PDA

View Full Version : Help me get into Doctor Who



TheStillWind
2010-12-12, 02:37 AM
I have only a basic knowledge of Doctor Who. I am familiar with the general plot and the themes only because it is the longest running science fiction series ever and you can play D&D or have unhealthy obsessions with Scifi/Fantasy books, TV shows, and movies without running into it somewhere. I have only seen one or two episodes of the show on the rare occasion when I have access to the BBC. I enjoyed what I did watch but never really got into it because I was intimidated by the length of the series and didn't want to be 800 episodes behind. Recently my fiance has been bugging me to get a hold of it just to test the waters and see if we want to watch the whole thing. So I ask you, where do I begin? Do I start season 1 episode 1? Do I start with the current season and just hope that ad questions would be filled in for me? What should I expect?

chiasaur11
2010-12-12, 02:39 AM
Just watch the latest season.

You'll catch up as you go. Later, you can start delving, but I'm warning, there is a lot of canon material, some of it not even featuring the Doctor.

Just finished a big novel. No Doctor, no Daleks. Just four Russian brothers, and maybe the devil. Still, good book.

V'icternus
2010-12-12, 02:39 AM
I have recently started from the 2005 season, with the 'new' season 1. But apparently if you start from any season that introduces a new Doctor you should be fine.

chiasaur11
2010-12-12, 02:43 AM
Why I recommended season five.

Latest one, new Doctor, new companions, new TARDIS, new big threat.

Some tie ins to earlier stuff, but all explained more or less.

And, most importantly, it has less sucky stuff than any other season in recent memory.

SilentNight
2010-12-12, 02:59 AM
If you want to get straight into it then yes, the newest season is the place to go, Smith hasn't quite won me over but on average the writing is quite good. However, as a David Tennant fan I highly recommend you start with him, which is easiest with either the 2007 or 2005 seasons.

chiasaur11
2010-12-12, 03:06 AM
If you want to get straight into it then yes, the newest season is the place to go, Smith hasn't quite won me over but on average the writing is quite good. However, as a David Tennant fan I highly recommend you start with him, which is easiest with either the 2007 or 2005 seasons.

Alright.

This is a perfect point to mention something important.

At some point, if you like the show, it is guaranteed you will find "Your" Doctor. Not that the others are less than good. Just one is the best, the most Doctory.

Generally, it is accepted it takes all sorts. Just let others have their opinions, and you'll learn a lot.

Also, your choice should be Matt Smith or Tom Baker. All other options are wrong.

V'icternus
2010-12-12, 03:12 AM
Why I recommended season five.

Latest one, new Doctor, new companions, new TARDIS, new big threat.

Some tie ins to earlier stuff, but all explained more or less.

And, most importantly, it has less sucky stuff than any other season in recent memory.

Bfwuhgflabn! Spoilers!
What happens to the old TARDIS? :smallfrown:

Fjolnir
2010-12-12, 03:36 AM
I would say start with the Christopher Eccleson stuff and work your way forward, each of the new doctors was pretty good in their own way and bring something new to the character...

Though the Dr Who role seems to go to someone with a few years of experience as a bit player in any number of BBC productions as a test to see if they can hold their own OR it is given as a bone to veterans of the BBC as a reward for a job well done...

V'icternus
2010-12-12, 03:58 AM
I would say start with the Christopher Eccleson stuff and work your way forward, each of the new doctors was pretty good in their own way and bring something new to the character...

I agree.


Though the Dr Who role seems to go to someone with a few years of experience as a bit player in any number of BBC productions as a test to see if they can hold their own OR it is given as a bone to veterans of the BBC as a reward for a job well done...

Cannot comment here, not being as well-versed in modern BBC television as I could be.

Androgeus
2010-12-12, 06:01 AM
Bfwuhgflabn! Spoilers!
What happens to the old TARDIS? :smallfrown:

It's not a new tardis, just a change of the desktop theme (they redesigned the set)

Eldan
2010-12-12, 07:35 AM
I would recommend starting in 2005, when they revived the series after a very long time off the air. They start pretty much from nothing there and introduce everything as you go along. I had never even heard of the Doctor before, and I got along fine.

Kobold-Bard
2010-12-12, 07:42 AM
Start with Eccleston (2005). They went into that expecting people to know almost nothing about Dr. Who because it hadn't been on the air in decades.

You say you're familiar with he basic concept (zany adventures in space & time, what a Dalek looks like etc.) which is all you will need. Everything from the older series is explained, and if you're going to watch it you might as well start from the "beginning".

Mauve Shirt
2010-12-12, 09:37 AM
Eccleston is the best, and he's only in one season of episodes, so he's an easy place to start. But you can also start with Matt Smith, since he also only has one season so far and is still around. I wouldn't start with Tennant unless you've watched Eccleston first.

Kobold-Bard
2010-12-12, 09:44 AM
Eccleston is the best, and he's only in one season of episodes, so he's an easy place to start. But you can also start with Matt Smith, since he also only has one season so far and is still around. I wouldn't start with Tennant unless you've watched Eccleston first.

True, Tennant has all the Billie Piper stuff from Eccleston's run, best not to start with him.

