TV Home Forum

Doctor Who - Revolution Of The Daleks

New Years Day - 6:45pm - BBC One ... 8pm (US) - BBC America

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
JC
JCB
Jodie's first series was something of a reset though. There was no backstory, no classic villans, no arc...and everyone hated it! Then last year they went completely in the other direction by blowing up the shows entire mythology and everyone hated that too. The show doesn't doesn't seem to be able to please anyone.
MD
mdtauk
If Jodie was to move on I think the show faces a huge decision. The massive back story makes it quite hard to follow, especially for the casual viewer. It’s got too complicated and its history even rewritten.

To succeed it needs to be simple. ...


This recent Timeless Child storyline. The details will matter to the long time fans, but on the surface, all the new audience needs to know, is that the Doctor has had more past lives than she remembers, and she feels hurt and betrayed having had her memories and lives taken away.

Stephen Moffat used to reference past stories and events in ways that the long time fans would recognise, but I am not sure if prior knowledge was ever essential.

But yes, when Chibnall took over, Series 11 was a fresh start, and did not use existing races or story elements.

Series 12 has included some, but not much more than the two most famous races (Daleks and Cybermen) which many would have heard of just from the ether. It also gave the audience the opportunity to hear about the Doctor's background through the companion's asking the Doctor about her past.
PA
paul_hadley
Going back to the New Year special, I did find the big finale a bit of a cop out and Jack was slightly underused after all the hype IMO.
JO
johnnyboy Founding member
Going back to the New Year special, I did find the big finale a bit of a cop out and Jack was slightly underused after all the hype IMO.


And why did the Judoon not arrest the Doctor again following her escape?
DA
davidhorman

So, are they making a show for die hard fans, which, comparatively, is a smaller audience.
Or making a general family drama?


Well most of the die-hard fans aren't happy with the big retcon either. I'd actually be quite happy with just the existence of Jo Martin's Doctor, who makes most sense as between-two-and-three incarnation, only Moffat had already done a secret incarnation so it feels like a bit of a rehash.

Changing the Doctor's entire history, though, just leaves you feeling like you never knew her in the first place. If they can change that , nothing's off limits for a future showrunner, which I think is a bit of a dangerous precedent. I'm all for pushing the envelope, but don't rip it.

Quote:
Oh and the daleks/cybermen - It just gets repetitive and a bit boring.


The Lone Cyberman was a great character, with huge potential... who then got killed off in his second episode.

As for the Daleks, this year's story was just a rehash of last year's plus Moffat's Victory of the Daleks . They could do with a rest.

Going back to the New Year special, I did find the big finale a bit of a cop out and Jack was slightly underused after all the hype IMO.


Ah, now, this brings me to one of my biggest peeves with the recent episode, and a classic example of Chibnall's inability to show instead of tell.

The gang meets Jack and he tells them about his immortality. He gets attacked by a Dalek mutant, but doesn't die, so he doesn't get to do his big thing.

Then later, as they're about to teleport off the Dalek ship, Jack gets his action-hero one-line quip, which was:

Quote:
I'm Captain Jack Harkness. And I'm immortal.


which would be fine if his immortality had anything to do with the scene, but it doesn't! He just teleports away! He might as well have said "I'm Captain Jack Harkness, and I'll shag anything that can consent." Technically correct, but utterly irrelevant.

I'm getting really fed up of watching a Doctor Who episode and getting to the end with a list of a dozen simple things that would have each have improved the episode. It's like Chibnall - and the rest of the team, to be honest - does 95% of the work and calls it a day, whereas as RTD and Moffat would have sweated over that all-important 5% until it was perfect, likely to the point of nervous breakdown in RTD's case.
BR
Brekkie
Never been a Doctor Who fan - have dipped in to only one or two episodes per doctor since it revived. However always thought the 13 Doctor limit actually somewhat protected the show for outlasting it's welcome and overriding it was just a lazy way to keep it going when in reality perhaps it should not - ending the current run now after 15 years would not be a bad outing at all, and when it inevitably gets rebooted again it could be seen as a remake from the first Doctor rather than continuing the timeline - although of course that would put an end to the multi-doctor stories they so love, initially at least.
RI
Richard
Never been a Doctor Who fan - have dipped in to only one or two episodes per doctor since it revived. However always thought the 13 Doctor limit actually somewhat protected the show for outlasting it's welcome and overriding it was just a lazy way to keep it going when in reality perhaps it should not - ending the current run now after 15 years would not be a bad outing at all, and when it inevitably gets rebooted again it could be seen as a remake from the first Doctor rather than continuing the timeline - although of course that would put an end to the multi-doctor stories they so love, initially at least.


Although Christopher Eccleston was still the same man as the previous 8 doctors, they were careful not to dwell too much on the past so as not to alienate new fans. This gradually changed but I think it was important to do it the way they did. A future break and reboot could do the same, without having to throw away all the history.
JO
Jon
Never been a Doctor Who fan - have dipped in to only one or two episodes per doctor since it revived.

I’m not entirely sure why you feel the need to give your opinion then and you seem to know a lot about it for someone who’s only watched it a couple of time!

To me it’s a bit like suggesting Corrie should be cancelled because it’s got stale. If it’s still reasonably popular and there is an audience for it, why should it end? The show can reinvent itself without starting from scratch quite successfully. So I don’t really see the need for an actual reboot in that strictest sense of the word. If some people don’t like it now with the current team, in a couple of series it could have a totally different cast and direction and those people might like it then. That’s surely the strength of the show, it can more or less be anything.
Alfie Mulcahy and Jonwo gave kudos
JO
Jonwo
Jon posted:

I’m not entirely sure why you feel the need to give your opinion then and you seem to know a lot about it for someone who’s only watched it a couple of time!


Brekkie doesn't like anything!
RW
Robert Williams Founding member
However always thought the 13 Doctor limit actually somewhat protected the show for outlasting it's welcome and overriding it was just a lazy way to keep it going when in reality perhaps it should not


The 13 limit was only ever introduced as a plot point in The Deadly Assassin in 1976 to give motivation for the Master in that particular story. The idea that the producers should remain beholden to that forever, that they should have no choice but to end the programme regardless of its popularity at the time, solely due to a plot point from some 40 years earlier, is ludicrous.

And it was overridden years ago anyway - in The Five Doctors in 1983 it was shown that it was possible for a Time Lord to be offered a new cycle of regenerations. Steven Moffat did so to the Doctor in 2013, and then Chris Chibnall in 2020 showed that the Doctor has already regenerated countless more times than anyone thought. Each showrunner is free to add to, and alter, the lore as they see fit - nothing needs to be set in stone.
NJ
Neil Jones Founding member
I thought the 13 doctor limit thing started in the 1960s when they had a need to recast the first doctor? Or am I thinking of something else? I'm sure the need for William Hartnell to leave the show for health reasons was the catalyst as it were for the whole concept of a regeneration in the first place and somebody just happened to pick a "limit" of 13?
RW
Robert Williams Founding member
I thought the 13 doctor limit thing started in the 1960s when they had a need to recast the first doctor? Or am I thinking of something else? I'm sure the need for William Hartnell to leave the show for health reasons was the catalyst as it were for the whole concept of a regeneration in the first place and somebody just happened to pick a "limit" of 13?

No, in 1966 the concept of 'regeneration' was introduced (although it wasn't yet called that) in order to recast the lead - but the 13 limit wasn't dreamt up until 1976.

Newer posts