|
Post by whiskeybrewer on Apr 27, 2016 10:59:32 GMT
|
|
|
Post by acousticwolf on Apr 27, 2016 12:16:26 GMT
Not quite what I was expecting, but interesting nonetheless.
Cheers
Tony
|
|
|
Post by Ela on Apr 27, 2016 16:04:35 GMT
Yeah, that was an interesting ramble.
|
|
|
Post by doctorkernow on Apr 27, 2016 19:13:50 GMT
Hello again. Who is Doctor Who for? Well, it is quite simple. It is for anyone who likes to leave everyday concerns and escape for a while. To travel with an alien adventurer who can go anywhere in the universe and any when. At the end of the day it is a creative form of entertainment designed to be watched by anyone who wants to watch it. Doctor Who is for everyone.
|
|
|
Post by constonks on Apr 27, 2016 19:21:44 GMT
The idea of something being "just a kids' show" makes me think of things like Avatar: The Last Airbender or Adventure Time, shows that push boundaries and tell stories in fantastic and challenging ways.
If anything, kids' media should be held to an even higher standard than adults-only drama, given its wider reach and its potential to educate and mould its target audience.
Actually I think Chris Eccleston said something similar about acting for kids - that they wouldn't let you away with any BS. That it was something more honest and real in a way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2016 22:19:56 GMT
The idea of something being "just a kids' show" makes me think of things like Avatar: The Last Airbender or Adventure Time, shows that push boundaries and tell stories in fantastic and challenging ways. If anything, kids' media should be held to an even higher standard than adults-only drama, given its wider reach and its potential to educate and mould its target audience. Actually I think Chris Eccleston said something similar about acting for kids - that they wouldn't let you away with any BS. That it was something more honest and real in a way. I actually find the idea of something being " just a kids' show," rather insulting. You don't hear parents going, "Oh, it's just kids' food," or "Oh, it's just kids' clothes." Children are able to be right there in that moment in a way that adults rarely if ever are. I remember watching the old stories and understanding exactly what Barbara was going through in The Aztecs, why the Anglo-Chinese peace conference in The Mind of Evil was so important, what Inferno was all about, what the implications of Attack of the Cybermen were (even having never seen The Tenth Planet). The last is most important because people cite it as being riddled with continuity lock-out. I was eight at the time and I had no trouble watching it. I absolutely agree with He Who Moans, I really do think children enjoy being challenged. If you take the proviso that it's " just a kids' show," then why should the kids care? At that age, 12 and such, I was watching Bond films that weren't coddling me as much. Hell, I was just leaving high school when Matt Smith was on air and even being part of that targeted demographic, I thought the show was all over the place.
|
|
|
Post by elkawho on Apr 28, 2016 0:44:28 GMT
I love He Who Moans. Sometimes I agree with him, sometimes I really disagree with him, but he is always interesting and makes very valid points. I agree with everything he says in this one.
|
|
|
Post by relativetime on Apr 28, 2016 3:33:07 GMT
Honestly, I don't think it's so much a problem of "oh, Doctor Who doesn't know what it is anymore!" than it is a problem with the fans. When I usually here someone raging against how the show is now, there's this unspoken sense that they believe Russell T. Davies did the show better, which I think that's a rather nostalgically informed opinion. I would not call these people a vocal minority, necessarily, but it is FAR from the truth to say that they make up the general consensus in the Doctor Who fandom.
That's at least how I see this video, which mostly seems directed at how Moffat has handled his tenure. He does have a point, though.
Personally, I feel what's really in need of evaluation is the series' tone. Series 5 to 7 were all pretty consistent in tone, but Series 8 and 9 seem miles apart. Series 8 claimed to be this dark new start for the Doctor and for the most part it did a really good job of conveying that. Series 9, on the other hand, felt like it was trying to be both that AND a Matt Smith season, which I think jarred with what many fans were led to expect from Series 8.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2016 6:59:57 GMT
Honestly, I don't think it's so much a problem of "oh, Doctor Who doesn't know what it is anymore!" than it is a problem with the fans. When I usually here someone raging against how the show is now, there's this unspoken sense that they believe Russell T. Davies did the show better, which I think that's a rather nostalgically informed opinion. I would not call these people a vocal minority, necessarily, but it is FAR from the truth to say that they make up the general consensus in the Doctor Who fandom. That's at least how I see this video, which mostly seems directed at how Moffat has handled his tenure. He does have a point, though. Personally, I feel what's really in need of evaluation is the series' tone. Series 5 to 7 were all pretty consistent in tone, but Series 8 and 9 seem miles apart. Series 8 claimed to be this dark new start for the Doctor and for the most part it did a really good job of conveying that. Series 9, on the other hand, felt like it was trying to be both that AND a Matt Smith season, which I think jarred with what many fans were led to expect from Series 8. I'll say this of the Moffat production team, they've tried pretty much everything they can; throwing all manner of stories at the screen to see what sticks. It's gotten to the point where as a fan, I know what I'd like to see, but I often have no idea what to expect. That might be a point in their favour, I think.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Apr 29, 2016 18:27:21 GMT
It's amazing how unhappy people can be when their favourite show is currently a huge worldwide success.
