Russell Two Davies

[Nick R]

Apparently, today there was some news about a change to Doctor Who’s production staff, in some obscure behind-the-scenes role. I don’t know if anyone else heard about it?

Topic

[Rushy]

Good news folks, we’re retconning everything past 2009

In fairness, there isn’t all that much after 2009 worth keeping. Show was going off the rails by the middle of the Silence arc. 

[Ben Saunders]

EXTREMELY LOUD INCORRECT BUZZER

[Rushy]

Spare me the poisonous barbs, they fall on deaf ears! 

[Dave]

In fairness, there isn’t all that much after 2009 worth keeping.

[Professor Flibble]

Nah, the revival peaked with Series 5. 2013 was when things started to go wrong.

[Rushy]

Nah, the revival peaked with Series 5. 

Yeah, tbf that’s really what I meant. I’ve always regarded the Big Bang as a kind of ending, when the Doctor sacrifices his own existence to bring the universe back. 

There’s certainly episodes I like after that, but there’s never been a full season that I’m completely happy with after 5. 

Series 10 comes the closest, but I don’t like anything about Missy’s arc or the Monks. 

[Professor Flibble]

Series 10 comes the closest, but I don’t like anything about Missy’s arc or the Monks. 

I like the Doctor’s blindness having an impact in the Monk trilogy, that’s the kind of narrative arc I prefer over the way the New Series usually does it. Simple cause and effect storytelling where an aspect of one story affects the next one. But yeah Series 10 isn’t perfect but it’s one of the best imo

[Professor Flibble]

Actually, that’s one good thing about the tender document stating one series, I really hope when Doctor Who comes back, it ditches the whole overarching stories over multiple years thing. Just make one good series at a time 

[Ben Saunders]

There are too many brilliant episodes past Series 5 to have such a doomer outlook on it. Even the shit ones have a certain je ne sais quoi to them that vanished when Capaldi walked off into the sunset. Except maybe Kill The Moon and Into The Forest of the Night.

[Professor Flibble]

I hope they find some way to resolve that Billie Piper cliffhanger without it impeding the show having a fresh start. Could they not green screen her on the TARDIS set for a Children in Need this year, say she’s Rose and there was some weird dimension hopping thing? I don’t want another RTD or Moffat type coming along in 10 years going “So about that Billie Piper cliffhanger…” 

[Warbodog]

There are some great Capaldi episodes I’ll watch again eventually, but I didn’t care about any of his arcs. So about the same as Tennant, really. The bit in the middle’s called Smith, and that makes me come.

[Flap Jack]

I would never de-canonise any era of the show, and Capaldi was probably the modern Doctor with the highest average episode quality after Tennant and Eccleston. However,

[Professor Flibble]

Listen was shit.

[Dave]

Capaldi has lots of great individual episodes, but I agree the arcs are a bit wonky. I wish Clara had cleared off a lot sooner and we got more years out of Bill.

[Rushy]

Listen fell flat on its face towards the end, but the narrative device of Capaldi breaking the fourth wall and treating the audience as the companion (also in Before the Flood and to a certain extent in Heaven Sent) worked remarkably well and should’ve been more of a trademark for his Doctor. 

That aside, my main issue with Capaldi is that I don’t think he was well suited for Moffat’s ADHD-mannered dialogue. Smith was a natural at it, and McGann made it work by being very understated. But I don’t think it ever came naturally to Capaldi. And watching him in interviews where he talks about bringing back “the cold winter nights” to Doctor Who, I feel like he imagined his era being very different from what it ended up being.

Often, Moffat’s writing was very good, but Capaldi’s line delivery was off. Or Capaldi was very good, but Moff was giving him rubbish. Never consistent. 

[Professor Flibble]

I think Moffat’s way of writing alternates between being dynamic and insufferable. Particularly I’m not keen on the way he writes side characters. The best Doctor Who he’d written for me is probably either The Curse of Fatal Death or A Christmas Carol.

