• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Doctor Who [Spoilers]

Nice sonic there, Bubble.

I don't get that so many people have a downer on Jodie's version of the Doctor. It's different, but others have been different too. Each to their own taste, and plenty of long time fans can't get on board with her. Personally, I love that even though she is female, to me she still feels remarkably Doctor-ish. I also love the sexlessness of her portrayal, just as I've always liked the sexlessness of the character, snogs and soppy crushes aside. The goofiness does seem a bit overplayed, but I can live with goofy Doctors. It is a goofy programme. Other Doctors have sometimes not seemed to be the cleverest person in the room at times, and some, like Tom, Sylvester and Matt, were proper goofballs to varying degrees.
 
CharmerKamelion said:
Nice sonic there, Bubble.

I don't get that so many people have a downer on Jodie's version of the Doctor. It's different, but others have been different too. Each to their own taste, and plenty of long time fans can't get on board with her. Personally, I love that even though she is female, to me she still feels remarkably Doctor-ish. I also love the sexlessness of her portrayal, just as I've always liked the sexlessness of the character, snogs and soppy crushes aside. The goofiness does seem a bit overplayed, but I can live with goofy Doctors. It is a goofy programme. Other Doctors have sometimes not seemed to be the cleverest person in the room at times, and some, like Tom, Sylvester and Matt, were proper goofballs to varying degrees.
Click to expand...

I think @catseye nailed it above.
There's simply no sense of ages-old wisdom in Whittaker's Doctor.
Just a gormless, tenth-rate Victoria Wood impersonator, who can paper over every plot-hole by waving her sonic screwdriver.
 
CharmerKamelion said:
Nice sonic there, Bubble.

I don't get that so many people have a downer on Jodie's version of the Doctor. It's different, but others have been different too. Each to their own taste, and plenty of long time fans can't get on board with her. Personally, I love that even though she is female, to me she still feels remarkably Doctor-ish. I also love the sexlessness of her portrayal, just as I've always liked the sexlessness of the character, snogs and soppy crushes aside. The goofiness does seem a bit overplayed, but I can live with goofy Doctors. It is a goofy programme. Other Doctors have sometimes not seemed to be the cleverest person in the room at times, and some, like Tom, Sylvester and Matt, were proper goofballs to varying degrees.
Click to expand...
They might not have seemed to be clever in the moment, but they would wheel out something that left you in no doubt at some point in the episode. I'm not really feeling that from this Doctor. Too much reliance on the sonic to tell her something that the Doctor would already know.
 
This Doc doesn't have a catchphrase, so the sonic screwdriver stands in for one.
 
blessmycottonsocks said:
I think @catseye nailed it above.
There's simply no sense of ages-old wisdom in Whittaker's Doctor.
Just a gormless, tenth-rate Victoria Wood impersonator, who can paper over every plot-hole by waving her sonic screwdriver.
Click to expand...
Other Doctors - notably Eccleston and Capaldi- have clearly had their character planned out from the start. Whittaker's Doctor gives me the impression that very little thought was put into developing a distinct personality for her Doctor- its like she's just based it on some half-remembered Matt Smith episodes.
 
Catseye, you are right that the Sonic is too prominent. It shouldn't be needed that much, and you do wonder if Jodie likes to wave it about to give her something physical to do in her wordy scenes.

And GNC, the 'Fam' thing was a bit catchphrase-y but it was very irritating. Seems to have gone, thankfully, with Ryan and Graham's departure. I just hope it doesn't re-surface with Dan and Vinder's arrival.

I don't feel the Doctor should be too all-knowing or too confident. The audience knows that the Doctor is going to survive and (usually) win the day, but an element of doubt, of potential vulnerability, has always been an essential thread in the fiction of the character. It was only during late Tennant that he started to come across as a super-being. It all got a bit OTT. Sadly Steven Moffat carried it through with Smith and Capaldi. I much prefer a less omniscient Doctor, even if it means she carries on waving that bloody gadget around willy and indeed nilly.
 
