Doctor Who Series 12B: The Timeless Chibnall (Xmas special & pre-Series 13 chat)

[Deyv]

Nah, Coleman's acting is good, and the writing is also good. The most you could say is the character's a bit rubbish, but even then I disagree. I'm sure there are youtubers who could prove she's a bad character, though. Maybe that youtube channel who has "Did It Suck?" in their thumbnails.

I also disagree that good actors can rise above poor writing. The closest you can get is the Shatner approach, a sort of amused disconnection from their lines. I admit I haven't thought this through entirely.

[Replies From View]

I also disagree that good actors can rise above poor writing.

Peter Capaldi and Michelle Gomez frequently did, in the same episodes that apparently Coleman was only bad in because of the writing.

[Deyv]

Hmm, fair point, although I should point out that to me, that's one episode (Lie of the Land), which Coleman wasn't in. I can find something to enjoy in literally every other episode.

[Mister Six]

Not really, as good actors can generally rise above poor writing.

Yes, although Matt was noticeably muted in Chibnall's Silurians two-parter. Takes a real lack of talent to knock the wind out of that lady's sails.

[Kelvin]

It's unfair to be claiming Moffat's stage directions were poor when we know they weren't.

That's not what I wrote or meant. I'm saying that the character was fundamentally flawed at a conceptual level, with both an obnoxious know-it-all, seen-it-all-before tone and a muddled motivation / relationship with the Doctor. Those are the main issues that sunk the character, and the blame lays squarely at Moffat's feet. It was clearly not Coleman's fault that the character was often so unlikable and distant, because it was core to her character, to the things the said, not just how she said them - and of course, if Coleman was significantly messing up his otherwise strong vision, as showrunner, Moffat should have stepped in, reworked the character, advised her and the directors how to play it, and not kept her in the role for multiple years. It's not just stage directions (and the director should make sure stage directions are followed), it's the entire way the character was written, from concept to dialogue.

Then magically Pearl Mackie was able to take stage directions from the same writer and communicate more behind the eyes.  And before them both, so could Karen Gillan.

Yes. Because both Amy and Bill were conceived and written as significantly better characters from the off, and Moffat clearly had a clearer idea of how to write and define them than he did with Clara.

It's not a coincidence that the three weakest series of Moffat's era were the ones with Jenna Coleman.

No, it's not. A big part of why those years were weaker is because the character she was playing was so poorly conceived. Which is Moffat's fault.

And of course, the other big reason those years were weaker is because Moffat clearly didn't know quite what to do with the wider show itself, as shown with the disjointed structure of series 7, his ill defined 12th Doctor, and his awful Hybrid arc in series 9. The writing issues with Clara were symptomatic of the wider problems Moffat was having with the show during those years - for a range of reasons, he clearly didn't have the same clarity of vision that he had with series 5, 6 and 10.       

At the time most people were saying it was because Moffat had gone off the boil, but he bounced back with series 10 didn't he, almost as if the problems with the dynamics weren't entirely due to him.

This is some next level delusion, suggesting that all the issues those years had were because Coleman couldn't act. I think Moffat made a number of bad choices after the Pond's left the series and those arcs wrapped up, and he struggled to pull the disparate elements, staggered over series 7, 8, and 9, back into a coherent shape. The reason things improved significantly in series 10 was because he gave himself a clean break, with a new, better defined companion, another new approach to Capaldi's Doctor, and a simpler, more streamlined arc. It was not because a performer left.

[Kelvin]

Peter Capaldi and Michelle Gomez frequently did, in the same episodes that apparently Coleman was only bad in because of the writing.

I didn't say Coleman was a great actress, in the way Smith or Capaldi are great actors. But I also think it's transparently rubbish to say that great actor should always elevate humdrum material, when their are many examples where they don't.

[Replies From View]

That's not what I said or meant. I'm saying that the character was fundamentally flawed at a conceptual level, with both an obnoxious know-it-all, seen-it-all-before tone and a muddled motivation / relationship with the Doctor. Those are the main issues that sunk the character, and the blame lays squarely at Moffat's feet. It was clearly not Coleman's fault that the character was often so unlikable and distant, because it was core to her character, to the things the said, not just how she said them - and of course, if Coleman was significantly messing up his otherwise strong vision, as showrunner, Moffat should have stepped in, reworked the character, advised her and the directors how to play it, and not kept her in the role for multiple years. It's not just stage directions (and the director should make sure stage directions are followed), it's the entire way the character was written, from concept to dialogue.


Yes. Because both Amy and Bill were conceived and written as significantly better characters from the off, and Moffat clearly had a better idea of how to write and define them than he did with Clara.


No, it's not. A big part of why those years were weaker is because the character she was playing was so poorly conceived. Which is Moffat's fault.

And of course, the other big reason those years were weaker is because Moffat clearly didn't know quite what to do with the wider show itself, as shown with the disjointed structure of series 7, his ill defined 12th Doctor, and his awful Hybrid arc in series 9. The writing issues with Clara were symptomatic of the wider problems Moffat was having with the show during those years - for a range of reasons, he clearly didn't have the same clarity of vision that he had with series 5, 6 and 10.         

I know all that (I've said much the same thing in the threads from years ago), but a better actor would have brought Clara to life more.

[Kelvin]

I know all that (I've said much the same thing in the threads from years ago), but a better actor would have brought Clara to life more.

If you know it, stop blaming Coleman for the myriad issues with those years, and acknowledge that it was Moffat who is chiefly responsible, both as head writer and showrunner, for what a mess those series were at times. His writing was still very good, but the characterisation and structure fell to pieces, by his standards.   

