|
||||||||
DW under Chibnall could see a return to the Tennant style & format |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#151 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,462
|
Of course there's got to be a female companion, who else is going to do the screaming ? Only joking !
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#152 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Bromley
Posts: 456
|
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. There is also a storyline that they appeared to be building up, that seemed to get forgotten. When Clara joined the Tardis, the Tardis appeared to hate her. I suspect this was because at the end of the series, she jumped into The Doctor's timeline, visiting every single incarnation, and the Tardis had a problem with this, but that was never actually explained in the story. That said, I enjoyed the 50th Anniversary episode, and was glad that Steven Moffat used that episode to effectively close off the Time War storyline. I was never particularly comfortable with the idea that The Doctor, for whatever reason, would kill an entire race. I always thought he would face that kind of decision and find some clever way around it. As he did in the 50th Anniversary episode. Sadly, they seem to have forgotten about the Doctor hunting for Gallifrey storyline they appeared to be hinting at at the end of the 50th Anniversary ep. |
|
|
|
|
|
#153 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,601
|
Quote:
He said that male companions were like friends in law, which to me just sounds completely ridiculous. I like Moffat but from time to time, he can come out with some stupid stuff though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#154 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,693
|
Ugh if this is true it will be my worst nightmare and I know my parents who are watchers of the show will find it hard to watch too.
I can't stand another endless repeat of the "Doctor's assistant loves him" arc and the episode after episode longing looks etc. Secondly why do they have to be "dashing"? SO just simple eye candy for the kiddies and girls to swoon over? Also it will introduce what I hated so much about the Matt Smith era, IE Matt prancing around like an excited puppy on speed with all sorts of "zip zappy wim wammy flim flanny biggity bingity boingity" dialogue and zany behaviour... David Tennant was probably still best know when he joined for his Shakespeare work. It's certainly where he cut his teeth. Can't we have a good actor rather than a "dashing one"? I don't mean to be blunt but as many kids that watch Doctor Who, there are 40,50,60 year old parents and 20-30 year old geeks like me. |
|
|
|
|
|
#155 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,173
|
Quote:
It's one of those things, isn't it?
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. ![]() Quote:
He said that male companions were like friends in law, which to me just sounds completely ridiculous. I like Moffat but from time to time, he can come out with some stupid stuff though.
It always works better with male and female companions. A young adoring female on her own (Martha, Amy, Clara) is just boring after a while as they seem to need a backstory and 'arc' these days to justify them being there. Adding Rory gave Amy a much more interesting side and Donna was a huge improvement. I liked Rose but with Jack as well for those few episodes it looked so much more balanced. The only time I don't think it worked was with Danny Pink. I quite liked him (better than Clara, anyway) but the storyline felt so forced it negated him. |
|
|
|
|
|
#156 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,829
|
I very rarely post on here anymore, but I do find this article really interesting. I gave up with Doctor Who last year. I didn't finish the series. Got no interest in the Christmas special (didn't even remember about it until I just saw a clip on Tumblr). I'm just not keen on Capaldi in the role at all. But I'm intrigued by what will hopefully be a huge shake up by Chibnall, even though I'm not usually keen on his writing.
I quite liked 11 & Clara together, but their series was so short that I barely had the chance to properly enjoy the show again. Never liked Amy Pond and thought she was in it for far too long. I got very used to Russell's way of changing things every year - either a new companion or a new Doctor - and I'd love for that to return to be honest. But yeah, I was a huge Doctor Who fan back in Tennant's time. Bought the merchandise, bought the DVDs, visited the exhibitions, went to the BBC Doctor Who Proms etc. - loved Torchwood too. I'd say Doctor Who was a huge part of my life, actually! A lot of my friends loved it too. It was event TV, you know? Brilliant stuff. We used to chat about what might happen in the next episode in form time at high school. Moffatt's episodes under RTDs were excellent, but I don't think I've enjoyed any of his episodes in his own run anywhere near as much as Blink, The Doctor Dances or The Girl in the Fireplace. But I don't remember much as I've never rewatched any of the series past series 5. Plus, the whole thing got terribly confusing and it became impossible to watch Doctor Who with my old Dad anymore (aged 73 now) as he just didn't understand it and kept calling it stupid. Personally, I'm more bothered about caring about the characters, and I never really did that much since series 5. I thought Matt Smith did a brilliant job, but it always felt like that was despite the scripts, you know? I saw him at the BBC Proms too and he was excellent with the youngsters in particular. He was just...a character. Although, I didn't like his ending at all. The other thing is, I was always under the impression that Doctor Who was supposed to be popular with 8 year olds. I work in a primary school (have done for almost 4 years now) and I've never heard a single child mutter anything about the show, and I've not seen any of the merchandise either. I think that's a huge shame. Anyway, that's just a few random points. I was just being nostalgic about Who and stumbled back into this forum. Looking forward to hopefully a new start when Moffat goes. |
|
|
|
|
|
#157 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,506
|
Quote:
Ugh if this is true it will be my worst nightmare and I know my parents who are watchers of the show will find it hard to watch too.
