Re: Doctor Who [11]

by Pettytyrant101 Sun Oct 18, 2015 10:28 pm

Disagree entirely. Capladi is definitely in my top 2, maybe higher now. And I would say he is the best actor to have had the role.

And from all the interviews and the panels and the like it seems clear that Capaldi has a firm input into how he plays the role as well as going on the writing and many conversations with Moffat. It seems a very collaborative process.

by azriel Sun Oct 18, 2015 10:42 pm

I was wowed by Capaldi at first, thought he was "The One", now, Im thinking he should have played The Dr differently. He's trying to carry on from Tenant & Smith with his quick, manic, get up & go. I think he should have been quietly serious, broody, a touch sinister but silently confident & unrattled. I thought thats how he would go at the beginning but now its just "lets be like the last two". Rolling Eyes

by Mrs Figg Sun Oct 18, 2015 11:31 pm

yep I was curious and interested in how he would play the Doctor in the beginning, I liked him most in the episode with the steampunk robots. that's probably one of his first outings, but since then he has a schizoid mix of rock star messing about to sometimes gnawing his fingernails over whether he is he a good man and should he do stuff or not, like make your mind up, which is it? he is a confident guitar playing hero, or a wimpy neurotic worrier? either, or, not both. it makes him seem badly thought out.

by Pettytyrant101 Mon Oct 19, 2015 12:05 am

You've moaned about Capaldi from the first episode!

Personally I get far more classic Doctor influences in his performance than I do NUWho, he is much more 1,2,3 and 4 than he is 9,10 or 11.

And regards the speed and the fast dialogue, there is far more dialogue in the show since Capaldi took over the role than there has been previously- the episodes are of a slower pace not quicker, especially this series which so far has been all two parters.

by Mrs Figg Mon Oct 19, 2015 12:36 am

its not moaning. its debating. quite different.

by David H Mon Oct 19, 2015 4:08 am

Mrs Figg wrote:its not moaning. its debating. quite different.

by David H Mon Oct 19, 2015 4:23 am

A question for ya all. I've been watching all the 50th stuff, and it's quite legitimately stuffed to overflowing with Dr Who nostalgia. ( I know my heart soared when Rose popped up, and my eyes got a bit damp when Tom Baker showed up as Curator Sad

) I enjoyed the spirit of the docudrama as well.

At the same time there were points where they lost me (5ish Doctors for example). They seemed to consider it a fair trade to puncture the mystery of Doctor Who for a cheesy inside joke. Queen Elizabeth was an unfortunate choice as well. Perhaps I can explain better after harvest.

My question for now is this: What do you think should be the balance between good sold storytelling and nostalgia for long-time fans? They both clearly belong in Dr Who, but they also clearly bump into each other from time to time.

by Pettytyrant101 Mon Oct 19, 2015 10:58 am

The 5ish Doctors was a comedy/mockumentary made by Peter Davidson getting some of the classics Doctors together. It was entirely Davidsons idea, and written and directed by him and pitched at the BBC- its just a bit of fun really. Its not exactly part of the official stuff, its a bit off to the side.

Why Queen Elizabeth an unfortunate choice? It ties in with a long running thing since the RTD era between the Doctor and Queen Elizabeth- in her later life she wanted his head for something, and at other points we hear he left her in a glade after proposing, and in 10's last story he lets slip he recently accidental married her, Queen Eliz 10th in Beast Below also made reference to it as did the DreamLord in Amy's Choice, but we never found out what it was all about- Moffat just incorporated all that into the 50th and showed how it happened.

As to fan stuff verus storytelling- thats one quite simple for me- if I watch it with someone with no knowledge of the stuff being referenced, and they can still follow it or it doesn't confuse the story then its been well enough explained.

The 50th is a bit of an exception to that as its two things- a look back over 50 years and a set up for the next 50. So its full of references large and small. But having said that I don't think it stops the story for being easily understood, everything you need to know is explained.

by malickfan Mon Oct 19, 2015 12:24 pm

azriel wrote:I was wowed by Capaldi at first, thought he was "The One", now, Im thinking he should have played The Dr differently. He's trying to carry on from Tenant & Smith with his quick, manic, get up & go. I think he should have been quietly serious, broody, a touch sinister but silently confident & unrattled. I thought thats how he would go at the beginning but now its just "lets be like the last two".

