|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Jun 15, 2016 9:56:25 GMT
Some of the fans on this forum don't like what I say about Doctor Who, wether I'm right or wrong. Here are some questions I'd like you to answer -
1 - Would it be such a bad idea to have a companion from Earths past? It worked for Jamie and Victoria.
2 - Would it be such a bad idea to have a companion from Earths future? Zoe worked.
3 - Would it be such a bad thing that the companion is not some kind of impossible, special, mysterious companion?
4 - Would it be so bad to turn The Master back to a man, and introduce a Time Lady? Worked for The Rani.
5 - Is it such a bad idea that the companion develops through learning from experience, rather than the story be the companion?
6 - Is is so bad an idea, that when a companion leaves or dies - They don't come back?
These are some small points, which I think would vastly improve Doctor Who. There are more problem that I haven't mentioned, but this would be a start.
So, try and answer, YES, or NO, and a short comment!
|
|
bobod
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,759 
|
Post by bobod on Jun 15, 2016 10:14:13 GMT
None of these things are necessarily bad, no. Neither is it the case that the absence of any of those things is intrinsically bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Jun 15, 2016 10:16:49 GMT
None of these things are necessarily bad, no. Neither is it the case that the absence of any of those things is intrinsically bad. Spoken like a true politician! Would you want any of the above to happen in series 11? EDIT Let me rephrase that Would you switch off and stop watching if the above happened? |
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Jun 15, 2016 10:21:54 GMT
Those are all things I'd like to see, some of them I think are even necessary in the long run. But not one of them will impact my liking of the show as it is now; they're all details, apart from people staying dead, and have little to no impact on the actual story. "in the long run" ? NuWho has been on for 11 years, and every companion has been from present day Earth! About 90% of companions have been impossible, mysterious, special companions. The companion has become the story! |
|
aztec
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,849
|
Post by aztec on Jun 15, 2016 10:24:47 GMT
Hmm...
Q. 1/2. On paper, no...but in practice for New Who possibly yes, the whole point of the companion is to act as an audience surrogate, we see the storyline through their point of view, their background and home life is crucial to how the storylines unfold and how we see the Doctor, with Capaldi's Doctor being rather more mysterious and abrasive than the previous three it's arguable that you need a more relabel and modern companion more than before, a past/future companion could also be harder to sell abroad and could effect merchandising, as far as the BBC is concerned if it ain't broke why fix it I suppose?
I believe Moffat originally intended to make Clara Victorian but was forced to rewrite the character by the BBC...
3. No, I'm getting kinda bored with this trend as well, Donna remains my favourite New Who companion because she was normal, down to earth and just travelled with the Doctor for fun, even when she became the Doctor Donna she paid a heavy price for doing so, however I'd argue that the companion for better or worse is no almosy as important to the show as the Doctor is, so I suppose there's a push by some writers to put them on the same power level as it were...
4. For me personally it would be bad, Missy is easily my favourite Master since Delgrado and she plays off Capaldi brilliantly, having t*ts is in no way detrimental to the character, The Master has always been either a calculating Moriarty or a batsh*t crazy loon, and at least with a female perspective the character's been slighty tweaked, to be honest I never really found the Master to be very interesting or threatening (camp if anything) originally I was completely against the idea of a female Master but Gomez plays the part brilliantly, although I'm against a female Doctor, are transgender regeneration's really that far-fetched?
5. No
6. No
Personally Series 8/9 has been my favourite era of Doctor Who since the show returned (admittedly the scripts have been pretty hit or miss at times, but I'm enjoying Capaldi's Doctor so much I don't mind) so I don't think the show needs improving per se, but I do understand where you are coming from...though I do think because you are looking at New Who through the eyes of an adult viewer who grew up with the Classic Series, you are naturally going to have a different view to younger viewers who only know the New Series, flaws and supposed problems with the show are going to be different to every viewer.
I've come across some New Who fans who have been Less interested in Classic Who because of the above...
