|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Sept 29, 2017 23:59:59 GMT
So, there are infinite discussions on what is the 'best episodes of Who, old and New. Favourite villains or monsters, favourites Doctors, favourite lines, favourite cliffhangars, but let's look past the surface a bit and ask a deeper question: what is it that really makes a great Who story? What are the common elements that make magic happen?
|
|
|
Post by omega on Sept 30, 2017 0:24:57 GMT
A well-written story with well-written characters. If the story is clever, interesting or thought-provoking enough then that contributes to it. Caves of Androzani is a gripping, compelling story with characters with recognisable motives.
|
|
shutupbanks
Castellan
There’s a horror movie called Alien? That’s really offensive. No wonder everyone keeps invading you.
Likes: 5,941
|
Post by shutupbanks on Sept 30, 2017 0:44:56 GMT
From DWM's poll of a few years back:
1 THE DAY OF THE DOCTOR (2013) 2 BLINK (2007) 3 GENESIS OF THE DALEKS (1975) 4 THE CAVES OF ANDROZANI (1984) 5 CITY OF DEATH (1979) 6 THE TALONS OF WENG-CHIANG (1977) 7 THE EMPTY CHILD/THE DOCTOR DANCES (2005) 8 PYRAMIDS OF MARS (1975) 9 HUMAN NATURE/THE FAMILY OF BLOOD (2007) 10 REMEMBRANCE OF THE DALEKS (1988)
It's hard to distill what these stories all have in common apart from having the Doctor in them. I'd tend to go with Omega's definition: well-written, with the added proviso of good production values to aid to the investment of belief.
|
|
|
Post by omega on Sept 30, 2017 1:46:28 GMT
From DWM's poll of a few years back: 1 THE DAY OF THE DOCTOR (2013) 2 BLINK (2007) 3 GENESIS OF THE DALEKS (1975) 4 THE CAVES OF ANDROZANI (1984) 5 CITY OF DEATH (1979) 6 THE TALONS OF WENG-CHIANG (1977) 7 THE EMPTY CHILD/THE DOCTOR DANCES (2005) 8 PYRAMIDS OF MARS (1975) 9 HUMAN NATURE/THE FAMILY OF BLOOD (2007) 10 REMEMBRANCE OF THE DALEKS (1988) It's hard to distill what these stories all have in common apart from having the Doctor in them. I'd tend to go with Omega's definition: well-written, with the added proviso of good production values to aid to the investment of belief. You cannot ignore performances either. The best script can still be let down by poor performances and badly chosen production values. Both Warriors of the Deep and Paradise Towers are intelligent scripts, but we have the Myrka, a military sea base lit up like a football stadium, obvious spray tan and a comedy leg, not to mention a character called Pex cast as a rather less muscled actor. Meanwhile a fantastic performance can elevate the best script, the worst script, and everything in between. Colin Baker has never phoned it in, and there isn't a Sixth Doctor story that isn't unlistenable (Beyond the Ultimate Adventure tries it darndest however). Basically a story needs to have a vision that will resonate with the audience and to carry out that vision successfully. Talons of Weng-Chiang is oozing with the Victorian atmosphere, and the fact in introduced two characters able to launch a highly successful audio spin-off over thirty years later doesn't hurt either.
|
|
|
Post by omega on Sept 30, 2017 4:06:30 GMT
General checklist: - Engaging story. The plot is one of the main things that can turn people off, and them turning the episode off or putting the book down. It can be simple or complex, but it needs to do what the writer intends for it to do. - Well written characters, the regulars and the guest cast. These are the players populating the story and the ones driving and reacting to events. If they are written compellingly then we become invested in them and, and thus become more invested in the story being told around them. - Has to recognisably be its own story. Being set-up or a coda from another story, trying to be clever and stuffing it with continuity references and emulating another story so much as to ape it aren't ways to do this. Unfortunately sequels tend to rehash the original, just with a minor change to accommodate any social commentary the writer has and the Doctor/Companion team. - It's a story you'd show to someone as a great Doctor Who story
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2017 6:45:23 GMT
Very tricky. There's so much that can be done right and so much that can fall wrong. From what I've seen, it can be a narrative with a sense of forward momentum, an engaging guest cast as well as main characters, a moral Doctor and resourceful companion...
The Classic Series was very good at establishing atmosphere, I think that's what caught and held audiences over four, six, even eight or twelve episode runs. Characters got the opportunity to breathe and be explored in a way that wouldn't have been commonly possible in a single fifty-minute timeslot. It's difficult to nail down what has made the successes of each era work. For Pertwee, I'd have said the self-described "moments of charm". For Troughton, the ever flexible formula of base-under-siege. For Hartnell, the morality plays and high adventure.