I can't stand another endless repeat of the "Doctor's assistant loves him" arc and the episode after episode longing looks etc. Secondly why do they have to be "dashing"? SO just simple eye candy for the kiddies and girls to swoon over? Also it will introduce what I hated so much about the Matt Smith era, IE Matt prancing around like an excited puppy on speed with all sorts of "zip zappy wim wammy flim flanny biggity bingity boingity" dialogue and zany behaviour... David Tennant was probably still best know when he joined for his Shakespeare work. It's certainly where he cut his teeth. Can't we have a good actor rather than a "dashing one"? I don't mean to be blunt but as many kids that watch Doctor Who, there are 40,50,60 year old parents and 20-30 year old geeks like me. |
|
|
|
|
|
#158 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,355
|
Quote:
I very rarely post on here anymore, but I do find this article really interesting. I gave up with Doctor Who last year. I didn't finish the series. Got no interest in the Christmas special (didn't even remember about it until I just saw a clip on Tumblr). I'm just not keen on Capaldi in the role at all. But I'm intrigued by what will hopefully be a huge shake up by Chibnall, even though I'm not usually keen on his writing.
I quite liked 11 & Clara together, but their series was so short that I barely had the chance to properly enjoy the show again. Never liked Amy Pond and thought she was in it for far too long. I got very used to Russell's way of changing things every year - either a new companion or a new Doctor - and I'd love for that to return to be honest. But yeah, I was a huge Doctor Who fan back in Tennant's time. Bought the merchandise, bought the DVDs, visited the exhibitions, went to the BBC Doctor Who Proms etc. - loved Torchwood too. I'd say Doctor Who was a huge part of my life, actually! A lot of my friends loved it too. It was event TV, you know? Brilliant stuff. We used to chat about what might happen in the next episode in form time at high school. Moffatt's episodes under RTDs were excellent, but I don't think I've enjoyed any of his episodes in his own run anywhere near as much as Blink, The Doctor Dances or The Girl in the Fireplace. But I don't remember much as I've never rewatched any of the series past series 5. Plus, the whole thing got terribly confusing and it became impossible to watch Doctor Who with my old Dad anymore (aged 73 now) as he just didn't understand it and kept calling it stupid. Personally, I'm more bothered about caring about the characters, and I never really did that much since series 5. I thought Matt Smith did a brilliant job, but it always felt like that was despite the scripts, you know? I saw him at the BBC Proms too and he was excellent with the youngsters in particular. He was just...a character. Although, I didn't like his ending at all. The other thing is, I was always under the impression that Doctor Who was supposed to be popular with 8 year olds. I work in a primary school (have done for almost 4 years now) and I've never heard a single child mutter anything about the show, and I've not seen any of the merchandise either. I think that's a huge shame. Anyway, that's just a few random points. I was just being nostalgic about Who and stumbled back into this forum. Looking forward to hopefully a new start when Moffat goes. I never hear who brought up as a subject in the real world, unless it's by me, to which all anyone wants to do is say how it was so much better in the Tennant era. Yes, that's my subjective experience, but the post i've quoted above is saying the same thing as so many have in the past. Anyway, although I still watch because there are still some good episodes, (though I have to do trying to ignore arc hints because I know they will ultimately come to nothing satisfying) I am also looking forward to perhaps being able to be a proper full on fan like I was in the RTD era instead of sort-of-half-fan I feel like currently. |
|
|
|
|
|
#159 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wigan
Posts: 4,881
|
Quote:
Of course there's got to be a female companion, who else is going to do the screaming ? Only joking !
|
|
|
|
|
|
#160 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Scattered
Posts: 7,446
|
Nearly a week on and I still think this article is completely true.
Terrible wording and personal bias in the article aside, it just makes so much more sense for Chibnall and for the BBC to completely revamp the show and to do that, everything needs to be new. |
|
|
|
|
#161 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,514
|
Quote:
Nearly a week on and I still think this article is completely true.
