|
||||||||
Is Doctor Who Losing People's Interest? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#376 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Steven Moffats pantry
Posts: 8,808
|
Quote:
Well, at the risk of being dismissed as a 'squeeing' so called 'fan', (Well, I do personally think 'Heaven Sent' was superb) I agree with a lot of that! (although there was a fair degree of 'Tennant-mania going on back in the day. Mainly around the time of his 3rd series and to a degree the specials...he was even on the Christmas ident in 2009!)
'...Mysterio' performed perfectly well (comfortably third most watched drama of the festive season, behind CTM and Sherlock) and it's only Series 9 that saw a noticeable drop in viewers; I've read Series 8 being mentioned in this area re: viewing figures, but it actually did perfectly well. Hell, in the grand scheme of things UK ratings wise, Series 9 wasn't a flamin' *disaster* or anything either! Said before and will say it again; we will see, quite soon, whether it was a 'blip' or not when Series 10 airs. So I'm not just 'jumping in' cos I generally like the Moffat era and being all defensive. (RTD fans can do that too, of course when 'their era' is being criticised. Me, I've enjoyed most of C21 Who to a greater or lesser degree....) |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#377 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Steven Moffats pantry
Posts: 8,808
|
Quote:
I too struggle to see this monstrous decline that Doctor Who is supposedly going through, but saying that usually gets me accused of burying my head in the sand and being a hardcore licker of Moffat's behind (because enjoying his work is a huge crime on these forums, apparently).
![]() Beyond TV in general not seeing the ratings it did before, I think the main reasons behind S9's lower ratings are the ridiculously late air times and the poor promotion by the BBC. But as said, it still did reasonably well even then and there are many good shows around that would kill for DW's position. And as also mentioned, critical reception was glowing for S9, which some people may not care to hear, but I think counts for a lot when critics can support their thoughts on an episode with well-reasoned points, whereas people on sites like this just say stuff like "I stopped watching after five minutes because I didn't get it, worst TV ever!" |
|
|
|
|
|
#378 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,506
|
Quote:
Bravo! But careful saying that. You'll get accused of snobbery. But as I posted above, someone like Mark Lawson who is highly respected and has no bias one way or the other clearly thinks its good TV as do many, many more. I remember posting a summary of reviews for Heaven Sent which got totally ignored by those who were doing the 'WORST THING EVER' routine. As, I say, the Sherlock threads are just as bad. I will never forget it but during the last series someone posted in all seriousness that not only was Sherlock not very good, it was the WORST thing ever made on british television and that it should cause us shame internationally as a nation because of how bad the show is. And these people expect to be taken seriously?!?!?
There was a lot of accusing Moffat of trying too hard to be clever, a complaint I've never understood. Perhaps some people are just intimidated by TV you have to actually pay attention to instead of jusy typing away on forums? |
|
|
|
|
|
#379 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Steven Moffats pantry
Posts: 8,808
|
Quote:
I took a peek at the Sherlock thread sometime after the episode finished and quickly gave up reading it. People are entitled to their opinions and all, but Jesus, the way some of them talk they sound like their parents never hugged them. I'd be interested to hear why people didn't enjoy it, but I couldn't find out amongst all the "worst thing ever" comments.
There was a lot of accusing Moffat of trying too hard to be clever, a complaint I've never understood. Perhaps some people are just intimidated by TV you have to actually pay attention to instead of jusy typing away on forums? I think its about how you choose to interpret it and says as much about you as a person - if you somehow feel spoken down to or insulted by Moffat then its your issue not his. All I see is a great, sometimes frustrating, writer doing what he loves. Same with RTD. People get very caught up in these funny ideas about agendas and ulterior motives when really its just a writer doing what they know best. Moffat didnt get handed a seat at the top table. This isnt the House of Lords. He earned it. What he didnt earn is the bizarre and at times worryingly personal levels of abuse and ire he seems to provoke. And I have no problem with those that criticise his work. I do it. And without puffing up her no doubt already bloated ego ( i bet she has an oil painting of herself hung above the mantelpiece...) Granny McSmith is the perfect example of someone who takes each episode on its merits- she will go from hating an episode to celebrating another because she bases it purely on the episode itself. I don't agree with her on much of what she says about Moffat but its clearly just a take it as it comes approach. Not this odd and bitter hatred which some exhibit. |
|
|
|
|
|
#380 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,514
|
Quote:
Remember to take your head out of the sand now and again. Oh, and your fingers out of your ears. And stop going 'la la la, not listening' when people are pointing out FACTS to you...
