• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Doctor Who
Results:What kind of storytelling would you like for Doctor Who?
Separate stories.
1 (1.82%)
Separate stories plus ocasional past references.
2 (3.64%)
Separate stories plus companion development and occasional past references.
8 (14.55%)
Mostly separate stories with background arc.
19 (34.55%)
Mostly separate stories with stronger arc.
14 (25.45%)
Mostly linked stories with strong arc.
7 (12.73%)
Arc dominant seasons.
3 (5.45%)
Novel for television.
1 (1.82%)
Voters: 55. You can't vote on this poll right now - are you signed in?
Arcs vs Standalones
<<
<
3 of 3
>>
>
saladfingers81
19-01-2016
Originally Posted by Sam_Gee1:
“I never said that at all. Every season needs these background arcs, but they aren't the focus of the season or series.

You name me any show which isn't a comedy, and there will be evident background arcs, to accompany the main arc of the season which has a lot of focus, as it is the main arc.

The mention of Bad Wolf isn't an arc, sorry but it isn't. If the finale can happen without the events of catchphrases then it isn't an arc.”

Bad Wolf is the story arc of Season 1.
Brandon_Smith
19-01-2016
Originally Posted by saladfingers81:
“Bad Wolf is the story arc of Season 1.”

I think he meant the Memes written all over time, that even without it, we would still have our finale, am I right or wong ?
Sam_Gee1
19-01-2016
Originally Posted by Brandon_Smith:
“I think he meant the Memes written all over time, that even without it, we would still have our finale, am I right or wong ?”

You are correct.
Tom Tit
20-01-2016
Originally Posted by GDK:
“BIB: Episodic TV and soap operas are the opposite of literary drama. In "true" drama the central characters are changed by or "learn something important" (or sometimes fail to "learn something important") from the events in the story. In episodic TV, TV without an arc that progresses towards a resolution, the central characters must be more or less the same at end of each episode as they were at the start, otherwise you risk destroying the format of the show. Each episode is really about the guest characters and their situation each week and it's their story that's wrapped up by the end of the episode.

The Doctor and his companion remain, in essence, the same throughout the series. Doctor Who's clever format, that allows rotating Doctor's and companions while keeping the show's premise the same, creates and sustains the necessary illusion of dramatic progress of our central characters.

After 50+ years the show, despite changes in appearance, style and tone is still fundamentally the Doctor and companion, travelling the universe and having imaginative and exciting adventures.”


This is very well written and all completely true but I'm not sure why you're explaining it to me? I'm well aware of the point you're making, which is why I said that I think that Doctor Who could never have a novel-like structure... it was my original point a couple of pages back.
Tom Tit
20-01-2016
Originally Posted by GDK:
“I recognise it's only my personal preference and my "surprise" is partly my disappointment at the lack of support for something a little more complex than the simplistic catchphrase arcs we've tended to get in Doctor Who. I just thought there'd be more support for that, given there's so much concern about the current state of Doctor Who expressed around here.”

My point was that you shouldn't expect a poll to reflect the stated opinions of a minority. And every single opinion is a minority. People who feel strongly enough and who have a certain personality type will want to express their detailed or nuanced opinion in whatever public form they deem best for it (on a forum like this it will be largely people who express their thoughts best, or most easily through written language).

But a poll is a very different beast. It encourages participation in the consensus forming by the rest of the population who don't fit that description, who may read but don't generally feel comfortable or capable of putting across their opinion well, or who do so by different means (they might make a video for example). Also, it takes very little time and effort to participate in a poll relative to taking the time to formulate a statement about one's opinions. Therefore you can always expect to have a greater number of people voting than discussing.

Discussion's great; it can be stimulating, informative, challenging and so on but it's just a mistake to try and observe any kind of trend or consensus from it. People supporting or opposing your own views here really is totally meaningless to the big picture of the consensus opinion.
Tom Tit
20-01-2016
Originally Posted by Sam_Gee1:
“The reason most would like to go with that as it has worked in the past, and i am not sure many would trust Moffat with a more serious arc.”

No. I already explained this. The show is extremely popular. It would not be popular if it's format wasn't liked by a majority of the audience. A poll therefore is going to show a strong preference for the established format. For it to do otherwise would suggest an unpopular or waning show, which Doctor Who is not.

It's simple logical reasoning, not requiring any of the supposition you're offering.


(Sorry, I should have conflated my numerous posts above)
GDK
20-01-2016
Originally Posted by Tom Tit:
“My point was that you shouldn't expect a poll to reflect the stated opinions of a minority. And every single opinion is a minority. People who feel strongly enough and who have a certain personality type will want to express their detailed or nuanced opinion in whatever public form they deem best for it (on a forum like this it will be largely people who express their thoughts best, or most easily through written language).

But a poll is a very different beast. It encourages participation in the consensus forming by the rest of the population who don't fit that description, who may read but don't generally feel comfortable or capable of putting across their opinion well, or who do so by different means (they might make a video for example). Also, it takes very little time and effort to participate in a poll relative to taking the time to formulate a statement about one's opinions. Therefore you can always expect to have a greater number of people voting than discussing.

