For me Dr Who has lost it's heart. David Tennant did have charisma in the role and even though I disliked the companions falling in love with him, there was real connection between the doctor and his companions. Matt Smith came across as eccentric and kindly right from the start and I really loved Amy's loyalty to him. Amy was an ordinary person who wanted adventure and he looked after her.

Clara being made the 'most important companion' in terms of saving the doctor means that she has lost the real value of the companion which is to relate to the viewers. She is too knowing, too clever, too perfect and too judgemental. She never seems scared or phased by any situation in fact she doesn't come across as a real person at all. I absolutely cant wait until she leaves. It's not good when the companion is more important that the doctor. PC should be taking centre stage not Clara.

PC might be better with a new companion but I don't find him as likeable as Smith or Tennant so far.

That is a straw man argument. Yes, there are good and bad episodes in every season. No one is arguing against that. However, it used to be that the good far outnumbered the bad. Nowadays, however, the bad episodes far outnumber the good.

In your opinion.

I thought bad episodes outweighed good in the Tennant era. Doesn't mean it's somehow 'true'.

No matter how hard you press it your opinion remains your opinion and you can't make it objective by insistence.

The viewing figures are objective and they would support my side of the debate here.

Also, just because something is my opinion, does not mean that it is wrong. That is another straw man argument, to try and infer that something is wrong just because it is my (or anybody's) opinion.

Hi all

So, seems to me theres a fair bit of negativity going about lately with regards to Dr Who - especially on this forum. Things have changed. There used to be the odd moan and healthy debate when an episode wasn’t to someones personal liking - and you can’t please everyone all the time, but nowadays it seems to be overwhelmingly negative.

As a lifelong fan of Dr Who, its a bit saddening to see the downhill slide happening - but am I saying people are wrong in their opinions? No! - Opinions are what they are and everyone’s is perfectly valid.

Personally speaking, I think there IS something wrong lately but its quite hard to put my finger on it. I think problems can be summarised in the 3 areas of Casting, the Showrunner, and Scheduling.

1. Casting

Is Peter Capaldi a good Doctor? Well, yes I suppose so. Is he as well received as Matt or David? Certainly not. Why? Well, I think that the ‘grumpy doctor’ was OK to a point but they went too far and too long during series 8 and he really wasn’t that accessible or even likeable as a character. People often compare him to Jon Pertwee’s 3rd Doctor… and the similarities are there - Pertwee was more pompous and condescending for sure - but when you watch his episodes there was always an underlying ‘kindness’ there.
I am reminded back to the ‘reveal’ of Peter Capaldi’s casting back in 2013. When I heard the ever increasing rumours that he was the frontrunner, I remember thinking ‘I do hope not - that guy just doesn’t seem very doctor-y to me’. However, I had faith that the BBC knew what they were doing, and that it was very important to have someone TOTALLY DIFFERENT to David and Matt. The thing about David and Matt is that they were very similar in many ways - young, enthusiastic, chirpy, and friendly. To me, when they appeared on the Day of the Doctor, it was really obvious that the two of them were much the same - it was actually quite nice to have John Hurt’s Doctor present to give you some balance and show you that the Doctor can be different - I think that many modern Who ‘fans’ needed to be reminded of that (and it was a lead-in to what was to come!). What is funny is that at the time, there was an overwhelming positive reaction from the fans overjoyed with his casting…. where are you all now I wonder??

Also, Clara. I don’t think that there is anything wrong with Jenna, but I think that Clara has stayed too long. It was great to have a companion span 2 doctors - we had missed out on that for Matt, but she should have left last year and series 9 should have been a fresh start with a new companion. I find it hard to believe that it was allowed to be the actresses choice here - it should always be whats best for the show and not for an individual as to whether they stay or go. I think Clara’s story was wrapped up nicely, and it was the right time to leave. One personal criticism I have about Clara is that the show does feel too much about her - so many stories the Doctor almost seems like a background character - almost Clara’s chauffeur, and it is her, or her presence in the story, that provides the ultimate resolution. This is wrong, it should be the Doctor being brilliant and not the assistant. This is more aimed at series 8 than 9, but series 8 was so important to establish the new Doctor and it didn’t really happen - it was all about Clara.
One thing that irked me slightly recently was at the end of the Zygon Inversion, the doctor returns to the TARDIS and there is Clara casually flicking switches on the console - doesn’t really seem right a human companion operating the TARDIS controls - however I do think that she is being set up as too confident so this is on purpose perhaps…. we shall see.

