Doctor Who? ( Put It Out of Its Misery!)

Doctor Who, a Nerd confidential...



After being back on the air for 6 years - its time to cancel Doctor Who again.

Sad, really. A huge fan for decades, I hated to see the new Doctor Who marred by bad acting, rushed lines, and shoddy writing. Over acting by David Tennant, and hackneyed romanticism are only two examples of this bad production. (BTW -Doctor Who is not a romance! There is no crying in Doctor Who!)

Doctor Who was never about lavish productions or computer graphics, but was a classic SciFi adventure built around by great character driven stories, solid acting performances, and fantastic imagination. Even at a low ebb, most Doctor Who episodes of the first 25 years were lightyears ahead of their time. If Doctor Who was ever about ANYTHING it was about trascendence, of limits, real or perceived, of course.

The new Doctor Who was schmultz, contrived and over dramatized which offended the higher than normal intellect of its ever devoted fanbase. As competent as some of the actors involved are, they were forced into over performing lackluster predictable plots, rushing thru overly convoluted crap that would test the patience of the nerdiest Asimov fan, bored by detail. To make it worse, the writers introduced new agey crystals, and Harry Potter potions, and other unbelievable fimsy hocus pocus, too numerous to mention.

Also, major plot mishaps happened as Eccelston disappeared after 6 months, and fans cried foul, harkening back to the 80's when the much beloved Colin Baker was axed, much to their dismay. Then, the Galifreyans were snuffed out,an always entertaining source for endless mystery and intrigues (see the classic "Trial of a Timelord " again for reminders) and endless fun.

Does this mean Capt. Picard was right, that "all good things must end"?

Does this mean I have to finally "grow up"?

Goodbye, Doctor.

 

Where the old Doctor Who series, each episode plot was at least 1 1/2 hours, now they cram each storyline into 45 min. so the characters are forcing us to react to emotional situations before the story naturally develops, we are supposed to feel teary eyed before we can ever empathize. Rose was always blubbering and the viewer never knew what for! We were never allowed to see the character progress like Sarah Jane or Jo so how could we feel also?

Similar cases arise with the 3 new Doctors, and I have seen them all. Before we can experience each new regeneration and the subsequent persona changes, the viewer is forced to emote in programmed ways without being shown why. Next, the villians, who we are told to fear but don't conjure the emotion? Roger Delgado was genuinely seemed diabolical, we are supposed to dislike the new Master because he gorges turkey? And in the new Dalek episode w/ Matt Smith, the Daleks run around making threats but NEVER shoot anyone. How threatening is that? Much in the same way, how we can we relate to a Doctor if he is odd, but not genuinely funny?

Note: classic Doctor Who series was written by professional theatre playwrights and professional theatre actors.

The new Doctor Who has angels, demons, rings, lighting bolts, is this Lord of the Rings, Who, or Harry Potty? And when David Tennant falls 40 feet thru the plate glass window ceiling onto a marble floor face first he doesn't regenerate or nothing, is he Superman now?

You have to admit that it is nowhere near the quality of classic Who.

Try watching the old Jon Pertwee episodes again for a reminder. The acting is better than the majority of Hollywood stuff produced today, (and hence, more believable). Tom Baker and Colin Baker are all so fun.

Some favorites: Death to the Daleks, The Mutants, the Daemons, as well as, the Android Invasion, the Brain of Morbius, and Revelation of the Daleks is quite good, too.

Well, I'm sorry if fans aregenuinely offended by my critique. I have to call them on what I feel are crucial errors. I am against Hollywood also for mucking around with remakes, and for cliche stories and bad acting as well. I haven't been to a show since the last Star Wars, and well the last Star Trek Discovery remake was TREASON, a betrayal of a great original. Movies are just about a quick cash-in anymore, not quality. Star Trek Discovery has Klingons as enemies again -BORING!



I always enjoy being an inspiration to others ...


