The Doctor Who thread

Heartfeltdawn

Philly_Q said:

darthed1981 said:

Cards played very close to the chest by the BBC so far!

No Daleks, Cybermen, Master, Sontarans etc. in trailers....

Would the BBC let them do a series without Daleks?

No villains at all, I'd imagine.  Just a lot of empathising and hand-holding for the snowflakes.

Instead of sonic screwdrivers, the Doctor simply no-platforms his enemies and finally defeats them with an incisive hashtag campaign. 

Fretwired

Apparently the Doctor is not a woman but a non-binary and gender-fluid being. Glad they cleared that up ... that should upset female fans of the show.

MrBump

Fretwired said:

Apparently the Doctor is not a woman but a non-binary and gender-fluid being. Glad they cleared that up ... that should upset female fans of the show.

Maybe, but he didn't half fancy Rose.

darthed1981

MrBump said:

Fretwired said:

Apparently the Doctor is not a woman but a non-binary and gender-fluid being. Glad they cleared that up ... that should upset female fans of the show.

Maybe, but he didn't half fancy Rose.

Understandably

EricTheWeary

The move to Sunday did stick out. However, I seem to recall that it is usually the most watched programme on iPlayer so maybe the thinking is the day of broadcast isn't that important.  

Fretwired

EricTheWeary said:

The move to Sunday did stick out. However, I seem to recall that it is usually the most watched programme on iPlayer so maybe the thinking is the day of broadcast isn't that important.  

The show runner said it's a statement about breaking with the past. New Doctor, new day no past baggage with the Time Lords, Time War etc. A relaunch of sorts.

In fairness it makes sense f you're trying to attract a new, younger audience who don't really care what happened i the 1960s and 70s episodes. The older die hard fans are mad.

I'm surprised the BBC hasn't done a Star Trek and spun out other Doctor Who related series .. I don't count Torchwood or the Sarah Jane Adventures ..

EricTheWeary

Fretwired said: 

EricTheWeary said:

The move to Sunday did stick out. However, I seem to recall that it is usually the most watched programme on iPlayer so maybe the thinking is the day of broadcast isn't that important.  

The show runner said it's a statement about breaking with the past. New Doctor, new day no past baggage with the Time Lords, Time War etc. A relaunch of sorts.

In fairness it makes sense f you're trying to attract a new, younger audience who don't really care what happened i the 1960s and 70s episodes. The older die hard fans are mad.

I'm surprised the BBC hasn't done a Star Trek and spun out other Doctor Who related series .. I don't count Torchwood or the Sarah Jane Adventures ..

Given what I understand to be the complexity and competition for peak slots in the schedule I feel that's the explanation that's been given rather than what actually happened. But, hey ho - I suspect it will be a wet Wednesday evening iPlayer job for us. 

thumpingrug

I think the Sunday night slot is probably a good one.  Realistically it has to sit around the Strictly results show, so will they put Dr W on at 7.00 and Strictly at 8.00 or the other way around.  My only concern is a clash with F1 races in the US and Mexico.

Heartfeltdawn

Fretwired said:

The show runner said it's a statement about breaking with the past. New Doctor, new day no past baggage with the Time Lords, Time War etc. A relaunch of sorts.

In fairness it makes sense f you're trying to attract a new, younger audience who don't really care what happened i the 1960s and 70s episodes. The older die hard fans are mad.

I'm surprised the BBC hasn't done a Star Trek and spun out other Doctor Who related series .. I don't count Torchwood or the Sarah Jane Adventures ..

It's very hard to relaunch like that. Trek did it well with TNG, DS9, and eventually Voyager. Everything after that, including the films, has been pretty horrible. Alienate the old fans, you lose them from the viewing figures and potentially reduced merchandising income. 

If Who ends up having a Last Jedi reaction, it'll be interesting to see how Chibnall goes from there. 

thumpingrug

Fretwired said:

EricTheWeary said:

The move to Sunday did stick out. However, I seem to recall that it is usually the most watched programme on iPlayer so maybe the thinking is the day of broadcast isn't that important.  

The show runner said it's a statement about breaking with the past. New Doctor, new day no past baggage with the Time Lords, Time War etc. A relaunch of sorts.

In fairness it makes sense f you're trying to attract a new, younger audience who don't really care what happened i the 1960s and 70s episodes. The older die hard fans are mad.

I'm surprised the BBC hasn't done a Star Trek and spun out other Doctor Who related series .. I don't count Torchwood or the Sarah Jane Adventures ..

The Doctor is pretty much a stand alone character.  Difficult to see who and how it could be spun off other than the shows that have already happened.  One aimed squarely at the adult audience and the other at children.  Its not like they could suddenly start creating new timelords to follow around the galaxy as its pretty much already covered.

Fretwired

thumpingrug said:

Fretwired said:

EricTheWeary said:

The move to Sunday did stick out. However, I seem to recall that it is usually the most watched programme on iPlayer so maybe the thinking is the day of broadcast isn't that important.  

