Doctor Who - where does everyone stand now ?

[gatchamandave]

The new boards have led to the demise of the good old Dr Who threads, so I thought it might be nice to start afresh.

So what do the jury think, now that season 3 is over ?

Personally, I think that it is now high time that a new team is brought in. Whilst RTD and chums deserve due credit for bringing the show back and making it a multi-media hit, it's pretty apparent that they are running out of ideas.

The pattern seems to me to be

(1) drop hints that an old enemy is coming back

(2) bring back said old enemy in a supposedly new, more powerful form

(3) have old enemy nearly exterminate/enslave/cyber-ise entire human race

(4) defeat old enemy by having Doctor press big button marked RESET

(5) reduce old enemy to campy, impotent scene-chewer

Chuck into the mix some references to current day fads ( boy bands, Big Brother, Barbara Windsor ), rip off past movies ( Event Horizon,Flash Gordon, Titanic from the look of it ) and hammer in some having-a-laugh CGI ( Doctor Dobbey ?). Is this to be the structure of every season ? How long before viewer fatigue sets in, if that is the case.

It's all too noticeable that three seasons in we still haven't had anything like a convincing, let alone impressive, new monster or enemy that can be used for more than their initial story. Yes, the statues in Blink were genuinely impressive and probably put a few kids behind the sofa - but we're never going to see Genesis of the Slitheen or Invasion of the Statues are we ? We quite possibly will see the Silurians again, or the Sontarans - but wouldn't it be better for something new and terrible that could fire the imagination of the new fans, and not a few of the old ones ? I'd like to think it could be done.

It was a cliche in the 90s fan circles that Dr Who died from a combination of a production team that was Who'd out and a reproduction of past glories that lacked the strengths or values of the original. RTD moved among those circles so he must have heard those arguments himself. So how has he come to do the same ? Hubris ? Over-enthusiasm ? Lack of time and attention ? 

Over on OG there is a hard-core that seem to believe that come Chrimbo we'll be watching Kylie as the Rani. I'd like to think they are being facetious. Sadly, I wouldn't be surprised if it actually did turn out that way.

I'd be interested to know what others think - am I being unnecessarily negative or is there cause for concern ?

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

http://www.cookdandbombd.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=14804.0

The show sucks by the way.

[Ambient Sheep]

Not wishing to pee on your parade, but please don't be under the impression that we've lost the old threads.  We haven't, at least not any more.  Here they are, in chronological order of creation:

New Doctor Who (Series 1 (27) & 2 (28))
Old Doctor Who
Torchwood Series 1
Newer Doctor Who (Series 3 (29) part 1)
The Best And Worst Of Doctor Who... Ever
The New Doctor Who thread (Series 3 (29) part 2 - the current one)

As for your post itself, yes, a lot of what it says is quite true.  Unfortunately.  It'll be interesting to see where a new team take it.

[danielreal2k]

I think Terry Nation would turn in his grave at the comical farce that was written in series 3, they should of left the daleks out of this series.

High points for me were Captain Jack being the Face of Boe.
Derek Jacobi and John Simm, although they fucked up Simms role in the last episode, and Tennant being Jesus sucked major. 

Series 4,  RTD, no daleks or cybermen, leave them be and come up with something new, go back to war time Britain, get out of fecking London/Cardiff settings , do an episode in Spain, Africa anywhere!

[gatchamandave]

Well, I'd be quite happy for this thread to be merged with the most suitable existing one, folks.

[Mister Six]

The first couple of series were horribly variable (the second one particularly awful in terms of messed-up character progression and clumsy alleged story arc), but aside from the shitty Dalek episodes, this last season has been good-to-excellent from start to finish. Even Chris Chibnall, whose Torchwood scripts were laughable, managed to turn in something a little more reasonable. And there have been considerably fewer contrivances along the lines of the big blade-covered walkway from The End of the World or the trapdoor from The Christmas Invasion.

The last couple of years I've been praying for Davies to fuck off. This year I'm actually glad he didn't, and am looking forward to both the next Christmas episode and series four.