Also: I love your avatar :smallbiggrin:

valadil
2010-12-12, 12:11 PM
I started with Eccelston and Tennant and had no trouble catching up. I've seen some best ofs from the earlier seasons and crossed a couple earlier doctors off my list entirely.

Evil DM Mark3
2010-12-12, 12:27 PM
All this advice of starting with the NuWho is good, there is a marked difference between Old Who and NuWho however. When you buy DVDs you will get one Old Who story, which can be from 2 to 10 episodes. Be careful with doing this however, as some of the Old Who is TERRIBLE (imagine something on the level of love and monsters, but 6 episodes long...).

I would say that 2005 or 2010 are good jumping on points, as are most of the box sets the BBC have put old of Old Who. As a rule there are few stories that are difficult to get into the swing of. Don't worry about "having missed 800 episodes" as while episode to episode the stories often build quite well in Old Who most stories are self contained with only limited story to story interaction.

Syka
2010-12-12, 12:35 PM
I started halfway through NuWho Season 1, during a SyFy marathon. I believe it was actually the Empty Child (no wonder I like Moffat). I then proceeded to watch through the finale.


Personally, I'd say start with Matt Smith (the most recent season). But that's just because he is my favorite Doctor so far. It really is a series that you can start- literally- anywhere with.

Don't worry about the backlog of 700+ OldWho episodes. It's referenced a few times in NuWho, but nothing really that makes it confusing. More just adds character to the show (like bringing back Sarah Jane).

Given that NuWho is still running strong, start somewhere with that. Series 5 would let you also get in to the newest Christmas Special coming out and Series 6. Watching it won't really spoil Series 1-4, unless I'm forgetting something major.



Speaking of, I'm currently marathoning NuWho from Series 1, Episode 1 for the run up to the Christmas Special. :smallbiggrin: Just got my copy of Series 5 on Wednesday!

shadow_archmagi
2010-12-12, 12:36 PM
(imagine something on the level of love and monsters, but 6 episodes long...)

I liked Love and Monsters!

Anyway, yes, New-Who and Old-Who should be treated as two entirely separate, but related series.

Start with the first Eccleston episode and proceed forward, is my recommendation. The Old-Who definitely has some really, really bad episodes.

I'd advice against starting with Matt Smith simply because there are several hanging plot threads and recurring enemies that crop up, and it's best if you've seen the previous episodes.

Season 1 Episode 1 (OF the New Series) is the best starting place.

Teron
2010-12-12, 02:07 PM
Given that NuWho is still running strong, start somewhere with that. Series 5 would let you also get in to the newest Christmas Special coming out and Series 6. Watching it won't really spoil Series 1-4, unless I'm forgetting something major.
Nothing major, but watching series 5 first (aside from a few scattered episodes of 1-4) weakened Blink a bit for me when I got around to seeing it, and you'd probably get a similar effect with a few other episodes. I'll echo the advice to watch New-Who in order (and starting with Tennant is the "worst" choice because there's a bit more continuity in 1-4, but it's still not a big deal).

shadow_archmagi
2010-12-12, 05:30 PM
Nothing major, but watching series 5 first (aside from a few scattered episodes of 1-4) weakened Blink a bit for me when I got around to seeing it, and you'd probably get a similar effect with a few other episodes. I'll echo the advice to watch New-Who in order (and starting with Tennant is the "worst" choice because there's a bit more continuity in 1-4, but it's still not a big deal).

Worst is in quotation marks because Tennant is never a *bad* idea.

Ragitsu
2010-12-12, 05:48 PM
Main character and most supporting characters aside, Doctor Who has quite a bit of misandry. This surprised me at first, but then I realized most of the BBC is misandrist.

Kobold-Bard
2010-12-12, 05:50 PM
Main character and most supporting characters aside, Doctor Who has quite a bit of misandry. This surprised me at first, but then I realized most of the BBC is misandrist.

http://www.funnyforumpics.com/forums/ORLY/3/orly-thumb.jpg

To tell.

Leecros
2010-12-12, 06:00 PM
I actually enjoyed most of the OldWho episodes i have seen, but meh, i might just be a little different :smallconfused:

shadow_archmagi
2010-12-12, 06:01 PM
Main character and most supporting characters aside, Doctor Who has quite a bit of misandry. This surprised me at first, but then I realized most of the BBC is misandrist.


Er, what?

Main and supporting aside? Who does that even leave? Extras? Are you suggesting that Doctor Who loves to kill Guy In Crowd more than Girl In Crowd?

Evil DM Mark3
2010-12-12, 07:16 PM
Main character and most supporting characters aside, Doctor Who has quite a bit of misandry. This surprised me at first, but then I realized most of the BBC is misandrist.

This is a misinterpretation of the hatred. It is infact the mixture of RTD's sexuality crusades (note how Captain Jack is a character who otherwise fills the "bad person TM" template but is made distinct by his sexuality) and the show's overall "violence/military = EVIL" attitude. Never mind the fact that UNIT is one of the shows longest lasting and most beloved elements... The point is the people who are put in as the "baddie" under those thrusts are always men (and one female Silurian).

Allthough this does seem to be dieing off a bit in the Grand Moff's era.

