|
Post by martinw8686 on Feb 13, 2023 0:07:57 GMT
The Timeless Child is a tricky one, as I mentioned in a previous post I didn't enjoy the way the episode was written, just down to personal taste, I do think the actual premise of the Timeless Child is really interesting and it'll be a shame if it's all ignored by RTD.
Wouldn't it be nice if as fans we could more often validate each others different opinions on what is good about the show.
I'd love to hear an objective view on the Whittaker/Chibnall era, I've not revisited it yet. I've mentioned before reasons why it wasn't to my taste, it would be refreshing to have it sold to me out of genuine love for the era, too often we fans just bicker back and forth about why we are of the right opinion.
If possible I'd like to avoid negativity towards the era in this thread as I'm looking to validate those that really enjoyed 13s run. I'm genuinely interested in why it's loved by some fans without the need to respond in defensive manner because of criticism. Critic's of the era have already been very vocal on why they don't like it, let's have some positives for a change.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Wearer of Hats on Feb 13, 2023 3:02:58 GMT
Basically, it seems to me that Chibbers wanted to move towards something a bit more “death in paradise” - serious topic, light touch/performances feel. Which I’m all for. Yes, while my ideal Who is that it should be scary, but Who-scary, monsters, creepy scenarios with a sort of “anti-nightmare fuel” in the form of rhe Doctor, a sort of safe scary (you can allow yourself to be scared/children can be reassured that no matter how scary it is the Doctor will win because they’re the Doctor)… sorry off tangent… modern Who should be that “comfort food” of TV, it’s filling, but you know what you’re in for and it’s not taking itself seriously. An escape from reality. You get that feel from Chibber’s first series. Creepy spiders? You balance that with a comedy villain and the Doctor being compassionate to the monster. Racism? You explore it, but by virtue of who your characters are you take the edge of with an implicit “but we can grow and mature and not be like that anymore”.
|
|
shutupbanks
Castellan
There’s a horror movie called Alien? That’s really offensive. No wonder everyone keeps invading you.
Likes: 5,677
|
Post by shutupbanks on Feb 13, 2023 12:24:26 GMT
Chibnall was about - at first - doing something that wasn’t too heavy on the continuity, rather like what RTD achieved with his first season as showrunner. He’s also a far more straightforward storyteller than RTD or Moffatt and uses characters that aren’t quite so “iconic” or unique. I found his work to be a bit of a return to traditional Who of the 70s and early 80s before it started to sink under the weight of its own legacy.
Honestly, I really enjoyed Season 11: the arcs were there if you wanted them but the overarching storyline’s that weighted down the Moffatt era and distracted viewers from RTD’s faults as a storyteller were largely absent. Season 12, with its bigger plot threads and storylines actually felt a lot more organic than what had been achieved over the previous decade. Flux, which was a genuine story told over a disrupted season was what I’d wanted from Who for years: a serial told over an entire season, without side trips and “casual” references to story arcs or themes.
I don’t think what he did was perfect but I think his seasons feel a lot more even in tone and intention than what we had previously: there was no Caves of Androzani/Twin Dilemma or Satan Pit/Love And Monsters effect where we have brilliant stories followed by terrible/divisive stories.
|
|
|
Post by martinw8686 on Feb 13, 2023 13:46:51 GMT
I was thinking about each Doctor from 1963 onwards and what you could fairly say are really bad episodes, while each Doctor has plenty of middling stories, there aren't many truly terrible episodes for each Doctor. Looking back I think the Whittaker/Chibnall era is no different to all the others that have gone before, Doctor Who has always been a mixed bag, 13's era had Orphan 55, but Tom Baker has a few stinkers to his name, Underworld, Power of Kroll, Horns of Nimon anyone?
I'm not always good with change, initially Chibnall/Whittaker stood out as very different from RTD/Eccleston/Tennant and Moffat/Smith/Capaldi but I think this is a good thing, otherwise we'd have a very short lived show.
|
|
|
Post by bonehead on Feb 16, 2023 13:25:59 GMT
One of the things I loved about CC's time on the show - something that some others don't like - is the low-key development of some fairly pivotal moments; mainly, when a companion leaves. Ryan, Graeme and Dan elect to leave in a purely reasonable and understandable way. They aren't central to saving the universe, they're not part of some OTT arc. They just decide, for reasons of their own, to go. Only Yaz - lovely, lovely Yaz - is wrenched away from The Doctor by reasons beyond her control, and that's after saving her life. I'm happy with all that.