2. Showrunner

I think that Steven Moffatt has been exceptional. I have no complaints. it must be quite a challenge to keep a show like this going. HOWEVER…….. Nobody can keep going creatively and keep things fresh forever, and to be totally honest, I think that it is time to step aside and let someone else take the reins. Are his Ideas becoming stale? Not really. Is he repeating himself? No, I don’t really feel that is true either. Does the tone and direction of the show need changing again? YES I really think it does - and the only way for this is to get someone new in.
Personally, I am rather deflated at the news that he is staying for series 10 with Peter Capaldi’s doctor - I just don’t see it will change or ignite some lost viewer’s interest until he steps aside. There will be a new companion, yes, but I don’t think that is enough to kick things up a gear. I really, REALLY, hope the next companion isnt special or mysterious at all - just an everyman who is there to react, and ask the right questions, and be that moral compass that the Doctor needs.

3. Scheduling.

A lot has been said about the ratings. I think there is no doubt that they are suffering. I can’t understand why its been moved to late evening. As others have said, 8.30 is too late. Why can’t it go back to 7pm… well the reason this year is Strictly etc…. and then of course its been on at Halloween, in direct competition with the X-Factor, and the Rugby world cup. I don’t understand the late nights given these factors.
I would like to see it go back to the Spring. That way there is a 12 episode run to enjoy, followed by a longish break to Christmas, and then only a short hop after that to the next series. Nowadays all Dr Who is concentrated in the autumn and this year theres only a few weeks until the Christmas Special.
It does seem like we have an enforced long break coming up after this series, and I suspect that some questions will be asked about scheduling and viewing figures.
I know that the way people watch TV has changed, and that most people watch on catchup or from a recording - especially given the 8.30pm scheduling this series - and its a shame that these aren’t reliably included on the ratings figures. Doctor who is the only programme I ever try to watch live - everything else, for many years, I have recorded and watched at leisure after the event.


So, these 3 elements need to be addressed in some way. I will never give up on Dr Who, I have been watching it long enough to know that the Doctor changes, and that its not always going to be to your taste. I do think there is a slight misstep happening here - and the sheer amount of complaining around this forum just demonstrates that. I have several friends who were avid fans of Doctor Who, and they have all stopped watching since Peter Capaldi. I don’t really understand this. To me, will I ever give up and stop watching? NO - never… I will always enjoy it. Is the current series my favourite? No - its not. Is it heading in a direction that I like? Im pretty neutral on that - the show thrives on change and re-invention and there is always scope to change and adapt and it surely will as time goes by. Is Peter Capaldi my favourite Doctor? No, he isnt. A bold choice, a necessary step to remind people that the Doctor is not always the jovial amiable Matt or David variety - but he must never lose his heart and compassion.

So, what next…. obviously with the next series starting filming in the Spring, there is going to be some scheduling changes coming up - I doubt that we will get series 10 in the autumn but thats a good thing. Make it earlier in the evening and don’t pit it agains some behemoth ITV series or sporting events.

Also, as I said earlier, I am a little heavy hearted to know that Steven Moffat is continuing onto series 10 - I just don’t think that it can be different enough with the current showrunner and Doctor combination. He’s had a great run, and has been very successful under Matts tenure to make the show a worldwide phenomenon the likes of which some older fans would never have though possible for Dr Who. However, time to give someone else a go, with new ideas, and a new direction. The only things that I think will ‘revive interest’ are both a new Doctor AND a new show runner. This is not forthcoming and I hope that after series 10 the damage is not irreversible.

Oh yes, obviuosly... <rolleyes>

But the 'good'ness or the 'bad'ness of a television programme is not immutable - it is entirely subjective. Your opinion is of no greater value than anyone else's. It is no more correct, nor is it no more wrong.

Also, viewing figures are not indicative of something's inherent 'good'ness or 'bad'ness either. As an example (and for this I'm using literature): 50 Shades of Grey. Became a phenomenon, best seller world-wide, spawned a lucrative film. Yet the writing is terrible - it is lazily copied fan-fiction (analysis has shown that 70% of the references to original source material Twilight is still there), the overtly mysoginistic overtones can be harmful to young girls and their mental development (their sense of self-worth compared to men and their place in society), and at its core is a knock off of an itself poorly written hugely successful trilogy.

Objectively, the 50 Shades of Grey series is bad. But the fact that it became an international best-seller would appear to go contrary to that point. It doesn't - it's still bad whether it is successful or not.

The viewing figures do not make your opinion more legitimate than somebody else's, which is what you seem to be suggesting. The War Games fared terribly for its time (I believe it was the lowest scoring serial of the Patrick Troughton era) and yet is remembered by many as one of his best stories. Game of Thrones has scored below the 3 million mark before, yet the episode in question was very well received. The only thing the viewing figures seem to say for Doctor Who is that more people now watch it through other means than its initial airing on BBC1.

Hang on, you can't have it both ways, you know!