Kryptonite said:
Other Doctors - notably Eccleston and Capaldi- have clearly had their character planned out from the start. Whittaker's Doctor gives me the impression that very little thought was put into developing a distinct personality for her Doctor- its like she's just based it on some half-remembered Matt Smith episodes.
Click to expand...
Or, even worse, that they are using 'female' as her dominant characteristic!
 
CharmerKamelion said:
I don't feel the Doctor should be too all-knowing or too confident. The audience knows that the Doctor is going to survive and (usually) win the day, but an element of doubt, of potential vulnerability, has always been an essential thread in the fiction of the character. It was only during late Tennant that he started to come across as a super-being. It all got a bit OTT. Sadly Steven Moffat carried it through with Smith and Capaldi. I much prefer a less omniscient Doctor, even if it means she carries on waving that bloody gadget around willy and indeed nilly.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's a good observation, she's more vulnerable than her immediate predecessors, some described her as David Tennant lite, but I think she's more Patrick Troughton, and he was great. He also had a recorder he'd whip out at every opportunity.
 
GNC said:
Yes, that's a good observation, she's more vulnerable than her immediate predecessors, some described her as David Tennant lite, but I think she's more Patrick Troughton, and he was great. He also had a recorder he'd whip out at every opportunity.
Click to expand...
But the recorder didn't solve the problem, it was just way of passing a bit of time. My objection to the sonic is that if you took that out of the Doctor's arsenal at the moment, she'd be powerless. I don't mind her being vulnerable, the Doctor should never feel invincible or infallible, but s/he should feel incredibly intelligent. Not totally reliant on a piece of technology, even if she did make it herself. If the Doctor is capable of making a sonic screwdriver out of spoons, then she's certainly capable of analysing something without pointing said ex-spoons at it.
 
Reading these comments, it seems to me you're all mostly missing something. Jodie is pitching her performance towards children. She's the lovable big sister, or your big sister's nice best friend who always has time for you. What she's not doing is pitching her performance at ageing amateur critics on the internet. The kids love the sonic screwdriver business because that's how they play Doctor Who, pointing away.
 
So true. We do tend to forget that there is lot of stuff in there for youngsters to latch on to. I think Karvanista is there for the kids, like Dan is there for the dads (to identify with, I mean). Back in the day, Pat Troughton's performance and delivery ("oh my giddy aunt! Jamie! Zoe! Run!") was very much aimed at kids. But... you know... simpler times *sigh*
 
GNC said:
Reading these comments, it seems to me you're all mostly missing something. Jodie is pitching her performance towards children. She's the lovable big sister, or your big sister's nice best friend who always has time for you. What she's not doing is pitching her performance at ageing amateur critics on the internet. The kids love the sonic screwdriver business because that's how they play Doctor Who, pointing away.
Click to expand...
I think on here I have been very vocal in my expressing that Doctor Who is a children's programme. But I think that children don't need to be shown that the only way a female Doctor can solve problems is by using a device. It's precisely BECAUSE it's for children that I'd like to see her using her brain!
 
GNC said:
Reading these comments, it seems to me you're all mostly missing something. Jodie is pitching her performance towards children. She's the lovable big sister, or your big sister's nice best friend who always has time for you. What she's not doing is pitching her performance at ageing amateur critics on the internet. The kids love the sonic screwdriver business because that's how they play Doctor Who, pointing away.
Click to expand...
Good point. Kids won't have (like me) 40 years of Who memories to compare her too.

However, I didn't explain that I don't blame JW for the lack of depth that I feel her character has. She's a seriously talented actor who hasn't been given much to work with by the production team- I honestly feel she's been let down by the writing on the show over the last few years.
 
I've mostly enjoyed what Chibnall did with the characters, running DW is a poison chalice because a lot of people watching are convinced they could do a better job. Has he been perfect? No, but he's taken risks, and good for him, but maybe risks aren't what too many of the audience wanted. I suppose the fact they're bringing back RTD speaks volumes, though!

