Does anyone still care about Moffat era Doctor Who?

I mean really care? The forums are quiet, almost silent. Fans are leaving in droves. Yes the ratings are holding up, but only at peak points such as Christmas Day and among new viewer markets such as the US where the programme is still fresh. Those watching seem tobe 99.999999999999999% casual viewers with fandom diminishing.

Untrue! Moffats Who is doing just as well as ever. It's just the fact that the majority of fans are silent. A silent majority, if you will.

It's not Moffat Who that is causing the problems.

It's the lingering stigma of the Classic Series. Formerly vocal fans have been shocked into silence because only now can they see how awesome the show is. Before there was a certain fancred to be had in following the classic series. It was like being into heroin when everyone else was huffing paint thinners.

But now that Doctor Who has the scaled the same heights, in terms of production value and writing, as Supernatural or Haven,or even the mighty Warehouse 13, the appalling truth is revealed: the classic series simply wasn't that good and suffered massively at the hands of overambitious directors,penny-pinching producers, egomaniac actors and writers who had no sense of scale or achievability.

What those fans are feeling is shame. Crushing, degrading shame. Which is traditionally accompanied by silence, recrimination and tear stains.

Dave Webb wrote:It's not Moffat Who that is causing the problems.

It's the lingering stigma of the Classic Series. Formerly vocal fans have been shocked into silence because only now can they see how awesome the show is. Before there was a certain fancred to be had in following the classic series. It was like being into heroin when everyone else was huffing paint thinners.

But now that Doctor Who has the scaled the same heights, in terms of production value and writing, as Supernatural or Haven,or even the mighty Warehouse 13, the appalling truth is revealed: the classic series simply wasn't that good and suffered massively at the hands of overambitious directors,penny-pinching producers, egomaniac actors and writers who had no sense of scale or achievability.

What those fans are feeling is shame. Crushing, degrading shame. Which is traditionally accompanied by silence, recrimination and tear stains.

Complete nonsense. What people can see is how superior in almost every way the classic series was compared to the mind-numbing populist trash of today. Take, for example, Shada. Wonderful Cambridge setting, great scenery, witty dialogue and normal dramatic pacing. Then take 'The Snowmen', silly running around, fantasy staircases and incomprehensible 'plot'.

Thing is, every time I watch Shada, I feel like something is missing. It's very jarring. Like they gave up half way through or something.

Oh, come now, Sparacus. The Snowmen wasn't nearly the disaster you describe. Devices like that spiral staircase (which actually got an explanation during the episode) were simply little visual devices to show how isolated and hermit-like the Doctor has become in the wake of the Pond's departures.

I think Dave has a point about how the "revived" Doctor Who has exceeded the classic series original. I also think there's a point to be made about the fact that the Moff has not put himself in a position to be criticised due to controversy. There's no stray "Ming Mong" comments escaping the Moff's lips.

Doctor Who is doing just fine, and its fans appear to be getting older and wiser. That's all.

sparacus wrote:
Complete nonsense. What people can see is how superior in almost every way the classic series was compared to the mind-numbing populist trash of today. Take, for example, Shada. Wonderful Cambridge setting, great scenery, witty dialogue and normal dramatic pacing. Then take 'The Snowmen', silly running around, fantasy staircases and incomprehensible 'plot'.

Ah yes. Classic Doctor Who. So good, it was cancelled. And Shada! A story so great that Douglas Adams loathed it and reused the god bits for a far more successful non-Doctor Who novel which may yet be properly adapted for the screen and feature the talents of Steven Mangan - a far better actor than the nonsense merchant Tom Baker. There's only so far pop-eyed incredulity and upstaging your cast members can take you, but in the seven years of Baker's tenure we saw that envelope pushed to the very limit.

As for "silly running around" - poppycock! Have you ever actually watched any Classic Who? Episodes 2 and 3 of any given four parter were generally running around and had to be! Because the stories generally contained 40 minutes of actual dramatic content and had to undergo frantic padding to fit the four part remit. If that's your definition of normal dramatic pacing it just shows that you need to spend a bit more time in the presence of late 20th and early 21st century drama, where writers actually employ pacing appropriate to story and mood instead of throwing in another chase sequence to lead up to a drama-free "cliffhanger". I challenge you to name one four to six part story that wouldn't benefit from having all the scenes in corridors removed and replaced with some actual action or quality dialogue.

Johnstone McGuckian wrote:Thing is, every time I watch Shada, I feel like something is missing. It's very jarring. Like they gave up half way through or something.

And that is exactly the point. It is unfinished yet still more enjoyable than most of the Moffat era output.

Patrick wrote:Oh, come now, Sparacus. The Snowmen wasn't nearly the disaster you describe. Devices like that spiral staircase (which actually got an explanation during the episode) were simply little visual devices to show how isolated and hermit-like the Doctor has become in the wake of the Pond's departures.