[Mr. Analytical]

I still think it's a horrible variable series.  The early episodes in this run really were cack... the Daleks in Manhattan one was one of the weakest they've made without invoking Peter Key with Moffat again providing the stand-out episode.

I do think that they'll need to pull their socks up a bit for the end of the fourth series as there really is a pattern emerging.  I don't have a problem with RTD continuing to run the show, I just wish he'd stop writing all the major episodes.  He could just as easily brief a writer on what plot points he wants to get across and then leave them to it.

I think him planning on doing 4 is a good idea as I expect that a fifth series would be mulch.  However, I really hope that the BBC continue with Who.  in fact, I was wondering whether giving Moffat Jekyll wasn't an attempt to give him a bit of a go as a show-runner, to see if he could work in the BBC Drama department.  He ran Coupling quite successfully for a number of series and I can't believe that the BBC brass aren't aware of how successful his Who episodes have been. 

[Catalogue Trousers]

Series 3 good to excellent? I beg to differ! A handful of episodes fell into that category - Gridlock, the second Dalek episode, the Human Nature two-parter, Blink, Utopia, and The Sound Of Drums. And perhaps 42.

That still leaves about half the series as unimpressive mediocrity to downright fecking gash. Which isn't good enough.

Oh, gatchamandave - if (God forbid) we do get Kylie as the Rani at Chrimbo, what are the odds that she does a pointless song-and-dance number, possibly with some nudge-nudge innuendo about "chemistry" or similar? Oh, and of course she'll fancy the Doc. Because everybody does now.

[gatchamandave]

Oh, gatchamandave - if (God forbid) we do get Kylie as the Rani at Chrimbo, what are the odds that she does a pointless song-and-dance number, possibly with some nudge-nudge innuendo about "chemistry" or similar? Oh, and of course she'll fancy the Doc. Because everybody does now.

A year ago I'd have said you were being unduly cynical - now, I wouldn't be at all surprised.

[Mister Six]

I think him planning on doing 4 is a good idea as I expect that a fifth series would be mulch.  However, I really hope that the BBC continue with Who.  in fact, I was wondering whether giving Moffat Jekyll wasn't an attempt to give him a bit of a go as a show-runner, to see if he could work in the BBC Drama department.  He ran Coupling quite successfully for a number of series and I can't believe that the BBC brass aren't aware of how successful his Who episodes have been. 

Maybe it was to sweeten him up for the job of taking over from Davies?

Mind you, it would mean pulling the plug on Jekyll after the second or third series, because that plus three or four Who episodes plus production duties might be too much to bear.

[Marvin]

Series 3 good to excellent? I beg to differ! A handful of episodes fell into that category - Gridlock, the second Dalek episode, the Human Nature two-parter, Blink, Utopia, and The Sound Of Drums. And perhaps 42.

That still leaves about half the series as unimpressive mediocrity to downright fecking gash. Which isn't good enough.

What? 8 out of 13 is a handful now?

[Ballad of Ballard Berkley]

Well, I for one genuinely adored this series for the most part. In fact, only that crappy Dalek two parter and the first 35 minutes of 42 failed to entertain.

I agree with gatchamandave's observation that the climax to this series was a bit too similar to last year, but I don't necessarily agree that laying the seeds for THE BIG BAD during earlier episodes, only for them to make a big climactic appearance towards the end is a conceptually bad idea. Indeed, this has been the only season so far during which that idea has actually worked. I liked all the Saxon teasing earlier on, and I wasn't disappointed with Simm's Master or the denounment in general.

The show sucks by the way.

Cheers. Thanks for your thoughtful contribution.

I think Terry Nation would turn in his grave at the comical farce that was written in series 3

This is the same Terry Nation reponsible for the comical farces "Planet Of The Daleks", "The Chase" and "Destiny Of The Daleks", right?

The last couple of years I've been praying for Davies to fuck off. This year I'm actually glad he didn't, and am looking forward to both the next Christmas episode and series four.