Ragitsu
2010-12-12, 07:25 PM
Er, what?

Main and supporting aside? Who does that even leave? Extras? Are you suggesting that Doctor Who loves to kill Guy In Crowd more than Girl In Crowd?

Supporting being those friendly with the Doctor, with distinct names (usually two or three at any one time) that get roped into his adventures.

Granted, it's subtle at times, but it's consistently around in one form or another.

(Note that i'm speaking about the Tennant run. I haven't watched any with the newest lead actor).

The Big Dice
2010-12-12, 09:48 PM
This is a misinterpretation of the hatred. It is infact the mixture of RTD's sexuality crusades (note how Captain Jack is a character who otherwise fills the "bad person TM" template but is made distinct by his sexuality) and the show's overall "violence/military = EVIL" attitude. Never mind the fact that UNIT is one of the shows longest lasting and most beloved elements... The point is the people who are put in as the "baddie" under those thrusts are always men (and one female Silurian).

Allthough this does seem to be dieing off a bit in the Grand Moff's era.

Unit were a feature of Classic Who for four years, with a recurring role roughly once per Doctor after that. I'd hardly call them long lasting in terms of a show that ran almost continuouslyfor27 years. The "UNIT family" of Jo Grant, Brigadier Lethbridge Stewart, Captain Yates and Sergeant Benton lasted for three years of the show's run.

And RTD handled UNIT with respect and skill. It's funny how many people diss his writing, and yet the only reason that Christopher Ecclestone took the part was for the chance to work with RTD again. The man is one of the most respected television writers in the world. If it wasn't for him, Doctor Who would never have been brought back at all.

And it's intersting that Moffat has taken to changing things for no reason other than to change them, and has had to make his first reversal of policy having been show runner for only a year. He's a good writer when he has someone else to edit him,but he's not so great at calling the shots.

Leaving important plot threads dangling that won't be resolved for a year or more isn't a good thing when your show is marketed very heavily at pre teen children.

The thing is, other than the 3rd Doctor, all of them have been strongly characterised as anti establishment figures. First, second and fourth were extremely opposed to the established order, working aginst governments and multinationals in equal measure. And the Doctor has never been a character who resorts to violence as his first option when it comes to dealing with his enemies.

That's why there was such strong backlash against Colin Baker shooting cybermen. Because it was felt to be out of character for a character who uses his wits rather than his weapons.

So the military and violence being bad isn't really something that new writers have brought into Who. It's something that'sbeen there since the very beginning.

The one thing RTD did get rid of was the implied sexism and the patronising manner that earlier Doctors were guilty of. In the 60s and 70s, this was normal paternalism. But on today's television, it just comes across as sexist and insulting.

And Jack Harkness doesn't fill the "Bad Person TM" slot. He's a modern day Han Solo, with the added complication of his sexuality. He starts off as the time travelling con man, becomes a self sacrificing hero and eventually goes on to becomes a slightly darker version of the Doctor. One more willing to use a gun, but not as his first resort.

Finally, mostly casting male villains isn't just something that Who is guilty of. Female villains are rarer in general.

Gamer Girl
2010-12-13, 12:28 AM
Doctor Who is a hard show to wrap your brain around.

Start with the 2005 Doctor and work your way up.

To say Doctor Who has a ton of lore is an understatement. But it gets worse. All of that lore contradicts itself to make one huge mess.

To get it all you'll need to talk to people well versed in the lore. At least those of us that want it to all make sense and don't just say 'it's all wrong'.

But you don't need to know all the lore to enjoy an episode. A well written episode is all you need.

Juhn
2010-12-13, 12:44 AM
(and starting with Tennant is the "worst" choice because there's a bit more continuity in 1-4, but it's still not a big deal).

I started with Tennant and quite enjoyed myself (though yes, people in this thread are right: there was a lot of "Who is this 'Rose Tyler' and why should I care about her?" when I was first watching). Tennant's general awesomeness made up for it though.

Evil DM Mark3
2010-12-13, 06:59 AM
Unit were a feature of Classic Who for four years, with a recurring role roughly once per Doctor after that. I'd hardly call them long lasting in terms of a show that ran almost continuouslyfor27 years. The "UNIT family" of Jo Grant, Brigadier Lethbridge Stewart, Captain Yates and Sergeant Benton lasted for three years of the show's run.Four years is longer than many Doctors and they did far more comming back than any other feature of Doctor Who appart from The Doctor and The TARDIS.


