Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«20 »
Which season should the next animated reconstruction be from?
Season 1 (Marco Polo)
Season 2 (The Crusade)
Season 3 (Galaxy 4/The Myth Makers/The Daleks' Master Plan/The Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Eve/The Celestial Toymaker/The Savages)
Season 4 (The Smugglers/The Highlanders/The Underwater Menace/The Evil of the Daleks)
Season 5 (The Abominable Snowmen/The Web of Fear/The Wheel in Space)
Season 6 (The Space Pirates)
View Results
  • Post
  • Reply
Bicyclops
Aug 27, 2004

You can't take it with you, you know.


Burkion posted:

I don't know, he seems to have pretty strong opinions that Amazon workers should just shut the gently caress up and happily throw themselves into the meat grinder because at least they get paid

Yeah, that was a bad episode that I feel like undermined itself purely for the sake of a twist ending

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007
Simaggeddon



Khanstant posted:

Why do people poo poo on Moffat? Aren't all the best Doctor Who seasons under his reign?

His time running the show was... We'll go with chaotic. Personally I really liked his run as a run of Doctor Who, but its fair to say that he had a certain style, and a reliance on certain tropes, that a lot of people did not enjoy, or found wearing in the long run.

Sydney Bottocks
Oct 15, 2004

Eh.


Khanstant posted:

Why do people poo poo on Moffat? Aren't all the best Doctor Who seasons under his reign?

It was Moffat's run that caused me to finally give up on the revived series, if that gives you any indication as to my opinion of his time on the show.

Bicyclops
Aug 27, 2004

You can't take it with you, you know.


The problem with Stephen Moffat isn't that any of his writing was atrociously bad in a vacuum, but first of all, whenever you put a microphone in front of him, he said things that made you dislike him and it's pretty inarguable at this point that production staff left because of weird feuds with him. That and after awhile, you got tired of certain patterns. Basically every major companion under his reign died-but-also-didn't-die, major events often involved being inside of a simulated reality, romantic relationships were often handled the same way 90s sitcoms would have handled them, and certain popular concepts that had limited staying power (the Paternoster gang, the Weeping Angels) were revisited a few too many times. I also think both the Brigadier and the First Doctor being used the way they were was a really bad move and that he would have done more of that if he'd remained the showrunner.

I think most of the best episodes of the revival were done by him though, including during the RTD era, but it was time for him to go. Chibnall is not who'd I'd have picked as showrunner, but I have to admit that so far, the only thing I really have against him is that the first season wasn't bonkers enough and the second season finale was the wrong kind of bonkers.

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006



By this point, two series in, both Moffat and RTD had produced some great stuff, and some terrible poo poo. Setting the timeless child poo poo aside for the moment, Chibnall has been mostly ok, but there are a couple really bad episodes and no great ones.

Bicyclops
Aug 27, 2004

You can't take it with you, you know.


marktheando posted:

By this point, two series in, both Moffat and RTD had produced some great stuff, and some terrible poo poo. Setting the timeless child poo poo aside for the moment, Chibnall has been mostly ok, but there are a couple really bad episodes and no great ones.

I think Moffat's first season was probably stronger than Chris Chibnall's (and ironically, the worst episodes in season 5 are written by... Chris Chibnall, haha), but that overall, the "Chibnall era" such as it exists yet is about normal for Doctor Who in terms of how mixed a bag it is. If they course correct from this season's finale or even just leave addressing the TImeless Child stuff mostly just for season finales, it could easily get good again.

Khanstant
Apr 5, 2007

Swobu



I'll admit I was sick of Weeping Angels by the end of their first appearance. "Freeze tag" is a really neat idea for a monster but too often it felt like, "get some drat mirrored sunglasses and the problem solves itself the end."

Totally dug the Paternoster gang (had to look it up bc the name didnt ring a bell but reptilian/redditor-thumb/lady were a fun combo)

Clara and Amy were my favourite runs, but I also do get what you mean by 90s romance plots. We are lucky they didn't have Clara and The Doctor get married.

