Russell T. Davies Returns to Doctor Who as New Showrunner

[Emperor-Tiberius]

I'm continuously amused how some fans take some of this waaaayyyyy too seriously. Same complaining, different era. Only difference from now and all of the big changes during the classic series is how the Internet makes that complaining more noticeable.

What's the alternative? When do fans' complains on the direction of a show become acceptable? its not the reasonable of us have gone and requested RTD himself to come back or to pretend Whittaker never occured. Why is it that any criticism that has roots on actual issues of the show are put aside as a kind of overreaction by "some" fans? Genuinely, I don't think its unreasonable to critique the program so long as the argument is rooted within the show itself.

Like, I can understand not condoning hyperbole (and I am guilty of that sin myself, I freely admit) but on the other hand, outreach of an argument is not necessarily a bad thing, particularly when its on a controversial topic such as this. It is understandable that some may like this Timeless Children retcon. it is not to dictate to fans that dislike it and argue why and how it doesn't as fans who don't "get the show." That never stops being a low blow, as if we're not fans because we didn't experience it from the olden days, as someone implied earlier. So, I'm with you on regards to misoginy, wokeness, etc, those are all nonsense issues that don't deserve either the attention nor the drama. BUT, on the other hand, if I take offense to Kerblam!'s asinine messaging and with the overall political feel the Chibnall era exudes, as long as I articulate my take, there's no reason for a discussion not to be had.

 

[Mr Awe]

I'm continuously amused how some fans take some of this waaaayyyyy too seriously. Same complaining, different era. Only difference from now and all of the big changes during the classic series is how the Internet makes that complaining more noticeable.

I don't know if I'm in the group of complainers. I don't like the Timeless Child and all its implications. I try not to take it too seriously and be reasonable about it. But the fact is I just don't like it.

Undoubtedly, I will continue to watch and, when the TC is in the background, I'm sure it'll be fine.

Of course, YMMV. I can see why some people don't mind. I think if I was a newer fan, it wouldn't be such a big deal. And it's not a big deal for some longer-term fans too. But for me, it's the rewriting of the show's longstanding lore that is problematic.

In short, I'd rather they create intriguing situations and scenarios by creating things going forward rather than monkeying around and trying to rewrite the show's past.

Obviously, they're not making the show for me. And there has been other things haven't liked over the years. But the massive retconning particularly grates.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

I don't have a problem with criticisms. Those are fine. Hell, I was plenty vocal during the Davies run, especially the first two series.

But what I do have an issue with are fans who continuously complain and complain and complain about their criticisms, some to the point saying that Chibnall has "ruined" Doctor Who (and far cruder statements and not just this thread).

That's what I mean by taking the show too seriously. There's a big gap between criticism and simply not letting go of that anger and hatred. Especially towards an individual, no matter what you think of their writing and creative decisions.

 

[The Wormhole]

Sadly, that's not just restricted to Doctor Who fandom. Star Trek fans are quite vocal in their complaints about the current showrunners, I remember one person actually comparing Rick Berman and Brannon Braga to serial killers once. Star Wars fans are the ones who coined the term "raped my childhood" in response to the changes made to the Star Wars movies with the Special Editions in 1997. Every fandom has its vocal angry mob.

 

[DigificWriter]

I don't know if I'm in the group of complainers. I don't like the Timeless Child and all its implications. I try not to take it too seriously and be reasonable about it. But the fact is I just don't like it.

Undoubtedly, I will continue to watch and, when the TC is in the background, I'm sure it'll be fine.

Of course, YMMV. I can see why some people don't mind. I think if I was a newer fan, it wouldn't be such a big deal. And it's not a big deal for some longer-term fans too. But for me, it's the rewriting of the show's longstanding lore that is problematic.

In short, I'd rather they create intriguing situations and scenarios by creating things going forward rather than monkeying around and trying to rewrite the show's past.

Obviously, they're not making the show for me. And there has been other things haven't liked over the years. But the massive retconning particularly grates.

Technically speaking, the additions to the Doctor's history and lore that Chibnall ushered in with the Timeless Child storyline aren't retcons, because you have to have a united continuity and Canon in order to retcon things, and Doctor Who really doesn't have either (united continuity or a canon).

 

[Mr Awe]

Technically speaking, the additions to the Doctor's history and lore that Chibnall ushered in with the Timeless Child storyline aren't retcons, because you have to have a united continuity and Canon in order to retcon things, and Doctor Who really doesn't have either (united continuity or a canon).

So, the TC is not canon. Cool!

 

[Haggis and tatties]

So, the TC is not canon. Cool!