[Replies From View]

I didn't say Coleman was a great actress, in the way Smith or Capaldi are great actors. But I also think it's transparently rubbish to say that great actor should always elevate humdrum material, when their are many examples where they don't.

Why are you even claiming this?  A good actor should always elevate humdrum material; why would they not?  Why would they plod on with a mediocre performance rather than give it their all?  Peter Capaldi's Doctor was always watchable; he was always sparkling in a way that often rose above the material he was given.  Jenna Coleman never sparkled; she sometimes coped with the scenes where she had to be a bossy boots but other than that she was out of her depth.  Given mediocre material she sank, but given strong material she looked like an actress rather than a person.

Yes the character was all over the place, but at no point was she ever told to play her character without any life behind her eyes. 

Take Elizabeth Sladen.  She could stand in the background of a scene, with no lines to read whatsoever, yet still come across as a living person.  Outside of how thinly Clara's character was drawn Jenna Coleman should have brought something to the role herself, but there was nothing there.

[Kelvin]

Why are you even claiming this?  A good actor should always elevate humdrum material; why would they not?  Why would they plod on with a mediocre performance rather than give it their all?  Peter Capaldi's Doctor was always watchable; he was always sparkling in a way that often rose above the material he was given.  Jenna Coleman never sparkled; she sometimes coped with the scenes where she had to be a bossy boots but other than that she was out of her depth.  Given mediocre material she sank, but given strong material she looked like an actress rather than a person.

Yes the character was all over the place, but at no point was she ever told to play her character without any life behind her eyes. 

Take Elizabeth Sladen.  She could stand in the background of a scene, with no lines to read whatsoever, yet still come across as a living person.  Outside of how thinly Clara's character was drawn Jenna Coleman should have brought something to the role herself, but there was nothing there.

I just don't think that's true of Coleman. Her character was written as above it all, always in control of herself. That is how she played the character, even though the character wasn't ideal for the role of a companion. She was doing a perfectly decent job of playing a smug, sassy control freak. And once the character was revised to be more human, less arrogant, more vulnerable, she did a perfectly good job of that too, as shown in scenes like the one I posted earlier. Even if I agreed with you that her acting lows were lower than other companions, I'd still argue that her acting highs were higher.   

[Replies From View]

Can you think of no occasions when Clara was supposed to lose control of herself?  What about when she slapped the Doctor all those times?


Don't you think it would have been handy for her to express wonder sometimes?  She was not written to never be impressed by anything; that was a lack behind the actor's own eyes, and the stage directions we've read for series 8 show it wasn't a conscious choice that was made.

During series 7 I actually accepted Clara's faults as character-bound.  I know a lot of academic women whom I'd say come across as fairly aloof and detached, and take a lot of time to get to know properly.  So I gave Clara the benefit of the doubt at first.  But then when she was written to no longer be The Impossible Girl and instead be a human being with a teaching job and a boyfriend, her lack of any expression became untenable.

[Kelvin]

You and I are just flicking back and forth between two threads to argue, now  :)

Anyway, I've said all I want to say about Rebecca Long-Bailey. Her inability to emote was clearly partly her fault, but I still think the problem is behind the scenes, rather than with her as an individual.

[JesusAndYourBush]

Incoming transmission. #MessageFromTheDoctor #DoctorWho
https://twitter.com/bbcdoctorwho/status/1242783288571211776

[Mister Six]

That breathless delivery actually just made me feel anxious when before I felt fine. Imagine Matt charming and frowning his way through that. Although admittedly he would also have a better script to work off.

[Mango Chimes]

Yes, I mean it's not for us, but she seems terrified and gravely serious. Is that reassuring to the kids? She says "you'll get through this" with the tone of "I think you might die".

The further we get from Matt Smith, the more I appreciate him.

[Malcy]

New Chibnall short story.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/doctorwho/entries/97411dd5-13e3-45a8-9ed2-dbf97ef85516

[Mango Chimes]

Ah, was just going to post that. It's nice they published an eight year old's story on the official website, isn't it?

[Old Gold Tooth]

Fucking hell that's bad. Also feels like just a way of saying "ahhhhhhh" to all those people who not unfairly questioned why the Doctor wasn't red mist after she fell hundreds of feet into a train.

[notjosh]

And what's that warm feeling in my stomach? Ah, I'm kind! Brilliant.

Doctor Derke

[Malcy]

It was a bit of a slog to get through.

[Mister Six]

I'm going to be charitable and assume that was written in a deliberately childlike way because it's for children.

Then I'm going to remember what Terry Pratchett's kids books read like.

Then I'm going to stop being charitable.

...

Yep, there we go.

[Huxleys Babkins]

It reminds me of a Mr. Men story. But then I remembered that this exists and even Adam Hargreaves, hack that he is, wrote Doctor Who for kids better than that.

[Old Gold Tooth]

Also struck me as someone trying for Douglas Adams, chiefly the whale dropping onto Magrathea.

[Artie Fufkin]

.

[Mister Six]

Meanwhile, here's what The Doctor thinks when falling and being scripted by a competent writer.

https://youtu.be/c5cLOCCVsGg

[Replies From View]

It reminds me of a Mr. Men story. But then I remembered that this exists and even Adam Hargreaves, hack that he is, wrote Doctor Who for kids better than that.

Is she naked or what


I mean apart from the shoes and socks

[lipsink]

Yeah, it looks a bit wrong and saucy looking.

[Huxleys Babkins]

And you wonder why more Mr. Men don't post on this forum.

[Replies From View]

Little Miss Thirteen

[pigamus]

She looks like a lesbian boxer

Not that there's anything wrong with that