|
||||||||
DW under Chibnall could see a return to the Tennant style & format |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#101 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,355
|
Quote:
RE: Capaldi
It's funny to say this as I love Moffat dearly and usually will don my tin hat and go to war for him in most arguments. But while I think he is a genius, and i really do, I think his worst excesses can be quite terrible. And one of his problems seems to be a total disregard for character development, continuity and consistency. It happened with Matt Smith. The massive lurches in tone that started to occur from S6 onwards did Smith no favours at all. I consider S5 to be almost perfect- Matt just WAS the Doctor and everything felt confident and fully realised. It was like RTD in S4 (though I prefer other RTD seasons I think this will forever stand as his defining one). A writer just working at the peak of his powers and seemingly following a clear vision on what the Doctor, his companions and the show should be. Obviously many did not take to it but it seemed to have direction. But unlike Tennant, who only got better and better, poor Matt Smith got saddled with far too much silliness from S6 on. Too many changes. Too much throwing so many things at the wall and hoping one sticks. My friend messaged me the other day. She is doing an 11 era re-watch and she said 'Matt Smith was a fantastic Doctor but my god he was given some shitty scripts'. And I sort of agree. I digress a bit but I think this is the same problem with Capaldi. I am biased here because S8 was like heaven for me. I loved it. But again, for better or worse, Moffat seemed to have a clear vision of what Capaldi's Doctor should and would be. But he didn't stick with it. Like all the changes in costume which annoy me no end (pick an outfit and go with it. It works better). Have confidence in the material and in the original vision. Capaldi doesn't do the 'wacky, arm flailing' stuff very well. He does the brooding and serious incredibly well. So play to his strengths. The characterisation of the Doctor has felt almost schizophrenic at times in the Moffat era. As if they are trying to please all of the people all of the time and end up pleasing nobody. I laughed at the bravado of it all when it first aired but with hindsight the guitar playing, tank straddling sunglass wearing, aged-rock star stuff they forced Capaldi to perform in S9 is a travesty and an insult to a great actor and what had started off as a great Doctor. It baffled me how we had gotten from the Doctor of 'Listen' and 'Dark Water' to this in less than a season. Yes I get the reasons for the change but it isn't a good one. I still consider him fantastic- I disagree, re: Class- he lit up the screen and showed the lack of quality in every other minute of the show that didn't have him on screen and he still is one of my all time favourtie Doctors. But much like Matt Smith I think it will be another case of a Doctor that hit the ground running and then was hampered by some terribly uneven writing. I have to ask though, how is it that someone who can see and freely admits the many writing problems that Moffat has had, and how badly he has disregarded character development and continuity still say ' I love Moffat' and 'I think he is a genius'? I ask that not to judge your opinion, but just out of pure curiosity, since I've never seen someone who is such a big Moffat fan point out all the bad aspects of his writing. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#102 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 695
|
I think Moffat is the best writer new who has had but is a very poor showrunner. This has lead to constant breaks, lower quality scripts and just too many issues arising.
RTD was the opposite too me, a good writer not on SM's caliber, but an excellent showrunner. |
|
|
|
|
|
#103 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 413
|
To me, Moffat was a great writer in his pre-showrunner days and continued to be that through Series 5, 6 and first half of series 7. Things started to go downhill from there on with some good episodes along the way admittedly, but since Peter most definitely, it's all gone wrong.
The breaks in the show have never annoyed me. Doctor Who is just like any other show. Not every drama comes back every year, some are 18 months, 2 years or more. Doctor Who doesn't have to be on every year, it really doesn't. I just wish what we've had since 2014 was of a better standard, that's my gripe with Moffat. He could do no wrong before then in my eyes. Now, his reputation has been tainted by episodes not living up to his previous standard. |
|
|
|
|
#104 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,066
|
Quote:
I have to ask though, how is it that someone who can see and freely admits the many writing problems that Moffat has had, and how badly he has disregarded character development and continuity still say ' I love Moffat' and 'I think he is a genius'? Quote:
I just wish what we've had since 2014 was of a better standard, that's my gripe with Moffat. He could do no wrong before then in my eyes. Now, his reputation has been tainted by episodes not living up to his previous standard. I didn't start out thinking he was a poor writer, far from it. I came to that conclusion through the experience of disillusion and disappointment. I thought he was wonderful when he was writing for RTD. He still turns in the odd excellent script, but he's been so bad for so long, for reasons outlined in Kill Jester's post among others, that I just laugh at the epithet "genius". |
|
|
|
|
|
#105 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 413
|
Quote:
I'm also a bit puzzled as to how someone can clearly see that Moffat is a bad writer in many ways, yet still think him a genius.