I haven't been praying for him to fuck off as such, but I agree with many of the reservations people have about his writing. He can be incredibly lazy and glib. But, I too am looking forward to next year. I really have enjoyed new Who for the most part, with the good far outweighing the bad.

the second Dalek episode

You liked that? See, for me that was the worst episode of the whole third series, and the only one I would actually describe as boring. But that's the fab thing about discussing Who, innit? Some people will adore an episode which you hated. Indeed, they'll love it for all the reasons you didn't. It's all very odd.

Mind you, it would mean pulling the plug on Jekyll after the second or third series

Considering Jekyll's rapidly diminishing ratings, I wouldn't have thought it would go to a second series. I hope the relative failure of that show (both creatively and ratings-wise) doesn't harm Moffat's chances of taking the reigns when RTD goes. Obviously, none of us know whether Moffat actually wants the job, but his appointment, if it happens, would make a whole lot of sense and could take DW into a potentially fantastic new era.

Oh, and I agree that the production team really have to create an iconic villain/monster of their own. They've been at it for three years now, and they still haven't managed it. RTD was obviously trying to do just that with the Slitheen and the Judoon, but no one other than the most easily-pleased child could tolerate the former, while the latter were just Sontarans in skirts. The only memorable monster in new Who is The Face Of Boe, and he's basically just an ancient Captain Jack in a massive pickle jar.

So anyway, I really do love Doctor Who, me, and I don't really have any great reservations about what RTD and co have done to it. I just hope they don't become complacent as they did in the 2nd series. I would imagine that what with series 4 being RTD's final year, he'll at least attempt to maintain the quality control.

Oh, and David Tennant is the best Doctor since Tom Baker. No need to argue.

[Sheldon Finklestein]

I'd agree that this has been the strongest series since Who came back. The highs have been higher and the lows haven't been as low. The Dalek episodes were a dreadful waste of potential, but they were nice to look at and at least they weren't bloody Fear Her. I'd divide the series up like this:

Bad - Dalek two-parter, Shakespeare Code, 42 (that's not blind Chibnall-hate, it was just a bit dull, really)
Good - Smith and Jones, Gridlock, Lazarus Experiment
Excellent - Utopia, final two-parter (all of which had sublime moments)
Sublime - Human Nature, Family of Blood, Blink

This series is notable for having easily the longest run of brilliant episodes in the revival, perhaps even the show's history (Human Nature to Last of the Time Lords). So, while I'd welcome Moffat in charge, I won't mind seeing where RTD will go with it. He's an interesting writer, because he will get 20 little things wrong and then make up for it by getting one thing MASSIVELY right. Case in point: last Saturday's episode. A hundred and one little things that irked me, but in the end, it doesn't matter because of the brilliance of the Master's fate. Same goes for Parting of the Ways; the 9th Doctor regenerating was genuinely affecting, simply and subtley written. Perhaps that's why Torchwood went so horribly wrong: it inherited all of RTD's little weaknesses, but without his grasp of characterisation and ability to pull something truly great out of his hat.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

My position on Dr. who is as always:

[Famous Mortimer]

I thought the Shakespeare one was excellent too, and really, apart from the Dalek one, it was all at least good, and at times brilliant.

[papalaz4444244]

I enjoy Moffat's stories but I hope he does not take over after RTD.

Just because of his tendancy towards fantasy. His stories tend towards magic rather than SF, which is FINE, occasionally.

His jokey dialogue can be over the top, too.

(the "sonic" conversation, timey-wimey etc)

Again, fine now and then but I wouldnt wish it to be like that all the time.

I'd rather it was Mark "Phantasmagoria" Gattis or Rob "Jubilee" Shearman

Probably end up with "Shakespeare Code" writer, Gareth Whatsisface.

[the hum]

This is the first series since its return that I've not actually been sitting down to watch every Saturday evening, although I've usually been catching up with them on youtube.  I'd almost go as far as saying I'd lost all enthusiasm, until Human Nature came along....easily the best thing since the show's return, the first episode to somehow get under my skin and really make me feel like I was watching proper Who, whatever that may mean.  Second part didn't quite live up to it but was nonetheless still great, and then Blink, a "filler" episode that I think'll stand the test of time as one of the true great bits of Who.

