Doctor Who [9]

ok ok! what about the exact height of attack eyebrows?

nother nit pick. how come Clara can go to Trenzilloob to meet the boy Doctor and make him who he is, if its got a time lock on it?.

plus I object to Moffat being omnipotent and deciding its Clara of all of the assistants who sets the Doctor off on the path of being a warrior without a weapon. Its the equivalent of Ramses 11 building a willy waving tower and weeing on it to mark his territory.

what about the exact height of attack eyebrows?- Figg

Depends on his mood- quite high when surprised or quizzical or disbelieving, quite low when grumpy.

'how come Clara can go to Trenzilloob to meet the boy Doctor and make him who he is, if its got a time lock on it?.'

I assume you mean Gallifrey not Trenzalore.
You can take your pick here or mix and match.

1. The Moment was able to open time tunnels into the Time War because it took the form of Bad Wolf. Bad Wolf was the Heart of the TARDIS in a human body, Rose's. So the TARDIS has the power to breach the Time Lock, but probably not on her own. So she used Clara in similar fashion to Bad Wolf, as Clara was 'plugged into' the TARDIS at the time.

So, 2. Not going would be a paradox. The TARDIS exists outside of the flow of Time  and can go to any point, at the right time, in her own Time Line. In fact, she has too.To not do so would create a huge paradox. As Clara meeting the young Doctor happened already (from the Doctors perspective) Clara has to go there, and from the TARDIS' point of view she has to go there and has already been there all at once. So it doesn't actually breach the Time Lock.

3. It was Clara flying the TARDIS when they went there and she is the impossible girl splintered through space and time, and one version of her already existed on Gallifrey in the Time of the first Doctor. As Clara was doing the flying through the telepathic circuits sexy used Gallifrey Clara as her 'landing lights' (in much the same way 11 got the TARDIS into Weeping Angel infested New York and all its paradoxes by using the ming vase as his 'landing lights')

'I object to Moffat being omnipotent and deciding its Clara of all of the assistants who sets the Doctor off on the path of being a warrior without a weapon.'

I dont see how you can rationally object- all writers are omnipotent when they write their own stories. Thats what writing is.
Also she influenced him but was one of several influences on the young Doctor. He still has to meet his hermit friend (mentioned by the 3rd Doctor) and go to the Academy and meet the Master and others of his generation not to mention his favourite tutor.
It merely adds to his influences it doesn't make it the sole one.
Objecting is like objecting that the writer of the 3rd Doctor made up a hermit that he learned a lot from or objecting that another writer invented the Master from his childhood.
Or that the writer of 2nd Doctor story War Games made up a race called Time Lords, never heard of before then.

The writers have to have the freedom they want to add to the Doctor's story or whats the point?

I kinda agree with Figgs on this one.

My major problem with Moffat's era (well, Matt Smith's era at least-I never warmed to him or his storylines that much, but I loved this series so far) was his seeming desperation to cram in as much plot and changes to the mythology as possible-his Doctor lived the longest, his doctor was the first to be married, his doctor had hundreds of years of 'off screen' adventures, his Doctor rebooted the universe, saved gallifrey, escaped his own timestream, faked his death whilst it was Moffat who took us back to Gallifrey and showed the Doctor as a child, stealing the tardis (after being told to by a companion he invented), and gave him a new regeneration cycle. Let's chuck in The War Doctor as well, and Clara the companion who splinters herself across his timeline and saves his live hundreds of times.


Sure it's very interesting stuff, and massive revelations for the fans...but couldn't Moffat leave a few things for his successors to do? It's a hell of a lot to take in in three seasons, and a very sudden jump from the tone of Russell Davies Tenure. I don't have a problem with Moffat's stories per se, it's more the execution and pacing of them

Doctor Who is already a niche genre, pandering to fans or tying itself up in own mythology can only end up alienating casual fans-people I know tuned out in the Moffat years because they want to be entertained by simple escapism, not confused by complicated plots or dark drama ''it's a show about a crazy alien in a magic box fighting rubber aliens, it shouldn't take itself too seriously''.

Moffat is at heart a fanboy of the show, and for better or worse, he has too much freedom and has influenced the show too much, too quickly for my liking. Wasn't that one of the major criticisms of the C.Baker/Mcoy years? Too Dark and too self indulgent? (coupled witj crappy storylines and budget cuts).

Whilst I had many problems *Rose* with Davies Tenure as head writer, by and large casual audiences seemed to have enjoyed it alot-as a relative said the other day after tuning out in Listen (paraphrased) 'Confusing and boring, what happened to the simple show about a Alien who explores the universe fighting monsters?. The general impression I've got from non-fans of the show is they like things when they are simple.

If aint broke don't fix it (though it is very debatable if or when Who first got 'broken')

Of course this is entirely a matter of personal opinion, and not one I particularly have strong feelings on either way.

