Doctor Who

[delta79]

When i saw the children in need sketch i thought it was davros before the incident the scared him and left him needing a life support unit.

 

[Dave]

Had Moffat left sooner than he did then maybe things might have gone better but Chibnall probably wasn't the right choice but in many ways he was set up to fail IMO. Even if you ignore the female doctor, there was so many issues in which combined with the allegations of woke, shody writing, poor marketing, a divided fanbase that seemed as bad as the Star Wars fandom and the infamous Timeless Child episode which was the final straw for many, it just seemed that that whole era was just doomed to fail though I'd argue Moffat was the real villain in all this.

Why are we ignoring the female doctor? I thought Whittaker was really good, I was less keen on the stories they gave her. I imagine there will be another female doctor in the future. Apologies if I misunderstood your intent with the comment but it read like they should not have gone with a female doctor:

The Wokeness issue always baffled me with the Who fandom. The series was started by one of the first female producers in UK TV history and its first director was a gay Asian man in the 60’s. Dr Who has always been “woke”, the issue is the older folk forget that the world has moved on from when they where children and ultimately Who is a young persons TV show, the old farts (and I count myself in that category) need to let go of the children's fantasy programme if they can’t move with the youth it’s intended for.

As for the episode it was fine, Tennant isn’t my favourite new who doctor but he knows what he is doing, it felt a bit rushed though, particularly the first half.

 

[QTXAdsy]

Why are we ignoring the female doctor? I thought Whittaker was really good, I was less keen on the stories they gave her. I imagine there will be another female doctor in the future. Apologies if I misunderstood your intent with the comment but it read like they should not have gone with a female doctor:

The Wokeness issue always baffled me with the Who fandom. The series was started by one of the first female producers in UK TV history and its first director was a gay Asian man in the 60’s. Dr Who has always been “woke”, the issue is the older folk forget that the world has moved on from when they where children and ultimately Who is a young persons TV show, the old farts (and I count myself in that category) need to let go of the children's fantasy programme if they can’t move with the youth it’s intended for.

As for the episode it was fine, Tennant isn’t my favourite new who doctor but he knows what he is doing, it felt a bit rushed though, particularly the first half.

Yeah, you did misread my comment, I have nothing against Whittaker or a female doctor, we all knew a female doctor would come sooner or later even if I personally thought Whittaker was the wrong choice to play the Doctor as she seemed to borrow personalities from both Tennant and Smith and not allowing to be her own character though I'm unsure if that is on her, direction, writing or all three.

What I meant to say is that no matter who Chibnall had cast in the role either male or female, many glaring issues during his tenure as showrunner would have still happened as we still would have got Timeless Child which everyone hated.

The anti-woke thing is not just related to Doctor Who but across the board in pop culture on so many places in which is too much to list that I'll be here all night talking about it, but what I have seen isn't that people are against per say woke content in general, but that writers of these shows/films are using it as shields to protect them from criticism when something is badly received the creators/showrunners will lash out on those who hate it are either racist, bigoted and all sorts when in truth those who have issues with the show are just a minority and not everyone of these as all they have are legit issues with it such as story, direction, writing and such and are being unfairly being tarred by the same brush and this in a way has sadly led to the rise of the anti-woke content on the Internet in which IMO would have never happened had those creators been humble and not try to attack audiences which is always a terrible idea, look no further than Mandy Thompson and Pleasure Beach which is very thing in action with THAT interview recently!

Yes, Doctor Who you can say has always been progressive but with everything else in media going this way, and being badly handled IMO, means that DW is just the same as the rest and sadly so called woke content is now being seen as byword for terrible writing, narcissistic actors and writers who fight back on social media in which has made it all such a sorry state that would never had happened had those in charged of those properties didn't lash out and make mountains out of molehills.

In summary, a great strength of DW is now sadly being seem as its greatest weakness out of no fault of its own by these culture wars online which is just a mess that honestly both sides have made this worse as it never needed to happen. Sorry about all this but rant over...I just want good quality content that everyone of every race, gender, sexual orientation and political opinion to enjoy something together but alas I fear that ship has long since sailed.

 

[DiogoJ42]

I personally thought Whittaker was the wrong choice to play the Doctor as she seemed to borrow personalities from both Tennant and Smith and not allowing to be her own character though I'm unsure if that is on her, direction, writing or all three.

My golden rule: never blame an actor for bad writing and / or direction. They can only work with what they are given. Case in point: Kate Mulgrew as Captain Janeway. Brilliant actress, moronic writers.


I believe that if you read back through this topic, at some point you will find a post from me, many, many years ago, where I said something along the lines of “The Doctor is one of the few roles that can be cast with anyone, of any skin colour or gender”. And I stand by that. But that doesn’t mean gender politics should become the main plot point. Far from it, it should be so inconsequential to the plot as to be beyond mention.

I guess this is what inevitably happens when Disney sieze control of anything.