Sydney Bottocks
Oct 15, 2004

Eh.


We were all excited for Moffat's run because he wrote some really good stuff for Eccleston (I am not as enamored of the stuff he wrote for Tennant as others, mainly because I still don't get how "Blink", an episode that barely features the Doctor, was somehow people's go-to episode to introduce new fans to the series). I was only familiar with Moffat through the "Curse of Fatal Death" skit, which I liked well enough, and an episode or two of "Coupling", which I didn't care for because it was just basically "Friends, but British" (and I'd rather be dragged naked through broken glass than watch an episode of "Friends").

Then the adult Amy Pond showed up on the screen and within a few episodes I was completely sick of her. Ditto for Rory (who I otherwise liked as a character) and his constant pining for a rather emotionally manipulative woman who only paid him attention when it looked like he might be losing interest in her. Their relationship was stock Hollywood bullshit "two people who are completely wrong for each other somehow wind up happily together anyways" and the fact that the whole "River Song origins" stuff got tied into them was even stupider.

And don't even get me started on the whole "Clara is the most important girl in the universe" thing.

Bicyclops
Aug 27, 2004

You can't take it with you, you know.


Khanstant posted:

We are lucky they didn't have Clara and The Doctor get married.

It was any couple that interacted romantically on the show, basically. The superhero episode and Craig in The Lodger, for example. And the Craig episode works fine on its own (the superhero one doesn't), but on a rewatch it's hard, because you're like "Ah, yes, the Moffat shy guy getting the courage to ask out the woman who already likes him thing again"

Clara is one of those divisive companions. I think she wasn't good until they got past the Impossible Girl plot, but that she was actually pretty good after that.

Khanstant
Apr 5, 2007

Swobu



Sydney Bottocks posted:

We were all excited for Moffat's run because he wrote some really good stuff for Eccleston (I am not as enamored of the stuff he wrote for Tennant as others, mainly because I still don't get how "Blink", an episode that barely features the Doctor, was somehow people's go-to episode to introduce new fans to the series). I was only familiar with Moffat through the "Curse of Fatal Death" skit, which I liked well enough, and an episode or two of "Coupling", which I didn't care for because it was just basically "Friends, but British" (and I'd rather be dragged naked through broken glass than watch an episode of "Friends").

Then the adult Amy Pond showed up on the screen and within a few episodes I was completely sick of her. Ditto for Rory (who I otherwise liked as a character) and his constant pining for a rather emotionally manipulative woman who only paid him attention when it looked like he might be losing interest in her. Their relationship was stock Hollywood bullshit "two people who are completely wrong for each other somehow wind up happily together anyways" and the fact that the whole "River Song origins" stuff got tied into them was even stupider.

And don't even get me started on the whole "Clara is the most important girl in the universe" thing.

Clara is very important*, I would eagerly watch a Doctor Who show where every person was played by Jenna Coleman. If I were to ever own a poster of anyone's face, it would be hers. I also just liked her as companion, she seemed to grok the struggles of being The Doctor and her fate as Companion more than the others.

I was almost ready to give up watching once Amy was gone (to be fair I get a little attached to every companion and am always like "come on, bring em back!"), but Clara turned it around for me. I did hate Rory though. Bad enough they're bad for each other, but his whole "standing guard for ages" was a big eyeroll. Get a life, dude, geez.

*Doesn't the time baby thing basically reduce her importance to irrelevance? Now she only ever knew a subset of the doctors afterall.

Edward Mass
Sep 14, 2011

The Timeless Child is THE DOCTOR? Oh, for God's sake!


Top Cop

In "Why you hold off on buying single episode Blu-ray" news, Resolution will be on the Series 12 box set.

cargohills
Apr 17, 2014



It is techically correct to describe the Chibnall era as a "mixed bag", but the vast majority of the mix in the bag ranges from very bad to mediocre.

Burkion
May 10, 2012

Changeman! And Not A Moment Too Soon!


cargohills posted:

It is techically correct to describe the Chibnall era as a "mixed bag", but the vast majority of the mix in the bag ranges from very bad to mediocre.

