Sherlock - BBC [4]

Pettytyrant101 wrote:You have still not said what it is you disagree with in my analysis of Moffat- his reach? His popularity? His ability to cross cultures? The critical and fan awards he has received? His output? The history of his previous work? The success of his casting choices? Which of these is in error?

Pettytyrant101 wrote:But there also facts Blue. Objective ones.

Heres one - Doctor Who is watched in nearly 200 countries. 182 to be more precise (but that's 2014 figures, cant find this years which I know was another increase)

Now things can be taken from this fact, if we were discussing evidence that Tolkien's stories have universal appeal one of the main-planks of evidence would be how many countries his work has been translated for. And quite rightly so. Its a measure of the works reach and appeal.
The exact same can be said for tv and Moffat tv- in years when its on Sherlock is alongside Who BBC Worldwides top selling programs globally.

This indicates a universality to the writing that appeal across countries and cultures.

Secondly as the vast , majority of the countries showing Moffat's work are doing so through commercial broadcasters it is not in those broadcasters interests to put on a show which does not bring in audiences and revenue. It can therefore also be deduced that Moffats work not only transfers well across boundaries but is also popular enough to sustain itself.

As you say popularity is no measure of quality, but its a measure of accessibility and universality- and that in turn shows that your original contention that Moffat cannot write straight forward television is in error. If he could not do so the above facts about his work simply would not exist.

Regards awards many of Moffats are audience voted not industry, and among the industry ones I would not discount BAFTA entirely- they are snooty and arty and tend to only go for stuff that is worthy rather than just popular and have quite high standards for craftsmanship. Most of the time.

Norc wrote:we'll see if i can write something about democracies..

Pettytyrant101 wrote:overall positive critical reception. sometimes he does have sometimes he doesn't.- Figg

Overall he does- that's easy to check on sites like iMDb.
Obviously that's not to say he doesn't also get negative reviews- everyone does. But taken together his critical reception is overall good asw to are hisw ratingsw given by the public and demonstrated in the BBC AI figures (last episode getting a respectable 83- good- rating).

'and a LOT of people object to his sexism.'

And judging on the viewers overall a lot more don't. Not that I accept the charge in the first place.
And its undeniable that his two biggest shows Sherlock and Who have very large female fan bases and clearly they appeal to both sexes, again, overall.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:A LOT maybe- but a drop in the ocean of the overall audience. The majority of whom just watch it and enjoy it.

And if you take this series of Who just so far the first story female characters far outnumbered male and all were in positions of authority, the last story female characters were the stronger featured and had the positions of authority (again) and one of them was deaf. I look, but I see the opposite of sexism. Or discrimination of any sort.

Spoiler:

Norc wrote:aah.. where would women be in this world if it wasn't for sexism.... *dreamy eyes*

Pettytyrant101 wrote: UNIT woman, in authority but useless and ineffectual, Missy in authority strangely flirty and non-threatening, more pantomime villain. two female crew members whose love lives were the focus of the story. one female crew member giggly fangirl.- Figgy

The only way you can describe the female character sin this manner is be utterly selective and ignore 99% of everything they say and do.

so UNIT woman was an effective and decisive leader was she? I must have missed that bit, so the gormless expression was a cunning plan?

For example Cass and Lunn, who dismiss here as 'two female crew members whose love lives were the focus of the story.'

yep. After all according to Moffat girls on a space-craft/base/military thingie, cant just be there to do a job, oh no, romance and boys has to be the end result of mixed sex work environments. Never mind about professional relationships or work ethic. women just want a snog. no matter that for 99.9% of the story romance wasn't even mentioned.

Spoiler:

This is one of the reasons when you go about Moffats blatant sexism I find it very hard to take seriously-

oh I am well aware of your brushing off of many peoples concerns and the need to defend Moffat from the slightest critique

as you are so selective in your evidence and often deliberately ignore the vast bulk of a character just to try to present them in a light that makes it sound either like they are sexistly written, or hopeless- when neither is the case.

As to Missy 'pantomine-villain' is a perfectly accurate description of every version of the Master since the original, including RTD's.

But RTD's master was genuinely scary and a real threat, not a woman who wants to flirt and tickle Dalek balls. The male Master didn't grope and kiss the Doctor did he? only the female Master does that, funny that.

