Doctor Who II

[polishgenius]

3 hours ago, williamjm said:

British government program would actually meet its target in terms of delivering something.

 

Well that's why they farmed it out to a private company.




Anyway yeah agree with the general consensus. Was okay, not fantastic. It being another Dalek episode was just dull, but I understand they gotta get them in to keep the rights, which tbh I'd just let them go and let the Nation estate try to use Daleks without the Doctor but...
The dialogue was better than Chibnall sometimes manages, but he does have a problem with a bit too much Characters Explaining Things (both exposition and emoting out loud) and that was true here, but there were some good emotional scenes too.

One thing that annoyed me was the Tardis trap. It's a neat idea and everything but canonically a tardis is a sentient being and while only one episode really leaned into that, new Who has obviously leaned into the idea quite heavily without explicitly stating it. So just programming one to destroy itself seems harsh.

Good to see Chibnall commit to the plot that Moffatt bottled, of companions leaving of their own free will. Strongly suspect we'll see the pair of them in a special down the line but the leavetaking was sweet. Plus it took Chibnall a while but he's finally settled on a solid characterisation for this Doctor, and a logical follow on from previous versions (particularly Smith's) terminally insecure but confident when saving a world. He's been aiming at it the whole time really, but this is probably the first episode where I think it made sense and he and Whittaker got it down.

Another small botheration though: they hear she's been in prison and the only thing they can think about is that she left them for ten months. OH NO.

[Werthead]

 

Quote

Anyway yeah agree with the general consensus. Was okay, not fantastic. It being another Dalek episode was just dull, but I understand they gotta get them in to keep the rights, which tbh I'd just let them go and let the Nation estate try to use Daleks without the Doctor but...

I think they ruled this out a while back and the BBC can use them whenever now. They've certainly gone more than one whole season without them showing up.

Quote

One thing that annoyed me was the Tardis trap. It's a neat idea and everything but canonically a tardis is a sentient being and while only one episode really leaned into that, new Who has obviously leaned into the idea quite heavily without explicitly stating it. So just programming one to destroy itself seems harsh.

I was wondering about that. During the Time War they mention losing thousands of TARDISes in combat with the Daleks, so certainly sacrificing a TARDIS to take out a Dalek taskforce is on-brand for them.

There's also a possible rationalisation that TARDISes become sentient over very long periods of time, whilst the TARDIS sacrificed in the episode may have been a newer one which had not developed that ability yet.

Quote

Another small botheration though: they hear she's been in prison and the only thing they can think about is that she left them for ten months. OH NO.

She never mentioned that she was in prison for 20+ years though, and she made it sound like a bit of a lark rather than something to be really concerned about, so they didn't follow up on it.

[felice]

1 hour ago, Werthead said:

There's also a possible rationalisation that TARDISes become sentient over very long periods of time, whilst the TARDIS sacrificed in the episode may have been a newer one which had not developed that ability yet.

Or even the Doctor's TARDIS being unique in how it's developed in conjunction with its unique pilot.

[Jaxom 1974]

On 1/1/2021 at 2:49 PM, Werthead said:

 

One key weakness is that Chibnall seems to think that Jack Robertson is a far more charismatic and interesting villain than, well, anyone else on Earth. 

  Hide contents

 

 

I don't know.  I realize it's a stretch, but having Noth, as an American, as the bad guy in this, particularly on his he's such a slimeball overall, it feels a bit like commentary on the state of things... but I realize that's a stretch. 

 

[Werthead]

7 hours ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

I don't know.  I realize it's a stretch, but having Noth, as an American, as the bad guy in this, particularly on his he's such a slimeball overall, it feels a bit like commentary on the state of things... but I realize that's a stretch. 

Oh, it makes sense. His original first-Chibnall-season appearance was very much a Trump thing, but like all these comedic attempts to out-Trump Trump, it doesn't work because the real thing is far more bizarre than fiction.