He has no story telling highs, but boy his lows

Bicyclops
Aug 27, 2004

You can't take it with you, you know.


A bunch of yellow Starbursts and then you open a red but it turns out to be one of the weird experimental flavors instead of cherry.

Dabir
Nov 10, 2012


Chris Chibnall IS Doctor Who's Ian Flynn.

ConanThe3rd
Mar 27, 2009


You're getting him and Penders mixed up.
Penders was the one adding random bullshit into the cannon without rhyme, reason or care.
Flynn was the one trying desperely to run a show inspite of everything being on fire.

ConanThe3rd fucked around with this message at 21:10 on Mar 11, 2020

Dabir
Nov 10, 2012


Doctor Who's Penders is Moffat.

Dabir
Nov 10, 2012


actually I take it back, RTD is Flynn, Mad Larry or Cartmell or whoever it was is Penders

shades of eternity
Nov 9, 2013

Where kitties raise dragons in the world's largest mall.

Once the 13th doctor shows she's dangerous alone, I seriously want a multiple doctor's episodes.

David Bradley has already shown he plays a fantastic 1st doctor.

Sean Pertwee is a spitting image of his father and proved his acting credits on Gotham.

We still got Tom, Peter, Colin and Sly from the original run.

and pretty sure both David Tennant, Matt Smith and Peter Capaldi could be convinced for a cross over easy.

sunnyboy
May 10, 2011

Hawkmen Diiiiiiiiiiiiiiive!


Bicyclops posted:

In the last thread, someone said that Ernest P. Worrell would have made a good Doctor Who, and, darn it, they're right.

That was me. It wasn't meant to be serious, but you are correct. Ernest the Doctor *would* be great.

But while discussing the last 3 episodes of the current season with my daughter, who *was* a great Dr. Who fan. My kids grew up watching every episode of Avengers (the John Steed one, not the comic thingy) Dr. Who (they started on our PBS in the '80s with 'Robot' but looped back to cover everything then available from 1-7), Monty Python, Hitchhiker's Guide (the TV series) and Red Dwarf.

But she quit watching during the last Capaldi season and won't come back. I'm probably not much help as I can't stand *most* of the last two seasons.

But... But... BUT... I kinda liked the finale. Maybe I'm contrary, but with everyone else predicting doom and gloom and hating the last episode, I really... LIKED it.

I could care less about Dr. Who "canon", because there really isn't any. I mean, during 7th run he was revealed to be MERLIN, for goodness' sake! (I loved that episode, BTW). That season had more "but WHO is the doctor?" type reveals and mysteries than anything until the later recent series. (The blue-meanie hollering 'DOC-TOR-WHO!' was just as bad, IMO).

So what did I really like about the season finale of this season?

I guess it's simple. The new master. He is great. He is evil and doesn't give a crap about anything except being evil and pushing the Doctor's buttons. It reminded me of some of the best episodes with Delgado and Ainsley (like Logopolis - torture Adric and mess with reality 'for giggles'). I actually enjoyed how he was a complete match for the Cybermen. (well, at least the head cyber-dude). I also loved how he 'dispatched' the cyber dude instantly and without fanfare once he was unnecessary.

Let's not forget that gawd-awful (IMO) Cyberman episode with Smith & Clara and those two 'most horrible child actors in Dr. Who history' that Clara 'babysat' and how they destroyed all cyber-thing canon with that constant "UPGRADE" nonsense. At least they came back this time as more typical Cybermen, even with weirdo-leader dude.

So basically while reminiscing with daughter about the 'good old days' of Dr. Who I realized that there has been as many gawd-awful episodes of DR. ... from classic Who right up to all the recent incarnations. So all-in-all, this last episode was pretty good.

Where Chibby seems to really fall down is *every time* he tries to involve some "real history" in the stories. The man CANNOT write historical 'fiction' to save his life. Again, IMO. So of the last couple episodes, I would rate the Mary Shelly ep to be "horrible" for that reason, but this last one I really did like.

