Giving up on Doctor Who
September 8, 2014 11:01 PM Subscribe
I gave up mainly because I’d got tired of watching talented actors reduced to eye candy and acting out the fantasies of overgrown adolescents who had somehow finagled their way into writing scripts. Where they were writing scripts that looked like old-time Doctor Who, without necssarily understanding why old-time Doctor Who worked and more importantly why it didn’t.Maureen K. Speller: I’m giving up on Doctor Who again. This time it may be final.
For the last two seasons I've had this nagging feeling about the show, and now with Capaldi I'm reduced to listening to it as backgroundnoise whilst I read.
the author has hit the nail on the head, the narrative and structure is shock full of tropes, i'm not entirely sure an 8 year old could do worse. and as far as overall plot? it seems to be reduced to the saturday-night plot of the week.
posted by xcasex at 11:14 PM on September 8, 2014 [5 favorites]
the author has hit the nail on the head, the narrative and structure is shock full of tropes, i'm not entirely sure an 8 year old could do worse. and as far as overall plot? it seems to be reduced to the saturday-night plot of the week.
posted by xcasex at 11:14 PM on September 8, 2014 [5 favorites]
IMexteremely polarizingHO, 100% of the problem with modern doctor who is how much of a shitty hack Steven Moffat is.
If they just fired him and started the next season from scratch something a lot better would probably come out the other side. Making him the showrunner was the dumbest fucking move they possibly could have done.
Dude ruins everything he touches. The newest sherlock was also a gross tugjob of fanwank.
You could, and people have, also write a huge essay about the bizarre way he handles women. and any number of other things too.
posted by emptythought at 11:14 PM on September 8, 2014 [51 favorites]
If they just fired him and started the next season from scratch something a lot better would probably come out the other side. Making him the showrunner was the dumbest fucking move they possibly could have done.
Dude ruins everything he touches. The newest sherlock was also a gross tugjob of fanwank.
You could, and people have, also write a huge essay about the bizarre way he handles women. and any number of other things too.
posted by emptythought at 11:14 PM on September 8, 2014 [51 favorites]
Wow, I was about to come in and be all snobby 'Well, I gave up thanks to Matt Smith. So nyeh nyeh nyeh.' But she gave up during Tennant??? I mean, Moffat hadn't even started being painfully awful yet then!
posted by Quilford at 11:17 PM on September 8, 2014 [2 favorites]
posted by Quilford at 11:17 PM on September 8, 2014 [2 favorites]
And yet there are a lot of people who are feminists who tend to think critically about their media who still like Sherlock and Who and lots of things, even those who think there's a problem with the female characters sometimes, as if there's anything you can watch where that isn't true. I don't mind at all that some people have a problem with this, I have always failed at getting into the show to begin with, but I hate the way these discussions start to be tinged with "and if you like anything Moffat has ever done you're disgusting".
posted by Sequence at 11:18 PM on September 8, 2014 [17 favorites]
posted by Sequence at 11:18 PM on September 8, 2014 [17 favorites]
I just watched the first Capaldi episode last night and I agree, it wasn't a very good one. Strax was about my favourite part, really.
posted by the agents of KAOS at 11:20 PM on September 8, 2014 [2 favorites]
posted by the agents of KAOS at 11:20 PM on September 8, 2014 [2 favorites]
I rather enjoy Doctor Who.
(Trying to get in early with the most controversial comment in the thread.)
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 11:25 PM on September 8, 2014 [29 favorites]
(Trying to get in early with the most controversial comment in the thread.)
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 11:25 PM on September 8, 2014 [29 favorites]
If Moffat is terrible, it's only because RTD was horrendous before him. (And I'm someone who gave up a little while into Moffat's run.)
posted by koeselitz at 11:29 PM on September 8, 2014 [3 favorites]
posted by koeselitz at 11:29 PM on September 8, 2014 [3 favorites]
I loved eccelston, i loved tenant, and I like Capaldi; I patiently waited out the clock on Smith. These last two episodes have been so dull. I don't have TV, so I had to buy the whole season on amazon to get a discount, but I wish I hadn't. Surely someone will swoop in and save the show?
What's Davies doing these days!?!
posted by MoxieProxy at 11:29 PM on September 8, 2014 [4 favorites]
What's Davies doing these days!?!
posted by MoxieProxy at 11:29 PM on September 8, 2014 [4 favorites]
But she gave up during Tennant???
I gave up when Donna left. :( Came back for the new Doctor, and so far it's been about what I expected. Honestly, I'm saving my ragequit energy for Sherlock S4.
posted by betweenthebars at 11:33 PM on September 8, 2014 [5 favorites]
I gave up when Donna left. :( Came back for the new Doctor, and so far it's been about what I expected. Honestly, I'm saving my ragequit energy for Sherlock S4.
posted by betweenthebars at 11:33 PM on September 8, 2014 [5 favorites]
I just watched the first Capaldi episode last night and I agree, it wasn't a very good one.
I felt like the first Capaldi episode was entirely not about Doctor Who but instead was entirely a meta-episode about how fans who had only picked up watching DW during the NewWho years would feel about having Capaldi play the Doctor.
Clara is standing in for that segment of the audience, other characters are standing in for older Who fans who know the Doctor is continuous across regenerations and who give new Doctors a chance to develop into their own strengths, and Capaldi is being both The Doctor and being Capaldi, expressing a combination of misgivings plus a desire for confidence as he steps into the role.
The biggest plot hole for me, in that script that wasn't very strong but was an interesting exercise in meta-scripting, was how Clara was expressing all this doubt and mistrust of Capaldi's Doctor, when only a few episodes before she had stepped into the Doctor's timeline and was working behind the scenes with ALL of the Doctors across the eons, guiding and steering events to keep any of them on the right track throughout.
If she had experienced all that, why is she so freaky about this new regeneration? Oh right, because the script isn't about her character, it's about her being a stand-in for NewWho audiences who are used to seeing the Doctor become younger and being a heartthrob.
It's not a great episode, but I thought it was fascinating and well-done for what it was trying to accomplish.
I will admit, I was openly mocking the newest episode even while it was running, while mr. hippybear (who is older than me and who has been watching Who for an appropriately longer amount of time than I have) was being very patient with it all. "They aren't all going to be great episodes", he was saying...
posted by hippybear at 11:36 PM on September 8, 2014 [25 favorites]
I felt like the first Capaldi episode was entirely not about Doctor Who but instead was entirely a meta-episode about how fans who had only picked up watching DW during the NewWho years would feel about having Capaldi play the Doctor.
Clara is standing in for that segment of the audience, other characters are standing in for older Who fans who know the Doctor is continuous across regenerations and who give new Doctors a chance to develop into their own strengths, and Capaldi is being both The Doctor and being Capaldi, expressing a combination of misgivings plus a desire for confidence as he steps into the role.
The biggest plot hole for me, in that script that wasn't very strong but was an interesting exercise in meta-scripting, was how Clara was expressing all this doubt and mistrust of Capaldi's Doctor, when only a few episodes before she had stepped into the Doctor's timeline and was working behind the scenes with ALL of the Doctors across the eons, guiding and steering events to keep any of them on the right track throughout.
If she had experienced all that, why is she so freaky about this new regeneration? Oh right, because the script isn't about her character, it's about her being a stand-in for NewWho audiences who are used to seeing the Doctor become younger and being a heartthrob.
It's not a great episode, but I thought it was fascinating and well-done for what it was trying to accomplish.
I will admit, I was openly mocking the newest episode even while it was running, while mr. hippybear (who is older than me and who has been watching Who for an appropriately longer amount of time than I have) was being very patient with it all. "They aren't all going to be great episodes", he was saying...
posted by hippybear at 11:36 PM on September 8, 2014 [25 favorites]
but I hate the way these discussions start to be tinged with "and if you like anything Moffat has ever done you're disgusting".
For what it's worth, that isn't the reason i took it there. I threw a bone to that point, but i actually think he's just a fucking terrible writer. Even the best stuff he wrote is way harder to watch than even the most embarassing farscape episodes.
He's not even capable of making good bad tv. I love me some cheesy rubber alien mask kind of shit, and he manages to just horribly fuck that up.
posted by emptythought at 11:37 PM on September 8, 2014
For what it's worth, that isn't the reason i took it there. I threw a bone to that point, but i actually think he's just a fucking terrible writer. Even the best stuff he wrote is way harder to watch than even the most embarassing farscape episodes.
He's not even capable of making good bad tv. I love me some cheesy rubber alien mask kind of shit, and he manages to just horribly fuck that up.
posted by emptythought at 11:37 PM on September 8, 2014
My first thought was "who is Maureen K Speller and why am I reading her blog?" Her About page says she's involved in a lot of science fiction editing, and has had a couple of things published... but beyond that, why are her thoughts worth posting to Metafilter?
That issue aside; her opinion is one I strongly disagree with.
I take the view that Moffat is one of the best things to happen to Nu-Who. While Russell T. Davies is to be comended for bringing Doctor Who back from the dead, his scripts relied on far too many deus ex machina's for my liking. He often came up with scenarios that were awesome, like planets being stolen, but then realised he had written himself into a corner, so suddenly we discover the TARDIS can tow planets back because WHAT THE FUCK THE TARDIS CAN TOW PLANETS? I mean, I don't even...
But. BUT! As any long term Doctor Who fan will tell you (and Speller says she's not one, so again, who cares what she thinks? It's like me watching an episode of True Blood, which I hate, then blogging about me giving up on True Blood...), Doctor Who has always been silly. It's had moments of seriousness, and darkness, but when you has a science fiction show being produced by the BBC on a budget, with shaky sets and bad special effects, silly was a way of glossing over the cracks. Silly is part of its charm. Nu-Who, both Davies and Moffatt equally, deserve credit for keeping its essential silliness in place despite big budgets and better sets and special effects.
But back to Moffat. Is he a great writer? I think he's not bad, yeah. His scripts were often the best ones during the R.T.Davies era. I enjoyed that his version of Who showed a more complex, thoughtful approach to storytelling. Arcs weren't just a season long; now they stretched over multiple series. And the Doctor remembered he had a time machine, which he seemed to have forgotten when Davies was in charge, so time travelling became a way to solve problems. And that's good, because like I said; the Doctor owns a fucking time machine.
Which can tow planets, apparently.
Look, Moffatt is a good writer, but he's not perfect. And Capaldi is three episodes into his tenure as the Doctor. I liked Eccleston, Tennant and Smith, but comparing episode three in each of their tenures compared to their later episodes shows that they all take time to grow on you. Hell, even Tom Baker needed a few episodes to find his footing.
Maureen K Speller is entitled to her opinion, but Doctor Who will get by just fine without her. Indeed, it's probably better off without her. The less whingey fans (or in her case, essentially non-fans) we have complaining that their vision of the show is better than the reality of the show, the better.
posted by Effigy2000 at 11:40 PM on September 8, 2014 [35 favorites]
That issue aside; her opinion is one I strongly disagree with.
I take the view that Moffat is one of the best things to happen to Nu-Who. While Russell T. Davies is to be comended for bringing Doctor Who back from the dead, his scripts relied on far too many deus ex machina's for my liking. He often came up with scenarios that were awesome, like planets being stolen, but then realised he had written himself into a corner, so suddenly we discover the TARDIS can tow planets back because WHAT THE FUCK THE TARDIS CAN TOW PLANETS? I mean, I don't even...
But. BUT! As any long term Doctor Who fan will tell you (and Speller says she's not one, so again, who cares what she thinks? It's like me watching an episode of True Blood, which I hate, then blogging about me giving up on True Blood...), Doctor Who has always been silly. It's had moments of seriousness, and darkness, but when you has a science fiction show being produced by the BBC on a budget, with shaky sets and bad special effects, silly was a way of glossing over the cracks. Silly is part of its charm. Nu-Who, both Davies and Moffatt equally, deserve credit for keeping its essential silliness in place despite big budgets and better sets and special effects.
But back to Moffat. Is he a great writer? I think he's not bad, yeah. His scripts were often the best ones during the R.T.Davies era. I enjoyed that his version of Who showed a more complex, thoughtful approach to storytelling. Arcs weren't just a season long; now they stretched over multiple series. And the Doctor remembered he had a time machine, which he seemed to have forgotten when Davies was in charge, so time travelling became a way to solve problems. And that's good, because like I said; the Doctor owns a fucking time machine.
Which can tow planets, apparently.
Look, Moffatt is a good writer, but he's not perfect. And Capaldi is three episodes into his tenure as the Doctor. I liked Eccleston, Tennant and Smith, but comparing episode three in each of their tenures compared to their later episodes shows that they all take time to grow on you. Hell, even Tom Baker needed a few episodes to find his footing.
Maureen K Speller is entitled to her opinion, but Doctor Who will get by just fine without her. Indeed, it's probably better off without her. The less whingey fans (or in her case, essentially non-fans) we have complaining that their vision of the show is better than the reality of the show, the better.
posted by Effigy2000 at 11:40 PM on September 8, 2014 [35 favorites]
I take the view that Moffat is one of the best things to happen to Nu-Who. While Russell T. Davies is to be comended for bringing Doctor Who back from the dead, his scripts relied on far too many deus ex machina's for my liking. He often came up with scenarios that were awesome, like planets being stolen, but then realised he had written himself into a corner, so suddenly we discover the TARDIS can tow planets back because WHAT THE FUCK THE TARDIS CAN TOW PLANETS? I mean, I don't even...
It takes all sorts, I guess, what I like best about Who is precisely this ostensibly-written-into-a-corner-only-to-be-saved-by-preposterous-deus-ex. I mean this entirely unironically. When you think about it, with time travel and regeneration already on the table, it takes some doing to write yourself into a corner.
posted by juv3nal at 11:46 PM on September 8, 2014 [18 favorites]
Pfft, as if even old Doctor Who "worked." Doctor Who in all its incarnations is basically make-believe, with the distinction that someone pointed a camera at it. I feel ashamed as a geek when people associate this fandom with me.
posted by malapropist at 11:56 PM on September 8, 2014 [3 favorites]
posted by malapropist at 11:56 PM on September 8, 2014 [3 favorites]
So Dr Who is lots and lots of shows. Its pure horror, and farce, and adventure, and sometimes even dramatic. New Who isn't really old Who. It shares lots of characteristics, but its fundamentally different. It has modern sensibilities, which particularly applies to pacing. Stories have to finish (usually) in 45 minutes and that sometimes works great, and sometimes doesn't.
I get the Moffat hate. He can write women, but really only a very limited pallate of women (the saucy hero, the mother figure and.... well that's about it), and so I absolutely understand that people are tired of that. His romance plotlines are basically all the same (dorky man rescued by competent lady. See Clara, Amy, Sally Sparrow, excetera).
But he's written some of the best episodes of New Who. I actualy think his first season as show runner was pretty decent. The next one didn't really work, although it had its moments, and the one following that was hampered by budget cuts and filming issues. I happen to think the 50th special was terrific, although the other "of the Doctor" episodes were bloody awful.
I get why people hate Moffat, I remember feeling this strongly about Davies as he bashed out another complete mess of a science fiction plot. Its easy to remember the lows, and forget the highs. Still, I enjoy Dr Who for what it is, and try to take it an episode at a time. I think a lot of people come to Who with high expectations, despite the fact that Dr Who has never been that good! It has always had clunky episodes and clunky serials and poorly characterised protagonists. It has always been all over the shop. That's just what it is.
posted by Cannon Fodder at 11:56 PM on September 8, 2014 [12 favorites]
I get the Moffat hate. He can write women, but really only a very limited pallate of women (the saucy hero, the mother figure and.... well that's about it), and so I absolutely understand that people are tired of that. His romance plotlines are basically all the same (dorky man rescued by competent lady. See Clara, Amy, Sally Sparrow, excetera).
But he's written some of the best episodes of New Who. I actualy think his first season as show runner was pretty decent. The next one didn't really work, although it had its moments, and the one following that was hampered by budget cuts and filming issues. I happen to think the 50th special was terrific, although the other "of the Doctor" episodes were bloody awful.
I get why people hate Moffat, I remember feeling this strongly about Davies as he bashed out another complete mess of a science fiction plot. Its easy to remember the lows, and forget the highs. Still, I enjoy Dr Who for what it is, and try to take it an episode at a time. I think a lot of people come to Who with high expectations, despite the fact that Dr Who has never been that good! It has always had clunky episodes and clunky serials and poorly characterised protagonists. It has always been all over the shop. That's just what it is.
posted by Cannon Fodder at 11:56 PM on September 8, 2014 [12 favorites]
missed the new Doctor Who when it started up again, then stumbled onto Torchwood via Netflix, Children of Earth in particular. That was top notch. So I figured I'd better catch up with the Doctor again ... but I didn't get through the first season. It felt stuck somewhere between being modern and slick and yet trying to work in some of the old lo-tech charm at the same time.