The show runner said it's a statement about breaking with the past. New Doctor, new day no past baggage with the Time Lords, Time War etc. A relaunch of sorts.

In fairness it makes sense f you're trying to attract a new, younger audience who don't really care what happened i the 1960s and 70s episodes. The older die hard fans are mad.

I'm surprised the BBC hasn't done a Star Trek and spun out other Doctor Who related series .. I don't count Torchwood or the Sarah Jane Adventures ..

The Doctor is pretty much a stand alone character.  Difficult to see who and how it could be spun off other than the shows that have already happened.  One aimed squarely at the adult audience and the other at children.  Its not like they could suddenly start creating new timelords to follow around the galaxy as its pretty much already covered.

The Patnernoster Gang with Madame Vastra or Ashildr and Clara (who had their own Tardis) could have made an excellent series.

Heartfeltdawn

Standalone adventures should have happened around the 50th Anniversary. The chance for a Paul McGann-led jump back in time would have been perfect to close off the whole Time War shenanigans. An hour long special, a real bit of fanwank, loads of fun. 

Instead we had a load of shit to finish Smith's era and then wasting the talents of Capaldi. 

Now I'm expecting Skins in Space minus the sex and drugs. 

thumpingrug

Fretwired said:

thumpingrug said:

Fretwired said:

EricTheWeary said:

The move to Sunday did stick out. However, I seem to recall that it is usually the most watched programme on iPlayer so maybe the thinking is the day of broadcast isn't that important.  

The show runner said it's a statement about breaking with the past. New Doctor, new day no past baggage with the Time Lords, Time War etc. A relaunch of sorts.

In fairness it makes sense f you're trying to attract a new, younger audience who don't really care what happened i the 1960s and 70s episodes. The older die hard fans are mad.

I'm surprised the BBC hasn't done a Star Trek and spun out other Doctor Who related series .. I don't count Torchwood or the Sarah Jane Adventures ..

The Doctor is pretty much a stand alone character.  Difficult to see who and how it could be spun off other than the shows that have already happened.  One aimed squarely at the adult audience and the other at children.  Its not like they could suddenly start creating new timelords to follow around the galaxy as its pretty much already covered.

The Patnernoster Gang with Madame Vastra or Ashildr and Clara (who had their own Tardis) could have made an excellent series.

Yer,  Ill give you that one.  It does work as a spin off.

Fretwired

Oh dear ....

Rabs

Fretwired said:

Oh dear ....

I don't know...  While its no secret that the BBC are always trying to be politically correct, I also think a lot of this is just nonsense.. Like the bit where Capalidis Doctor says not to mention Penny, the guy in the video says that he has become a whimp and doesn't want the original doctor to say such things about women.. When I saw that I just thought he didn't want reminding about old companions that he has lost over the years...  Also there is a truth to the fact that when doctor who was first made we lived in a far more sexist and racist society.

So while there is something to this.. I don't think its as bad as is being made out in the video.. We haven't even seen an episode yet and its being condemned...   

Yes it does look like they are going to down a different path.  But it doesn't mean its going to be bad, of course it doesn't mean its going to work either but we will soon see. And if he is worried about the BBC alienating the current audience, I think actually that's the whole point of this change, cos the current audience was dwindling.

Fretwired

Rabs said:

Fretwired said:

Oh dear ....

I don't know...  While its no secret that the BBC are always trying to be politically correct, I also think a lot of this is just nonsense.. Like the bit where Capalidis Doctor says not to mention Penny, the guy in the video says that he has become a whimp and doesn't want the original doctor to say such things about women.. When I saw that I just thought he didn't want reminding about old companions that he has lost over the years...  Also there is a truth to the fact that when doctor who was first made we lived in a far more sexist and racist society.

So while there is something to this.. I don't think its as bad as is being made out in the video.. We haven't even seen an episode yet and its being condemned...   

Yes it does look like they are going to down a different path.  But it doesn't mean its going to be bad, of course it doesn't mean its going to work either but we will soon see. And if he is worried about the BBC alienating the current audience, I think actually that's the whole point of this change, cos the current audience was dwindling.

My oh dear was aimed at the guy who made the vid. He had a few valid points but lost the plot so invalided much of what he said. The ratings were falling as the scripts were poor. Capaldi was a lost opportunity - fine actor but too many dodgy stories and crap scripts. He was right about Destroy the Moon - the nadir of modern Doctor Who.

If they're going to teach kids things then that's the end. What people want is entertainment, proper sci fi, some scary monsters and well written stories. Going back to the civil rights era USA will be fraught .. play it by the book and it will be boring and preachy. Chuck in some monsters and you'll wind up people who think it's being trivialised. There are still people alive who lived through that era.

Rule one - go back far enough in time that nobody remembers what happened.

Roswell could make a good story.

Rabs

Fretwired said:

Rabs said:

Fretwired said:

Oh dear ....