(For the record I haven't watched any of Davies' stuff in three or four years, and I still haven't watched series 6)

I cant say I agree at all Malick. Nor do I think the facts support your contention.
Who has a bigger audience now than ever before.
Series 8 has had 4 episode in the UK with consecutive figures over 7 million- thats more consecutive episodes over 7 million than at any other time in the entire nuWho run (and over 11 million tuned in for the anniversary episode not including cinema audiences).
Series episodes were not filling out cinemas either in the RTd era and the show did not go on World Tours.

When it comes to change I think when the 2nd Doctor story introduced the Time Lords, the 3rd Gallifrey and added the Master and when they made the 4th President of Gallifrey and gave him a Time Lord companion as well as all the other backstory fills and hints they were no different or any less major a set of changes.
RTD showed us the Master's childhood and Gallifrey, added the whole looking into the schism thing as children and invented an off screen Time War that completely changed the setting and personlaity of the main character as well as stories about the young Doctor running in the fields of Gallifrey ect.

Nor is it the first time the Doctor has lots of off screen adventures -that has always happened and is where Big Finish gets all the space to tell its stories.
Whoever was the current showrunner would have had to address the regen limit when the Doctor changed one way or another too, so I dont think its Moffats fault the music happened to stop while he was show runner and it was down to him to come up with a way to get round it.

Of course you can prefer RTD's style more, thats a personal choice thing, I happen to love how Moffat constructs stories myself but thats just my personal choice.
But in terms of affecting lore he has not done more than any other showrunner has over the years. He has incorporated the changes more directly into the show however, showing us them rather than just telling us they happened. Which I prefer.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:what about the exact height of attack eyebrows?- Figg

Depends on his mood- quite high when surprised or quizzical or disbelieving, quite low when grumpy.

'how come Clara can go to Trenzilloob to meet the boy Doctor and make him who he is, if its got a time lock on it?.'

I assume you mean Gallifrey not Trenzalore.
You can take your pick here or mix and match.

1. The Moment was able to open time tunnels into the Time War because it took the form of Bad Wolf. Bad Wolf was the Heart of the TARDIS in a human body, Rose's. So the TARDIS has the power to breach the Time Lock, but probably not on her own. So she used Clara in similar fashion to Bad Wolf, as Clara was 'plugged into' the TARDIS at the time.

So, 2. Not going would be a paradox. The TARDIS exists outside of the flow of Time  and can go to any point, at the right time, in her own Time Line. In fact, she has too.To not do so would create a huge paradox. As Clara meeting the young Doctor happened already (from the Doctors perspective) Clara has to go there, and from the TARDIS' point of view she has to go there and has already been there all at once. So it doesn't actually breach the Time Lock.

3. It was Clara flying the TARDIS when they went there and she is the impossible girl splintered through space and time, and one version of her already existed on Gallifrey in the Time of the first Doctor. As Clara was doing the flying through the telepathic circuits sexy used Gallifrey Clara as her 'landing lights' (in much the same way 11 got the TARDIS into Weeping Angel infested New York and all its paradoxes by using the ming vase as his 'landing lights')

'I object to Moffat being omnipotent and deciding its Clara of all of the assistants who sets the Doctor off on the path of being a warrior without a weapon.'

I dont see how you can rationally object- all writers are omnipotent when they write their own stories. Thats what writing is.
Also she influenced him but was one of several influences on the young Doctor. He still has to meet his hermit friend (mentioned by the 3rd Doctor) and go to the Academy and meet the Master and others of his generation not to mention his favourite tutor.
It merely adds to his influences it doesn't make it the sole one.
Objecting is like objecting that the writer of the 3rd Doctor made up a hermit that he learned a lot from or objecting that another writer invented the Master from his childhood.
Or that the writer of 2nd Doctor story War Games made up a race called Time Lords, never heard of before then.

The writers have to have the freedom they want to add to the Doctor's story or whats the point?

yeah Gallifrey.

as for 1. 2. and 3. I have no idea what all of that stuff meant. it was timey wimey waffle.

and I can rationally object because thats what he is doing, whether he is aware of it or not, he is branding Who in his image.

I can rationally object because thats what he is doing, whether he is aware of it or not, he is branding Who in his image. - Figg


All showrunners brand the show in their own image- always have. Thats why Whovians more often when discussing the shows history refer to eras not by Doctors but by showrunners- they are all distinct from one another.
The Hitchcliffe era is as different from the Adams era as RTD is from the Moffat era. And all reflect the showrunner of their time.
I dont see how it could possibly be any other way. It hasnt survived 50 years by staying the same thing every week.