I think Dave has a point about how the "revived" Doctor Who has exceeded the classic series original. I also think there's a point to be made about the fact that the Moff has not put himself in a position to be criticised due to controversy. There's no stray "Ming Mong" comments escaping the Moff's lips.

Doctor Who is doing just fine, and its fans appear to be getting older and wiser. That's all.

The spiral staircase came across as silly, Tim Burtonesque fantasy. Doctor Who is no longer pitched at both children and adults. Its pitched only at children, and the under 12s at that.

Dave Webb wrote:

Ah yes. Classic Doctor Who. So good, it was cancelled. And Shada! A story so great that Douglas Adams loathed it and reused the god bits for a far more successful non-Doctor Who novel which may yet be properly adapted for the screen and feature the talents of Steven Mangan - a far better actor than the nonsense merchant Tom Baker. There's only so far pop-eyed incredulity and upstaging your cast members can take you, but in the seven years of Baker's tenure we saw that envelope pushed to the very limit.

As for "silly running around" - poppycock! Have you ever actually watched any Classic Who? Episodes 2 and 3 of any given four parter were generally running around and had to be! Because the stories generally contained 40 minutes of actual dramatic content and had to undergo frantic padding to fit the four part remit. If that's your definition of normal dramatic pacing it just shows that you need to spend a bit more time in the presence of late 20th and early 21st century drama, where writers actually employ pacing appropriate to story and mood instead of throwing in another chase sequence to lead up to a drama-free "cliffhanger". I challenge you to name one four to six part story that wouldn't benefit from having all the scenes in corridors removed and replaced with some actual action or quality dialogue.

Doctor Who was cancelled because of internal BBC politics rather than it being poor. It was deliberately run down by Michael Grade, firstly by keeping JNT on long after he had run out of ideas and secondly by scheduling it opposite Coronation Street. There was a bit of padding in some classic era stories but mostly what people call padding was actually depth of dialogue and characterisation.

sparacus wrote:
Doctor Who was cancelled because of internal BBC politics rather than it being poor. It was deliberately run down by Michael Grade, firstly by keeping JNT on long after he had run out of ideas and secondly by scheduling it opposite Coronation Street. There was a bit of padding in some classic era stories but mostly what people call padding was actually depth of dialogue and characterisation.

It was deliberately run down by Michael Grade because he knew it was awful and wanted shot of it. Can't say I blame him.

JNT wasn't the ideas guy. If you want to blame the man for anything, blame him for casting Peter Davison, Colin Baker and Sylvester McCoy. I feel these were all solid choices, and lay the actual blame for the quality of stories at the feet of Chris. Bidmead and Eric Saward who actually were the ideas men and script editors. And, by the way, I do blame them.

There was padding in ALL of the classic era stories. Moffat and RTD have both shown you can tell as compelling a story as the classic series ever produced in no more than 60 minutes. I will stand Blink or Midnight against anything the Classic series ever did, safe in the knowledge that even the best of the Classic contains at least one episode of pure guff.

Dave Webb wrote:

sparacus wrote:
Doctor Who was cancelled because of internal BBC politics rather than it being poor. It was deliberately run down by Michael Grade, firstly by keeping JNT on long after he had run out of ideas and secondly by scheduling it opposite Coronation Street. There was a bit of padding in some classic era stories but mostly what people call padding was actually depth of dialogue and characterisation.

It was deliberately run down by Michael Grade because he knew it was awful and wanted shot of it. Can't say I blame him.

JNT wasn't the ideas guy. If you want to blame the man for anything, blame him for casting Peter Davison, Colin Baker and Sylvester McCoy. I feel these were all solid choices, and lay the actual blame for the quality of stories at the feet of Chris. Bidmead and Eric Saward who actually were the ideas men and script editors. And, by the way, I do blame them.

There was padding in ALL of the classic era stories. Moffat and RTD have both shown you can tell as compelling a story as the classic series ever produced in no more than 60 minutes. I will stand Blink or Midnight against anything the Classic series ever did, safe in the knowledge that even the best of the Classic contains at least one episode of pure guff.

I disagree with much of this however I do think that some of the story choices made in the Saward & post Saward periods were awful. I mean 'Time Flight' for example. However the show always had enough good stories to be enjoyable. The irony is that it was cancelled after season 26 which was an improvement on the previous two seasons, especially 'Curse of Fenric'. It was cancelled because Grade had a dislike if 'niche' sci fi telly, tried to cancel it in 1985 and failed and so it became a matter of ego for him. It did not deserve cancellation.

I still care and I don't think Doctor Who has ever been better than it is at this point. I mean, what RTD did was good, but Moffat has re-instilled the sense of mystery that seemed to be lacking. As for the Snowmen, I have a few friends who are who fans and they all believed it was amazing. I must also admit that it is one of my all time favorite stories. Go Clara Oswald/Oswyn! There hasn't been a companion so intriguing in a long time... (Sorry Amy, you're still brill)

Then again, I am a Romana/Ace fan. I also agree that 80's Who was aweful except for gems like Fenrik.