the show and where it might go

[chuck]

I can't really predict becauseI predict the worst: the show is already showing signs of aging badly and repeating itself, badly. The 10th Doctor has yet to prove himself as A Doctor and although he did well in Xmas INvasion, he's really limp in the others I've seen. No one's comments on the forums have inspired me that he'll improve from the awful way he was in New Earth and Tooth and Claw...very bland...and in the Sarah one he's almost unlikeable...which i think might be more Doctor like. The show is also relying on Gimmicks (kids drawing monster, daleks vs Cybermen (high time too), returning companions, will Rose die, etc) RATHER than good stories like season one (EMPTY CHILD, DOCTOR DANCES, FATHER'S DAY, DALEK, The Margaret Price one,. etc) and even when the scripts lacked (END OF THE WORLD, ALIENS OF LONDON) the lines and charfacter interplay was enough to hold it together...season 2 has yet to do this for me and I think almost all of what I've seen is forced including the Sarah stuff and the Rose jokes in Tooth and Claw. I think the show is already gone down the tubes and it will take more than gimicks to get it back for me, still the ratings seem to be there but whatever. In the US many peopple watched crap like Laverne and Shirley; and Stargate really ended quality in season 8 so...rating don't really make a show good...just keep it on forever...

[Eryx]

I have to disagree cos I think there are some very good stories in season 2 (Tooth & Claw, School Reunion, Idiot's Lantern and Army of Ghosts), but yes, there are some poor choices. I think RTD needs new writers and to get away from the usual save the Earth shtick. Lets see those alien worlds!

I also think that Tennant has a good Doctor persona, he's just suffering from the writing and needing to find his feet abit better.

[Dominic Smith]

I think series three will prove a larger mix, there are several new writers on the team as well as a few faces from series one so we should see a few new ideas.

Mind you, to be honest I can't see where you're coming from with the criticism for series two, it's excelled series one for me and even if you would class some episodes as having a 'gimmick' (e.g. Sarah Jane returning in 'School Reunion'), they have a good reason for being there as well (again in 'School Reunion' Sarah does not just make a cameo for the sake of it she helps to show Rose the full extent of a life of travel with the Doctor).

As for you idea of 'Fear Her' having a 'gimmick' in terms of a child's drawings, surely that's part of the plot; it's like saying that the idea of kids school lunches being spiked in 'School Reunion' or the idea of a human upgrade in 'Rise of the Cybermen' were 'gimmicks' when in truth they're not, they're central parts of the plot, in terms of the latter it's almost a moral.

There have been many original story ideas in this series, such as 'School Reunion', 'The Girl In the Fireplace', 'The Impossible Planet / 'The Satan Pit' and several others.

Finally, regarding David Tennant I actually think he's managing to find his way; he's given some sterling performances throughout the series and I have to completely disagree with your comments on 'School Reunion', his farewell scene with Sarah and his scene with Rose explaining about the curse of the Time Lord were simply brilliant.

But really it all comes down to personal opinion so there you go

[The Thinker]

The types of Doctor Who viewers are as follows:

• Casual Viewers.
  
• Casual Fans.
  
• Devoted Fans.
  
• Who-Buffs.
  
• Obsessed Fans (otherwise known as people who need to get a life, like me).
  
• Overgratuitous Praisers- fans who praise even the very worst episodes.
  
• The Bloke who was just channel hopping and liked what he saw.
  
• The Generic Sci-Fi fan
  and...
  
• Fault Locators- viewers or fans who see faults and no redeeming features in any episode.
  

I think that we're seeing too many Fault Locators going around. I think that most of the David Tennant Who-Stories were good and I didn't let minor glitches spoil my viewing pleasure, except for 'Love & Monsters'.

[Dominic Smith]

johnlumicdavros said:

I think that we're seeing too many Fault Locators going around. I think that most of the David Tennant Who-Stories were good and I didn't let minor glitches spoil my viewing pleasure, except for 'Love & Monsters'.

I'll drink to that...well I'd drink to most things but that's not really something that's relevant the moment. For more information please see my psychiatrist

[davisonera]

Series 2 has just been so much better than Series 1. Tennant is a great doctor, most of the time and Eccleston was so un-doctorish it was untrue. The show should carry on for another few years but you've got to remember that the show hasn't had enough time to repeat itself yet as most of the viewers now have no memory of old doctor who.

[Dominic Smith]

davisonera said:

Eccleston was so un-doctorish it was untrue.

In what way?

[davisonera]

He had no personality. He did the same thing every episode and had no wacky or bizarre personality traits. Watch an episode of his and see how many times you notice him saying the word fantastic.

