This is actually detailing some of my main problems with his way of doing things. He comes up with his own stories but quickly grows tired of them, yet constantly wants to reach back into the pre established history to mess with what we thought we already knew.

Although he has written some good stories, I feel he often is more interested in sensationalism and how he can advertise an episode/arc rather than if its a solid story or not. 'oh look the doctor is dead, completely' (series 6) or 'oh look, it's the doctors final grave' (or not as it turned out) or 'oh look, we haven't made Clara interesting on her own character merits yet, so lets try and force her importance by a nonsensical storyline where she had a hand in every episode up until Name of the doctor' or 'oh look, we've shoehorned in an extra secret incarnation of the doctor as a gimmick' or 'were not sure if the second part of this series 8 finale will interest people on it's own, so why don't we just have Clara say she's the doctor in the pre titles sequence. It doesn't matter that the whole thing is a completely hollow, pointless lie that brings nothing to the story, by the time they realise that, they'll have already given us the ratings' or I imagine him thinking 'keep throwing in those random brigadier references, and old daleks, that'll keep the old fans watching if nothing else'.

As someone else mentioned, RTD's time war and 'last of the time lords' period was solid and didn't feel like a gimmick or messing with who history, but rather an update of what had happened in the off screen years. developments in the RTD time felt respectful of the show and it's history and building on it, rather than trying to change and overwrite it. I don't feel Moffat has 'left the biggest stamp' in the lore as you say, I feel he's done things with who lore people do and will just want to forget in much the same way that the 'half human' line in the tv movie or 'extra doctor faces' in the morbius episode are treated today.

There's always going to be a divide between fans as to whether the writer is leaving their stamp on the lore, or whether a writer is stamping all over the lore. And I'd have to agree with you that Moffat has more than once taken things too far, often because of what amounts to a sensationalist story. As soon as he said he'd had one of his "maddest ideas" for Series 9 I worried - Doctor Who should be mad, fun, engaging, a little bit ridiculous and occasionally deep or dramatic. But those things come from good ideas, not mad ones. Again I agree that he's done things that I would like to really forget. I love John Hurt to pieces but the whole War Doctor concept just doesn't work (The Doctor has always been upfront about his actions and involvement in the Time War, everyone from viewer to companion knows he can change his face... So having a secret incarnation for that purpose only served to deliver stunt casting - as a plot development it's nonsensical), for example.

But can I speak for the common consensus? Not really. The truth is that most people loved the War Doctor reveal, most people are unphased that the Doctor was forced to spend half his life on Trenzalore and that Handles just happened to die on the exact same day that Clara came back in a 300 year window. Most people don't care and lap up the developments he's made. I'd be lying if I said I didn't like a few myself, though my general opinion is that he is very close to overstepping the mark and overstaying his welcome. I don't think most people are clambering to forget his mark on the show though - much as I might sometimes, much as you might, his mark on Doctor Who is generally well received.

I seem to recall there were those who felt then (and maybe still feel) that RTD had done to Who lore what you accuse SM of now. Some people even went so far as to refuse to accept new Who was a continuation of classic Who (DariaM anyone - don't say the name 3 times, though ).

There must have been some who liked the half human thing.

One man's gimmick is another's clever twist. Why should "he's doomed - oh no he's not" be any more of a gimmick than the Master's repeated "deaths" and inevitable returns? At least we got some kind of explanation to justify things and not just "hand waved away".

Personally, I feel he is at least as respectful of established Who lore as RTD was. He's taking seriously his responsibility to the show as much as RTD did.

Yeah. What Doctor Blue Box is essentially saying is 'I don't like what he did so I'm going to say lots of people don't and pick and choose' .Well that's fine. We can all do that. Personally I find the existence of 10.5 and the Doctors Daughter far more 'offensive' and slapdashedly disrespectful of the sanctity of the Doctor Who universe than anything Moffats done apart from maybe the Clara saving everything all of the time thing.

To be fair, I made it perfectly clear that it was just my opinion and didn't say anything about 'lots of people' feeling the same, or suggest it was in anyway anyone else's opinion.

I did suspect though that some would feel the same, and that was almost instantly verified when in the next post abomination agreed with most of the points that I made, although he added that a lot of people did like those Moffat created moments which, yes I can see that is true, just as I can understand that you might also like those moments but not like things such as the 10.5 doctor.

It's called a difference of opinion. Many people have them.

Thats fair enough, that's your opinion just as my post was mine. each to their own.

I agree with you too.

My perspective on this very narrow aspect of Moffat's Who is that RTD took things forward and Moffat seems to be wanting to keep revisiting the past - possibly bits of the past that I very much like being obscure. I didn't care for the idea of 10.5 going off to snog Rose in another universe, but it doesn't change a damn thing about the real Doctor, or the real Doctor's established history. It doesn't have to be ignored in the way that I have to "la la la I'm not listening" the Half Human thing.

Likewise the 2005 "last of my kind" story. It wasn't very appealing to me at the time (I quite liked the Time Lords in their 70s fuddy duddy role), but it was progression - some terrible war had happened, the Doctor had intervened. Nothing about it spoiled my thoughts of the Doctor's history prior to this Time War, and nothing about what he said he'd done contradicted what we know about the Doctor. He's always been able to act the badass when required, albeit this was at the extreme end of the scale. More traumatic even than when he decided to whack a frenchman over the head with a shovel.

Whereas I don't much care for Moffat reaching back to his past life. It was 100% understandable when he was writing stories to be shown in the 50th anniversary year. Of course the end of Name of the Doctor was a hoot! I loved seeing the first Doctor and Susan steal the Tardis etc etc. But actually - I hated it too. That's not how the Doctor stole the Tardis really. Not in my mind. I don't want to be shown it - same way nobody in their right mind ever wanted to see Darth Vader running around as a little kid. And I don't want Clara running around being the actual reason the Doctor won all those 60s, 70s and 80s adventures. And I don't want the Doctor's fundamental character being something about Qui Gon Clara visiting young Anakin Doctor when he a little kid. And I really don't want to find out that the Doctor fled Gallifrey as the result of some shameful guilt as a result of a blunder. (which is the kind of thing I fear Moffat would do).

I liked the War Doctor - but only in the context of Moffat having to respond creatively to Eccleston refusing to return and John Hurt is always a pleasure. Moffat did a good job with the cards dealt him and I enjoyed it - as long as I took care to ignore continuity. What people have said is correct - it actually makes no sense. 9th, 10th and 11th Doctors were constantly banging on about their acknowledged role in the Time War. It wasn't a secret he was in denial about. But I did like the way the Sisterhood of Karn helped him make a conscious decision to regenerate into a Warrior to get that job done.

I think it's this assertion that has lead people - at least myself and saladfingers - to assume you were generalising:


Comes across a little generalise-y...

I'm of the opinion that Moff has been in charge in a unique period - not only has the show been (and continues to be) an incredible mainstream success compared to the classic era, it has also just been the 50th anniversary. One could understand why these things should allow a certain amount of looking back and reaching into the lore to refresh it. Keeping something exactly as it was could cause stagnation, and he's trying to make sure that doesn't happen, so some other showrunner can be doing the same thing 50 years down the line.