http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2014-...-steven-moffat
Some priceless quotes in there.
Gotta love the Moff
Some priceless quotes in there.
Gotta love the Moff
Moffat: "We tried to trick Doctor Who fans into thinking Missy was the Rani"
1 of 2
Originally Posted by ProfMarius:
“http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2014-...-steven-moffat
Some priceless quotes in there.
Gotta love the Moff”
“http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2014-...-steven-moffat
Some priceless quotes in there.
Gotta love the Moff
”
I find he tends to induce the complete opposite reaction in me.
Why did he change it? It would have been quite funny to come on here after the episode and see all the posts from those who post during proclaiming half way through that it was basically confirmed she was the rani, only for it to be wrong by the end of the episode.
Whilst I can't blame the guy for having a little harmless fun, it does kind of say alot about the style of his era for the show, namely that he puts his heart far more into creating a mystery for an episode/arc and adding hints and tricks to egg it on than he does in actually making the answer as interesting or concentrating on a coherent plot.
Whilst I can't blame the guy for having a little harmless fun, it does kind of say alot about the style of his era for the show, namely that he puts his heart far more into creating a mystery for an episode/arc and adding hints and tricks to egg it on than he does in actually making the answer as interesting or concentrating on a coherent plot.
Originally Posted by doctor blue box:
“Why did he change it? It would have been quite funny to come on here after the episode and see all the posts from those who post during proclaiming half way through that it was basically confirmed she was the rani, only for it to be wrong by the end of the episode.
Whilst I can't blame the guy for having a little harmless fun, it does kind of say alot about the style of his era for the show, namely that he puts his heart far more into creating a mystery for an episode/arc and adding hints and tricks to egg it on than he does in actually making the answer as interesting or concentrating on a coherent plot.”
“Why did he change it? It would have been quite funny to come on here after the episode and see all the posts from those who post during proclaiming half way through that it was basically confirmed she was the rani, only for it to be wrong by the end of the episode.
Whilst I can't blame the guy for having a little harmless fun, it does kind of say alot about the style of his era for the show, namely that he puts his heart far more into creating a mystery for an episode/arc and adding hints and tricks to egg it on than he does in actually making the answer as interesting or concentrating on a coherent plot.”
I have to admit, you're right.
Don't you think he looks tired?
Originally Posted by doctor blue box:
“Why did he change it? It would have been quite funny to come on here after the episode and see all the posts from those who post during proclaiming half way through that it was basically confirmed she was the rani, only for it to be wrong by the end of the episode.
Whilst I can't blame the guy for having a little harmless fun, it does kind of say alot about the style of his era for the show, namely that he puts his heart far more into creating a mystery for an episode/arc and adding hints and tricks to egg it on than he does in actually making the answer as interesting or concentrating on a coherent plot.”
“Why did he change it? It would have been quite funny to come on here after the episode and see all the posts from those who post during proclaiming half way through that it was basically confirmed she was the rani, only for it to be wrong by the end of the episode.
Whilst I can't blame the guy for having a little harmless fun, it does kind of say alot about the style of his era for the show, namely that he puts his heart far more into creating a mystery for an episode/arc and adding hints and tricks to egg it on than he does in actually making the answer as interesting or concentrating on a coherent plot.”
Well said, Moffat is all 'style' over substance. It's nothing but self-regarding nonsense. I think Moffat's big problem is that he's nowhere near as clever as he thinks he is.
Nice to see Kapellmeister still here, four years later, on the Doctor Who section of the forum complaining about Moffat. Remember that time you said "if things don't improve quickly I'll stop watching"? :P
Did he fool many?
Some on here picked her as the Master very early on,must admit I thought it might be Romana but the Rani? never thought that for a minute
Some on here picked her as the Master very early on,must admit I thought it might be Romana but the Rani? never thought that for a minute
Originally Posted by Ash_735:
“Nice to see Kapellmeister still here, four years later, on the Doctor Who section of the forum complaining about Moffat. Remember that time you said "if things don't improve quickly I'll stop watching"? :P”
“Nice to see Kapellmeister still here, four years later, on the Doctor Who section of the forum complaining about Moffat. Remember that time you said "if things don't improve quickly I'll stop watching"? :P”
Things did improve in series 4 and series 5. What a shame they went downhill again so quickly.
