tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632641.post7025771630079918996..comments2024-02-28T13:10:22.715-06:00Comments on Cindy A. Matthews, writer, novelist, blogger: Style Over Substance in (New) Doctor WhoCindy A. Matthewshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12724627097783524710noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632641.post-79854836773183577642015-10-13T16:42:26.364-05:002015-10-13T16:42:26.364-05:00"It's nothing to do with people not under..."It's nothing to do with people not understanding or being a bit bloody simple. The stories don't make sense when stacked against one another, because they contradict each other in areas that are flat out stated as rules."<br /><br />Exactly. Poor writing and poor script editing are still poor writing and script editing. Any show that isn't well scripted is going to suck frankly. It's called the "George Lucas Effect" with its best example being "The Phantom Menace". All the nice sets, all the nice SFX and explosions can't hide the fact that the story is boring and the actors weren't given adequate direction so they could develop their characters. Special effects and nice sets alone don't make for a decent story. The story, the WRITING has to be first rate before the special effects and sets are added, otherwise you're just throwing your money down the drain.<br />Who Fannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632641.post-48740351299760184432015-10-13T11:17:03.724-05:002015-10-13T11:17:03.724-05:00The problem with Doctor Who is that at its core is...The problem with Doctor Who is that at its core is the plot device of being able to go anywhere in the whole of time and space, but for some writers... that's just not enough.<br />Exploring the nature of the journey is, of course, their right and probably to some degree their duty...<br />But it becomes an issue when you have one episode saying "Time Can't Be Rewritten!!! Absolutely not, no way, no how... Once it's been written down in a book... it HAS to play out the way it says in the book! It just HAS TO!!!" but that story is 6 episodes after an entire series devoted to telling the story of how one man can trick history into believing one thing while another thing was happening.<br />There is no continuity in the method. That's fine if you do it every ten years, and it's the core of a complex plot that won't work any other way, but it;s like every series there is a new rule of time that cancels out the old ones to make telling a story a bit simpler.<br />Rory laying in a bed as an old man... Dying...<br />All the Doctor had to do was close the door, phone his mates in the Teselecta, get them to nip back in time disguised as old Rory and pretend to die in the bed...<br />EXACTLY the self same trick the Doctor used to avoid his own death at Lake Silencio 6 episodes earlier...<br />But NO!!!! They "saw" Rory die... so he HAD TO die... there was no way round it...<br />It beggars belief that those two Time Travel stories were written by the same man within about 12 months of one another... <br /><br />It;s nothing to do with people not understanding or being a bit bloody simple. The stories don;t make sense when stacked against one another, because they contradict each other in areas that are flat out stated as rules.<br /><br />Of course now we have the author's voice in he characters mouth... "Just Accept It!" when something stupidly unlikely happens... dressed up in the guise of a joke about a cup of tea, but the message is clear... it doesn't HAVE to make sense.. because I'M writing it!Tommyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13935122899691112740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632641.post-29184835495101338152015-10-13T05:15:35.617-05:002015-10-13T05:15:35.617-05:00I can't help but think this is unfair. A few y...I can't help but think this is unfair. A few years ago, in the middle of Series 6/7, Doctor Who (and Steven Moffat) was criticised for being too complicated by various people. Personally I don't think they were right, and it was just the viewers not paying attention properly.<br /><br />Now we have an article saying that this episode, which explained the premise of the episode in a fun and experimental way (I've not rewatched the episode yet, but I find it very similar to the pre-titles of 'Listen'), was a welcome change from 3 very dark episodes (okay, maybe not 'The Lodger', but certainly not as dark as last week), and we're not complaining that the episode was, basically, too accessible. <br /><br />The Doctor Who fandom appears to be in meltdown 99% of the time, and it's normally because one side of the fandom wants one thing, and another wants something different. Surely we should just enjoy the episode for what it was? Very good, well-constructed, funny at parts, not as rich as the opener, but still very strong.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16053041213680732769noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632641.post-91700916901838129732015-10-12T21:02:42.064-05:002015-10-12T21:02:42.064-05:00I did not see the episode, but I think you're ...I did not see the episode, but I think you're right on all counts. As an aside, the new series made me a Who fan, but I just can't get into Capaldi. I've only seen three of his.Edward Buatoishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08863863706268851541noreply@blogger.com