Terrible wording and personal bias in the article aside, it just makes so much more sense for Chibnall and for the BBC to completely revamp the show and to do that, everything needs to be new. It makes sense or doesn't make sense depending on your viewpoint - it can be argued persuasively either way. However the striking thing about the article was the way it referred to Chibnall's series as some way-off future event which was still under discussion and key decisions hadn't been finalised. I don't find that credible, for the following reasons which I posted a few days ago: Quote:
The article is behind the times. If a Chibnall-helmed series 11 starts in Spring 2018, following the pattern of series 10, and indeed series 1-5, then filming will need to begin around late June / early July next year. Therefore you have to assume that the general direction of the series has been decided upon, at least some of the scripts for the series have already been written, and that any casting decisions have already been made! If Capaldi is indeed leaving during the 2017 Christmas Special, then his successor will need to be present at the series 11 read-through next June, only seven months from now. It would be extremely surprising if he or she hadn't already been chosen. Yet there are no substantive rumours about a): Capaldi definitely leaving and b): His successor. There certainly were, months before both David Tennant's and Matt Smith's departures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#162 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,080
|
Quote:
Nearly a week on, there's still zero evidence either way.
It makes sense or doesn't make sense depending on your viewpoint - it can be argued persuasively either way. However the striking thing about the article was the way it referred to Chibnall's series as some way-off future event which was still under discussion and key decisions hadn't been finalised. I don't find that credible, for the following reasons which I posted a few days ago: If he's staying, well, there we go....if he's leaving, surely steps have already been taken to sort out who is taking over. |
|
|
|
|
|
#163 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 410
|
Quote:
I hear, see and feel myself the same sort of sentiments you are detailing here.
I never hear who brought up as a subject in the real world, unless it's by me, to which all anyone wants to do is say how it was so much better in the Tennant era. Yes, that's my subjective experience, but the post i've quoted above is saying the same thing as so many have in the past. Anyway, although I still watch because there are still some good episodes, (though I have to do trying to ignore arc hints because I know they will ultimately come to nothing satisfying) I am also looking forward to perhaps being able to be a proper full on fan like I was in the RTD era instead of sort-of-half-fan I feel like currently. |
|
|
|
|
|
#164 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 22,156
|
Only thing I want him to do is declutter the stories.
he needs to sort out and keep PC's doctor on a specific path. that's one of Moffats biggest problems for me. He's got a talented Actor and hasn't managed to use his talents to the very best. Watching the series on Netflix from 2005 onwards and you can see the stories just getting more and more complicated. A lot of the recent ones just don't need that level of complexity and totally switch people off. Kill the moon, and Robot of Sherwood should never have left the ideas table let alone be part of the first series of a new actor playing the doctor. |
|
|
|
|
#165 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 695
|
Quote:
Only thing I want him to do is declutter the stories.
he needs to sort out and keep PC's doctor on a specific path. that's one of Moffats biggest problems for me. He's got a talented Actor and hasn't managed to use his talents to the very best. Watching the series on Netflix from 2005 onwards and you can see the stories just getting more and more complicated. A lot of the recent ones just don't need that level of complexity and totally switch people off. Kill the moon, and Robot of Sherwood should never have left the ideas table let alone be part of the first series of a new actor playing the doctor. |
|
|
|
|
|
#166 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 56
|
I love Robot of Sherwood. Yes it has it's faults but I think it's both funny and moving.
Kill the Moon is a great example of a problem many shows have now, not only Doctor Who. There always HAS to be a subtext or metaphor or moral dilemma instead of just telling a great, exciting story. The first 20 minutes of that episode are fantastic. It looks amazing. But it falls to pieces once it starts taking itself too seriously (and I say this as someone who has professed their love for the more thoughtful and darker episodes). They could have kept the conflict at the centre of the episode by changing it slightly and cutting out the self-righteous nonsense that blighted the second 30 minutes and collapsed into outright farce by the end. Maybe one of the crew becomes infected and its a greater good versus the individual kind of thing. Something. Anything. Anything but the ludicrous and heavy handed silliness we ended up with. The episode would have been brilliant, maybe an all time classic, if they had just kept it basic. They're on the Moon. There are some evil creatures. The Doctor and friends must defeat them and escape. Sometimes less is more! Whats wrong with that? Nothing wrong with some dumb fun and thrills every so often. |
|
|
|
|
|
#167 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 695
|
Quote:
I love Robot of Sherwood. Yes it has it's faults but I think it's both funny and moving.