[Moonlight]

“Focus on character and don’t rely on established Dr Who lore”

I have no business posting in this thread as I don’t think I’ve seen more than about five episodes of 2005 Who but I do feel like a lot of long-running franchises get absolutely crushed under the weight of their own lore and the fan expectation that they keep all of it in mind with each new installment. I’m just kind of tired of media being self-referential at this point (I’ve been moaning in the Futurama thread for a couple years now about them rehashing old jokes way too often).

[sleepey]

I hope they find some way to resolve that Billie Piper cliffhanger without it impeding the show having a fresh start. Could they not green screen her on the TARDIS set for a Children in Need this year, say she’s Rose and there was some weird dimension hopping thing? I don’t want another RTD or Moffat type coming along in 10 years going “So about that Billie Piper cliffhanger…” 

Start of episode 1, Billie (or if she’s not available, Sylvester McCoy in a blond wig) is still standing at the TARDIS entrance. A few seconds later she changes into someone else, who changes into someone else – the regeneration is still going, just cycling through a few different faces before it settles on the right one. “Huh, weird.” After the opening titles they’ve recovered & gone on an unrelated adventure & it never comes up again.

[Rushy]

I wouldn’t touch it with a barge pole until the show is in a healthy state again. Just have the next Doctor be the 16th and save the Billie Piper story for another time, for when Tennant is available again. 

My idea for it was Rose is trying to break back into our dimension from Pete’s World, but somehow ends up possessing the Doctor mid-regeneration. And she and the 14th Doctor go on one final adventure together before the 14th Doctor decides to give up his life so the regeneration can be completed. 

It’s not ideal, but it’s the only way I can think of to give her appearance some kind of meaning. 

[Dave]

[Ben Saunders]

I think I have actual PTSD from seeing that image of Billie as the Doctor because every time I do it ruins my day. I hope they just pretend it never happened, they can deal with it in a Big Finish I’ll never listen to that’s Really Good Actually.

[Jenuall]

I think Moffat’s way of writing alternates between being dynamic and insufferable. Particularly I’m not keen on the way he writes side characters. The best Doctor Who he’d written for me is probably either The Curse of Fatal Death or A Christmas Carol.

A Christmas Carol is basically a perfect episode of television, every aspect of the production absolutely knocked it out of the park there.

Series 5 followed by that special is what cements Moffat as the best showrunner for me. He may have lost consistency over time but that run is just so good I can forgive the some of the later wonky moments

[Dave]

Yeah, same here really. It’s a fantastic yearlong run that was never bettered. And personally I think The Eleventh Hour is a better jumping-on point than Rose.

[Warbodog]

I extend that classic run into the opening two-parter of series 6 (enigmatic lake astronaut, Doctor time skip dynamic switcheroo, Amy in the orphanage increasingly covered in tally marks), which I’ve always been able to separate from its disappointing follow-ups.

[Dave]

Series 6 started great but the payoffs in the back half are poor, and make it clear that Moffat didn’t really have a plan.

Still, that back half does have Rory putting Hitler in a cupboard, so it’s not a total loss.

[Flap Jack]

Interesting Bluesky thread from Nev Fountain:

https://bsky.app/profile/nevfountain.bsky.social/post/3mvpvqhqs2c2d

I find myself agreeing with most of it (although saying things like “The Doctor does not have a character” feels needlessly provocative), but I definitely disagree with his point about there needing to be an authority figure like the Time Lords acting as a check on The Doctor, and the one about it being bad if “aimless wandering” is the only thing connecting the stories. As far as I’m concerned the show is at its best when the stories are standalone, and throwing in Time Lords seems like treating the symptom instead of the disease.

[Rushy]

I definitely disagree with his point about there needing to be an authority figure like the Time Lords acting as a check on The Doctor, and the one about it being bad if “aimless wandering” is the only thing connecting the stories. As far as I’m concerned the show is at its best when the stories are standalone, and throwing in Time Lords seems like treating the symptom instead of the disease.

I don’t think the Time Lords ever really functioned as a “check” on the Doctor. On two occasions, they were a major nuisance (War Games & Trial) and the rest of the time, they basically popped up once every few seasons to give him a job to do. 

