nu-Who new series...thoughts on the first episode?

So the BBC's latest Nu-Who episode has just aired - what are everyone's thoughts?

Personally I thought the story was pretty terrible, being a lazy family friendly rip off of predator, with a lot of stupidity, some absolutely awful scenes and far too much silliness...but two of the new companions seem like they are going to be great (Tosin Cole & Mandip Gill), and it's far too early to tell if Jodie will work out as a good "Dr Who" or not.

I didn't like Capaldi at all at the start so I am hoping she grows on me as he did - he took 3-4 episodes before I started to believe he was a good Dr Who. He was also given some terrible stories at the start of his season, so again, lets hope it improves.

The Cinematography seems to have changed a bit too - it has the distinct feel of a Spin Off (felt much more "Torchwood" that nu-Who) which is a bit odd.

Time will tell how the series works out - I give the opener a 4/10 but like I say Capaldi started out the same way so never know! I have to keep reminding myself that none of the new series are really Dr Who and that it needs to be taken as it is...I still wish they had re-branded it to take away the comparison between the classic series and the new one given how radically different they are.

Thoughts?

It has become a parody of itself.

Reserving judgement till next week. The first episode with any new doctor is always the same plot. Memory loss, confusion, before remembering who they are just in time to save the day.

Seemed OK, but then I am not very astute at critising things like this. Seemed like a more upbeat Dr, more in line of Matt Smith (or at least, how I am rememerbing him playing it).

Still, I can't help thinking of the accidental spin-off Frank Skinner came up with a couple of years' ago due to a mispronounciation on the radio about Dr Hugh, from the west country, fighting the Cidermen and the Dereks! :D

Overall I thought the new doctor was ok, nothing more or less really. The story was average. Tosin Cole I think will do well, Mandip Gill seemed a bit like she wasn't sure if she should be there or not.

Time will tell. No pun intended :)

I agree that it takes a few episodes to tell if a Doctor is going to work. I think that's partly about me (us) getting used to a new Doctor's quirks, but also about the new actor relaxing a bit into tne roke.

That said, so far, not impressed. Partly it's that having been watching DW since the original Hartnell series, to me, Doctor Who just isn't a woman, and I rather resent the gender-equality political correctness messing about with a childhood favourite.

But also, so far, not impressed with Jodie. She seems to be trying to be a female Matt Smith and it isn't working, at least, for me. That said, it took a few episodes to get used to Smith, and I never did much rate Capaldi. Doctor Who peaked with Ecclestone and Tennant, and has progessively slipped since. Mind you, some of the companions have been great, including Piper and Coleman.

But this series? Jury is out.

Only caught a few minutes of it, and I don't care that the new Doctor is a woman - it's a fairly gender neutral role anyway IMO - but, like Saracen, I wasn't enamoured with Matt Smith when I first saw him in the role, and he turned out to be great.

So, I'm happy to and let it develop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saracen

I think that's partly about me (us) getting used to a new Doctor's quirks, but also about the new actir relaxing a bit into tne roke.

---

I'm not convinced that changing the person in charge of the series and the Doctor who actor at the same time could ever go smoothly.

Some googling on Chibnall's past turned up some mini episodes he did called Pond Life which somehow I hadn't seen at the time, here mixed into one 5 minute short: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00y9ly3

Edit: I think the way they built up towards having a female doctor who was a bit rubbish. The ground was plainly laid out in "The Night of the Doctor" when McGann was told he could choose:

"Fat or thin, young or old, man or woman." (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U3jrS-uhuo_

then they turned the Master into Missy. Much though I enjoyed Cipaldi, I think the timing would have been better if they had used a woman for the last regeneration not this one.

It also feels to me given how they dragged the whole gender thing out like the next doctor has to be a female as well or people will say "well that was a token role, back to male actors."

Three words completely killed any chance of me liking it :

"I would of"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saracen

Partly it's that having been watching DW since the original Hartnell series, to me, Doctor Who just isn't a woman, and I rather resent the gender-equality political correctness messing about with a childhood favourite.

---

I do still find this an issue too, even if the world seems to be against me for it ;) I did go back and watch two episodes of early Dr Who after this to remind myself how good it can be (Enemy of the world, as that DVD arrived yesterday, and then the power of the daleks, just because it's an amazing Troughton story, even if most of it is an animation on the recovered copy).

It could have been worse though - they could have brought back a Catherine Tate style companion. There is an entire season of nu-who with a good Doctor that I just cannot watch because of her.