I didn't start out thinking he was a poor writer, far from it. I came to that conclusion through the experience of disillusion and disappointment. I thought he was wonderful when he was writing for RTD. He still turns in the odd excellent script, but he's been so bad for so long, for reasons outlined in Kill Jester's post among others, that I just laugh at the epithet "genius". I still look back fondly at what he brought at first in his pre-showrunner days and the first part of his era, but it is becoming ever more tainted the longer its gone on. I think he's a great writer, but obviously the task of handling two bigs shows at once had dried up his creativity sadly. I don't like the argument that he should have given up DW for Sherlock. I'd have happily accepted even less DW than we had if the quality was still to the pre-Series 7 decline that I've witnessed. No writer is perfect, but for what he did in the show, which engaged me more than ever, I'll call him a genius for that part. He is deeply flawed though. |
|
|
|
|
#106 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Scattered
Posts: 7,444
|
Moffat has his strangths and weaknesses as both a writer and a showrunner. Ultimately he's done more good for the show though it needs new life and that's where Chibnall should come into things and that will also include a new Doctor.
|
|
|
|
|
#107 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 2,295
|
Quote:
I think Moffat is the best writer new who has had but is a very poor showrunner. This has lead to constant breaks, lower quality scripts and just too many issues arising.
RTD was the opposite too me, a good writer not on SM's caliber, but an excellent showrunner. |
|
|
|
|
|
#108 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,344
|
Quote:
Moffat has his strangths and weaknesses as both a writer and a showrunner. Ultimately he's done more good for the show though it needs new life and that's where Chibnall should come into things and that will also include a new Doctor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#109 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,505
|
Personally, I do think Moffat is a genius. If that's something people want to snort at, go ahead.
![]() I mean, he's not Dostoyevsky or James Joyce, but I find him a lot better than some of the other cheap rubbish that gets put on TV. |
|
|
|
|
|
#110 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,588
|
Quote:
Personally, I do think Moffat is a genius. If that's something people want to snort at, go ahead.
![]() I mean, he's not Dostoyevsky or James Joyce, but I find him a lot better than some of the other cheap rubbish that gets put on TV. |
|
|
|
|
|
#111 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 56
|
Quote:
The points i've highlighted in bold above are all points I strongly agree with and Clear reasons as to why I haven't enjoyed Moffat's time as much as RTD's. Especially the point about 'a total disregard for character development, continuity and consistency'.
I have to ask though, how is it that someone who can see and freely admits the many writing problems that Moffat has had, and how badly he has disregarded character development and continuity still say ' I love Moffat' and 'I think he is a genius'? I ask that not to judge your opinion, but just out of pure curiosity, since I've never seen someone who is such a big Moffat fan point out all the bad aspects of his writing. Understand your confusion when I can be so openly critical of his writing but for me that sums Moffat up. He can go from the sublime to the ridiculous. He has written not only some of my very favourite Doctor Who episodes but some of my favourite episodes of anything full stop. And then at the same time he has on occasion made me furious with some of his silly decisions. His writing can be all over the place. But I quite enjoy that in a weird way. The many peaks certainly more than justify the troughs. Whereas someone like Chris Chibnall I consider a 'safe' pair of hands but it is a plateau of comfortable mediocrity. I just don't think he has a 'Blink' or a 'Heaven Sent' or a 'Midnight' or a 'Utopia' up his sleeve. I will be happy to be proved wrong. And while I did point out his flaws you will note that I also called S8 heavenly and S5 perfect. Same with RTD. Maybe its something about the nature of Doctor Who but it can be all over the place. There are some of RTDs episodes that I could watch over and over again and some I would ever want to waste another second watching. But for both of them, when they are are at the their best they are almost peerless, but when they are bad they are very, very bad. I'm ok with that though. Like I said. I choose that over it being average but consistent. |
|
|
|
|
|
#112 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,078
|
Quote:
I suppose because I hold him in such high regard I am also prone to being more critical. I think in terms of modern television that Moffat is a genius. As was/is RTD. I think they are two of the best writers in the world right now (you can add Brooker to that list after the most recent season of Black Mirror) and have been for some years.
