Moffat Who simply looks better.

[Redfern]

Shooting in HD definitely seems to make a difference, but I don't think that's entirely it. I'd bet they have a different production designer and a whole new art team. Mostly though I have appreciated how they switched to the standard American framerate for broadcast television; I never could stand the soap opera feel of the old Doctor Who.

Soap Opera Feel?

I think he means the "videotape" method of image capture. Daytimr dramas (aka "soap operas") at least in the US have traditionally recorded their episodes upon videotape whereas primtetime broadcasts usually relied upon film. The videotape gives a harsher, sharper look to the images; film produces a softer effect.

"Classic" DW was recorded on tape. Actually, so is modern DW, but since its revival, the show uses a post process that gives the footage a "film" like quality. I think the majority of productions have switched to high end video capture, but like NuWho, some shows process the footage to resemble film.

Sincerely,

Bill

 

[Relayer1]

The show is shot now in HD but it really doens't look that much better to me than the RTD era nor is it as exciting as the RTD era to me.

Looking back, it's quite interesting to realize how much influence each producer has had on the show.

These days of course you have Russel T. Davies' larger-than-life, romantic approach versus Steven Moffat's "postmodern fairytale" take on the show. But that's nothing new. In the past, we've had Barry Letts' "Doctor Who as a socially relevant action movie", Philipp Hinchcliffe's gothic stories / Hammer studio homages, Graham Williams' spoofs and self-parodies, John Nathan Turner's increasingly self-referential shows or Peter Bryant's base-under-siege/cardboard monsters era.

RTD did a great job bringing it back, but he was a rotten writer of Sci-fi. He wrote all the worst episodes. It's much better now...

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

RTD did a great job bringing it back, but he was a rotten writer of Sci-fi. He wrote all the worst episodes. It's much better now...

Russel T. Davies wrote some excellent episodes, such as "Rose", "Smith and Jones" or "Utopia", which may not be considered thought-provoking science-fiction, but are certainly very good Doctor Who stories. And he wrote things like "Turn Left" and "Midnight", which are pretty good science-fiction tales.

 

[Stevil2001]

I feel like every episode of Moffat's run is set at night.

 

[Cutter John]

I feel like every episode of Moffat's run is set at night.

He does seem to have a fondness for dark stories (and I can't help thinking he's a closet steampunk fan as well). He and Philipp Hinchcliffe would have probably gotten on quite well.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

He does seem to have a fondness for dark stories (and I can't help thinking he's a closet steampunk fan as well). He and Philipp Hinchcliffe would have probably gotten on quite well.

Both of them are still alive. Maybe they get along well.

 

[MadOnion]

I'm definitely not talking about HD, I don't even have HD. I'm speaking more in terms of design, cinematography, even the color scheme. RTD's was much more cartoony, almost like the old Batman TV show.

 

[Cutter John]

I'm definitely not talking about HD, I don't even have HD. I'm speaking more in terms of design, cinematography, even the color scheme. RTD's was much more cartoony, almost like the old Batman TV show.

I think that was just his style. RTD seems to love big, overblown spectacles. Adn thats fine with me. I've always enjoyed DW when it was just a bit OTT.

 

[Takeru]

RTD did a great job bringing it back, but he was a rotten writer of Sci-fi. He wrote all the worst episodes. It's much better now...

In your opinion, I haven't liked the show very much since Moffat took over, I liked it much better during the first four years.

 

[tomalak301]

I think I like RTD's Tardis design more than I like Moffat's. At least the old one looked a little cleaner. There are times when I still don't know where everything is on the new Tardis. As for everything else, I haven't noticed much of a difference.

 

[MadOnion]

I'll give you the Tardis. But the fact that everything is dirtier with Moffat is part of what I like. It looks more real, more lived in.

 

[Sindatur]

I'll give you the Tardis.

Cool, There's boatloads of stuff I wanna do with it

 

[DWF]

I'll give you the Tardis. But the fact that everything is dirtier with Moffat is part of what I like. It looks more real, more lived in.

I'd hardly call the ipod color coded Daleks dirtier the ones from RTD's era.

 

[Redfern]

I'd hardly call the ipod color coded Daleks dirtier the ones from RTD's era.

I dunno'; have you heard the naughty limmericks they've concocted about Jo Grant? Might you, she did do that photoshoot with a gold Dalek. Frankly, I think the New Paradigms are just a bit jealous!

Sincerely,

Bill

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

I think it's mostly a matter of the recent seasons not having as much money, so they have to more carefully craft the images & the color palette to disguise that fact. Also, generally, the Moffat seasons seem more careful about not overreaching and trying to do things that the budget just can't support. There were several episodes in the RTD era where one of the major set pieces was everyone being chased down the corridor by a very dodgy CGI monster ("Tooth & Claw," "School Reunion," "The Lazarus Experiment"). I'd almost count the Cyber-King in "The Next Doctor" in that category too.

Shooting in HD definitely seems to make a difference, but I don't think that's entirely it. I'd bet they have a different production designer and a whole new art team. Mostly though I have appreciated how they switched to the standard American framerate for broadcast television; I never could stand the soap opera feel of the old Doctor Who.

Soap Opera Feel?

I think he means the "videotape" method of image capture. Daytimr dramas (aka "soap operas") at least in the US have traditionally recorded their episodes upon videotape whereas primtetime broadcasts usually relied upon film. The videotape gives a harsher, sharper look to the images; film produces a softer effect.

"Classic" DW was recorded on tape. Actually, so is modern DW, but since its revival, the show uses a post process that gives the footage a "film" like quality. I think the majority of productions have switched to high end video capture, but like NuWho, some shows process the footage to resemble film.

