Doctor Who - Regeneration 9 - Part 8

[Hawkingbird]

It isn't. It really isn't. It is as deep, dark and meaty as Twilight.

I don't even know how this is argument. RTD is the man who created farting aliens. Moffat created the Silence and the Weeping Angels. RTD gave us Dobby Doctor. RTD gave us Rose, Martha and Donna. Moffat gave us a married couple in the Tardis. Moffat had his Doctor give the Silence a worldwide execution.

But I would love you to explain it. You keep making these statements, but don't really give examples from the show. 9 yelling at a Dalek that is so close to be being ridiculously cheese isn't dark.

What is so dark or meaty about RTD's work in comparison to River Song, the Weeping Angels, the Silence, "The Beast Below", The Christmas Carol, or how The Great Intelligence has consumed the life of children for over a 100 years? The 6th season is one big dark fairy tale.

The complexity of Amelia Pond, River Song, and now Clara Oswald show far more meat and more depth then anything RTD had going.



Do tell.

It's my opinion. I don't really know how my argument is different to yours. You seem to be being hypocritical.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

It's my opinion. I don't really know how my argument is different to yours. You seem to be being hypocritical.

What is deep, dark or meaty about RTD's Who? You are entitled to your opinion, but you keep talking to me without actually giving examples.

 

[Lord Valumart]

Do tell.

I just didn't find there to be anything to it. I was never bothered by the Angels as a monster, finding them rather dull. There was nothing particularly scary about anything in the episode, and I didn't care for Sally the way everyone else did. Just nothing caught me.

It's okay. The rest of us don't like Love & Monsters.

Upon reflection I change nothing.

 

[Lord Valumart]

It's my opinion. I don't really know how my argument is different to yours. You seem to be being hypocritical.

What you appear to be doing is saying "NO!" to things, stating your opinion and not really giving anything to back it up. Obviously I've simplified the debate here, but giving reasons why you think A was done better than B, why X is better at something than Y, allows for not only a more engaging conversation between then two people having it, but also for those reading it.

For instance points have been brought up by people having a debate that someone else has never thought of before, thus allowing them think a bit more about the subject. Without backing up with evidence of why you think these things, it's not really helping anyone move things along.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I just didn't find there to be anything to it. I was never bothered by the Angels as a monster, finding them rather dull. There was nothing particularly scary about anything in the episode, and I didn't care for Sally the way everyone else did. Just nothing caught me.


Upon reflection I change nothing.

That is fair. Personally didn't find the Angels truly scary until "The Time of Angels". Amy and her television Angel is great example of clever writing that doesn't need to break the rules to add a dimensional to the villain.

But I am a big, big fan of Sally Sparrow and the general execution of Blink. The Weeping Angels were something unique and actually tied to time travel. They also touch on a fear most have. 10's message might be Tennant's best bit of acting over his whole time. Also really enjoyed the general manipulation of time.

 

[Lord Valumart]

That is fair. Personally didn't find the Angels truly scary until "The Time of Angels". Amy and her television Angel is great example of clever writing that doesn't need to break the rules to add a dimensional to the villain.

But I am a big, big fan of Sally Sparrow and the general execution of Blink. The Weeping Angels were something unique and actually tied to time travel. They also touch on a fear most have. 10's message might be Tennant's best bit of acting over his whole time. Also really enjoyed the general manipulation of time.

Again, even in their returns they did little to nothing for me. The Angels just haven't caught me. I get that there's the little niggling thing in some kids mind that maybe statues are alive, which is a great fear to play up on in all honesty.

I did think they had a decent idea with the Angles zapping people back to the past and living off their "could have been..." energy, or whatever it was. But that old case of good idea in a sea of meh.

 

[wiegeabo]

The angels freak me out far more than the Daleks or Cybermen ever did.

The idea that there are predators hiding in plain sight. That that feeling of paranoia when there's nothing around but statues, or the feeling that you could have sworn you saw something move out of the corner of your eye, turns out to be true.

The idea that you have to stare at the thing trying to kill you, and never look away. Never. Even. Blink. Or you will die. Even when you're eyes are drying out and demanding relief for just a single blink. Just close your eyes for a moment. What could it hurt?

That last is the part that really gets to me.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Again, even in their returns they did little to nothing for me. The Angels just haven't caught me. I get that there's the little niggling thing in some kids mind that maybe statues are alive, which is a great fear to play up on in all honesty.

I think it is more common, general fear that when you aren't looking, anything could be happening behind you. Like when you hear a noise behind you and turn around and there is nothing but a lamp post. But what if that lamp post could kill you?