Understand your confusion when I can be so openly critical of his writing but for me that sums Moffat up. He can go from the sublime to the ridiculous. He has written not only some of my very favourite Doctor Who episodes but some of my favourite episodes of anything full stop. And then at the same time he has on occasion made me furious with some of his silly decisions. His writing can be all over the place. But I quite enjoy that in a weird way. The many peaks certainly more than justify the troughs. Whereas someone like Chris Chibnall I consider a 'safe' pair of hands but it is a plateau of comfortable mediocrity. I just don't think he has a 'Blink' or a 'Heaven Sent' or a 'Midnight' or a 'Utopia' up his sleeve. I will be happy to be proved wrong. Hmm. Tortuous analogy, banged on about Dylan and peed off any Coldplay fans on a Who forum. I do apologise, people. |
|
|
|
|
|
#113 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 56
|
Quote:
Think I get what you're saying. I don't really tend to use the word "genius" in the context of TV writers, however talented they are and how much I have enjoyed their work so I'll use another example; Dylan wrote 'Visions of Johanna' (Effing sublime; one of the most spine-tingling recordings ever IMO) and also wrote 'Wiggle Wiggle' ("...like a bowl of soup." Okaaay, Bob.) He released albums like 'Blonde and Blonde' and 'Blood on the Tracks' and also 'Self Portrait' and 'Down in the Groove'. But even his poorer material is still somehow *interesting* at the very least cos it's Dylan, even when sometimes you're going "oh, gawd...' So you hope Chibbers isn't more yer Coldplay?
Hmm. Tortuous analogy, banged on about Dylan and peed off any Coldplay fans on a Who forum. I do apologise, people. I understand the reluctance to throw around the word genius. But in the arts world Moffat is one of them. And also one of the most frustrating. He has written lines of dialogue that are greater than some entire series by lesser writers, And he also wrote The Bells of St. John. ![]() One thing is for sure...We won't see the likes of 'Heaven Sent' on a Saturday night once Chibnall takes over. Some will think this a cause for celebration. I think it'll be a damn shame. |
|
|
|
|
|
#114 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 695
|
Quote:
Tortuous analogy or otherwise...you got it! I would chuck Bowie into the mix just to further confuse and annoy some people. In among all the moments of era-changing and defining brilliance there are some real dodgy bits. But that's always going to happen if you are original and dare to do something different. The same vision that gave us Ziggy Stardust also gave us Tin Machine and those ropey drum and bass experiments in the '90s. Not everything sticks. And while I fear I am testing the analogy to breaking point and will no doubt irritate the holy hell out of his detractors I think this is a spirit that Moffat and indeed RTD share. They have a fearlessness and singular vision that means when they don't hit the target they can really mess up but when they are at their best they create some of the finest TV you could hope to see. There are plenty of writers who want to achieve nothing more than spewing out the same old in-offensive background noise- they write Casualty and Midsomer Murders and Doctors. People like Kay Mellor. And its fine...they do what they do. But chances are they will never produce episodes of television like 'Blink' or 'Midnight'.
I understand the reluctance to throw around the word genius. But in the arts world Moffat is one of them. And also one of the most frustrating. He has written lines of dialogue that are greater than some entire series by lesser writers, And he also wrote The Bells of St. John. ![]() One thing is for sure...We won't see the likes of 'Heaven Sent' on a Saturday night once Chibnall takes over. Some will think this a cause for celebration. I think it'll be a damn shame. |
|
|
|
|
|
#115 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Essex
Posts: 8,404
|
Quote:
Personally, I do think Moffat is a genius. If that's something people want to snort at, go ahead.
![]() I mean, he's not Dostoyevsky or James Joyce, but I find him a lot better than some of the other cheap rubbish that gets put on TV. |
|
|
|
|
|
#116 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Essex
Posts: 8,404
|
Quote:
One thing is for sure...We won't see the likes of 'Heaven Sent' on a Saturday night once Chibnall takes over. Some will think this a cause for celebration. I think it'll be a damn shame.