And RTD handled UNIT with respect and skill. It's funny how many people diss his writing, and yet the only reason that Christopher Ecclestone took the part was for the chance to work with RTD again. The man is one of the most respected television writers in the world. If it wasn't for him, Doctor Who would never have been brought back at all.Indeed he did, I was simply using them to draw a contrast, not to attack those episodes (although the way The Doctor seems to dislike UNIT irks me a little). As for RTD, he was undoubtedly a decent producer, but lets take a look at the episodes he actually wrote for a minute:

Rose and The End of the World: No complaints here, a good solid start.
Aliens of London and World War III: A plot with (admittedly just a few gigantic holes) and the second ever Doctor Who fart joke.
The Long Game: A mostly mediocre episode that serves a good arc role.
Boom Town: Another mediocre and plot hole filled episode (this time more than a few) with yet more fart humour.
Bad Wolf and The Parting of the Ways: A fairly solid end to the series, a bit of pandering aside. No real complaints.
The Christmas invasion: The power of TEA and The Doctor meddling in the proper course of human history to satisfy his personal mores for reasons that do not add up aside a fun episode.
New Earth: A fun episode, marred only by RTD's now trademark tissue paper science.
Tooth and Claw: A very nice episode, my favourite of the season.
Love and Monsters: Say no more.
Army of ghosts and Doomsday: Decent enough episodes, but ones that leave logic holes in the series so huge that the suspension of disbelief dies a slow, painful, death next season when we arrive on earth.
The Runaway Bride: Recall the fan backlash when Donna Noble came back? That is not good. Although an interesting story the characterisation of the Doctor has started its trademark bipolarism with The Doctor more than willing to stand and watch a race he is destroying die, apparently even to the point where he would have drowned himself.
Smith and Jones: Another interesting and decent episode, say what you like about RTD he can open a season well although we do seem to be hitting a formula here.
Gridlock: I don't know why but a lot of people seem to hate this episode. Perhaps it is the shameless and pointless use of the Macra that did it.
Utopia, Sound of Drums and Last of the Timelords: Interesting episodes and mostly well written, and yet all most people can say is "twinkly Dobby Jesus Doctor."
Voyage of the Damned: I myself can't understand why, but I don't like this episode, still not bad on the whole based on the opinions of others.
Partners in Crime: See my comments about opening stories. I really like this one infact.
Midnight and Turn Left: I have never met anyone who likes both, although I have found many who love one, so score one, and loose one, in whichever order you want.
The stolen Earth and The Journey's End: By now the cycle of RTD silliness has reached all of reality in danger and The Doctor objecting to killing Daleks, along with some VERY bad regeneration stuff that had most of the fanbase in uproar.
The 2008 specials. Nothing wonderful, but nothing terrible. Yet more questions about how on earth humanity has forgotten about Aliens and a final special that had the fans in uproar because they interpreted it as meaning that Tenant was being booted off the show.

My point is that he has not written anything that compares to Moffat's weakest Doctor Who offering, and he has written quite a few of the show's total clangers and tone misteps. In addition to this the finales of each season became a running joke. Each had more Deus Ex Machina and each put a larger chunk of reality at risk. Also the damage he did to the internal logic of the show on his way out, and the utterly pathetic way that 10's regeneration was handled, meant that Moffat had to do a lot of damage control in his first season. Donna? GONE. Torchwood? GONE. The Daleks? GONE. The earth's ignorance of aliens? GONE so hard it left a hole in the wall. 11's entry? RUNINED by 10 showing exactly no spine when facing his death and saying "I don't want to go". What a betrayal! RTD did a good job producing, but he won't be forgiven by many fans for some of what he did and that eclipses the good stuff in their minds. Myself? I am indifferent.


And it's intersting that Moffat has taken to changing things for no reason other than to change them, and has had to make his first reversal of policy having been show runner for only a year. He's a good writer when he has someone else to edit him,but he's not so great at calling the shots. I think that Moffat's first season is as least as good as RTD's, and there was a lot of clean up to do after RTD's destructive exit (see above).


Leaving important plot threads dangling that won't be resolved for a year or more isn't a good thing when your show is marketed very heavily at pre teen children.Funny I was under the impression that pre-teens where humans who could process information over a long period of time. Being a school teacher and in a good position to observe such creatures, the hanging plot threads are still causing much debate and consideration among some of them who can't wait for the resolution.


The thing is, other than the 3rd Doctor, all of them have been strongly characterised as anti establishment figures. First, second and fourth were extremely opposed to the established order, working aginst governments and multinationals in equal measure. And the Doctor has never been a character who resorts to violence as his first option when it comes to dealing with his enemies.

That's why there was such strong backlash against Colin Baker shooting cybermen. Because it was felt to be out of character for a character who uses his wits rather than his weapons.

So the military and violence being bad isn't really something that new writers have brought into Who. It's something that'sbeen there since the very beginning.And the First, Second and Fourth Doctors where also all willing to work with Authority when it was in their and the innocents' best interests. The Tenth Doctor was rude, obstructive and abrasive towards the military even when they shared goals. Colin Baker is not the typical doctor (although in truth Five was the Doctor who used firearms most often, not Six).


The one thing RTD did get rid of was the implied sexism and the patronising manner that earlier Doctors were guilty of. In the 60s and 70s, this was normal paternalism. But on today's television, it just comes across as sexist and insulting.Agreed. But he has also admitted that he wanted to use Doctor Who as a vehicle for his own Gender Politics. This is a family show.


And Jack Harkness doesn't fill the "Bad Person TM" slot. He's a modern day Han Solo, with the added complication of his sexuality. He starts off as the time travelling con man, becomes a self sacrificing hero and eventually goes on to becomes a slightly darker version of the Doctor. One more willing to use a gun, but not as his first resort.He starts off as a man interested in his own financial well-being above the safety of others (he had no way of knowing that crashing the ship would not hurt people, and it did) and willing to use violence to achieve his ends. He is at least 80% of the way there.