Capaldi is easily my favorite Doctor from New Who, a mixture of grumpy uncle and sarcastic aged rockstar, but I'd agree they haven't yet managed to nail down a consistent tone for him. I think part of the trouble is the headwriter, tardis and companion being carried over from Smith's Doctor-he's still living in the shadow of the previous incarnation, Capaldi's casting seemed to indicate a clear break from the other Doctors, but after 10 years of writing for young, manic doctors I don't think the current crew would be best placed to write for an older, less outwardly emotional Doctor, they need a new companion and headwriter i.m.o.

I preferred the Series 8 version of 12-snarky, abrasive, unpredictable and very alien, but Series 8 seemed to have received a massive backlash on social media from the more casual fans (who wouldn't have seen Classic Who and only tune in for a hour of escapism), who were expecting another dashing romantic with quick quips and quirky hair, Capaldi's such a talented actor at pulling off mystery and darkness, but unfortunately I don't think casual audiences would go for it-you only have to look at the amount of moaning after they ditched the (frankly annoying at the stage) sonic screwdriver to know who 'fans' hate change, but bitch about things staying the same Suspect

. You just can't win, I don't think Robots of Sherwood, The Moon Egg or the Forest Episode were much worse than some of the dreck Eccleston, Tennant and Smith had to work with, but because Capaldi's Doctor was so 'different' (i.e very similar to 1-4 and 6) I think the failings of his character and the hit and miss stories he had to work with hit all the harder.

Capaldi still has the humour, charisma and quirks of his previous incarnations, but he's much more subtle at showing them, and more guarded with his feelings, I got extremely bored with Tennant's (and to an extent Smith's) Doctor wearing his heart on his sleeve and being so fallible, lovey dovey and emotional all the time (You are a bloody alien! Try and act like one! Extremely Crabbit

) and find Capaldi's mystery and bluntness a breath a fresh air, and much more reminiscent of Classic Who than the previous three icarnations, that said, Capaldi got much less character material to work with in Series 8 and with such a topsy turvy relationship with Clara, I think some viewers would have found it hard to sympathize or care about his inner turmoil...

Despite Moffat claiming otherwise, I think they were forced to soften Capaldi's Doctor much faster than they originally intended-compare his sharp suit, blunt sarcasm and severe haircut in Deep Breath to his Electric Guitar, Hipster Hoody and warmer sense of humour in Series 9-it's certainly decent character development, and Capaldi pulls it off nicely, but it seems to have happened rather suddenly, and dosen't i.m.o feel totally genuine to Capaldi as an Actor...the (pointless) arc of Series 8 was the Doctor coming to terms with whether he was a good man, if they were going to make into someone this approachable from the start, why didn't they just do it in the first place and not alienate millions of viewers in the process?

Capaldi has so much potential as a Doctor, I hope he is given the chance to stick around as long as possible and fufill it.

Eccleston is clearly a very talented actor, but I think having such a short tenure actually proved a benefit to his Doctor (I never felt he was 100% comfortable in the role), I got very bored with Tennant towards the end, and I never felt Smith's Doctor reached his full potential (fantastic in Series 5, but his range as an actor, and the 'old man in a young man's body' was lost under the weight of childish humour and overly complicated storylines)...Capaldi is the first actor since Tom Baker (well, excluding McGann) I'd be happy to see attempt to break his 7 year tenure as the doctor.

by malickfan Mon Oct 19, 2015 12:51 pm

David H wrote:
My question for now is this: What do you think should be the balance between good sold storytelling and nostalgia for long-time fans? They both clearly belong in Dr Who, but they also clearly bump into each other from time to time.

I think Big Finish's 50th Anniversary Special 'The Light At The End' did this the best.

https://www.bigfinish.com/ranges/released/doctor-who-50th-anniversary

On paper it sounds like eye rolling fan fiction nostalgia bait- a 2 hour, 8 Doctor special set partially in 1963 with the Crispy Master as the Big Bad, but it actually turned out to be a very charming, one -off solid story (that happened to feature 8 doctors) that wasn't wrapped up in it's own importance, not perhaps as 'special' or 'epic' as the Day Of The Doctor, but it marked the occasion very well for fans and casual listeners i.m.o, without falling victim to its own hype, I enjoyed Day Of The Doctor when I watched it, but in retrospect it seems kinda self indulgent and too pandering to New Who fans...what other show would mark its 50th Anniversary by excluding most of the leading actors, and tell a story than reverses the underlying themes of a major 8 year long Character Arc? Suspect