And even at this he failed. The little "hints" he dropped for the sole purpose of trying to fool the fans made it sound far more likely that Missy was Romana, not the smegging Rani. Even AFTER the "Master" was revealed she still had lines like "It's our Paris moment!"
Sorry Moffat, you aren't nearly as clever as you like to think you are. Even RTD didn't bother trying to give fanboys the finger as much as you do.
Sorry Moffat, you aren't nearly as clever as you like to think you are. Even RTD didn't bother trying to give fanboys the finger as much as you do.
Originally Posted by donovan5:
“Did he fool many?
Some on here picked her as the Master very early on,must admit I thought it might be Romana but the Rani? never thought that for a minute”
“Did he fool many?
Some on here picked her as the Master very early on,must admit I thought it might be Romana but the Rani? never thought that for a minute”
The spoiler thread picked up filming scenes where lip-readers believed that Missy revealed that she called herself the Rani...
...turns out they were right. A decoy scene was filmed.
Quote:
“The dialogue was as follows: “You know who I am. I’m Missy. Or, if you’d prefer, Random Access Neural Integrator. Rani for short.””
“The dialogue was as follows: “You know who I am. I’m Missy. Or, if you’d prefer, Random Access Neural Integrator. Rani for short.””
Originally Posted by CD93:
“The spoiler thread picked up filming scenes where lip-readers believed that Missy revealed that she called herself the Rani...
...turns out they were right. A decoy scene was filmed.”
“The spoiler thread picked up filming scenes where lip-readers believed that Missy revealed that she called herself the Rani...
...turns out they were right. A decoy scene was filmed.”
Fair enough I didn't see that as I try to stay clear of spoilers.
Moffat: "We tried to trick Doctor Who fans into thinking Missy was the Rani"
And you failed miserably!
And you failed miserably!
Originally Posted by W._O._Frobozz:
“Even AFTER the "Master" was revealed she still had lines like "It's our Paris moment!"”
“Even AFTER the "Master" was revealed she still had lines like "It's our Paris moment!"”
That's a Casablanca reference, not a reference to Romana.
Originally Posted by trollface:
“That's a Casablanca reference, not a reference to Romana.”
“That's a Casablanca reference, not a reference to Romana.”
It's both actually. The Paris part in Casablanca is now quite a commonly used metaphor for any particularly romantic interlude between recently reunited old lovers.
That's how I took it anyway.
I saw this interview and you have to put his comments in context. Moffat was talking about the dr who fans who were watching the shooting of the scene in london. They taped two versions with misi and then rani.
I thouht the Romana tease was more about i'm the one you left behind moment
I thouht the Romana tease was more about i'm the one you left behind moment
Originally Posted by donovan5:
“Did he fool many?
Some on here picked her as the Master very early on,must admit I thought it might be Romana but the Rani? never thought that for a minute”
“Did he fool many?
Some on here picked her as the Master very early on,must admit I thought it might be Romana but the Rani? never thought that for a minute”
To be fair, most who said it was the Master from early on are the same ones who say 'It's the master' every time any new character comes into Dr Who. So sometimes they will be right lol. Just like a broken clock, twice a day.
Originally Posted by kninemark2:
“I saw this interview and you have to put his comments in context. Moffat was talking about the dr who fans who were watching the shooting of the scene in london. They taped two versions with misi and then rani.
I thouht the Romana tease was more about i'm the one you left behind moment”
“I saw this interview and you have to put his comments in context. Moffat was talking about the dr who fans who were watching the shooting of the scene in london. They taped two versions with misi and then rani.
I thouht the Romana tease was more about i'm the one you left behind moment”
Yes it was a Classcbit of Moff misdirection... Like the beginning of A Good Man goes to War... We know the baby is Rory's but... And in this case we were pretty sure Missy was the Master but...
Originally Posted by GDK:
“It's both actually. The Paris part in Casablanca is now quite a commonly used metaphor for any particularly romantic interlude between recently reunited old lovers.
That's how I took it anyway.”
“It's both actually. The Paris part in Casablanca is now quite a commonly used metaphor for any particularly romantic interlude between recently reunited old lovers.
That's how I took it anyway.”
Yes, that's the Casablanca reference. But there's no reference to Romana. Romana has nothing to do with this story, and the fact that the 4th Doctor went to Paris with her is irrelevant.
