I'm not really sure how to take this story. That story was abysmal, should no-one ever say so for fear of upsetting her? Apparently RTD and the rest of the production crew didn't and we got two of the show's worst episodes as a result.

Yes, that's a good point. It's one thing for Davies to complain about the abuse Raynor got (although it shouldn't have been personal) but he must take his share of the blame for allowing such a poor script to be produced in the first place.

I take your point. I guess what I was trying to say is that if too much attention was paid to just hard-core fans we'd up end with 'Attack of the Cybermen' again - and so Moffat just needs to remember that the show has a broader audience than that. But you are right - we are more critical and perhaps that is a good thing too.

This is the second, more positive internet. The other one is a lot darker

Not sure why you think a perfectly escapable situation that was in no way ever claimed to be impossible needs any further resoution.

And is that really how you think TV programmes are made? Really? That with all the money, time and man-hours needed to be accounted for they would just let someone's whim take them wherever they desired? That they would go out and recast the main character as reset? Seriously?

I get that you weren't keen, that's fine. But to suggest that the BBC basically bows down to the fickle flights of fancy of someone is disingenuous at best. It also shows a lack of critical thinking, tbh - which I'm sure is only due to bias, and isn't a general thing, before you accuse me of personal insults. I'm not suggesting that at all - but personal bias can colour our views and stop us from properly examining something.

Good on Moffat.

The vocal side against him at times is bloody tiresome to read.

He has a better measure of fandom than his detractors ever will about him it seems.

Yeah, right.

Yes. Shawn is right. I agree.

You would.

Ok, to your first point I'll concede I am probably being fanatical. As for your issue with my thoughts on why we got a new Doctor just take another look at some of Matt's interviews around the time it was announced he was leaving. It looked as if he wanted to cry sometimes and if you look at when it was announced that Capaldi was taking over in his interview Matt couldn't look directly at the camera - averting his eyes away a lot of the time.

Ok its only speculation but it seems to me that Matt was keen on staying on and that for some reason that didn't happen. I was suggesting that perhaps Moffat was running out of ideas for the Silence story which was 11's story basically and that instead of giving him a new story he chose to go with a new Doctor because the direction in which Matt's Doctor was going was no longer going closer to where the original series was going and by introducing a new Doctor he hopes to go back on to that. I don't understand what you think is unreasonable or unrealistic about that. Sure it is all conjecture and probably wrong but I am merely making a guess based on what I have seen and the facts surrounding Matt's departure (ie the fact that clearly there was something up with him around about the time that the news broke).

I thought I was the only one who got that impression. No idea of the true facts surrounding the circumstances of his departure, but I did get a strong vibe around that time that the decision to go was completely out of his hands.

Just thought to add - look at Capaldi's story of shooting the regeneration scene, where Matt passes on the watch his Doctor wore to Capaldi and gives him a big hug saying to take good care of the Doctor, now again reading between the lines based on observation it sounds like Matt was really saying no hard feelings its not your fault I was forcefully moved on. Even if what I am speculating is right I'm not saying it's right or fair that it happened but this sort of thing does happen in TV production, sure normally what would happen is that the character just disappears without a word of explanation but with the Doctor you have to recast you can't just get rid of someone when they play the Doctor but you don't have to renew a contract. What I am saying is that I am perfectly aware of how production works thank you. As for the rushed tie in story point which I missed in my original post maybe that is subjective but in that case surely I am entitled to my opinion on that rather than being accused of a lack of critical thinking.

I remember he admitted he just didn't have time to polish those scripts like he did with some others. His work schedule was crazy! It's also worth noting that Helen was a script editor on the show, so with her writing the episode itself that was always going to affect things.

Tbh, they threw Helen Raynor in at the deep end, giving her a Daleks 2-parter set in 1930s New York! It's not as though they were horrible either. There have been much worse episodes...

I think the Daleks in Mathattan two parter was fab! Wonderful story and a beautiful backdrop.

It was the prosthetics of the Human Dalek that let it down for me. That's all. Everything else was fine, and we got to see a very different story for the Daleks, who quite often end up with very repetitive storylines.

Well, I'm sure it was a lot more simple than some moffat conspiracy theory.
Matt was a (relative) unknown when he signed the part, contract negotiation time came around and boom...he wanted more money.

The series probably couldn't afford a significant wage hike so, off he goes plying his wage in all likelyhood not on publicly funded television.

Conversely Peter, who has a much higher profile, probably rakes in a lot of royalties from his many copious appearances in other fine work and has much more of a passion for the show, might have been ok with the relatively low (for an actor of his repute) wage to get the opportunity to perform the role he has so wanted to play since he was a child.