Finally, mostly casting male villains isn't just something that Who is guilty of. Female villains are rarer in general.This was not the point I was making and I am sorry if I gave that impression. What you say is true and not what I meant to say.

Eldan
2010-12-13, 07:06 AM
I'm perhaps in the minority, but I liked a lot of RTDs stuff. Yes, he had some pretty horrible ideas, the Dei Ex machinae were annoying from time to time and his idea of humour is pretty horrible.

But I'll be damned if he can't create EPIC atmosphere. Which, at least for me, has been lacking in the newest season. Moffat is great at creating suspense and scary monsters, but even in his season finale, I never had any of those real "woohoo!" fistpump moments.

shadow_archmagi
2010-12-13, 07:07 AM
pre-teen children.

wait what!?

Eldan
2010-12-13, 07:09 AM
Children that aren't teenagers yet.
As opposed to adult children. As a student, I encounter enough of those every day :smalltongue:

shadow_archmagi
2010-12-13, 07:12 AM
Children that aren't teenagers yet.
As opposed to adult children. As a student, I encounter enough of those every day :smalltongue:

I mean, Doctor Who is for babbies? Since when?

Eldan
2010-12-13, 07:20 AM
Always been a children's show, actually.

Doesn't mean adults can't like it as well.

V'icternus
2010-12-13, 07:31 AM
Have you seen the episode "Blink"?
I wouldn't show that to the kid of my worst enemy!
Nightmares!

But in general, yes, it is a show aimed at children... or at least kept accessible to them.

We just appreciate it more. :smalltongue:

Eldan
2010-12-13, 07:33 AM
Phh. Children need a good nightmare now and then. :smalltongue:

I mean, why even bother being a kid if you can't have random, bet-wetting terror?

V'icternus
2010-12-13, 07:36 AM
I'll leave them with nightmares about evil Care Bears and Gremlins, thank-you-very-much.

...Although denying them Daleks would be a crime. :smalltongue:

Eldan
2010-12-13, 07:42 AM
Heh. I remember seeing the Indiana Jones movies as a kid.

I would jump whenever anyone even mentioned the word "Skull" near me.

V'icternus
2010-12-13, 07:43 AM
Most people only do that when someone says Crystal Skull. :smalltongue:

But yes, I remember old Doctor Who reruns as a child...
Daleks were and are the greatest things ever to ever be ever.

Eldan
2010-12-13, 07:44 AM
Indy 1-3 had melting faces, people thrown into Lava and the entire catacombs in the Last Crusade. Each of those movies gave me nightmares for months. And I still loved them.

Thufir
2010-12-13, 08:15 AM
Midnight and Turn Left: I have never met anyone who likes both,

*Raises hand*
And I hardly think I'm the only one.


The 2008 specials. Nothing wonderful, but nothing terrible. Yet more questions about how on earth humanity has forgotten about Aliens and a final special that had the fans in uproar because they interpreted it as meaning that Tennant was being booted off the show.

In the words of Tennant, What?!
Sorry, but that's one of the most ridiculous things I've seen said on the subject, since the fact of Tennant being replaced by Matt Smith was announced long in advance and well publicised.


Donna? GONE. Torchwood? GONE.

These two are not such significant issues as you make them out to be. Apart from anything else, both were introduced by RTD in the first place, they weren't integral elements of the show he'd messed around with.


The Daleks? GONE.

This one, yes, fair enough. It was one of the problems of the RTD era that every time the Daleks turned up they were pretty much extinct by the end of the episode/two-parter. And yet they still always came back.


11's entry? RUINED by 10 showing exactly no spine when facing his death and saying "I don't want to go". What a betrayal!

MASSIVE disagreement here. I can confidently say I am far from alone in finding that to be a highly poignant exit from the series. If you want to question the regeneration, question the over-extended 'Doctor visits all his old companions' sequence beforehand. THAT had some definite isssues with it. But Tennant's last line was a perfect emotional climax to his whole run as the Doctor.


But I'll be damned if he can't create EPIC atmosphere. Which, at least for me, has been lacking in the newest season. Moffat is great at creating suspense and scary monsters, but even in his season finale, I never had any of those real "woohoo!" fistpump moments.

I acknowledge that point, but personally I prefer the Moffat way.
Also, RTD's epic atmosphere came at the cost of the Dei ex machina, because he would raise the stakes so high that he had no real way out short of the Doctor more or less waving his hand and making it so it all never happened. This is why general opinion I've seen on here seems to be that RTD's two-part finales would have brilliant first halves and terrible second halves. Brilliant build-up, terrible resolution.
(OK, I'm exaggerating a bit, but that's the gist).

Also, I disagree with the point of Doctor Who being for children. I mean, yes, it is for children, but it is by no means exclusively for children at this point. I would say that really, at this point, Doctor Who's target audience is basically the entire population of Great Britain.

Eldan
2010-12-13, 08:24 AM
True, true. I'd still like to see a bit higher stakes from time to time. If they can be resolved without doctoral finger-snipping, all the better, but I really didn't care all that much.