Should The BBC To Put ‘Doctor Who’ Out Of Its Misery?
By Shaun2k5 ----February 7, 2017

https://www.screencritics.net/bbc-doctor-misery/
..............................................................................


examples: (with joke overdubs)

Doctor (awful Matt Smith) is surrounded by Daleks - yet none of them shoot !



Doctor and sad Davros with bad makeup effects, dialogue, and silly squid puppet




The Cybermen and Daleks are everywhere but barely muster a fight



The awful Doctor Who (David Tenant) won't stop apologizing ....

David Tennant (The Tenth Doctor) says "Sorry"... 120 times!




Doctor Who ( Chris Eccleson) can't kill the last Dalek after they'd killed millions

 

That's a bit 'ageist' doncha think? I'm sure many 5-year olds would miss it?

 

They should probably just do a Christmas episode every year and forget about the series.

 

I'm a big fan of the 4th Doctor (Tom Baker), but let's face it, the original series was marred by bad writing, ham acting, cheesy dialogue, sh!t special effects, laughable costumes, camera technology that a webcam manufacturer would be embarrassed by today, overused plot elements, and the annoying tendency to leave more threads dangling than a dime store towel. The new series is marred by bad writing, ham acting, cheesy dialogue, and political correctness run amuck. And yet it's still good, or was up until the end of Peter Capaldi. I haven't seen the new female Doctor yet, and may choose not to. If she ends the series' run, then it will be fair to say that political correctness killed the show.

 

They lost me when the Time Lords were losing a TIME WAR to the Daleks, the Daleks, okay they were a powerful species in regular war but in a war in Time and Space when they had all the disadvantages in that ... sure.

 

I loved the original doctors. From one, Hartnell through 7, Sylvester McCoy. I have little to no use for this new series. In the original seven doctors, it seemed the story developed with all its nice intricacies and plots. Those episodes, stories usually ran an hour and a half up to 2 1/2 hours and there may have been episodes that were even longer. Each was basically a movie. I loved them. When I watch Dr. Who now, regardless who is the new doctor, it seems so much of the story, the plot is missing. The new TV episodes don't develop and the suspense fails to materialize on its own.

I have stopped watching altogether. Now I'll put on some old VCR tapes which I have all the episodes from doctor 3 thru 7 and most of number 2 Patrick Troughton. I only have a couple of episodes with Hartnell. But I love watching these original doctors with Tom Baker my favorite doctor.

Something is missing in these TV episodes, something grand and needed. What exactly that is, I haven't a clue. I just know the new doesn't interest me at all.

 

I grew up with the original Doctor Who and loved it. When I re-watch it I can see all the flaws I missed as a child. There were plenty of poor episodes, poor sets, poor special effects, poor acting & writing (especially post-Peter Davison). However, there was also a huge dolop of great stories, great acting, great writing and great looking sets & special effects. The magic is still there.

I LOVE the new Doctor Who. Made by adult fans for adult fans. Not every episode has been a winner, but the quality has been very high. The preparedness to explore aspects of the Doctor's existence that were never much thought of in a show originally aimed at kids has added depth. The choice of actors for the Doctor has been great, and some of the companions have been up there with the best of the originals.

I don't know how long the series will continue, but its still great fun.

 

A french speaking aquaintence of mine said he just started watching the very first 1963 William Hartnell series with his son. The debut episodes are so well made. Not corny even in the slightest.
He said he loved it after my suggestion of classic Who.



An Unearthly Child is so classic, and the mixture of Susans great acting w/ Hartnell rival Patrick Troughton and Jamies great onscreen chemistry.



Don't miss the Jon Pertwee era either (1970-1975) all best viewed in their 2 to 3 hour
full episode story arc.

I won't spoil any surprises for SCI-FI fans who haven't been exposed to it -

but if you have an admiration for great acting, literature, and suspense -

START AT THE BEGINNING IN 1963 w/ "An Unearthly Child" - and follow the online
episode guides - you won't be disappointed.






