5 years ago? We all know its Susan!

"I like leaving it open, because then you can imagine what you want. I think the fans will say it's Romana. Or even the Rani. Some might say that it's Susan's mother, I suppose. But of course it's meant to be the Doctor's mother."

To be fair, Moffat (and RTD before him) has to do a pitch to the BBC ahead of each season to let them know what the plans are for the coming year and get them to agree/buy into it.

I've also heard the version of events you have referred to, that the BBC essentially ordered Moffat to start again. But it never rang true for me - why would the BBC order a complete change to a show that's hit record viewing figures and delivering tens of millions in worldwide sales?

You are quite right about the new Doctor being out of his hands. But the version I've heard (from a number of friends who still work at the BBC) is that there was very much a request from Moffat to 'clear the decks' as much as possible (certainly companion-wise) as he had already set up a number of story arcs that necessitated a new companion (Amy/River's Mother) when he took over. And that's a key reason RTD only invited Catherine Tate back for a single season (that was agreed with Tate from the outset). The rest of the season 5/season 1 stuff also came from Moffat.

He does strike me very much as a "my vision" writer, rather than a "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" writer.

That's something to approve of, almost regardless of whether or not you actually like the particular vision in question. Leaders (showrunners) have to lead and sometimes make bold decisions to take things forward. A certain amount of ego is required to have the confidence to do the job.

Of course a show should play to its strengths, and not take foolish risks, but another way of saying "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" is "Let's play it safe" and when a show "plays it safe", you know that really is its death knell. The irony is that "playing safe" is a risk in itself - the risk of becoming stale and repeating what's been done before.

I'd rather have someone with a strong, vibrant vision for the show that I didn't quite like, than someone who takes no risks and changes nothing.

To be honest, GDK, if I have really loved the past five years of Who I very much doubt I'd be complaining so much about Moffat's 'line in the sand' approach to the RTD years.

I still think there's an argument that there was no need to (essentially) reboot the show in 2010 and, from my perspective, Moffat pretty much jettisoned all the stuff I loved about the show (from the RTD years).

So it's a shame when we have a thread like this, asking about an unresolved mystery from RTD's final story and its almost a certainty that it will not be revisited. Not because it wouldn't necessarily warrant a revisit, but just because the current lead writer wants to concentrate on his own stuff.

Not liking Moffat and his stuff is one thing, but making blatantly false statements and then presenting them as fact is a different matter.

First you claim that Moffat that he doesn't show interest in anything prior to 2010, just a few pages later you concede that you only meant the RTD era, I give you that, and I have no idea how anyone could argue that he has no interest in anything but his own Who, I mean come on, he technically even canonized Big Finish in The Night of the Doctor.

But even him not showing interest in RTD era stuff is false.

Just because he doesn't put the RTD era on a pedestal and 11 and 12 weren't still going around moping about Rose or Donna doesn't mean that he completely forgot about it or disregards it. He gives it the same kind of place in his references as he does any other era of the show.

If he didn't then we would have never seen any of the following things:

- The Time War which is an RTD invention was constantly referenced throughout the Matt Smith era even prior to The Day of the Doctor. Sure 11 wasn't constantly going on about it and moping about it like 9 and 10, but it would make sense that a characters tries to move on from something so terrible and therefore the references were mostly low key: The Doctor's Wife (House: "Fear me, I killed hundreds of Time Lord." 11: ""Fear me, I've killed them all"), The Beast Below ("Amy: So there are other Time Lords, yeah?
The Doctor: No. There were but they’re all— just me now. Long story. It was a bad day. Bad stuff happened. And you know what, I’d love to forget it all, every last bit of it. But I don’t. Not ever. ‘Cause this is what I do. Every time. Every day. Every second. This. Hold tight. We’re bringing down the government."), The Hungry Earth ( "Because I'm the last of my species and I know how it sits in a heart. So don't insult me.")
And of course then there's all of The Day of the Doctor, I believe several of the thing that were mentioned by 10 in The End of Time became parts of what we saw from the Time War in that episode. Now, you might not like the fact where Moffat went with the Time War story in The Day of the Doctor, but it is no more "not showing interest" in RTD stuff than RTD having the character who could not even wipe out the Daleks when presented with the opportunity back in Genesis of the Daleks commit mass genocide of not only the Daleks but also of his kind was
- returning characters: the way that most of the RTD era characters were written out gave Moffat little opportunity to bring them back. You can't have Donna come back, can you? Rose's story was also done and it was showing respect to what RTD did with her character not having her come back for the 50th. But he still brought Billie Piper back and he did it in a way in which he referenced the series 1 story arc with Bad Wolf as well as Rose Tyler. Martha could come back, but then again it's not like she was extremely popular, so why bring her back? The only RTD era character that could come back that would make sense within the story is Jack and from what we know he would have been in A Good Man Goes to War had the shooting not clashed with the shooting of Torchwood. But it's not like the characters are completely forgotten, they got several mentions over the Moffat years albeit low key. But it's the same with Moffat's past characters, putting aside the short cameo for the regeneration, he is more likely to have his own characters who departed mentioned by small references that only the fans will see. Instead of having post-Snowmen 11 and 12 mope about the Ponds, he has Clara reading a book by Amelia Williams, 11 wearing Amy's glasses, 12 mentioning her legs. And I'm pretty sure that once series 9 is over and 12 is travelling with his new companion we will mostly only get these kinds of references to Clara. And it's the same treatment that the RTD era characters or classic characters get.

Like in The Wedding of River Song, Rose Tyler and Captain Jack get the same kind of room as the Brigadier does: "I could help Rose Tyler with her homework. I could go on all Jack’s stag parties in one night.
Maldovar: Time catches up with us all, Doctor!"

From The Day of the Doctor: "A vortex manipulator bequeathed to the UNIT archive by Captain Jack Harkness on the occasion of his death. Well, one of them. "

In Let's Kill Hitler 11 sees the holograms of all three of the major RTD era companions (Rose, Martha and Donna) and makes it clear that he still feels guilt about them. When a classic companion is referenced in the Moffat era we only get throwaway lines like "gobby Australian" or "I once came here with my granddaughter", so the RTD companions got more than most if any of the classic companions in just that one episode.

Hell he even had the Slitheen mentioned in the series 5 finale.

And he used the explanation that comes from an RTD era episode and character for Capaldi's face.

Also I'm pretty sure that if Moffat explained the woman from TEOT now RTD fanboys and fangirls would find a way to hate on him for it saying that he was destroying or retconning RTD stuff or whatever...

[quote=Mulett;80474122
He does strike me very much as a "my vision" writer, rather than a "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" writer.[/QUOTE]

Isn't that what RTD was, though? His vision of Doctor Who was arguably the most radically different of the entire show, and I believe it was a few years before it was even confirmed the classic series was canonical with his run. Moffat does have his very own vision but he doesn't act like any of the show prior to his run doesn't exist, especially not RTD's era. This year's series has even had quite a few throwbacks to RTD creations.

Just for the record, SilenceWillFall, I didn't concede I clarified. I thought I was talking to the other forum member about New Who only and was a little surprised when they started quoting Classic Who examples to me. So I simply made it clear I was talking about New Who.

Please don't pretend I am changing my argument - my argument has been exactly the same for five years. There was a clear narrative for the show from 2005-2009. I don't think anyone could argue there was any attempt at a continuation from 2010 onwards. You are right - there has been the odd mention of pre-Moffat characters. But there was very much a 'fresh start' in 2010 that I personally don't think was warranted taking into account the show was a success not a failure.

And please don't call me a liar either. If you don't agree with my point of view then please feel free to disagree. But don't start name calling. There are a few other forum members currently behaving like this (not just towards me) and it feels like those of us who express views that are not in favour of Moffat should now expect personal accusations in response.