I ended up just watching the old 60s and 70s stuff again, which I'm loving.
posted by philip-random at 11:59 PM on September 8, 2014
I ended up just watching the old 60s and 70s stuff again, which I'm loving.
posted by philip-random at 11:59 PM on September 8, 2014
Children Of Earth... *shudder* I still have minor PTSD from watching that. Brilliant and horrible.
It's important to remember that Doctor Who remains, at its core, a show designed to be watchable by children. Torchwood was never that.
posted by hippybear at 12:02 AM on September 9, 2014 [9 favorites]
It's important to remember that Doctor Who remains, at its core, a show designed to be watchable by children. Torchwood was never that.
posted by hippybear at 12:02 AM on September 9, 2014 [9 favorites]
Don't like the current Doctor Who? Then I recommend not watching it for a while.
Just wait twenty years or so, and Mofffat will die, and Dr. Who will continue.
posted by happyroach at 12:05 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
Just wait twenty years or so, and Mofffat will die, and Dr. Who will continue.
posted by happyroach at 12:05 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
First episode of the new season was long and slow and a bit dull, other two have been great fun. Yay!
posted by alasdair at 12:07 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
posted by alasdair at 12:07 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
> Just wait twenty years or so, and Mofffat will die, and Dr. Who will continue.
DOCTOR WHO CANNOT BE STOPPED
DOCTOR WHO CANNOT BE REASONED WITH
ALL IS LOST
posted by tiaz at 12:08 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
DOCTOR WHO CANNOT BE STOPPED
DOCTOR WHO CANNOT BE REASONED WITH
ALL IS LOST
posted by tiaz at 12:08 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
I suppose the one good thing about Who in the 80s and 90s was nobody cared what you thought of it and left you alone.
posted by fullerine at 12:09 AM on September 9, 2014 [15 favorites]
posted by fullerine at 12:09 AM on September 9, 2014 [15 favorites]
it is a children's show
posted by Sebmojo at 12:12 AM on September 9, 2014 [15 favorites]
posted by Sebmojo at 12:12 AM on September 9, 2014 [15 favorites]
Moffat did "Blink."
_____________
Moffat rules. QED.
posted by persona au gratin at 12:19 AM on September 9, 2014 [8 favorites]
_____________
Moffat rules. QED.
posted by persona au gratin at 12:19 AM on September 9, 2014 [8 favorites]
I suppose the one good thing about Who in the 80s and 90s was nobody cared what you thought of it and left you alone.
Not sure how much Who YOU were watching in the 90s, but there wasn't much to be seen...
That aside, the thing I remember about when I was first watching the Doctor, starting in the late 70s, was that basically nobody else I could possibly have talked to about it had even seen it. It was on only very late at night on weekends on PBS, it seems like it was only on sporadically and only with full story-arcs shown at once, so there might be 2 hours on or 6 hours on, and I remember it started around 10pm usually, so sometimes I'd be up until 2 or 4 am hoping the whole thing would end soon, desperate for sleep but unwilling to miss the end.
It was this oddly alienating thing, culturally, because I was, like, 10 or 12 years old, I had just had one of the most amazing experiences of my media-consuming life, this gigantic adventure that was slightly cheesy with horrible shaky sets, but the story was completely absorbing and the plot was really well worked-out, and NOBODY ELSE HAD SEEN IT.
I mean, maybe if I had been a college student or even in high school... but at my age... yeah, nobody else. It was like my own private little world.
I was on the downslope toward 30 before I engaged on any real level in real life with anyone else who had even heard of Doctor Who. I'm still with him today.
posted by hippybear at 12:25 AM on September 9, 2014 [14 favorites]
Not sure how much Who YOU were watching in the 90s, but there wasn't much to be seen...
That aside, the thing I remember about when I was first watching the Doctor, starting in the late 70s, was that basically nobody else I could possibly have talked to about it had even seen it. It was on only very late at night on weekends on PBS, it seems like it was only on sporadically and only with full story-arcs shown at once, so there might be 2 hours on or 6 hours on, and I remember it started around 10pm usually, so sometimes I'd be up until 2 or 4 am hoping the whole thing would end soon, desperate for sleep but unwilling to miss the end.
It was this oddly alienating thing, culturally, because I was, like, 10 or 12 years old, I had just had one of the most amazing experiences of my media-consuming life, this gigantic adventure that was slightly cheesy with horrible shaky sets, but the story was completely absorbing and the plot was really well worked-out, and NOBODY ELSE HAD SEEN IT.
I mean, maybe if I had been a college student or even in high school... but at my age... yeah, nobody else. It was like my own private little world.
I was on the downslope toward 30 before I engaged on any real level in real life with anyone else who had even heard of Doctor Who. I'm still with him today.
posted by hippybear at 12:25 AM on September 9, 2014 [14 favorites]
Moffat did "Blink." Let's have 5 years of nothing but "Blink"-esque stories.
-- whoever is in charge
posted by Phssthpok at 12:28 AM on September 9, 2014 [5 favorites]
-- whoever is in charge
posted by Phssthpok at 12:28 AM on September 9, 2014 [5 favorites]
I didn't get through the first season.
I hear you, but you gotta stick with it. Davies was wildly uneven, and it took him a while to really figure out what he was doing. There's some good stuff in that first season, but generally it is ROUGH.
I'm reaching a point where I won't dignify the Moffat hate by engaging with it. Relax already. If you really hate it that much, maybe you should ask your doctor if Zoloft is right for you.
posted by Ursula Hitler at 12:47 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
I hear you, but you gotta stick with it. Davies was wildly uneven, and it took him a while to really figure out what he was doing. There's some good stuff in that first season, but generally it is ROUGH.
I'm reaching a point where I won't dignify the Moffat hate by engaging with it. Relax already. If you really hate it that much, maybe you should ask your doctor if Zoloft is right for you.
posted by Ursula Hitler at 12:47 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
I hear you, but you gotta stick with it.
so where does it (the "new" Dr. Who) really find its momentum? I'm looking at seven series available (Canadian Netflix).
posted by philip-random at 12:59 AM on September 9, 2014
so where does it (the "new" Dr. Who) really find its momentum? I'm looking at seven series available (Canadian Netflix).
posted by philip-random at 12:59 AM on September 9, 2014
I'm a bit of a sense-of-wonder junkie, where Who delivers unevenly. But when it does...
One of the major problems with the show, which Moffat has been explicit both talking about and dealing with, is the huge weight of ritual and tradition. If you go off-piste, people scream. If you try and stick to the rules, people snore. So far, Capaldi has been a bit too much Who-by-numbers for me - but it's three episodes into the new Doctor: introduction where everything falls apart - check. Daleks to establish credentials - check. Faux historical swashbuckler - check. (Do these _ever_ work?). But the whole 'Promised Land' thing feels heavy-handed and formulaic, so it's hard to care.
Let's see the new guy get properly off-planet and somewhere new. Say what you like about RTD, he could pull all the stops out and devil take the hindmost, and some of that - conceptually or visually - would be welcome hereabouts.
It's an entertainment, not a religion. No souls are harmed in its making.
posted by Devonian at 1:00 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
One of the major problems with the show, which Moffat has been explicit both talking about and dealing with, is the huge weight of ritual and tradition. If you go off-piste, people scream. If you try and stick to the rules, people snore. So far, Capaldi has been a bit too much Who-by-numbers for me - but it's three episodes into the new Doctor: introduction where everything falls apart - check. Daleks to establish credentials - check. Faux historical swashbuckler - check. (Do these _ever_ work?). But the whole 'Promised Land' thing feels heavy-handed and formulaic, so it's hard to care.
Let's see the new guy get properly off-planet and somewhere new. Say what you like about RTD, he could pull all the stops out and devil take the hindmost, and some of that - conceptually or visually - would be welcome hereabouts.
It's an entertainment, not a religion. No souls are harmed in its making.
posted by Devonian at 1:00 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
I remember watching “Rose” nine(?) years ago and thinking, at the point the dumpsters starting coming alive and eating old ladies or something, “this is fucking ridiculous.”
Then I remembered I’m watching Doctor Who, which for 40+ years (at that time) had made a fine art out of “fucking ridiculous.” We’ve had nearly a solid decade of the modern take on Fucking Ridiculous.
Davies with his fucking ridiculous Deus Ex Machinas and God complexes, and Moffatt with his fucking ridiculous trope-mongering and cardboard heroines, both of them with their fucking ridiculous willy-nilly disregard for character continuity, and every Who actor ever with their fucking ridiculous scenery-chewing. (Capaldi excels at scenery-chewing. He’ll do nicely.)
It’s been like this since 1963 and if you’ve stuck with it for literally decades it’s because it’s fucking ridiculous not despite. It's a motherloving miracle that it’s still ridiculous with its comparatively huge budgets and modern pacing (compare: Torchwood); I still get the same charge of whimsy and stupidity from watching Who late at night after the kids are in bed that I got watching it late at night after my parents went to bed thirty-five years ago.
p.s. I made it through about a third of Speller’s article. What’s new there? (They’ve been at this fifty years right? We’ve heard this all before…) I appreciate more the discussion happening here.
posted by axoplasm at 1:03 AM on September 9, 2014 [28 favorites]
Then I remembered I’m watching Doctor Who, which for 40+ years (at that time) had made a fine art out of “fucking ridiculous.” We’ve had nearly a solid decade of the modern take on Fucking Ridiculous.
Davies with his fucking ridiculous Deus Ex Machinas and God complexes, and Moffatt with his fucking ridiculous trope-mongering and cardboard heroines, both of them with their fucking ridiculous willy-nilly disregard for character continuity, and every Who actor ever with their fucking ridiculous scenery-chewing. (Capaldi excels at scenery-chewing. He’ll do nicely.)
It’s been like this since 1963 and if you’ve stuck with it for literally decades it’s because it’s fucking ridiculous not despite. It's a motherloving miracle that it’s still ridiculous with its comparatively huge budgets and modern pacing (compare: Torchwood); I still get the same charge of whimsy and stupidity from watching Who late at night after the kids are in bed that I got watching it late at night after my parents went to bed thirty-five years ago.
p.s. I made it through about a third of Speller’s article. What’s new there? (They’ve been at this fifty years right? We’ve heard this all before…) I appreciate more the discussion happening here.
posted by axoplasm at 1:03 AM on September 9, 2014 [28 favorites]
My peak Who watching was nightly before dinner on the ABC in Sydney as an 11yro. My sister liked it too, and my Dad would watch if he was home in time. Mum was ambivalent.
Now, my 11yro and 8yro are Who mad and the parents will watch along, happy that this is a show a million times better than CGI star wars animations or or iron man cartoons or the other stuff pitched at 11 year olds.
I reckon it was ever thus, and if you are expecting "serious business" from the show you have the wrong expectations.
posted by bystander at 1:03 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
Now, my 11yro and 8yro are Who mad and the parents will watch along, happy that this is a show a million times better than CGI star wars animations or or iron man cartoons or the other stuff pitched at 11 year olds.
I reckon it was ever thus, and if you are expecting "serious business" from the show you have the wrong expectations.
posted by bystander at 1:03 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
I think Coupling is still the best that Moffat has created, it's all downhill from there.
posted by Pendragon at 1:08 AM on September 9, 2014 [5 favorites]
posted by Pendragon at 1:08 AM on September 9, 2014 [5 favorites]
fuckity-bye
posted by hellojed at 1:20 AM on September 9, 2014 [21 favorites]
posted by hellojed at 1:20 AM on September 9, 2014 [21 favorites]
I just finished Season 2 about 20" ago. The constant deus ex machina endings really drain the suspense for me. I like the characters, and i like the set-ups - i just hate the penultimate 5" of almost every episode. And so I keep plodding through. I was hoping that the Moffat era - if i ever get that far - would be an improvement.
Maybe for me he will be.
posted by kanewai at 1:20 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
Maybe for me he will be.
posted by kanewai at 1:20 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
Let's all agree to come back here in two years, post a flimsy argument as a pretense to a discussion and then we can assess if Capaldi sucks or not. That would be a fair amount of time to see what both he and Moffat do with this new Doctor. Three episodes in? Not even close to time.
posted by Effigy2000 at 1:23 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
posted by Effigy2000 at 1:23 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
She makes some very good points: I hope Moffat and the BBC read them.
However, we must remember that complaining about how Who isn't as good as it used to be has actually been the mainstream way of enjoying the programme at least since Pertwee, if not since the second series of Hartnell.
posted by Segundus at 1:38 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
However, we must remember that complaining about how Who isn't as good as it used to be has actually been the mainstream way of enjoying the programme at least since Pertwee, if not since the second series of Hartnell.
posted by Segundus at 1:38 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
as a mildly autistic 7-9 year old kid in the early 90s I obsessively watched every episode of every season of the old Dr Who available in all the video stores in my city, and read all the novels available in all the local libraries. Somewhere around the age of ten I realized how embarrassingly silly it all was, although to this day I've never managed to forget the enormous trove of old-Who trivia that was embedded in my brain during that developmental period. From the few minutes I've watched of the revived series, it seems quite loyal to the original silliness, the only difference being that the actors are generally much better looking. (Capaldi probably being a bit of a legacy element in this regard).
It's really pretty ridiculous for a grown adult watching a kid's show to write a big long complaint about how it's a kid's show. That's all it ever was, grow up and watch something else.
posted by moorooka at 1:40 AM on September 9, 2014
It's really pretty ridiculous for a grown adult watching a kid's show to write a big long complaint about how it's a kid's show. That's all it ever was, grow up and watch something else.
posted by moorooka at 1:40 AM on September 9, 2014
so where does it (the "new" Dr. Who) really find its momentum?
Most geeks will agree the show eventually got good, but nobody is going to agree on when the show was good and when or if it stopped being good. I think there's a general consensus that The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances was a pretty good early two-parter. They were Moffat episodes, back in the days when the fans used to rant about how he should've been running the show instead of Davies.
Even the iffy episodes have some stuff you may grow to adore. Just have faith that it will eventually become a show you enjoy watching, because at some point, at least for a while, you will probably really like it. The people who say it's just no good ever... I think they must be secret Daleks or something.
posted by Ursula Hitler at 1:42 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
Most geeks will agree the show eventually got good, but nobody is going to agree on when the show was good and when or if it stopped being good. I think there's a general consensus that The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances was a pretty good early two-parter. They were Moffat episodes, back in the days when the fans used to rant about how he should've been running the show instead of Davies.
Even the iffy episodes have some stuff you may grow to adore. Just have faith that it will eventually become a show you enjoy watching, because at some point, at least for a while, you will probably really like it. The people who say it's just no good ever... I think they must be secret Daleks or something.
posted by Ursula Hitler at 1:42 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
I think it's obvious that we all have wildly varying definitions of "ridiculous", "terrible", "horrible", "cheesy", "sucks", etc.
I'm just glad they seem to have taken the gain control away from Murray Gold. Baby steps, people; baby steps…
posted by Pinback at 1:49 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
I'm just glad they seem to have taken the gain control away from Murray Gold. Baby steps, people; baby steps…
posted by Pinback at 1:49 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
hippybear: When Clara entered the timeline, a ton of new instances of her were created - self-inserts.Each only experienced a part of the whole. The original Clara (who may have been one of those self inserts in a spot of timey-wimeyness) ended up in a cheap set full of re-used props and a bunch of weird men walking about. In other words, she's in the entirety of Doctor Who, all of it at once... and she doesn't know where she is. She only came in at the start of Eleven's era, after all.
posted by BiggerJ at 1:58 AM on September 9, 2014
posted by BiggerJ at 1:58 AM on September 9, 2014
The thing is, despite all this, the Doctor hasn't given up on Maureen K. Speller.
posted by Shepherd at 2:02 AM on September 9, 2014 [17 favorites]
posted by Shepherd at 2:02 AM on September 9, 2014 [17 favorites]
If you're going to argue that Moffat can't write women, why open your case with Madame Vastra? "Good evening. I'm a lizard woman from the dawn of time. And this is my wife." The Victorian crimefighter who caught, and ate, Jack the Ripper. She's not Moffat's worst work.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 2:11 AM on September 9, 2014 [12 favorites]
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 2:11 AM on September 9, 2014 [12 favorites]
I'm not much of a Whovian, more a casual watcher, but I think it would be better if there were any sense of risk, which I don't think I've ever picked up on from Dr. Who. I mean he's always going to win, basically. I think the Dr. needs to have an adversary really and truly kick his ass.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 2:33 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 2:33 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
My girlfriend and I were just talking about this, and one thing that stands out to us is that 45 minutes just isn't enough time to tell a convincing Who story.