Who's canon is whatever you personally want to make it, that is the good thing about modern who, you can easily ignore entire runs or episodes with ease because it feels so much more modular than the original series, and the only ones who really lose are the BBC's commercial arm from potential lost sales of whatever run the fans don't like.

 

[dupersuper]

As for you other questions, we just don't know. It seems like Jack would be able to survive those types of events, so why not some unknown alien from another universe?

We see him die in Turn Left by drowning...I think surviving an A-bomb may be expecting too much.

 

[jaime]

We see him die in Turn Left by drowning...I think surviving an A-bomb may be expecting too much.

Yeah, I get why they did that (and what they were implying but couldn’t say) but it is giggle worthy that the Thames is more deadly than the hard vacuum of space or the time vortex itself. No dumping bodies in the river! Indeed.

 

[Steve Roby]

Who's canon is whatever you personally want to make it

Why do people try to win arguments by saying "that's not canon" if canon is just each person's own opinion? Because canon isn't each person's opinion, it's what the people running a show say it is. And the people running Doctor Who have never declared what is or isn't canon. Anyone who argues that something isn't canon in Doctor Who is wrong from the minute they mention the word.

whatever run the fans don't like

There is no such group as "the fans." For everything one fan likes in Doctor Who, there's another fan who dislikes it, and vice versa.

 

[DigificWriter]

^ I'll repeat what I've previously said: with Doctor Who, everything is canon and nothing is canon.

 

[Haggis and tatties]

Why do people try to win arguments by saying "that's not canon" if canon is just each person's own opinion? Because canon isn't each person's opinion, it's what the people running a show say it is. And the people running Doctor Who have never declared what is or isn't canon. Anyone who argues that something isn't canon in Doctor Who is wrong from the minute they mention the word.



There is no such group as "the fans." For everything one fan likes in Doctor Who, there's another fan who dislikes it, and vice versa.

If you are personally happy with what the show runners tell you is canon then more power to you, but that makes no difference to my personal preferences of what i choice to see as canon, and more importantly for the franchise what i am willing to spend on it.

 

[Photoman15]

If you are personally happy with what the show runners tell you is canon then more power to you, but that makes no difference to my personal preferences of what i choice to see as canon, and more importantly for the franchise what i am willing to spend on it.

That's NOT how canon works.

 

[Steve Roby]

If you are personally happy with what the show runners tell you is canon then more power to you, but that makes no difference to my personal preferences of what i choice to see as canon, and more importantly for the franchise what i am willing to spend on it.

So... you not only think you have the right to define what counts as Doctor Who canon, you also think you have the right to change the definition of the word canon. How can you have meaningful conversations about Doctor Who with other people who don't know what your personal rules and definitions are?

 

[Haggis and tatties]

That's NOT how canon works.

My canon is my canon, that is how my canon works, what you choose to view as canon is your choice.

 

[Steve Roby]

That's the whole point. We don't have canons. We have things we like. Showrunners and creators have canons.

 

[jaime]

If it was made in whole or in part by the bbc, (or in some cases under license) and is doctor who, then it’s canon. It’s pretty much the only rule, and the only obvious exception is Curse Of The Fatal Death.
(This is why the books didn’t do the Time War and ended eights run with an ambiguous sky dive, and why they didn’t do the regen in DWM either, with DWM also being ixnayed by RTD at the time)

 

[DigificWriter]

If it was made in whole or in part by the bbc, (or in some cases under license) and is doctor who, then it’s canon.

This is false.

The BBC and Doctor Who production teams have expressly avoided establishing an official canon for the property, making it one of the few (if not the only) IPs not to have an internal guiding framework for telling stories and expanding the IP's lore.

That's the whole point. We don't have canons. We have things we like. Showrunners and creators have canons.

Yep.

And, as I just noted above, Doctor Who has no official canon.

 

[The Knappos]

Shalka?
Dimensions in Time?
16 versions of Shada?

 

[Allyn Gibson]

^ I'll repeat what I've previously said: with Doctor Who, everything is canon and nothing is canon.

I think of this exchange from Deep Space Nine:

Garak: My doctor, they all were true.
Bashir: Even the lies?
Garak: Especially the lies.

It's a very Grant Morrison approach to take all the stories, even the one that contradict others, and treat them all as true. Lance Parkin's 1998 novel The Infinity Doctors is built around that very idea -- all the Gallifrey stories are true, even the ones that don't fit with the others.

That's the way Doctor Who works. There are lots of toys in the toy box that writers have added over the last sixty years. Sometimes, producers and writers use one group of toys. Sometimes they use another. Sometimes an unexpected toy gets used and someone discovers it fits with the other toys in interesting ways. And if you don't like the way someone's playing with the toys right now, that's okay. Come back in a couple of years and someone new will be playing with the toys in a different way that might be more to your liking.