Quote:
I too struggle to see this monstrous decline that Doctor Who is supposedly going through, but saying that usually gets me accused of burying my head in the sand and being a hardcore licker of Moffat's behind (because enjoying his work is a huge crime on these forums, apparently).
![]() Beyond TV in general not seeing the ratings it did before, I think the main reasons behind S9's lower ratings are the ridiculously late air times and the poor promotion by the BBC. But as said, it still did reasonably well even then and there are many good shows around that would kill for DW's position. And as also mentioned, critical reception was glowing for S9, which some people may not care to hear, but I think counts for a lot when critics can support their thoughts on an episode with well-reasoned points, whereas people on sites like this just say stuff like "I stopped watching after five minutes because I didn't get it, worst TV ever!" I admit, I'm a big fan of Capaldi's doctor, he's my favourite doctor since the return in 2005. However I also immensely enjoyed both Eccleston's and Tennant's doctors. Indeed, although he was my least favourite, I liked Matt Smith's doctor. So I don't think this is bias - I simply don't see DW as being in anything other than rude good health for a 12 year old show. |
|
|
|
|
|
#381 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,362
|
Quote:
I think season 5 is basically what Moffat would have delivered if he had been chosen (ahead of RTD) to bring Doctor Who back to TV
|
|
|
|
|
|
#382 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 695
|
There is definitely exaggeration about the quality of the show as clearly many still think it is boss. However maybe I am wrong in saying this as there isn't actually proof but I feel the direction the show has taken past couple seasons or so has isolated a decent faction of the audience. Particuarly those who are quite young and I also feel that there isn't a new generation coming in watching the show because of this. Personally I don't see the show has hyped or big as it once was but I wouldn't go so far too say that it is dieing as some do. I do think interest has definitely dipped though. This is why it seems we are going back to lighthearted stories and what seems to be a comedic duo of companions incoming to recapture the lost audience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#383 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,703
|
From the overall gist of this page I must be in unusual circumstances.
![]() I'm a hardcore fan who watched series 2-5 (when it was at its peak in my opinion) episodes multiple times. Often 3-4 times in the following week, and more later. Only the very weakest episodes only got a couple of watches. The key eps around the 50th I did the same for. Capaldi's era - almost none. It's 'enough' for me to see them once. The Husbands I tried rewatching a number of times but the ridiculous slapstick 'toss the head in the bag around' stopped me short every time until recently, when I finally managed to get to the only interesting/well-considered part of the episode - Darillium. Who used to be must-watch TV for my dad (he'd leave important family events early, urging me to drive us home in time to catch the start). I'd say he fell properly in love in series 2 and that lasted until 5. He started getting disillusioned in 6, and pretty much gave up in 7. He stuck with the Xmas specials but this year didn't care, even though I've recorded it and said he must catch up, 'it's really good'. Completely apathetic. One of my best (and snootiest critics of 'non-intelligent' TV) friends found Who absolutely essential around series 4 - so much so he planned his nights out around it. I don't think he does so now! For a few years up to the 50th my nieces and nephew knew of Doctor Who as a national institution and were looking forward to the age when they would be allowed to watch. Not any more - they've lost all (secondary) interest. They used to buy me the books and mugs etc. Now they just shrug their shoulders when I mention it. I'm honestly surprised viewing figures haven't fallen further. |
|
|
|
|
|
#384 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,071
|
Quote:
And I have no problem with those that criticise his work. I do it. And without puffing up her no doubt already bloated ego ( i bet she has an oil painting of herself hung above the mantelpiece...) Granny McSmith is the perfect example of someone who takes each episode on its merits- she will go from hating an episode to celebrating another because she bases it purely on the episode itself. I don't agree with her on much of what she says about Moffat but its clearly just a take it as it comes approach. Not this odd and bitter hatred which some exhibit. )I would point out that it was Moffat writing badly that came before the general dislike. Most people were disposed to like Moffat because he'd been so good under RTD's showrunnership. The stuff he came up with was disappointing; people felt let down. That's when they went off him in droves. It wasn't that they decided to hate him for no reason, and didn't give him a chance. |
|
|
|
|
|
#385 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,831
|
Quote:
Which, in my opinion, would be catastrophic for the show as a "drama" series. i don't get this obsession with being funny, gag after gag, quip after quip, bang-bang-bang...it's tiresome and utterly undermines the drama. We're not far away from the show being described as a "fun sci-fi spoof" again as it was in the UK press during the McCoy years. Wit, please, not gags.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#386 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,831
|
Quote:
However there are some facts, if you want them.