[Dominic Smith]

But surely the idea of being a more serious Doctor was part of the character; he's the sole survivor of a war all of his people have been destroyed in and it's hardened him. As for wacky personality traits he's actually a bit more random in the first two episodes but does mellow as time goes on.

Surely the idea of the character of the Doctor is that he can be many different things; zany, serious or anything else, there's no rule that says he must be only one thing or the other.

[davisonera]

It's just my opinion and I didn't like him.

[Eryx]

davisonera said:

He had no personality. He did the same thing every episode and had no wacky or bizarre personality traits. Watch an episode of his and see how many times you notice him saying the word fantastic.

*Speechless*

Interesting point of view. I don't agree, but hey, its interesting to see other peoples views.

[chuck]

Wow. Chris's 9th Doctor was always doing wacky things. Plus, let's not forget he was coming out of the whole Gallifrey thing...that he just seemingly destroyed it. Also to the poster who says there are more original ideas in season two? Where? A werewolf is hardly original, nor is Satan in a pit on the moon. Satan an alien from far ago, that's been done. A monster that sucks people into it and shows their faces on its belly (Does that remind you of Freddie or Austin Powers' baddie? lol). School Reunion was not original: aliens that sort of cannibalize what they take from other races is old hat and the plot does not hold together. It is like the Demon Headmaster...and bat monsters--I'm sure there are several 1950-1960 old horror movies that have this plot, kids vanish from school. Ho hum. I'll give you the GIRL IN THE FIREPLACE--it was very very good but again, a spaceship that uses body parts is not a brand new idea but this was a good use. I like season two somewhat thus far (aside from Rose being a prat and making jokes and watching someone die just to watch him die in TOOTH AND CLAW) BUT IT'S nowhere near as good as season one. Season one had a real emotional tie in even the worst eps (and I can only think of one really bad one THE LONG GAME). ALIENS OF LONDON is not my favorite two parter (can't think of the other title) but some of the Jackie, Doctor, Rose stuff was very well done and funny and emtionally based (esp when Jackie asks if her daughter will be allright and he can't answer). I've seen almost NO emotional goodies in the four I've seen thus far. And what I have seen has not been well handled. As for DT, I've been willing to be impressed and he did impress me in XMAS INVASION but unimpressed me in NEW EARTH mostly due to the script. My feeling is if a Doctor can't impress right away, he's in trouble. Tom Baker and Peter Davidson impressed right away. Colin a bit. McCoy was awful in his first story and the story was crapola, thus...so was New Earth really. I mean it was a bit better than Time and the Rani but McCoy improved so I guess DT will. Thing is the show never really recoverd fully from Time n the Rani and Paradise Towers and before that the awful MindWarp. The scripts can hurt a Doctor. I also don't like the DOctor saying things like , "I've still got it." off the cuff like that. Prove you still have it. There was no pay off or lead up to that line. It comes off as foolish. Ditto Sarah Jane. Have you EVER had any inkling that Sarah would pine away for the Doctor as her one true love? Sarah and the Doctor were friend, very good friends,nohting more. In fact, almsot no companion, save maybe Liz Shaw (those hugs were very close in INFERNO) ever had a sexual relationship with the Doctor. There's simply no evidence for it on screen at all, ever. I"m not saying I would not be open to that but to think he ever did or that any companion ever really felt that toward him to wait for him all the time Sarah did...it just doesn't seem to ring true for me. In the long run, Sarah seems like a real BIG LOSER in School Reunion. And taht is the way this series season runs around. Instead of shjowing people at their best such as they did with Rose, Jack, Jackie, Mickey, Dickens, and a ton of others in season one, this season relies on downfalls of others including Rose...okay I've only seen four eps and Xmas doesn't count cause it was, uhm, really entertaining but in season two we see the Doctor having to do it all ...and as for his caring only when Rose is in danger in that TV BOX ep...for shame!

[chuck]

another thing is the excitement of seeing the Doctor with Sarah and K9 again...that makes you forget all the shortcomings of the script and the story until it's time to get back to it...then it looks rather weak.

[Dominic Smith]

I see where you're coming from although I do disagree but that's your opinion and there's no reason you can't stick to it. Surely though it could be said that there are no truly new ideas; everything borrows something from somewhere else and modifies it. I'm sure there are a few exceptions ('The Empty Child' seemed rather new to me although I could be wrong) but on the whole every story is spawned from ideas from other places; quite a few of the Phillip Hinchcliffe episodes were pastiches of various horror fictions but it didn't make them any less popular.

If you look at the episode guide for the original series on the BBC website every story has a list of places it was inspired / adapted from.