Kind of like evil Toy Story.

I did think they had a decent idea with the Angles zapping people back to the past and living off their "could have been..." energy, or whatever it was. But that old case of good idea in a sea of meh.

Could it possibly be more meh then any other Doctor Who villain though? I mean, the Dalek's are the Doctor's greatest foe, and they are cheesy as all hell. Angels, the Silence, and the Master on his very best day. The rest of the best are usually the misunderstood, which aren't really villains at all.

 

[Gold Samurai]

Anyone want to be executive producer of "Doctor Who"?

If you want to apply for Skinner's former job, the BBC is taking applications for the next ten days.

As Executive Producer you will be responsible to the Head of Drama, Wales, for the editorial, production and financial management of Doctor Who. The successful candidate will therefore have extensive production experience in popular and complex primetime television series and be confident in leading and inspiring a team to create their best work.

Who's ready to tackle Steven Moffat's ego?

 

[The Batman]

For instance points have been brought up by people having a debate that someone else has never thought of before, thus allowing them think a bit more about the subject. Without backing up with evidence of why you think these things, it's not really helping anyone move things along.

Hawkingbird could write a thesis and it wouldnt mean anything. Darthskywalker, much like 90% of the people in this thread, are set in their ways regarding RTD. At this point, its kind of a waste of time even talking about it.

You can go as deep and detailed with an argument as you like...but when you go as far as to compare RTD's Doctor Who to Twilight, its kinda hard to take certain arguments seriously.

 

[C. Lee]

The angels freak me out far more than the Daleks or Cybermen ever did.

The idea that there are predators hiding in plain sight. That that feeling of paranoia when there's nothing around but statues, or the feeling that you could have sworn you saw something move out of the corner of your eye, turns out to be true.

The idea that you have to stare at the thing trying to kill you, and never look away. Never. Even. Blink. Or you will die. Even when you're eyes are drying out and demanding relief for just a single blink. Just close your eyes for a moment. What could it hurt?

That last is the part that really gets to me.

That's the way I feel too. Daleks and Cybermen are robots/androids...a standard of science fiction tales...cool, neat, persistant....but not scarey. The angels on the other hand....scarey. My wife can't even watch the angel episodes now.

 

[SpideyFan866]

RTD created great and memorable characters, but placed them in horrible stories and gave them horrible character arcs to the point where they became unlikable. At least, at times.

 

[Hawkingbird]

What is deep, dark or meaty about RTD's Who? You are entitled to your opinion, but you keep talking to me without actually giving examples.

I have given my examples! His entire series! Now stop being so big and intimidating. It's my personal preference. I simply thought he was a better story teller. Simple.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I have given my examples! His entire series! Now stop being so big and intimidating. It's my personal preference. I simply thought he was a better story teller. Simple.

And what is so big, dark and meaty about his seasons of Doctor Who? What specifically? If it was simple, you would think it would be easy to explain.

Hawkingbird could write a thesis and it wouldnt mean anything. Darthskywalker, much like 90% of the people in this thread, are set in their ways regarding RTD. At this point, its kind of a waste of time even talking about it.

You can go as deep and detailed with an argument as you like...but when you go as far as to compare RTD's Doctor Who to Twilight, its kinda hard to take certain arguments seriously.

Is it as bad as Twilight? Of course not. Though I do wonder how much Twilight you have seen. But RTD isn't really a good writer, he is a smart one, like Meyer. They know how to appeal to a very specific audience and milk it. Hence the romantic Doctor who all the ladies can't help but fall for.

 

[chamber-music]

I don't find the Daleks and Cybermen scary at all. Even if I was a little kid I know I wouldn't find them scary.

 

[Hawkingbird]

And what is so big, dark and meaty about his seasons of Doctor Who? What specifically? If it was simple, you would think it would be easy to explain.


Is it as bad as Twilight? Of course not. Though I do wonder how much Twilight you have seen. But RTD isn't really a good writer, he is a smart one, like Meyer. They know how to appeal to a very specific audience and milk it. Hence the romantic Doctor who all the ladies can't help but fall for.

I give up, you're basically doing this:

I prefer the stories, and I am not going to go into a big essay as to why I think he is a better writer. I will just sum it up with this: I prefer his stories and his writing. Easy.

 

[The Batman]

Is it as bad as Twilight? Of course not. Though I do wonder how much Twilight you have seen. But RTD isn't really a good writer, he is a smart one, like Meyer. They know how to appeal to a very specific audience and milk it. Hence the romantic Doctor who all the ladies can't help but fall for.