8th most watched show on TV this Christmas Highest individual ratings for an episode in 2 years. Massive figures for BBC America |
|
|
|
|
|
#387 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,831
|
Quote:
From the overall gist of this page I must be in unusual circumstances.
![]() I'm a hardcore fan who watched series 2-5 (when it was at its peak in my opinion) episodes multiple times. Often 3-4 times in the following week, and more later. Only the very weakest episodes only got a couple of watches. The key eps around the 50th I did the same for. Capaldi's era - almost none. It's 'enough' for me to see them once. The Husbands I tried rewatching a number of times but the ridiculous slapstick 'toss the head in the bag around' stopped me short every time until recently, when I finally managed to get to the only interesting/well-considered part of the episode - Darillium. Who used to be must-watch TV for my dad (he'd leave important family events early, urging me to drive us home in time to catch the start). I'd say he fell properly in love in series 2 and that lasted until 5. He started getting disillusioned in 6, and pretty much gave up in 7. He stuck with the Xmas specials but this year didn't care, even though I've recorded it and said he must catch up, 'it's really good'. Completely apathetic. One of my best (and snootiest critics of 'non-intelligent' TV) friends found Who absolutely essential around series 4 - so much so he planned his nights out around it. I don't think he does so now! For a few years up to the 50th my nieces and nephew knew of Doctor Who as a national institution and were looking forward to the age when they would be allowed to watch. Not any more - they've lost all (secondary) interest. They used to buy me the books and mugs etc. Now they just shrug their shoulders when I mention it. I'm honestly surprised viewing figures haven't fallen further. The real proof in the pudding will be to see whether or not the viewing figures go up once Chibnall is the showrunner during Series 11 and 12. |
|
|
|
|
|
#388 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,690
|
Recorded it but still not got round to watching the Christmas special yet. Had the opportunity but prefered to watch other stuff in my spare time. This would never have happened during the during the ecclestone, Tennant era when I couldn't wait to watch If missed live.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#389 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Essex
Posts: 8,406
|
Quote:
And as also mentioned, critical reception was glowing for S9, which some people may not care to hear, but I think counts for a lot when critics can support their thoughts on an episode with well-reasoned points, whereas people on sites like this just say stuff like "I stopped watching after five minutes because I didn't get it, worst TV ever!"
Heaven Sent got amazing reviews but had the second lowest AI of season 9. Even the truly appalling Sleep No More (lowest AI in years) failed to get a stronger critical review than 'not the strongest episode of the year'. And it is important to remember than 1.25m viewers didn't come back for season 9, and the show/lead actors are no longer getting shortlisted for popular awards (never mind actually winning). The critical acclaim is also somewhat distorted by the fact that many of the TV critics are also Steven Moffat fans. As an example, The Guardian's Dan Martin writes most of that paper's Doctor Who reviews and has also written whole articles about his love for Moffat's writing, even falsely crediting Moffat for making Doctor Who an international hit. And I don't personally feel we need to look to TV critics to make 'well reasoned points'. I've often seen on this very forum some beautifully crafted, passionate and well reasoned reviews of episodes, critiques of entire seasons or praise/criticism of particular writers (including RTD and Moffat). Just because someone writes for a paper or online, doesn't mean their point of view is any more valid than anyone on here. |
|
|
|
|
|
#390 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,362
|
Quote:
Recorded it but still not got round to watching the Christmas special yet. Had the opportunity but prefered to watch other stuff in my spare time. This would never have happened during the during the ecclestone, Tennant era when I couldn't wait to watch If missed live.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#391 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Essex
Posts: 8,406
|
Quote:
Ah you mean Season 31.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#392 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 695
|
Quote:
I have continuously referenced the critical acclaim that the show has had over the past few years. The problem I have is what I see as the disconnect between those critical reviews and the audience enjoyment of the show.