Because the Doctor and the companion(s), outside of special event episodes, are pretty much guaranteed to live, and the TARDIS is guaranteed not to be permanently damaged, that means that all the suspense has to hang off the other characters, and Who being Who, the other characters change every week.
So in 45 minutes, the show has to introduce a new setting (and explain it, if it's complicated) and a whole bunch of new characters, introduce a threat (time saved if it's The Fucking Angels Again), break it all apart, and have the Doctor and friends save the day. So we get shorthand characters--"I'm a resistance fighter and I have three kids!"--and shorthand locations--"We're on a medical frigate."--with no detail, no backstory, and no context. We care about them because we don't want someone with three kids who helps defend a medical frigate to die. We don't care about them because of them.
I think they should bring back the serial format. Give us blocks of two-to-four episodes telling one complete story every so often. There'd be time to develop characters, flesh out locations, and even have some meta-plot going on in the background without having to resort to characters running past a wall with "Bad Wolf" graffiti'd on it. They could also space the blocks of episodes throughout the year, and probably save on sets because instead of having to build or repurpose new sets and costumes for 10 45 minute stories every year, there'd be only three or four separate stories per "season."
Bring back the serials!
posted by ArmyOfKittens at 2:46 AM on September 9, 2014 [51 favorites]
Because the Doctor and the companion(s), outside of special event episodes, are pretty much guaranteed to live, and the TARDIS is guaranteed not to be permanently damaged, that means that all the suspense has to hang off the other characters, and Who being Who, the other characters change every week.
So in 45 minutes, the show has to introduce a new setting (and explain it, if it's complicated) and a whole bunch of new characters, introduce a threat (time saved if it's The Fucking Angels Again), break it all apart, and have the Doctor and friends save the day. So we get shorthand characters--"I'm a resistance fighter and I have three kids!"--and shorthand locations--"We're on a medical frigate."--with no detail, no backstory, and no context. We care about them because we don't want someone with three kids who helps defend a medical frigate to die. We don't care about them because of them.
I think they should bring back the serial format. Give us blocks of two-to-four episodes telling one complete story every so often. There'd be time to develop characters, flesh out locations, and even have some meta-plot going on in the background without having to resort to characters running past a wall with "Bad Wolf" graffiti'd on it. They could also space the blocks of episodes throughout the year, and probably save on sets because instead of having to build or repurpose new sets and costumes for 10 45 minute stories every year, there'd be only three or four separate stories per "season."
Bring back the serials!
posted by ArmyOfKittens at 2:46 AM on September 9, 2014 [51 favorites]
My friends are all Dr. Who fans, so I tried, but I got as far as The Christmas Invasion and the Doctor ruining Harriet Jones' life for doing the responsible thing and couldn't keep watching. That episode was bullshit and it crystallized the unpleasant ways I'd been feeling about the show to that point.
posted by Pope Guilty at 2:57 AM on September 9, 2014
posted by Pope Guilty at 2:57 AM on September 9, 2014
My friends are all Dr. Who fans, so I tried, but I got as far as The Christmas Invasion and the Doctor ruining Harriet Jones' life for doing the responsible thing and couldn't keep watching. That episode was bullshit and it crystallized the unpleasant ways I'd been feeling about the show to that point.
That actually has very bad consequences in-series, at least.
posted by kewb at 3:11 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
That actually has very bad consequences in-series, at least.
posted by kewb at 3:11 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
I had no idea David Tennant was not a terrible actor until I watched other things he did where he's not gurning at the camera all the time.
posted by winna at 3:26 AM on September 9, 2014 [4 favorites]
posted by winna at 3:26 AM on September 9, 2014 [4 favorites]
the Doctor ruining Harriet Jones' life for doing the responsible thing. (emphasis mine)
Not to re-argue something that's been hashed out on the internet a million times already, but wasn't that the Doctor's whole point? She did the responsible, tactically-sound, hollow-hearted thing. She had just witnessed the Doctor, who -- lest we forget -- is the ancient and brilliant alien whom she had begged to help her planet, drive off an alien invasion wearing pajamas. He'd won a duel, held the alien horde at their word and they just picked up and left, because he told them to.
And then she shot them all in the back.
After he'd made a whole big speech about how important it was that humans be left alone to develop their potential and get their heads out of the gutter. After the aliens had made it clear that they were capable of honoring their agreement. After he'd made it clear that he wasn't a "second chances" kind of guy. Here he was, fresh off a victory and still mentally unbalanced, and she'd just rubbed his face in humanity's worst tendencies and not shown the slightest bit of gratitude?
The Doctor doesn't represent the responsible thing. He's the irresponsible hope and unlimited possibility. And if you want stable, rational decision making from him, don't go to him on regeneration day.
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 3:46 AM on September 9, 2014 [17 favorites]
Not to re-argue something that's been hashed out on the internet a million times already, but wasn't that the Doctor's whole point? She did the responsible, tactically-sound, hollow-hearted thing. She had just witnessed the Doctor, who -- lest we forget -- is the ancient and brilliant alien whom she had begged to help her planet, drive off an alien invasion wearing pajamas. He'd won a duel, held the alien horde at their word and they just picked up and left, because he told them to.
And then she shot them all in the back.
After he'd made a whole big speech about how important it was that humans be left alone to develop their potential and get their heads out of the gutter. After the aliens had made it clear that they were capable of honoring their agreement. After he'd made it clear that he wasn't a "second chances" kind of guy. Here he was, fresh off a victory and still mentally unbalanced, and she'd just rubbed his face in humanity's worst tendencies and not shown the slightest bit of gratitude?
The Doctor doesn't represent the responsible thing. He's the irresponsible hope and unlimited possibility. And if you want stable, rational decision making from him, don't go to him on regeneration day.
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 3:46 AM on September 9, 2014 [17 favorites]
I'm enjoying the new series so far as serviceable genre TV. My expectations aren't that high for a series that has to aim for several different audiences at once. Capaldi is still finding his feet and it'll take a little while for us to get accustomed to the radical change of character from Tennant/Smith's tenure.
posted by panboi at 4:05 AM on September 9, 2014
posted by panboi at 4:05 AM on September 9, 2014
I think Coupling is still the best that Moffat has created, it's all downhill from there.
I seem to recall Press Gang (late 80s/early 90s) having been quite good for a young-adult show.
posted by acb at 4:11 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
I seem to recall Press Gang (late 80s/early 90s) having been quite good for a young-adult show.
posted by acb at 4:11 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
It was this oddly alienating thing, culturally, because I was, like, 10 or 12 years old, I had just had one of the most amazing experiences of my media-consuming life, this gigantic adventure that was slightly cheesy with horrible shaky sets, but the story was completely absorbing and the plot was really well worked-out, and NOBODY ELSE HAD SEEN IT.
That was my experience starting with Doctor Who as well, it was shown super late at night on local public television, and the internet was still years away from becoming a thing. It was very isolating.
posted by JHarris at 4:12 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
That was my experience starting with Doctor Who as well, it was shown super late at night on local public television, and the internet was still years away from becoming a thing. It was very isolating.
posted by JHarris at 4:12 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
Who cares that the Sycorax were going to leave Earth alone? The Sycorax not killing us means they're off to kill somebody else. They're not some reasonable dudes who have a beef with Earth- they're literally intergalactic pirates who kill and enslave for profit. The Doctor basically just doomed some other planet instead of Earth. That's not heroism, it's callous lunacy. How many lives across the galaxy did Harriet Jones save by giving that order?
posted by Pope Guilty at 4:17 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
posted by Pope Guilty at 4:17 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
Dr. Who, I enjoy the series. I loathe the fandom.
posted by Fizz at 4:22 AM on September 9, 2014 [11 favorites]
posted by Fizz at 4:22 AM on September 9, 2014 [11 favorites]
I think Coupling is still the best that Moffat has created, it's all downhill from there.
I quite liked Jekyll. I suppose I might be alone on that one, since it got only one season.
posted by Krop Tor at 4:39 AM on September 9, 2014 [7 favorites]
I quite liked Jekyll. I suppose I might be alone on that one, since it got only one season.
posted by Krop Tor at 4:39 AM on September 9, 2014 [7 favorites]
Dr. Who is one of those things that by caste and lineage I should enjoy. Every so often, I look into starting points or whatever on the internet, but it seems like the show has moved on from a point I would enjoy - it looks too soap opera-y.
I mean, I liked the first few seasons of Supernatural and Sherlock, but I don't think I could take all those characters living together on the TARDIS, which the internets assure me is happening right now.
posted by robocop is bleeding at 4:39 AM on September 9, 2014
I mean, I liked the first few seasons of Supernatural and Sherlock, but I don't think I could take all those characters living together on the TARDIS, which the internets assure me is happening right now.
posted by robocop is bleeding at 4:39 AM on September 9, 2014
Someone else mentioned this in a Fanfare thread, but Moffat's problem is that he gets too hung up on his really very good ideas and forces them beyond their natural scope. Either he has a great concept that can't be filmed on a BBC budget, but he does it anyway and it falls flat emotionally; or he takes a truly stunning villain like the Weeping Angels and then pushes them to the point of not being scary anymore; or he takes a great female character like Professor River Song, space-faring archeologist who's brave, intelligent and independent, and turns her into someone who has literally never done anything in her life that wasn't all about The Doctor.
He's clever, and he's a good writer. But he needs an editor, and as show-runner there's no-one to tell him to dial it back or try a different way of reaching his story goal.
Pope Guilty, I still haven't forgiven Ten for Harriet Jones. But I feel like it gets addressed in the Waters of Mars special by another tough female character - just because you have god-like powers and good intentions doesn't mean you're not a bossy arsehole, and no-one is obliged to go along with your plans to save them.
posted by harriet vane at 4:42 AM on September 9, 2014 [12 favorites]
He's clever, and he's a good writer. But he needs an editor, and as show-runner there's no-one to tell him to dial it back or try a different way of reaching his story goal.
Pope Guilty, I still haven't forgiven Ten for Harriet Jones. But I feel like it gets addressed in the Waters of Mars special by another tough female character - just because you have god-like powers and good intentions doesn't mean you're not a bossy arsehole, and no-one is obliged to go along with your plans to save them.
posted by harriet vane at 4:42 AM on September 9, 2014 [12 favorites]
The problem with NuWho is that its loudest detractors fondly remember a tiny handful of OldWho stories that were pretty good, all the while their brains have mercifully erased all memory of the much larger bunch of equally awful dreck that made up the bulk of OldWho.
Who is, ostensibly, a kid's show that also has to give a generous nod and wink to adults in the audience. Over time, that nod has had to become all but a full bow and curtsey. I enjoy the show, but I never expect much from it, either, other than an hour of whimsical escape.
posted by Thorzdad at 4:45 AM on September 9, 2014 [6 favorites]
Who is, ostensibly, a kid's show that also has to give a generous nod and wink to adults in the audience. Over time, that nod has had to become all but a full bow and curtsey. I enjoy the show, but I never expect much from it, either, other than an hour of whimsical escape.
posted by Thorzdad at 4:45 AM on September 9, 2014 [6 favorites]
How many lives across the galaxy did Harriet Jones save by giving that order?
That may be the same logic the government uses to call in first strikes in the Middle East. Think about it.
More to the topic at hand - I am a Moffat-moderate; my love for Blink and The Empty Child don't ameliorate the weak spots, and the weak spots don't sour me on the show. (I do think someone else should be a show runner and demote Moffat back to writer so someone can keep him in check.) So I don't as such have a problem with him.
But something about the past few eps has indeed seemed off. I actually fell asleep during the last episode, and I don't think that was entirely due to my own exhaustion. I'm not giving up on the show, but I haven't been as jazzed about The Capaldi Years thus far, and I haven't figured out why just yet. (Actually, I'm often having trouble understanding what people are saying - not just Capaldi, everyone sounds like they're mumbling. What's up with that?)
I had no idea David Tennant was not a terrible actor until I watched other things he did where he's not gurning at the camera all the time.
Aw, I liked his doctor. but I'm also looking forward to seeing him in Gracepoint this fall, even if he did have to surrender the Scot burr for it; I saw the original Broadchurch and it blew me away. The thing that Gracepoint has going for it is that it also kept the original writer, and I trust that guy.
Hey, maybe they should bring Chris Chibnall back in as show runner and demote Moffat.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:45 AM on September 9, 2014 [4 favorites]
That may be the same logic the government uses to call in first strikes in the Middle East. Think about it.
More to the topic at hand - I am a Moffat-moderate; my love for Blink and The Empty Child don't ameliorate the weak spots, and the weak spots don't sour me on the show. (I do think someone else should be a show runner and demote Moffat back to writer so someone can keep him in check.) So I don't as such have a problem with him.
But something about the past few eps has indeed seemed off. I actually fell asleep during the last episode, and I don't think that was entirely due to my own exhaustion. I'm not giving up on the show, but I haven't been as jazzed about The Capaldi Years thus far, and I haven't figured out why just yet. (Actually, I'm often having trouble understanding what people are saying - not just Capaldi, everyone sounds like they're mumbling. What's up with that?)
I had no idea David Tennant was not a terrible actor until I watched other things he did where he's not gurning at the camera all the time.
Aw, I liked his doctor. but I'm also looking forward to seeing him in Gracepoint this fall, even if he did have to surrender the Scot burr for it; I saw the original Broadchurch and it blew me away. The thing that Gracepoint has going for it is that it also kept the original writer, and I trust that guy.
Hey, maybe they should bring Chris Chibnall back in as show runner and demote Moffat.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:45 AM on September 9, 2014 [4 favorites]
Meh. I gave up watching after William Hartnoll left. I had a brief flirtation when Catherine Tate was the doctors assistant, but none of the post-Hartnoll Doctors ever seemed like the real Dr Who to me.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 4:47 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
posted by PeterMcDermott at 4:47 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
Empress, I think it's less that people are mumbling and more that Murray Gold's score is often too prominent in the sound mix. It should be a background to the dialogue, not competing with it.
posted by harriet vane at 4:48 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
posted by harriet vane at 4:48 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
I find contemporary Who fandom so weird, I must confess. I've mentioned before that I grew up with Tom Baker/Peter Davison era as a child and was thrilled beyond measure when the Doctor returned in 2005. (I still feel like Paul McGann got short shrift, though this was made up in the audio plays.) But when it first returned, there was no Tumblr, no gif-set making. The people I talked and argued about it the most were the folks on Barbelith where not being an asshole to each other was the rule, not the exception.
But then, sometime after Matt Smith, Who fandom became an unrecognizable thing where I wouldn't feel welcome to join in or participate, which makes me sad because despite the flaws, I love the Doctor. I never stopped loving the Doctor. I see people I follow on Twitter gnash their teeth and wail about how Who fandom is fucked up--and they themselves are part of it--and I think I am okay with just engaging with talking about the new episodes in smaller ways. Mostly with old Barbelith people on Twitter, because I know them and because they're less likely to drag out horrible behavior.
posted by Kitteh at 4:57 AM on September 9, 2014 [5 favorites]
But then, sometime after Matt Smith, Who fandom became an unrecognizable thing where I wouldn't feel welcome to join in or participate, which makes me sad because despite the flaws, I love the Doctor. I never stopped loving the Doctor. I see people I follow on Twitter gnash their teeth and wail about how Who fandom is fucked up--and they themselves are part of it--and I think I am okay with just engaging with talking about the new episodes in smaller ways. Mostly with old Barbelith people on Twitter, because I know them and because they're less likely to drag out horrible behavior.
posted by Kitteh at 4:57 AM on September 9, 2014 [5 favorites]
Who cares that the Sycorax were going to leave Earth alone? The Sycorax not killing us means they're off to kill somebody else.
Well, no, the Sycorax are off to be free to make another moral choice when they get to the next planet. They have another chance to do the right thing, to redeem themselves. He is forgiving: remember the parable of the Prodigal Son?
