Doctor Who

Logan wrote: So, how are people liking the newest season/series so far (with Chibnall/ Jodie Whittaker)? I miss Moffat and Capaldi a lot. Warning, some spoilers. This has been the first season since Doctor Who rebooted that I wasn't excited to see a new episode, and actually had to push myself two watch some of the episodes and to finish some. I'm not impressed with Chibanll's writing, feel like there are more companions than necessary and I don't find the companions terribly engaging (especially the young ones), I find the accents hard to understand (I need subs and wish they would enunciate more), I find the villains uninteresting, and the new Doctor doesn't quite work for me. Chibnall went for ethnic diversity, but I don't feel like he got enough diversity in the companions in more interesting-to-me ways -- excuse me, I shouldn't say companions, it's now the more genteel Team Tardis or "fam". That said, I did quite enjoy the last two, Demons of the Punjab and Kerblam! (my dad was a British officer in India during the partition, and was very against it). It's getting very mixed reactions. At rottentomatoes the critics score for the season is 96%, which I think far too generous, but the audience score is 45%. I found Arachnids in the UK and The Tsuranga Conundrum to be really sub-par episodes. Rosa was nicely done, but some backstory on the villain would have made his character more interesting. In the future I would have expected species-ism to be a bigger issue than racism. It wouldn't go down well, but it would be interesting if in his future society white human males are the oppressed ones. I think understanding his motivation might have made it more interesting, but I don't think that he was needed at all (there were less fantastic ways to advance the plot). I wish there was more of a story arc. I think standalone episodes can be great (think anthology series such as Black Mirror, Inside No. 9, The Twilight Zone, The Other Limits and various great Doctor Who episodes which could stand alone), but I tend to prefer serials generally (think Fargo, Westworld, Game of Thrones, Utopia, In the Flesh, Stranger Things etc.) Anyway, I'm not finding the plots that interesting, the characters are not working for me (the apraxia does not even seem consistent enough in Ryan), and the messages can seem a bit heavy-handed in execution.

 

So, how are people liking the newest season/series so far (with Chibnall/ Jodie Whittaker)?

I miss Moffat and Capaldi a lot.

Warning, some spoilers.

This has been the first season since Doctor Who rebooted that I wasn't excited to see a new episode, and actually had to push myself two watch some of the episodes and to finish some. I'm not impressed with Chibanll's writing, feel like there are more companions than necessary and I don't find the companions terribly engaging (especially the young ones), I find the accents hard to understand (I need subs and wish they would enunciate more), I find the villains uninteresting, and the new Doctor doesn't quite work for me. Chibnall went for ethnic diversity, but I don't feel like he got enough diversity in the companions in more interesting-to-me ways -- excuse me, I shouldn't say companions, it's now the more genteel Team Tardis or "fam".

That said, I did quite enjoy the last two, Demons of the Punjab and Kerblam! (my dad was a British officer in India during the partition, and was very against it).

It's getting very mixed reactions. At rottentomatoes the critics score for the season is 96%, which I think far too generous, but the audience score is 45%.

I found Arachnids in the UK and The Tsuranga Conundrum to be really sub-par episodes. Rosa was nicely done, but some backstory on the villain would have made his character more interesting. In the future I would have expected species-ism to be a bigger issue than racism. It wouldn't go down well, but it would be interesting if in his future society white human males are the oppressed ones. I think understanding his motivation might have made it more interesting, but I don't think that he was needed at all (there were less fantastic ways to advance the plot).

I wish there was more of a story arc. I think standalone episodes can be great (think anthology series such as Black Mirror, Inside No. 9, The Twilight Zone, The Other Limits and various great Doctor Who episodes which could stand alone), but I tend to prefer serials generally (think Fargo, Westworld, Game of Thrones, Utopia, In the Flesh, Stranger Things etc.)

Anyway, I'm not finding the plots that interesting, the characters are not working for me (the apraxia does not even seem consistent enough in Ryan), and the messages can seem a bit heavy-handed in execution.

I don't think you're sexist with that comment, although I have seen sexist comments and comments like, "so does this mean that the sonic screwdriver will noticeably vibrate now?" Excellent posts, by the way, and I'm very happy to see there's somebody else here paying attention

I can actually pretty much say ditto to everything you said there. Those are the Chibnall episodes I like and your 'seasoning' order works for me.