|
|
|
Post by constonks on Apr 29, 2016 20:08:00 GMT
It's amazing how unhappy people can be when their favourite show is currently a huge worldwide success. While I definitely agree that it becomes a bit much at times, if the criticism remains constructive - if it would be more likely to inspire future writers than push them away from Who - I see no harm in it. When it becomes "Moffat needs to go!! Bring back David Tennant!!!" on the other hand... Edit/Afterthought: Also it's grating when it's all someone talks about. I've unfollowed at least one prominent Big Finish fan on tumblr cause of excessive hate tainting everything they ever talked about.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2016 20:52:15 GMT
It's amazing how unhappy people can be when their favourite show is currently a huge worldwide success. While I definitely agree that it becomes a bit much at times, if the criticism remains constructive - if it would be more likely to inspire future writers than push them away from Who - I see no harm in it. When it becomes "Moffat needs to go!! Bring back David Tennant!!!" on the other hand... Edit/Afterthought: Also it's grating when it's all someone talks about. I've unfollowed at least one prominent Big Finish fan on tumblr cause of excessive hate tainting everything they ever talked about. I think "Moffat needs to go" is valid comment. I used to love his stuff, but it now just seems tired and I'm really concerned about the fact he's doing series 10 when he really wanted to leave. Personally I find the consistency of his work really suffers over time as he constantly needs to reinvent. According to Moffat the old saying seems to be "if it isn't broken, break it anyway so you can fix it". as in he needs to find a way to make every season different to the last. I can understand his concern that the show will otherwise become stale, but we could easily take three years of stability before he needs to mix it up.
|
|
shutupbanks
Castellan
There’s a horror movie called Alien? That’s really offensive. No wonder everyone keeps invading you.
Likes: 5,750
|
Post by shutupbanks on Apr 30, 2016 0:51:15 GMT
Personally, I feel what's really in need of evaluation is the series' tone. Series 5 to 7 were all pretty consistent in tone, but Series 8 and 9 seem miles apart. Series 8 claimed to be this dark new start for the Doctor and for the most part it did a really good job of conveying that. Series 9, on the other hand, felt like it was trying to be both that AND a Matt Smith season, which I think jarred with what many fans were led to expect from Series 8. Spot on! I really liked Matt Smith's portrayal of the Doctor but he sometimes came off as a little too "wise child" for me. Coupling that character with an older actor or a performance that's "quieter" (not "better" or "more thoughtful," mind) made it feel perfect, which is what I really enjoyed about Series 9
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2016 1:47:33 GMT
Personally, I feel what's really in need of evaluation is the series' tone. Series 5 to 7 were all pretty consistent in tone, but Series 8 and 9 seem miles apart. Series 8 claimed to be this dark new start for the Doctor and for the most part it did a really good job of conveying that. Series 9, on the other hand, felt like it was trying to be both that AND a Matt Smith season, which I think jarred with what many fans were led to expect from Series 8. Spot on! I really liked Matt Smith's portrayal of the Doctor but he sometimes came off as a little too "wise child" for me. Coupling that character with an older actor or a performance that's "quieter" (not "better" or "more thoughtful," mind) made it feel perfect, which is what I really enjoyed about Series 9 I really enjoyed the Eleventh Doctor's quieter moments a lot more than I did his goofy bombast. Despite its faults, The Doctor, The Widow and the Wardrobe had a really nice scene at the beginning with the Doctor quietly illustrating that he knows how the widowed mother feels dealing with children in an increasingly unforgiving world. I almost got a gleaming of Peter Cushing's Doctor beneath it all with all the fantastical trappings. I think the error that was made with his character (and this is very subjective) was that he was the victim of a continual sense of one-upmanship. They tried to make him mythical like his predecessors rather than allowing him to be quietly endearing in his own right. That and they made his life too cushy, even Cushing's Dr. Who had someone put a knife at his throat. He needed an Androzani like Davison did, which he got in the DWM comics. A lot. Particularly once Scott Grey took over writing duties. For every non-death on television, you got something horrific on the page.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2016 6:51:59 GMT
Spot on! I really liked Matt Smith's portrayal of the Doctor but he sometimes came off as a little too "wise child" for me. Coupling that character with an older actor or a performance that's "quieter" (not "better" or "more thoughtful," mind) made it feel perfect, which is what I really enjoyed about Series 9 I really enjoyed the Eleventh Doctor's quieter moments a lot more than I did his goofy bombast. Despite its faults, The Doctor, The Widow and the Wardrobe had a really nice scene at the beginning with the Doctor quietly illustrating that he knows how the widowed mother feels dealing with children in an increasingly unforgiving world. I almost got a gleaming of Peter Cushing's Doctor beneath it all with all the fantastical trappings. I think the error that was made with his character (and this is very subjective) was that he was the victim of a continual sense of one-upmanship. They tried to make him mythical like his predecessors rather than allowing him to be quietly endearing in his own right. That and they made his life too cushy, even Cushing's Dr. Who had someone put a knife at his throat. He needed an Androzani like Davison did, which he got in the DWM comics. A lot. Particularly once Scott Grey took over writing duties. For every non-death on television, you got something horrific on the page. I'm on an Eleven watch through at present and about to start Bells of Saint John. So far I haven't disliked any of it. It has flaws certainly, but it's been a very enjoyable ride, and Matt's Doctor has been great.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2016 9:53:15 GMT