That is another reason why this season may tank - no Daleks. even if I am not fully on board with the direction they have taken them, it is still a shame!

At least Big Finish are keeping me happy with some genuinely brilliant Dr Who content - I cannot recommend their full cast audio plays enough if you are a Dr Who fan - I often find if I start one I have to have (or find!) 3-4 hours to finish it there and then. Their Time War series has been particularly brilliant.

@Saracen if you are a Hartnell fan then give this a shot - https://www.bigfinish.com/releases/v...of-winter-1323 - first episode is free, like anything you know will be addictive :) (all DRM free, available as MP3/audiobook/CD)

They're just scoring points on the diversity quota and waving it in our faces. I usually don't even notice what race someone is in this programme, and the fact that I noticed what race every person was in this just screams Diversity Quota, IMO. Not only in the main story, but especially in the preview bit at the end, it was very much a mixture of BBC Names You Might Recognise, and Token Person Of Ethnic Origin.

The Doctor, as usual, is some pretty decent actor whose talents will be utterly wasted in some pissy nonsensical scripts. So far, she's basically copying David Tennant all over again, who was fun but nothing like The Doctor should be. Smith, Ecclestone and Capaldi were all fantastic Doctors, but again each suffered from utterly dire scripting and the fact that the programme was more about the 'companions' than the Doctor himself - They used to be called 'assistants', because they're supposed to play second fiddle, not come up with the solutions themselves all the time.

Why don't you tell us how you really feel Ttaskmaster :)

@Spud .... it's not so much that I'm a Hartnell fan. I certainly prefer the recent few series and it's hard to see, oh, Cybermen for example, where "effects" consists of a bloke in a tinfoil hat. Though, something tells me I ought to be fine with that. Not sure ....ahem .... why. ;)

But I do remember those days. Black and White minstrels, and for that matter, B&W TV. Neither of which, perxonally, I remember without a shudder.

But Doctor Who, for me, is a life-long tradition. If they'd brought out a new series with a female TimeLord that somehow escaped, fine. But a female Doctor just grates on my nerves. It's a bit like Hollywood's penchant for reinterpeeting history to put US forces, or an American character, as the hero/centre of a historical tale where it's just plain wrong.

It grates like doing Florence Nightingale or Joan of Arc as a dude. Or Julie Caesarette getting stabbed by Barbie on the Ides of March.

And before someone asks if I know Doctor Who is fiction, my reply would be :-

a) Yes, of course he is,

b) Are you sure? :)

It's like Paddington Bear was female, or Father Christmas was female, of for that matter, Little Red Riding Hood was a guy, or Rapunzel aas transgender.

Why do film/TV makers feel tyey have to mess with tradition and Doctor Who is moee of a tradition to me having lived through all 55 years of it's evolution, than all those others put together.

Does a gender shifted Doctor breach any 'rules' of the Doctor or regeneration? Probably not. But it just doesn'% feel right. It also feels absolutely unnecessary, done for all the wrong reasons, and it .... how do I put it ... cheapens the concept.

Will I settle in to Jodie as the Doctor? Dunno. As someone said, time will tell.

But right now, I feel a bit like I did when Mum and Dad sat me down and told me ..... *** SPOILER ALERT FOR KIDS OF ALL AGES *** ....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.... Santa Claus isn't real.

A female Doctor jyst somehow pops the illusion.

I'll give it a few episodes, but frankly, it feels to me like the end of an era. I'd almost rather both the Doctor and the series had died ... but gone out with a bang, instead of this politically correct bull-doodah.

I don't care if the Doctor's a man or a woman, the re-generation thing kind of says to me 'why not?'. We won't have true equality until it's a ginger, like Tennant wanted to be at the beginning of his tenure.

Interesting fact from last night's episode: The lady who plays Grace provided lead vocals on Nomad's "I want to give you devotion". FACT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonj1611

Why don't you tell us how you really feel Ttaskmaster :)

---

Because if I did that, I'd be hit with the Banhammer so hard the fallout would ban everyone who ever posted here in The Lounge....!
I have to curb and moderate my postings, you see.

I've no problem with a female Doctor and the possibility was established a while back.
But the time to do it was long ago, not today where it just comes across as finally giving in and pandering to the long-standing social equality demands of the luvvies.
In addition to Tennant's act, they're clearly trying to evoke the spirit of previous Doctors in her outfit, with the stripes, boots and braces. Bit of a Capaldi hoodie, bit of a Baker longcoat...

