Heartland

Is gonna write an episode of Dr Who

Crikey blimey

Yay!

I think it could be really good for Doctor Who to get some guest writers in occasionally (especially if they're of Neil Gaiman's calibre - I'm looking forward to that one).

However this should only be an occasional thing - the problem with guest writers is that it makes it far more difficult to create well-crafted story arcs across a series (or even across series).

I'm really hoping that Steven Moffat tones down the "Timmy Mallett in Space" tendencies of the last few series (which in all fairness I think was primarily a feature of RTD's writing), which would be even more unbearable with Matt Smith, and instead turns it into something closer to a modern version of Sapphire and Steel (actually I could see Neil Gaiman writing an episode of Sapphire & Steel). A young actor playing the Doctor needs to be far more serious in order to be taken seriously, as he'll lack the gravitas of age and experience.

His episode of Babylon 5 was pretty good, so hopefully this bodes well.

OOohhhh!!!!! Have to keep an eye out for that one. I have to admit I have not seen that many ep of Dr Who, but some. They ofcourse do not send it here.

Currently reading The Graveyard Book, allthough a children book, so far I quite like it.

Fingers crossed! I can't imagine him writing anything 'goofy', but the Eleventh Doctor comes pre-prepared with daft catchphrases.

A young actor playing the Doctor needs to be far more serious in order to be taken seriously, as he'll lack the gravitas of age and experience.

Wise words indeed! Davison managed it well, I thought. Conversely, quality has decreased since McGann.

timsinister wrote:Conversely, quality has decreased since McGann.

I dunno, I thought Chris Ecclestone was awesome. David Tennant played to the gallery a bit much for my liking.

markfiend wrote:

timsinister wrote:Conversely, quality has decreased since McGann.

I dunno, I thought Chris Ecclestone was awesome. David Tennant played to the gallery a bit much for my liking.

Can't disagree with that.

you all should be spanked and made to watch Mad Men, check this pie chart



or the bit with words - http://www.cracked.com/funny-4033-christina-hendricks/

markfiend wrote:

timsinister wrote:Conversely, quality has decreased since McGann.

I dunno, I thought Chris Ecclestone was awesome. David Tennant played to the gallery a bit much for my liking.

I can see it I suppose, but I couldn't get to grips with Ecclestone's brash Northern monkey routine. Mind you, McGann himself kind of phoned in his performance - got the idea he'd read the script, but nobody took the time to explain it to him...

I'll never be pleased, I've read most of the Virgin New Adventures!

I thought there was a real other-worldliness to Ecclestone's performance though. (And as his Doctor said, plenty of planets have a North.)

You'll have to show me some time, I can't see it myself! Too ready with the laughs, too fumbling with the 'dark times' IMHO.

But I'm a stubborn git over DW, so please don't take offence!

The clips for the new series looked good, well the ones without the student Doctor...

It's a bit f**king Twilight-lite

I find the concept of Twighlight-lite about like a low fat version of skimmed milk!

Wasn't Stephen Fry supposed to be doing an episode which came to nothing in the end? Still, I'm keeping my fingers crossed someone at the BBC will see sense and give him the chance to play the title role at some point. John Cleese and Tim Curry are too old now.

I'm too glad RTD is gone.On the one hand RTD did bring the show back, but..he can't write decent characters for s**t now. The biggest example being that overblown American queen Captain Jack. Davies wrote realistic gay men in QAF, why such a panto performance?
And turning the Master into a "Evil Doctor on meth" rather than the Bond villain with a sense of humour we had previously.
For me the biggest thing has been the air of disappointment. You get excited for a big plot twist only to find it's actually rather dull. "Daleks vs Cybermen!! Oh..that was quick. And one-sided.."."The Time Lords are back?? Oh..wait..no..they're not..and they're evil now..hang on, Rassilon?? Wasn't he dead centuries before the Doctor was born? And what's with the Oven-Mitt of Doom?? Oh..they're gone again. Oh, is that his mum?"

I still say there hasn't been a credible actor in the role since Colin Baker, and look at the terrible plotlines they gave him..

Debaser wrote:[Neil Gaiman] Is gonna write an episode of Dr Who

Crikey blimey

But not until next year, just in case anyone got a bit too excited there.

markfiend wrote:

timsinister wrote:Conversely, quality has decreased since McGann.

I dunno, I thought Chris Ecclestone was awesome. David Tennant played to the gallery a bit much for my liking.

Can't agree with you there. Ecclestone always seems so uncomfortable in his own skin that he never convinces as a real person, never mind as a fictional one. One of the most overrated actors of his generation (alongside forever bored Kevin Spacey). Tennant, on the other hand, was charismatic, exciting and a damned good actor to boot. Took him a while to settle in but once he did, he became definitive in the way that Tom Baker was in the old days.

DeWinter wrote:I'm too glad RTD is gone. For me the biggest thing has been the air of disappointment. You get excited for a big plot twist only to find it's actually rather dull. "Daleks vs Cybermen!! Oh..that was quick. And one-sided.."."The Time Lords are back?? Oh..wait..no..they're not..and they're evil now..hang on, Rassilon?? Wasn't he dead centuries before the Doctor was born? And what's with the Oven-Mitt of Doom?? Oh..they're gone again. Oh, is that his mum?"

I'll agree with that (the bits that I've actually left in. Personally, I liked Jack, although Barrowman in person is annoying.) On the whole, I'm confident that Moffatt will change things for the better, but there are a few worrying signs that he's listened to RTD too much. The bloody Daleks are back yet again (is anyone not completely fed up of them?) and the Doctor snogs his companion (always to get a gratuitous rise out of the audience when RTD did it, Moffatt's The Girl In The Fireplace being the only occasion when it actually had a genuine place in the story). And Moffatt described in a recent interview how he and the other execs spend most of their time watching all of the dailies as they come in. Does it not occur to anyone these days to trust the directors they hire to do their jobs and just wait and see the first rough cut? RTD spent too much time controlling every aspect of the show (anyone read his overpriced whinge The Writer's Tale, where he complains about having to rewrite every script cos none of the writers he hires are capable of, er, writing?) and I had hoped that Moffatt wasn't going down the same road.

stufarq wrote: But not until next year, just in case anyone got a bit too excited there.

I didn't think that bit was important There's nowt wrong with a bit of excitement.

DeWinter wrote: The biggest example being that overblown American queen Captain Jack.

To be fair, I think that's more Barrowman's fault than RTD. Although with a bit of direction someone could have reined him in.

I'm going to reserve judgement until actually I've seen a few episodes.
Based on what Moffat has written for the series, I'd say he is a far better writer than RTD. He's managed to capture the "hiding behind the sofa" quality that has been sadly lacking.
Call me repressed, but what's with all the emotional incontinence?
To date, the show has lacked subtlety in defining the relationship between characters.
Sometimes less is more.

I only dip into Dr. Who occasionally but I saw the Moon episode on BBC Three last night with the D'Doon (?). I was spellbound from start to finish.
It was also the first episode I've seen with martha in. Wow.

And I love Gaiman - it can only be a good thing.