Jerusalem
May 20, 2004

Would you be my new best friends?


Edward Mass posted:

In "Why you hold off on buying single episode Blu-ray" news, Resolution will be on the Series 12 box set.

God loving DAMMIT it should have been on the Series 11 boxset, and this makes me assume that the next holiday special is a looooong way away

Sydney Bottocks
Oct 15, 2004

Eh.


The difference between the 7th Doctor being Merlin and whatever nonsense Chibnall came up with is that the Merlin thing A)took place in another dimension and B)was posited as a potential future version of the Doctor (along the same lines as The Watcher, The Valeyard, and The Curator). "Future version of the Doctor" is fine because that's easily ignored if people who work on the show later decide they don't want to go down that road.

Whereas Chibnall explicitly retconned the Doctor's origins, changing the character from a bored near-immortal alien who craved adventure into some super duper secret being who basically created the Time Lords (or whatever the gently caress). It's not hard to see why people who like the character's original origin story might be just a bit upset.

Also I'll take a duff episode of the old series over a duff episode of the new series any day, because at least the old series has that "don't knock over the cardboard sets" charm to it. The new series is very slick and polished, but unfortunately so is everything else these days, so the writing has to be really good, or else it's just slick and polished and boring.

Jerusalem
May 20, 2004

Would you be my new best friends?


Another great thing about the Merlin stuff was that in at least one (and possibly all?) versions of King Arthur, Merlin was living backwards through time. So having "Merlin" show up in Battlefield to meet for the first time a villain who hated him for that other time earlier in HER life when he defeated her was great.

On a slight tangent, I dug that Moffat did a similar thing with The Great Intelligence, where it turns out its first encounter with the Doctor was with 11, and THEN it went on to meet the 2nd Doctor next where it tried to get the jump on him, but despite having no knowledge of their future encounter the 2nd Doctor actually had the GI right where he wanted it and was ready to destroy it until Jamie (I think) hosed everything up by "saving" him.

Rochallor
Apr 22, 2010


Sydney Bottocks posted:

The difference between the 7th Doctor being Merlin and whatever nonsense Chibnall came up with is that the Merlin thing A)took place in another dimension and B)was posited as a potential future version of the Doctor (along the same lines as The Watcher, The Valeyard, and The Curator). "Future version of the Doctor" is fine because that's easily ignored if people who work on the show later decide they don't want to go down that road.

Whereas Chibnall explicitly retconned the Doctor's origins, changing the character from a bored near-immortal alien who craved adventure into some super duper secret being who basically created the Time Lords (or whatever the gently caress). It's not hard to see why people who like the character's original origin story might be just a bit upset.

Yeah, it's not bad because it's a retcon, it's bad because it's a retcon that makes things less interesting.

The timeless child retcon changes things so that the Doctor has ALWAYS been a super important person by circumstance of their birth, which is at best utterly boring and at worst morally repugnant. I'm definitely not against delving into the Doctor's backstory and history on Gallifrey, as long as it doesn't fundamentally change what the character is (and ideally it should be done sparingly). Stuff like the Doctor admitting that he left Gallifrey because he was scared in Heaven Sent is a big retcon, but it hints at interesting ideas and also fits in with stuff like One apparently having been scheming about things in Remembrance of the Daleks.

Sydney Bottocks
Oct 15, 2004

Eh.


Rochallor posted:

Yeah, it's not bad because it's a retcon, it's bad because it's a retcon that makes things less interesting.

The timeless child retcon changes things so that the Doctor has ALWAYS been a super important person by circumstance of their birth, which is at best utterly boring and at worst morally repugnant. I'm definitely not against delving into the Doctor's backstory and history on Gallifrey, as long as it doesn't fundamentally change what the character is (and ideally it should be done sparingly). Stuff like the Doctor admitting that he left Gallifrey because he was scared in Heaven Sent is a big retcon, but it hints at interesting ideas and also fits in with stuff like One apparently having been scheming about things in Remembrance of the Daleks.