TBH, they should never have gotten rid of Paul McGann in the first place!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saracen

Doctor Who peaked with Ecclestone and Tennant, and has progessively slipped since.

---

this.. with a blue tardis on

The random madness of Ecclestone followed by the depths that Tennant finally went too....

but I am not watching the new one until a few are on iplayer so I can back-to-back them and not suffer from one opening nu-Who episode

i'm not surpised the "Who is a Woman" debate has started....

It was my belief from a young age that Dr Who shouldn't really by a man or a woman, but an entity..and lets face it.. we don't have them on earth so we're stuck with actors.

Tom Baker did it for me... and then Ecclestone and Tennant... none of the others including Tristan Farnan ;)

but..... will we have a future Dr Who is a person in a wheelchair, with no legs, oriental with a hint of Icelandic, cererbal palsied and with a 3 legged puma as a pet?

tough call......

just needs a good script and tbh it could be any actor who can ....er.... act.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zak33

but..... will we have a future Dr Who is a person in a wheelchair, with no legs, oriental with a hint of Icelandic, cererbal palsied and with a 3 legged puma as a pet?

---

I'm detecting a bias against people who are trans-gender! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zak33

i'm not surpised the "Who is a Woman" debate has started....

---

The debate has been ongoing in earnest ever since whichever Doctor it was regenerated and said, "Still not a woman".

I think the debate is more about how this has come far too late to be of any use. It's old hat, already done to death as both a novelty and a serious empowerment by so many other programmes and films. By leaving it so late, The Doctor has become an inescapably intrinsically male character.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zak33

just needs a good script and tbh it could be any actor who can ....er.... act.

---

And ^that is why DW has been such a let-down in recent years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix

I'm detecting a bias against people who are trans-gender! ;)

---

Do keep up, Mickey - It's been long-known that Timelords can regenerate into male or female, so the trans-gender element is already accounted for. :cool:

And yes, my smiley's sunglasses are sonic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix

I'm detecting a bias against people who are trans-gender! ;)

---

crap.. I forgot to add that in.. and being ginger too.

Make Dr Who invisible,then none of that gender milarky. Then think of all the hilarity when someone says here is The Doctor,and people say "Dr Who???" as they can't literally see them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zak33

crap.. I forgot to add that in.. and being ginger too.

---

Ginger also pretty well covered via Amy Pond.

Who is the side character? Is it a man or a wo man?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Millennium

Who is the side character? Is it a man or a wo man?

---

The companions are two men and a woman.

Well the second episode was better, but still part of the generic new doctor setting up scheme that they all seem to go through. So we got:

New TARDIS interior
New "odd thing" the doctor likes. In this case custard cremes.
The obligitary reminder the Doctor doesn't do guns.
Setting up the big bad for the series arc.

That said, it developed the links between the two male companions, had a few good jokes and had the doctor be not entirely upbeat and positive, hopefully some more of the darker side will come in future.

First proper stand alone episode next week I expect.

Took me ages to like Capaldi but did in the very end so expect similar here though currently feels she is a bit one dimensional. Not really conveying the change in emotions that the other doctors have managed to do. But still next weeks awaits.

However finding Mandip Gill's character a bit flaky, seems to be a bit vacant.

Love the custard cream dispenser. Want one for the car, would probably be quite easy to make (handbrake off, custard cream dispensed) but I would put on weight so fast :D

Was in the right mood for Epis 1, so I did it ...

The only thing I was truly disapointed abuut was the blue "pod" thing in the woods... it looked rubbish. But everything else was ... well.. it was better than average and in part.. good. With the effort for the writhing mass of snakecables and the excellent portal hovering in the woods... it felt spot on.
I think she's has got herself lined up properly.... I can feel David Tenant in there. And luckily, no Capaldi at all. Sadly I keep seeing flashes of Coronation Street, because Whittaker sometimes looks like one of the girls on Cora!

As others have mentioned, shame that the other characters played a bigger part in the story than the Dr did, but that's Directors issues, not actors, and I think... I think I will watcht the next one very soon :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spacein_vader

had a few good jokes and had the doctor be not entirely upbeat and positive

---

Spoiled by the blatant diversity reference (this time sexuality), and The Doctor being all "I failed you" right at the time where she should have been quite upbeat... because even I was screaming about [spoiler - highlight -->] how the TARDIS was simply out of phase, so you just wait until it pops back in again.... which they did and all was good.