Kill the Moon is a great example of a problem many shows have now, not only Doctor Who. There always HAS to be a subtext or metaphor or moral dilemma instead of just telling a great, exciting story. The first 20 minutes of that episode are fantastic. It looks amazing. But it falls to pieces once it starts taking itself too seriously (and I say this as someone who has professed their love for the more thoughtful and darker episodes). They could have kept the conflict at the centre of the episode by changing it slightly and cutting out the self-righteous nonsense that blighted the second 30 minutes and collapsed into outright farce by the end. Maybe one of the crew becomes infected and its a greater good versus the individual kind of thing. Something. Anything. Anything but the ludicrous and heavy handed silliness we ended up with. The episode would have been brilliant, maybe an all time classic, if they had just kept it basic. They're on the Moon. There are some evil creatures. The Doctor and friends must defeat them and escape. Sometimes less is more! Whats wrong with that? Nothing wrong with some dumb fun and thrills every so often. The problem however i feel rests in the other episodes for almost none taking a lighter tone so an episode like this stands out more, the only couple which took a lighter tone were the worst received and most hated of the season. Because in the case of Forest of the Night, they took the piss. |
|
|
|
|
|
#168 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 56
|
Quote:
The Doctor and Clara conflict was the best part of the episode and one of the best in the season for me. I found it great that The Doctor got called out with that behaviour which i am not a fan when companions always immediately forgive his actions. Not every story should be good vs evil, some need to have some tough choices which the show did for over 50 years.
The problem however i feel rests in the other episodes for almost none taking a lighter tone so an episode like this stands out more, the only couple which took a lighter tone were the worst received and most hated of the season. Because in the case of Forest of the Night, they took the piss. I agree with you about the conflict between Clara and the Doctor. I would cheer for more of that. I would welcome more discontent on the Tardis. But in this instance the reveal was so dopey it negated everything that went before it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#169 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 56
|
Oh and as far as the Doctor/Clara conflict goes...if only it had actually had some more significance instead of being pretty much dropped by the next episode and having zero impact beyond a few lines of dialogue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#170 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 695
|
Quote:
Oh and as far as the Doctor/Clara conflict goes...if only it had actually had some more significance instead of being pretty much dropped by the next episode and having zero impact beyond a few lines of dialogue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#171 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,831
|
Quote:
That's what's got me the most if I'm honest. It's just very dismissive and rude to any man that's been aboard the TARDIS. It's the way he's said it that's rather annoyed me.
If I was in charge of the show, I'd definitely shake things up and have a Doctor and male companion mix (even for just one series) to make things different, but ultimately I do like the mix of male and female companions. A TARDIS trio always works far better to me. |
|
|
|
|
|
#172 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,831
|
Quote:
Don't be silly. A show which is more or less guaranteed at least another four years is not in a remotely "perilous" condition. It's in a much more comfortable position than a lot of shows, as a matter of fact. As to Moffat's tampering, your exaggerating a lot. Only the "Hybrid" stuff has really gone against what has been said before, but that's his only major offence in terms of altering the past.
Moffat has gone way overboard in altering the past. The Hybrid stuff is just the most recent debacle. |
|
|
|
|
|
#173 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,831
|
Quote:
When the Doctor was stuck with UNIT they really were his assistants. Official
![]() I thought that was stupid, effectively writing off Ian, Steven, Ben, Jamie, the Brig, Turlough, Adric, Harry, Jack and Mickey, all of whom were great characters in their own right and playing off the females they happened to be travelling or working with at the time. It always works better with male and female companions. A young adoring female on her own (Martha, Amy, Clara) is just boring after a while as they seem to need a backstory and 'arc' these days to justify them being there. Adding Rory gave Amy a much more interesting side and Donna was a huge improvement. I liked Rose but with Jack as well for those few episodes it looked so much more balanced. The only time I don't think it worked was with Danny Pink. I quite liked him (better than Clara, anyway) but the storyline felt so forced it negated him. |
|
|
|
|
|
#174 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,464
|
If it is going to be Moffat and Capaldis last episode could have some important returns old friends and enemies.
Would love it to be a two parter end with a cliffhanger on Christmas Night followed by the second part on New Years Day. |
|
|
|
|
|
#175 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Scattered
Posts: 7,446
|
Won't be a two parter this time around. Just a Christmas episode but maybe a slightly longer one so if Capaldi is leaving in it, it gives the story some breathing space and doesn't feel too rushed.
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 20:12.