For me, the best resolution would be to dispense with Gallifrey entirely, but keep the Time Lords around as disconnected factions spread throughout time and space. Like survivors who all went their own way and develop their own colonies. Any writer can then do their own version of them. 

As for the stories being standalone, I liked it best how it was in the Hartnell years, where there was this subtle cohesion between stories. Like how Barbara is hypnotised by the Animus because she’s wearing the gold bracelet that Nero gave her in the previous story. Or Ian casually wearing his Chinese outfit throughout Keys of Marinus. Or Steven’s breakdown after enduring the Daleks’ Master Plan and the Massacre in a row. 

[Rudolph]

I find myself agreeing with most of it (although saying things like “The Doctor does not have a character” feels needlessly provocative), but I definitely disagree with his point about there needing to be an authority figure like the Time Lords acting as a check on The Doctor, and the one about it being bad if “aimless wandering” is the only thing connecting the stories. As far as I’m concerned the show is at its best when the stories are standalone, and throwing in Time Lords seems like treating the symptom instead of the disease.

It’s all a bit like Graham Williams in 1977. He was worried that the Doctor’s status as a free agent made him morally ambiguous, so he decided to give the Doctor a boss and a job.

[Technopeasant]

Oh? Haven’t heard of this. What was the pitch?

Serialized reboot of TOS essentially. I get long form arcs were his thing, but it just did not seem like Trek to me and the Kelvin films later did the reboot thing anyway to what weren’t exactly tremendous results.

[Professor Flibble]

I agree with…I think about 70% of what Nev says? Somewhere in that ballpark.

Continuity: I think it’s really that Doctor Who’s been hyperfocused on continuity to the detriment of new audiences. What fans really want is just to be updated on what’s going on with the pre-established stuff every now and again and, you know, not an entire arc about who those faces were in Brain of Morbius. 
The Doctor is most certainly a character, he’s my favourite character in all of fiction. Not sure I have much of a counterpoint but I think it’s a bit reductive.
Different companions and characters: Yes, definitely.
Bring back the Time Lords: Tbh even if all their presence amounted to was just them sending the TARDIS somewhere and the Doctor yelling up into the sky, I prefer the idea they’re still there over the Doctor having nobody to be on the run from, so yeah I totally agree with the reasoning. I’d just say not to the point their authority over him should dominate the show on a story-by-story basis.
Story arcs: Yes, please for the love of god can we move on from “what’s (insert ominous phrase or title here)? Find out in 12 weeks, or maybe 2 years.”
Cliffhangers: Yup, agreed. New Series cliffhangers are mostly just “this character was actually this character the entire time!”
The Doctor shouldn’t know everything: Yeah, I want the Doctor to be a bit more vulnerable again. Not in the sense of “ooh there’s an enigmatic character who’s teasing the Doctor about the series finale” but more the Doctor doesn’t know literally everything, they do have a degree of vulnerability and its what makes their adventures more interesting.

[Professor Flibble]

As for the stories being standalone, I liked it best how it was in the Hartnell years, where there was this subtle cohesion between stories. Like how Barbara is hypnotised by the Animus because she’s wearing the gold bracelet that Nero gave her in the previous story. Or Ian casually wearing his Chinese outfit throughout Keys of Marinus. Or Steven’s breakdown after enduring the Daleks’ Master Plan and the Massacre in a row. 

Yeah that kind of narrative cohesion is more what I want to see in a series of Doctor Who than some ominous portent being crowbarred onto the end of every episode

[Ben Saunders]

Yeah, same here really. It’s a fantastic yearlong run that was never bettered. And personally I think The Eleventh Hour is a better jumping-on point than Rose.

Agreed. Although I recently had the nightmare scenario where my friend asked me where to start watching Doctor Who specifically for Jenna Coleman, and I was like uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh well if you want her first appearance that’s Asylum of the Daleks, but that’s slap bang in the middle of Amy & Rory’s arc so maybe you’re better off with The Eleventh Hour, but then there’s a lot of brilliant stuff before that, but then there’s also a lot of shash before that, so uhhhhh just start with Series 1 Episode 1. And luckily, he liked it and wants to watch more.