Some tweaking still needed and still too much David Tennant, but could be fun.

Yes I did think the doctor was a bit defeatist lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ttaskmaster

Some tweaking still needed and still too much David Tennant, but could be fun.

---

she needs MORE Tennant as I think he was closest to who she can be

here's an aside.. I was discussing this discussion with my wife (not a Dr Who fan), and the swap frm male to female actor and she said.

"Dr Who has never been particularly masculine, and always a little effeminate... even Tom Baker wasn't overly masculine"

which I think is an interesting perspective

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zak33

she needs MORE Tennant as I think he was closest to who she can be

---

She could be a seriously awesome and awesomely serious Doctor, given the chance. I've only seen snippets, but I believe she's quite the actress in her other stuff.... But we do not need more Tennant. He was never enough of a Doctor compared to other iterations and way too crazy-madcap, despite being entertaining in his own right. We need more Capaldi, with a good dose of Matt Smith's capacity to evoke previous Doctors while hinting at a really old being in a young body... we need someone who can seem like they're actually 900 years old.
Without that, the Doctor is little more than a Childrens' TV presenter.

Liking Custard Creams is not weird. FACT.

Well personally I'm loving it. Some decent Sci-fi I can watch in the evening which isn't completely depressing! Looking forward to Episode 3.

Got to say though I thought they said no series story arc this series. Feels like there is one with this new race featuring in both Episodes...

I'm struggling to get into this, 3 companions seems a stretch, its like a gaggle all going around together and even breaking off to do their own bit seems half hearted.

The extras seem more prominent than the main character, and the person released from the stormcage with a vortex manipulator, its a male River Song :)

Checked out imdb and read the next 3 episodes, well the summary anyway and more of the same however will keep watching, its only going to get better. Right? Right??

I'm still really enjoying it. Its got the old Who feel of using a mixture of jump scares and scary monster reveals to build a bit of tension. It also has the doctor not coming off as having super human abilities to fix everything and save everyone unlike some of the more recent series. I also think the companions are just right - Bradley Walsh is doing a great job of acting grief stricken which I would never have thought possible when I hear him be announced.

Can't say I am to be honest, watchable yes but the "main" actor seems to be Bradley Walsh, the Dr is coming across as quite meek.

I'm still on the fence, but still watching. It's still coming across as a bit preachy for me. Hopefully we will get an episode soon that wasn't written by Chibnall himself, perhaps that's the problem.

Yes, it is coming across like that at the moment, last week civil rights movement, this week toxic waste. I hear next week it's the green cross code monster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonj1611

Yes, it is coming across like that at the moment, last week civil rights movement, this week toxic waste. I hear next week it's the green cross code monster

---

My money's on saving the universe by eating 5 a day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix

My money's on saving the universe by eating 5 a day.

---

Lol. Could go either way this series !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonj1611

Lol. Could go either way this series !

---

It already does. Jack Harkness established that yonks ago.

Apparently no Christmas Day Dr Who this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonj1611

Apparently no Christmas Day Dr Who this year.

---

"Instead, 13th Time Lord Jodie Whittaker will have an hour-long special which runs at New Year – with a storyline that relates to the arrival of 2019".

Because:

“I sort of think we might have mined, and possibly over mined, every single thing we could about Christmas in Doctor Who and the last time we more or less ignored it”.


Also:
"The episode is likely to be the ONLY outing for Doctor Who next year, with fans facing a 'gap year' until 2020".

Because:
"Filming on Jodie’s second series has been pushed back to early 2019, meaning the series is unlikely to be finished in time to air in the autumn".


So yeah......

Facing a gap year? Didn't they just have that :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix

I'm still on the fence, but still watching. It's still coming across as a bit preachy for me. Hopefully we will get an episode soon that wasn't written by Chibnall himself, perhaps that's the problem.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonj1611

Yes, it is coming across like that at the moment, last week civil rights movement, this week toxic waste. I hear next week it's the green cross code monster

---

So,they want to take on issues which might be of historic or environmental significance?? Emm,go back to the first Dr Who episodes,what do you think the commentary about the Daleks was about?? It was an era when nuclear war was a distinct possibility,and that was Dr Who making a social commentary that continued hate,and continued arms races would lead to nothing good.

Dr Who has been making sideways social commentary for decades.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix

My money's on saving the universe by eating 5 a day.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonj1611

Lol. Could go either way this series !