by Mrs Figg Mon Oct 19, 2015 3:30 pm

well I have to say this about Eccleston and Tennant and even Smith. They were well rounded and CLEAR interpretation off the bat. Capaldi still is not comfortable in his role. he is still not understood by loads of people. there is still confusion as to who he is, too many versions sometimes contradictory and unfocused in one person. Eccleston was a short run, but he is etched clearly in my mind as his character, its crystal clear who he is and the type of Doctor he was. Not so Capaldi, we have WILDLY fluctuating versions, one minute he is a rock star, next he is introverted, etc etc, not saying he has to be one note, BUT, he has to be ONE person not an amalgamation of confusing elements just shoved in willy nilly. If people still don't GET him that's down to bad writing and bad acting. ((((not because he is a bad actor but he is a bad Doctor, he just doesn't cut the mustard))))

by Mrs Figg Mon Oct 19, 2015 3:41 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Why Queen Elizabeth an unfortunate choice? It ties in with a long running thing since the RTD era between the Doctor and Queen Elizabeth- in her later life she wanted his head for something, and at other points we hear he left her in a glade after proposing, and in 10's last story he lets slip he recently accidental married her, Queen Eliz 10th in Beast Below also made reference to it as did the DreamLord in Amy's Choice, but we never found out what it was all about- Moffat just incorporated all that into the 50th and showed how it happened.

.

Queen Elizabeth is an unfortunate choice because she was turned from one of the most important rulers in British history to a buxom sex mad flirter who whose only interest was getting into the Doctors pants. Moffat has denigrated and sexualised one too many historical females such as Nefertiti for it to be a coincidence. this is because he cant resist turning powerful women into needy sex maniacs. He cant have a powerful female ruler be a powerful female ruler, he has to have them pouting and grabbing the Doctor in a sexually predatory manner, this is because Moffat is a misogynistic idiot.

by Nagual Mon Oct 19, 2015 3:46 pm

I've got a sneaky suspicion that there is a reason for the Doctors flip-flop personality. No idea what the reason is though.

by Mrs Figg Mon Oct 19, 2015 4:16 pm

The Doctor changes from writer to writer depending on their personal interpretation. maybe this is because Moffat hasn't got a plan or maybe he is too busy with other stuff, like Sherlock, to notice, or maybe he is just letting Capaldi wing it because he knows its going to be cancelled next year anyway and he just doesn't give a monkeys any more.

by David H Mon Oct 19, 2015 4:23 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:
Why Queen Elizabeth an unfortunate choice? It ties in with a long running thing since the RTD era between the Doctor and Queen Elizabeth- in her later life she wanted his head for something, and at other points we hear he left her in a glade after proposing, and in 10's last story he lets slip he recently accidental married her, Queen Eliz 10th in Beast Below also made reference to it as did the DreamLord in Amy's Choice, but we never found out what it was all about- Moffat just incorporated all that into the 50th and showed how it happened.

That's exactly why it was unfortunate. It was a brilliant little running gag about one of the most influential monarchs in British history whose virginity is still so famous that the USA has a whole state named for it.

That allowed a lot of room for imagination. It let the viewer feel that no matter how many layers were pealed away, there'd always be more to the Doctor. And so it made the Who universe feel larger and fuller in the same way that Tolkien hints at backstories for Bombadil, Ents, Nazgul etc., etc.

If the decision is made to pop that balloon, why not at least give us something epic in it's place? For Churchill, Doctor Who gave us the Battle of Britain. I think I had every right to expect the Spanish Armada in this case. Mad

(Edit: also what Mrs Figg said)

by **Amarië** Mon Oct 19, 2015 5:06 pm

Yeah, I agree. It was hinted at as a grand tale and it turned out to be just another degrading story. It sounds like a web troll wrapped in slightly better spelling, really. She wouldn't be such a bitch if she had a man. Would Moffat ever have Ceasar enslaved and threatened with rape? The equivalent of Queen Elizabeth remaining a virgin because the Doctor leaves her would be, oh lets say; Henry VIII killing his wives because they just don't compare to the his oh so delightful Doctor - or Missy for that matter. Amy giving birth in a box; Lock Rory in a box and say "Oh, you're awake. Just in time, say 'byebye kidney! Heeheeheehee!'"

