get to see the opening episode of Game of Thrones and 24 at the same time as the US. Rather like catch up, it's the future of TV whether you like it or not.

The simple thing for me is it's become too much about the plot and not enough about the characters. Moffat's characters are moulded to fit his plot and we lose depth - anything that's not plotty is deemed 'uninteresting' by him. Which is nonsense when it comes to writing we can relate to.

If you could mix RTDs ability with character with some of Moffat's plots then you'd have a much stronger show.

I actually agree with you that RTD is often better at the character stuff. Though Moffat has shown he can do it especially in Sherlock and on occasion in DW.

I felt there was a distinct lack of any real character arc or development for Eleven. Which was a shame. There were degrees of it. But not enough for me.

That said I find alot of the RTD plots overly simple and uninteresting and its only the character moments that make me rewatch. Whereas with Moffats era though sometimes messy I find the narrative and the visuals make me want to watch again and again.

I agree the ultimate would be RTDs character skills with Moffats plots. Moffat favours telling us we should care whereas with RTD we just did care.

I found some of the moments in The Time of the Doctor utterly heartbreaking thanks mostly to Matts performance and Moffats ability to write some killer lines. But on the other hand because so much was packed into one episode (literally hundreds of years) i didn't really feel the connection between Eleven and the residents of Trenzalore. It was story telling with the finger on the fast forward button.

That said I find the episodes in general to be richer in detail so a slight preference towards them.

I think RTD's 'Bad Wolf', Mr Saxon and Doctor/Donna fall into the simple category. They were gentle mentions throughout each season that came together at the finale.

But I think Moffat's crack, Silence and impossible girl arcs imposed themselves far more on individual stories throughout each season. It was all terribly clever but, ultimately, they didn't really work for me and I felt Moffat relied too heavily on those story arcs/mysteries at the expense of characterisation and emotional depth.

I do personally think it is sympathetic, believable characters that drives an audience to watch a show. Perhaps a bit of romance, perhaps a bit of comedy too. But if clever story arcs replace that emotional depth then I think viewers will feel the show is less of a 'must see' and will watch it more casually later in the week. The problem with that, long term, is you might end up with viewers who have two or three weeks' worth of episodes and they eventually lose interest and don't watch at all.

For season 8, I'm really hoping to see a really funny, warm relationship between Peter Capaldi and Jenna Coleman and also see Clara's life outside of the TARDIS fleshed out a bit more too. At the moment (for me) she's a bit like Amy was - 80% storyline and only 20% character.


You may be right. I think it depends on how much the trend to iPlayer continues. If we have reached saturation point already then it probably is that. But if the overnights continue to drop in favour of watching the show later in the week, I think the BBC might begin to look at whether there is a problem with the show itself.

But they didn't. If anything, we might have had a minute of content at the most, and none of it mattered to the understanding of the episode in question. For example, the lead fish in Vampires of Venice gave a speech about the holes in time that they fell through, but that didn't affect what the fishes' plan was, or the terrible deeds they were doing, or what happened to the characters. It wasn't necessary to understand that this was a part of a bigger theme in order to understand the story. There was more impact in Flesh and Stone, but that's an exception, and all you really needed to know was the effect of what the crack did, which was new to that story anyway.

I've heard the criticism that Moffat doesn't, or can't, do 'characters', and it's utter nonsense. Sure, he stuffs his episodes full of plot, so the character bits don't necessarily have time to linger - which is probably why his feature-length episodes are quite well received - but they're beautifully written.

I wouldn't call it utter nonsense, Johnny. As you said, its all down to whatever your own personal feeling is. The 11th Doctor, Amy and (so far) Clara didn't hit any emotional pressure points with me. I watched to see how the stories resolved themselves but never particularly cared what happened to the characters themselves.

I honestly felt I understood where Rose, Martha and Donna were coming from. But with Clara, for instance, we've had a quick montage showing the 'leaf' story and that (for me) just wasn't enough to make her a real person.

Oddly enough, I've enjoyed Moffat's re-occurring characters (River, Madame Vastra, Jenny, Strax) far more than his core cast.

Emphasis mine.

And like most people on a high, it has done bad things, which it will regret in the morning.