[williamjm]

19 hours ago, polishgenius said:

Well that's why they farmed it out to a private company.

Farming things out to private companies often seems to be the point at which the UK Government's plans go wrong.

[Jaxom 1974]

4 hours ago, Werthead said:

Oh, it makes sense. His original first-Chibnall-season appearance was very much a Trump thing, but like all these comedic attempts to out-Trump Trump, it doesn't work because the real thing is far more bizarre than fiction.

I know it's overly Trumpy the first time out, but this time...kinda felt like it was meant to be more of a piss take on America overall...but yeah, it's hard to beat the real stuff...

[SpaceChampion]

This:

 

[Werthead]

On 1/3/2021 at 11:50 PM, SpaceChampion said:

This:

 

To be fair, this was a much bigger problem during the Murray Gold era (shudder).

[Derfel Cadarn]

I wonder if they’re setting up a Doctor/Yaz romance? Would drive many Classic Who fans berserk; they hated the idea of the Doctor having sex with women even when the character was a man 

Hence Susan’s actress having to push to be allowed to call the Doctor ‘Grandfather’ in The Five Doctors; the now-non canon looms/Susan supposedly the granddaughter of the guy the Doctor is a reincarnation of.

 

[williamjm]

2 hours ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

I wonder if they’re setting up a Doctor/Yaz romance? Would drive many Classic Who fans berserk; they hated the idea of the Doctor having sex with women even when the character was a man 

I did wonder that as well in the most recent episode.

[mormont]

They’ve definitely got the Doctor/Yaz romantic tension as pretty heavily signposted subtext. But it won’t go further than that, I assume.

[Ghostlydragon]

3 hours ago, mormont said:

They’ve definitely got the Doctor/Yaz romantic tension as pretty heavily signposted subtext. But it won’t go further than that, I assume.

It can't. If it does it will just support Chibnall's belief that Yaz is the best companion ever when really she's the worst (at least in new who).

Having a companion feel that way isn't exactly new but the doctor should only reciprocate when the person is really special and there is something magical there.

But then again, whatever this has become since 2018 isn't Doctor Who so what do i know 

[Werthead]

2 hours ago, Ghostlydragon said:

It can't. If it does it will just support Chibnall's belief that Yaz is the best companion ever when really she's the worst (at least in new who).

All three companions had reasonable on-paper arcs (Yaz with her family and job, Ryan and Graham with grief) but they were not very-well transmitted on screen, especially Yaz and her career, which seemed to get short shrift.

But there's definitely been other companions (even only going back to 2005) with poorer character arcs (Donna, Martha, arguably Mickey and Bill) and portrayed by poorer actors (Freema Agyeman was very likable and enthusiastic but was not accomplished during her time on Who but has been outstanding in subsequent shows, like Sense8; Catherine Tate never really evolved beyond just being herself), especially if we count the briefer semi-companions like Adam and (argh) Craig.

Quote

But then again, whatever this has become since 2018 isn't Doctor Who so what do i know 

I do find the attempts to make some kind of difference between pre-Chibnall Who and the rest of 2005+ Nu Who to be pretty unconvincing. Who came back in 2005 as a hyperkinetic live-action cartoon for children with oft-incoherent plotting and spotty characterisation but you ignore that to have fun, and so it has remained ever since. If anything, Chibnall's first season was possibly the most consistent in terms of quality since the show came back (no particularly great episodes, but no particularly awful ones), although his second was definitely one of the most inconsistent. But I'm not seeing any quantum shift in storytelling or characterisation from Davies to Moffat to Chibnall.

That's probably been Nu-Who's biggest problem. The original series changed style and tone every few seasons, sometimes being sillier and more lighthearted, sometimes more serious and more of a drama (and, very briefly, actually exploring harder SF ideas in the late Baker/early Davison era). The new show's been pretty consistent at being a lightweight show since 2005 and could probably stand to have the tone and style changed more dramatically, even if just as a one-off, one-episode experiment.