My oh dear was aimed at the guy who made the vid. He had a few valid points but lost the plot so invalided much of what he said. The ratings were falling as the scripts were poor. Capaldi was a lost opportunity - fine actor but too many dodgy stories and crap scripts. He was right about Destroy the Moon - the nadir of modern Doctor Who.

If they're going to teach kids things then that's the end. What people want is entertainment, proper sci fi, some scary monsters and well written stories. Going back to the civil rights era USA will be fraught .. play it by the book and it will be boring and preachy. Chuck in some monsters and you'll wind up people who think it's being trivialised. There are still people alive who lived through that era.

Rule one - go back far enough in time that nobody remembers what happened.

Roswell could make a good story.

Well you never know.. It may end up being an educational show with voice overs from David Attenborough explaining alien physiology and mating habbiits.. 

(and anything with David Attenborough is automatically good )

We will soon find out.

digitalscream

Fretwired said:

My oh dear was aimed at the guy who made the vid. He had a few valid points but lost the plot so invalided much of what he said. The ratings were falling as the scripts were poor. Capaldi was a lost opportunity - fine actor but too many dodgy stories and crap scripts. He was right about Destroy the Moon - the nadir of modern Doctor Who.

If they're going to teach kids things then that's the end. What people want is entertainment, proper sci fi, some scary monsters and well written stories. Going back to the civil rights era USA will be fraught .. play it by the book and it will be boring and preachy. Chuck in some monsters and you'll wind up people who think it's being trivialised. There are still people alive who lived through that era.

Rule one - go back far enough in time that nobody remembers what happened.

Roswell could make a good story.

He is right about one thing, though - it will be impossible to be male and dislike the show (for any reason) without being called sexist. Taking that a little further, the media will be all over it whether it's good or not; it's kind of a master stroke from the BBC, on the basis that no reviewer will scrag it for fear of being labelled "sexist".

So yeah...it doesn't matter whether Jodie Whitaker ends up being good or not, it doesn't matter whether the scripts are any good or not, and it doesn't even matter if half the audience gives up on the whole endeavour (given that most of the audience are adults with fond memories of the show inspiring their love for sci-fi, not kids who want to be educated about social issues), because it has 100% chance of being hailed as a massive success.

Heartfeltdawn

digitalscream said:

He is right about one thing, though - it will be impossible to be male and dislike the show (for any reason) without being called sexist. Taking that a little further, the media will be all over it whether it's good or not; it's kind of a master stroke from the BBC, on the basis that no reviewer will scrag it for fear of being labelled "sexist".

So yeah...it doesn't matter whether Jodie Whitaker ends up being good or not, it doesn't matter whether the scripts are any good or not, and it doesn't even matter if half the audience gives up on the whole endeavour (given that most of the audience are adults with fond memories of the show inspiring their love for sci-fi, not kids who want to be educated about social issues), because it has 100% chance of being hailed as a massive success.

No it won't and if we start ever thinking that it will be impossible because an asshole like Dave Cullen says so, we're fucked.

I have zero hope for the new series being any good but I will give it a go. 

Myranda

digitalscream said:

Fretwired said:

My oh dear was aimed at the guy who made the vid. He had a few valid points but lost the plot so invalided much of what he said. The ratings were falling as the scripts were poor. Capaldi was a lost opportunity - fine actor but too many dodgy stories and crap scripts. He was right about Destroy the Moon - the nadir of modern Doctor Who.

If they're going to teach kids things then that's the end. What people want is entertainment, proper sci fi, some scary monsters and well written stories. Going back to the civil rights era USA will be fraught .. play it by the book and it will be boring and preachy. Chuck in some monsters and you'll wind up people who think it's being trivialised. There are still people alive who lived through that era.

Rule one - go back far enough in time that nobody remembers what happened.

Roswell could make a good story.

He is right about one thing, though - it will be impossible to be male and dislike the show (for any reason) without being called sexist. Taking that a little further, the media will be all over it whether it's good or not; it's kind of a master stroke from the BBC, on the basis that no reviewer will scrag it for fear of being labelled "sexist".

So yeah...it doesn't matter whether Jodie Whitaker ends up being good or not, it doesn't matter whether the scripts are any good or not, and it doesn't even matter if half the audience gives up on the whole endeavour (given that most of the audience are adults with fond memories of the show inspiring their love for sci-fi, not kids who want to be educated about social issues), because it has 100% chance of being hailed as a massive success.

If you mean like Ghostbusters - you can criticise it, because it was unrelentingly shitty, unfunny and poorly written... but a lot of criticism of it was based on the fact that wimmins was in it and came before the film was out.

Anyone accusing you of sexism for critique of the writing or the acting should know I'm waiting to kick them up the arse. If however people say it's bad because of the lack of penises on the lead character then I can happily kick them too 

Doctor Who has lived through some pretty shitty writing though, so how would we know?