All of a sudden I'm hooked again, but Utopia just didn't quite live up to the previous three, and I'm afraid by the time TLotTL came round I'd resorted back to wanting to throw things at the telly.

I'm not sure what my problem is, although I suppose I've always had particular ideas about the way the show should be were it ever to return.  Now it's been back for three years, meh, I dunno.  With RTD at the helm we probably all thought the show in safe hands what with him being a die-hard fan.  Now I'm wandering if appointing a fan in the top post was not a huge mistake.  Fans think its cool because he's a fan too, and are perhaps therefore more loathe to criticise him, whilst he's surrounded himself with a team of writers who are mostly all self-confessed Who addicts.  Hell, Mark Gatiss has openly said we wants to play the Doctor, nevermind just right for the series, and Tennant himself is also a fanboy.  In that kind of cuddly environment, would there ever be much room for creative conflict?

The next Exec Producer should really be someone experienced in telly who could handle the big challenge and understand the significance of it's history (and therefore the importance of continuity etc), but with little or no emotional connection to the series, and who would take a chance with some writers outside the 'who clique' (although I'd be quite happy to see Cornell and Moffat continuing to contribute as they've more than proven themselves).

Interesting to note than in the entire run of the original series there were only ever two self-confessed fans who contributed to it.  Andrew Smith (Full Circle), and Marc Platt (Ghost Light).

Hope these ramblings make some sort of sense.

[Famous Mortimer]

For those of you fortunate enough to not have read the other Who thread:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/news/cult/news/drwho/2007/07/03/46831.shtml

[nixon]

I saw "Rose"  and that's it.  It's on when I'm in work and by the time I though.. hmm must watch it we were already in season 3 or summat.  But with todays announcement of Catherine Tate as the new assistant.. er.. no.. not for me thanks.  It's turned into a celeb fest.

[Sheldon Finklestein]

In light of new developments, I'd like to change all of my above references to Russell T Davies to a banner reading 'he's a twat'.

[gatchamandave]

By all means, if some-one with more computer savvy than me can merge this thread with one of the existing ones, please feel free to do so. They were good threads and I'm embarrassed not to have resurrected it. Mea culpa.

However,

I think the hum has hit on something there – the insular cosy-ness of the current production team. I can't help but wonder what might happen if, Bod forbid, Mark Gatiss were to walk in with a completely cack episode – would they knock it back, or would they go ahead with it ? There are, after all, huge lists of abandoned or unaccepted scripts from the original series that include luminaries such as Christopher Priest, Malcolm Hulke, John Brosnan and the like. The story of Terry Nation's original pitch for a story to Barry Letts evoking an unenthusiastic response, and a suggestion that maybe Nation should write a script dealing with the origin of the Daleks is the stuff of legend. Yet, as far as I am aware, every script that's been run past RTD's eyes has been accepted for production – I haven't heard of any unproduced writings, and such stuff is usually gold-dust to rumour-orientated fans.

Is there a quality control on the show at the moment ? How much power does the script-editor have compared to Bob Holmes or Terrance Dicks ? It's notable that the one question  she ducked in the no-holds-barred interview she gave DWM a few months ago  was  Russell's own " What don't you like about my scripts ?". Answer came there none.

I have no problem with laying the grounds for an end of season Big Bad – though with caution. Buffy, for example, became increasingly screwed up over such things as it went on, to the detriment of increasingly far-apart strong stand-alone episodes. Moreover, there is a crying need for something new in that position– I don't know about you but I'd be a bit depressed if next season ended with Sutekh in league with the Sontarans to establish a dominion over space and time having it all fall apart at the last moment when Tennant joins forces with Eccles and McGann ( " we're not going to do something embarrassing like all join hands and defeat it with the power of love, are we ?" as General Black-blood once put it. ). Because the multi-Doctor story is about the only cliché they haven't resurrected yet.

Well, that, and bumping into Nick Courtney.