...

​

 

Exactly, 1-7 were quite good. Perhaps the doctors and episodes that followed seem to be just thrown together for a TV audience. That not much thought went into the story or plot. Then again, in hour show, episode, usually around 44-45 minutes of the actual show minus the commercials. Perhaps there just isn't time to let the story build. It has to be thrust at the viewer in as few minutes as possible.

 

So - for those of you not keeping up -

just HOW BAD is the new Doctor Who ???


(which premiered again in 2005)




The 2017 season final of Peter Capaldi and his dreadful over-acted and over dramatic, unfunny, nonsensical portrayal of the hero reportedly got 3.75 million viewers in overnight ratings. These numbers ARE FAR LOWER than Sylvester McCoy received when Doctor Who was first cancelled in 1989.

This is by an actor , WHO, even if he DID have a script, is more than capable of performing, but since the BBC cannot produce an action packed story or any cohesive plot lines, it is worthless. The season final the Master who becomes a woman, Cybermen that stand around doing nothing, and a convoluted trap set for the Doctor even the nerdiest dorks hanging on every word cannot possibly understand. Then - at the last minute, the Master changes his/her mind, and decides to save the Doctor, and thru some last minute hocus pocus BS the Cybermen are all short circuited all at once.

Previously, Rotten Tomatoes - whose credibility is worthless - had to grudgingly give the Doctor Who (w/ Capaldi) previous season finale in 2015 a passing grade, though even the nerd SCI FI websites noted the many plot holes,never ending boring talking, no action story, in "Hell Bent" which brought back the Galifreyans, The Sisterhood of Karn, and the old TARDIS console room.

These were all obvious gimmicks to attack fans, but got just over 4 milllion viewers, AGAIN FAR BELOW the worst Doctor Who ever portrayed, the universally despised, (and cheapened) silly Sylvester McCoy era.

GO AWAY !

In case you still give a rip about Doctor Who after the last two unbearably bad 60 minute season finales, this was Series 10 since the horrid new revival, which genuine, classic Doctor Who fans should NOT COUNT AS LEGIT. They should be regarded the same way as we regard the lexicon of new non- George Lucas Star Wars, as a cheap, hackneyed cashing in, dip into your wallet, designed to rip off audiences everywhere.



I must say - that I am a uniquely patient fellow who will scour thru libraries looking for rare biographies, (read 10 on Hemingway, 3 on H.S. Thompson, 2 on Poe, 6 on Lovecraft, and 1 on Bowie) and will spend hours hunting a dozen libraries, reading pulp Fantasy, Sci Fi , and all types of Non-Fiction and Novels.

This Doctor Who revival is the most singularly boring tripe amd waste of time ever concocted by any Fantasy storytellers anywhere, by far.

I've stomached the poor attempt to revive The Sword of Shannara Trilogy, tried pushing past the first three Piers Anthony 'On a Pale Horse' series, went as far the first 12 Conan Robert E. Howard books, many Douglas Adams books, Karl Wagners "Blood Red" Kane books, up to "The Priest Kings of Gor" (while Michael Moorcocks 'Dancers at the End of Time' Trilogy is still my favorite) as are the Hawkmoon, Elric, Corum, Castle Brass, Silver Warriors, Eternal Champion books ... and so forth ...

But after after trying to sit thru a dickish Matt Smith Doctor Who episode w/ multi colored Daleks (ugh, the pointy lights ontop made them look like toys already), stupidly inane plots and titles like "Let's Kill Hitler" a Master who is neither cunning, engaging, malevolent, or charasmatic, Cybermen who stand around and die easily, an over emphasis on empty, thoughtless, romanticism, as a substitute for adventure and action, the hammy unconvincing David Tennant school of acting mimicked badly by every player on the show, (next up a woman Doctor Who - um spare me the politically correct speeches Bill Maher got cancelled 20 years ago, and feminism took off in 1975) and hordes of aliens (Rise Of The Cybermen / The Age Of Steel, Journey's End, Doomsday,The End Of Time) appearing, then defeated thru some last minute gimmick, the equivalent of waving a magic wand, and mean old Timothy Dalton (overacting as an evil Rassilon) goes poof.



