So, your top 10 stories then?

[Sci]

^ I think you need to rework your definition of fairytale. For example, Pan's Labyrinth is a fairytale. Peter Pan (J.M. Barrie's) is a fairytale. The Dream Lord would be right at home in a fairytale.

Fair enough, but you seemed to be implying that Moffat so heavily moderates the negative emotions of his scripts that there's no sense of tragedy or genuine pain to them, the sort of pain that we find in real life among normal people -- that's what I thought you meant in saying that his stories feel like a fairy tale. And considering that one of Moffat's recurring themes in his RTD-era works was the effect of loneliness on a person, how often loneliness is actually a defining trait that cuts through other traits cultivated to distract from loneliness, I really don't think that's a fair critique of his work.

If his work is fairy tale-like, it's often more like the sort of fairy tale that reflects real life rather than Disneyfies it.

 

[Thestral]

Er... I don't believe I'd said anything in this thread up to that post. I was just seeing people throw around "fairytale" in the bowdlerized sense (you happened to be the most recent) and thought it was important to note that fairy tales can be very dark, moody things. Fairies often weren't nice beings after all, more Time Lord than Tinkerbell - kidnapping people, punishing them for minor offenses, and of course the changeling stories..

If anything, I'd say Moffat's scripts are often very tragic and painful. When they do end happily it's usually not without going to some dark and/or scary places.

Maybe not as, oh what's the word... pop-culture-ey as RTD? But moodier, more atmospheric and gloomy at times - lonely's a good word. I expect monsters to be more monstrous from a Moffat story than an RTD one (Midnight aside, oh god Midnight...). A bit more stylized maybe, but not to the point of unreality.

What makes Pan's Labyrinth (and, say many Neil Gaiman tales) so effective was the way the highly stylized and fantastic imagery and story is able to touch on real human emotions and struggles.

 

[Sci]

Er... I don't believe I'd said anything in this thread up to that post.

Sorry! It was late at night and I really shouldn't have posted while that tired.

 

[Thestral]

No worries. It happens.

 

[Starkers]

DWF, I didn't say that Lake had to be the one to defeat the Cybermen and deassimilate Miss Hartigan. Even I think that would be... well... absurd.

But Lake should have been involved in some capacity at the climax. He should have had a moment where he got to be the hero in his own story. He should have saved his son. And he should have been the one to fly the balloon; maybe Lake steers it while the Doctor does his jiggery-pokery with the infostamps. Neither change would have made the episode less about the Doctor.

Yup exactly. I'm not sure why RTD didn't give him a moment like that, saving his son was perfect, and actually maybe after that sideline him, because the Doctor wouldn't want him potentially getting harmed now he has his son back, but he's basically non essential for the second half!

The show has profited greatly from having an anchor in the world and culture of today. Rose, Mickey, Jackie and Donna particularly were characters who looked like they had the same real world troubles and experiences that people of today face - both the good and the bad.

When RTD anchored the series in now once I actually didn't mind, I thought it was interesting to see how the family of a companion dealt with there loss...he didn't need to repeat with every companion, we don't need each companion to be anchored in the now, and its one of the reasons that RTD Who began to get a little samey. I'm not saying you should never do it, but at the end of the day the show is about a blue box that can go anywhere, some of the mystery of that is lost if the companion's calling home on her super mobile every two minutes. IMO.

BTW I wouldn't argue there was no repetitiveness to Moffat's work, I just don't think that's atypical....it will be very interesting to see what the next series is like, see what he and the others of the production team have learned from their first series.

 

[Sadistro]

Magical realism is the technical term for Moffat's work, and its what I mean when I refer to his work as fairytales.

My point is that RTD managed to make the show both realist and fantasical at the same time. No matter the situations that were occuring, it never felt like some kind of alternate universe to our own.

By constantly referencing the world we see in as authentic a way as he could (the news report with current newscaster Andrew Marr to take just one example), it felt like this was something happening in our world, not just a version of our world in this show.

That is how mainstream shows suceed; just look at all the people who write to Sherlock Holmes every year, people who go up to soap opera stars and remonstrate because of 'their' actions onscreen etc.

They are the extremes obviously, but they arise from the deep connection that the masses have, when they are invested in a show that is set in the world they know, that they live in every day.

Sci-fi audiences meanwhile, tend to attach to the shows that depict reality as they would prefer it to be. Even if that reality is war torn, or filled with horrific creatures and ghosts etc, it appeals to an audience who are disatisfied with the mundanity of real world society etc.