The New Series has been very good at distilling the essential facets of its predecessors down to a runtime of forty-five minutes. For the RTD era, it was a distinctive, down-to-earth thread running through grounded pastiches of everything from Spearhead from Space to The Avengers's "The Cybernauts". For the Moffat era, it was twisting and folding the format upon itself to try and constantly reinvent itself. Never wanting to be the same thing twice.
Doctor Who at its best... I think is about building things up, rather than tearing them down. It's about discovering the universe, exploring and investing in what's around you. Fighting the monsters is certainly part of it, but it's not the main focus. It's the wonder. To be a stranger in a strange land and walk a path known only to wanderers of an endless midnight. Everything that can be found in walking across the alien sand, hearing the cries of strange birds. Everything that happens when you sit to watch them wheel in another sky. To know, really know, that you are somewhere else. It's a long story -- sometimes well-told, sometimes lost in riddles -- about the philosophical Other, the outcast, the stranger and everything that exists beyond.
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Sept 30, 2017 9:27:06 GMT
Incredibly difficult to say. At a push I'd have to go for well-written characters performed well (Jago & Litefoot, pretty much everyone in Caves of Androzani) with engaging story concept (Caves has the Doctor in a war zone, Blink has statues that move when you look away, Midnight is tourists trapped alone with something with them, Heaven Sent has the Doctor in his personal Hell, Genesis has the creation of the Daleks).
But those are both pretty vague statements, any story in any medium needs them. Think what's interesting about Who is that it's best episodes tend to be the unique ones, think the DWM write-up on Caves after it won the 2009 poll said it best when it outlined how Caves is great in unto itself, but isn't a good template for the series as a whole. Equally not every episode could be like Heaven Sent or Blink or Midnight or Genesis-because they're unique templates. I'd argue one of the most compelling Who episodes is one which can never be repeated-An Unearthly Child Episode 1 (it's a shame the following three episodes don't quite live up to it but anyway) Even the more standard templates stories which are lauded (when I say standard I mean follow the template of 'Doctor and co land somewhere, discover evil etc') such as Talons, Kinda or City of Death have something unique about them. Perhaps that goes for Who as a whole, there is no easy formula for good stories because they're all so different.
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Sept 30, 2017 10:12:36 GMT
Part of the fundamental nature of Who is that, for a Who story, pretty much nothing is fundamental, if you look at Blink as an example, it seems even The Doctor only needs to play a passing part.
What makes a great story is the writing, the direction and then the acting, but the story contents, the writing style, the style of the producer and the interpretation brought by the actors can vary wildly from story to story but each story can still be great.
|
|
|
Post by omega on Sept 30, 2017 10:28:03 GMT
Part of the fundamental nature of Who is that, for a Who story, pretty much nothing is fundamental, if you look at Blink as an example, it seems even The Doctor only needs to play a passing part. What makes a great story is the writing, the direction and then the acting, but the story contents, the writing style, the style of the producer and the interpretation brought by the actors can vary wildly from story to story but each story can still be great. Talons is a great period piece while Human Nature is an effective look at what it means to be the Doctor. Going into the audios, A Death in the Family is about how the Doctor has influenced his companions and what he means to them.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Sept 30, 2017 15:46:36 GMT
A well written script that establishes the rules and continues to play fair with the audience while also laying out the stakes and then turning the pressure up with both humor & conflict. Inventive production design that flows organically out of the script. Nuanced performances that remain in synch with the script. Direction that isn't showy but rather embellishes on the script while keeping everything moving along at a good clip but knowing when to take a moment to breath. A top flight editor can never be understated in importance and a score that takes the audience by the hand and helps to underline the action.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Sept 30, 2017 17:19:03 GMT
What makes a great Doctor Who story is subjective. We all will have different ideas as to what a great Doctor Who story is, and the only way we can work that out for ourselves is by looking at our favourite stories. I'm going to go for my top five. My favourite stories are:
The Day of the Doctor World Enough And Time/The Doctor Falls The Name of the Doctor The End of Time Genesis of the Daleks
Based on this, I'd say a great Doctor Who story to me is something that explores the Doctor's moral compass and how far down the dark path he'll go. That's the one thing all five stories have in common - they are essentially a character study of the Doctor without removing the mystery of who he is.