Heaven Sent got amazing reviews but had the second lowest AI of season 9. Even the truly appalling Sleep No More (lowest AI in years) failed to get a stronger critical review than 'not the strongest episode of the year'. And it is important to remember than 1.25m viewers didn't come back for season 9, and the show/lead actors are no longer getting shortlisted for popular awards (never mind actually winning). The critical acclaim is also somewhat distorted by the fact that many of the TV critics are also Steven Moffat fans. As an example, The Guardian's Dan Martin writes most of that paper's Doctor Who reviews and has also written whole articles about his love for Moffat's writing, even falsely crediting Moffat for making Doctor Who an international hit. And I don't personally feel we need to look to TV critics to make 'well reasoned points'. I've often seen on this very forum some beautifully crafted, passionate and well reasoned reviews of episodes, critiques of entire seasons or praise/criticism of particular writers (including RTD and Moffat). Just because someone writes for a paper or online, doesn't mean their point of view is any more valid than anyone on here. |
|
|
|
|
|
#393 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 413
|
Quote:
I have continuously referenced the critical acclaim that the show has had over the past few years. The problem I have is what I see as the disconnect between those critical reviews and the audience enjoyment of the show.
Heaven Sent got amazing reviews but had the second lowest AI of season 9. Even the truly appalling Sleep No More (lowest AI in years) failed to get a stronger critical review than 'not the strongest episode of the year'. And it is important to remember than 1.25m viewers didn't come back for season 9, and the show/lead actors are no longer getting shortlisted for popular awards (never mind actually winning). The critical acclaim is also somewhat distorted by the fact that many of the TV critics are also Steven Moffat fans. As an example, The Guardian's Dan Martin writes most of that paper's Doctor Who reviews and has also written whole articles about his love for Moffat's writing, even falsely crediting Moffat for making Doctor Who an international hit. And I don't personally feel we need to look to TV critics to make 'well reasoned points'. I've often seen on this very forum some beautifully crafted, passionate and well reasoned reviews of episodes, critiques of entire seasons or praise/criticism of particular writers (including RTD and Moffat). Just because someone writes for a paper or online, doesn't mean their point of view is any more valid than anyone on here. I do feel there is a little bit of a disconnect with the shows perception between viewers and reviewers though. Obviously reviewers aren't watching it at the same time as us, they get the early copies to watch, and for that to keep happening, they have to build good relationships with the BBC et all don't they? I can't just make a contact with someone in the BBC for example and say send me preview copies of shows. Relationships with publications and the BBC have been made over a number of years and obviously the intent is to maintain them. I'm not trying to use that as an excuse, but it can probably cloud the review somewhat slightly in that they can be overtly negative as they ruin relationships with those sending out early copies of programmes. It's something to think about, well it is to me anyway. Of course, we all see the show differently, but the reaction in reviews to how I'm personally experiencing the show has never been so far apart at present and that does feel odd. |
|
|
|
|
#394 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,703
|
Quote:
I have continuously referenced the critical acclaim that the show has had over the past few years. The problem I have is what I see as the disconnect between those critical reviews and the audience enjoyment of the show.
Heaven Sent got amazing reviews but had the second lowest AI of season 9. Even the truly appalling Sleep No More (lowest AI in years) failed to get a stronger critical review than 'not the strongest episode of the year'. And it is important to remember than 1.25m viewers didn't come back for season 9, and the show/lead actors are no longer getting shortlisted for popular awards (never mind actually winning). The critical acclaim is also somewhat distorted by the fact that many of the TV critics are also Steven Moffat fans. As an example, The Guardian's Dan Martin writes most of that paper's Doctor Who reviews and has also written whole articles about his love for Moffat's writing, even falsely crediting Moffat for making Doctor Who an international hit. And I don't personally feel we need to look to TV critics to make 'well reasoned points'. I've often seen on this very forum some beautifully crafted, passionate and well reasoned reviews of episodes, critiques of entire seasons or praise/criticism of particular writers (including RTD and Moffat). Just because someone writes for a paper or online, doesn't mean their point of view is any more valid than anyone on here. Another friend used to do nationally published games reviews as a sideline. The thing is, he often didn't even play the games. He just got the general reaction from other writers and then, because he's an engaging writer, would write good copy and make up a score. Quote:
I think to an extent we should listen to the reviewers - its how I do pick shows sometimes after they've aired to see what the general reaction was, but as you say, we the viewers are just as able to give as good a review as them.