Seems to me you are just having a go at Moffat for something that every single showrunner has done in the entire history of Who- made the Who they want.

not really. But Moffats tinkering seems more egotistical than most. Its like he is reducing the Doctors importance and uniqueness and lessens him by making Clara (Moffats character) the one who made the Doctor who he is. The Doctor should make himself who he is, through his own special character not some whispered half arsed pseudo waffle from an assistant.


I have developed a bit of a crush on Capaldi, he could be be one of the best Doctors ever if only he got some meaty stories.

You mean as opposed to a companion who is the only one the Doctor has ever fallen in love with, absorbs the Heart of the TARDIS, becomes temporarily omnipotent and makes Jack immortal and a fixed point in Time, destroys an entire Dalek fleet single handed and cures the Doctor of his guilt and pain from the Time War, then even after she is supposedly left and written out RTD cant leave her alone, his favourite and created character. And she comes back in the next series and is such a constant presence when not, that Martha chooses to leave rather than compete, and then she comes back to save the entire universe with a big gun.

Nothing at all like a show runner making his companion super special at all

yeah but Rose is super special innit.

The Truer logic always wins in the end!

Well I just finished Time Heist.

Spoiler:

One big difference from the classic series is that you now have a showrunner who writes scripts, script edits and handles production duties. In the classic series these responsibilities were seperated into two roles, that of script editor and producer. Roles that were also circulated more often than the current showruner role is.

Now there are obviously merits to both these models, but one drawback of the showrunner role, that ties in quite well with Figgs criticism, is that the show gets tied into that one persons vision to such a degree it limits input from others. In other words it limits the scope of the show. That both RTD and Moffat are the kind of showrunners who needs to be in complete control of the show they are running doesn't necessarily help either.

So, after 5 years, the show is still all Moffat. And I can understand criticism from people who, after an extended amount of time with him as showrunner, with the advent of a new Doctor would have liked a new direction in vision for the show as well.

I agree. It all feels rather stale, and its frustrating as Capaldi could be superb with some more original storylines, the stories seem to be on a backburner while the character development is chugging along. but why cant they have both? I am really missing the truly fresh and fascinating stories, its as if Moffat has decided to switcheroo from Smiths over complicated stuff to more self contained plots, but as all the fast paced timey wimey bling of Smiths era has been stripped away we are left with the Emperors clothes.

I agree with Blue also, Its a shame that we think like this as Who is such a great show ! Its been there quietly in the back ground of my life for so long that I dont want it ruined by any small degree. Its never wrong, its always right. your never lost, your always saved. but, even allowing guest writers would inject a bit of fresh lemon squeezy !

Hmm, although I hope Moffat will step aside after series 9 (if only to match Russel Davies five year tenure as executive producer, and as Azriel said to keep things fresh), in some ways it will feel a little weird, whilst he was the clear front runner to take over from Davies (I seem to remember it had be discussed as early as 2007) there dosen't seem to be any real front runner this time around.

To me the most likely choices to suceed Moffat are either Mark Gatiss (please no!) or Toby Whithouse (why not?), but I wouldn't mind a totally new writing team come in (though perhaps one of the old writers could stick around as a script editor?) and get a new spin on things (preferably with Capaldi sticking around as well, he has such great potential it would be great to get a lot of variety to stretch it), In some ways I wish they would return to the old stand alone (more or less) serial fomat of the old series, though this could be a very risky move to make with modern audiences in mind.


On a side note, I've recently started listening to Big Finish properly ...me likely alot!

there must be new Writers just busting a gut to have a chance to write for Who, I say give em a chance.

I love the new Doctor* and Clara** and even Pink***is good so far. I like the stories, but I don't mind seeing a real creepy one after so many with pure adventure or comedic overlays. I do find plenty of variety as things stand, but you naysayers are right, the more variety the better.  I have spoken.


*{{{I think I have a crush too Mrs Figg}}}

** {{{I think I have a crush, Petty}}}

*** {{{I think I have a crush, Eldo}}}

Mrs Figg wrote:there must be new Writers just busting a gut to have a chance to write for Who, I say give em a chance.

Me, me. me, Me, I say!

Still haven't watched the second episode of this new season. Thinking about it, though.

oooh I hear theres a new writer for tonights episode. fingers crossed.

Oh now I'm liking it!! Yeah!

Nice, who is this writer?

Oooh.... what next? I'm so looking forward to next week. Capaldi s brilliant. Clara shows another aspect.

Spoiler:

Courtney is a painful teenager -- exactly that! Great, characters one can engage with. Whoopee!  


(((Err... Eldo I managed to erase your last post even as I was replying to your last post! But, yes, check out Pinky! You won't be disappointed --- and I hope Ringo doesn't find out...  }}}

An afterthought: I think all the characters have substance in this series. None of their personalities are over blown or over dramatic or over acted. There is something understated and real about them, I think. Maybe Capaldi is teaching them how to act?