Moffat is very capable of writing brilliant stuff, so why does he keep returning to these cheap woman-loathing cheap tricks? Does he (well the whole crew as well ) actually and truthfully believe he is amusing and clever when pulling these stunts? Shrugging

by Pettytyrant101 Mon Oct 19, 2015 8:57 pm

he is still not understood by loads of people. there is still confusion as to who he is- Figg

Nor should he be- the shows called Doctor Who. Not doctor we know really well. Moffat and Capaldi both stated outright before series 8 aired that a large part of what the both wanted to do was to make him unpredictable again, alien, and to put the WHo back in the shows title with meaning.

'he was turned from one of the most important rulers in British history to a buxom sex mad flirter who whose only interest was getting into the Doctors pants. Moffat has denigrated and sexualised ' blkah blah

We've been here before not that youd know it from the way you just ignore all the previous evidence to the contrary- firstly the notion that something romantic or more had gone on was nothing to do with Moffat, he just ran with it, that was RTD.
Secondly she is only buxom in the episode because the actress had just given birth, she had her baby on set for feeds.
Or are you saying that what Moffat should have done is take a look at the rushes, declare he doesn't want a pregnant women on set and sack her?

Nor does Moffat sexualise or denigrate her- in the story she physically defeats and kills the Zygon Commander, successfully takes it place and fools the other Zygons into believing it, frees the Doctors, unravels the enemies plan and then tells them what iot is, and procures the TARDIS for them to make their escape.

'If the decision is made to pop that balloon, why not at least give us something epic in it's place? '

Easy answer there budget- in case no one noticed that section of the episcde is the cheap bit- just a few outdoor location shoots job done.
As to popping the bubble of that stroy- there are stacks of such stories or suggestions about the Doctor we have never seen- we never did see any of 11's parties with the original Holywood Bratpack for example, legendary as they were.
I suspect the reason Moffat choose this particular one is because it ties 10 and 11 together as it crossed both incarnations.

'The equivalent of Queen Elizabeth remaining a virgin because the Doctor leaves her '= Amarie

Except nowhere in the episode is that suggested- but hey make your own stuff up, pretend it was in the episode then get offended at it!
And if memory serves 10's final reference to her is implying that the name Virgin Queen might not be entirely applicable!

by **Amarië** Mon Oct 19, 2015 9:03 pm

"And if memory serves 10's final reference to her is implying that the name Virgin Queen might not be entirely applicable!"

I'd offer you a shovel, but I see you can dig yourself a hole just fine by yourself. Rolling Eyes

fakeedit:
And you were missing the point as usual. There are plenty of rumours and maybe-truths about QE, refering to wellknown 'gossip' without actually saying anything, is different from deciding to make something canon.

by Pettytyrant101 Mon Oct 19, 2015 9:05 pm

That would be RTD Amarie. 10 if you note. But hey- feel free to accuse Moffat of the sexism for it anyway- that'd be par for the course. Rolling Eyes

by **Amarië** Mon Oct 19, 2015 9:13 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:That would be RTD Amarie. 10 if you note. But hey- feel free to accuse Moffat of the sexism for it anyway- that'd be par for the course.

Oh chill. I just wonder why "RTD did it first and then Moffat made did it far far worse" is meant to make me change my mind?

by **Amarië** Mon Oct 19, 2015 9:50 pm

So, besides "he started it" and "you're stoopid", any other thoughts to what I actually said?

...

Adding a midnight thought;
I just realized QE is Mickey in a dress. It's pretty much the same character arc.

by Pettytyrant101 Mon Oct 19, 2015 11:43 pm

any other thoughts to what I actually said?- Amarie

No, not really. What would be the point? The hysteria on the Moffat is sexist side, the exaggeration, the ignoring of facts, the selective memory of what actually happened and who wrote what all means its pointless.
Its impossible to engage seriously with.

Elizabeth is a good example in fact- she is entirely proactive, makes her own decisions without recourse to anyone, physically handles herself in combat, infiltrates the enemy uncovering their plan, and saves all three Doctors and Clara.
Yet because she is shown to be in love with the Doctor al that is immediately ignored as if it doesn't happen and she instead just a degradation of all womankind.
It would be funny if it wasn't so stupid.

And if being in love with the Doctor is immediate proof that the writer is a misogynist who hates women then Rose is the worse offender of all.

Dave raised a good example, for the wrong reasons!, Churchill- another historical leader from Moffat era. Churchill does nothing- heis basically a catchphrase ('Keep Buggering On') and he tries to nick the TARDIS key whenever he can get a chance- thats it. He does nothing in the plot, he solves nothing, he defeats no one, he is useful zero amounts of time. Elizabeth gets more dialogue and far more to do and what she does is crucial to the plot and story.