But then the issue with starting with Series 1, which is very good, is you then have to watch Series 2, which is a bit shit, or at least full of corny crap like New Earth, Love & Monsters and Fear Here, and Ten/Rose’s relationship, which gets really insufferable at points. Basically, welcome to Doctor Who – a lot of it is brilliant but some of it is fucking shite.

[Ben Saunders]

The companion is the “check” for the Doctor, not the Time Lords. While I think the opening to Key to Time is phenomenal and spooky, essentially God himself intervening in the Doctor’s life, that arc works best when Robert Holmes and Douglas Adams are subtly deconstructing it, or David Fisher is blatantly ignoring it.

[Warbodog]

The Snowmen for introducing Clara and the series, probably. They’re asking to jump into a revival series that’s already well underway, so they should expect to be a bit left behind.

I like the people who ask “is Eccleston worth watching?” and presumably checking back for replies filled with spoilers and bias rather than just fucking watching an episode or 13 to find out.

[Jenuall]

The companion is the “check” for the Doctor, not the Time Lords. While I think the opening to Key to Time is phenomenal and spooky, essentially God himself intervening in the Doctor’s life, that arc works best when Robert Holmes and Douglas Adams are subtly deconstructing it, or David Fisher is blatantly ignoring it.

Companion is more of the audience surrogate than specifically a check for the Doctor though. Overall I don’t really agree with the concept the the Doctor needs a check for the show to work. A few of the writers could have benefitted from one on a few occasions though! 

[Professor Flibble]

Yeah I’m a bit tired of that too, the companion always taking the Doctor down a peg or two, like their sense of authority needs to constantly be challenged. Sometimes, the Doctor is a bit of a dick but christ the amount of times the New Series tries to do some big introspection thing or problematise the Doctor’s way of living, it gets old.

[Flap Jack]

I don’t think the Time Lords ever really functioned as a “check” on the Doctor. On two occasions, they were a major nuisance (War Games & Trial) and the rest of the time, they basically popped up once every few seasons to give him a job to do. 

Well I can see where Fountain is coming from, because that War Games instance did last for multiple full seasons and create an era which was both popular and critically well received. So it’s proven that a cosmic authority putting hard limits on The Doctor’s freedom can work, I just think that only works as a temporary subversion of the status quo, not as the status quo itself. And the suggestion that it “is not drama” if The Doctor isn’t being frequently bothered by the Time Lords or some equivalent to them is pretty silly. I think if you actually committed to this idea (while still having the show explore time and space, because that’s the premise), then The Doctor avoiding or outright defeating the Time Lords would quickly become routine and they’d lose all their bite.

The classic formula of “the Time Lords are around, and they generally leave The Doctor alone and don’t get involved in things, but on the rare occasion they do intervene, it’s serious” is fine though.

The companion is the “check” for the Doctor, not the Time Lords.

In what way? They definitely serve as emotional grounding, but I wouldn’t say they limit The Doctor’s freedom or power at all, at least not usually. Unless you mean that they prevent The Doctor from going all out against their enemies because they can’t risk them getting hurt?

[Ben Saunders]

In what way?

Well the Time Lord Victorious arc for a start, and how having a companion like Clara who fed into the Doctor’s bullshit instead of opposing it led to disastrous consequences. It’s a pretty big theme in New Who.

[Technopeasant]

Agreed. Although I recently had the nightmare scenario where my friend asked me where to start watching Doctor Who specifically for Jenna Coleman, and I was like uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh well if you want her first appearance that’s Asylum of the Daleks, but that’s slap bang in the middle of Amy & Rory’s arc so maybe you’re better off with The Eleventh Hour, but then there’s a lot of brilliant stuff before that, but then there’s also a lot of shash before that, so uhhhhh just start with Series 1 Episode 1. And luckily, he liked it and wants to watch more.

So if someone likes Elisabeth Sladen do you tell them to start with Spearhead from Space because it’s otherwise in the middle of the exile arc, or just start them with An Unearthly Child?

