|
|
Post by rberman on Jan 28, 2020 8:27:54 GMT -5
You like the Donna season? It takes all types, I guess. Out of the first four "New Who" seasons, the only one I like is the Martha season, primarily because I could not stand either Rose or Donna. I loved the episode that introduced the Weeping Angels, and the two-parter written by Paul Cornell, with the Family of Blood, was simply brilliant. Loved the Amy/Rory eps (Karen Gillen is my celeb crush), didn't mind the Clara with Matt Smith eps, kind of liked the 12th Doctor seasons (although I wasn't a big fan of the Doctor himself, the supporting cast, especially Nardole and Missy, elevated them). Haven't seen any of the 13th Doctor eps yet, since we don't have cable any longer and they aren't free as part of Amazon Prime as the others are. Is that a surprise? Rose has a great arc, going from nobody shopgirl to confident companion. Martha was quite a letdown from that, pining constantly after the Doctor. Both of them (as well as Mickey) underwent offscreen "one year later" transformations into rugged warriors that weren't entirely believable. Donna on the other hand was confident from the get-go, despite being another nobody "Just a temp." She was brassy like Tegan Jovanka but far more fun. Like Romana I, she was ready to go toe-to-toe with the Doctor with screwball yet non-romantic interplay. Plus Catherine Tate is a brilliant improvisationalist; I've seen her live twice, and she commands a ballroom full of nerds despite being very non-nerdy herself. Whereas Billie Piper had basically nothing to say and had to be rescued by John Barrowman even when given a host to keep the flow going. I'll grant you that "Blink" is one of the single best pieces of television ever. Every time I see it, I'm amazed again at Stephen Moffat's writing skill. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2020 8:53:39 GMT -5
I've had a love-hate relationship with New Who. Some of the writing (since 2005) has seemed like "glorified fan fiction". Just my view, of course. There have been stellar moments, such as the Weeping Angels, most of Peter Capaldi's run, the historical episodes of Whittaker's run, etc. There have been moments where I've said, "Wow." Like some comic companies, I wonder if there's been a little bit of an over-reliance on "Everything you know is a lie..." I feel writers should be careful with that. And not keep revisiting that well. Low-key can be fine. There doesn't have to be a major revelation every season, not for me. Everyone's mileage varies, of course. I do feel some of the alien siege episodes of the modern era are very generic. But I guess with only 45-50 minutes to play with, there's no time for character development. I think of William Gaunt as Orcini in "Revelation of the Daleks". Well-developed and believable. If he was appearing today, his backstory and motivations would be glossed over in moments, and he would not leave a lasting impression. It's the constraint of the 45-50 minute format, I guess. Remember, no cliffhanger will ever compare to the marvel of the cliffhanger in part 1 of 1985's "Revelation of the Daleks".  |
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Jan 28, 2020 9:07:12 GMT -5
I do miss those days of the 4-6-8 parters when Who 1st came across the pond to the USA. It was splendid fun coming in from work each night (PBS ran it twice a day: at 4:00pm and repeated at 10:00pm) and sitting back with dinner to enjoy the slower pacing over a few episodes. Gave the show quite a different feel and mood from typical television here. I recorded it all on VHS at the time and even had my mom sitting and watching (she's got good taste she did! She sat up Friday night with me as wee little child watching Star Trek while waiting for my dad to get home from work) since the show was more plot/character driven. She enjoyed it as much as I enjoyed watching her soap opera General Hospital in the summer (good ol' days of Luke/Laura) and Dark Shadows after school) with her. And that is what Who is great in: sharing the viewing with others and the fond memories of those 1st tingly scares provided from aliens in rubber or tin suits!
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Jan 28, 2020 11:49:46 GMT -5
I've had a love-hate relationship with New Who. Some of the writing (since 2005) has seemed like "glorified fan fiction". Just my view, of course. There have been stellar moments, such as the Weeping Angels, most of Peter Capaldi's run, the historical episodes of Whittaker's run, etc. There have been moments where I've said, "Wow." Like some comic companies, I wonder if there's been a little bit of an over-reliance on "Everything you know is a lie..." I feel writers should be careful with that. And not keep revisiting that well. Low-key can be fine. There doesn't have to be a major revelation every season, not for me. Everyone's mileage varies, of course. I do feel some of the alien siege episodes of the modern era are very generic. But I guess with only 45-50 minutes to play with, there's no time for character development. I think of William Gaunt as Orcini in "Revelation of the Daleks". Well-developed and believable. If he was appearing today, his backstory and motivations would be glossed over in moments, and he would not leave a lasting impression. It's the constraint of the 45-50 minute format, I guess. Remember, no cliffhanger will ever compare to the marvel of the cliffhanger in part 1 of 1985's "Revelation of the Daleks". One big difference between Doctor Who and American TV: It's (usually) not an ensemble. Only two or three names in the opening credits. So no B-plot. Just A plot, often with chase scenes as filler, and sometimes with several minutes left at the end to fill, like in "The Doctor Dances." The lack of ensemble also means few character-focus episodes. Which is too bad, because the Doctor-light episodes (Turn Left, Love and Monsters, The Girl Who Waited, and of course Blink) are some of my favorites. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2020 12:41:28 GMT -5
While that is true, the 45-50 minute restriction is of no help to New Who. It makes it very shallow. I can think of a dozen "alien siege" episodes from 2005 onwards that are virtually indistinguishable from each other.