But hey- look how big the actresses tits are- lets just slag her off for those instead and claim that's Moffat being sexist somehow.

by Mrs Figg Tue Oct 20, 2015 12:23 am

Pettytyrant101 wrote: he is still not understood by loads of people. there is still confusion as to who he is- Figg

Nor should he be- the shows called Doctor Who. Not doctor we know really well. Moffat and Capaldi both stated outright before series 8 aired that a large part of what the both wanted to do was to make him unpredictable again, alien, and to put the WHo back in the shows title with meaning.

there is a great difference between interesting and nuanced, and confusing and all over the shop. He is unpredictable in a bad way.

'he was turned from one of the most important rulers in British history to a buxom sex mad flirter who whose only interest was getting into the Doctors pants. Moffat has denigrated and sexualised ' blkah blah

We've been here before not that youd know it from the way you just ignore all the previous evidence to the contrary- firstly the notion that something romantic or more had gone on was nothing to do with Moffat, he just ran with it, that was RTD.

Again with the non existent evidence already RTD didn't denigrate female historical rulers, that's Moffat.

Secondly she is only buxom in the episode because the actress had just given birth, she had her baby on set for feeds.

Or are you saying that what Moffat should have done is take a look at the rushes, declare he doesn't want a pregnant women on set and sack her?

say what!

Nor does Moffat sexualise or denigrate her- in the story she physically defeats and kills the Zygon Commander, successfully takes it place and fools the other Zygons into believing it, frees the Doctors, unravels the enemies plan and then tells them what iot is, and procures the TARDIS for them to make their escape.

so lets get this straight. making her a sex mad numpty doesn't denigrate one of the greatest females in history?, you know famous for being a VIRGIN and NOT being married, or needing a bloke to rule one of the greatest empires the world has ever known. but according to Moffat, (who cant bear to see a woman being strong without being needy and predatory), she was gagging for it, couldn't have done it without sausage.'

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Oct 20, 2015 12:31 am

He is unpredictable in a bad way.- Figg

So you say. Im loving him.

RTD didn't denigrate female historical rulers- Figg

No he just implied that the Doctor had a romantic relationship with her.
And nor does Moffat Elizabeth does a lot in the episode with no recourse to anyone but herself.

'making her a sex mad numpty doesn't denigrate one of the greatest females in history?'

Anopthe rgreat example of you getting offended by things that only happen inside your own head- where is she a 'sex mad numpty' they have a romantic picnic together, it lasts less than five minutes, and its a ruse on the Doctors part to expose a Zygon.

'you know famous for being a VIRGIN and NOT being married, or needing a bloke to rule one of the greatest empires the world has ever known'

Same again, you are just making stuff up and then getting offended at what you just made up and blaming Moffat for it!- she is still the Virgin Queen- we don't see them have sex you know nor is implied they do. Nor does she need a bloke to rule- she doesn't even need one to do everything she does in this episode- she doesn't even tell the Doctor what she has done until afterwards.
And she goes on after the Doctor leaves to rule the Empire, alone as history says.

by Mrs Figg Tue Oct 20, 2015 12:51 am

Pettytyrant101 wrote:He is unpredictable in a bad way.- Figg

So you say. Im loving him.

RTD didn't denigrate female historical rulers- Figg

No he just implied that the Doctor had a romantic relationship with her.
And nor does Moffat Elizabeth does a lot in the episode with no recourse to anyone but herself.

'making her a sex mad numpty doesn't denigrate one of the greatest females in history?'

Anopthe rgreat example of you getting offended by things that only happen inside your own head-

'inside my own head?' you mean thinking? that happens inside my head. Of course Moffat thinks from another part of his anatomy. Or maybe that's his arse.

where is she a 'sex mad numpty' they have a romantic picnic together, it lasts less than five minutes, and its a ruse on the Doctors part to expose a Zygon.

'you know famous for being a VIRGIN and NOT being married, or needing a bloke to rule one of the greatest empires the world has ever known'

Same again, you are just making stuff up

er are you familiar with british history?

and then getting offended at what you just made up and blaming Moffat for it!- she is still the Virgin Queen- we don't see them have sex you know nor is implied they do. Nor does she need a bloke to rule- she doesn't even need one to do everything she does in this episode- she doesn't even tell the Doctor what she has done until afterwards.

so whats all the ogling, pouting, snogging and groping? not to mention the marrying?
And she goes on after the Doctor leaves to rule the Empire, alone as history says.