And I would certainly agree with Sam_Gee1 - Chibnall does 'dark' and does it really well too. There are scenes in Broadchurch I'm surprised made it past the censors, particularly when you bear in mind the whole premise of that show is a paedophile grooming and then murdering a young boy. |
|
|
|
|
|
#117 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 413
|
Quote:
'Heaven Sent' is one of my least favourite episodes of Doctor Who of all time, and it is much more of a Marmite episode than this forum would suggest, I think.
And I would certainly agree with Sam_Gee1 - Chibnall does 'dark' and does it really well too. There are scenes in Broadchurch I'm surprised made it past the censors, particularly when you bear in mind the whole premise of that show is a paedophile grooming and then murdering a young boy. I absolutely hated that episode. It's whole premise is just a no-go for me. There's need to be more characters in an episode than that for it to work. It was so lacking and trying to be different for the sake of it.Anyway, as you say, Chibnall is a great writer in my opinion. Broadchurch was great and the dark that he wrote in that showed that variety that he can bring to proceedings. Then again, I always will look at Dinosaurs on a Spaceship. I don't think its his best loved episode but amidst all the fun and larks in that episode, there is dark in the form of what the Doctor chooses Solomon's fate to be and the implications of what Somolon was going to do to Nerfertiti too. It certainly won't be all light and fluffy with Chris at the helm! |
|
|
|
|
#118 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 695
|
Quote:
Never seeing an episode like Heaven Sent again would be a blessed relief!
I absolutely hated that episode. It's whole premise is just a no-go for me. There's need to be more characters in an episode than that for it to work. It was so lacking and trying to be different for the sake of it.Anyway, as you say, Chibnall is a great writer in my opinion. Broadchurch was great and the dark that he wrote in that showed that variety that he can bring to proceedings. Then again, I always will look at Dinosaurs on a Spaceship. I don't think its his best loved episode but amidst all the fun and larks in that episode, there is dark in the form of what the Doctor chooses Solomon's fate to be and the implications of what Somolon was going to do to Nerfertiti too. It certainly won't be all light and fluffy with Chris at the helm! |
|
|
|
|
|
#119 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 600
|
"Genius", like "iconic", is a word that has lost all currency due to tiresome overuse.
Einstein, Shakespeare, Da Vinci, Mozart, Moffat. Anyone spot the odd one out? |
|
|
|
|
|
#120 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 413
|
Quote:
"Genius", like "iconic", is a word that has lost all currency due to tiresome overuse.
Einstein, Shakespeare, Da Vinci, Mozart, Moffat. Anyone spot the odd one out?
|
|
|
|
|
#121 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 413
|
Having explained my previous liking for Moffat, which has dwindled since the second half of series 7, it's articles like this that don't help my view of him now....
http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/doctor-...aintwitterpost I don't agree with him on this at all. |
|
|
|
|
#122 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Scattered
Posts: 7,444
|
I think there should be a female companion around most of the time but I also think having both a female and a male companion works too.
His comments on male companions kind of irks me a little. Plus, isn't Nardole technically a companion this series, much as I wish he wasn't returning? |
|
|
|
|
#123 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 413
|
Quote:
I think there should be a female companion around most of the time but I also think having both a female and a male companion works too.
His comments on male companions kind of irks me a little. Plus, isn't Nardole technically a companion this series, much as I wish he wasn't returning? Previously he's spoken up before in bigging up Rory, saying that's who he'd be like if was a companion etc - obviously he created the character, so wasn't going to talk him down, but still it doesn't make sense. It seems to go against what he's said before. And as you say, a mix of male and female companions is the best to me. A trio in the TARDIS works far better to me for the show as a whole. |
|
|
|
|
#124 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,344
|
Quote:
I think there should be a female companion around most of the time but I also think having both a female and a male companion works too.
His comments on male companions kind of irks me a little. Plus, isn't Nardole technically a companion this series, much as I wish he wasn't returning? |
|
|
|
|
|
#125 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 413
|
Quote:
Why do some fans call them companions and others call them assistants?
I've always called them companions. I always associate assistant as being a demeaning term as in they only assist the Doctor when required. A companion is there at the Doctor's side and is their equal in helping stop the threats. Assistant doesn't give off that same vibe to me. |
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:02.







I absolutely hated that episode. It's whole premise is just a no-go for me. There's need to be more characters in an episode than that for it to work. It was so lacking and trying to be different for the sake of it.