Moffat's vision caters to this later audience, but not the former. The world Moffat is showing, is not the world that mainstream audiences know. And over time, that is eroding their interest in, and support for the show.

And we can argue all we like on that point. Its been raging since the last season aired, and everyone has their stats and figures that 'prove' beyond a shadow of the doubt that Doctor Who is still pulling in the mainstream or that it isn't.

Needless to say, I am very much of the opinion that DW is losing its mainstream audience fast. Because it is losing its relevance to people outside the core fanbase.

His episodes rely heavily on strong visuals to carry non genre viewers through his often utterly prepostrous plots. The ghostly boy in the gasmask, the clockwork soldiers, the weeping angels etc.

Because in episodes where that is absent, the mainstream just get completely lost. 'Silence in the Library' being a prime example, but 'The Pandorica Opens' is another good one.

And like it or not, mainstream viewers are what keep shows alive, and keep them on everyone's lips. When they fall away, money is withdrawn, writers and actors leave to accept better offers etc.

Moffat's situations and characters glory in their outsider status. They take swipes at society, and shrink reality down to the emotional vicissitudes of his aforementioned terminally self obsessed characters.

Not that I think it is exclusively the mainstream who can take issue with Moffat's handling of the show. Greater numbers of episodes by him are just highlighting the problems that were always there -

How does Amy afford to live in that house by herself? She is either the highest paid kiss-o-gram in Britain, or Aunt Sharon must be absolutely loaded (seeing as how she has her own house).

Did Aunt Sharon just wake up one morning and think 'Hmm, I have 2 houses, don't I? One for me, and one for Amy... Why did I do that - I'm paying a fortune?!

Not to mention that as soon as Amy's parents' workplaces contact them (as they will be paying a ghost employee that they don't remember hiring, but who is on their books), the police will be very interested in all the pictures and documentation in the house for this man and woman who apparently don't exist.

Because we know from the picture of Rory that people who fall into the cracks did still exist, they have just been forgotten. Things they owned and carried about will still be where they put them (Rory's wedding ring for example).

So unless banks, workplaces, any place that has Amy's parents receiving or making payments, all decide not to investigate this oddity, this whole thing would unravel.

Identity Fraud is a serious crime, madam...

With her parents never having existed, that also means there is no money coming from them. So how does Amy afford to maintain the house, mortgage, heating, electricity, water, food, clothes etc?

Why did she not get swallowed up by the crack, why did Aunt Sharon not get swallowed up? How did Amy reconcile the pictures of her with her parents in the house, their clothes in the wardrobes, their car out the front of the house?!

That's a hell of a lot of places and things to never be looking at or noticing, if that is how Moffat is explaining it!

The whole thing was absurd. It may have sounded whimsical and tragic, but it just wouldn't work in any kind of real world scenario.

 

[Thestral]

I think that, in short, you're way overthinking things and looking for it to fall apart. Also don't think there's any legitimate reason to say Who is failing to connect with audiences now, but that's another argument

Magical realism is the technical term for Moffat's work, and its what I mean when I refer to his work as fairytales.

I don't think that you quite understand what magical realism is and means (to the extent that it's defined at all). In short, it's a world where everything is realistic - except for the odd things that aren't. For example Due South, a standard buddy cop/odd couple show about a Chicago cop and a Mounty that mixed procedural and humor and was entirely non-fantastic - except when the Mounty's dead father's ghost turns up. The overriding realism is a central premise of magical realism.

My point is that RTD managed to make the show both realist and fantasical at the same time. No matter the situations that were occuring, it never felt like some kind of alternate universe to our own.

By constantly referencing the world we see in as authentic a way as he could (the news report with current newscaster Andrew Marr to take just one example), it felt like this was something happening in our world, not just a version of our world in this show.

Whether or not I agree with you (and I mostly do) - a world where Britain has to ask the UN for its own nuclear launch codes is obviously and alternate one.

The world Moffat is showing, is not the world that mainstream audiences know. And over time, that is eroding their interest in, and support for the show.

How exactly is Moffat's world so much more unlike the one mainstream audiences know than Davies?

How does Amy afford to live in that house by herself? She is either the highest paid kiss-o-gram in Britain, or Aunt Sharon must be absolutely loaded (seeing as how she has her own house).

