Balance of two-parters and standalones
- I get that Moffat likes playing with the structure a little bit, and that's a good thing. But sometimes it's one extreme to another, and it leads to inconsistency. Series 8 could have used another two-parter. Series 9 would have benefited from one less. You don't need to overhaul the whole structure every time. Series 3 brilliantly pulled the rug from beneath the feet of the mainstream viewer by revealing Utopia to be the first part in a three part story. That relatively minor move was fantastic. I think Series 10 would benefit from a balance of strong standalone stories and a couple of two-parters. And so as to not feel top-heavy it seems vital that the finale remains at least two episodes in all cases.
'Send you a postcard' feeling
- I don't know what it was but there was something special about Series 4 in its story type. I think it was ultimately the variety of the stories on offer. It felt like we were genuinely travelling around a massive universe with loads of possibility. Historic pompeii one week, a morally corrupt corporate future in the snow the next. Agatha Christie in rural England one week, a planetary library from the 51st century the next. It struck a terrific balance and felt well-travelled in a way no other series really has. Ultimately it made a real identity out of the places it was going. Apart from a handful of instances, one weakness of more recent series (and that's not to say I don't love those series... Series 9 is one of my favourites) has been that its locations don't stand out quite so vividly. Series 10 could use some locales that make you go 'wow' a bit more... places both real and fictitious.
No companion death
- One of the biggest setbacks the show seems to have now is the need to 'kill off' every companion. This wouldn't be so problematic if the show could actually dare to do it, but it's always a cop out. Rose never actually dies, and is simply on a list of the dead somewhere. Donna arguably suffers a fate worse than death, but it wasn't death itself. Amy and Rory ventured closer to the prospect of death, but only because they lived to death... which is essentially what anyone does. And Clara got so pain-stakingly close to the point you can argue that she is indeed dead now. But they left a window open by also making her functionally immortal in contrast to her fate, and so it's a bit of a cop-out. It's a case of the show wanting to have its cake and eat it. If it's not ever going to genuinely kill off its main characters that's fine, but it needs to spend a lot less time entertaining the idea if that's the case. By all means put them in jeopardy so that a rug may always been proverbially pulled from beneath our feet, but don't go to the lengths of actually killing off a character and then bringing them back and immortalising them. It feels like a waste of time, a waste of emotional investment and effectively lowers the stakes.
I love Clara's character to pieces, but her death was brilliant. It thematically fit in with Series 9 but managed to still be quite hard-hitting, it made her cameo in Heaven Sent count all the more and was an excellent driver for all that was going on in Hell Bent too. Until she actually appears again and we get a Clara revival story rather than the Gallifrey story that has been teased. It's so intrusive and counter productive. Whilst I can argue she is indeed dead now, the loophole is that she also might not be. What's the point of emotional investment then? If Bill is a one-off companion, I want less of this kind of fuss. When she goes she goes... if she's killed off then deliver on that. If not, then deliver on that too. Don't sloppily opt for something somewhere between the two.
Historical figure...
- ...or a historical event. It feels like ages since we last encountered a proper one. Earlier series arguably went overboard with a formulaic approach to one or two a series (I guess you never know how long a show will stay on the air for) but it's also a tried and tested formula that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing to bring back right now. An episode with Amelia Earhart would be a personal preference for me but there's countless more that could be chosen. I also still maintain that the black death would be a great basis for a story. The plague doctors would be a genuinely creepy design to play on...and it's been so long since something very genuinely, visually creepy appeared (in the same sort of way as the empty child and the clockwork robots make something rather ordinary much more creepy).
Returning characters?
- It's always fun to see characters come back, but you run the risk of making this huge universe feel tiny if you're constantly running into the same people over and over again. Doctor Who isn't the kind of show that trudges up Rose Tyler for the rest of its existence (it gave it a decent go for a while!
). It loses her and it moves on to new characters. Every now and then we get someone who slips through and reappears completely out of their time. A Sarah-Jane Smith, for example. For Series 10 I do think bringing back Captain Jack would be quite fun, and also marks ten series since he debuted. But do something different with him. The character supposedly lives for thousands, millions, even possibly billions of years. Let's see him somewhere further down the line... you can still keep John Barrowman involved (in fact whilst he's ageing fairly well, it's still a great way to explain why he's aged if he turns up in a 90th Century story or something). I think Capaldi and Barrowman would have a brilliantly unique dynamic.
If Moffat wants to bring back the Paternoster's for a last hurrah then that'd be fine too. Or maybe he could play his Jenny (daughter) card at long last? Maybe all of these things could happen in a single story which unites a time travelling assemblage of heroic characters. What a last hurrah that'd be for Moffat (and I mainain the Weeping Angels would be a superb villain in a story for that...as their basis of threat is time travel).
As a final idea, though overload if any of the above were to happen, would be a Doctor-lite episode that featured the Eighth Doctor instead. Paul McGann deserves a credit in the TV show proper, and it's a great way to do it.
Villains
The Daleks seem an inevitability both because they're Daleks and because of the 'asBill' introduction clip. I'd also wager Missy will have a story somewhere along the line and that's no bad thing either... she's superb. I wouldn't be against giving the Weeping Angels the big finale for Moffat, if he can genuinely restore their menace and threat at least.
But beyond these three, Series 10 will again benefit from strong, new villains. The Cybermen will benefit from more time off. We've seen Davros back now so the Daleks don't need a big two-part story again yet (and Moffat successfully avoided falling back into the Earth invasion stories with them that he could have done). There's plenty of time to establish new threats.
Writers
- they're also fun to consider if you know who they are. Moffat's rule seems to be seven writers one year and eight in the next. There's nothing to say that's something that'll happen again, but for argument's sake we get eight writers for Series 10.
- Steven Moffat, Toby Whithouse, Peter Harness, Jane Goldman, Sarah Dollard, Catherine Tregenna, Jamie Mathieson, *another new writer*.
That's my wishlist... eight writers, two new (and for anyone counting this still, that's three women in there). I suspect though we'll have to accept Mark Gatiss will still get a slot. In which case I'd give up wither Mathieson, or Tregenna (who I love but she needs something better than
The Woman Who Lived).
Long story short...
- Balance of standalones and two-parters.
- Companion who doesn't "sort of" get killed off.
- Historical figure episode.
- More diverse and stand-out locations visited.
- Balance of villains old and new, with an emphasis on new.
- One or two returning characters is fine, but again emphasis on new.
