Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 06:18:22 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Doctor Who - Series 11 (Part 2)

Started by Mister Six, November 02, 2018, 01:50:06 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Ballad of Ballard Berkley

Quote from: Mister Six on December 11, 2018, 01:52:25 PM
Kelvin got here before me, but I'll second his motion - don't shut up unless you really want to. I've enjoyed your thoughtful, reasoned criticism and sharp piss-taking alike, and there's no need for you to stop now. Is Tallulah Chibnall's mum or something? Regardless - carry on if you want to.

I sort of don't want to, as I'm just repeating myself. I'll never give up on Doctor Who, it's my favourite television show, but if it carries on like this then I can't imagine ever having anything else to say about it. Ever the optimist, I just hope that season 12 is an improvement. I can't imagine it improving with Chibnall in charge, but I'll gladly eat my hat if it does. I'll even post pics to prove it.

Mister Six

#1651
My hope is that he's self-aware enough to hire a great script editor/dialogue doctor, and write fewer episodes. That would honestly fix the most serious problems with this season. As I've said before I think his instincts in a lot of other areas - structurally, ditching cold opens; promotionally, keeping previews to a minimum; visually, with the anamorphic cameras and location shoots - have spoken well of him as a showrunner. He just doesn't have the nuts and bolts talent to do the heavy writing that Moffat and RTD did.

My other hope is that any competent potential showrunners who were terrified to follow up Moffat will feel more confident whenever Chibnall chooses to move on. As others have said, Toby Whithouse must have been courted and turned it down - if so, I hope this was why.

Ballad of Ballard Berkley


Blinder Data

I watched this yesterday having heard bad things, which might have tempered my reaction. Even though it clearly wasn't very good and performs poorly as a finale, I enjoyed it more than other episodes. I think this was down to it having a few recognisable Who things: alien planet, scary villain, etc.

But I echo other comments on here that Chibnall desperately needs a script editor. There were so many interesting ideas barely dealt with, or badly formed ideas that needed ironing out. I know it's a trope, but I emitted a derisory snort when Tim Shaw happily revealed his plan to the Doctor and simply let the Doctor run away to stop it. The Ux as a concept annoyed me too - just two people with TRANSFORMATIONAL powers that the Doctor had heard about, but had been hoodwinked by a monster that anybody with two brain cells could surmise was an evil monster.

Leaving Tim Shaw in a chamber for eternity - is that better or worse than killing him? Why not explore that concept? And poor Yaz has had absolutely nothing to do all series, save for Punjab.

To the Series 11 defenders who think we're being too negative, I want to hear your POV. The people I can see liking this series the most are those who barely watched it before or watch it every now and again and like the fact they can dip in and out of it, but perhaps I'm wrong.

kidsick5000

Quote from: Mister Six on December 12, 2018, 04:32:19 AM
My other hope is that any competent potential showrunners who were terrified to follow up Moffat will feel more confident whenever Chibnall chooses to move on. As others have said, Toby Whithouse must have been courted and turned it down - if so, I hope this was why.

Chibnall sorbet?

I was asked what I thought of this series and I felt rotten saying that it left me cold.
Emotionally, it feels like watching through a thick sheet of frosted perspex.

Sadly that thrill that the cliffhanger at the end of Episode 1 - the feeling that this series was going to unusual places - just didnt return

Small Man Big Horse

Quote from: Blinder Data on December 12, 2018, 11:01:51 AM
Leaving Tim Shaw in a chamber for eternity - is that better or worse than killing him? Why not explore that concept? And poor Yaz has had absolutely nothing to do all series, save for Punjab.

It's like the ending to arachnids in the uk, was it really better to leave the spiders asphyxiating to death or should they have let Sex and the City bloke just shoot them all to put them quickly out of their misery? Both conclusions allow the Doctor not to kill the villain, but they still suffer an enormous amount anyway.

Bourgyste

Cameron Reilly, from The Guardian's panel of bloggers, podcasters and journalists, nails it in my opinion (save for the given up bit. That's nonsense):

QuoteThe Doctor, even in his most pleasant of incarnations, has had a singular trait – he is a psychopath. Not the serial-killer type of psychopath, but the Steve Jobs type. A benign psychopath who, for reasons as yet unknown, has decided to use his intelligence for the benefit of others. I was very excited to get a female Doctor. I loved Chibnall's work on Broadchurch and hoped he would cast Olivia Colman as the Doctor. Whittaker was a great second choice.

Unfortunately, from the outset, I felt Chibnall either doesn't get the fundamentals of the Doctor's inherent psychopathy, or has decided to write it out, making Whittaker a kinder, gentler, touchy-feely, kid-friendly Doctor. That is fine – he's the show runner and it's his prerogative to make the Doctor the way he wants her to be. But, after a lifetime of Doctor Who fandom, I've given up and decided to sit out the rest of the Chibnall era. His Doctor doesn't talk or act like the Doctor I have been watching since I was a child. She is full of self-doubt, is indecisive and wants a hug. That's not my Doctor.

olliebean

She did say in this episode that her stance re:weapons was inconsistent, but I fear that's more a cover-up for Chibnall's inability to write a consistent character trait than an actual character trait.

pigamus

The way Jodie's Doctor has been set up is just so incredibly lightweight. Can you imagine her doing a speech about being haunted by the Time War or something like that?