 

[James]

Whittaker is a good actress that was stuck with bad writing, but I do wonder if her lack of research into the show (she was instructed by Chibnall to not watch any classic series) influenced her to take more inspiration from Tennant and Smith. Some people liked her though. I didn’t like her but that was because of the scripts.

I’m all for a female Doctor and I hope it’s done again. I loved Michelle Gomez as The Master (The Mistress) and that shown the potential in switching up the role. Not that ‘NuWho’ is the first time we’ve seen women play Timelords (e.g. The Rani).

 

[Dave]

Yeah, you did misread my comment, I have nothing against Whittaker or a female doctor, we all knew a female doctor would come sooner or later even if I personally thought Whittaker was the wrong choice to play the Doctor as she seemed to borrow personalities from both Tennant and Smith and not allowing to be her own character though I'm unsure if that is on her, direction, writing or all three.

What I meant to say is that no matter who Chibnall had cast in the role either male or female, many glaring issues during his tenure as showrunner would have still happened as we still would have got Timeless Child which everyone hated.

The anti-woke thing is not just related to Doctor Who but across the board in pop culture on so many places in which is too much to list that I'll be here all night talking about it, but what I have seen isn't that people are against per say woke content in general, but that writers of these shows/films are using it as shields to protect them from criticism when something is badly received the creators/showrunners will lash out on those who hate it are either racist, bigoted and all sorts when in truth those who have issues with the show are just a minority and not everyone of these as all they have are legit issues with it such as story, direction, writing and such and are being unfairly being tarred by the same brush and this in a way has sadly led to the rise of the anti-woke content on the Internet in which IMO would have never happened had those creators been humble and not try to attack audiences which is always a terrible idea, look no further than Mandy Thompson and Pleasure Beach which is very thing in action with THAT interview recently!

Yes, Doctor Who you can say has always been progressive but with everything else in media going this way, and being badly handled IMO, means that DW is just the same as the rest and sadly so called woke content is now being seen as byword for terrible writing, narcissistic actors and writers who fight back on social media in which has made it all such a sorry state that would never had happened had those in charged of those properties didn't lash out and make mountains out of molehills.

In summary, a great strength of DW is now sadly being seem as its greatest weakness out of no fault of its own by these culture wars online which is just a mess that honestly both sides have made this worse as it never needed to happen. Sorry about all this but rant over...I just want good quality content that everyone of every race, gender, sexual orientation and political opinion to enjoy something together but alas I fear that ship has long since sailed.

It’s certainly possible though I think the flip side of that coin is people are using “I’m only criticising the writing” as an excuse to go at “woke” content. I did find some of the episode to be a bit forced in that respect though.

My golden rule: never blame an actor for bad writing and / or direction. They can only work with what they are given. Case in point: Kate Mulgrew as Captain Janeway. Brilliant actress, moronic writers.


I believe that if you read back through this topic, at some point you will find a post from me, many, many years ago, where I said something along the lines of “The Doctor is one of the few roles that can be cast with anyone, of any skin colour or gender”. And I stand by that. But that doesn’t mean gender politics should become the main plot point. Far from it, it should be so inconsequential to the plot as to be beyond mention.

I guess this is what inevitably happens when Disney sieze control of anything.

I doubt Disney have much to do with that, they tend to be fairly conservative when it comes to gender politics and LGBT in their production due to the American audience.

Also at the moment they are just a distributor, they get script review (I suspect to avoid them distributing something that affects their brand) but the BBC still have creative control…. For now.

 

[ScottishChris]

So... I loved the episode of Dr Who. I am pretty disgusted about some of the "woke" chat going on [not on here], but the fact that a guy wearing a turban is deemed to be 'woke', or a lady in a wheelchair is 'woke' is pretty worrying and I feel is a wider representation of some of thee racial and discriminatory tensions in society today. I believe it is very right for a show like Dr. Who to help normalise this.

The pronoun chat: I feel that it was very interesting, but a tad clumsy. The question resulted in The Meep stating that it was "The definitive article"... as in it is both non-gendered, but also the only one of it's kind. The fact the doctor stated that this was like 'him', the definitive article and the only one [bar the Master when he appears] of his kind. The non-binary/ trans Rose seems to be a sub-plot in the making - looking back to THE Bad Wolf episodes, and the Timelord/ Tardis energy within them - gould this be another 'definitive article character' in the making?

Anyway, it was a fun episode, and I see it more as a sub-plot about what is upcoming. I can't wait to see the NPH Toymaker episode.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

I guess this is what inevitably happens when Disney sieze control of anything.

This is entirely an RTD creative choice. He pushed boundaries a little in the 2000s with Captain Jack's pansexuality, on a show which is essentially aimed at children. He also knew what he was doing, and what he wanted to do, when he cast Yasmin Finney to play Rose. You only have to look back at RTD's other shows to see that he's more than happy to cram as much LGBTQI+ representation into a show as possible. This is the man who created Queer as Folk, after all, which is a whole other problematic conversation to have at some other time.