I do feel there is a little bit of a disconnect with the shows perception between viewers and reviewers though. Obviously reviewers aren't watching it at the same time as us, they get the early copies to watch, and for that to keep happening, they have to build good relationships with the BBC et all don't they? I can't just make a contact with someone in the BBC for example and say send me preview copies of shows. Relationships with publications and the BBC have been made over a number of years and obviously the intent is to maintain them. I'm not trying to use that as an excuse, but it can probably cloud the review somewhat slightly in that they can be overtly negative as they ruin relationships with those sending out early copies of programmes. It's something to think about, well it is to me anyway. Of course, we all see the show differently, but the reaction in reviews to how I'm personally experiencing the show has never been so far apart at present and that does feel odd. |
|
|
|
|
|
#395 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 413
|
Quote:
I don't know how or if it makes a difference, but I think it's pretty obvious from heavy pointers in much of his work that Moffat is a Freemason. They don't tend to criticise each other too much publicly, not suggesting that's the 'reason' - just saying and throwing that one out there as a possible factor.
I don't really get any pointers from a potential Freemason link in his work either if I'm honest.... |
|
|
|
|
#396 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,588
|
Quote:
I too struggle to see this monstrous decline that Doctor Who is supposedly going through, but saying that usually gets me accused of burying my head in the sand and being a hardcore licker of Moffat's behind (because enjoying his work is a huge crime on these forums, apparently).
![]() Beyond TV in general not seeing the ratings it did before, I think the main reasons behind S9's lower ratings are the ridiculously late air times and the poor promotion by the BBC. But as said, it still did reasonably well even then and there are many good shows around that would kill for DW's position. And as also mentioned, critical reception was glowing for S9, which some people may not care to hear, but I think counts for a lot when critics can support their thoughts on an episode with well-reasoned points, whereas people on sites like this just say stuff like "I stopped watching after five minutes because I didn't get it, worst TV ever!" Quote:
I took a peek at the Sherlock thread sometime after the episode finished and quickly gave up reading it. People are entitled to their opinions and all, but Jesus, the way some of them talk they sound like their parents never hugged them. I'd be interested to hear why people didn't enjoy it, but I couldn't find out amongst all the "worst thing ever" comments.
There was a lot of accusing Moffat of trying too hard to be clever, a complaint I've never understood. Perhaps some people are just intimidated by TV you have to actually pay attention to instead of jusy typing away on forums? |
|
|
|
|
|
#397 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,080
|
Well, Freemason is a new one!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#398 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,588
|
Quote:
Bravo! But careful saying that. You'll get accused of snobbery. But as I posted above, someone like Mark Lawson who is highly respected and has no bias one way or the other clearly thinks its good TV as do many, many more. I remember posting a summary of reviews for Heaven Sent which got totally ignored by those who were doing the 'WORST THING EVER' routine. As, I say, the Sherlock threads are just as bad. I will never forget it but during the last series someone posted in all seriousness that not only was Sherlock not very good, it was the WORST thing ever made on british television and that it should cause us shame internationally as a nation because of how bad the show is. And these people expect to be taken seriously?!?!?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#399 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,588
|
Quote:
Thank you (I think -but when did you see my mantelpiece?
)I would point out that it was Moffat writing badly that came before the general dislike. Most people were disposed to like Moffat because he'd been so good under RTD's showrunnership. The stuff he came up with was disappointing; people felt let down. That's when they went off him in droves. It wasn't that they decided to hate him for no reason, and didn't give him a chance. |
|
|
|
|
|
#400 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,703
|
Quote:
Having met with Freemasons in my work, I can't say that Moffat comes across as one at all. There's not exactly a certain 'look' or anything, but he certainly doesn't come across as one.
I don't really get any pointers from a potential Freemason link in his work either if I'm honest.... |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 20:08.