On the subject of companions, and I don't want to sound unneccessarily grumpy but this is how I feel; I found CC's companions (and Bill Potts from the previous Maffat-produced series, come to that) a huge and refreshing change in terms of personality from the smug and patronising Clara and the truly obnoxious and petulent Amy Pond. Sorry about that. Some say CC's characters lacked development or whatever; I disagree. They were developed just fine. Just because they didn't slap the Doctor when they felt slighted, or threaten to kill him (her) when a loved one dies, doesn't mean they lack developent: it just means you wouldn't want to travel with them, especially if you were as (supposedly) wise as The Doctor!
|
|
|
Post by martinw8686 on Feb 16, 2023 19:21:24 GMT
One of the things I loved about CC's time on the show - something that some others don't like - is the low-key development of some fairly pivotal moments; mainly, when a companion leaves. Ryan, Graeme and Dan elect to leave in a purely reasonable and understandable way. They aren't central to saving the universe, they're not part of some OTT arc. They just decide, for reasons of their own, to go. Only Yaz - lovely, lovely Yaz - is wrenched away from The Doctor by reasons beyond her control, and that's after saving her life. I'm happy with all that.
On the subject of companions, and I don't want to sound unneccessarily grumpy but this is how I feel; I found CC's companions (and Bill Potts from the previous Maffat-produced series, come to that) a huge and refreshing change in terms of personality from the smug and patronising Clara and the truly obnoxious and petulent Amy Pond. Sorry about that. Some say CC's characters lacked development or whatever; I disagree. They were developed just fine. Just because they didn't slap the Doctor when they felt slighted, or threaten to kill him (her) when a loved one dies, doesn't mean they lack developent: it just means you wouldn't want to travel with them, especially if you were as (supposedly) wise as The Doctor!
All fair points, at the least Chibnall tried to do something different. I think there were many understated elements to the era. I do like the way companions left, Rose, Donna, Amy, Rory, Clara and Bill had various epic exits, often tragic, there does come a point where this pattern becomes old hat. I really enjoyed Bill and Nardole as a Tardis team, they were a breath of fresh air after Clara. Clara was a bit of a yo yo between strong confident female and smugness, for me one week she was great and then the next too much. Companions leaving has a history with the show of being a mixed bag, so many rushed romances, for example Susan, Jo, Leela and not mention Peri and Yacanos. I'm sure there's plenty of elements Chibnall did something interesting with, I thought the feelings between Yaz and the Doctor were handled in subtle manner, which could have so easily been sensationalised.
|
|
|
Post by Hieronymus on Feb 23, 2023 1:10:44 GMT
Whittaker did an outstanding job throughout her tenure. I would not fault any of the regular cast for their performances.
There were also some truly memorable episodes that were also innovative: especially Demons of the Punjab and Can You Hear Me?
The introduction of Ruth was brilliant. I want to know more of her story.
They tried new things with classic monsters: Daleks, Cybermen, and Sontarans were especially good I thought. Cybermen were properly scary, Daleks were manipulative survivors, and Sontarans were clever strategists.
I also noticed that the production team learned from shortcomings, and adapted accordingly. Whittaker's first season had bland cinematography, but that was no longer the case when her second season aired. The production team learned as they went, and made changes in order to provide a better show.