[Ben Saunders]

Not a fair comparison because the Amy/Rory stuff is a much heavier arc and is a focal point of the episode, while the exiled to Earth “arc” is more just the setting for the show that barely even comes up in most of the episodes. Besides, Sladen’s first appearance is in Season 10’s The Time Warrior, which is after the story where he gets his time travel knowledge back, The Three Doctors. You should have said Katy Manning.

[Professor Flibble]

Oh, Time Warrior is the first Season 11 serial

[Flap Jack]

Well the Time Lord Victorious arc for a start, and how having a companion like Clara who fed into the Doctor’s bullshit instead of opposing it led to disastrous consequences. It’s a pretty big theme in New Who.

Ah, I see. So I think you and Nev Fountain mean different things when you talk about there needing to be checks on The Doctor. A companion will sometimes persuade them not to abuse their power or cross ethical lines, but the Time Lords would hypothetically directly limit their capabilities, in particular making it more difficult and risky to do standard hero stuff that companions typically do not have a problem with at all.

It’s like “Superman is too powerful – there’s no tension in his stories because we know he can take down any threat” vs. “Superman is too powerful – what if he enslaves humanity?”. It’s debatable if either or both these things are actually problems, but saying “Superman would never enslave humanity because his friends and family are too strong of a moral influence” does not solve the issue of Superman stories not having enough dramatic tension.

The Time Lord Victorious example is an interesting one too, because while a companion would probably not support The Doctor’s subsequent megalomaniacal attitude, the instigating incident – risking the integrity of space-time in order to save more lives – is something a companion would usually be on board with. The Aztecs, Father’s Day, The Fires of Pompeii… it’s always the companion who’s trying to get The Doctor to abuse their time travel privileges for a perceived greater good, while The Doctor pushes back and acts as his own check. Just think of Genesis of the Daleks, where The Doctor is saying “Do I have the right?” while Sarah Jane is in the back of the shot saying “Oh my god, who cares, they’re Daleks, just kill the bastards already!”. (Ironically the Time Lords were actually on Sarah Jane’s side in this instance, but the principle is still there.)

[Ben Saunders]

Oh, Time Warrior is the first Season 11 serial

Shit, I even edited my post because I thought The Three Doctors was the season before Time Warrior, but it actually opens that season. Just move everything one number up and you’re good. 

[Technopeasant]

You should have said Katy Manning.

I take your point, but I was trying to fit in the companion stretching over multiple Doctors bit. I could have said the UNIT family setup instead though.

[Flap Jack]

I think I would be annoyed if I primarily wanted to watch Doctor Who for Jenna Coleman and my fan friend compelled me to watch the prior 88 episodes before she first shows up. Even at the height of Moffatian excess, Doctor Who isn’t THAT serialised – starting at Asylum of the Daleks surely would have been fine. TV shows are generally written to bring new viewers on board, at least if you start at the beginning of a series.

It’s just that if you’re a fan you want newbies to experience things in the ideal order and have maximum context for things, but it’s not really necessary. You can become a massive Red Dwarf fan even if you start with Back to Reality. Luckily it worked out in this case though!

[Professor Flibble]

Asylum of the Daleks is shit, so I’d say there are better first stories. I’m not a fan of Clara so I’m not keen on the idea but Snowmen’s good.

[Warbodog]

You can become a massive Red Dwarf fan even if you start with Back to Reality.

Bad luck for any Crime Traveller fans who are only interested in watching Chloë Annett’s episodes.

Then again,

[Flap Jack]

Asylum of the Daleks is shit, so I’d say there are better first stories. I’m not a fan of Clara so I’m not keen on the idea but Snowmen’s good.

AotD is shit, but is it shit to the same degree if you’re a Doctor Who novice? Not having any prior familiarity with the Daleks or Amy and Rory might be the optimum conditions to enjoy the episode, even if it won’t become great (you don’t need to know the show to know how contrived it is for a couple to finalise their divorce without having a single honest conversation about why they’re breaking up). But more research may be needed.

[Ian Symes]

I’m a massive Doctor Who fan, and my first experience of it was Dimensions in Time. You can start anywhere.

[Renegade Rob]

I’m a massive Doctor Who fan, and my first experience of it was Dimensions in Time. You can start anywhere.

[Author]

Replies