I'd file the Whittaker years under "Nice Try", sometimes it's excelled, other times it's faltered, but what 60 year old TV show doesn't? It's still something I enjoy watching, because nobody making it is doing so only for the salary, they really love the show and I appreciate that.
 
catseye said:
I think on here I have been very vocal in my expressing that Doctor Who is a children's programme. But I think that children don't need to be shown that the only way a female Doctor can solve problems is by using a device. It's precisely BECAUSE it's for children that I'd like to see her using her brain!
Click to expand...

I bet you were relieved when her strategy assisting pointy thing wasn't the sonic screwdriver!
 
I wondering if any kids have been playing 'Dan and the Sontarans' today, running around whacking their siblings or schoolmates on the back of the head with a frying pan, or a wok, for the more purist child viewer. Say what you like about the Daleks, there is a limited amount of injury you can inflict with a sink plunger and an egg whisk. I know. I've tried.
 
CharmerKamelion said:
I wondering if any kids have been playing 'Dan and the Sontarans' today, running around whacking their siblings or schoolmates on the back of the head with a frying pan, or a wok, for the more purist child viewer. Say what you like about the Daleks, there is a limited amount of injury you can inflict with a sink plunger and an egg whisk. I know. I've tried.
Click to expand...
Then you have not tried hard enough. The Daleks have nearly taken over/ destroyed the universe on several occassions with just those implements.
 
I've been surprised how much I've enjoyed the first two episodes. The real test for me will come tomorrow though, as I tend to find Cybermen stories dull as ditchwater. I really want to be proved wrong though!
 
I am a long time lover of Doctor Who, and (unlike many of my fan friends) I have had no problems at all with Chibnall & Jodie's era. "Flux" is holding my attention, but we seem to be getting just more and more questions, and at the halfway point it feels to me that the whole thing might be in danger of collapsing under its own weight. I hope I'm wrong, and I hope Chibnall will somehow make it all make sense. Puzzled as to why the Flux was originally said and shown to be completely destroying anything and everything in its path - but now we have people, buildings and planets surviving it. Maybe that was just hyperbole to big up the stakes in Episode 1.
 
Awsok sounds more like an acronym than a name to me. A Woman Source Of Knowledge? A Woman Stationed Outside Karn?
 
And, speaking of acronyms, the mention of the Great Serpent makes me wonder if...

SWARM could be an acronym for Sontarans, Weeping Angels, Ravagers, Mara...
 
Kryptonite said:
And, speaking of acronyms, the mention of the Great Serpent makes me wonder if...

SWARM could be an acronym for Sontarans, Weeping Angels, Ravagers, Mara...
Click to expand...
I thought perhaps:
Sontarans, Weeping Angels, Ravagers... Master!
 
Last edited:
I really liked the Doctor being in the time stream and 'being' different people. Things not being what they seem. I really hope we get a good payoff but to be honest I got used to so many of Stephen Moffat's Great Ideas falling under their own weight and having a so-so conclusion that I won't be disappointed if this just peters out. I'm liking the journey.
 
catseye said:
I really liked the Doctor being in the time stream and 'being' different people. Things not being what they seem. I really hope we get a good payoff but to be honest I got used to so many of Stephen Moffat's Great Ideas falling under their own weight and having a so-so conclusion that I won't be disappointed if this just peters out. I'm liking the journey.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with the journey comment, so many fans fall out with TV shows because they wouldn't have ended them the way the writers and producers did, but how does that cancel out the fun you were having for the rest of the time? It's like Lost, I had such a great time with its mysteries that I didn't mind they went for a mild conclusion. They journey was more important to me.

Anyway, Doctor Who, very Slaughterhouse-5 this week, I thought, with the Doc unstuck in time. Reminded me of 1970s cosmic comic books, too. Liked the new character, she knew how to handle a Cyberman. Could have been needlessly complicated, but they're keeping the plot and question juggling going surprisingly successfully. Barbara Flynn was a nice surprise, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top