|
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Jun 15, 2016 10:25:28 GMT
Some of the fans on this forum don't like what I say about Doctor Who, wether I'm right or wrong. Here are some questions I'd like you to answer - 1 - Would it be such a bad idea to have a companion from Earths past? It worked for Jamie and Victoria. 2 - Would it be such a bad idea to have a companion from Earths future? Zoe worked. 3 - Would it be such a bad thing that the companion is not some kind of impossible, special, mysterious companion? 4 - Would it be so bad to turn The Master back to a man, and introduce a Time Lady? Worked for The Rani. 5 - Is it such a bad idea that the companion develops through learning from experience, rather than the story be the companion? 6 - Is is so bad an idea, that when a companion leaves or dies - They don't come back? These are some small points, which I think would vastly improve Doctor Who. There are more problem that I haven't mentioned, but this would be a start. So, try and answer, YES, or NO, and a short comment! I like all of those bar part of number 4. I have no issue with the Master being a man or a woman, and see no reason for why the Rani needs to be always female in all incarnations. But from other posts, I suspect you mean by point 4, can't men be men and women be women, to which I say sure, but they can be other things too. I can see individual timelords having a personal preference on which sex they are. But as for why The Master has become female in the current incarnation, I suspect by that thread a story hangs. |
|
bobod
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,759
|
Post by bobod on Jun 15, 2016 10:25:32 GMT
None of these things are necessarily bad, no. Neither is it the case that the absence of any of those things is intrinsically bad. Spoken like a true politician! Spoken like a true [expletive deleted]. |
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Jun 15, 2016 10:31:01 GMT
Hmm... Q. 1/2. On paper, no...but in practice for New Who possibly yes, the whole point of the companion is to act as an audience surrogate, we see the storyline through their point of view, their background and home life is crucial to how the storylines unfold and how we see the Doctor, with Capaldi's Doctor being rather more mysterious and abrasive than the previous three it's arguable that you need a more relabel and modern companion more than before, a past/future companion could also be harder to sell abroad and could effect merchandising, as far as the BBC is concerned if it ain't broke why fix it I suppose? So, its okay to make The Master a woman, and still be able to sell abroad and have merchandise, but not a good idea to have the companion from the past/future? I find it hard that overseas fans can accept a female Master, and not a past/future companion! |
|
|
|
Post by acousticwolf on Jun 15, 2016 10:35:15 GMT
Spoken like a true politician! Spoken like a true [expletive deleted]. --MODERATION-- bobod and paulmorris7777You are both entitled to your opinions, but keep it civil. Be polite and respectful please ... --END MODERATION-- |
|
aztec
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,849
|
Post by aztec on Jun 15, 2016 10:36:59 GMT
Hmm... Q. 1/2. On paper, no...but in practice for New Who possibly yes, the whole point of the companion is to act as an audience surrogate, we see the storyline through their point of view, their background and home life is crucial to how the storylines unfold and how we see the Doctor, with Capaldi's Doctor being rather more mysterious and abrasive than the previous three it's arguable that you need a more relabel and modern companion more than before, a past/future companion could also be harder to sell abroad and could effect merchandising, as far as the BBC is concerned if it ain't broke why fix it I suppose? So, its okay to make The Master a woman, and still be able to sell abroad and have merchandise, but not a good idea to have the companion from the past/future? I find it hard that overseas fans can accept a female Master, and not a past/future companion! The difference being (as far as I can see) New Who viewers would have only really experienced the Master as a zany, over the top camp shouty bloke...Missy, despite the gender change really isn't too different, casting a past/present companion would be a much more dramatic shake up to the Doctor/Companion relationship, although New Who is about escapism, it's firmly anchored in Modern Britain, and I'm somewhat doubtful certain sections of the fanbase would agree with the Doctor being the one to explain everything to the companion, rather than the companion discovering things for themselves... I'd like to see a historical companion (Fitz and Jamie both historical companions, are amongst my favorites) but there's fairly obvious reasons why it hasn't happened...not saying I disagree with what you are saying, but although Moffat and co are fans, they can't write the show purely for them... |
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Jun 15, 2016 10:39:50 GMT
I'd like to see a historical companion (Fitz and Jamie both historical companions, are amongst my favorites) but there's fairly obvious reasons why it hasn't happened...not saying I disagree with what you are saying, but although Moffat and co are fans, they can't write the show purely for them... What obvious reason? |
|
bobod
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,759
|
Post by bobod on Jun 15, 2016 10:45:27 GMT
Spoken like a true [expletive deleted]. --MODERATION-- bobod and paulmorris7777 You are both entitled to your opinions, but keep it civil. Be polite and respectful please ... --END MODERATION-- I thought it was funny. Apologies if that didn't come across.
It is however, more than a tad disingenuous to describe pointing out the amount of weighting going on in the phrasing of the original post as being like a politician.
|
|
aztec
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,849
|
Post by aztec on Jun 15, 2016 10:49:09 GMT
I'd like to see a historical companion (Fitz and Jamie both historical companions, are amongst my favorites) but there's fairly obvious reasons why it hasn't happened...not saying I disagree with what you are saying, but although Moffat and co are fans, they can't write the show purely for them... What obvious reason? -It could alienate younger/new viewers and effect merchandising-as I said above, several fans I know prefer New Who because it is all modern companions-it makes it easier for them to identify with the companion (i.e ''oh there from 2016, just like me so I can understand why they react that way'' etc) and the C/Doctor relationship, if you have both of the main characters completely removed from the current era some may find it less enjoyable/harder to follow the character relationships, I think part of the charm of New Who is that is very modern and very British... -The home life and 'base' of companions has played a very prominent role in New Who so far, and New Who's budget isn't particularly massive, a past/future companion would mean more episodes set in that era and more $ spent on sets and costumes rather than effects and set pieces (not sayin that is a bad thing though)... -It could mean more time wasted on explaining things to the companion every five seconds. Again, not saying it's right, but it's a fairly sensible decision from a commercial point of view to keep companions modern. |
|
|
|
Post by acousticwolf on Jun 15, 2016 10:59:46 GMT
--MODERATION-- bobod and paulmorris7777 You are both entitled to your opinions, but keep it civil. Be polite and respectful please ... --END MODERATION-- I thought it was funny. Apologies if that didn't come across.
