Originally Posted by Mulett:
“A good writer ensures viewers engage and invest in a story. Why would we bother investing if it turned out we’d been watching a fraudster for 3 months?
Dramatically, it wouldn’t work because for every viewer who was shocked/excited by the twist, there would be millions more who would find it a massive turn-off. And that's the last thing Doctor Who needs after 16 years in the wilderness.
Think about Bobby Ewing coming back in the shower in Dallas. Did that work dramatically? I think not because it undermined the integrity of the entire show, leaving viewers thinking “God, how stupid”. They pulled in the viewers for his come-back episode, but it was down-hill all the way thereafter.
I’d hate to see something like that happen with Dr Who.”
“A good writer ensures viewers engage and invest in a story. Why would we bother investing if it turned out we’d been watching a fraudster for 3 months?
Dramatically, it wouldn’t work because for every viewer who was shocked/excited by the twist, there would be millions more who would find it a massive turn-off. And that's the last thing Doctor Who needs after 16 years in the wilderness.
Think about Bobby Ewing coming back in the shower in Dallas. Did that work dramatically? I think not because it undermined the integrity of the entire show, leaving viewers thinking “God, how stupid”. They pulled in the viewers for his come-back episode, but it was down-hill all the way thereafter.
I’d hate to see something like that happen with Dr Who.”
Whilst I agree with you about a shock ending, if RTD started to build up the idea that the doctor wasn't who we thought he was now, then we would believe it.
If this is introduced in the last episode, as a quick fix, I agree that it would alienate many viewers.