Archonic Energy
2010-12-13, 08:37 AM
Voyage of the Damned: I myself can't understand why, but I don't like this episode, still not bad on the whole based on the opinions of others.


if it pleases the court may i enter excibit A into procedings
Ex A: Kylie in a maid uniform.

The Big Dice
2010-12-13, 01:24 PM
Four years is longer than many Doctors and they did far more comming back than any other feature of Doctor Who appart from The Doctor and The TARDIS.
And the Daleks. Or the cybermen.Or the Time Lords, who were severely over used once John Nathan Turner took over as producer.


As for RTD, he was undoubtedly a decent producer, but lets take a look at the episodes he actually wrote for a minute:
Yes,let's take a look.


Rose and The End of the World: Was a great reintroduction for a show that had literally been off the air for so long that a huge chunk of the target audience had no idea it was a sequel to a 35 year old story. It also game the Doctor a darker tone than he'd had since the Hartnell years. All that stuff about death being his constant companion and the mysterious front the Doctor put up made for a solid reintroduction.

Aliens of London and World War III: Dodgy cliffhanger, silly aliens. Aliens that were hiding in human bodies, a concept that has been used time and again over the years on Who. The first extended story of the new era was a learning experience for the production. But it is also a good story in it's own right. Remember, they aren't making late night adult drama here, it's a family show that's heavily aimed at the children of the UK.

The Long Game: A great character piece. And more important than it first seemed. This one takes the relationship between Doctor and companion to a whole new place that it's never been before. Both in terms of sexual tension and the rejection of Adam. All because someone responded like a normal person would.

Boom Town: This one was filler, but it did develop the character of the Doctor further. He was shown to be someone who both runs away from the consequences of his meddling and who is willing to let people die in horrible ways.

Bad Wolf and The Parting of the Ways: Great stuff, Jack Harkness completes his hero journey, Mickey saves the world with a big yellow truck, Rose gets all obsessive, Jackie gives great comedy moments as well as providing a human heart to all the crazy stuff. And the Doctor regenerates, giving a new generation of British kids a complete Doctor Who experience in one season. To quote the ninth Doctor, fantastic!

The Christmas invasion: Absolutely barmy. Keep the lead unconcious for three fourths of the show. And dress him like Arthur Dent too. Evengive Dent a namecheck. Sword fights in the sky and bringing down governments with six words and all that good stuff.

New Earth: Cat nuns! Silly science! Something Who isn't the only source of, I might add. Lemon grass.A good introduction to the tenth Doctor, who turns out to bethe same guy but with a new face and a lot more energy.

Tooth and Claw: Was a great, atmospheric yet character driven story. And it laid the foundations for both the season finale and John BArrowman's spin off vehicle.

Love and Monsters: I liked this one. It was quirky, pushed the format of the show into totally new directions and was generally a good bit of fun. It's a good reminder that the format of Who is so flexible that it can do out and out parody without losing what makes it unique.

Army of ghosts and Doomsday: These were a great end to the second series. The stakes were higher, the prophecy from the thing in the cave from The Impossible Planet were looming large and the double cliffhanger that revealed both the cybermen and Daleks was amazing. And the second part didn't dissapoint either, with great dialog from the Daleks and cybermen, something that went against received wisdom from older Who writers. And a great departure for Rose Tyler, with the Doctor showing genuine emotion. Once again, RTD took the character to a place nobody else had, would or could.

The Runaway Bride:The christmas specials need to be looked at in a different light from the regular season of the show. That said, Catherine Tate turned in a decent performance as Donna. And the Doctor showed that even he was capable of going to a very bad place. This is a guy who has repeatedly lost everything and seen more people die for bad reasons than most of us will ever meet. As he says in this special, sometimes he needs someone. And Donna reacted properly, with fear rather than admiration and the desire to run off with this scary man in a box that defies physics and logic in equal amounts.

Smith and Jones: A platoon of Judoon on the moon. A good first episode, a good introduction for Martha and her family. Not the best episode ever, but still watchable.

Gridlock: Gridlock was fantastic. The Doctor lied to Martha to make himself look good. He took her to a place he'd taken Rose on their first date. It put a whole new spin of hte character of the Doctor. And that's a good thing. As for the Macra, they were a nod to a generation of fans that might remember a monster from a story from over 40 years ago. A story that's missing most of it's episodes and never had the monster make a return to the show.

Utopia, Sound of Drums and Last of the Timelords: The return of the Master. In triumphant style. A rare chance to see the Doctor beaten hands down by a man who is his equal. And an incredible performance from John Simm, I might add. And was the only time the reset button was really used during RTD's run on the show.

Voyage of the Damned: How can a combination of a disaster movie in space, Banakafalata and Kylie in a maid's outfit not be a winner? Add in Bernard Cribbins explaining how London is deserted because of the madness and death from the skies that had happened the last two years running and you see that the rest button isn't hit anywhere near as often as you might think. And that people remember the mad stuff that goes on.

Partners in Crime: This one was pure farce, again showing how flexible the format of Who is. This one and Gridlock also both demonstrate how RTD sees up and down as more visually interesting than side to side.