JNT was very smart when he shot down Cartmel's ideas for delving deeper into the Doctor's backstory during the McCoy era. It's much better if all we know about the Doctor is that the character wanders through time and space having adventures, after having left the boring bureaucratic "do nothing but observe" society of the Time Lords. If they had actually established that the Doctor was actually a contemporary of Rassilon and/or Omega it would have been completely stupid. Just like saying the Doctor is actually a super duper secret being that created the Time Lords in the first place is also completely stupid.

Fair Bear Maiden
Jun 17, 2013


I'd honestly be okay if they, say, cast someone as a young One and made a point about how maybe he snuck out of Gallifrey here and there before he got old and left it for good with Susan. Or if they decided to show us the Doctor family as new characters, as we know they exist but they're a blank slate in terms of characterization.

There's a lot of space where I think the series is ripe for retconning/writing in the gaps without really ruining the mystique and the openness of the premise of the show. I really feel, based on what I've heard so far, that Chibnall messed it up though. It's nothing irreparable, Doctor Who is full of stuff that's either ignored or retconned out of existence and this will probably end up under the latter category based on the reaction it got so far (I only know a few people who were positive about the finale), but it's a bit of a bummer that it happened in the first place, especially when it was coming from a big Doctor Who fan doing his first big arc for the show.

Davros1
Jul 19, 2007

You've got to admit, you are kind of implausible




https://twitter.com/JamesStreetmanx...6704611329?s=20

York_M_Chan
Sep 11, 2003



There should be a "Curse of Oak Island" type show about people searching for the lost episodes.

Sydney Bottocks
Oct 15, 2004

Eh.


Fair Bear Maiden posted:

I'd honestly be okay if they, say, cast someone as a young One and made a point about how maybe he snuck out of Gallifrey here and there before he got old and left it for good with Susan. Or if they decided to show us the Doctor family as new characters, as we know they exist but they're a blank slate in terms of characterization.

There's a lot of space where I think the series is ripe for retconning/writing in the gaps without really ruining the mystique and the openness of the premise of the show. I really feel, based on what I've heard so far, that Chibnall messed it up though. It's nothing irreparable, Doctor Who is full of stuff that's either ignored or retconned out of existence and this will probably end up under the latter category based on the reaction it got so far (I only know a few people who were positive about the finale), but it's a bit of a bummer that it happened in the first place, especially when it was coming from a big Doctor Who fan doing his first big arc for the show.

It's why I say that elevated fanboys shouldn't be running the show. Back in the day, working on DW was just another gig for the producers, script editors, and writers. As the show went on it was at times considered a very prestigious gig, but it was still just another job. With perhaps the exception of the Cartmel era (which was tempered by JNT reining in their more excessive ideas about the Doctor's history), the bulk of the people that worked on DW during the show's original run were not fanboys, they were just people working a job.

Nowadays, things are very different at the Beeb, and the showrunners on DW (and several other shows, I'm sure) thus far have all been elevated fanboys with apparently more ideas than sense. And since they're in charge of everything about the show, and there's nobody to talk them out of pursuing some particularly dumb flights of fancy (or in this case, telling them that actually putting their personal DW fanfic on screen is a very bad idea)...well, the results are pretty evident.

shades of eternity
Nov 9, 2013

Where kitties raise dragons in the world's largest mall.

The oodcast had this lovely phrase about the last episode.

"They did a beautiful cats cradle and then set it on fire."

it's not that they blew up doctor who canon.

It's that they didn't use it for anything and took away agency for the Doctor.

What was the point?

An Ounce of Gold
Jul 13, 2001

Back in action!


Chibnall's the type of writer that would pitch a MCU move like, "Imagine it! Spider-Man... but without the Spider!"

The_Doctor
Mar 29, 2007

"The entire history of this incarnation is one of temporal orbits, retcons, paradoxes, parallel time lines, reiterations, and divergences. How anyone can make head or tail of all this chaos, I don't know."