God ("The Doctor") gave us free will and dominion, and we get chances: we might make the wrong choice, but He doesn't take the free will away. Remember, He didn't stop the Daleks coming into existence when He had the chance, arguing that they deserved the opportunity to make their own decisions. Same with the Sycorax.
posted by alasdair at 5:16 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
Well, no, the Sycorax are off to be free to make another moral choice when they get to the next planet. They have another chance to do the right thing, to redeem themselves. He is forgiving: remember the parable of the Prodigal Son?
God ("The Doctor") gave us free will and dominion, and we get chances: we might make the wrong choice, but He doesn't take the free will away. Remember, He didn't stop the Daleks coming into existence when He had the chance, arguing that they deserved the opportunity to make their own decisions. Same with the Sycorax.
posted by alasdair at 5:16 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
But then, sometime after Matt Smith, Who fandom became an unrecognizable thing where I wouldn't feel welcome to join in or participate, which makes me sad because despite the flaws, I love the Doctor. I never stopped loving the Doctor.
Well, then, ignore the fandom and watch the show.
Seriously. You are not required to discuss the show, make gifs about the show, go to conventions, go to conventions dressed as A) A Doctor, B) A Not-Doctor, C) K9, or complain about Davis/Moffat/The BCC/That Doctor/That Other Doctor.
You can just watch the show.
posted by eriko at 5:31 AM on September 9, 2014 [13 favorites]
Well, then, ignore the fandom and watch the show.
Seriously. You are not required to discuss the show, make gifs about the show, go to conventions, go to conventions dressed as A) A Doctor, B) A Not-Doctor, C) K9, or complain about Davis/Moffat/The BCC/That Doctor/That Other Doctor.
You can just watch the show.
posted by eriko at 5:31 AM on September 9, 2014 [13 favorites]
So there's this thing I say about fandom a lot, and I don't know who first said it:
The difference between Star Wars fans and Star Trek fans is that Star Wars fans love the Star Wars in their heads much more than the Star Wars on the screen, while Star Trek fans love the Star Trek on the screen about as much as the Star Trek in their heads.
Star Trek fans write their fanfic and come up with their fanon and fill in the gaps and elide the errors because they want to help Roddenberry et al, while Star Wars fans do all that because they want to correct Lucas.
Doctor Who fans in the olden days were Star Trek fans. Now they're Star Wars fans.
Gave up on NuWho because of River Song, Steven Moffat and Matt Smith, more or less in that order. Can't be arsed to start up on Capaldi.
posted by Etrigan at 5:32 AM on September 9, 2014 [12 favorites]
The difference between Star Wars fans and Star Trek fans is that Star Wars fans love the Star Wars in their heads much more than the Star Wars on the screen, while Star Trek fans love the Star Trek on the screen about as much as the Star Trek in their heads.
Star Trek fans write their fanfic and come up with their fanon and fill in the gaps and elide the errors because they want to help Roddenberry et al, while Star Wars fans do all that because they want to correct Lucas.
Doctor Who fans in the olden days were Star Trek fans. Now they're Star Wars fans.
Gave up on NuWho because of River Song, Steven Moffat and Matt Smith, more or less in that order. Can't be arsed to start up on Capaldi.
posted by Etrigan at 5:32 AM on September 9, 2014 [12 favorites]
REPRESENT.
Archness, the enemy of the speculative.
posted by glasseyes at 5:34 AM on September 9, 2014
Archness, the enemy of the speculative.
posted by glasseyes at 5:34 AM on September 9, 2014
Among the many things that the band Sloan has given me over the years, perhaps the best is the following lyric, from "Coax Me":
It's not the band I hate, it's their fans
...which doesn't seem like a revolutionary sentiment or anything, but hit me at exactly the right time in my life to solidify how I felt about a lot of things in 1994. It resonates in my head whenever I read threads like this.
I will forever be a flyer of the Matt Smith flag, though -- I don't blame him for the scripts he was saddled with, and I feel that he, of all the actors I've experienced playing the Doctor (all from Baker on up), was uniquely powerful in pivoting from gallant young space-good to weird, old, tired, angry alien in about zero seconds.
I feel like he takes a lot of splash damage for Moffat problems and fandom problems and sudden-popularity-in-America problems, but he just absolutely nails the two extremes of the Doctor, and did a fantastic job of building the character of a thousands-year-old jaded, angry, lonely creature living inside the self-deluding shell of a daffy boy adventurer.
posted by Shepherd at 5:48 AM on September 9, 2014 [14 favorites]
It's not the band I hate, it's their fans
...which doesn't seem like a revolutionary sentiment or anything, but hit me at exactly the right time in my life to solidify how I felt about a lot of things in 1994. It resonates in my head whenever I read threads like this.
I will forever be a flyer of the Matt Smith flag, though -- I don't blame him for the scripts he was saddled with, and I feel that he, of all the actors I've experienced playing the Doctor (all from Baker on up), was uniquely powerful in pivoting from gallant young space-good to weird, old, tired, angry alien in about zero seconds.
I feel like he takes a lot of splash damage for Moffat problems and fandom problems and sudden-popularity-in-America problems, but he just absolutely nails the two extremes of the Doctor, and did a fantastic job of building the character of a thousands-year-old jaded, angry, lonely creature living inside the self-deluding shell of a daffy boy adventurer.
posted by Shepherd at 5:48 AM on September 9, 2014 [14 favorites]
Well, then, ignore the fandom and watch the show.
Yes, I believe if you finished reading my comment, that I state that is more or less what I do and when I do talk about the show, I talk about with people I already have established a relationship, and they themselves avoid the Who fandom.
But you know, thanks for your concern.
posted by Kitteh at 5:56 AM on September 9, 2014 [5 favorites]
Yes, I believe if you finished reading my comment, that I state that is more or less what I do and when I do talk about the show, I talk about with people I already have established a relationship, and they themselves avoid the Who fandom.
But you know, thanks for your concern.
posted by Kitteh at 5:56 AM on September 9, 2014 [5 favorites]
But back to Moffat. Is he a great writer? I think he's not bad, yeah. His scripts were often the best ones during the R.T.Davies era. I enjoyed that his version of Who showed a more complex, thoughtful approach to storytelling. Arcs weren't just a season long; now they stretched over multiple series.
Length != complexity. Moffat's arcs are long, but thoughtful? They don't make any sense. At all. He throws everything in until the weight can no longer bear, it collapses into a messy heap, we yell a catchphrase, and then dust off our hands and move on to the next one. I can only give the Doctor so much credit for remembering he has a time machine when he discovers it will explode and destroy the universe and his response is to go visit Van Gogh. Or when he abandons a little girl in peril and doesn't worry about it because he's seen her as an adult and therefore knows she's okay. This is not "thoughtful" storytelling.
I've stopped. I think Capaldi can make a good Doctor but I've had enough of Moffat. I'm sitting this season out unless I'm assured it's not the same crap as seasons 5-7.
The problem with Moffat's tenure is, I've been watching the show since the early 80s and it used to be that a bad episode was just a bad episode of Doctor Who. Now it's a bad episode of the River Song show or the Vastra and Jenny show or the Amy and Rory show or the Clara show and I wouldn't be watching those shows in the first place. (And it especially irks me that my list of frustrations with the show are largely female, even though I don't think it's me who has a problem with women on the show.)
But some people like this shallow tropey squeebait stuff and hey, good on 'em. It's not my thing, so I too am giving up.
posted by Legomancer at 6:09 AM on September 9, 2014 [4 favorites]
Length != complexity. Moffat's arcs are long, but thoughtful? They don't make any sense. At all. He throws everything in until the weight can no longer bear, it collapses into a messy heap, we yell a catchphrase, and then dust off our hands and move on to the next one. I can only give the Doctor so much credit for remembering he has a time machine when he discovers it will explode and destroy the universe and his response is to go visit Van Gogh. Or when he abandons a little girl in peril and doesn't worry about it because he's seen her as an adult and therefore knows she's okay. This is not "thoughtful" storytelling.
I've stopped. I think Capaldi can make a good Doctor but I've had enough of Moffat. I'm sitting this season out unless I'm assured it's not the same crap as seasons 5-7.
The problem with Moffat's tenure is, I've been watching the show since the early 80s and it used to be that a bad episode was just a bad episode of Doctor Who. Now it's a bad episode of the River Song show or the Vastra and Jenny show or the Amy and Rory show or the Clara show and I wouldn't be watching those shows in the first place. (And it especially irks me that my list of frustrations with the show are largely female, even though I don't think it's me who has a problem with women on the show.)
But some people like this shallow tropey squeebait stuff and hey, good on 'em. It's not my thing, so I too am giving up.
posted by Legomancer at 6:09 AM on September 9, 2014 [4 favorites]
Actually, I'm often having trouble understanding what people are saying - not just Capaldi, everyone sounds like they're mumbling. What's up with that?
THIS! I thought I was going deaf. The dialogue is more difficult to hear since Capaldi took over, which is particularly problematic with Capaldi's deep voice and rapid-fire patter with Clara.
posted by leotrotsky at 6:22 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
THIS! I thought I was going deaf. The dialogue is more difficult to hear since Capaldi took over, which is particularly problematic with Capaldi's deep voice and rapid-fire patter with Clara.
posted by leotrotsky at 6:22 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
I don't understand a lot of Capaldi's dialog either. Thought that was just me.
posted by octothorpe at 6:32 AM on September 9, 2014
posted by octothorpe at 6:32 AM on September 9, 2014
Moffat's arcs are long, but thoughtful? They don't make any sense. At all. He throws everything in until the weight can no longer bear, it collapses into a messy heap, we yell a catchphrase, and then dust off our hands and move on to the next one.
--
Either he has a great concept that can't be filmed on a BBC budget, but he does it anyway and it falls flat emotionally; or he takes a truly stunning villain like the Weeping Angels and then pushes them to the point of not being scary anymore; or he takes a great female character like Professor River Song, space-faring archeologist who's brave, intelligent and independent, and turns her into someone who has literally never done anything in her life that wasn't all about The Doctor.
BOTH OF THESE.
Moffat has great ides, but he needs someone standing over him to keep him from returning to that same well again and again. The Angels were scary as fuck the first time you saw them. River Song was fantastic the first time you saw her. But Moffatt just keeps wanting to re-use his great ideas and make them New And Improved or whatever, and...they didn't need that. You don't need to Learn More About The Angels or Learn More About River, they are self-contained in and of themselves the first time you see them and it's okay if there's stuff you don't know. The Big Bad that scared me almost as much as the Weeping Angels was whatever was in Midnight, when there were a bunch of people trapped in that vacation tour bus and some kind of beastie outside was making people inside go all Jedi mind-trick on each other and they tried throwing the Doctor out.
Scary shit. And - you never saw the beastie. All you saw was what it made people do to each other.
Sometimes only a little information is enough, and less is more. And Moffatt needs someone on top of him to remind him of that.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:38 AM on September 9, 2014 [15 favorites]
--
Either he has a great concept that can't be filmed on a BBC budget, but he does it anyway and it falls flat emotionally; or he takes a truly stunning villain like the Weeping Angels and then pushes them to the point of not being scary anymore; or he takes a great female character like Professor River Song, space-faring archeologist who's brave, intelligent and independent, and turns her into someone who has literally never done anything in her life that wasn't all about The Doctor.
BOTH OF THESE.
Moffat has great ides, but he needs someone standing over him to keep him from returning to that same well again and again. The Angels were scary as fuck the first time you saw them. River Song was fantastic the first time you saw her. But Moffatt just keeps wanting to re-use his great ideas and make them New And Improved or whatever, and...they didn't need that. You don't need to Learn More About The Angels or Learn More About River, they are self-contained in and of themselves the first time you see them and it's okay if there's stuff you don't know. The Big Bad that scared me almost as much as the Weeping Angels was whatever was in Midnight, when there were a bunch of people trapped in that vacation tour bus and some kind of beastie outside was making people inside go all Jedi mind-trick on each other and they tried throwing the Doctor out.
Scary shit. And - you never saw the beastie. All you saw was what it made people do to each other.
Sometimes only a little information is enough, and less is more. And Moffatt needs someone on top of him to remind him of that.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:38 AM on September 9, 2014 [15 favorites]
Good job not liking thing.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 6:38 AM on September 9, 2014 [4 favorites]
posted by DirtyOldTown at 6:38 AM on September 9, 2014 [4 favorites]
I don't think nearly as many people would be complaining about Who if it wasn't currently the king of the SF hill. For a lot of people who identify as fans of the genre, it comes off as simplistic and a bit childish. That crowd doesn't want to walk into forbidden planet looking for stuff that's "for them" and instead have a plushy dalek shoved in their face. Right now they're getting a lot of plushy dalek's shoved in their face, and they don't like it much. This'll pass. A new thing that's more like BS:G will come along and a different crowd will start complaining that its too serious and mature. Unless the new thing is a Welcome to Nightvale TV show, in which case dissension will not be tolerated.
posted by lownote at 6:40 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
posted by lownote at 6:40 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
I've said this before and I'll say it again, even though nobody who cares is listening, but the next showrunner for Who needs to be Tony Lee, who has done several amazing "seasons" of Who in comic books. He did story arcs for 10 and 11 that are as good as the best episodes of the TV show.
I believe he's said in the past (via twitter, IIRC) that he wouldn't want the job. But I don't care - make it happen, universe!
posted by jbickers at 6:43 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
I believe he's said in the past (via twitter, IIRC) that he wouldn't want the job. But I don't care - make it happen, universe!
posted by jbickers at 6:43 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
We need K-9 back. And I don't mean some modern reimagining, I mean the original.
But then maybe I just like to sit back in fan forums and watch heads explode.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 6:43 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
But then maybe I just like to sit back in fan forums and watch heads explode.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 6:43 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
EC nails with one of Moffat's many writing troubles. The scary things he creates are scary as one-off, but become less scary and more "oh come on!" when he brings them out more. I am very glad that the Vashta Nerada have not made another appearance.
posted by Kitteh at 6:53 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
posted by Kitteh at 6:53 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
The amazing thing Moffat has done in his run is make me actually miss RTD. (The T stands for "Beatify Rose Forever and Ever".) I loved some of Moffat's episodes back in the RTD era, but as others have said better above, he just doesn't seem to know what to do with large plots.
(Though I'm still not going to forgive RTD for Children of Earth. I know everybody hypes it up, but for me it was pure bathos.)
posted by kmz at 6:55 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
(Though I'm still not going to forgive RTD for Children of Earth. I know everybody hypes it up, but for me it was pure bathos.)
posted by kmz at 6:55 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
Well Ms. Speller, congratulations on your epiphany that Doctor Who is a kid's program that, in it's recent incarnation, is all the worse for being aimed more at child-adults than actual children. Now good luck working on the whole superhero movie thing.
posted by Decani at 6:56 AM on September 9, 2014
posted by Decani at 6:56 AM on September 9, 2014
I'll agree that Moffat's writing has some issues, but let's not kid ourselves: Doctor Who has always been a show full of hits and misses.
When it's great, it's fantastic, and when it's bad, it's often cringe-worthy. This has always been the case.
Moffat's written some great episodes. The problem seems to be that he's having a tough time controlling the overarching tone and arc of the plot. I also agree with EC that Moffat needs a counterpart to take over these responsibilities, and keep the plot slightly more on the rails.
Doctor Who has never needed "Classic Star Trek" levels of continuity, but a bit more coherence (and even pacing) would greatly improve the show.
That being said, I still enjoy watching it, as imperfect as it is....
posted by schmod at 7:03 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
When it's great, it's fantastic, and when it's bad, it's often cringe-worthy. This has always been the case.
Moffat's written some great episodes. The problem seems to be that he's having a tough time controlling the overarching tone and arc of the plot. I also agree with EC that Moffat needs a counterpart to take over these responsibilities, and keep the plot slightly more on the rails.
Doctor Who has never needed "Classic Star Trek" levels of continuity, but a bit more coherence (and even pacing) would greatly improve the show.
That being said, I still enjoy watching it, as imperfect as it is....
posted by schmod at 7:03 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
Oh My God. I just realized that Doctor Who is the new Star Wars. (Head explodes)
Or scratch that, there's a lot of Star Trek mixed in there too. Raise your hand if you're old enough to remember the fan hate around Wesley Crusher.
I just never expected Doctor Who of all things to get such a cultural moment in the sun! But think, all three fandoms are bifurcated (or multifurcated, in the case of ST) along generational lines.