Wasn't that a failed attempt to ramp up the tension, trying to say the Big Bad is so BAD that they need wepons.

notjosh

Quote from: Small Man Big Horse on December 12, 2018, 12:49:57 PM
It's like the ending to arachnids in the uk, was it really better to leave the spiders asphyxiating to death or should they have let Sex and the City bloke just shoot them all to put them quickly out of their misery? Both conclusions allow the Doctor not to kill the villain, but they still suffer an enormous amount anyway.

This is a potentially interesting trait. It is very narcissistic to put her own image and principles above all practical considerations, even when this results in more damage and misery (she really should have let that bloke kick Tim Shaw off a crane - he was an interplanetary assassin for god's sake). She's basically wiping her hands of all difficult decisions and trusting the universe to put things straight. I doubt there will be any self-reflection or examination of this under Chibnall, but it's a good thread for Big Finish to pick up on when they re-invent the character in a few years.

Quote from: olliebean on December 12, 2018, 01:12:18 PM
She did say in this episode that her stance re:weapons was inconsistent, but I fear that's more a cover-up for Chibnall's inability to write a consistent character trait than an actual character trait.

Yeah, it was played very oddly - basically putting a lampshade on a character inconsistency. And it might seem like a small or unimportant moment to the casual viewer but it really jarred for me. I don't reckon the Doctor should ever bring out a rucksack full of weapons so matter-of-factly, especially before the threat they're facing has even been figured out.

olliebean

It was inconsistent anyway, right from episode 2, when she used that EMP to knock out the droids. How was that any less a weapon than the gun Ryan had shot them with? More so, if anything, as it knocked them out for longer.

Kelvin

The problem is not that this Doctor is more indecisive, passive, and lacking in confidence. It is that these traits are not conveyed or used in an interesting way, and do not actually feel consistent or well defined across the series. In the first half she seems far more passive than the shouty variation we see repeatedly in the second half, and I never feel like she is being properly tested on a moral level, only in the intellectual sense of how she will solve the mechanics of the plot.

Kelvin

Quote from: olliebean on December 12, 2018, 01:12:18 PM
She did say in this episode that her stance re:weapons was inconsistent, but I fear that's more a cover-up for Chibnall's inability to write a consistent character trait than an actual character trait.

It wasn't even an inconsistent position anyway. She was saying it was okay to destroy doors, walls, and mindless robots, but not to kill.

Chibnall can't even make his inconsistent charachters inconsistent when he's trying.

olliebean

It was OK for her to knock out mindless robots with an EMP bomb, but somehow not for Ryan to do it with a gun.

Small Man Big Horse

Quote from: Bourgyste on December 12, 2018, 01:05:06 PM
Cameron Reilly, from The Guardian's panel of bloggers, podcasters and journalists, nails it in my opinion (save for the given up bit. That's nonsense):

The Doctor, even in his most pleasant of incarnations, has had a singular trait – he is a psychopath. Not the serial-killer type of psychopath, but the Steve Jobs type. A benign psychopath who, for reasons as yet unknown, has decided to use his intelligence for the benefit of others. I was very excited to get a female Doctor. I loved Chibnall's work on Broadchurch and hoped he would cast Olivia Colman as the Doctor. Whittaker was a great second choice.

Unfortunately, from the outset, I felt Chibnall either doesn't get the fundamentals of the Doctor's inherent psychopathy, or has decided to write it out, making Whittaker a kinder, gentler, touchy-feely, kid-friendly Doctor. That is fine – he's the show runner and it's his prerogative to make the Doctor the way he wants her to be. But, after a lifetime of Doctor Who fandom, I've given up and decided to sit out the rest of the Chibnall era. His Doctor doesn't talk or act like the Doctor I have been watching since I was a child. She is full of self-doubt, is indecisive and wants a hug. That's not my Doctor.

I can't say I agree with the whole psychopath thing, that would suggest that the Doctor is incapable of empathy and remorse which definitely hasn't been the case with the series from the beginning, maybe Hartnell could occasionally be accused of such a thing but not the others.

olliebean

This is the 13th Doctor's Theme, apparently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gNz_6HeaW4

It's quite a nice piece of music, but I think it sounds more incidental than theme-y - it certainly doesn't say The Doctor to me. Doesn't really fit the way Whittaker is playing it, either.