This team also had to contend with producing a huge show during 2020, which is no small feat.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Feb 26, 2023 23:37:10 GMT
Well, seems as good a place as any to put this. Now we can get Chibnall's side of things and answers to some lingering questions and why some things were the way they were:
|
|
|
Post by shallacatop on Feb 27, 2023 18:32:16 GMT
Really interesting that Spyfall was due to be a Christmas Day / Boxing Day special but Part One was deemed too scary for broadcast on that day / timeslot. Backed by a cracking trailer at the end promoting the rest of the series, it does make you wonder how the viewing figures would’ve fared.
|
|
|
Post by bonehead on Mar 1, 2023 14:54:29 GMT
I've just listened to the Radio Free Skaro #895 - The Exit Interview in its entirety and been pretty enthralled throughout. Recording the show through the pandemic - without closing down - sounds like several nightmares rolled into one. That Doctor Who was made at all during that time is miraculous, that a complete, cohesive series was finished is one step up from that - and that Flux was so darned brilliant (in my opinion) against all the odds, is astonishing. A great interview.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Apr 13, 2023 12:26:22 GMT
And here's another one, diving more into the adoption element of the TC story and his connection.
|
|
|
Post by timleschild on Nov 12, 2023 12:26:57 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2023 19:03:39 GMT
I've recently rewatched the whole run and really enjoyed it, more than I was expecting to. There were some small elements that still didn't land with me, but there were with the previous show runners as well.
Ive often wondered how much of viewer unhappiness with any era is due to subverted expectations. Watched a second time, knowing what you're going to get, even Orphan 55 was really enjoyable. Never thought I'd type those words!
|
|
|
Post by martinw8686 on Nov 12, 2023 20:00:35 GMT
There is much to recommend about the era in terms of enjoyable Sci Fi. I'd say I enjoyed Flux much more than season 11 and 12.
Season 11 and 12 were hit and miss for me. I realise Who has always been a little hit and miss but my favourite Doctors elevate the weaker episodes.
I'm not too keen on the 13th Doctor, which was my main struggle with the era. She's fine as a lead character but I don't find her to carry the traits I enjoy the most in the character. I like to see the heroics and humour balanced with darkness, grumpiness, flippantcy, an alien view of humanity and weirdly old/young soul. I think for me, 13 was just too nice. I think I would have preferred the Fugitive Doctor to have been the main Chibnall Doctor.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Wearer of Hats on Nov 13, 2023 7:44:41 GMT
In furtherance of my previous comment …. The Doctor has been given a motto, one derived from (IIRC) Nick Courtney’s description of rhe character - never cowardly, never cruel. Chris Eccelston lionised the character as saying the Doctor doesn’t react with fear or anger towards the unknown or different but curiosity and joy. DWM described the Doctor as carrying Jelly Babies in order to make new friends, and being disappointed whenever someone is mean to them. And ALL THAT is there in Whittaker’s Doctor. She walks softly, but with a bold compassion. She looks to tomorrow with curiosity. She opens the doors to the TARDIS and is surprised and happy to see somewhere new, or somewhere old ro show off to friends.
|
|
|
Post by timleschild on Nov 13, 2023 9:53:27 GMT
In furtherance of my previous comment …. The Doctor has been given a motto, one derived from (IIRC) Nick Courtney’s description of rhe character - never cowardly, never cruel. Chris Eccelston lionised the character as saying the Doctor doesn’t react with fear or anger towards the unknown or different but curiosity and joy. DWM described the Doctor as carrying Jelly Babies in order to make new friends, and being disappointed whenever someone is mean to them. And ALL THAT is there in Whittaker’s Doctor. She walks softly, but with a bold compassion. She looks to tomorrow with curiosity. She opens the doors to the TARDIS and is surprised and happy to see somewhere new, or somewhere old ro show off to friends. "Travel hopefully. The universe will surprise you. Constantly."
|
|
|
Post by martinw8686 on Nov 13, 2023 15:59:42 GMT
In furtherance of my previous comment …. The Doctor has been given a motto, one derived from (IIRC) Nick Courtney’s description of rhe character - never cowardly, never cruel. Chris Eccelston lionised the character as saying the Doctor doesn’t react with fear or anger towards the unknown or different but curiosity and joy. DWM described the Doctor as carrying Jelly Babies in order to make new friends, and being disappointed whenever someone is mean to them. And ALL THAT is there in Whittaker’s Doctor. She walks softly, but with a bold compassion. She looks to tomorrow with curiosity. She opens the doors to the TARDIS and is surprised and happy to see somewhere new, or somewhere old ro show off to friends. 13 definitely has the kindness and awe at the beauty of the Universe qualities of the Doctor in abundance. One thing I love about my favourite Doctors is that they aspire to never be cruel or cowardly despite their character flaws. I adore 12s journey because he begins so full of doubt, closed off and focused on pragmatism. He runs from responsibility but ultimatly does the right thing. He wants to leave young Davros to die but returns to show mercy. My preference is for the Doctor to be an old fool (genius), irresponsible in their search for knowledge and adventure, riddled with alien character flaws but ultimately deeply kind and compassionate. My problem with 13 has been that she has the characters flaws dialled back too much. I also struggled to see any sign of her age portrayed. Peter Davison, David Tennant and Matt Smith portray the Doctor's age so well despite being young when originally cast. Despite my struggles Jodie is the Doctor. I adore Capaldi and anyone following him would have struggled to meet my expectations.