---

So,like all the other Dr Who series too! :rolleyes:

Why won't anyone think of the poor Daleks or Cyber Men?? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheesemp

I'm still really enjoying it. Its got the old Who feel of using a mixture of jump scares and scary monster reveals to build a bit of tension. It also has the doctor not coming off as having super human abilities to fix everything and save everyone unlike some of the more recent series. I also think the companions are just right - Bradley Walsh is doing a great job of acting grief stricken which I would never have thought possible when I hear him be announced.

---

Watched a bit - it wasn't as bad as I expected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH

So,they want to take on issues which might be of historic or environmental significance?? Emm,go back to the first Dr Who episodes,what do you think the commentary about the Daleks was about?? It was an era when nuclear war was a distinct possibility,and that was Dr Who making a social commentary that continued hate,and continued arms races would lead to nothing good.

---

Well you learn something new everyday

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonj1611

Well you learn something new everyday

---

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24848815

Dr Who and Star Trek have always been "preachy" and making social commentaries. The hero always wins the day or if they don't they find a way to redeem themselves in a "greater way".

Edit!!

At least one good thing Dr Who does,is that there is very literal visceral gore(or nudity),meaning for the most part it is somewhat family friendly. A lot of sci-fi now,tends to amp up gore and nudity to make it feel "more adult".

A week behind on this now, but I don't think I'll catch up again. The spider episode didn't really do anything for me, even Rosa I was a bit disappointed that they didn't do anything clever with the story. You've got the whole of space and time to play with, tell the stories in a more interesting way please!

I think that episode was an improvement, but still not there yet. Afterwards my daughter said something along the lines of "Why do they have to make the monster so cute, that just wasn't scary. They need to do something like Silence in the Library or The Empty Child."

I think she's right, my reply was just "yeah, or Blink" :)

Blink, amazing, hardly had the doctor in it and one of the best yet(imo)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH

Dr Who has been making sideways social commentary for decades.

---

Sideways, sure, and usually mentioned in passing as things the rest of teh galaxy has conquered, leaving humanity to catch up... but not direct wave-in-your-face tackling of things, and never as random statements in the middle of an episode without any pretext or context.

I have to hop on iPlayer, as I fell asleep during the last episode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ttaskmaster

Sideways, sure, and usually mentioned in passing as things the rest of teh galaxy has conquered, leaving humanity to catch up... but not direct wave-in-your-face tackling of things, and never as random statements in the middle of an episode without any pretext or context.

I have to hop on iPlayer, as I fell asleep during the last episode.

---

Shrugs. I always thought of Dr Who being a bit preachy anyway,a bit like Star Trek:TOS. I would always give a new series,a season at least to bed itself in. Its a women playing a role,a Man has always played,so I assume it will be new ground for the script writers. But I remember back in the day some series took at least the first season to start to get better - B5,TNG,etc.

Anyway,I watch this quite casually,so what does my opinion worth? I suppose if you are a more hardcore Who fan it might be different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH

Its a women playing a role,a Man has always played,so I assume it will be new ground for the script writers.

---

Script writer, singular. They are all just credited with Chris Chibnall which seems very odd, a quick look on Wikipedia shows previous series were 50% Steve Moffat at most. You would hope the person who decided Dr Who should be a girl would know what to do with the decision :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH

I suppose if you are a more hardcore Who fan it might be different.

---

I wouldn't say I am an especially hardcore viewer. My wife is more into this than me.
But there are certain fundamental elements to it, which I feel are being disregarded in this latest series.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix

Script writer, singular. They are all just credited with Chris Chibnall which seems very odd, a quick look on Wikipedia shows previous series were 50% Steve Moffat at most. You would hope the person who decided Dr Who should be a girl would know what to do with the decision :D

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ttaskmaster

I wouldn't say I am an especially hardcore viewer. My wife is more into this than me.
But there are certain fundamental elements to it, which I feel are being disregarded in this latest series.

---

Give it a season - if it doesn't seem to have improved by then end,then I suppose time to replace it in the schedule with another series. The fact is Dr Who in its current form is 13 years old,so its bound to end up having big changes as new people get onboard,and also it depends on the demographic they are targetting and also societal norms of those demographics.

More often than not you see shows trying to chase new viewers - look at SG:U or the new Star Trek,etc. So big changes. In the case of SG:U it tried to BSG,when its fanbase wanted more swashbuckling tales of the heroes saving the universe. Hence it tanked and ended a longrunning series.

Sometimes with big changes I hated them,but as time progressed I warmed into them. For instance Lucy Liu playing Watson in Elementary.Other times for other series,I said meh,moaned a bit and then stopped watching the series.