Sadly this is a much more likely scenario than anything to do with Moffat sacking Matt because he can't think of any ideas.
There's no conformation of either hypothesis but Moffat would have no problem sending the show in a new direction with series 8 even if Matt was in the role.
He nearly did the same with series 7 when it was implied the Doctor was going around erasing himself from everybody's history so he'd be forgotten, only to suddenly stop that and have the Daleks remembering him again very quickly.
It'd take him less that one ep to completely reset the series regardless of who is playing the Doctor.

Ok for one it's hardly a Moffat conspiracy, merely I am suggesting that Moffat and Matt wanted different things and being the boss Moffat won. Besides there is a gaping hole in your theory if it were a simple issue of money I don't see why Matt would look so upset. The way he was behaving even if money was an issue he would have been willing for a compromise, certainly not anything to get so upset at, unless he was asking for some unreasonable amount and even then I don't see why this would cause such an issue. But this is all conjecture and guess work so really we could all be wrong and it turns out that they are all green monsters with pink polka dot spots prancing about singing "In the Navy" for all that we know. I mean all we know is that at the time of the announcement that Matt was leaving he appeared to look rather upset about it.

My take for what it's worth; Matt was upset about leaving a role that he loved, but had decided after 3 series, culminating in the 50th and Christmas, it was time to go. Like David before him I'm sure it was a very tough decision.SM would've love him to stay. (and indeed David if he had decided to do a fourth series) I assume Matt didn't start sobbing uncontrollably when he went to lunch with Peter C...

That conjecture is, admittedly, a bit dull.

Maybe, but again I don't see how that would warrant how upset Matt was but that's just my opinion on the whole thing

Occam's razor would suggest this. It is what I thought, and still think. Has nobody else had to leave something/someone and still be massively upset, even though it is the right thing to do?

An example: You buy your first house/flat. It is your pride and joy, you did it up, you fall in love with the odd bits that shouldn't be there - the creaking floorboard just in front of the bathroom; the window in the kitchen that just won't unlock; the rapidly growing 'damp' patch in the living room ceiling and the suddenly-always-been-there second storey... Okay, not that last bit. But anyway, I digress... So you love this house/flat. It is part of you, and you are part of it.

But then you get married. Or along comes your first baby. Or you get promoted and relocated. You still love your first house/flat, but you have to move on. It's right for your future. You will be upset for a while, but it is ultimately the best choice.

The evidence for Matt having been pushed is only really there in the face of bias - when viewed with a particular end in sight, then it might appear that way. But it really doesn't seem like that for the rest of those observing it.

He was actually pretty balanced on fandom and didn't generalise fandom as a whole, so yes, he does have a good measure on fandom. More so than certain fans do with him.

I get what your saying but even in the scenario you describe yes you would be upset - not once have I denied that I'm sure David was upset when he left yet you didn't get the feeling he wanted to cry every interview. My point is in the scenario you described you would have made your peace with having to move out of the place you love and so wouldn't look like you want to cry every time someone asked you about it. Sure maybe I'm taking a cynical view on it and sure everyone is different and maybe I am biased due to my view point but based solely on what we do know I do not understand why your unwilling to accept that it is as much of a possibility as any other scenario - no matter how unpleasant it may be.

Wait. So for some people we have gone from a few sad faces and a couple of subdued interviews to it being a thing now that Smith was forced out of the role? What?!?! This is complete twaddle with no basis in anything resembling fact and more to do with some peoples salacious need for gossip and drama even when there is none. A bit like those who have fabricated a story that Capaldi doesn't liked previous Doctors just because he felt it was time for a change. All very silly.

You're right. It is possible. Obviously it's possible.

But there's no real evidence to back it up. It's a more complicated reason for something that could (and in all likelihood does) have a much less complicated reason. Sensibility leads me to disregard many other things that could be possible - just as you have. You just have decided to stick with a more complicated reason, that has to be fit into what we know. Mine doesn't need any other explanation, and doesn't need to be 'fitted in' around anything. I prefer not to have to reach for an explanation, and am just going on the face of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Zim8zL3Q5k
and there were plenty of other such interviews where he has that shifty look about him as if he can't quite look people in the eye with out showing how he truly feels. The sort of look a naughty school boy might give after he's been caught doing something he shouldn't, and whilst I'm not suggesting Matt did something wrong it does appear to be more a case of he wanted to stay on and was told he couldn't for what ever reason. I can't be bothered with this argument any more so I'll leave it there.

Everyone get's upset when they've just left a job that was dear to them, no matter how genuine and proactive their own decisions were for leaving.