It's just weird living in a world where the obsessions of my youth--like Doctor Who and Lord of the Rings, which were such secret, private worlds then, are now pop culture playgrounds everyone over the age of 4 seems deeply familiar with.
posted by rikschell at 7:06 AM on September 9, 2014 [6 favorites]
Or scratch that, there's a lot of Star Trek mixed in there too. Raise your hand if you're old enough to remember the fan hate around Wesley Crusher.
I just never expected Doctor Who of all things to get such a cultural moment in the sun! But think, all three fandoms are bifurcated (or multifurcated, in the case of ST) along generational lines.
It's just weird living in a world where the obsessions of my youth--like Doctor Who and Lord of the Rings, which were such secret, private worlds then, are now pop culture playgrounds everyone over the age of 4 seems deeply familiar with.
posted by rikschell at 7:06 AM on September 9, 2014 [6 favorites]
I'll criticise the show along with the rest of the crowd, but it is episodes like Blink, Midnight (good lord yes that was great), Dalek, The Planet of the Ood and The Rebel Flesh that keep me coming back. It's like those pigeons that peck the button even though they only get a treat once in a while... intermittent reinforcement? The good bits are very good, and I'm happy to sit through a few dogdy episodes for them.
posted by harriet vane at 7:17 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
posted by harriet vane at 7:17 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
There is a lot wrong with the current runs of Doctor Who, and there are also excellent bits - really excellent bits - but its like reading Stephen King for those short stories where he forgets he's supposed to be a hack, or Bleach for the once in an arc chapter of eloquence.
I just admitted to reading Shonen comics - I think I'm done here.
posted by pan at 7:24 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
I just admitted to reading Shonen comics - I think I'm done here.
posted by pan at 7:24 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
Your favorite sci-fi TV show sucks.
Really though. Giving up on Doctor Who three episodes into a new Doctor when you haven't watched any of the previous three seasons ("what's up with the lizard woman")? Forgive me if I completely disregard your opinion. NuWho has never really been about individual episodes (although some are excellent), but about the long game of building the characters and relationships and stressing the theme of kindness and intelligence over cynicism and violence. Yes, the characters are broadly drawn and the themes are not subtle -- it's a family show.
I started watching last summer, and binged the entire new series, the top-rated Classic Who episodes, and at least one episode from each classic Doctor (ugh, the Twin Dilemma). As with any form of entertainment that has existed for that length of time, some of the episodes are duds. A fair amount of the classic series is nearly unwatchable. About half of the episodes in the first two seasons of NuWho are cringeworthy - fart jokes and stupid gags. But taken as a whole, it's a fantastic show that keeps reinventing itself and giving the audience more to think about.
This season is starting slowly, as New Doctor seasons generally do. The Dalek episode was terrible, but I know that not every episode is going to be a work of art. The Robin Hood episode was silly fun, and I'm looking forward to the scare-fest next week. I think we can agree that the biggest problem with the new season is that THE MUSIC IS TOO FUCKING LOUD. Seriously guys - I can't understand half of the dialogue. Fix that.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 7:33 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
Really though. Giving up on Doctor Who three episodes into a new Doctor when you haven't watched any of the previous three seasons ("what's up with the lizard woman")? Forgive me if I completely disregard your opinion. NuWho has never really been about individual episodes (although some are excellent), but about the long game of building the characters and relationships and stressing the theme of kindness and intelligence over cynicism and violence. Yes, the characters are broadly drawn and the themes are not subtle -- it's a family show.
I started watching last summer, and binged the entire new series, the top-rated Classic Who episodes, and at least one episode from each classic Doctor (ugh, the Twin Dilemma). As with any form of entertainment that has existed for that length of time, some of the episodes are duds. A fair amount of the classic series is nearly unwatchable. About half of the episodes in the first two seasons of NuWho are cringeworthy - fart jokes and stupid gags. But taken as a whole, it's a fantastic show that keeps reinventing itself and giving the audience more to think about.
This season is starting slowly, as New Doctor seasons generally do. The Dalek episode was terrible, but I know that not every episode is going to be a work of art. The Robin Hood episode was silly fun, and I'm looking forward to the scare-fest next week. I think we can agree that the biggest problem with the new season is that THE MUSIC IS TOO FUCKING LOUD. Seriously guys - I can't understand half of the dialogue. Fix that.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 7:33 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
Shepherd, I came in to say like that exact same thing. Smith deserved so much better than Moffat.
I for one would love to see Bryan Fuller run the show. As much as I love Hannibal, I'd throw it under the bus for that. (Not that Bryan Fuller is entirely without fault, but can you imagine what he'd do with it? Whimsy and lovecraftian horror in one weird package! It'd be great.)
posted by dogheart at 7:52 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
I for one would love to see Bryan Fuller run the show. As much as I love Hannibal, I'd throw it under the bus for that. (Not that Bryan Fuller is entirely without fault, but can you imagine what he'd do with it? Whimsy and lovecraftian horror in one weird package! It'd be great.)
posted by dogheart at 7:52 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
I’m giving up on Doctor Who again.
Oh, yeah? Well, I'm sick of the Swiss!
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 7:59 AM on September 9, 2014 [8 favorites]
Oh, yeah? Well, I'm sick of the Swiss!
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 7:59 AM on September 9, 2014 [8 favorites]
So do I hold the most controversial opinion, in that I liked Matt Smith and thought S5->S6 was the best of the modern Doctor Who?
Right balance of everything really. S1-S4 were often too ridiculous (towing planets, whoever said that). Capaldi feels like a bad Saturday morning cartoon so far, which is a mild improvement from S7 in that I was able to watch it.
posted by GreyboxHero at 8:08 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
Right balance of everything really. S1-S4 were often too ridiculous (towing planets, whoever said that). Capaldi feels like a bad Saturday morning cartoon so far, which is a mild improvement from S7 in that I was able to watch it.
posted by GreyboxHero at 8:08 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
I'm with you, GreyboxHero. The Silence / Impossible Astronaut / River Song reveal season is my favorite. I'm fully aware that it doesn't make any sense if you think about it too hard, but I don't care.
That said, I love it all. The Dobby-Doctor-turns-into-Jesus-Doctor finale was a low point for me, but I can almost always find something to enjoy.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 8:15 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
That said, I love it all. The Dobby-Doctor-turns-into-Jesus-Doctor finale was a low point for me, but I can almost always find something to enjoy.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 8:15 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
I wish all the people who want to pontificate loudly on how terrible modern Who is and how people who enjoy Moffat's version of the show are Bad Human Beings would quit. And then STFU about it.
Add me to the list of people who loves the show in both incarnations, through the great and terrible, and wants to discuss flaws and merits with interested parties but is tired to death of the fandom. Fortunately I have an age peer buddy of similar tastes (not on Metafilter) with whom I email back and forth regularly about the sweet summer children on Tumblr and wave our canes silently from our porch as the kids stomp across the collective Who lawn.
posted by immlass at 8:16 AM on September 9, 2014 [4 favorites]
Add me to the list of people who loves the show in both incarnations, through the great and terrible, and wants to discuss flaws and merits with interested parties but is tired to death of the fandom. Fortunately I have an age peer buddy of similar tastes (not on Metafilter) with whom I email back and forth regularly about the sweet summer children on Tumblr and wave our canes silently from our porch as the kids stomp across the collective Who lawn.
posted by immlass at 8:16 AM on September 9, 2014 [4 favorites]
FWIW, when Matt Smith got killed dead 5 minutes in to The Impossible Astronaut, I also died a bit inside.
Easily the best moment of the reboot and one of the most unpredictable opening episodes. That said, it's all pretty enjoyable, just not great at all times.
Sucks that Smith's end run was kind of whatever.
posted by GreyboxHero at 8:23 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
Easily the best moment of the reboot and one of the most unpredictable opening episodes. That said, it's all pretty enjoyable, just not great at all times.
Sucks that Smith's end run was kind of whatever.
posted by GreyboxHero at 8:23 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
all the while their brains have mercifully erased all memory of the much larger bunch of equally awful dreck that made up the bulk of OldWho.
*cough*Robot*cough*
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 8:29 AM on September 9, 2014
*cough*Robot*cough*
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 8:29 AM on September 9, 2014
While I do have Opinions about Things, including Doctor Who, I have to wonder what on earth is driving all this serious criticism of pop culture products. (These posts have been popping up here regularly for a while now, so I'm assuming this is a thing that internet writers are doing?)
I mean, Doctor Who is substantial creative work, but it's pop art, something made on deadline and on a budget, in serial form, by many people. It will never be able to stand up to the kind of substantial, deeply considered criticism this author is applying to it--no serialized show ever will.
If Moffatt were sitting in his mountain cabin spending months at a time writing and crafting a single episode, and then working with his cast and crew over weeks filming just that one episode, with opportunities to rehearse, rewrite, shoot, edit, rewrite and shoot again, etc., it would be an episode that deserves the depth of critical analysis being applied here. As it is, she's doing exegesis of the back of a cereal box.
I think this author needs to consider Roger Ebert's approach to criticism: judge the thing within its idiom. Serial shows will always be imperfect, often in obvious ways; it is an inevitable outcome of the working process. If one is going to apply literary or artistic standards of the highest order to something, it should be work intended to hit those marks. And if you have a fair criticism of Doctor Who, don't take over 2200 words to say it.
Talk about beanplating.
posted by LooseFilter at 8:36 AM on September 9, 2014 [5 favorites]
I mean, Doctor Who is substantial creative work, but it's pop art, something made on deadline and on a budget, in serial form, by many people. It will never be able to stand up to the kind of substantial, deeply considered criticism this author is applying to it--no serialized show ever will.
If Moffatt were sitting in his mountain cabin spending months at a time writing and crafting a single episode, and then working with his cast and crew over weeks filming just that one episode, with opportunities to rehearse, rewrite, shoot, edit, rewrite and shoot again, etc., it would be an episode that deserves the depth of critical analysis being applied here. As it is, she's doing exegesis of the back of a cereal box.
I think this author needs to consider Roger Ebert's approach to criticism: judge the thing within its idiom. Serial shows will always be imperfect, often in obvious ways; it is an inevitable outcome of the working process. If one is going to apply literary or artistic standards of the highest order to something, it should be work intended to hit those marks. And if you have a fair criticism of Doctor Who, don't take over 2200 words to say it.
Talk about beanplating.
posted by LooseFilter at 8:36 AM on September 9, 2014 [5 favorites]
Agreed. And I don't have a problem with Who fandom in general, just the people who feel the need to complain about everything. After all, I've had a complete ball on internet threads speculating about plot points, identifying references, comparing and contrasting Doctors, etc. I can beanplate with the best of them.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 8:44 AM on September 9, 2014
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 8:44 AM on September 9, 2014
Which is not to say that you can only play in my pool if you avoid saying anything negative about Doctor Who. The show is clearly not above criticism, but it's better when that criticism comes from a place of love.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 8:47 AM on September 9, 2014
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 8:47 AM on September 9, 2014
I’m giving up on Doctor Who again. This time it may be final.
For only the fourth time? Amateur.
The wonderful thing about Doctor Who is that if one is disappointed with the current version—whether the actor in the role, the producer, the directors, or the writers (even the fans)—it's just a matter of waiting until it renews itself. Even if Capaldi's run so far isn't as good as [my first doctor's], as long as the ratings don't threaten cancellation, I'm sufficiently content.
While I'm still dutifully slogging through "Robert of Sherwood" mainly for Capaldi and Ben Miller, plenty of viewers rather enjoyed it, and Capaldi's teaser for "Listen" looks good. Writer Mark Gatiss, whose episodes have never rated more than a beta/beta-plus in my book, at least gets this about the show:
posted by Doktor Zed at 8:47 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
For only the fourth time? Amateur.
The wonderful thing about Doctor Who is that if one is disappointed with the current version—whether the actor in the role, the producer, the directors, or the writers (even the fans)—it's just a matter of waiting until it renews itself. Even if Capaldi's run so far isn't as good as [my first doctor's], as long as the ratings don't threaten cancellation, I'm sufficiently content.
While I'm still dutifully slogging through "Robert of Sherwood" mainly for Capaldi and Ben Miller, plenty of viewers rather enjoyed it, and Capaldi's teaser for "Listen" looks good. Writer Mark Gatiss, whose episodes have never rated more than a beta/beta-plus in my book, at least gets this about the show:
Q: What have you found different about writing for Capaldi versus Eccleston, Tennant, and Smith?Moffat has another shot at getting the audience watching from behind the sofa with "Listen", and if he misses, then it's the turn of Frank Cottrell Boyce (24 Hour Party People, A Cock and Bull Story).
A: You always start from the same point: The Doctor is the Doctor. I’ve never actually written a script where I didn’t know who the Doctor was going to be. You just start thinking about the actor’s voice, speech patterns, mannerisms, and the whole attitude. The main thing with Peter is the obvious factor that he’s a lot older than Matt. I knew he wanted to be a lot more skeptical and less accessible while still being lots of fun. And immediately, you start to think of early Tom Baker in that way. One of the things I remember being thrilled about as a child watching the show — Jon Pertwee was my Doctor, and I was devastated when he left — but I remember the thrill of the newness of Tom. There’s a bit in “The Seeds of Doom” when they’re discussing amputating someone’s arm because it’s been infected by the Krynoid. Tom sits there with his hat on like Clint Eastwood and just says, “You must help yourselves.” And it sent goose-bumps down my spine because it’s like, “What? The Doctor’s not like that!” But suddenly he was. And suddenly, in this episode, you’ve got a Doctor who’s quite grumpy with Robin Hood. Matt would probably have gone out for a drink with him! Just the fact that you can suddenly have a change of attitude like that makes the whole thing new and fresh again.
posted by Doktor Zed at 8:47 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
I agree with the critical points made by the the author of TFA, but I don't know if "I'M OUTTA HERE FOREVA" is a viable response.
posted by grubi at 9:07 AM on September 9, 2014
posted by grubi at 9:07 AM on September 9, 2014
There's a line in Microserfs by Douglas Coupland about how nerds love slamming doors. "I am out of here AND YOU CAN'T STOP ME!" *slam*
Histrionics aside, there are two traditional enemies of The Doctor: the Daleks and whoever is running the show at the time. If it's not Moffat, it's RTD or JNT or the Cartmel Masterplan. But still, there is an embarrassment of riches to the show--it's going strong on the current run, we keep finding classic episodes lurking in various corners of the globe, and the audio episodes from Big Finish are some of the best presentations today.
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 9:16 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
Histrionics aside, there are two traditional enemies of The Doctor: the Daleks and whoever is running the show at the time. If it's not Moffat, it's RTD or JNT or the Cartmel Masterplan. But still, there is an embarrassment of riches to the show--it's going strong on the current run, we keep finding classic episodes lurking in various corners of the globe, and the audio episodes from Big Finish are some of the best presentations today.
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 9:16 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
aimed more at child-adults than actual children.
Decani I submit that the apotheosis of this movement is this commercial.
You may want to have a kitty close at hand to pat so you can calm down after viewing it. It is terrible.
posted by winna at 9:53 AM on September 9, 2014
Decani I submit that the apotheosis of this movement is this commercial.
You may want to have a kitty close at hand to pat so you can calm down after viewing it. It is terrible.
posted by winna at 9:53 AM on September 9, 2014
Up and to my office, and so to dinner at home; and then to Westminster to argue withe Dr. Castle about this business of locking the Privy, which I do not much mind, it being little worth . . . Thence into Covent Garden to an alehouse, thence to see an Punch & Judy show, which hath gone much off the rayles since when I was in uni. . . .posted by Herodios at 9:59 AM on September 9, 2014 [9 favorites]
-- Sam Pepys, Friday 9 May 1662
There's this weird assumption when it comes to Dr. Who that people who don't like something should just quietly disengage. This ignores that doing so is nigh-impossible with the way that pop culture within "geekdom" is reflected and amplified and repeated.
The "it's a kid's show, relax" argument in particular doesn't make sense to me, as the show has obviously not targeted actual chronological children as its primary audience for a good while, now.
posted by truex at 10:00 AM on September 9, 2014 [7 favorites]
The "it's a kid's show, relax" argument in particular doesn't make sense to me, as the show has obviously not targeted actual chronological children as its primary audience for a good while, now.
posted by truex at 10:00 AM on September 9, 2014 [7 favorites]
"When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
posted by kmz at 10:00 AM on September 9, 2014 [7 favorites]
posted by kmz at 10:00 AM on September 9, 2014 [7 favorites]
One of the things I love about NuWho is how how different it looks from American TV shows. The supporting actors in each story look more like real people. NuWho also shows women and PoC in positions of power. Here we have Harriet Jones and Captain Erisa Magambo and Nasreen Chaudhry and they're not paragons, they're allowed to be more human. They screw up, sometimes fixing their mistakes in the story, sometimes not. And they don't look like 20-something supermodels in the process! What an amazing idea! I don't know, somehow it fills me with hope.