Which is entirely reasonable. But it's your interest that is your own personal feeling, not necessarily the skill of the writer. I never found myself being too interested in Rose, or her cartoon mother, or Martha, but loved Donna and Amy. But still, I did love the character moments that RTD wrote, just as I love Moffat's. Perhaps there's too few of them with Moffat, perhaps there were too many with RTD - but you can't say the writer isn't capable of them.


I completely agree that Clara is under-written - that she's a little too 'perfect' to be interesting. So far, at least. I like that she's the first companion that actually respects the Doctor rather than idolising him, but I don't really know what that says about her.

I actually think Jenna Coleman has the potential to be a truly memorable companion. Her comedy timing is terrific and I remember someone (possibly Moffat) saying she and Matt Smith were going to have a sort of Cary Grant/Katherine Hepburn relationship (or some famous Hollywood classic couple). I don't think he managed that but maybe he will with Peter Capaldi.

No sex/kissing - As fun as it was to watch Rose and the doctor together, I'm bored of whole "the companion wants to shag the doctor" thing now. It's time for something different. Something similar to what we got when Donna was a companion would be nice.

No River Song - Please, please, please don't bring River Song back, she's a horrible character, and even though it's nice to see a doctor who is about her age, I'm sick of her now and hope she never returns.

No (nonsensical) story arcs - I'm not a fan of SM, but there are times when I do enjoy his scripts. Season five was excellent, I loved the anniversary episode, and Sherlock is brilliant too, but seasons six and seven were awful. His episodes are much more enjoyable when there is more focus on one episode, rather than what's going to happen or something that happened almost a year ago.

Two part episodes - Goes back to the point above. I'd rather we got a few two part episodes than a story arc.

Pacing is an issue too.

Better characterization - Some people are obviously better at characters than others, and RTD was brilliant at it, and that's one of the things I've missed these past two seasons. I'm not saying that SM is useless at writing sympathetic characters, Amy had the potential to be a great companion, the quirky little orphan who waited all those years for the doctor to return, I felt sorry for her, and I liked her during season five, but she turned into a nasty bitch during season six. The only character who I had any sympathy for during seasons six was Rory, and that was because I felt sorry for him, being married to that horrible cow, Amy,

Clara is nice, but I'd like to see her involved in the episodes a bit more, so here's hoping that a new doctor and (hopefully) more focus on small story-lines will bring her out of her shell a bit more. And this is my point, I think season eight should focus one/two part episodes, as that's when SM's episodes are more enjoyable, both characterization and plot wise.

I don't know if anyone will agree with me, but I feel that Moffat is not only horrible at writing characters but also emotional scenes. When the Ponds left I honestly felt nothing. I'd even say I felt more emotion through Donna in The Fires of Pompeii. Moffat is too busy focusing on what will make viewers go ''ahh I see'' than he is on focusing character development. It's as if he is using them as tools to create his big series arcs. I think RTD had a much better balance of character and plot.

Amen. I agree wholeheartedly. It is time to end the Moffatization of Doctor Who and get back to some well done characters and good stories.

Quick update:

The series finale was shot in a block of it's own with a different director to previous ep so it looks like that won't be a 2 parter

Also no 2 episodes in a row have the same director and same writer so it looks like no 2 parters at all Which is a complete piece of sh*t. I don't understand why Moffat has cut them. They are much better than single episodes. Which under him have been poor.

The two-part finale is currently being filmed. Episodes 11 & 12, directed by Rachel Talalay. We even have a title.

But other than that... well actually that's the entire update shot down in flames Sorry, but always check for confirmation before declaring something a complete piece of sh*t - it will make things much easier.

HAHAHA just spotted it now. However it looks like our only two part episode throughout the series which is a piece of crap

That does give us 11 new stories to look forward to. Including an extended introductory one. Assuming they are all going to be poor or crap (especially under new producers, directors, writers, script editors & lead actor) is a very cynical approach.

I disagree. I found RTD to be better at characterisation but the plots were often lacking. Moffat has shown that he is good at both and I prefer Moffat's plots but sometimes his stories feel a little messy, like he is trying to cram too much into an episode. It reminds me of J K Rowling whose Harry Potter books got longer and longer or George R R Martin who takes longer and longer to write each Song of Fire and Ice book. The writers just seem to get a little lost in their worlds. In my opinion Moffat just needs a good script editor to untangle his plots and I have high hopes that Brian Mitchin will be a good influence in this regard.