As for Broadchurch, I felt the story was not tight enough and took too long to tell. I didn't even like her very much in it. You should see Attack the Block if you get the chance and haven't seen it yet. Not for her, but just because it's a fun movie. And I love Black Mirror, but she wasn't in a favourite episode of mine, nor did she make much much impression on me there.

That was good thinking with the monks, but maybe at a later date we'll get something a little more epic.

I'll be interested to see how she plays it from that angle to. And will we have a male (or perhaps female) companion, like with Rose and Martha, who have crushes on the Doctor. My guess is that she'll play it feminine but in an understated way. I don't think we'll have her touching up her makeup in between fighting the Daleks and the Cybermen (now to be known as Cyberpeople). Now that sounds sexist, quite deliberately. And will she call herself a Time Lord or a Time Lady?

Edited by Logan - July 19 2017 at 18:12

Like starting with "I know I'm going to sound racist", saying "I know I'm going to labelled as sexist" usually means that you are, but it isn't true in all cases, and I'm not saying this of you. ;)

I've read where Chibnall has said that he always wanted to choose a female doctor and where he's said that he plans on making bold changes. I would have preferred a male the Doctor before, but now I don't care. The other thing that people have been calling for is non-white the Doctor (especially black or South Asian from comments I've seen). Maybe he thought that the first female "coloured" Doctor would be too much (I like blue). Incidentally, I preferred to think of the Master as transgendered which explained Missy rather than this regenerating into different sexes (and colours as we saw in Hell Bent). I think gender exchange was established in Doctor Who stories years ago, and we had a female Doctor in the spoof The Curse of Fatal Death. They have a different physiology, and I don't really have a problem with swapping apparent genders or colours. They swap accents too (just please, please, please, let's not have a Doctor who insists on finishing every sentence with "innit?" "Innit" irritates me even more than "eh" does in Canada. Innit, bruv, eh?

I'm also most concerned about content. If the writing is good, and the audience is treated as intelligent, but still kids can follow, then I think we'll have a good show. I was a little worried when I found it who was heading it up (though I like Broadchurch and enjoy episodes he wrote). I'd wondered if Mark Gatiss might become the showrunner at one time, although I prefer his work with The League of Gentlemen to his work with Doctor Who.

We had a year's hiatus and this is Moffat's swansong, so I was expecting a little more. I still liked it, but not up to the former season (especially for me with the marvelous Heaven Sent). Lesbian kiss aside, I think he played it too safe, and maybe worked not to come across as too clever, and wanted to make it simpler for people to follow (especially if they weren't long time fans of the show). Ratings had declined, I think because many couldn't accept an older Doctor. Kids liked to be scared by monsters, but some don't like to see lines on faces or grey hair.

A lot of people complained about Moffat when he became showrunner and said that he was no "the Russel" (c'est dommage), but Moffat has been overall the best writer in my opinion of NuWho and did a terrific job.

Personally I would have like a darker and gritter more adult show, but then we already had a Torchwood, but of course DW is family viewing, and as Moffat has said, the show should be optimistic and is supposed to suitable for children.

As for the Monks, I like the concept, but It didn't turn out as interesting as The Silence or even the headless monks. The defeat was cheesy as hell. That said, it was worth it for me just to say those photoshopped photographs of a monk behind Churchhill etc. I laughed heartily.

By the way, while I really like Capaldi, for me Moffat's strongest run was the first half of series six, but really series/ season 9 was as strong, or arguably stronger -- actually, stronger I think, series nine is terrific. Never mind.

Anyway, there have been no Doctors that I haven't liked yet. There have been some companions I wasn't that big on, but certainly the writing has not been consistently strong through the years.

Sorry, this is a longer and sloppier post than I intended, but I don't feel like editing.

^ I see that I embedded a youtube link the bad old way which doesn't work any longer.

Bumping this topic since we, well some us, learnt recently the identity of the new Doctor. I was expecting this kind of a change. Warning, identity revealed in video. I hope it's not too much a of a spoiler to say that Capaldi left (I mean that departure was announced a long time ago, as was Moffat's).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1IczjLYCIM

I knew that person from various other roles. It should be an interesting change.

By the way, I enjoyed it, but was a tad disappointed with this last series. I was hoping for a stronger narrative arc at first, but really wasn't expecting it since Moffat talked of more stand-alone episodes and that he wouldn't complicate matters (I like it complicated). That said, there were some strong episodes, I liked Bill and Nardole, and I think that Capaldi has always been great. It also featured one of my favourite openings scenes in all of Doctor Who with "The Lie of the Land".