Real fans of Doctor Who recall Timelord Rassilon as the good guy in the classic THE FIVE DOCTORS, 20th anniversary episode (1983) aye - a truely memorable show getting 7.7 million viewers, and still regarded as fantastic.


BBC ruined Doctor Who - and I believe they did so purposefully.







Time to close the console room - for good.





...
​

 

Ah well with the new doctor being female ........

 

I honestly can't tell if your standards are too high or too low. I wouldn't read any of that crap you mentioned, so too low. Your analysis of the recent Doctor Who season is spot-on, but the shows were still interesting, so too high. But then The Five Doctors was a boring mishmash of pointless crap much inferior to most of the Tom Baker serials, so too low again.

 

Liberal narratives have infected Dr. Who, like so many other things, which is one reason why Hollywood is tanking.

 

I discovered Doctor Who with the new reboot (2005), Honnestly, I think it was fine until Matt Smith was gone. The period of Peter Capaldi was much more politicized and it was quite boring. I didn't grow up with the "old" doctor who however.

The last season was awfull because full of SJW feeling. I don't care if a character is black or lesbian or whatever, but I hate when you throw a character who have no personnality and make him/her homosexual and says "hey look how I'm cool, I put homosexual characters".

I have no problem with the new doctor to be a woman, but I'm very afraid that it will end as a SJW show and this doctor risk to have no personnality but be a woman.

I hate woman and black empowerement, that's an awfull thing to do to women and black people because you don't recognize them anymore for their personnality but for their ovaries/melanin.

I liked the BBC serie the Musketeers, Capaldi was great as Richelieu, and they made Porthos a half black guy, but without ruining the serie because of that, because he had a personnality outside being black.

The so called anti racist often define more people by their colour of skin rather something else.

 

DUH - thank you for saying so.

The ERA admendment thing, was like so 1970s - ladies, we all got the message.

But Remember - this is Great Britains BBC - DOCTOR WHO.

Not the usual source - puerile HOLLYWOOD - or the Meryl Streep / Katy Perry, Hillary Clinton booster club ...

But my grandma was a full Brit from Norton Canes, Staffordshire, England.

And I know the culture, this type of imported 'identity politics' is not their
style at all, esp. in the new Doctor Who or any Brit TV for that matter.

 

​

Doctor Who stars Nyssa and Tegan seem to think like me ...

There was something rotten in the state of Denmark, over at BBC and I don't mean Poland !


...
Sarah Sutton and Janet Fielding Panel











...

 

Strange history about Doctor Who is that actress Lalla Ward (Romana) said her and Tom Baker had to frequently re-write their lines, and scripts. John Nathan Turner producer thru 1981-89 mismanaged the show to the point
where:

A. Script editor hated Doctor Who star Colin Baker, his own admission.
B. Saward, the same editor wanted to kill off fan fave The Master.
C. Nathan Turner had a gay crush on (Adric) BBC page Matt Waterhouse.
D. Show has a curious history of sabotage from within, despite big profits.
E. Man who killed off classic Doctor Who got a 8 million golden parachute:






Michael Grade quits BBC for £8m

"Michael Grade is set to pocket £8m after defecting from the BBC to take control of ITV.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-1604815/Michael-Grade-quits-BBC-for-8m.html

read more on how Grade destroyed Doctor Who:

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-war-propaganda.470369/page-3#post-1068491105
...

 

I can't believe anyone over the age of 4 watches it! It's all part of the BBC's project of infantilising the United Kingdom.