Discussion's great; it can be stimulating, informative, challenging and so on but it's just a mistake to try and observe any kind of trend or consensus from it. People supporting or opposing your own views here really is totally meaningless to the big picture of the consensus opinion.”

I understand your points. I wasn't about to write a scientific paper or draw serious conclusions based on the results of an internet forum poll.

The poll result doesn't match my personal preference. Shrug. It doesn't matter. To paraphrase a well known Vulcan matriarch: "The result is the result. What can be done?".

As John Snow used to say quite frequently on general election nights when analysing results as they came in:

"This is just for fun".
GDK
20-01-2016
Originally Posted by Tom Tit:
“This is very well written and all completely true but I'm not sure why you're explaining it to me? I'm well aware of the point you're making, which is why I said that I think that Doctor Who could never have a novel-like structure... it was my original point a couple of pages back.”

I knew you were already well aware of all that, but others read the forum here too.

To re-iterate just once more: I really have not been arguing for a novel for television for Doctor Who. I agree it would not work for Doctor Who. However "novel for television" is my preferred form normally and that preference pulls me inevitably towards wanting deeper, more involving arcs for Doctor Who than the simplistic arcs we've tended to have.
POTD
20-01-2016
I find it hard to understand people saying that the S7b Impossible Girl Arc dominated the series, when in reality it was much like the the S1 Bad Wolf Arc. The occasional scene of a puzzled Doctor, or small references, such as Clara saying something linking her to her fragments in the same way as there would be occasional Bad Wolf references in S1.

And unlike the "Crack arc" all the events took place in the series as well, so was in some ways much more like the RTD style series arc, unlike the Matt Smith era "Crack arc" which lasted from S5 right until his regeneration in Time of the Doctor!
Sam_Gee1
20-01-2016
Originally Posted by POTD:
“I find it hard to understand people saying that the S7b Impossible Girl Arc dominated the series, when in reality it was much like the the S1 Bad Wolf Arc. The occasional scene of a puzzled Doctor, or small references, such as Clara saying something linking her to her fragments in the same way as there would be occasional Bad Wolf references in S1.

And unlike the "Crack arc" all the events took place in the series as well, so was in some ways much more like the RTD style series arc, unlike the Matt Smith era "Crack arc" which lasted from S5 right until his regeneration in Time of the Doctor!”

It was definitely more than the catchphrase arc.

The first episode is essentially at the beginning and prior to this episode The Doctor trying to find Clara. Then you have the Doctor trying to figure out what is happening, which is different to the catchphrase arcs as he actually knows what is happening.

The Tardis episode definitely the arc a bit aswell.

Yes it wasn't that in depth of an Arc, but we were reminded every waking moment that she is the impossible girl.
johnnysaucepn
20-01-2016
Originally Posted by saladfingers81:
“Bad Wolf is the story arc of Season 1.”

It's not a story arc. The occurrence of the phrase did not influence the plot in any way. The one place it was referenced prior to the 'big reveal' in the episode of the same name, it was a throwaway gag and the plot would have progressed without it.

The Impossible Girl stuff was a bit more, as it gave context and motivation to the Doctor's choice to travel with Clara.
nebogipfel
20-01-2016
Originally Posted by johnnysaucepn:
“It's not a story arc. The occurrence of the phrase did not influence the plot in any way. The one place it was referenced prior to the 'big reveal' in the episode of the same name, it was a throwaway gag and the plot would have progressed without it.

The Impossible Girl stuff was a bit more, as it gave context and motivation to the Doctor's choice to travel with Clara.”

That seems about right to me. Bad Wolf was certainly something that ran through the series, but it was only in hindsight it became significant. The characters weren't taking much (any) notice and it didn't influence them. Whereas series 5 and 6 and (definitely!) 7b had overt stuff that the Doctor was actively engaged in (OK, it took a few episodes before the Doctor realised the extent of the cracks and that the Tardis was heavily implicated, but the audience had their attention pointed strongly to the cracks from the start). Impossible Girl had the Doctor all in a flap throughout.

I tend to take the view that if the characters aren't actively engaged in whatever it is then I'm not going to take too much notice until the finale. E.g. Missy in series 8. Vaguely intriguing but if the Doctor's not investigating it then I'm not too interested either.

That's the way I like it. Series 5 did quite a good job of an actual story arc but series 6 demonstrated the difficulty of getting it right. I'm perfectly happy with stand alone stories with some character development as we go. Preferably not the Doctor too much. That's what companions are for. Keep the Doctor as fairly constant for most of the time and let us see him through the companions eyes as they grow, change, get used to him, grow to like or dislike him or whatever.

That's not to say he should be set in stone, but a light touch with him evolving should be enough. Every now and then you can do a Gap Year Victorious thing. But that should be enough.

The only time they really need to meddle with the Doctor's character is when they get it badly wrong (series 8) and even then I'm happy for them to just adjust it asap without too much explanation. (Just explain it away as a post-regeneration sickness).
<<
<
3 of 3
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map