Although character-focused episodes are rare, for the reasons you describe, the serial nature of Classic Who meant we could at least have some. Orcini, who I mentioned earlier, was one. Even some of the worst Seventh Doctor stories had a modicum of character development due to the fact there were 2-4 episodes per serial. It had to move a little slower.
The problem I have with *some* New Who stories is that they leave no lasting impression. "Orphan 55" from a few weeks ago is the kind of thing I am talking about. Its plot was identical to so many New Who stories. I wish, to be honest, that the 12 episodes we get a year for New Who could be six two-part stories instead. Or four 3-part stories.
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Jan 28, 2020 12:55:17 GMT -5
I haven't seen the last half of Capaldi's last season or anything newer. "Alien siege" was not uncommon in old Who either: Horror of Fang Rock, Robots of Death, Earthshock, Full Circle, etc. They can be ok or bad, depending on the details. "Father's Day" was a great siege episode because of the story of Rose and her parents, not because of the giant bats pounding on the church walls.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2020 13:05:47 GMT -5
That is true (hey, "The Robots of Death" is a favourite of mine!). But I think the slower pace made those "alien siege" episodes of yesteryear unique. With the shorter running time of New Who, it almost feels like the producers are saying, "Here's the threat, not much room for exposition or development - and on we go with the chase!" There are always going to be exceptions, of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Jan 28, 2020 13:31:28 GMT -5
Some of my favorite episodes felt like the Doctor was almost incidental. Take "The Ribos Operation," which is mainly about two con men trying to swindle a deposed tyrant into buying a worthless ice planet. It also contains the Doctor looking for the first segment of the Key to Time, but that's not the great part.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2020 13:48:01 GMT -5
Yes, there's definitely some stories where the Doctor was almost incidental. And I'm referring to all eras! (I haven't seen "The Ribos Operation").
One of my favourite stories is the First Doctor's "The War Machines". I rewatched that on DVD again recently. I had the videotape many years ago, but it was great to see it again.
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Jan 28, 2020 13:58:18 GMT -5
Yes, there's definitely some stories where the Doctor was almost incidental. And I'm referring to all eras! (I haven't seen "The Ribos Operation"). One of my favourite stories is the First Doctor's "The War Machines". I rewatched that on DVD again recently. I had the videotape many years ago, but it was great to see it again. It's pretty funny and comes just before the Douglas Adams-penned "The Pirate Planet." It also introduces Romanadvoratrelundar. If you haven't seen the Key to Time saga (a series of connected stories lasting all season... sound familiar?) you should. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2020 14:14:21 GMT -5
Yes, there's definitely some stories where the Doctor was almost incidental. And I'm referring to all eras! (I haven't seen "The Ribos Operation"). One of my favourite stories is the First Doctor's "The War Machines". I rewatched that on DVD again recently. I had the videotape many years ago, but it was great to see it again. It's pretty funny and comes just before the Douglas Adams-penned "The Pirate Planet." It also introduces Romanadvoratrelundar. If you haven't seen the Key to Time saga (a series of connected stories lasting all season... sound familiar?) you should. "My" Doctor is the Seventh Doctor. He's the one I grew up with. Thanks to VHS and DVD, though, I've done pretty well (I feel) catching up with Classic Who. Still quite a few Second, Third and Fourth Doctor tales to watch. I'll get there! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2020 18:26:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2020 18:37:03 GMT -5
For the first time in years, I'm caught up on New Who.
Really digging Jodie Whittaker's Doctor and am loving all the twists we are getting in this season.
|
|
|
|
Post by beccabear67 on Feb 1, 2020 20:35:13 GMT -5
I've had a love-hate relationship with New Who. Some of the writing (since 2005) has seemed like "glorified fan fiction". Just my view, of course. I don't think new Who is any different from 'classic' Who, it's always had some clunkers and dodgy continuity. I don't think any modern Who has been any worse than say The Gunfighters back when William Hartnell was the one and only Doctor. I do get a bit tired of the frantic pace and camera-constantly-moving thing sometimes with the newer, but that's a problem with many modern shows and movies, not just Dr. Who. I don't think I would buy magazines about anything after Eccleston though, not even want the DVDs for the extra features. Something about reading of the making of the shows in the past can still interest me though. Will be watching tomorrow. Like Coronation Street I swear off the program then find myself tuning in again all the same.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2020 8:20:03 GMT -5
Good point, Becca.
There are some Seventh Doctor stories ("my" Doctor) that are too slapstick for my liking. And I am not a fan of "The Romans" (First Doctor). So, yes, good and bad in every era.
|
|