I don't dislike Dr Who at the moment – I could never do that – and there have been many times this season when I've been as proud of it as ever I was. I just wish it would try harder – pressing a reset button is the sort of thing that went on in Star Trek: TNG and seems to be contrary to the entire ethos of Who, where "...you don't get a second roll of the dice, Scaroth. "

[Ronnie the Raincoat]

I'm out.  I'm not watching.  I can't stand her, even photos of her make me want to punch her.

[gatchamandave]

For

Fuck's

Sake

Quality control ? I wish

[Ambient Sheep]

How much power does the script-editor have compared to Bob Holmes or Terrance Dicks ? It's notable that the one question  she ducked in the no-holds-barred interview she gave DWM a few months ago  was  Russell's own " What don't you like about my scripts ?". Answer came there none.

Oh, that's true, she never DID get back to DWM about that, did she?! 

[gloria]

I was under the impression that RTD came up with the actual stories and then writers were 'cast' to them.  This happens a lot in TV.

[Mister Six]

if, Bod forbid, Mark Gatiss were to walk in with a completely cack episode – would they knock it back, or would they go ahead with it ?

Go ahead with it, judging by The Idiot's Lantern - although that was apparently to do with shifting filming blocks leaving him about five minutes to write the script. And season two was shaky for quality control anyway, unlike season three which was largely consistent.

Behind-the-scenes reports suggested that some scripts from season one went through as many as 30-40 rewrites.

And, of course, Stephen Fry dropped out of writing Who because of all the rewrites he had to do on his script. Granted, that was partly because Piper was replaced with Agyeman, but it shows that there was some control and thought going into the creative process and it wasn't just a case of Fry (who is surely the biggest name they've ever had behind a typewriter) throwing in a script and them slavishly producing it.

I think only Steven Moffat has a clause in his script that means Davies or someone else can't re-write it - and even then, they can send it back for HIM to re-write it as many times as they like.

Yet, as far as I am aware, every script that's been run past RTD's eyes has been accepted for production – I haven't heard of any unproduced writings, and such stuff is usually gold-dust to rumour-orientated fans.

Paul Abbot's script about Rose being created and manipulated by The Doctor to become the perfect companion was ditched because it pretty much assassinated both the protagonists' characters. And someone apparently pitched a script in which Rose gets pregnant and The Doctor gets all pro-life but that was rightly dimissed out of hand.

Even Torchwood had at least one script written for it that was never produced (by Si Spencer, a comic book author).

I was under the impression that RTD came up with the actual stories and then writers were 'cast' to them.  This happens a lot in TV.

Starting with the second season, Davies created a bunch of plot outlines (from something vague like "the 1960s" to more complex ones - especially where the two-parters were involved) and the writers were assigned different ones.

I think the first season was a mix of vague outlines and free-for-all pitching.

[Dark Sky]

Behind-the-scenes reports suggested that some scripts from season one went through as many as 30-40 rewrites.

Nah that's just silly!  Though I heard some of the writers moaning about having done seven or eight rewrites.  Rob Shearman's Dalek episode had the most rewrites, apparently, but mostly due to them not getting the rights to the Daleks, creating a new monster for the episode, then getting the rights to the Daleks again.  And yet it was still a clunky episode.

I heard that Steven Moffat has a contract meaning that he can't be rewritten, so he can basically do what he likes.  Even if it means glaring continuity errors (like the Rose/Micky relationship between School Reunion and Girl In The Fireplace)...  "No-one told me!" wails Moffat on the commentary...

[Mister Six]

Nah that's just silly!  Though I heard some of the writers moaning about having done seven or eight rewrites.  Rob Shearman's Dalek episode had the most rewrites, apparently, but mostly due to them not getting the rights to the Daleks, creating a new monster for the episode, then getting the rights to the Daleks again.  And yet it was still a clunky episode.

Actually, Dalek was the one I was thinking of.

I heard that Steven Moffat has a contract meaning that he can't be rewritten, so he can basically do what he likes.  Even if it means glaring continuity errors (like the Rose/Micky relationship between School Reunion and Girl In The Fireplace)...  "No-one told me!" wails Moffat on the commentary...

But they can force him to rewrite his own stuff. It's the pod team's fault for not sending it back and asking him to rewrite the ten or so pages that actually featured Rose and Mickey together.