You're right, anything that's to do with entertainment value or the enjoyment the audience gets from the experience is entirely subjective. All of it. That's why, in those areas at least, no one person's opinion is any better or worse than anyone else's. "Popular" shouldn't be equated to "good" (or "bad"). Or "entertaining" or "not entertaining".

Which makes your opinion of "50 Shades" no more or less "right" than anyone else's. I'm not defending 50 Shades, BTW. I haven't even seen it.

I wasn't talking about whether I thought it was entertaining - I purposely left that out. As I was analysing the quality of it, I thought that was implied.

The writing is not good - I don't mean from an entertaimnment point of view, but from a quality of writing perspective. I personally cannot read them, because I don't like them - but my mother (who was very well educated) read them and loved them. We both can see they are written at a very very basic level, with the English comprehension level being very young, but that doesn't change the entertainment value of them from each perspective.

If you remove the little Englander attitude I think you'll find Doctor Who is as popular now as it's ever been since it's revamp, internationally the viewing figures are up. So more people are actually watching it now......

Objectively of course

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your meaning.

I think you may be using the term "quality" in a more specific, academic way than the general population would. For a piece of entertainment I can see no better indicator of "quality" than how much an individual enjoyed the experience. One individual's definition of quality may be wildly different from another's so their perceptions of quality of the same thing can also be wildly different. That makes quality entirely subjective too. You can't measure the quality of an entertainment and certainly not by use of metrics alone.

Quality is in the eye of the beholder.

The failure in Theo's logic remains the one you pointed out. You can't assume that because lots of people seem to have a similar opinion that your opinion is "right". I mean, lots of people used to think the Earth was flat, and the centre of the Universe.

Bit off-topic, but that's actually a myth in and of its own right. Very few people ever actually thought that.

But the 50 Shades analogy is somewhat apt. It's undeniably popular, both as a book and subsequently as a film. And whilst nobody can ever conclude whether it's 'good' or 'bad' because such things are subjective, there is nonetheless a common consensus that can be reached, and which is often considered in the case of anything subject to review. In the case of 50 Shades, there are many, many people who avoided the book and film both because it wasn't something that interested them, and also because of how bad a reception it had (for having poor writing, for being derivative of a source material also criticised for having poor writing). There are a massive number of people who did watch it or read it and admit how terrible it is...some people enjoyed it in spite of its problems, whilst many didn't. The common consensus to be drawn from this is that it is a bad book, it is a bad film - that doesn't mean there aren't people who enjoy it for whatever reason, and it doesn't mean because they enjoy something commonly considered to be bad, that their opinion is worth any less or is any less acceptable. All it means is they're in a minority view in regards to the common consensus, which is fairly going to be used to determine whether something gets picked up for sequels, or goes down as a 'classic'.

In the case of Doctor Who, we have an episode like Sleep No More which is massively divisive. The common consensus is that the episode was a poor one. And that's fine... you can't argue with a common consensus because it's just a collective opinion. You don't have to share in that collective opinion, and no opinion be it individual or collective is ever right or wrong, or any more valuable than another. I happened to think the episode was okay enough. It wasn't a classic, nor anywhere near the better ones of the series, but it was okay. The common consensus would disagree, as it suggests the episode isn't anywhere near as good as I maybe thought it was in places. I enjoyed it for what it was, but equally it wasn't a particularly good episode necessarily (because 'good' and 'bad' are opinions) and I have no authority to try and tell people that it was good or bad, only that I enjoyed it or didn't.

When it comes to Doctor Who as a whole, this forum in particular, there are members both passing and regular who seem to take that too far, and miss the point of opinionated discussion entirely. They'd be the kind of people to insist that they like 50 Shades of Grey, and then try to tell everyone else why they're wrong about the issues they have with it. Instead they tend to dislike Doctor Who, and sometimes imply that they know better, or that their vision of the show is the 'right' one. There are people who are "baffled" anyone could have liked that episode, just because they didn't themselves. They raise issue with actors or writers or production, and then insist that "we" all have an issue with it. There can and always is a common consensus, but you can never as an individual speak for it.

As for Series 9, it's hard to tell where the common consensus will land whilst the series is still in motion. Ratings and figures will all eventually fall by the wayside, because as already pointed out with the 50 Shades example, popularity, success and the common consensus don't always equate. The show could get 13m+ viewers for an episode like Voyage of the Damned, which by the common consensus wasn't particularly well received. It could have an episode like The Zygon Inversion which only gets 5m viewers and by the common consensus was mostly very well received.

In reflection I have a feeling Series 9 has gone down rather well with people (certainly more so that Series 8) though is nonetheless quite divisive, and has definite critics. Once the figures fall by the wayside that'll become clearer. And it's quite fair too, because as soon as the figures are what really matters and you start only making your show in pursuit of statistics, that's when things begin going wrong and the show gets run into the ground. You make it for those who enjoy it - fan and mainstream - to the best of your ability.