This forum is for all views to be aired. No one should be bullied simply for expressing their point of view.

RTD's job was totally different. He had to bring back from the dead an old sci-fi show that had become something of a laughing stock before being axed 16 years earlier.

Moffat inherited an insanely popular show that had record viewing figures, was an international hit, was earning tens of millions in overseas sales and winning awards left, right and centre. He also inherited a show that was on-air at the time.

So I personally think there is a difference between RTD bringing his vision to an empty canvas in 2005, and Moffat bringing his in 2010.

Given the current state of the show, I certainly think a new showrunner would have a stronger argument to deliver something brand new then Moffat did back in 2010.

Spearhead from Space - now THAT was a new start.
For Pertwee's first two series there was virtually nothing that related back to the black and white era. He only travelled in the TARDIS a couple of times, some stories it didn't even feature at all. The only link to the past was fleeting mentions of Time Lords (and they'd only been introduced in the story that set up the current exile story), and the Brigadier, who had been in just two stories previously.

Otherwise it was all new monsters, all new villains. No Cybermen, no Daleks, not even a Yeti on a loo, despite Jon's awoved fondness for such a scenario.

His second season did start seeing little nods to past - the photos of monsters that flash before his eyes in the Mind Of Evil for example, but his first series was so totally different from what had gone before that it was effectively a whole new show. And it took until 1972 before proper callbacks to the 'old' series (Daleks and Ice Warriors) started cropping up.

Drawing a line and starting afresh? Letts and Dicks did just that, realy seriously. Moffat - nowhere near as much.

The viewing figures for Troughton's final season (particularly the second half of his final season) were in decline and so I can understand why it was felt necessary to make the change.

Cast-wise, I don't know about Jamie and Zoe though - did they decide to leave along with Troughton or was it a 'complete fresh start' decision from higher up?

Can we please stop the false accusations of 'bullying' and 'personal attacks'? No one on this thread has been subject to either of these things. People have a right to disagree with what you post especially when some of what is posted is false or inaccurate.

Bullying is bullying. Those of us who are not massive Moffat fans should be able to raise concerns and voice criticisms without having personal comments made about us.

It would be nice if it was reciprocal too and us 'easily pleased Moffat fan boys' could have our views respected as well

Not saying that you are one of those posters BTW Mulett but it does happen.

Oh yes, the reasons for such a change were sound and justified and absolutely vital. In fact, there was some doubt whether or not Doctor Who would return at all. If it did, the series needed to make some production changes - not least the move into colour and the need to save money by setting everything on Earth. And I'd argue that this, more than the Moffat take-over, and more than the RTD re-start, was by far the biggest stylistic and narrative change to the series, ever.

I believe that Fraser Hines was planning to leave earlier in 1969. But both Patrick and Wendy decided to leave at the end of the season and asked Fraser to stay on so they could all go together.

I have a feeling that Terrance Dicks expressed some interest in keeping Jamie into the colour era but decided that it might get problematic, plot wise, to have Jamie stuck in the 20th century and anyway he simply wouldn't fit into the high-tech scientific direction that the series was taken.

No one has said otherwise. But you have also made false comments about Moffat or at least falsely attributed comments to him and when asked to provide proof of them have failed to do so. See now me asking you where you got those ideas from? Thats not bullying. It is not a personal attack. You keep saying things like 'Moffat wanted to start the show again' as if they are fact. I am sorry but they are not. I have a right to point this out to you without being labelled a 'bully'. I say again, No one has been bullied on this thread. Stop accusing people of doing things they arent doing.

People pointing out inconsistencies or inaccuracies in what you are posting doesnt mean they are attacking you. I would expect people to do the same to me and they have done.

I must admit, I'm not a huge fan of the Pertwee-era and the Doctor being stuck on earth and working for UNIT is a big part of that. It all got a bit dull, I thought.