Did Aunt Sharon just wake up one morning and think 'Hmm, I have 2 houses, don't I? One for me, and one for Amy... Why did I do that - I'm paying a fortune?!

... what 2 houses?

Because we know from the picture of Rory that people who fall into the cracks did still exist, they have just been forgotten. Things they owned and carried about will still be where they put them (Rory's wedding ring for example).

I think you're misunderstanding how that worked. They didn't still exist, they really were more than forgotten. But "echoes" live on. Rory's wedding ring is easy enough to explain - 'twas in the TARDIS.

With her parents never having existed, that also means there is no money coming from them. So how does Amy afford to maintain the house, mortgage, heating, electricity, water, food, clothes etc?

Same way Jackie Tyler did once Rose left I imagine. Does it matter?

The whole thing was absurd. It may have sounded whimsical and tragic, but it just wouldn't work in any kind of real world scenario.

Hmm, you know what else doesn't work in any kind of real world scenario? Plastic mannequins with guns built in, UNIT, or Torchwood. Among other things, of course.

 

[Starkers]

It really is quite worrying when people start to complain that Dr Who isn't realistic enough...

And I can't believe that apparently planets in the sky, Cybermen battling Daleks in London, Daleks taking over the world, the Sycorax in orbit, ghosts everywhere and a hosptial that vanishes are real world events...but apprently Amy's ability to pay a mortgage is unrealistic...

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

But he is.

Only when the show has enough humility to allow me to make that determination. It's like what Russell Brand once said; you're not really sexually attractive if you have to keep telling people that you're sexually attractive.

The Doctor's always been arrogant though even to himself in The Five Doctors.

I don’t know. What I like about Matt Smith is that he's more quietly self-assured as the Doctor. David Tennant seemed to be carrying this giant neon sign that said, "Love me. Love me! LOVE ME!" every few seconds.

I will, however, agree that Moffat probably doesn't put as much narrative focus on the idea that ordinary life is itself an extraordinary thing. He's so busy having the Doctor rebel against the idea of living a normal life (particularly in "Amy's Choice") that I think that thread gets lost.

It's consistent with the character. The Doctor has always been a rebel. His lifestyle was always a violent rejection of normal Time Lord society.

Yeah, but the Doctor's individual characterization is not the same thing as narrative theme. The Doctor may reject the idea of living a normal life, but that doesn't mean that the narrative itself should endorse the idea that normal life is something bad or oppressive.

Well, if we're talking about narrative theme as opposed to the Doctor's individual characterization, then I would say a recurring theme in Season 5 is to do whatever makes you happy. While the Doctor rebels against domestic life in "Amy's Choice," Rory seems quite happy with it. Amy seems torn but seems to value her relationship with Rory more than her adventures with the Doctor.

Then there's "The Lodger," where the Doctor seems totally enamored with the Craig/Sophie relationship. Plus, it ends up being those two "normal" people who end up saving the day.

On the other hand, it always felt a bit insincere whenever RTD would have the Doctor marvel at the ordinariness of life, particularly when Sarah Jane ("School Reunion"), Rose ("Doomsday"), & Donna ("Journey's End") all seemed to view their separation from the Doctor as a fate worse than death.

Though I would point out that what you claim about what Moffat is doing were the case, we would never have seen the Doctor scare away an entire fleet of alien ships with what amounts to a mildly witty speech over a microphone. "Think about every black day I ever stopped you. And then. And THEN! Do the smart thing: Let someone else try first." I mean, it's positively RTD-ish.

Well (ignoring the fact that it was all a ruse anyway); I don't think they were actually cowed by the Doctor's speech. It was merely a reminder of the Doctor's record. He's standing behind his previous actions as an empire-toppling badass rather than relying on other people to drone on & on about how wonderful he is.

[Rose] brings a healthy dose of reality to Ecclestone's Doctor. She's someone who you wouldn't naturally associate with wanting magical adventures, and so forth. But just because she lived an ordinary life and was content with it, shouldn't disqualify her from this opportunity.

On the contrary, I don't think Rose was satisfied with her pre-Doctor life at all. She may not have known exactly what it was she was missing but there did seem to be a sense of hollow-ness about the hustle & bustle of her life in "Rose."

On the other hand, I think Amy has enough inner self-confidence to survive without the Doctor. She missed him in "The Eleventh Hour" but she moved on with her life in a way that everyone seemed happy with. She likes traveling with him but she doesn't need to in the insufferably co-dependent way that Rose & Martha did.