|
|
|
Post by newt5996 on Sept 30, 2017 18:01:51 GMT
I'd also input that some stories just need that spark of life even if there are flaws which can be overlooked if a story is strong enough and of course there is a bit of subjectivity: For instance some of dalekbuster's favorite stories are stories I don't like and I like shows that aren't always as well received (Enlightenment, Paradise Towers, Ghost Light, Lungbarrow, etc.)
|
|
|
Post by themeddlingmonk on Sept 30, 2017 18:02:48 GMT
I refuse to count Day of the Doctor as a legitimate contender for one of the best episodes. It's not an awful story but compared to all the other contenders from that list it might as well be Delta and the Bannermen or Fear Her. The only reason it did so well was because of hype and the fact it was the 50th Special with returning characters. Remove the Tenth Doctor and the fact it was a special and it probably wouldn't have came close to the top 10.
|
|
|
Post by tordred on Sept 30, 2017 22:30:04 GMT
Two examples of extremely beloved Who "eras" are the Hinchcliffe era and the set of Steven Moffat stories written under RTD. While it's not the be all end all of what makes a story great, it's hard to ignore that horror is a big contributing factor.
|
|
|
Post by newt5996 on Sept 30, 2017 23:31:37 GMT
Two examples of extremely beloved Who "eras" are the Hinchcliffe era and the set of Steven Moffat stories written under RTD. While it's not the be all end all of what makes a story great, it's hard to ignore that horror is a big contributing factor. Or maybe horror is easier to make good? Because there are a few of the greats that don't really have horrific elements (City of Death, The Time Meddler, The Enemy of the World, etc.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2017 1:39:45 GMT
Two examples of extremely beloved Who "eras" are the Hinchcliffe era and the set of Steven Moffat stories written under RTD. While it's not the be all end all of what makes a story great, it's hard to ignore that horror is a big contributing factor. Or maybe horror is easier to make good? Because there are a few of the greats that don't really have horrific elements (City of Death, The Time Meddler, The Enemy of the World, etc.) I think you can make an argument for terror even in those three stories. They have less to do with instinctive fears and feel more cerebral, implied anxieties. The first two are concerned with the uprooting of history, either by someone who thinks it a game or is repulsed it even exists and the last, focusses on the terrible truth of a supposed benefactor in Ramon Salamander (and Giles Kent). All pretty spooky things when given some thought. It's like the dragon that menaces the American ambassador in The Mind of Evil. In that moment, it crosses over from the instinctual hysteria machine at Stangmoor and suddenly becomes a parable for a different kind of very adult fear. A terror of everything that Chin Lee and Red China are seen to represent. Just as unnerving for an adult because it means that the peace conference could still fail for reasons that the parents and adult viewers watching at home understand all too well. This is going to seem like pedantry, but it comes up a lot in studies of Gothic fiction: do we think Doctor Who relies more on horror or terror? In this case, terror being a growing sense of unrest and horror an intense moment of revulsion. The Hinchcliffe era seemed much more in the vein of Grand Guignol horror, while the early Moffat stories were more edged in terror.
|
|
|
Post by barnabaslives on Oct 1, 2017 5:19:59 GMT
I don't suppose my list of favorites would be a very good match for most poll results - or even that my list of favorite stories would be a good match for my list of what I think are the best stories - but off the top of my head, I think my favorite DW stories usually have something fairly novel to offer (and ideally, might offer some challenges to preconceived notions about anything). That might be the one of the best things I can say about a story is "You don't see/hear that every day" (as long as the writing doesn't go to awkward extremes just to achieve that). Evil of the Daleks is probably my favorite story to ever feature the Second Doctor because of the way the ending challenges preconceived notions about human behavior. I am in awe of how simple but eloquent a statement that is.
I don't know that I think all that much of The Five Doctors storywise, but I adore it because five Doctors (4 1/3?) isn't something you get to see very often. The Pyramids of Mars is a favorite of mine although I'm not really sure what's so great about it except that it did broach the subject of Sagan's "pyramids" on Mars and came up with an intriguing story around the premise. Stones of Blood is very high on my favorites lists for delving into megalithic archaeology (and the particular way that it went about it) and also for challenging my ideas about who makes for good companions - it might have been the next best thing to Evelyn Smythe if the Doctor and Romana had brought along that delightful scholar for a couple more adventures.