 

​

As is shown by multiple publications, Eric Saward, the script editor during
both Peter Davison and Colin Baker eras, as well as producer Nathan Turners chief collaborator on Doctor Who from 1982-1986, Saward was the problem ...

"He has claimed in interviews that he also performed uncredited writing duties, over and above that normally expected of a script editor, on The Awakening, The Twin Dilemma, Attack of the Cybermen and The Trial of a Time Lord, amongst others. Not all of these claims have been substantiated by other sources.".....

https://www.revolvy.com/main/index.php?s=Eric Saward


during the Time-Flight production:

"Meanwhile, new script editor Eric Saward felt that the Master had worn out his welcome and championed the idea of killing him off in “Xeraphin”. Nathan-Turner, however, stood by his plan to feature the Master as a recurring foe for the foreseeable future."
.....

during the creation of The Twin Dilemma:

"Nathan-Turner wanted a straightforward adventure pitting the Doctor against a strong villain, while Saward felt that the new Doctor's personality would be better showcased in a more unusual storyline. This was just one of an increasing number of points of disagreement between the producer and his script editor, amongst them Saward's unhappiness with Baker's casting in the first place."

...

later, Eric Saward would complained about not receiving ample writing credit
but then blamed classic Doctor Who and its difficulty entirely on Nathan Turner ...



"This is probably one of the most notorious interviews in the history of ‘Doctor Who’. Former script editor lets John Nathan Turner have it with both barrels in a scabarous encounter first published in issue 97 of ‘Starburst’."

https://drwhointerviews.wordpress.com/2009/08/06/eric-saward-1986/

http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Eric_Saward


....

Then there is this viewpoint:

The real villains of 1980s DOCTOR WHO
by Tom Pheby





​

"It's very difficult to write a piece about Michael Grade's involvement in the demise of Doctor Who without being ridiculously hostile towards him. The cigar puffing Yoda lookalike who assumed the roll of controller at the BBC in 1984 seemed to take an instant dislike to the series, hacking the budget and forcing it to take an 18 month hiatus between 1985 -1986. He alleged that the show had lost viewers, become too violent and lacked imagination. He went on to add that the long running series had become tired and needed a rest if it were to continue for another 21 years, but this was merely a smokescreen to disguise the fact that he wanted Doctor Who to end.​

http://www.warpedfactor.com/2014/04/the-real-villains-of-1980s-doctor-who.html









...​

 

Jodi Wittaker is great.

 

Oh barf!

She'll be worse than Sylvester McCoy !









...

 

Hello.FFS if you don't like it then don't watch it!

 

I liked Sylvester McCoy. I am a big fan of the first seven doctors. But I never got interested in Dr. Who once it returned in the one hour format. As for Jodi Wittaker, I don't really care. I don't watch Dr. Who anymore anyway. It's like Battlestar Gallactica, the original series with Loren Green and Dirk Benedict as Starbuck. The mini series didn't interest me one bit. I couldn't come to grips with a female Starbuck.

 

Precisely. If the poor little snowflakes want to throw tantrums because the show doesn't stick with the 'white guys run everything' and 'Recieved Pronunciation rules the Universe' world that reigned in the 60s then they don't have to watch it. They can just stick to watching the old ones or find something else that suits their view of how a fantasy world should be.

To be honest, anyone whose view of the world is so politicized that they see 'SJWs' lurking behind every script point is making themselves unhappy. No sympathy.

I must say I'm particularly amused at people who hold up 'classic' DW as their ideal forensically picking apart the story lines of the new ones. There is a hefty proportion of the 'classic' storylines that wouldn't stand up to an interrogation half as severe. Fans love to joke about shaky sets, crappy special effects, two dimensional bad guys, contradictory plots, endlessly helpless women and seemingly endless 'corridor running' and shots of quarries. If all of that & more is acceptable then nothing in the new shows is remotely worthy of criticism.

Some people just seem to enjoy complaining. Unfortunately the internet gives them a vastly bigger forum than they deserve.