PS. Any good forums people know of to discuss such stuff? I have occasionally posted to Den of Geek since they cover a lot of the shows I love.

EDIT: there has been some controversy and many stupid remarks made about the choice of the new Doctor, but my concern tends to be who will the companions be and how will that be handled. The companion angle can bring the show down for me somewhat.

Edited by Logan - July 18 2017 at 16:19

Logan wrote: Doug, Have you seen all the Capaldi episodes thus far? I liked series 9 much more than series 8. Said it before, but to me "Heaven Sent" is a real diamond, and top of my pecking-order in Doctor Who episodes (not that I've seen all of the first two Doctors episodes). It's everything I had hoped for with Capaldi. By the way, I probably started with Doctor Who at about the same time as you. -------------------------------------------------------------------   An aside, but there have been quite a number of re-appearances of characters as different people over the y

Doug, Have you seen all the Capaldi episodes thus far? I liked series 9 much more than series 8. Said it before, but to me "Heaven Sent" is a real diamond, and top of my pecking-order in Doctor Who episodes (not that I've seen all of the first two Doctors episodes). It's everything I had hoped for with Capaldi. By the way, I probably started with Doctor Who at about the same time as you.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Dean, I'm having problems with formatting in your post, and keeping that spoiler hidden, so in regards to your spoiler post without quoting:

I've read an article about that CLICK

Spoilers (also highlight text to read):

 Karen Gillan who would later play the 11th Doctor's companion Amelia Pond was also in Fires of Pompeii (as a soothsayer that would have died due to the eruption). She wasn't based on a real character like Capaldi's, but hey-ho. If both Frobisher and Caecilius frowned the Doctor that face, better said as the Doctor chose that face as a reminder to always save people, such as young Master Davros, no matter the consequences ("I'm the Doctor, and I save people") then what can the message be with the double-use of Gillan if there is one? The Doctor did not save soothsayer Gillan, nor did the Doctor save Amy Pond from the weeping angels back-in-time thing. Yes Amy chose to join Rory. Of course it was a later incarnation that chose that face as reminder to save people, so there's no conflict, I just find it kind of interesting. In a way the Gillan incident gives more credence to the whole change of heart, reminder story, or whatever. Time does not need need to re-assert itself. Anyway, my silly ramblings aside, seems that Amy and the soothsayer are both related by Moffat's logic. I really am confusing myself here. Move along....

Warning too, youtube spoilers, watch at peril:



Spoiler, highlight:

 An aside, but there have been quite a number of re-appearances of characters as different people over the years. One of my favourites was Colin Baker portraying two Gallifreyans, Commander Maxil and the 6th Doctor. It was particularly interesting because Colin Baker as Maxil shot the Colin Baker Doctor's predecessor.


Edited by Logan - November 24 2018 at 11:00

Really enjoyed the latest/modern Dr. Who episodes, still think the Rose ones were the best.

Dr Who is a kids' programme that has grown-up with its audience irrespective of how old you were when you started watching it. Originally designed to be educational it sort to give life-lessons through nightmarish stories. It was for many youngsters in the sixties the programme that you watched from behind the sofa, too frightening to watch but too gripping to tear your eyes away from and even today kids rate episodes by how scary they are, with the bad ones being less scary (and often more wordy and thus boring). I remember watching the original Ghostbusters during an afternoon matinee showing at the local cinema where most of the audience were young kids, all their laughter was not from the scripted gags that we adults laughed at, but from the scenes that scared them the most ... Kids love that kind of safe-scary almost cartoon-like stuff that Dr Who used to deliver because it wasn't realistic and doesn't mess with psychological fears or grim no-escape horror. Dr Who always had a clever solution to the cliff-hanger ending of each episode, brain beats brawn and any terror can be overcome. Older viewers who have stuck with it still fondly remember the earlier episodes and the Doctor that first introduced them to the programme but now they're not watching it from behind the sofa so are more critical of how each story is played. My daughter was 17 when 'Blink' was aired and it scared the crap out of her, yet she still watched it twice whereas I found it more as a clever concept, well written and smartly played except for the one (unnecessary) scene where the Angels were shown with 'scary' faces... less scared : more critical.