millarworld.tv Comics Creators

Haven't watched the new Doctor Who series yet

What’s the general consensus?

I’m a huge Moffat fan, an uber-fan, but fell away around six episodes into Matt Smith and when I tried to get back on the train a couple of times it had moved twenty stations down the line, all the shows being so interconnected. So I kinda missed it, never really watching Doctor Who as a kid and only really into the more self-contained ones.

Is the new series good and will I understand it given that I’ve missed around seven years of continuity?

MM

3 Likes

I haven’t watched it yet, but the general feeling (even among people who haven’t been fans of the last couple of years) is that the new series has been pretty good. There seems to have been an attempt to fashion the most recent series as a sort of relaunch, so I expect that it should be easy enough to catch up on.

2 Likes

Yes, general consensus is that it’s a bit of a return to form. Everyone seems to be enjoying it, even those who haven’t liked the last couple of Capaldi years.

It also helps that this series is positioned as a bit of a soft-reboot: there’s a new companion, a new status quo for the Doctor (as a University professor), self-contained individual stories, and a new overarching mystery that is fairly underplayed, and which seems (so far as we know at this point, anyway) to be unconnected to any major plots of previous series.

3 Likes

Yeah, it’s been very nice and enjoyable and not mired in its own continuity, which is a good change of pace from the last few years. Well worth checking out.

3 Likes

Yes and yes.

So far the 3 episodes have been fully self contained. There is a background mystery that he’s protecting something in a vault but it’s not related to any previous episodes, we don’t know what is in there yet.

3 Likes

I’ll echo the other posts on this thread.

From my own perspective I loved the relaunched Who up until the end of Tennant and enjoyed Smith, but to a far lesser degree and I was getting bored during some episodes by this stage.

I really like Capaldi’s Dr, but both series until now I’ve stopped watching after a few and relegated it to background noise while I’m doing something else.
I’ve missed a lot of what happened during that time as I wasn’t paying attention.

I feel this new season has pulled me back in, I’ve really enjoyed all 3 epsiodes and I’m at the stage where I’m getting excited for Saturday coming so I can see what they have in store next.

I think you should give it a go, the new companion has allowed for it to be very accessible for those who have not been following (as well as not being repetive for those who have) it’s been very cleverly balanced.

2 Likes

What they said :+1:t3:

3 Likes

What he said.

2 Likes

:zipper_mouth:

It’s ok. It’s still got that Doctor Who charm but it’s all cheap effects and corny baddies and sets that you’d find on a stage play. It’s not very funny, not very scary, not interestingly directed, not the most compelling but it is like a cup of tea for your brain.

The cheapness of the BBC added to it’s charm in years past, and it was always interesting to see how they told their stories despite having a seeming production budget of a couple of grand, but given the money being thrown at TV these days and some of the incredible shows it’s a bit like playing with a cardboard box when you have video games, robots and remote control cars to play with. I’d say there’s only really been one standout episode under Capaldi - he’s been somewhat wasted in the role.

As you have so little time to watch TV there’s loads of other shows I’d recommend before Dr Who.

1 Like

So… it’s like your favourite thing ever? :confused:

2 Likes

Certainly Finn’s favorite thing ever. We’ve had a big cardboard box in his play room for 6 weeks now. But he’s 2 years old.

6 Likes

You don’t want to read the 2,000-post thread, Marky?

1 Like

No Clara - success.

No Danny Pink - bigger success.

I enjoyed the last 2 Xmas specials, so that boded well but having been so burnt by the Capaldi-Clara combo (strangely I found her fine with Smith’s Doctor), I was sceptical. The first two episodes I really enjoyed, haven’t yet seen the third.

You say that like it’s a bad thing!

4 Likes

I thought it unforgivably poor when Billie Piper was the companion. Seen a few episodes since which haven’t changed my mind. Considering the money the BBC takes in and fritters the FX budget on a show like this should be enough to stand comparison with mid 90’s Star Trek. It isn’t. Tom baker and many of the scripts of that error were good, Genesis of the Daleks literally scared the underpants off me as a kid and those stories hold up now. Just like Blakes 7 which was powerful stuff in its day despite the FX.

Can’t understand why anyone bothers with this now

Even though you’ve said you’ve only watched a few episodes and despite many doubts when Piper and Tate were first cast (and I may have been among them) they are now considered firm favourites.

Anyway Mark has said he has only liked the new version so harking back to the 1970s probably won’t make much difference. :wink:

Tastes vary, I don’t really rate special effects very highly in any reason I would watch a show or movie. It would rate quite low in my demands. Mad Max Fury Road where I loved the rollercoaster ride may be an exception but I think CGI means most blends into an unexciting mush.

1 Like

I think the idea that Doctor Who would benefit from a much bigger budget is maybe an unfounded one.

As a family show that skews pretty low in terms of its youngest viewers, it’s always going to have a different approach than a more adult sci-fi show would take. The baddies and monsters aren’t meant to be things that are genuinely disturbing and scary for adults - they’re often slightly cartoonish creations that are more suitable for a family audience.

I think it’s tempting as an adult viewer of DW to judge it on the same criteria as other adult shows, but it’s not really trying to do the same thing. I’ve watched quite a bit of the show with my kids (the classic series and the RTD/Moffat years) and they enjoy it for the ideas, regardless of whether the effects are a bit shonky or the sets are a bit artificial - and in fact, for the scarier episodes, that slight shonkiness helps to reinforce the idea that it’s not real and it’s just a story.

I’m not saying the effects couldn’t be better - there are times when they look a little rough, especially compared to TV shows that have millions spent on them per episode, or big blockbuster movies - just that I don’t think it matters that much for a show like Doctor Who.

I think it’s particularly impressive that the show looks so good (and so much better than even a few years ago) given that the BBC are reportedly spending less money on it these days.

4 Likes

I think it’s how they spend it a lot of the time.

Location filming the second episode made it work. You could try to build that in VFX, but it’s not cheap. Some airline tickets and hotel rooms were better value.

Last week’s episode looked very good too.

2 Likes

The budget doesn’t always have to go to monsters and effects. It can put them in somewhere other than the local quarry or using whatever they can salvage from the BBC props department. For having all of time and space at their disposal they’re always in Dickensian London.