Can anyone point me at a scene where this is used in the programme, so I can hear how it fits in situ? Perhaps it was written for a particular character beat.

daf

#1668
Nutters : Hartnell / Tom / Colin / Eccleston / Hurt / Capaldi

Clowns : Troughton / McCoy / Smith

Dandies : Cushing / Pertwee /  McGann

Drips :  Davison / Tennant / Whittaker

- - - - - - - - - - -
(edited to add in the War Doctor)

Blinder Data

Quote from: daf on December 12, 2018, 02:20:18 PM
Nutters : Hartnell / Tom / Eccleston / Capaldi

Clowns : Troughton /  McCoy / Smith

Dandies : Cushing / Pertwee / Colin / McGann

Drips :  Davison / Tennant / Whittaker

You've left out John Hurt but included Cushing? Colin Baker a dandy and not a nutter?!

Stop getting Who wrong!

daf

#1670
Forgot about Hurt - I've edited him in, and swapped Colin round as you suggested.

(I originally had him as a 'Nutter', and then rememberd his ludicrous clothes, so bunged him in the 'Dandy' category)

Small Man Big Horse

Quote from: olliebean on December 12, 2018, 02:17:10 PM
This is the 13th Doctor's Theme, apparently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gNz_6HeaW4

It's quite a nice piece of music, but I think it sounds more incidental than theme-y - it certainly doesn't say The Doctor to me. Doesn't really fit the way Whittaker is playing it, either.

Can anyone point me at a scene where this is used in the programme, so I can hear how it fits in situ? Perhaps it was written for a particular character beat.

Sounds like the music they'd use in the 90s for an ad for aftershave to me.

MojoJojo

Quote from: Blinder Data on December 12, 2018, 11:01:51 AMThe Ux as a concept annoyed me too - just two people with TRANSFORMATIONAL powers that the Doctor had heard about, but had been hoodwinked by a monster that anybody with two brain cells could surmise was an evil monster.

There was a weird bit of dialogue when she was describing them all "There are only ever two of them, a male and a female...<snip>... and they've only ever been found on three planets!". Which caused my mind to grind to a halt as I tried to work out how two people could be found on three planets. OK, so time traveller, just about makes sense but you have to think about it. It's worse than Chibnals normal dialogue in that it's barely coherent, rather than just dull.

It makes me suspect that the original plan was to have a whole planet full of the Ux - but then they decided to not spend any money on extras, so they cut it to two. The whole pretending to be a god thing works as a theme a lot better if it's a whole planet, rather than just two people. It's not even a cult.

Deanjam

Quote from: daf on December 12, 2018, 02:20:18 PM
Nutters : Hartnell / Tom / Colin / Eccleston / Hurt / Capaldi

Clowns : Troughton / McCoy / Smith

Dandies : Cushing / Pertwee /  McGann

Drips :  Davison / Tennant / Whittaker

- - - - - - - - - - -
(edited to add in the War Doctor)

Troughton played the clown, but was always quick to blowing the shit out of the enemy. McCoy is a straight up psycho. Despite his hard edge, I'd put Tom in with the clowns more than the nutters.

Deanjam

Quote from: Small Man Big Horse on December 12, 2018, 01:40:37 PM
I can't say I agree with the whole psychopath thing

Agreed. The Doctor's always been a humanist with alien oddball tendancies to me. Ultimately (s)he reflects how we see ourselves.

olliebean

Somewhat telling though that the two others Whittaker is lumped in with are my previous least favourite Doctors from old and new Who.

Actually, top to bottom, that list is by and large my order of preference for types of Doctor (with perhaps some intermingling of nutters and clowns).

daf

Quote from: Deanjam on December 12, 2018, 04:25:37 PM
Troughton played the clown, but was always quick to blowing the shit out of the enemy. McCoy is a straight up psycho. Despite his hard edge, I'd put Tom in with the clowns more than the nutters.

Yeah - they all have a mixture really - bit of an imperfect science, but was trying to isolate the dominant factor of each one, as I saw it.

Chairman Yang

Reading everyone reflecting on Doctor Who has really reminded me how much I love the show, just as an idea.

In spite of all rationality I'm actually excited for some knockabout Dalek action story with scores (2 extras) of people being murdered. SuReLY tHey CaNT BugGeR THis Up?!

That's assuming it's not Ghost Light 2 or something....

Bourgyste

I laughed out in real life at Tennant among the drips.

Mister Six

Quote from: Kelvin on December 12, 2018, 01:23:13 PM
The problem is not that this Doctor is more indecisive, passive, and lacking in confidence. It is that these traits are not conveyed or used in an interesting way, and do not actually feel consistent or well defined across the series. In the first half she seems far more passive than the shouty variation we see repeatedly in the second half, and I never feel like she is being properly tested on a moral level, only in the intellectual sense of how she will solve the mechanics of the plot.

Want to emphasise this utterly correct point. It's fine for The Doctor to have flaws, provided they're recognised as such inside and outside the narrative and incorporated into the story. It's not fine to have this stuff either be ignored or (worse) normalised and proven correct by the events of the story.