But the show also has characters like Donna Noble. People who are obnoxious and weird from a lifetime of people telling them they're no good. They don't have fancy jobs or any particular skills, but by virtue of being who they are can affect positive changes. Again with the hope thing.
posted by Orange Dinosaur Slide at 10:01 AM on September 9, 2014 [11 favorites]
But the show also has characters like Donna Noble. People who are obnoxious and weird from a lifetime of people telling them they're no good. They don't have fancy jobs or any particular skills, but by virtue of being who they are can affect positive changes. Again with the hope thing.
posted by Orange Dinosaur Slide at 10:01 AM on September 9, 2014 [11 favorites]
I gripe about Tumblr fandom with the best of the fandom oldbies*, but everything I've heard from friends about Who fandom in the pre-reboot days suggests that it was just as much of a cesspit -- if not more so, because the sheer size of the fandom today and the ability to create your own personalized dashboard of tumblogs means that you can find and follow a handful of people who you find interesting and enjoy talking to, and ignore everybody else.
The trouble with Who fandom is the trouble with fandoms in general: take the social problems that emerge amongst any large group of people, add devoted interest to a single topic, season with generous helping of geek social fallacies, let simmer. It's not a problem restricted to Kids These Days; it's just more visible because of the nature of today's internet.
Anyway, at least Tumblr usually remembers Martha Jones exists. Unlike, say, Radio Times.
*Oldbie as in my first fandom was Harry Potter. Back when there were only 25 fics on fanfiction.net! *shakes cane*
On preview:
truex: "There's this weird assumption when it comes to Dr. Who that people who don't like something should just quietly disengage. This ignores that doing so is nigh-impossible with the way that pop culture within "geekdom" is reflected and amplified and repeated."
I agree, and this to my mind is one of the most toxic things about any long-running fandom -- the constant need to police and rank other people's enjoyment. Whether you're talking about Doctor Who, Star Trek, Star Wars, superhero comics or any other media franchise/universe whose breadth is literally multigenerational, you're not any less of a "real fan" for liking only part of the thing, or needing to take a break from the thing, or not consuming every single episode/issue/volume of the thing. I think more people would quietly disengage if there wasn't so much social pressure to prove your bona fides as a Real Fan by powering through.
posted by bettafish at 10:08 AM on September 9, 2014 [4 favorites]
The trouble with Who fandom is the trouble with fandoms in general: take the social problems that emerge amongst any large group of people, add devoted interest to a single topic, season with generous helping of geek social fallacies, let simmer. It's not a problem restricted to Kids These Days; it's just more visible because of the nature of today's internet.
Anyway, at least Tumblr usually remembers Martha Jones exists. Unlike, say, Radio Times.
*Oldbie as in my first fandom was Harry Potter. Back when there were only 25 fics on fanfiction.net! *shakes cane*
On preview:
truex: "There's this weird assumption when it comes to Dr. Who that people who don't like something should just quietly disengage. This ignores that doing so is nigh-impossible with the way that pop culture within "geekdom" is reflected and amplified and repeated."
I agree, and this to my mind is one of the most toxic things about any long-running fandom -- the constant need to police and rank other people's enjoyment. Whether you're talking about Doctor Who, Star Trek, Star Wars, superhero comics or any other media franchise/universe whose breadth is literally multigenerational, you're not any less of a "real fan" for liking only part of the thing, or needing to take a break from the thing, or not consuming every single episode/issue/volume of the thing. I think more people would quietly disengage if there wasn't so much social pressure to prove your bona fides as a Real Fan by powering through.
posted by bettafish at 10:08 AM on September 9, 2014 [4 favorites]
My beef with Moffat is that he allows really obviously stupid plot points through. In the most recent episode, Robin Hood, The Doctor and Clara shoot a golden arrow, that is an arrow made of solid gold, about a half-mile into the sky to hit a departing spacecraft. There's a always a moment like this in Moffat Who - the resolutions to plots ask me to suspend disbelief about ordinary everyday physics I can test in my backyard. Look, I can buy that the Doctor is a millennia-old time-travelling alien, because who knows, maybe there are millennia-old time-travelling aliens. Cybermen, Daleks, Silurians, transmats, faster-then-light travel, dimensional transcendence, all that stuff is easy to buy because nothing in my everyday experience suggests to me that it isn't possible.
In order for sci-fi to be believable though, the everyday stuff has to work as expected unless you offer an in-unverse explanation for why it isn't. And so: a solid gold arrow isn't going to fly through air, and even if the arrow were a normal arrow, nobody, not even Robin Hood, is going to shoot is a half-mile into the air at a spacecraft nearing escape velocity.
Thing is, Moffat almost always resolves his plots like this. The resolution of The Time Of The Doctor was that the Time Lords gave the Doctor extra regenerations, and The Doctor zapped his enemies with regeneration rays, which have never shown up before. If regeneration produces such powerful side-effects, how come we've never seen them before? And if the Time Lords can "grant" regenerations then why don't they always do that? Aren't they then functionally immortal? Thing is, it wouldn't have been difficult for some other resolution to the plot to occur. The Doctor could have actually risked his life, like he used to do in the classic series.
So I'll be glad when Moffat moves on. May it be soon.
posted by eustacescrubb at 10:14 AM on September 9, 2014 [5 favorites]
In order for sci-fi to be believable though, the everyday stuff has to work as expected unless you offer an in-unverse explanation for why it isn't. And so: a solid gold arrow isn't going to fly through air, and even if the arrow were a normal arrow, nobody, not even Robin Hood, is going to shoot is a half-mile into the air at a spacecraft nearing escape velocity.
Thing is, Moffat almost always resolves his plots like this. The resolution of The Time Of The Doctor was that the Time Lords gave the Doctor extra regenerations, and The Doctor zapped his enemies with regeneration rays, which have never shown up before. If regeneration produces such powerful side-effects, how come we've never seen them before? And if the Time Lords can "grant" regenerations then why don't they always do that? Aren't they then functionally immortal? Thing is, it wouldn't have been difficult for some other resolution to the plot to occur. The Doctor could have actually risked his life, like he used to do in the classic series.
So I'll be glad when Moffat moves on. May it be soon.
posted by eustacescrubb at 10:14 AM on September 9, 2014 [5 favorites]
There's this weird assumption when it comes to Dr. Who that people who don't like something should just quietly disengage. This ignores that doing so is nigh-impossible with the way that pop culture within "geekdom" is reflected and amplified and repeated.
I agree, and this to my mind is one of the most toxic things about any long-running fandom -- the constant need to police and rank other people's enjoyment. Whether you're talking about Doctor Who, Star Trek, Star Wars, superhero comics or any other media franchise/universe whose breadth is literally multigenerational, you're not any less of a "real fan" for liking only part of the thing, or needing to take a break from the thing, or not consuming every single episode/issue/volume of the thing. I think more people would quietly disengage if there wasn't so much social pressure to prove your bona fides as a Real Fan by powering through.
I don't think it's that way at all. It's more like, if you don't enjoy watching the show, just don't watch it, rather than watching it and then telling everyone on the internet what a horrible show it is.
I didn't like Dollhouse, despite being a big Joss Whedon fan. But I didn't write blog posts or internet threads about how much I disliked it. I just stopped watching. It's not as if this person is a television critic who is paid to tell us what she thinks of Doctor Who.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 10:18 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
I agree, and this to my mind is one of the most toxic things about any long-running fandom -- the constant need to police and rank other people's enjoyment. Whether you're talking about Doctor Who, Star Trek, Star Wars, superhero comics or any other media franchise/universe whose breadth is literally multigenerational, you're not any less of a "real fan" for liking only part of the thing, or needing to take a break from the thing, or not consuming every single episode/issue/volume of the thing. I think more people would quietly disengage if there wasn't so much social pressure to prove your bona fides as a Real Fan by powering through.
I don't think it's that way at all. It's more like, if you don't enjoy watching the show, just don't watch it, rather than watching it and then telling everyone on the internet what a horrible show it is.
I didn't like Dollhouse, despite being a big Joss Whedon fan. But I didn't write blog posts or internet threads about how much I disliked it. I just stopped watching. It's not as if this person is a television critic who is paid to tell us what she thinks of Doctor Who.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 10:18 AM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
It's more like, if you don't enjoy watching the show, just don't watch it, rather than watching it and then telling everyone on the internet what a horrible show it is.
And what do you suggest people do if they don't like conversation about what a horrible show it is?
posted by Etrigan at 10:22 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
And what do you suggest people do if they don't like conversation about what a horrible show it is?
posted by Etrigan at 10:22 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
*side-eye* Get different friends?
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 10:28 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 10:28 AM on September 9, 2014 [2 favorites]
There's this weird assumption when it comes to Dr. Who that people who don't like something should just quietly disengage.
Maybe for some, but people are obnoxious lots of the time about everything, so that's par for human behavior. Some of my favorite nerd arguments with friends are disagreeing about whether something we love is good or not "these days".
My complaint is simply that this writer is applying standards of criticism that are inappropriate to the creative mode, here (and that it seems to be epidemic around the internets). To expect a weekly serial to be dramatically compelling; realistic within limits (as eustacescrubb mentions); politically and socially aware, sensitive, and balanced; morally satisfying; and fun is simply expecting a bear to quack: it's not that kind of thing.
Having said that, beanplating TV shows (etc.) that we love is something fans adore doing, but expectations for what such a thing can be should be more reasonable than what is on offer in this post.
also, speaking of unreasonable expectations, can't let this pass:Dr. Who Doctor Who
posted by LooseFilter at 10:51 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
Maybe for some, but people are obnoxious lots of the time about everything, so that's par for human behavior. Some of my favorite nerd arguments with friends are disagreeing about whether something we love is good or not "these days".
My complaint is simply that this writer is applying standards of criticism that are inappropriate to the creative mode, here (and that it seems to be epidemic around the internets). To expect a weekly serial to be dramatically compelling; realistic within limits (as eustacescrubb mentions); politically and socially aware, sensitive, and balanced; morally satisfying; and fun is simply expecting a bear to quack: it's not that kind of thing.
Having said that, beanplating TV shows (etc.) that we love is something fans adore doing, but expectations for what such a thing can be should be more reasonable than what is on offer in this post.
also, speaking of unreasonable expectations, can't let this pass:
posted by LooseFilter at 10:51 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
It's strange Moffat has problems writing women in Dr. Who and Sherlock, when Coupling has some great female characters. Maybe because it's a comedy ?
posted by Pendragon at 10:59 AM on September 9, 2014
posted by Pendragon at 10:59 AM on September 9, 2014
The difference between Star Wars fans and Star Trek fans is that Star Wars fans love the Star Wars in their heads much more than the Star Wars on the screen, while Star Trek fans love the Star Trek on the screen about as much as the Star Trek in their heads.
There was an essay floating around years ago that made a pretty amusing case that "Star Wars fans" should more properly be called "Empire Strikes Back fans", since basically every other component of the franchise in every medium is viewed with a certain amount of obligatory derision by said fans. I would make the case that Tie Fighter should probably be added to ESB, but aside from that, I'd have a hard time disproving the premise...
posted by Wandering Idiot at 11:20 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
There was an essay floating around years ago that made a pretty amusing case that "Star Wars fans" should more properly be called "Empire Strikes Back fans", since basically every other component of the franchise in every medium is viewed with a certain amount of obligatory derision by said fans. I would make the case that Tie Fighter should probably be added to ESB, but aside from that, I'd have a hard time disproving the premise...
posted by Wandering Idiot at 11:20 AM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
I agree that Moffat's plotting is rattly (for such a much-revered episode, it is amazing how very little sense the end section of Blink makes either by the established episode world-building or basic human logic), but eh, that I could deal with. What turned me the hell off Moffat was his very creepy tendency to create Very Special Princesses that are All About The Doctor. In RTD's era, this mainly annoyed me because he would put the companions in a box doing nothing of importance so that he could go on about how very uniquely special his baby was to the Doctor.
When he got control of the show, it went to the nth degree. River Song annoyed me in her first appearance, but at least the Library two-parter implied that she had an adventurous and independent past. And then it turned out in Moffat-world that her entire existence, from before birth to after death, was the Doctor, to the point of being stored in a prison when he didn't have time to play. Amy Pond, Clara -- their entire lives are focused around the Doctor. Sure, Rose was in love with Ten, but she had family, Mickey, people who mattered and had real weight as characters. Same for Martha and Donna.
It even runs deeper than that -- the Very Special Princesses are where it is most visible, but Moffat is basically so in love with his main character that no one else really matters except in how they affect the Doctor. It shows up in tiny ways -- another way Blink annoyed me was that it was very eager to dismiss the other time-lost. "oh, she got married and was happy!" "he made lots of money" "don't spend any time or emotion on thinking their losses, they have no weight! the only real tragedy is that the Doctor is stuck!". It even shows up in male characters he writes, he is utterly uninterested in John in Sherlock beyond his adoration of Sherlock, even John's wife's story was All About Sherlock. Rory was basically the same utterly focused appendage of Amy that she was of the Doctor.
And that kind of thing makes me fall *out* of love with the main character. If the people around him have no independent value or strength, I can't care about the lead.
posted by tavella at 11:23 AM on September 9, 2014 [12 favorites]
When he got control of the show, it went to the nth degree. River Song annoyed me in her first appearance, but at least the Library two-parter implied that she had an adventurous and independent past. And then it turned out in Moffat-world that her entire existence, from before birth to after death, was the Doctor, to the point of being stored in a prison when he didn't have time to play. Amy Pond, Clara -- their entire lives are focused around the Doctor. Sure, Rose was in love with Ten, but she had family, Mickey, people who mattered and had real weight as characters. Same for Martha and Donna.
It even runs deeper than that -- the Very Special Princesses are where it is most visible, but Moffat is basically so in love with his main character that no one else really matters except in how they affect the Doctor. It shows up in tiny ways -- another way Blink annoyed me was that it was very eager to dismiss the other time-lost. "oh, she got married and was happy!" "he made lots of money" "don't spend any time or emotion on thinking their losses, they have no weight! the only real tragedy is that the Doctor is stuck!". It even shows up in male characters he writes, he is utterly uninterested in John in Sherlock beyond his adoration of Sherlock, even John's wife's story was All About Sherlock. Rory was basically the same utterly focused appendage of Amy that she was of the Doctor.
And that kind of thing makes me fall *out* of love with the main character. If the people around him have no independent value or strength, I can't care about the lead.
posted by tavella at 11:23 AM on September 9, 2014 [12 favorites]
Also of interest, Maya Phillips of Black Nerd Problems has been doing weekly reviews of new Who episodes.
posted by eustacescrubb at 11:44 AM on September 9, 2014
posted by eustacescrubb at 11:44 AM on September 9, 2014
Holy Pertwee's Velvet Coat, I could have written that essay. Reading it was like having my mind read. I started out copying chunks of text I wanted to quote, but it ended up being most of the essay.
I guess if I had to sum up, it'd be: "You CAN appeal to a young audience without pandering to them, but you'd never know it from watching the last few years of Dr. Who."
posted by The Underpants Monster at 11:49 AM on September 9, 2014
I guess if I had to sum up, it'd be: "You CAN appeal to a young audience without pandering to them, but you'd never know it from watching the last few years of Dr. Who."
posted by The Underpants Monster at 11:49 AM on September 9, 2014
In the most recent episode, Robin Hood, The Doctor and Clara shoot a golden arrow, that is an arrow made of solid gold, about a half-mile into the sky to hit a departing spacecraft.
Look, I'm with you with the regeneration laser, that was straight up stupid (why didn't they use that during the time war?) but this is just a different category. The gold problem is an invented problem. It could have been easily solved earlier by the Doctor throwing some more gold in. The reason its there is precisely so they can fire an arrow at a spaceship. Yes its stupid, and thats sort of the point of it. I get why one might not like it, but don't mistake that moment for laziness (also Moffat didn't write that episode!)
posted by Cannon Fodder at 11:53 AM on September 9, 2014
Look, I'm with you with the regeneration laser, that was straight up stupid (why didn't they use that during the time war?) but this is just a different category. The gold problem is an invented problem. It could have been easily solved earlier by the Doctor throwing some more gold in. The reason its there is precisely so they can fire an arrow at a spaceship. Yes its stupid, and thats sort of the point of it. I get why one might not like it, but don't mistake that moment for laziness (also Moffat didn't write that episode!)
posted by Cannon Fodder at 11:53 AM on September 9, 2014
There's this weird assumption when it comes to Dr. Who that people who don't like something should just quietly disengage.