[Ghostlydragon]

42 minutes ago, Werthead said:

All three companions had reasonable on-paper arcs (Yaz with her family and job, Ryan and Graham with grief) but they were not very-well transmitted on screen, especially Yaz and her career, which seemed to get short shrift.

But there's definitely been other companions (even only going back to 2005) with poorer character arcs (Donna, Martha, arguably Mickey and Bill) and portrayed by poorer actors (Freema Agyeman was very likable and enthusiastic but was not accomplished during her time on Who but has been outstanding in subsequent shows, like Sense8; Catherine Tate never really evolved beyond just being herself), especially if we count the briefer semi-companions like Adam and (argh) Craig.

I do find the attempts to make some kind of difference between pre-Chibnall Who and the rest of 2005+ Nu Who to be pretty unconvincing. Who came back in 2005 as a hyperkinetic live-action cartoon for children with oft-incoherent plotting and spotty characterisation but you ignore that to have fun, and so it has remained ever since. If anything, Chibnall's first season was possibly the most consistent in terms of quality since the show came back (no particularly great episodes, but no particularly awful ones), although his second was definitely one of the most inconsistent. But I'm not seeing any quantum shift in storytelling or characterisation from Davies to Moffat to Chibnall.

That's probably been Nu-Who's biggest problem. The original series changed style and tone every few seasons, sometimes being sillier and more lighthearted, sometimes more serious and more of a drama (and, very briefly, actually exploring harder SF ideas in the late Baker/early Davison era). The new show's been pretty consistent at being a lightweight show since 2005 and could probably stand to have the tone and style changed more dramatically, even if just as a one-off, one-episode experiment.

I just found series 11 incredibly boring for the majority of the show while being truly awful in 3 particular ones: Rosa, Demons of the Punjab and Arachnids in the UK.

Series 12 was so bad I've sworn to never watch the show again until they confirm the Master was lying about the events of the finale. I mean Orphan 55 was awful in its preachiness but Timeless Children ruined the history of the show. It was bad enough that Ruth was part of the first retcon but what came after was even worse and I can't believe it ever got approved. That Chibnall had this idea from day 1 was really bad.

And now JW is apparently going. Thats great. Maybe the new lead actor will do a better job of embracing the shows history and fandom but it won't make a real difference until Chibnall is gone and the new showrunner goes back to making a great show and won't allow bbc's identity politics to touch the show.

[felice]

5 hours ago, Ghostlydragon said:

Having a companion feel that way isn't exactly new but the doctor should only reciprocate when the person is really special and there is something magical there.

The Doctor is a hyperintelligent alien entity that's well over a thousand years old. That's like saying a human should reciprocate their pet hamster's romantic interest if the hamster is really special.

[Derfel Cadarn]

Just rewatched The Fiveish Doctors, an extra on thr 50th anniversary steelcase edition. An excellent addition, and the participents (including Peter Jackson and Ian Mckellen) are happy to send themselves up. 
Also Russell T Davies proposing himself as a new Doctor, and Sylvester McCoy never missing a chance to remind everyone that he’s filming The Hobbit.

[Derfel Cadarn]

Been rewatching some classic Who, starting with The Web of Fear. Currently on The Silurians. Interestingly, the Silurians launch a biological attack on humanity, releasing an infected human.

The Doctor and UNIT struggle to stop the disease by quarantining anyone who came into contact with the infected.

Had thr current government been in charge, the UK at least would be fucked.

[dog-days]

Jodie Whittaker and Chris Chibnall to leave Doctor Who in 2022

Didn't have a problem with Jodie Whittaker, but am relieved that Chibnall's going and not doing a two-doctor run like Davies and Moffat. 

[Ghostlydragon]

Finally! Three series makes sense and I can totally buy the rumours that her agent told her to get out since the terrible performance of the show will hurt her career, but for the showrunner to leave after such a short period is a huge surprise. But if the show continues, it will make no difference who is in charge while the BBC continue to push their agenda.