But Amy has been so much worse, strutting around with an air of utterly obnoxious entitlement, constantly asking for new stimulus and acting in a manner that is so irresponsibly reckless, that she is forever putting herself and others in danger.

Kind of like a certain transient alien we all know & love.

Let's not forget that Moffat is the person who had the Doctor (as far as he knew) strand Mickey and Rose on the 'Madame De Pompadour', on their own and with no way home, just to act out another of his romantic fantasies (with yet another rebellious female character).

Pfft! He could have easily come back for them. All he would need to do is wait for the 1st Doctor to show up during "The Reign of Terror," nick the TARDIS, take it back to the Madame du Pompadour, materialize it inside the other TARDIS, pick up Mickey & Rose, then drop the old TARDIS back in France where the 1st Doctor left it before anyone suspected a thing. (Come to think of it, I would love to see this sort of crossover at some point.)

But it always works out for the best with Moffat - because he cheats. In real life, act as recklessly and as foolishly inconsiderate as this, and there are consequences.

In real life, act responsibly and no one makes a TV show about you.

I really don't know what to say if you think Moffat is as authentic a writer of real life and real people as Paul Cornell and RTD. Moffat's characters and situations are highly stylized, always infused with fairytale style imagery, and never feel like people who actually exist outside of a story book.

There is power in Moffat's stories, but all of a similar variety. And that is my issue with him. He repeats himself; he repeats his imagery, his characters and his storytelling.

His stories just aren't something that I recognize as showing the truth of this life, fantastical adventures and galaxies or no. His is a vision of how her would like the universe to be, more romantic, more scary but in cool ways etc etc.

But that ignores that the Doctor resonated with the masses, because RTD was able to show how someone like him and the adventure and danger he brings, could be of value and relevance to the world we know.

And in that world, good does not always triumph, there are consequences and sacrifices.

But it’s just nice to know that someone cares. That's the Doctor's real power.

I would argue that Moffat's work is no more or less realistic than RTD's. Both exist in the realm of fantasy. However, I find Moffat's whimsy more to my liking and more appropriate to the show than RTD's over the top angst.

I really doubt your assertion that Doctor Who has been successful with the masses because RTD was able to turn it into "relevant" drama. The power of the show is the power of escapism and fantasy. To hear you describe it, you'd think that Doctor Who has succeeded in spite of its premise, not because of it. On the contrary, fantasy is in with the general public and has been for a while. Nearly all of the top box office grossers of the last decade have been fantasy films.

Despite how it may appear, I am not biased against Steven Moffat. Look in my Top 10 stories earlier in this thread, and you'll see I place 'The Beast Below' and 'Flesh and Stone' in there. Both by Moffat and both from his first series as show runner.

Funny, considering I would consider those to be Moffat's 2 worst episodes. "The Beast Below" was a half-baked story that never quite congealed for me. "Flesh & Stone" has a lot of good bits but gets very bogged down in exposition and Tennant-style shouty-ness.

 

[DWF]

Only when the show has enough humility to allow me to make that determination. It's like what Russell Brand once said, you're not really sexually attractive if you have to keep telling people that you're sexually attractive.

The Doctor's always been arrogant though even to himself in The Five Doctors.

I dunno. What I like about Matt Smith is that he's more quietly self-assured as the Doctor. David Tennant seemed to be carrying this giant neon sign that said, "Love me. Love me! LOVE ME!" every few seconds.

Being self assured or even quite has little to do with how arrogant he is.

The Doctor: Now the question of the hour is, "Who's got the Pandorica?" Answer: I do. Next question: Who's coming to take it from me? [Pause] Come on! Look at me! No plan, no back-up, no weapons worth a damn! Oh, and something else I don't have: Anything to lose! So, if you're sitting up there in your silly little spaceships, with all your silly little guns, and you've got any plans on taking the Pandorica tonight, just remember who's standing in your way! Remember every black day I ever stopped you! And then, AND THEN... do the smart thing: Let somebody else try first.[The battleships all flee to a much higher orbit]The Doctor: [to Rory] That should keep them squabbling for half an hour.

That's the Doctor's arrogance at work.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

It really is quite worrying when people start to complain that Dr Who isn't realistic enough.

*sigh* Yeah. It's like that adultism that the Doctor promised to cure Amy of in "The Eleventh Hour."