 

[Islander]

...the fact that a guy wearing a turban is deemed to be 'woke', or a lady in a wheelchair is 'woke' is pretty worrying and I feel is a wider representation of some of thee racial and discriminatory tensions in society today. I believe it is very right for a show like Dr. Who to help normalise this.

I certainly didn't see the lady in a wheelchair as woke, but it did feel forced in a bit of an odd place... purely from the fact that I spent most of those scenes thinking "...but this is a heavily industrialised area, with narrow gangways, stairs and gantries... how did she actually get there??" - which they then actually made a plot point!

 

[Plastic Person]

Definitely pleased to see trans and disabled characters in a show like Doctor Who, and agree with @ScottishChris that it's mad that the mere appearance of anyone otherwise marginalised in the show's history is seen by anyone as 'woke'. Nonetheless, the way that RTD writes the slightly didactic dialogue around this has always made my teeth itch, although a new era of the Doctor does need to play to a broader audience than his work on It's A Sin, for example.

 

[James]

Thoughts on the second special?

 

[Shaggy_Dog_]

Thoughts on the second special?

I’ll put down what I wrote on Reddit Gallifrey about it:

Well that was a strange one, it was almost absolutely brilliant but there were a couple of bizarre “WTF?” moments that threatened to derail the whole thing.

The salt shaker thing reminded me that RTD can have a habit of pulling something random out of nowhere to try and resolve a plot point and it just seemed really daft. Does the doctor just carry a salt shaker around with him in his pocket now? Invoking a superstition seems very Un-Doctorly and some of the CGI in the episode looked very dodgy as well. But it was a very tense episode, almost like a spiritual follow up to Midnight, and Murray Gold’s score was excellent. Just a pity that the episode didn’t take itself a little more seriously, it seemed to want to be a little slapstick like Aliens Of London rather than going for a darker tone like Waters Of Mars.

I also thought the Isaac Newton part at the start was a bit odd.

 

[WickerWonder18]

Definitely better than the first one. Better storyline and plot, kept on our toes. Few moments were a bit dodgy though, CGI poor at times etc.
Good ending too, nice to see Bernard and a cliffhanger for the last special.

 

[IanB]

I also thought the Isaac Newton part at the start was a bit odd.

Spoiler: Episode 2 Spoiler

I thought the point of that, was that they have gone back in time, and changed history, so Gravity is now called Mavity. This is now what is causing part of the chaos in the future, with the plane falling out of the sky and they are going to need to fix it in the future? If its not relevant to the final episode, it was a bit odd.

The CGI was very poor I thought on the long corridor, but okay else where.

 

[Burbs]

A strange episode but we’re definitely getting our Doctor and Donna money’s worth! I too thought the corridor CGI was particularly poorly implemented and that the long arms/jaws/etc CGI was laughable, but the idea and story was great!

 

[Shaggy_Dog_]

Spoiler: Episode 2 Spoiler

I thought the point of that, was that they have gone back in time, and changed history, so Gravity is now called Mavity. This is now what is causing part of the chaos in the future, with the plane falling out of the sky and they are going to need to fix it in the future? If its not relevant to the final episode, it was a bit odd.

The CGI was very poor I thought on the long corridor, but okay else where.

Spoiler

Yes, I’ve just watched the episode again and noticed the Doctor and Donna both using the word “mavity” at a later point so I think you are right in that the consequences of that scene will be something we’ll be returning to in a big way. I did wonder as well if the ethnicity-swapping of Isaac Newton (based on the actor portraying him) will also be a plot point in some way or whether it’s just a piece of colour blind casting.

 

[James]

I wasn't sure about the Newton bit at the start. It didn't fit in with the tone of the rest of the episode. If Mavity is linked to the final episode, I won't mind that scene as much.

I really enjoyed the episode. Midnight meets Waters of Mars. Some of the dodgy CGI (the corridor, in particular) bothered me and detracted from the tenseness of the episode. But I guess dodgy CGI and Doctor Who is business as usual!

Bernard Cribbins's scene at the end was wonderful.

Edit: I have seen people say online that the CGI doesn't look so bad in QHD on iPlayer. So I might give it a go on there when doing a second watch and see if it looks as bad.

 

[Islander]

Am I the only one who was really bothered by the Doctor choosing the wrong Donna at the end, and nearly getting it very wrong? It just felt... jarring.

 

[ScottishChris]

Am I the only one who was really bothered by the Doctor choosing the wrong Donna at the end, and nearly getting it very wrong? It just felt... jarring.

I feel that there must be something to this. I mean, the wrong Donna gave the right "Donna answer" and the right Donna's response wasn't 'her'. I will likely be wrong, but I do feel all these bits and pieces (Rose, the gender thing, Donna's responses, Newton's 'Mavity' etc.) have got to be laying a bed for a plot line.

 

[CSLKenny]

I think it was simply just to make for the tension of the would Donna die scene. Eventually strengthening her resolve to stay with her family and part ways with the Doctor because she keeps coming so near to death.