Midnight and Turn Left: How can anyone say that two of the best episodes of Who ever, not just since it came back, but since it started, are anything but masterpieces? These are two of the best episodes of any show that I can think of. Midnight is pure high octane nightmare fuel. And Turn Left is heartbreaking, both for the fate of Donna and showing how the world would change if the Doctor wasn't there.

The stolen Earth and The Journey's End: The return of lots of companions. All getting meaningful screen time. The Daleks stealing planets to destroy reality itself. Davros getting his best appearance saince Micheal Wisher's original performance. A cliffhanger that left me stunned. Yes, the shot of the TARDIS towing the Earth back to it's proper place was pure cheese, but other than that, this two parter is the best thing that Who has done since it's comeback.

The 2008 specials. Waters of Mars won a Hugo award. I's hardly call that inconsequential. The End of Time was a great two parter, too. With a real sense of scale, a hugely powerful return for the Time Lords, and a great little twist on how they had become the villains of the Last Great Time War. When it comes to the regeneration scene, everyone knew it was coming. It had been in the press for over a year by the time it actually hit the screens, so there was no sense at all that Tennant had been fired. Not in the UK, anyway. And it was the most poignant and powerful regeneration ever.


My point is that he has not written anything that compares to Moffat's weakest Doctor Who offering, and he has written quite a few of the show's total clangers and tone misteps.
Are you serious? Curse of Fatal Death may be a spoof, but hidden in it's sheer awfulness is an encapsulation of everything Moffat feels about Who. Casual time travel that breaks rules that have been in place since Barry Letts was producer are the least of it.


In addition to this the finales of each season became a running joke. Each had more Deus Ex Machina and each put a larger chunk of reality at risk. Also the damage he did to the internal logic of the show on his way out, and the utterly pathetic way that 10's regeneration was handled, meant that Moffat had to do a lot of damage control in his first season.
I don't think we watched the same season in 2010. The crack in the wall was a HUGE deus ex machina. That was the explanation for why everything about the RTD era was written out. And the season finale didn't just endanger the universe, it made the universe never have happened. Apart from one planet that was kept warm by an exploding TARDIS. That exploded continuously for a thousand years, I might add. And that blew up for no adequate reson, other than it seemed like a good idea at the time.

A plastic Roman Centurion lasting a thousand years without ever getting found out or damaged beyond repair seems a little improbable, too. And the Pandorica is nothing but a ridiculous paradox created by an alliance that wouldn't have happened. Cybus cybermen, Sontarans, Daleks and so on all becoming allies to set a trap for the Doctor? To build a cage for him rather than just killing him? I see a massive plot hole right there. Rather than ones that are assumed but never pointed out.


Donna? GONE. Torchwood? GONE. The Daleks? GONE. The earth's ignorance of aliens? GONE so hard it left a hole in the wall. 11's entry? RUNINED by 10 showing exactly no spine when facing his death and saying "I don't want to go". What a betrayal! RTD did a good job producing, but he won't be forgiven by many fans for some of what he did and that eclipses the good stuff in their minds. Myself? I am indifferent.
I think you miss the point of 10's recation to his impending regeneration. Of course he didn't want to go. He didn't the first time he started to regenerate, but that time he had his hand to siphon off the regeneration energy. I think David Tennant had the most powerful, emotional and dramatic send off of any Doctor to date.

And if you're going to complain about the Daleks being utterly destroyed, I point you to exhibit A. The Daleks, by Terry Nation. Their first appearance and the first timne they were wiped out at the end of the story. The Daleks being destroyed but somehow making a comeback is old news. It has been since 1964, when their first defeat was broadcast.

Personally, I think the nerd rage against RTD is severely misplaced. People are so busy making mountains out of molehills that they forget about the fact that he brought the show back. That he'd said for years he would only work for the BBC if they let him do Who. They also forget that the bad stuff in some episodes is totally overshadowed by the good stuff that is in those same episodes.

There's no real response to nerd rage other than to ignore it.


I think that Moffat's first season is as least as good as RTD's, and there was a lot of clean up to do after RTD's destructive exit (see above).
Destructive exit? It had been planned for over a year. The TARDIS set was trashed because it was felt that the old one was both getting battered and worn, and didn't look that great on high definition camera. Which is why it was destroyed so spectacularly. To make way for a new one. The first of many changes Moffat was going to ring, not all of them successful.

The so-called Tellytubby Daleks are going because of fan backlash against them. I've heard rumours that the theme tune wil be returning to the same score Murray Gold wrote for Tennant and Ecclestone's runs on the show, Again due to critical fan backlash.

All the character arcs that RTD had started, like Rose, Donna, Mickey, Martha and their respective families had been resolved. Leaving a blank slate for Moffat to do as he wished with. And what does he do? He erases everyone's memory of the planet being stolen, of a space ship crashing in the Thames, of a christmas star firing bolts of electricity at people and so on and so forth.

The wrong guy is getting the blame for things.