@stocklen, I'm afraid to say that the things that currently irk you have been repeated time and again on these boards and other, for the last eight years, long before Moffat was in the line of fire.


Is it possible to have a common consensus in something massively divisive?

OT: Interesting stuff. It's a pity so many today still insist there's a contradiction between religion and science.

Note to self: Must put all "Bluffers' Guide to..." on eBay (or a bonfire) and watch more QI.

You're like our version of Alan Davies...

"...and on minus 50 points..."

I'll get me coat.....

I'd say so in the long run, in most cases. Episodes that are generally quite divisive eventually fall on a definite side of the 'well-received'/'poorly received' scale. I think Love & Monsters may perhaps be the closest we've got to an episode that defies the idea of a common consensus, but even then it's probably more likely that it's a poorly received episode, that also happens to have a niche of defenders that remain quite vocal about it (and are able to remain vocal about it, because it's often brought up in conversation - as an example of a 'worst episode').

I'd say few to no episodes of the show fail to have a common consensus. Moffat, as a 'something' other than an episode of a show, remains quite divisive. But then perspective changes once he's gone and we're afforded hindsight. Unless something drastically goes wrong with Series 10, I think the common consensus will be that he did a good job and was a well received showrunner. That's admittedly only my prediction right now, and I may be entirely wrong about it

I was just about to post that and saw you already had!

This is one of my bugbears. If people thought the Earth was flat how were they navigating? It's true that in Europe, at a certain time in history, intelligent men had to pretend they believed the world was the shape Catholic dogma claimed it was. But few intelligent people have ever believed it.

It doesn't even look flat.

I don't even think Catholic dogma ever insisted the Earth was flat. They were perfectly content that it wasn't, with some rather debatable quibbling on the side by a few christian authority figures. They did cling to the idea of Earth being orbited by the sun, stars and planets - centre of the universe, but that's another matter.

This, so very much this.

I really, really want to like Capaldi. I always try to appreciate his performances in any episode I watch these days. The guy clearly loves the show to his bones, and I do think any misgivings I have is more to do with the writing rather than the acting. But they've been so inconsistent with him.

Series 8 painted the idea that this Doctor wasn't necessarily friendly. He wasn't going to be a lovable, "Space Gandalf." He was world weary, didn't suffer fools, and could be very unpleasant on occasion... but underneath it all, he was still the same hero we know and love. An interesting, new idea. Well, they definitely got the first part of that right... but the second part? Jury's out on that one. I'm sure I'm not alone in finding Capaldi rather unlikable last year. He was too rude, too mean.... it's hard to imagine anyone would really want to get to know this bloke.

Series 9 has been such a massive U-Turn on the Doctor we saw last year that it's hard to believe they are even the same person. Am I happy the Doctor is infinitely more likable now? Well, yes I am.... but if they had done a better job of his characterisation last year, they wouldn't have needed to change everything this time!

And then we have Clara. Don't get me wrong - I don't want a weak, "yes Doctor, no Doctor" companion. I want one who has class, and bravery. Someone to stand up to the Doctor, and not put up with his crap. But at the same time, they need to feel human. Just look at RTD's companions, and Amy and Rory. Love them or hate them, Rose, Martha and especially Donna felt like real people you could relate to. They were changed by the Doctor's influence, becoming stronger and better people,and in turn, they changed him. By the end of it all.... yes, I could very much believe that Martha could lead a human resistance against the Master all by herself, because of the growth and journey she'd experienced in series 3.

We've never really had that with Clara. She's just too perfect. She never develops, never grows.... the events last year, for example, should have had a monumental effect on her. Danny has not been mentioned this year. Once. You see, when you have a rather unlikable Doctor, we need to be able to find ways to like him through his relatable companion. When you take a bland, robot companion and pair them up with this Doctor.... oh dear. We need a new companion. One to be amazed by this Doctor, and to travel with him. For them to experience things together, and for it to change them both for the better.

Am I getting fed up? Well, it's like my other favourite show: Supernatural. Once it was a must see for me, every week. For the past Season and a half, I've had to force myself to watch it, for one part loyalty, but for another part because I love the characters. And, finally, things are looking up. It's the same with Who. Things can only get better going forward.

Let's see what happens.

Well, I did mention that too :


Don't I get any points for that?

One point.

Capaldi is perfect I can see the Doctor hes trying and wanting to be in some episodes but the creative team that currently writes his Doctor and Doctor Who isn't putting as much engangement or consistency as previouusly for Matt Smith and RTD, Julie Gardner and Phil Collison for David Tennant

Fantastic!