• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Moffat's Season better than all of RTD Combined?

Yes or No

  • Yes

    Votes: 19 18.1%
  • No

    Votes: 68 64.8%
  • Indifferent

    Votes: 18 17.1%

  • Total voters
    105

Brent

Admiral
Admiral
Yes or No, me, I think it is.... So far classic Who feel, it is rocking the house, Moffat is the Manny Coto of Doctor Who, who is with me?
 
Maybe. The Moffat-penned episodes have been good to brilliant. As for the others so far, Vampires and Choice were ok I think, though I wasn't paying too close attention. Victory and the Silurian two-parter were appalling though in my view.

That said, so far I think it's a better average than any of the other new Who series. And Matt Smith is by far the best new Who Doctor. If Moffat can put together a better finale than RTD managed (and considering the big gap between their respective competences, I'd be shocked if he couldn't), and the Curtis episode's worth the watch (even if the Roberts one is the travesty I'm assuming it will be), then it should easily be the best new Who series yet.

At the same time though, the Dalek redesign has met with universal disdain, the theme music's poor, and everything about the Silurian story managed to be an insult to the Pertwee classic.
 
Hard call. At this stage I'd have to say probably not, And though I won't go that far yet I'd say it's probably on a par with or slightly better than one of Ruskie's entire seasons - and thats putting Moffat's 8 or 9 eps vs 13 or 14 from RTD.

The way I arrive at this estimate is this: In a typical RTD season I normally get 3, maybe 4 stories that I really like. For eg. RTD Season 1 had The Unquiet Dead, Dalek and The Empty Child.

Out of this season so far I've liked 4 of them and I suspect it may be 5 once I watch the conclusion to the Silurian 2 parter. If any of those to come are good then I may be inclined to say this Moffat season surpasses 2 of RTD's.

Of course, there is the season as a whole. Without fail, I've found Russ' season arcs to all be huge build up, followed by massive letdown (followed by much gnashing of teeth). If Moffat even half delivers on 'The Crack' then I might be inclined to agree with your OP.
 
So far I've only really liked the premier, Amy's Choice and the two two-parters (as a whole, though both have their weaker halves). I found Beast, Victory and Vampires to be amongst the weakest, or at least most disposable, of all five seasons. I'll have to wait for the rest of the season, but right now I doubt it will rank any higher than its predecessors.
 
Take out the Daleks and the Silurian 2 parter and this would be a blindingly good series for me, and even those eps have their brilliant moments.
 
Bit early to judge, and often seasons can be made or broken in a handful of episodes (take season 3, 4 blindingly good episodes sandwitched between a lot of mediocrity.

We still have 4 episodes to go, and one of them could be the next Blink, or the next Fear Her!

It's been good and occasionally outstanding for me so far, but I could say the same about many of RTD's seasons. It's not light years better, not light years worse, it's just different.

I have found myself getting less annoyed with certain things this year though ;)
 
Way too early to say that - RTD's seasons had some great moments, some would say epic, that Moffat's season hasn't had the time to come close to yet. I will submit though, that a good chunk of those moments in earlier season came from Moffat.
This season has been decidedly hit and miss so far. When it hits, it really hits - and that so far has been the episodes Moffat writes himself. The other writers don't seem to have a handle on Smith's Doctor or on Amy in the way that he does, and lacklustre episodes have resulted.
I'm enjoying the season very much, but it has too many wobbles to outstrip RTD just yet. Part of me thinks Smith's second year will be where he really kicks ass.
 
Yes or No, me, I think it is.... So far classic Who feel, it is rocking the house, Moffat is the Manny Coto of Doctor Who, who is with me?

Not me.

Wake me up when there's an episode half as good as "Midnight" or "Turn Left" and a Companion who's more than a collection of one-liners in a short skirt.
 
I've enjoyed aspects of this season. And I dare say this is heresay, but I'll say it anyway, I'm not massively enjoying the "classic" vibe. It just seems cheap to me, and not in a good way. I liked RTD's opera against Moffat's more intimate style. Still, I'm in for the long haul. I just want to enjoy an hour of telly every Saturday evening and then have fun talking about it here. RTD did that for me for 5 years. If Moff can do the same, however that ends up looking, I'm happy.
 