Nor is she flirty- who does she flirt with in the opening two parter- I would say she was a lot less flirty than the last version was. And is simply enjoying her 'upgrade' to a woman as she calls it.

have you heard what you just said

As for Kate- well she is Head of one of the most powerful scientific and military groups on the planet- she is first in line to defend the planet and chosen by the worlds leaders to be liaison for the Doctor as President. Oh and she is also a working mum with two children, and an outstanding bridge player.
Yes Clara does work most of it out not Kate, but then its Kate who phones Clara and gets her in to help when she is stumped- there is nothing sexist about either asking for help or being stumped.

Kate is useless.

Especially not if the writer then uses not one, but two of his female characters to work out the answers (lets not forget UNIT's new science boffin is now a woman when under RTD it was a mans job).

So when you just reduce complex characters to one trait you think you can present in a sexist light, and ignore so much more, it becomes hard for me to see any merits at all in your accusations against Moffat and females.

that's pretty obvious.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:the gormless expression was a cunning plan?- Figg

Ah back to attacking physical characteristics in lieu of a good argument I see!

that's not a physical characteristic, its a facial expression. quite different. one is permanent the other isnt

'women just want a snog.'

Out of the opening four episodes there have been eight strong female characters carrying the plot- out of them 1 wanted a snog.

8? are you sure about that. stereotypical 'feisty' characters don't count.

In the opening of a new series Moffat choose to sideline the main title character for the first 3rd of the episode and trust entirely his audience will happily go with a story entirely led by female characters- the only males who appear are background guards for Missy to murder. These are not the actions of a sexist writer.

the 3rd episode was actually a Doctor Who story as it should have been done for the last two seasons, before this nonsense about the Doctor being the only important aspect of the story, which quickly got boring, that's why most people hated season 8. The Doctor was still the main focus for the first two-parter, and in the 3rd and 4th episodes the story itself became the focus. There was an equal number of male and female characters in both episodes. The companion is obviously a female and Clara had very little to do in ANY of the first 4 episodes. The only other female is Missy, and again she could have been cut completely without altering anything that happened. She was pretty much there just to interact with Clara otherwise Clara would have been absent from the first two episodes. the episodes were about the Doctor and Davros. so your protestations are faulty.

' I am well aware of your brushing off of many peoples concerns'

Only if those concerns are ill conceived and cannot be backed up by evidence. As in this case- to say that the two main female characters in the last two parter are there for nothing more than a love interest if silly and you know it.

I have given you evidence. you have ignore it because it didn't suit. I didn't say the two crew members were ONLY there as love interests, but their overriding concerns were at the end of the day, romantic relationships, rather than any interest on what had just happened.

'and the need to defend Moffat from the slightest critique'

I have critiqued in the past where it seemed warranted to me (Amy/Rory divorce plot line and the ending of Scandal  being two notable occasions).

'The male Master didn't grope and kiss the Doctor did he? only the female Master does that, funny that.'

Many people consider the RTD/Doctor story line to be a love story, especially with its ending.

perhaps its a love story, but if people are not sure that means it was SUBTLE.

When I recently watched it back it seemed quite clear to me that RTD wrote their relationship with some quite obvious gay undertones and in fact even contrasts it with the Masters relationship with his 'wife' (incidentally a mentally and implied physically abused women whose only role in the narrative is to initially stand about looking pretty then be abused to the point where she snaps and commits murder in vengeance as a plot convenience, and she has almost no lines to say- if Moffat wrote that you'd be screaming sexism from the rafters).

'Kate is useless. '

We have seen no evidence to back that up, and plenty to say otherwise. She is smart enough to keep up with the Doctors train of thought in Day for example "My God that man is clever!" And so is the woman who has already worked out what he is on about.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:The first half hour introduces the moral dilemma- the young Davros- set sup the plot arc- introduces Colony Sarf, that he works for Davros, that Davros is dying and wants to see the Doctor one last time but the Doctor is missing, reintroduces Missy in a fun and interesting way, shows how much Clara has learned from the Doctor by how she handles Missy in their confrontation, and shows where they are alike and how easily they can slip into working together.
And its a a plot carried almost exclusively by female characters.

The first half hour does quite a lot actually.

That Clara is not directly involved in the resolution is not of importance in this story as its a story in which we see the Doctor be the lead. Given how many have said its too much Doctor Clara its typical that when Moffat makes it a Doctor saves the day story its someone twisted yet again  into the vindictive need to claim it as sexism somehow.