I disengage when a show has become so awful that I truly don't care anymore (True Blood), or shows that I can't stand from moment one (anything and everything that J.J. Abrams has ever even breathed on).
The best discussions (or at least, the most dynamic) or about those shows that are kind of great and kind of flawed. This gives us something to analyze and debate, yeah?
Though from reading the discussions, I might give myself a pass on the bulk of the Smith / Moffat seasons. I'd like to catch up in time for the next doctor / companion!
so where does it (the "new" Dr. Who) really find its momentum?
I quite twice during the first season (after The Doctor Dances, which I alone didn't like; I thought, "if this is the best, why go on?") and for good (heh) after the whole Bad Wolf reveal at the finale.
The second season was uneven, but there were no points where I thought: this is so stupid that I can't go on. So my vote is: start in with the second season.
posted by kanewai at 12:02 PM on September 9, 2014
I disengage when a show has become so awful that I truly don't care anymore (True Blood), or shows that I can't stand from moment one (anything and everything that J.J. Abrams has ever even breathed on).
The best discussions (or at least, the most dynamic) or about those shows that are kind of great and kind of flawed. This gives us something to analyze and debate, yeah?
Though from reading the discussions, I might give myself a pass on the bulk of the Smith / Moffat seasons. I'd like to catch up in time for the next doctor / companion!
so where does it (the "new" Dr. Who) really find its momentum?
I quite twice during the first season (after The Doctor Dances, which I alone didn't like; I thought, "if this is the best, why go on?") and for good (heh) after the whole Bad Wolf reveal at the finale.
The second season was uneven, but there were no points where I thought: this is so stupid that I can't go on. So my vote is: start in with the second season.
posted by kanewai at 12:02 PM on September 9, 2014
The reason its there is precisely so they can fire an arrow at a spaceship. Yes its stupid, and thats sort of the point of it.
There are so many ways they could have written in a need to fire an arrow at a spaceship without being completely stupid, though. And, also, I think they want a moment that required The Doctor and Robin to work together. But that's the best they could come up with?
Also, Moffat, as show-runner, could have asked for a rewrite, having read the golden arrow thing.
posted by eustacescrubb at 12:28 PM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
There are so many ways they could have written in a need to fire an arrow at a spaceship without being completely stupid, though. And, also, I think they want a moment that required The Doctor and Robin to work together. But that's the best they could come up with?
Also, Moffat, as show-runner, could have asked for a rewrite, having read the golden arrow thing.
posted by eustacescrubb at 12:28 PM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
The problem with thinking of present-day Doctor Who has being a show for children is that it's almost completely incomprehensible when it tries to be profound.
I loved the Tom Baker episodes when I was a kid, and the Christopher Eccleston episodes as an adult. But when I talk my kids into watching it with me they have no idea what's going on. Not because of the accents, or the ongoing characters -- but every single episode has this moment where things get Deep and the Doctor gets a bit frightening and says things that sound wise but I, and they, can't figure out what the hell he's talking about.
posted by The corpse in the library at 12:35 PM on September 9, 2014
I loved the Tom Baker episodes when I was a kid, and the Christopher Eccleston episodes as an adult. But when I talk my kids into watching it with me they have no idea what's going on. Not because of the accents, or the ongoing characters -- but every single episode has this moment where things get Deep and the Doctor gets a bit frightening and says things that sound wise but I, and they, can't figure out what the hell he's talking about.
posted by The corpse in the library at 12:35 PM on September 9, 2014
The reason its there is precisely so they can fire an arrow at a spaceship.
I shot an arrow into the air, it fell to Earth... um...
I'm in the minority here -- I enjoyed the hell out of this episode . The whole thing was a loving homage to Boy's Own stories and bad 1950s Hollywood, from the panto ha-ha laughing in the face of danger and "you scallywag rogue you" introduction scene -- shot through with the Doctor's acid "or six months in your case" counterpoints; "Tom the Tinker's" not-even-trying disguise, and yes, the "let's go find a blacksmith's workshop / moments later with no chains" moment. I also appreciated that in contrast to previous Doctors, particularly OldWho, pulling some arbitrary thing out of his pocket, in this case a spoon, was set up by seeing him put the spoon in earlier. For fuck's sake, you're not supposed to take this episode seriously.
But yeah, everything to do with the golden arrow was a different flavor of dumb.
posted by George_Spiggott at 12:38 PM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
I shot an arrow into the air, it fell to Earth... um...
I'm in the minority here -- I enjoyed the hell out of this episode . The whole thing was a loving homage to Boy's Own stories and bad 1950s Hollywood, from the panto ha-ha laughing in the face of danger and "you scallywag rogue you" introduction scene -- shot through with the Doctor's acid "or six months in your case" counterpoints; "Tom the Tinker's" not-even-trying disguise, and yes, the "let's go find a blacksmith's workshop / moments later with no chains" moment. I also appreciated that in contrast to previous Doctors, particularly OldWho, pulling some arbitrary thing out of his pocket, in this case a spoon, was set up by seeing him put the spoon in earlier. For fuck's sake, you're not supposed to take this episode seriously.
But yeah, everything to do with the golden arrow was a different flavor of dumb.
posted by George_Spiggott at 12:38 PM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
While I do have Opinions about Things, including Doctor Who, I have to wonder what on earth is driving all this serious criticism of pop culture products. (These posts have been popping up here regularly for a while now, so I'm assuming this is a thing that internet writers are doing?)
Serious criticism has always been there. Where the internet helped was fostering and allowing communities built around such criticism. It really seemed to take off around 1999-2000.
posted by ZeusHumms at 2:19 PM on September 9, 2014
Serious criticism has always been there. Where the internet helped was fostering and allowing communities built around such criticism. It really seemed to take off around 1999-2000.
posted by ZeusHumms at 2:19 PM on September 9, 2014
It's fun to talk about stuff we like!
or stuff we would like if you know you wasn't in charge
posted by ArmyOfKittens at 2:27 PM on September 9, 2014
or stuff we would like if you know you wasn't in charge
posted by ArmyOfKittens at 2:27 PM on September 9, 2014
IMexteremely polarizingHO, 100% of the problem with modern doctor who is how much of a shitty hack Steven Moffat is.
Is this polarizing? I think it's pretty well accepted that Moffat wrote some awesome episodes in the RTD era (ie, Blink, The Doctor Dances, etc). He's also really good at this kind of world building and character creation - Madame Vastra, Strax, and all that have been great. But it's also pretty clear he burned out rather quickly being the showrunner. Each season since he started has been more and more like poorly-written fanfiction. And, yeah, he can't write women.
There should be term limits for Dr. Who showrunners. Moffat should step down, but I bet he could still do one or two excellent episodes a season with someone else at the wheel.
posted by heathkit at 2:46 PM on September 9, 2014
Is this polarizing? I think it's pretty well accepted that Moffat wrote some awesome episodes in the RTD era (ie, Blink, The Doctor Dances, etc). He's also really good at this kind of world building and character creation - Madame Vastra, Strax, and all that have been great. But it's also pretty clear he burned out rather quickly being the showrunner. Each season since he started has been more and more like poorly-written fanfiction. And, yeah, he can't write women.
There should be term limits for Dr. Who showrunners. Moffat should step down, but I bet he could still do one or two excellent episodes a season with someone else at the wheel.
posted by heathkit at 2:46 PM on September 9, 2014
Yeah, it's polarizing. There seems to be a 50/50 split between those who think Moffat is the antichrist and those who don't. I prefer the Moffat era to the Davies era.
That said, I wouldn't mind if Moffat passed the reins to someone else. He's already working on Season 9, but after that it'll be five years since he took over, so he might want to move on. One of DW's strengths is its constant reinvention, so I'd be happy to see what someone else wanted to do with it.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 2:55 PM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
That said, I wouldn't mind if Moffat passed the reins to someone else. He's already working on Season 9, but after that it'll be five years since he took over, so he might want to move on. One of DW's strengths is its constant reinvention, so I'd be happy to see what someone else wanted to do with it.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 2:55 PM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
There's this weird assumption when it comes to Dr. Who that people who don't like something should just quietly disengage.
More like "they can get their enjoyment in whinging about how terrible everything is somewhere out of my earshot, please". Life is too short to drink bad beer, both in terms of canon where my net enjoyment is negative and being around the section of the fandom that has more fun hating the showrunner than actually watching the show.
It's not analyzing and debating that I dislike, just the "ZOMG EVERYTHING SUCKS" and particularly also the "AND YOU SUCK FOR LIKING IT".
posted by immlass at 3:35 PM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
More like "they can get their enjoyment in whinging about how terrible everything is somewhere out of my earshot, please". Life is too short to drink bad beer, both in terms of canon where my net enjoyment is negative and being around the section of the fandom that has more fun hating the showrunner than actually watching the show.
It's not analyzing and debating that I dislike, just the "ZOMG EVERYTHING SUCKS" and particularly also the "AND YOU SUCK FOR LIKING IT".
posted by immlass at 3:35 PM on September 9, 2014 [3 favorites]
I only watched these when my family was watching them so I've only seen a fairly small portion of the Moffat run but the Davies episodes were so terrifically stupid that I have kind of a hard time seeing why someone would quit now. Like, do you want to watch some pretty cool UK actors banter their way through some nonsensical melodrama or not? I guess I haven't seen enough to address the sexism angle. I certainly feel like anyone watching the early episodes would have thought Moffat a good choice for the helm - it's interesting that he apparently hasn't turned out so well.
posted by atoxyl at 6:52 PM on September 9, 2014
posted by atoxyl at 6:52 PM on September 9, 2014
To me, it's so much simpler. All writers write good stuff they're proud of, and then they write other stuff they are not so proud of. If you got them in an honest moment, they might say something like, "Yeah, I was on deadline, and that was the best I could do."
I find great episodes in every season of Nu Who. I find horrible ones too. And I find filler ones (like Robin Hood) which are okay, but I know aren't really going to be that interesting whenever *any* writer for any series employs that sort of writing tripe.
Stephen King has written some great stuff. He's also written some horrible stuff. I appreciate his good stuff -- like I appreciate the good Dr. Who episodes -- without demonizing him for the bad stuff.
posted by docjohn at 7:37 PM on September 9, 2014
I find great episodes in every season of Nu Who. I find horrible ones too. And I find filler ones (like Robin Hood) which are okay, but I know aren't really going to be that interesting whenever *any* writer for any series employs that sort of writing tripe.
Stephen King has written some great stuff. He's also written some horrible stuff. I appreciate his good stuff -- like I appreciate the good Dr. Who episodes -- without demonizing him for the bad stuff.
posted by docjohn at 7:37 PM on September 9, 2014
Hey, someone on the internet doesn't like this thing that a lot of other people do like. This is my shocked face.
Conversely. Hey, someone on the internet likes this thing that a lot of other people don't like. This is my shocked face.
I mean, Moffat hadn't even started being painfully awful yet then!
Davies was equally as terrible. The surprise was that Moffat continued on being terrible. The stories are awful, overly melodramatic, and things that are supposed to have consequences rarely do. If you loved Star Trek Nemesis (hey look, the Captain is cool!) or Star Wars episodes 1 - 3 (hey look at this evil Darth Maul guy that never says anything and look at this fabulous magical kid!) you're going to love it. If you didn't, you're not going to be able to keep watching the show.
Doctor Who will get by just fine without her.
Of course. So did Star Wars, Nickelback, Two and a Half Men, etc.
It's important to remember that Doctor Who remains, at its core, a show designed to be watchable by children.
The show has all the design finesse of this site: http://www.theworldsworstwebsiteever.com/
Which kids might just love to look at because colours and flashy stuff. I'm serious, this what the show looks like to me. I appreciate it may look entirely different to others.
Just wait twenty years or so, and Moffat will die, and Dr. Who will continue.
This is the plan I've embraced. Without the dying part. Just moving on to butcher something else.
The initial run of the series fell into a deep shithole as well. It's too bad the new one basically started there and dug even deeper.
It's an entertainment, not a religion. No souls are harmed in its making.
Thankfully no one is saying otherwise. It fits in with the long tradition of terrible shows being wildly popular.
this is a show a million times better than CGI star wars animations or or iron man cartoons or the other stuff pitched at 11 year olds.
I disagree. A lot of the modern animated television series are way better at story telling then the Doctor Who show runners. Then again, the animated Clone Wars (both of them) were far more entertaining, overall, then the films. Opinions vary wildly, obviously. This would be an incredibly overly dramatic point in the new Who.
but it's better when that criticism comes from a place of love
Which most often it does, which is also why people are very disappointed.
I agree with the critical points made by the the author of TFA, but I don't know if "I'M OUTTA HERE FOREVA" is a viable response.
It's an interesting response in that one gives the show a chance and then concludes why bother wasting my time on something I think is fundamentally shit? Also, whenever I've been critical of the show on this very site, I've been told to stop fucking watching it then.
One of the things I love about NuWho is how how different it looks from American TV shows. The supporting actors in each story look more like real people.
This is largely true of much of British television when compared to American television outside of the truly great shows, none of which are on major networks. There are not good looking people on British TV.
I don't think it's that way at all. It's more like, if you don't enjoy watching the show, just don't watch it, rather than watching it and then telling everyone on the internet what a horrible show it is.
How do you tell everyone on the Internet anything? I'm pretty sure there is a massive amount of diversity in the general population and people who like or dislike the show will never have read criticism or praise of it. Why can't we give a show a chance, share our positive or negative impressions, give it even more chances, and then finally give up. It's like a relationship you keep trying to make work but in the end realize you should have gotten out of some time ago.
Also, when you see something so horrible, so unbelievably bad, you tend to share your thoughts on how something so horrible gets produced. Now let's all watch the Dukes of Hazzard!
posted by juiceCake at 8:08 PM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
Conversely. Hey, someone on the internet likes this thing that a lot of other people don't like. This is my shocked face.
I mean, Moffat hadn't even started being painfully awful yet then!
Davies was equally as terrible. The surprise was that Moffat continued on being terrible. The stories are awful, overly melodramatic, and things that are supposed to have consequences rarely do. If you loved Star Trek Nemesis (hey look, the Captain is cool!) or Star Wars episodes 1 - 3 (hey look at this evil Darth Maul guy that never says anything and look at this fabulous magical kid!) you're going to love it. If you didn't, you're not going to be able to keep watching the show.
Doctor Who will get by just fine without her.
Of course. So did Star Wars, Nickelback, Two and a Half Men, etc.
It's important to remember that Doctor Who remains, at its core, a show designed to be watchable by children.
The show has all the design finesse of this site: http://www.theworldsworstwebsiteever.com/
Which kids might just love to look at because colours and flashy stuff. I'm serious, this what the show looks like to me. I appreciate it may look entirely different to others.
Just wait twenty years or so, and Moffat will die, and Dr. Who will continue.
This is the plan I've embraced. Without the dying part. Just moving on to butcher something else.
The initial run of the series fell into a deep shithole as well. It's too bad the new one basically started there and dug even deeper.
It's an entertainment, not a religion. No souls are harmed in its making.
Thankfully no one is saying otherwise. It fits in with the long tradition of terrible shows being wildly popular.
this is a show a million times better than CGI star wars animations or or iron man cartoons or the other stuff pitched at 11 year olds.
I disagree. A lot of the modern animated television series are way better at story telling then the Doctor Who show runners. Then again, the animated Clone Wars (both of them) were far more entertaining, overall, then the films. Opinions vary wildly, obviously. This would be an incredibly overly dramatic point in the new Who.
but it's better when that criticism comes from a place of love
Which most often it does, which is also why people are very disappointed.
I agree with the critical points made by the the author of TFA, but I don't know if "I'M OUTTA HERE FOREVA" is a viable response.
It's an interesting response in that one gives the show a chance and then concludes why bother wasting my time on something I think is fundamentally shit? Also, whenever I've been critical of the show on this very site, I've been told to stop fucking watching it then.
One of the things I love about NuWho is how how different it looks from American TV shows. The supporting actors in each story look more like real people.
This is largely true of much of British television when compared to American television outside of the truly great shows, none of which are on major networks. There are not good looking people on British TV.