I can't make that call at this stage. If we're just comparing Moffat's episodes to RTD's, that would be a valid poll. But four complete vs one partially complete isn't something you can fairly compare. And Victory of the Daleks was as bad as any of the worst under RTD's watch.
 
Yes or No, me, I think it is.... So far classic Who feel, it is rocking the house, Moffat is the Manny Coto of Doctor Who, who is with me?

Not me.

Wake me up when there's an episode half as good as "Midnight" or "Turn Left" and a Companion who's more than a collection of one-liners in a short skirt.
I'd rate The Beast Below above both of those (going by my memory of them at least), and as for Amy, none of the others were any better. Rose was a thick chav who was the feeble attempt at a love interest in RTD's attempt to turn DW into a soap opera. Martha was an improvement, except she fell in unrequited love with the gurning prancer within about half an episode. As for Donna, she was just a vehicle for Tate's "comedy" shtick, as if confining it to her woefully unfunny sketch show of tedious catchphrases wasn't enough for the smug luvvie types at the BBC.
 
I enjoyed RTD's version so much more, I think it was more character driven rather than story driven and had a lot more fun about it. I'm not really digging Matt Smith and still think he is too young, but he's been decent the past 3 or 4 episodes. Just don't like the over all tone of the series so far, iDaleks sucked but I did like the episode. I think a lot of people just seem to put Doctor Who onto this pedastal when its more a bit of fun with a few serious episodes here and there. I also reckon lots of people already had, there was a vocal amount of people who bashed literally everything RTD did and were going on about how this season was going to be the greatest ever when it hasn't really been much of an improvement (again I prefered Tennant and RTD, Amy is shit imo).
 
I think Matt Smith is great, but Amy is underutilized, and many of the individual stories have been bleh.

Also: I'd be offended if someone called me "the Manny Coto of Doctor Who."
 
I dislike forgive Moffat for turning the Daleks into giant plastic toys.

I dislike Moffat for turning the weeping angels from nightmares that make you vanish into the past into ordinary stone gargoyles that just snap your neck and can move on camera.

I dislike Moffat for giving the Silurians human faces and making the militaristic ones into complete hypocrites.

I dislike Moffat for making Amy choose her human love interest, then cruelly wiping him from existence.

But I love Moffat for the spooky old, not to be trusted Dreamlord!
 
I think RTD's approach was better too, he approached it almost Whedon-esque which suits a show like Who.
 
Yes or No, me, I think it is.... So far classic Who feel, it is rocking the house, Moffat is the Manny Coto of Doctor Who, who is with me?

Not me.

Wake me up when there's an episode half as good as "Midnight" or "Turn Left" and a Companion who's more than a collection of one-liners in a short skirt.
I'd rate The Beast Below above both of those (going by my memory of them at least), and as for Amy, none of the others were any better. Rose was a thick chav who was the feeble attempt at a love interest in RTD's attempt to turn DW into a soap opera. Martha was an improvement, except she fell in unrequited love with the gurning prancer within about half an episode. As for Donna, she was just a vehicle for Tate's "comedy" shtick, as if confining it to her woefully unfunny sketch show of tedious catchphrases wasn't enough for the smug luvvie types at the BBC.

I didn't care for "Midnight" but I did like "Turn Left" and for my tastes, it's one of his best. "The Beast Below" felt like a beast in my bowels rumbling to get out.

Rose was useless. Couldn't stand either the character or the failed popstar turned actress portraying her. Martha was only an improvement in the sense that Freeman is far more attractive than Billie but her acting is far worse (if that's possible).

As for Donna, I couldn't stand the character in "The Runaway Bride" and was initially very much against the idea of her as a companion but she won me over quickly enough. It was nice to see a companion that wasn't head-over-heels for the Doctor and that kept him somewhat honest and in line.
 
I think RTD's approach was better too, he approached it almost Whedon-esque which suits a show like Who.
No it doesn't. I like Whedon's stuff but the idea that Doctor Who should be a disposable show full of youngsters cracking wise is mental.

This season is better than RTD's era by default. The fact that we don't see his massive grinning face in every interview on Confidential elevates it infinitely.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top