Its the same with games - I don't understand all the people supporting Pay2Win in non F2P games,or everything having to be an online survival MPfest,but apparently there is a big market for it. Apparently I am not conversant in the Nu-Logic.

I think this was the first episode where there was no mention of the Doctor's gender at all, and only in previous ones it has just been the odd one line or so. It shouldn't, and doesn't appear to have affected the script as I can just as easily see a man playing the same script.

The one thing I have noticed this season more than others are the facts that are getting dropped in. It was anti-matter drives this week, and how spiders "work" in the last episode, so I guess that goes back to original goal to educate as well as entertain. I guess I will learn a little bit more about how India was partitioned in 1947 next week.

The new series is not due until 2020.

After watching all this series can't say I am a fan of Jodie Whittaker. Whether the Dr is a man or woman I don't care but her acting has been quite flat and pretty much the rest of the cast doing a better job. Bradley Walsh coming out on top and thats not something I thought I would find myself saying!

So we're pretty much through a season now and sadly it didn't get any better.

I've got past the Jodie being "the dr" thing now...it's just, the stories and writing have been truly awful. Rehashed, boring concepts in the main (nothing new/imaginative imo), with every one playing up to whatever social issue that the companions have that they want to play up to that week. This season marks the only one that I have decided to not watch on the night it airs and to queue up for when I have nothing better to watch (very much like this season of the walking dead tbh now that a certain event has occurred).

They need to get rid of two of the companions imo, bring back some excitement and at least "mild peril" for the team, plus ideally hire some writers who have a clue what Dr Who is mean to be about.

It's almost like they have tried so hard to make "The Dr" fit and to make you not care that Jodie is now playing the character, that they have made "The Dr" irrelevant to the show. 3 Companions is still too much and Bradley Walsh just doesn't fit in at all..but then none of them really do. It's just so disappointing :(

Fingers crossed they don\'t completely screw up the new years episode when they are bringing back to the Daleks - its quite hard to make a Dalek story really bad, although they tried really, really hard to do so in the other poor season where they had Catherine Tate as a companion "shudder"....we will see in a few weeks!

Lol I did the same, recorded it on Sky and watched it when I got around to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spud1

So we're pretty much through a season now and sadly it didn't get any better.

---

I enjoyed that episode, and thought the last few have been an improvement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spud1

It's almost like they have tried so hard to make "The Dr" fit and to make you not care that Jodie is now playing the character, that they have made "The Dr" irrelevant to the show.

---

The Doctor has become increasingly irrelevant, from the moment the Assistants becanme the Companions, started getting their own plots, solving the problems that a 900 year old Timelord couldn't and generally making acting chops of no use in the trite rom-com plot lines...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ttaskmaster

The Doctor has become increasingly irrelevant, from the moment the Assistants becanme the Companions, started getting their own plots, solving the problems that a 900 year old Timelord couldn't and generally making acting chops of no use in the trite rom-com plot lines...

---

True enough, and it has to be said that some of my favourite stories in the Dr Who universe don't even feature "the Dr" at all. Notably the Dalek Empire, Gallifrey and "Cyberman" series from Bigfinish.

This is notable as the first season of Dr Who where i have felt it's intentional rather than byproduct of storylines.

So now we have had the new years day episode, and it just got worse and worse. Chris Chibnall needs sacking - keep Jodie, just get a writer who has some basic knowledge of the show's history and the concept of "canon".

He managed to run a Dalek story, something that even Catherine Tate couldn't quite manage :( Awful, just Awful.

Im going to go watch a proper Dalek story to calm down, he's really made me angry with this rubbish :(

It's a shame really. I have said before I don't care if the Dr is a man or a woman but the whole series has been a bit naff. No sense of any danger and a DR who needs serious help from the gaggle of companions. Why she needs so many is anybody's guess. Its like a entourage following her about.

I quite enjoyed the new series and special. I consider myself an old school doctor who fan... (The five Doctors is still my favourite episode)

I didn't rate the new series at all. It seems to have gone from one extreme to another. We had the great Eccleston/Tennant years, which were truly awesome, then Moffat comes along and makes everything far too complicated, and now here we have Chibnall making everything really simple and also boring!
I have no issue with any of the actors, just the stories, boring!!!

This guy sums it up best for me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOQuq6DlO0Y&t=603s

I tend to agree

Another good view imo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2w5xftaeik