THAT’s what this reminds me of! That weird mid-2000s stuff where it was ‘revealed’ Spider-Man was something like a representation of a spider-totem/god and it had specifically chosen him or something? It removed the ‘Peter was an ordinary kid and is making the best of juggling powers and a regular life’, and made him Always Been Extra Special.

An Ounce of Gold
Jul 13, 2001

Back in action!


The_Doctor posted:

THAT’s what this reminds me of! That weird mid-2000s stuff where it was ‘revealed’ Spider-Man was something like a representation of a spider-totem/god and it had specifically chosen him or something? It removed the ‘Peter was an ordinary kid and is making the best of juggling powers and a regular life’, and made him Always Been Extra Special.

by Chris Chibnall

Bicyclops
Aug 27, 2004

You can't take it with you, you know.


Like all those 90s era Legends of the Dark Knight where somehow all of Bruce Wayne's relatives back in the old country were also Batman somehow.

DancingShade
Jul 26, 2007

MAYBE IF MY WEAK NONSENSICAL "BURNS" ARE CONVOLUTED ENOUGH, NOBODY WILL NOTICE THAT IN SPITE OF BEING A CONDESCENDING TAINTSMEAR IN EVERY THREAD I POST IN, I HAVE LITERALLY NEVER HAD ANYTHING EVEN REMOTELY INSIGHTFUL OR FUNNY TO SAy.

An Ounce of Gold posted:

Chibnall's the type of writer that would pitch a MCU move like, "Imagine it! Spider-Man... but without the Spider!"

He's Spider Man but he never uses any web or climbing powers because in my version he's afraid of heights. Also no silly spider costume, he goes around in levi jeans and a casual shirt.

This will save on VFX and we can spend the difference on a Bollywood song and dance routine about two young people from adjacent villages getting married halfway through the movie that will lead into the fourth act.

Davros1
Jul 19, 2007

You've got to admit, you are kind of implausible




DancingShade posted:

He's Spider Man but he never uses any web or climbing powers because in my version he's afraid of heights. Also no silly spider costume, he goes around in levi jeans and a casual shirt.

This will save on VFX and we can spend the difference on a Bollywood song and dance routine about two young people from adjacent villages getting married halfway through the movie that will lead into the fourth act.

You've pretty much described an average episode of DC's Legends of Tomorrow, and those time idiots could totally pull it off.

MrL_JaKiri
Sep 23, 2003

Ask me about my calm and reasonable opinions on cycling!

I am in no way a zealot about cycling!

Cycling helmets are ABSOLUTE HARAM!


The_Doctor posted:

THAT’s what this reminds me of! That weird mid-2000s stuff where it was ‘revealed’ Spider-Man was something like a representation of a spider-totem/god and it had specifically chosen him or something? It removed the ‘Peter was an ordinary kid and is making the best of juggling powers and a regular life’, and made him Always Been Extra Special.

JMS's run on the Amazing Spiderman?

It's like that, but without being a critical and commercial success

Sydney Bottocks
Oct 15, 2004

Eh.


I think we can safely say now that Chibnall was Always Bad, and that whatever show he worked on that everyone loved (Broadchurch) was the exception that proved the rule.

The_Doctor
Mar 29, 2007

"The entire history of this incarnation is one of temporal orbits, retcons, paradoxes, parallel time lines, reiterations, and divergences. How anyone can make head or tail of all this chaos, I don't know."


DancingShade posted:

He's Spider Man but he never uses any web or climbing powers because in my version he's afraid of heights. Also no silly spider costume, he goes around in levi jeans and a casual shirt.

And then in the 3rd act, he fights a giant spider?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

2house2fly
Nov 14, 2012

You did a super job wrapping things up! And I'm not just saying that because I have to!

Sydney Bottocks posted:

I think we can safely say now that Chibnall was Always Bad, and that whatever show he worked on that everyone loved (Broadchurch) was the exception that proved the rule.

Don't know what everyone saw in that, to be honest. The plot was mostly "person who seems like a paedophile is actually misunderstood" and then the killer just phoned the cops up to confess at the end. It seemed mostly to be a way to show women crying a lot on the TV

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«20 »