I really enjoyed the Eleventh Doctor's quieter moments a lot more than I did his goofy bombast. Despite its faults, The Doctor, The Widow and the Wardrobe had a really nice scene at the beginning with the Doctor quietly illustrating that he knows how the widowed mother feels dealing with children in an increasingly unforgiving world. I almost got a gleaming of Peter Cushing's Doctor beneath it all with all the fantastical trappings. I think the error that was made with his character (and this is very subjective) was that he was the victim of a continual sense of one-upmanship. They tried to make him mythical like his predecessors rather than allowing him to be quietly endearing in his own right. That and they made his life too cushy, even Cushing's Dr. Who had someone put a knife at his throat. He needed an Androzani like Davison did, which he got in the DWM comics. A lot. Particularly once Scott Grey took over writing duties. For every non-death on television, you got something horrific on the page. I'm on an Eleven watch through at present and about to start Bells of Saint John. So far I haven't disliked any of it. It has flaws certainly, but it's been a very enjoyable ride, and Matt's Doctor has been great. He's just not to my tastes. I wasn't a fan of the Fifth Doctor on television either when I first saw him, it was only the Big Finish audios with Nyssa that quickly brought me around. His stories just don't entertain me, the jokes aren't funny and I saw the stories done before (and often better) by other writers. Not exclusively Doctor Who writers either. I like the Doctor, but not the stories if that makes any sense. It's the same reaction I've had with the Twelfth Doctor too (e.g. Time Heist is basically a rip-off of the absolutely stellar "Liars, Guns and Money" three-parter from Farscape).
|
|
|
Post by Ela on May 2, 2016 15:23:35 GMT
While I definitely agree that it becomes a bit much at times, if the criticism remains constructive - if it would be more likely to inspire future writers than push them away from Who - I see no harm in it. When it becomes "Moffat needs to go!! Bring back David Tennant!!!" on the other hand... Edit/Afterthought: Also it's grating when it's all someone talks about. I've unfollowed at least one prominent Big Finish fan on tumblr cause of excessive hate tainting everything they ever talked about. I think "Moffat needs to go" is valid comment. I used to love his stuff, but it now just seems tired and I'm really concerned about the fact he's doing series 10 when he really wanted to leave. Personally I find the consistency of his work really suffers over time as he constantly needs to reinvent. According to Moffat the old saying seems to be "if it isn't broken, break it anyway so you can fix it". as in he needs to find a way to make every season different to the last. I can understand his concern that the show will otherwise become stale, but we could easily take three years of stability before he needs to mix it up. You may think it valid now, but what about the people who have been screaming that Moffat was terrible and Moffat "needs to go" for basically his entire tenure as show runner? When exactly does it become valid?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2016 19:01:17 GMT
I think "Moffat needs to go" is valid comment. I used to love his stuff, but it now just seems tired and I'm really concerned about the fact he's doing series 10 when he really wanted to leave. Personally I find the consistency of his work really suffers over time as he constantly needs to reinvent. According to Moffat the old saying seems to be "if it isn't broken, break it anyway so you can fix it". as in he needs to find a way to make every season different to the last. I can understand his concern that the show will otherwise become stale, but we could easily take three years of stability before he needs to mix it up. You may think it valid now, but what about the people who have been screaming that Moffat was terrible and Moffat "needs to go" for basically his entire tenure as show runner? When exactly does it become valid? I think everyone's mileage will vary, but there's clearly a huge difference between the two. If you don't like someone from day one, my feeling is you just need to keep your head down and wait for them to move on. Not every era is to everyones taste and the beauty of Doctor Who is they all move on eventually.
|
|
|
Post by Ela on May 2, 2016 19:49:08 GMT
Very true, @brians.
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on May 2, 2016 20:56:28 GMT
It's amazing how unhappy people can be when their favourite show is currently a huge worldwide success. I dunno. It's like trying to be a G n' R fan in 1992. You get to the show on time. You wait hours. By the time Axl makes it on stage, Slash and Duff have drank so much that they're not in top form. Then Axl gets pissed off in the middle of the third song because an audience member took a photo, and walks off stage. Show over. You may love the overall music, but the delivery just plain failed you. You'll probably still listen to their records, but you'll be increasingly apprehensive about any future shows/records they might put out. Eventually, you might get just plain fed up and stick to the old records. Perfect analogy? Of course not. But it is certainly possible to be a big fan of something and become disgruntled with the new material of that something while still being a big fan in a larger sense.
|
|