Like Moffat dosen't do the same thing?

His Doctor like RTD's Doctor, has made out with most of his companions. He didn't have to have Amy play tonsil hockey with 11. He didn't have to have a french mistress snog The Doctor. He didn't have to create a character who's sole purpose is to be The Doctor's "wife", and 11/Clara didn't need to have romantic underpinnings...especially since 11 is technically married. To act like this is purely an RTD device is silly, much like saying "RTD isn't a good writer".

If RTD were so quick to pander to one audience, he wouldn't write/co-write stories like "Midnight","Gridlock", or "Waters of Mars".

I mean, I just think its funny how you guys take single aspects of RTD's run and try to act like that's all he ever did. Truth be told, RTD is more versatile than Moffat when it comes to writing Dr. Who. Moffat seems rooted in fairy tales, while RTD can go from a period style romp with werewolves to religious allegory to Disaster movie to Cabin Fever thrillers. To act like all RTD did was romance is ridiculous, and to act like Moffat dosen't do the same thing is even moreso.

This board pretty much likes to remember the worst of RTD and compare it to the best of Moffat, so I can't blame Hawkingbird for not really wanting to debate with you further.

 

[jonathancrane]

I find the Cybermen from the Tomb of the Cybermen to be disturbing (of course, that was the first serial I saw as a kid.) There is something about about the designs and sing-song-y voices that chills my blood.

 

[Manic]

I've never been too big a fan of the Daleks. The only Dalek stories from the New Series I like are Dalek, Bad Wolf/Parting of the Ways, and Asylum of the Daleks. I don't like them much in the classic series either. It's pretty much just The Chase, Master Plan, Genesis of..., and Remembrance of... for me. Granted, I haven't seen Power of..., Evil of..., or Resurrection of... yet. Still, I've seen all but 3 Dalek stories and I don't like that many.

--edit--

I might as well include the only audios I like with Daleks: The Mutant Phase, The Juggernauts, and Terror Firma.

 

[Manic]

On another note, I just realized Dan Starkey, the man who plays damn near every Sontaran on TV, also voices most of the Sontarans on audio. This dude has a monopoly on playing Sontarans in the same way Nicholas Briggs plays all the Daleks and Cybermen.

 

[Gold Samurai]

The


anti grav bike returns

Maybe we should start calling it the "Aunty Grav"

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I give up, you're basically doing this:

I prefer the stories, and I am not going to go into a big essay as to why I think he is a better writer. I will just sum it up with this: I prefer his stories and his writing. Easy.

I love how you are accusing me of being a bully when all I am asking you to do is to explain your point of view. You don't have to do it of course, but then perhaps you shouldn't expect others to understand your point of view.





The Batman, I will get back to you on your post, but I started writing my answer and I realized it is going to be a little long and I want to put some time into and prime time television is about to start here. Basically covering characterization, arc structure and romance (Mostly with 10, because I actually think 9 was very well done for the most part). But lets just say, how Moffat uses romance and its role in the characterization of the Doctor is very different. The Doctor's relationships with River, Amy and Clara are vastly different to Rose and Martha.

 

[Young Superman]

The angels freak me out far more than the Daleks or Cybermen ever did.

The idea that there are predators hiding in plain sight. That that feeling of paranoia when there's nothing around but statues, or the feeling that you could have sworn you saw something move out of the corner of your eye, turns out to be true.

The idea that you have to stare at the thing trying to kill you, and never look away. Never. Even. Blink. Or you will die. Even when you're eyes are drying out and demanding relief for just a single blink. Just close your eyes for a moment. What could it hurt?

That last is the part that really gets to me.

The angals creep me out.

 

[The Batman]

The Batman, I will get back to you on your post, but I started writing my answer and I realized it is going to be a little long and I want to put some time into and prime time television is about to start here. Basically covering characterization, arc structure and romance (Mostly with 10, because I actually think 9 was very well done for the most part). But lets just say, how Moffat uses romance and its role in the characterization of the Doctor is very different. The Doctor's relationships with River, Amy and Clara are vastly different to Rose and Martha.

I don't need a wall of text, I know they are different. It still does not change the fact that Moffat uses these romantic devices when he dosen't need to.

And lets not forget that it was Moffat who had 10 willingly dump Rose and Mickey on a spaceship to take the "slowpath" with Reinette.

 

[wiegeabo]

I will say, the Cyberman skull in The Pandorica Opens was an awesome scare.