There are some great stories, though. Interesting that the 4th Doctor couldn't throw himself back into life aboard the TARDIS quickly enough!

What current state of the show? The show seems safe to me.

RTD did intentionally give Moffat a clean slate to start his run, which I think is fine. Moffat has still picked up a lot of elements from Doctor Who's history, and only last week we saw the Judoon and the Ood, from RTD's era. The thing is, Moffat isn't RTD and his style is completely different: he can't be expected to imitate RTD and I'm more than certain RTD wanted to do his own thing with the show. As was stated before, this is one of the tamer clean slates the show has seen.

Opinions are opinions not facts, saladfingers81. Other forum members have already confirmed what Moffat said about the season 5/season 1 comment I made and that there was a push for a fresh start at season 5.

Some have claimed that was pushed onto Moffat by the BBC, my view is that it was driven by Moffat. Those are all opinions, not statements of fact.

So to call a forum member a liar because you don't agree with their opinion is harassment and a form of bullying. And it needs to stop. Denying it is happening, or your part in it, isn't going to stop me raising my concerns about it.

And you can keep saying its happening and it doesnt make it any more real.

I am glad you are actually conceding that it is your opinion and not fact. Perhaps to avoid confusion you should be more careful in your choice of words because if you read back this thread quite frequently you present your opinion as if it is established fact. As I said previously I am well aware that Moffat caused confusion about the numbering of the season. As you said yourself the articles are there to read. But when you say things like 'Moffat wanted it to be a new show' and 'Moffat wanted to start again' these are not facts. This is you reaching a conclusion based on your opinions. It is not the same as the numbering issue because there are no interviews on record or quotes where Moffat has said this is the case. As others and myself pointed out to you there is in fact plenty of evidence on screen and in interviews to suggest that in fact this is anything but the case. All the tangible evidence suggests Moffat does consider the show not only a direct continuation of what RTD started but in fact a continuation of what began in 1963.

SilenceWillFall explained their reasoning for why they disagreed with you in a polite and thoughtful post which clearly spelled out their reasons why. For you to then respond by calling them a 'bully' is I am afraid just not cricket.

As for the issue of series numbering I do believe that RTD himself later conceded he made an error in calling his first season Series 1 and that he should of carried on counting from Classic Who. However as I dont have the exact quote to hand I will refrain from claiming this to be a fact.

I am always clear that I am expressing an opinion, saladfingers81. The fact you are again presenting me as having been dishonest, promoted a falsehood or am backtracking is part of the bullying problem I am speaking about. SilenceWillFall also accused me of lying. How is that polite and thoughtful?

Clean up your act, guys.

Stop harassing people on this forum who post comments you disagree with.

Stop calling other forum members liars.

Allow people the space to post their views - which may will be the complete polar opposite of you - without resorting to name calling.

I will say no more except to suggest you make yourself familiar with how the words 'bullying' and 'harassment' are defined not only by language but also in law.

They are behaviours like any other, saladfingers81, and they have no place on this forum.

OK I'm not trying to single you out Mulett but I am little confused by what you're saying. A frequent criticism that I've read on these forums about series 9 is that it now references the past too much and therefore isn't engaging enough for new fans. I thought that was something that you had said before now Mulett on other threads but correct me if I'm wrong. But you now seem to be saying that Mofatt show doesn't reference the past enough?

I think you've misinterpreted those statements, though. It was said that Moffat had to pitch as if it were a new series, give them faith that he could stamp his own vision on it and not just do a weak re-tread of what had gone before. That is far different from being told to make a clean break.

It's demonstrably false - in this series alone we've had references to how Captain Jack's experiences affected him, appearances of the Shadow Proclamation, even the re-appearance of Davros, just as he was in Series 4. Prior to that we've had appearances of Amy, Martha and Donna in hologram form, and that's almost all in Moffat-scripted episodes. And that's not even mentioning River Song.