It is however, more than a tad disingenuous to describe pointing out the amount of weighting going on in the phrasing of the original post as being like a politician.
Sometimes the intent can get lost between writing and reading. I know many see emoticons as a nuisance, but they can help to give meaning to comments. I do agree with your second point, hence the moderation being directed at both of you. Cheers Tony |
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Jun 15, 2016 11:09:02 GMT
-It could alienate younger/new viewers and effect merchandising-as I said above, several fans I know prefer New Who because it is all modern companions-it makes it easier for them to identify with the companion (i.e ''oh there from 2016, just like me so I can understand why they react that way'' etc) and the C/Doctor relationship, if you have both of the main characters completely removed from the current era some may find it less enjoyable/harder to follow the character relationships, I think part of the charm of New Who is that is very modern and very British... -The home life and 'base' of companions has played a very prominent role in New Who so far, and New Who's budget isn't particularly massive, a past/future companion would mean more episodes set in that era and more $ spent on sets and costumes rather than effects and set pieces (not sayin that is a bad thing though)... -It could mean more time wasted on explaining things to the companion every five seconds. Again, not saying it's right, but it's a fairly sensible decision from a commercial point of view to keep companions modern. I honestly can't see why this would alienate the viewer. Some fans have complained that the stories are too complex, but many say they can follow it. Shouldn't you give some credit to the viewers "intelligence"? There are plenty period dramas that are watchable, and not necessarily relateable to - Call The Midwife, The Crimson Field, Foyles War, The Musketeers, etc. What about current sci-fi? 12 Monkeys, Dark Matter, KillJoys etc. Do fans relate to those characters? One of the biggest problems with Clara was the continued visits for work and boyfriend in present day Earth. A companion from the past/future doesn't mean having to continually visit that era - get on with the main story. |
|
|
|
Post by muckypup on Jun 15, 2016 11:09:34 GMT
1 - yes...It would work for long past or future but not just a few decades no. 2 - yes...same as above 3 - no... we need a ordinary companion, and a man (but not Matt Lucas does he actully count as a man  )would be good too. just an ordinary joe. 4 - not sure...I am ok with missy (not sure on the friends with the doctor bit) 5 - no...but why can we not just have the companion always be just a companion & not a plot device 6 - no...kill em all, Amy & Rory should be dead, Clara should have stayed dead. I think they way to help the new show is tell smaller stories, why is it always the world in peril and not just a base, a people, a quest, etc. or have longer story arcs 5 episode stories would tell a proper story the best episodes of the new series are the small scale ones. |
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Jun 15, 2016 11:53:19 GMT
whether or not you call Captain Jack a companion is debateable, but many fans want him to return, and he's from the future - relatable???
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2016 12:59:22 GMT
3 - no... we need a ordinary companion, and a man (but not Matt Lucas does he actully count as a man ) Yes, he does. Because he's a man. Not sure what you're driving at but I'll assume its badly phrased rather than something more sinister. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2016 13:06:55 GMT
Interestng questions, will keep it reasonably brief so...
1) & 2) No. It should be happening. Doctor Who is a TV show about time travel, so mixing it up with companions from Earth's past, present day, and Earth's future, along with non-human/alien companions even, should be a part of the show. The same general type of companion does get a bit boring.
3) No, nothing wrong with that.
4) No, that wouldn't be bad. I do like Missy as a character but 'The Master' by definition should be male. Maybe Missy is just a one-off regeneration? I would like to see a story that dealt with that regeneration and how/why the change happened. Would love to see a return of The Rani on TV too.
5) No, it's not a bad idea. Again though, mixing it up from time to time isn't a bad thing either. So a companion with a secret that the story revolves around now and again wouldn't be a bad thing. It's all about variety.
6) No. We all have to die, so why not a Doctor Who companion? If they die, leave them dead. Special appearances of old companions that have left, like SJS in School Reunion, is okay though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2016 13:14:32 GMT
Bobod is 100% right - just because some of these suggestions aren't awful doesn't make them in any way intrinsically good. Would there be any value in creating an alien or non-21st century companion if they're not written well?
And why just giving the Master a penis improves the show is beyond me. Name actors and actresses you'd prefer were in the role, fine, but just "She should be a man" is facile, head in the sand nonsense.
|
|
)would be good too. just an ordinary joe.