Evil DM Mark3
2010-12-13, 01:47 PM
I think we are both getting off the main point here, and we are never going to be able to agree on this, I respect your opinion, you are just wrong.:smalltongue: I will just add this one point however, part of the charm of Doctor Who for me has always been the fact that it could well have been happening in my own universe, all throughout classic who stuff was (mostly) kept either in the future or on a small scale that would allow it to be missed or covered up realisticaly. RTD seemed to wage war on that and it was that choice, more than anything, that wound me up. And just to clarify, I don't hate RTD, I am indifferent, I just see why some people might.

Anyway, TheStillWind, watch New Who and you can keep up with the raving nerdage that is the Who fandom!

Eldan
2010-12-13, 01:55 PM
Thank you, Big Dice. I just want to say I agree with most of what you said.

TheStillWind
2010-12-13, 10:46 PM
Wow this got a fair bit of attention. The consensus seems to be that we should either start with the current doctor or back at the reboot in 2005. I think we will go with the 2005 option and go on from there. I doubt that we won't enjoy it and we want to try to move in as linear a way as possible. Thanks everyone.

The Big Dice
2010-12-13, 11:42 PM
I will just add this one point however, part of the charm of Doctor Who for me has always been the fact that it could well have been happening in my own universe, all throughout classic who stuff was (mostly) kept either in the future or on a small scale that would allow it to be missed or covered up realisticaly. RTD seemed to wage war on that and it was that choice, more than anything, that wound me up. And just to clarify, I don't hate RTD, I am indifferent, I just see why some people might.

Anyway, TheStillWind, watch New Who and you can keep up with the raving nerdage that is the Who fandom!

I totally agree that part of the charm for Who is, it could be happening in the next town,or at the bottom of your garden. But part of the problem is the expectations of modern audiences. They want spectacle. A low key climax to a season just won't cut it today. Especially when you've got modern shows taking everything to new heights of tension and drama. Especially for end of season cliffhangers. And of course Who needs to be able to compete with that, but still keep what makes it work in the first place.

And I see that Steven Moffat is in no way toning down the redonculous scale of the season finale.

And yes, I definetly think that it's worth jumpin in with the first episode of the reboot. You've got a solid set of character arcs that run from that episode right to the final words of the tenth Doctor. And some quality cheese and something that's genuinely not like the shows that come out of the US.

dariathalon
2010-12-14, 12:18 AM
Wow this got a fair bit of attention. The consensus seems to be that we should either start with the current doctor or back at the reboot in 2005. I think we will go with the 2005 option and go on from there. I doubt that we won't enjoy it and we want to try to move in as linear a way as possible. Thanks everyone.

You are probably taking the best route. You would probably be okay starting with Matt Smith, starting with Eccleston is probably a better introduction. Go ahead and go straight through to the present. Then if you decide you want to go back and explore old who you can do so; and you will want to. Doctor Who is just that great.

Some advice for when you do try to go back. Don't go all the way back to the beginning and try to watch in a linear fashion. You'll only get frustrated by a series of road-blocks. Many of the earliest Who episodes have been lost. So if I were you, I'd just try to take a sampling of older who. Maybe watch a few arcs of each doctor, decide which ones you like best and go from there. With so much history behind the show, it'll take a very long time to get through them all anyway.

Serenity
2010-12-16, 11:56 AM
I totally agree that part of the charm for Who is, it could be happening in the next town,or at the bottom of your garden. But part of the problem is the expectations of modern audiences. They want spectacle. A low key climax to a season just won't cut it today. Especially when you've got modern shows taking everything to new heights of tension and drama. Especially for end of season cliffhangers. And of course Who needs to be able to compete with that, but still keep what makes it work in the first place.

And I see that Steven Moffat is in no way toning down the redonculous scale of the season finale.

See, I've never seen that as part of the charm, because I've never had the impression that it was true. The sheer ridiculousness and unashamed cheese is the appeal for me. This s a tale of a man who saves all of time and space with his inhuman wits, a magic wand, and a magic phone box. This is a show in which screeching pepper pots with whisks and plungers stuck on are possibly the most dangerous force in the universe, where angel statues haunt your nightmares, a spaceship is shaped like the Titanic--and for all this insane, barmy awesomeness, the characters are very real, and few episodes are without at least one moment of genuine touching pathos and real heart.

So I'll shout it from the mountaintops: I love RTD and Moffat in equal measure! I love Doctor romance. I love Rose, Mickey, Jackie, Jack, Martha, Donna, Amy, and Rory! I love the Bad Wolf, I love the Master, I love Jesus Doctor, I love the Doctor-Donna. I love all the magic technobabble. I loved tugging the Earth back home. Sure, it was cheesy, but it was cheesy in the best way, a Crowning Moment of Awesome and Heartwarming as every former companion united to set things right.

Who is like Gurren Lagaan to me, in a way. It is sheer ridiculous awesome wrapped up in hope and wonder and an indomitable human spirit.

Syka
2010-12-16, 02:10 PM
I just love Doctor Who. :smalltongue:

I thoroughly enjoyed Moffat's episodes (he wrote 3 of my top 5 episodes...all from the first 4 seasons plus specials). I liked a lot of RTD. I like a lot of episodes people hate (see: Love and Monsters), dislike fan favorites (see: Rose, in general), but love the show as a whole.


Also, Water of Mars is STILL in a fight with Blink for my favorite Who episode. The end was just...my God. It was powerful.