It's no more a Romana reference than it is a Susan, Barbara or Ian reference, given that the Doctor was in Paris with all three of them; or a Steven reference, given that the Doctor was in Paris with him; or an Amy and Vincent Van Gogh reference, given that the Doctor was in Paris with both of them. That some people added 2 and 2 and got 15 and therefore believed that Missy was Romana in no way means that a throwaway reference to Casablanca is a reference to Romana.
Originally Posted by jason81:
“To be fair, most who said it was the Master from early on are the same ones who say 'It's the master' every time any new character comes into Dr Who. So sometimes they will be right lol. Just like a broken clock, twice a day.”
“To be fair, most who said it was the Master from early on are the same ones who say 'It's the master' every time any new character comes into Dr Who. So sometimes they will be right lol. Just like a broken clock, twice a day.”
I don't usually think people are the Master (or the Rani, or Romana, for that matter. And, in fact, I rarely subscribe to convoluted fan theories), but I did think Missy was the Master for 2 reasons. Firstly, it was being hyped that she was a character we knew, so she had to be a returning character. Secondly, the "Missy/Mistress/Master" thing is so incredibly Moffat.
There's other little things like the fact that Moffat seems to enjoy annoying people, so making the Master a woman seems like a Moffat move, but really those two bits of information in the previous paragraph made her being the Master seem more likely than any other possibility.
He enjoys intriguing and entertaining the audience but he also knows that when he tries something new or pushes the boundaries he will inevitably annoy a certain proportion of the audience.
You can't please all the people all the time. To not change and "stay safe" is to die. He is the show runner. It's his job to do what he sees fit to keep the show alive.
Unfortunately, some of those who dislike his work seem to take it as a personal affront and go on to make unwarranted personal attacks on SM and his work.
By all means, critique his work, yes, but don't make insulting personal attacks like "lazy writing" or "arrogant" or accuse him of enjoying annoying fans as a whole.
You can't please all the people all the time. To not change and "stay safe" is to die. He is the show runner. It's his job to do what he sees fit to keep the show alive.
Unfortunately, some of those who dislike his work seem to take it as a personal affront and go on to make unwarranted personal attacks on SM and his work.
By all means, critique his work, yes, but don't make insulting personal attacks like "lazy writing" or "arrogant" or accuse him of enjoying annoying fans as a whole.
Originally Posted by GDK:
“He enjoys intriguing and entertaining the audience but he also knows that when he tries something new or pushes the boundaries he will inevitably annoy a certain proportion of the audience.
You can't please all the people all the time. To not change and "stay safe" is to die. He is the show runner. It's his job to do what he sees fit to keep the show alive.
Unfortunately, some of those who dislike his work seem to take it as a personal affront and go on to make unwarranted personal attacks on SM and his work.
By all means, critique his work, yes, but don't make insulting personal attacks like "lazy writing" or "arrogant" or accuse him of enjoying annoying fans as a whole.”
“He enjoys intriguing and entertaining the audience but he also knows that when he tries something new or pushes the boundaries he will inevitably annoy a certain proportion of the audience.
You can't please all the people all the time. To not change and "stay safe" is to die. He is the show runner. It's his job to do what he sees fit to keep the show alive.
Unfortunately, some of those who dislike his work seem to take it as a personal affront and go on to make unwarranted personal attacks on SM and his work.
By all means, critique his work, yes, but don't make insulting personal attacks like "lazy writing" or "arrogant" or accuse him of enjoying annoying fans as a whole.”
Spot on.
Moffat has written eloquently about how much he reveres Robert Holmes work. Hinchcliffe and Holmes got a bit of a kicking from certain sections of fandom for The Deadly Assassin. A skeletal Master? The awe inspiring Time Lords of The War Games depicted as corrupt, politically motivated, fusty gits? Heresy! Doctor Who died for me that day! Or some such.
Holmes, the cheeky chap, had seeded that depiction with the bizarre bowler hatted man appearing in Terror of the Autons. It was a different take. It was change. Which I agree is vital for Who. Some'll like it, some won't, but I'm certain all Moffat, RTD, Holmes, Letts....all the way back to the brilliant Ms Lambert want to do is to make Who to the absolute best of their ability.
Then we can have a bit of fun debating the results on forums.
1 of 2