I don't think it's that way at all. It's more like, if you don't enjoy watching the show, just don't watch it, rather than watching it and then telling everyone on the internet what a horrible show it is.
How do you tell everyone on the Internet anything? I'm pretty sure there is a massive amount of diversity in the general population and people who like or dislike the show will never have read criticism or praise of it. Why can't we give a show a chance, share our positive or negative impressions, give it even more chances, and then finally give up. It's like a relationship you keep trying to make work but in the end realize you should have gotten out of some time ago.
Also, when you see something so horrible, so unbelievably bad, you tend to share your thoughts on how something so horrible gets produced. Now let's all watch the Dukes of Hazzard!
posted by juiceCake at 8:08 PM on September 9, 2014 [1 favorite]
-but it's better when that criticism comes from a place of love
--Which most often it does, which is also why people are very disappointed.
It's like my mother used to say when I was a kid pulling the whole, "You don't love me!" routine whenever I got in trouble for something. She'd say, "If I didn't love you, I wouldn't care what you did."
Most of the people I see airing grievances here strike me as coming from a place of, "This has so much potential to be a good show that it's very frustrating and even painful to watch that potential being casually pissed away."
posted by The Underpants Monster at 8:43 PM on September 9, 2014 [5 favorites]
--Which most often it does, which is also why people are very disappointed.
It's like my mother used to say when I was a kid pulling the whole, "You don't love me!" routine whenever I got in trouble for something. She'd say, "If I didn't love you, I wouldn't care what you did."
Most of the people I see airing grievances here strike me as coming from a place of, "This has so much potential to be a good show that it's very frustrating and even painful to watch that potential being casually pissed away."
posted by The Underpants Monster at 8:43 PM on September 9, 2014 [5 favorites]
eustacescrubb: "My beef with Moffat is that he allows really obviously stupid plot points through. In the most recent episode, Robin Hood, The Doctor and Clara shoot a golden arrow, that is an arrow made of solid gold, about a half-mile into the sky to hit a departing spacecraft. There's a always a moment like this in Moffat Who - the resolutions to plots ask me to suspend disbelief about ordinary everyday physics I can test in my backyard."Exactly, and therein lies the difference between suspension-of-belief-"OMG-that's-cheesy!" happy acceptance and "that's just fucking stupid!" disbelief.
> "There are so many ways they could have written in a need to fire an arrow at a spaceship without being completely stupid, though. And, also, I think they want a moment that required The Doctor and Robin to work together. But that's the best they could come up with?"
Consider how it might have been handled by other writers for other Doctors over the years:
- Hartnell: Wouldn'tve happened at all - it was, after all, a children's science show for most of his run. Likely, there would've been an earlier scene where he quietly drops a nugget of uranium into the engine matrix while it's being cast, and he'd sit back smugly while everyone's worrying about the ship exploding until he can explain that the uranium provided enough energy to boost the ship to escape velocity.
- Troughton: Robin would've taken the shot, but The Doctor would've slapped him on the back just as he was taking the shot - thereby ensuring that the misfired arrow shot up the exhaust port, causing an engine explosion that boosted it in to orbit. The Doctor would've looked suitably - but smugly - embarassed.
- Pertwee: Would've shot the arrow into the forest, causing a branch to fall, causing a red squirrel to scamper in alarm, causing a flock of birds to be frightened and fly into the spaceship, causing it to go off-course and fall back to earth and crash just the right way to avoid the expected massive explosion. As they were walking back to the TARDIS afterwards, he would've mentioned to a disbelieving Sarah-Jane that the crash site is in our time known as "Milton Keynes".
- Tom Baker: After a goofy "I can't"/"Can I?"/"Maybe I can!"/"Should I?"/"Oh, alright! [big grin]" exchange, he'd shoot the arrow straight through a ventilation duct, into the engine and providing enough power to reach escape velocity. Afterwards he'd give another big grin and stalk off waving his hands and saying "Oh, it was nothing!".
- Peter Davison: same sort of exchange as Baker, but with self-doubt instead of a big grin. Would've had gone exactly the same way and worked just as well.
- Colin Baker: Would've stood by doing nothing and looking smug about it; whatever the result he would've claimed it was his plan all along.
- Sylvester McCoy: Would've shot the arrow and missed the ship - but on falling to the ground it would've startled a horse; the reflected sunlight off the rider's armor temporarily blinding Ace just as she launches a bottle of Nitro-9 with a slingshot. Thankfully she too misses the ship, but the resultant shockwave boosts the ship just enough to reach orbit before exploding. On the way back to the TARDIS The Doctor once again admonishes her for playing with explosives, while telling her she should save them "for when we visit Slough"…
But instead, we get
- "the engines have parts made from gold" (note: they don't run on gold, which might actually go some little way to explaining how the arrow might help), and somewhow that leads to "sticking a gold arrow into the outside will boost the ship into orbit!"
posted by Pinback at 9:53 PM on September 9, 2014 [8 favorites]
There are not good looking people on British TV.
You and I are not watching the same British TV shows.
posted by jbickers at 5:28 AM on September 10, 2014 [3 favorites]
You and I are not watching the same British TV shows.
posted by jbickers at 5:28 AM on September 10, 2014 [3 favorites]
I'm behind, so I haven't been reading this thread so to avoid teh spoilerz.
Season 7, Episode 1 (Asylum of the Daleks) was pretty good. Now halfway through Season 7, Episode 4, I find myself increasingly understanding giving up...
posted by Zed at 9:53 AM on September 10, 2014
Season 7, Episode 1 (Asylum of the Daleks) was pretty good. Now halfway through Season 7, Episode 4, I find myself increasingly understanding giving up...
posted by Zed at 9:53 AM on September 10, 2014
An anti-Moffat article that I thought was interesting.
So the thing is, I think Moffat does some things well -- villains, at least until he overuses them, and clever stories. I think RTD did character well. I don't think either of them were particularly good at long-term plotting, but you can get a lot of narrative capital from people who feel like actual people (or actual aliens) in a way you cannot get from clever plot twists and tricks, so a bunch of episodes that are clever plot twist on top of clever plot twist enacted by characters who are essentially tropes don't -- to me -- add up as well as a bunch of episodes that are handwavium enacted by characters who feel like real people. This is a preference I know not everyone shares.
Do I still watch and complain about it? Sure. (I am not complaining about the Robin Hood episode; I rather enjoyed it.) I enjoy enough about it that it is worth it to still watch. I have dropped other shows -- Sherlock, for example -- because I didn't enjoy it. I probably would have quit shortly if Matt Smith had continued on because I thought his character was just a bunch of weird quirks, and I didn't think the actor was up to the job of making me care about him. Possibly no actor would have been able to do that. The reset gives it all another chance -- I was annoyed by the first two episodes for different reasons, but enjoyed episode 3. I think Capaldi is great, and I have hope that there will be something more underpinning the arc they are going on about, though if the word boyfriend comes back up with the doctor -- argh.
posted by jeather at 2:04 PM on September 10, 2014 [1 favorite]
So the thing is, I think Moffat does some things well -- villains, at least until he overuses them, and clever stories. I think RTD did character well. I don't think either of them were particularly good at long-term plotting, but you can get a lot of narrative capital from people who feel like actual people (or actual aliens) in a way you cannot get from clever plot twists and tricks, so a bunch of episodes that are clever plot twist on top of clever plot twist enacted by characters who are essentially tropes don't -- to me -- add up as well as a bunch of episodes that are handwavium enacted by characters who feel like real people. This is a preference I know not everyone shares.
Do I still watch and complain about it? Sure. (I am not complaining about the Robin Hood episode; I rather enjoyed it.) I enjoy enough about it that it is worth it to still watch. I have dropped other shows -- Sherlock, for example -- because I didn't enjoy it. I probably would have quit shortly if Matt Smith had continued on because I thought his character was just a bunch of weird quirks, and I didn't think the actor was up to the job of making me care about him. Possibly no actor would have been able to do that. The reset gives it all another chance -- I was annoyed by the first two episodes for different reasons, but enjoyed episode 3. I think Capaldi is great, and I have hope that there will be something more underpinning the arc they are going on about, though if the word boyfriend comes back up with the doctor -- argh.
posted by jeather at 2:04 PM on September 10, 2014 [1 favorite]
I've thought for a while that what unsettled me about the new Who was the shift in power from the Doctor being the powerful, eccentric rebel against staid morality (represented by the other Time Lords, who were themselves deeply flawed) to him becoming the moral force of the universe in isolation (reaching it's apex/nadir in "A Good Man Goes to War").
The episodes of the Doctors' that I like the best is when he's working against forces larger then himself but which he didn't want to destroy for various complicated reasons. I like when he has warm, loving relationships with his companions which aren't sexual, but I think tying the companions in time instead of having them stranded at the whim of an eccentric TARDIS grounded the series in a manner which wasn't always to it's benefit. I always hoped that his marriage would bring back a series of episodes of the Romana/The Doctor sort, where they were equals having hijinks across the universe, but sadly it was not to be.
I liked Dr. 11 because he reminded me a lot of 4 (MY Doctor) - in fact a lot of the later doctors were callbacks to the older ones; 10 to 5 (slightly embarrassed and nebbish, but fatalistic), 9 to 1 or 7 (they had the same brusque but kind manner; it was lovely). The only Doctor I've hated was 6; I hated 5 right when he took away my darling 4, but rewatching gave me new appreciation for him, and he has one of my favorite deaths of the whole series (I am an unrepentant Phantom of the Opera fangirl).
I've been on and off again in watching the new series because it fits into my brain like a malformed puzzle piece; I like it on and off, but it has a tendency to grate. The sexism around the companions isn't actually part of that - Dr Who has a long history of sexism, racism, and lots of other *isms and so while I would like it to Do Better, it is woven inexorably into my soul and thus gets more of a pass than it might if I came to it as an adult. The grating is more in what I feel like is a change in heart, symbolized best by the destruction of all other TimeLords, in which the Doctor goes from Plucky Rebel to All-Powerful Being in a way which distances him from the other races.
posted by Deoridhe at 10:19 PM on September 10, 2014 [2 favorites]
The episodes of the Doctors' that I like the best is when he's working against forces larger then himself but which he didn't want to destroy for various complicated reasons. I like when he has warm, loving relationships with his companions which aren't sexual, but I think tying the companions in time instead of having them stranded at the whim of an eccentric TARDIS grounded the series in a manner which wasn't always to it's benefit. I always hoped that his marriage would bring back a series of episodes of the Romana/The Doctor sort, where they were equals having hijinks across the universe, but sadly it was not to be.
I liked Dr. 11 because he reminded me a lot of 4 (MY Doctor) - in fact a lot of the later doctors were callbacks to the older ones; 10 to 5 (slightly embarrassed and nebbish, but fatalistic), 9 to 1 or 7 (they had the same brusque but kind manner; it was lovely). The only Doctor I've hated was 6; I hated 5 right when he took away my darling 4, but rewatching gave me new appreciation for him, and he has one of my favorite deaths of the whole series (I am an unrepentant Phantom of the Opera fangirl).
I've been on and off again in watching the new series because it fits into my brain like a malformed puzzle piece; I like it on and off, but it has a tendency to grate. The sexism around the companions isn't actually part of that - Dr Who has a long history of sexism, racism, and lots of other *isms and so while I would like it to Do Better, it is woven inexorably into my soul and thus gets more of a pass than it might if I came to it as an adult. The grating is more in what I feel like is a change in heart, symbolized best by the destruction of all other TimeLords, in which the Doctor goes from Plucky Rebel to All-Powerful Being in a way which distances him from the other races.
posted by Deoridhe at 10:19 PM on September 10, 2014 [2 favorites]
The grating is more in what I feel like is a change in heart, symbolized best by the destruction of all other TimeLords, in which the Doctor goes from Plucky Rebel to All-Powerful Being in a way which distances him from the other races.
This is a large part of my problem with Nu Who as well: the Doctor as celebrity (and occasionally supervillain) and its knock-on effects on the universe. It's one of the reasons why, even with all its and his flaws, I prefer the Moffat era of the new show overall to the Davies era.
posted by immlass at 8:08 AM on September 11, 2014
This is a large part of my problem with Nu Who as well: the Doctor as celebrity (and occasionally supervillain) and its knock-on effects on the universe. It's one of the reasons why, even with all its and his flaws, I prefer the Moffat era of the new show overall to the Davies era.
posted by immlass at 8:08 AM on September 11, 2014
Unrelated except by Whoviana: Five Underrated Doctor Who Companions (And One Scoundrel). Some of these companions are not underrated in our house or probably in this thread.
posted by immlass at 9:10 AM on September 11, 2014
posted by immlass at 9:10 AM on September 11, 2014
Those were nice, but he dissed K9! Man, what's a robodog gotta do?
posted by JHarris at 12:21 PM on September 11, 2014 [1 favorite]
posted by JHarris at 12:21 PM on September 11, 2014 [1 favorite]
Not that I don't love Wilf, but I've never gotten the impression that he's underrated.
posted by bettafish at 5:17 PM on September 11, 2014
posted by bettafish at 5:17 PM on September 11, 2014
Awww, I liked Mel. She was a champion screamer, and often really quite kind. I adore Nyssa more than Tegan and Adric, though I liked the dynamic of the three of them - Adric being a bit idealistic and unrealistic, Tegan's scathing wit, and Nyssa's quiet competence was really quite fun.
I think what I really like about the companions as a group is how varied they are. Maybe it's with the appreciation of hindsight, but it's really incredible how each one, pretty much bar none, was unique and fascinating in their own ways. For a long time as a teenager I decried a lot of the female characters as only screamers, but rewatching I see how they often point stuff out in addition to giving the Doctor people to save.
I wanted to be Nyssa as a child, though, and as a teenager I wanted to be Ace.
posted by Deoridhe at 6:05 PM on September 11, 2014 [2 favorites]
I think what I really like about the companions as a group is how varied they are. Maybe it's with the appreciation of hindsight, but it's really incredible how each one, pretty much bar none, was unique and fascinating in their own ways. For a long time as a teenager I decried a lot of the female characters as only screamers, but rewatching I see how they often point stuff out in addition to giving the Doctor people to save.
I wanted to be Nyssa as a child, though, and as a teenager I wanted to be Ace.
posted by Deoridhe at 6:05 PM on September 11, 2014 [2 favorites]
I think we can generally agree that Ace was, well, ace.
posted by JHarris at 7:23 PM on September 11, 2014 [1 favorite]
posted by JHarris at 7:23 PM on September 11, 2014 [1 favorite]
Not sure how much Who YOU were watching in the 90s, but there wasn't much to be seen...
Doctor Who in the 90s was a musical group called The KLF, otherwise known as the Justified Ancients of Mu Mu and furthermore known as The JAMMs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdTELokKfCk&sns=em
posted by at the crossroads at 11:43 PM on September 11, 2014
Doctor Who in the 90s was a musical group called The KLF, otherwise known as the Justified Ancients of Mu Mu and furthermore known as The JAMMs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdTELokKfCk&sns=em
posted by at the crossroads at 11:43 PM on September 11, 2014
The whole thing was a loving homage to Boy's Own stories and bad 1950s Hollywood, [...] "Tom the Tinker's" not-even-trying disguise [...] But yeah, everything to do with the golden arrow was a different flavor of dumb.
It's another reference. The big floppy hat disguise, moving the target back and splitting the arrow, and winning the golden arrow. I can see why the arrow is part of the resolution, and Doctor Who plot resolutions rarely make sense (I think it's why I couldn't watch it when I was a kid).
posted by Leon at 2:08 AM on September 12, 2014
It's another reference. The big floppy hat disguise, moving the target back and splitting the arrow, and winning the golden arrow. I can see why the arrow is part of the resolution, and Doctor Who plot resolutions rarely make sense (I think it's why I couldn't watch it when I was a kid).
posted by Leon at 2:08 AM on September 12, 2014
You and I are not watching the same British TV shows.
Actually I am. Too bad Simm's talent was wasted in Doctor Who. I've seen him in many things and in those shows, there were other people who were not good looking.
posted by juiceCake at 6:54 AM on October 7, 2014
Actually I am. Too bad Simm's talent was wasted in Doctor Who. I've seen him in many things and in those shows, there were other people who were not good looking.
posted by juiceCake at 6:54 AM on October 7, 2014
« Older Raise this barn, raise this barn, one, two, three... | Dem■n Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by hippybear at 11:11 PM on September 8, 2014 [33 favorites]