|
|
|
Post by timleschild on Nov 13, 2023 16:54:18 GMT
In furtherance of my previous comment …. The Doctor has been given a motto, one derived from (IIRC) Nick Courtney’s description of rhe character - never cowardly, never cruel. Chris Eccelston lionised the character as saying the Doctor doesn’t react with fear or anger towards the unknown or different but curiosity and joy. DWM described the Doctor as carrying Jelly Babies in order to make new friends, and being disappointed whenever someone is mean to them. And ALL THAT is there in Whittaker’s Doctor. She walks softly, but with a bold compassion. She looks to tomorrow with curiosity. She opens the doors to the TARDIS and is surprised and happy to see somewhere new, or somewhere old ro show off to friends. 13 definitely has the kindness and awe at the beauty of the Universe qualities of the Doctor in abundance. One thing I love about my favourite Doctors is that they aspire to never be cruel or cowardly despite their character flaws. I adore 12s journey because he begins so full of doubt, closed off and focused on pragmatism. He runs from responsibility but ultimatly does the right thing. He wants to leave young Davros to die but returns to show mercy. My preference is for the Doctor to be an old fool (genius), irresponsible in their search for knowledge and adventure, riddled with alien character flaws but ultimately deeply kind and compassionate. My problem with 13 has been that she has the characters flaws dialled back too much. I also struggled to see any sign of her age portrayed. Peter Davison, David Tennant and Matt Smith portray the Doctor's age so well despite being young when originally cast. Despite my struggles Jodie is the Doctor. I adore Capaldi and anyone following him would have struggled to meet my expectations. I thought this thread was supposed to be focusing on positivity?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2023 16:57:50 GMT
I was vocal about Jodie having no unique characteristics - what made her The Doctor that you couldn't say applied to others?
It took a while - the safe approach of her character in S11 was a misfire designed to make the "controversial" casting seem palpable to the angry emoji crowd. In the end, the scene that summed her up best was her very last. THAT'S the one scene that showed what made this Doctor different. Not a time for tears and speeches - "tag....you're it".
The Doctor who experiences the bad...and doesn't let it define them. Faces everything like the bag of fun exploring time and space with people you love should be. That's Jodie's Doc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2023 17:14:59 GMT
13 definitely has the kindness and awe at the beauty of the Universe qualities of the Doctor in abundance. One thing I love about my favourite Doctors is that they aspire to never be cruel or cowardly despite their character flaws. I adore 12s journey because he begins so full of doubt, closed off and focused on pragmatism. He runs from responsibility but ultimatly does the right thing. He wants to leave young Davros to die but returns to show mercy. My preference is for the Doctor to be an old fool (genius), irresponsible in their search for knowledge and adventure, riddled with alien character flaws but ultimately deeply kind and compassionate. My problem with 13 has been that she has the characters flaws dialled back too much. I also struggled to see any sign of her age portrayed. Peter Davison, David Tennant and Matt Smith portray the Doctor's age so well despite being young when originally cast. Despite my struggles Jodie is the Doctor. I adore Capaldi and anyone following him would have struggled to meet my expectations. I thought this thread was supposed to be focusing on positivity? In fairness this reads to me like a critic of the era acknowledging that while they had concerns, there were positives as well and wanting to validate that even if something wasn't to there taste, that doesn't stop it being "proper" Doctor Who. It's easy for fans of the era to be positive about it. It's more impactful for a critic of the era to acknowledge there are positives
|
|