Things like that, or the gridlock in Gridlock (one of my New Series favorites) are not things you're likely to see often, nor the breathtaking underwater shots in Under the Lake (it was the one time I didn't think the the NS got carried away with the big special effects - I thought it was exactly was needed to perfectly balance out a lot of scrambling down tubular hallways). I also get a huge kick out of the neighbor bagpiping in Terror of the Zygons for the sheer novelty of it.
I guess maybe I'm mainly agreeing with omega about originality? - and I do think there are some great Big Finish efforts that might have done themselves disservice by playing too close to the cuff of classic episodes, although not very often (hint: not every story about Peladon has to have an Alpha Centaurian in it just because the first one did). I'd also be agreed about the value of the strength of the acting - I'm not exactly sure what's so great about the Two Doctors as a story (and it's only one Doctor away from not being a multi-Doctor story, lol) but it's a favorite of mine just because Troughton's acting later on in the story is so good it's downright spooky.
|
|
|
Post by omega on Oct 1, 2017 5:45:48 GMT
I guess maybe I'm mainly agreeing with omega about originality? - and I do think there are some great Big Finish efforts that might have done themselves disservice by playing too close to the cuff of classic episodes, although not very often (hint: not every story about Peladon has to have an Alpha Centaurian in it just because the first one did). I'd also be agreed about the value of the strength of the acting - I'm not exactly sure what's so great about the Two Doctors as a story (and it's only one Doctor away from not being a multi-Doctor story, lol) but it's a favorite of mine just because Troughton's acting later on in the story is so good it's downright spooky. Ice Warriors too. It just wouldn't be a Peladon story without Ice Warriors. Returning monster stories and direct sequels are most prone to this. Revenge of Swarm rehashed a lot of Invisible Enemy, it's even lampshaded in the dialogue. Likewise with overloading stories with references to previous, better stories. You can come out preferring just to rewatch those stories instead of the writer proving they're a Doctor Who fan. You can have a Big Finish audio or a novel with a returning monster or character that puts a new spin on them. The Nimon (be praised!) in Seasons of Fear for example, or Kybo in Judoon in Chains. Between the novels and audios the Vardans have been rehabilitated from the tin foil aliens outsmarted by the intellectual might of the Sontarans. For the Master and Davros, their entries in the 2003 Villains trilogy.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Oct 1, 2017 15:57:21 GMT
What makes a great Doctor Who story is subjective. We all will have different ideas as to what a great Doctor Who story is, and the only way we can work that out for ourselves is by looking at our favourite stories. I'm going to go for my top five. My favourite stories are: The Day of the Doctor World Enough And Time/The Doctor Falls The Name of the Doctor The End of Time Genesis of the Daleks Based on this, I'd say a great Doctor Who story to me is something that explores the Doctor's moral compass and how far down the dark path he'll go. That's the one thing all five stories have in common - they are essentially a character study of the Doctor without removing the mystery of who he is. In terms of stories that work for me in terms of the Doctor's potrayl: Midnight, Waters Of Mars, City Of Death and World Enough And Time/The Doctor Falls stand out. Here's my reasons for each: Midnight - Exposes faults in the Doctor's character and how elements which we normally like in the Doctor can be twisted by others to make him seem like the enemy. Also the story is a brilliant example of herd mentality. Waters Of Mars - Shows the Doctor pushed to the limits. City Of Death - Doctor manages to manipulate people into thinking of him in a certain way. Shows more or less how intelligent he is. World Enough And Time/The Doctor Falls - Story defines Doctor, Master and Cybermen in the best way possible. Cybermen - Unstoppable threat. Whatever you do, they'll always somehow return. You can only postpone them. Master - Goes out of his way to be spiteful and mean. To the point when she does the first good thing in her life, she is shot by himself. The Master would rather destroy himself than be good. The Doctor - isn't out there for himself. He does what he does because he's kind and because he's decent. He does things without hope, without witness and without reward. The thing that makes these stories special is that we don't get them all the time. There are also other stories like Curse Of Fenric and the Web of Fear, which don't go out of their way to explore the Doctor himself too much,but are just good stories. There are many different kinds of ways to do Doctor Who good. That's a good analysis of each story. I also feel like World Enough And Time/The Doctor Falls would have been a good ending for the show if we weren't getting a Christmas Special and Series 11. If it wasn't for the end scene with David Bradley as the First Doctor, it would feel pretty conclusive.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2017 4:35:04 GMT
Colin Baker has never phoned it in, and there isn't a Sixth Doctor story that isn't unlistenable. Many would say that Twin Dilemma is more or less unwatchable. And many would say he's one of its biggest issues... *cough* Shameless plug for Chain Reaction. *cough*
|
|