If they tried that process during Seasons 1 & 2, it wasn't working. The video quality seemd a bit amateurish until Season 3.

 

[Mark_Nguyen]

The sets certainly were. Moffat has had a few hiccups in set choices since he took over (the incessant re-use of the Temple of Peace for one, and trying to make a basement & curtains look like a Dalek ship, which fooled NO ONE), on the whole he's made the sets look deeper, more detailed, and more complete than before. I think you can best put it that RTD Who sets were designed and shot very theatrically, while Moffat Who sets are shot more cinematically. HD probably has a lot to do with it, as you can't get away with as much cardboard in the set as you used to be anymore.

Mark

 

[Green Lantern]

Watched a lot of NuWho with all 3 doctors recently, and one thing that really stood out to me is how much better the overall "look" of the show under Moffat. Something about the sets and the props in the RTD era just looks really cheesy to me, especially the futuristic stuff. The last two seasons have much better set design and cinematography IMO.

Overall I like everything about Moffat Who better. Matt Smith is my favorite doctor. The stories and writing are better. The season long arcs are more intricate and imaginative. I found that the RTD era episodes that I wanted to watch again were mostly the Moffat ones.

I'd say the only thing RTD did better was the humor. The Harriet Jones shtick cracks me up every time.

How can you say that? Moffat is the worst thing which has ever happened to Dr Who, and the stuff looks alot cheesyer now. He's gone back to the awfull early 80s thing, while RTD was more realistic, enjoyable, and darker. Fine, under RTDs reign, Moffats episodes were some of the best, but that was under RTD. Look what happened to the Daleks, he designed his own versions based on the cheesy 60s movies, and look what happened. Rainbow toiletes, and now Moffat has finaly admitted he was wrong about the daleks by not using them in the last series, and going back to RTDs design in the new one comming soon. Good thing he's gonna darken the shade of the rainbow daleks, they were just awfull in series 5, and I hate all these cameos. Sontarans, cybermen, daleks in one episode together working with each other. Gayest thing I have ever seen in my life, and I've seen John Barrowman do it with another dude on an epidsode of Torchwood (mentaly scared for life after seeing that happen), but torchwood's still better than Dr Who at the momment. And all of series 6 was painfull to watch. Renember the Gangers? Two episodes of plastic nonsense. Hated that episode, and no one I have ever met in my life likes that episode. Granted Moffat had one some amazing episodes (the weeping Angel two parter, the Silence tow parter, and I have a feeling Aslyman of the Daleks and the 50th anniversary episode will be among my favourate too). Ironic how that all the episode 1s in RTDs reign were only ok or terrible, but in Moffats reign, they're the only watchable ones. Moffate has ruined dr who for me. Even the cybermen episode last series was made badly, you would have thought that a surviving ship of cybermen and the return of the cybermats would have been one of the best episodes ever, but it was just plain stupid. Renember that episode "Amys Choice". I actully fell asleap in that. And I hated the arcs in Moffats dr who. Not only were the Moffat arcs more boring than RTDs, but Moffats arcs were two series long. Oh come on it was. Series 5&6 lead into each other. Infact, did you hear that in the new series, there will be no arc because of the many complaints about them going on for too long. The only good things Moffat has done since the beggining of series 5 were the Sielence, the Tardis redesign (which still looks poor, I'd like them to do something sumular to what the doctor had in the old days, but in silver. Not keen on the orange look that the last two had, Pual Mcgans steampunk Tardis is my fave though), and the doctors long coat he wore for a few episodes, reminded me of the last series with Tom Baker, one of my favourate series ever. Everything else is crummy. Fine he brought us the weeping angels, but that was under RTD reign (although the RTD episode with them in didn't even have the doctor, hate those RTD episodes which don't have any Doctor in, probably the only thing I don't miss from RTD). I liked the whole old worn down space ships of RTDs reign, however, it'd be nice to have had some Moffat style clean space ships, and vice versa now, we never see a run down ship anymore. Over all, I used to really look foward to doctor who but after seeing series 6, I don't much. Then again, I have high hopes for the asylam of the daleks. Lets hope that we finaly get the nice mix of Moffat and RTD in the next series! Also, why does RTD not write any episodes anymore? I know he retired from it, but you think he'd do one episode for old times sake.

 

[Mark_Nguyen]

*And breathe*

RTD has moved on. He wrote the Eleventh Doctor episode of SJA, and even then his dialogue was clearly his, inasmuch as Moffatt's Doctor dialogue is his own style (don't believe me? Re-watch "The Girl In the Fireplace" and imagine Smith saying Tennant's lines). They are different writers and different producers, each with their selling points and things we don't like about 'em. I enjoy both eras just fine, problems and all.

And "worn down" sets are as much a product of where the Doctor happens to be visiting as much as the production values themselves."Midnight" featured a spa / tourist planet destination, and the look was suitably clean and furutristic. Similarly, the asteroid of Demon's Run looked properly worn and used. I'm much more critical of the lack of futuristic costuming to match the destinations - and as has been pointed out, Moffat tend to put futuristic humans in historical costumes instead of 21st century modern clothing, but at least he's trying. At least the crew of the starship in "A Christmas Carol" looked suitably Trekkish.

Seriously though, every fan will have different mileage. I agree with the OP that on the whole the sets and production values LOOK much better than the earlier seasons, and are shot better too. The TARDIS console room now LOOKS like it's enormous on the inside, we don't have to be told there's more than the console room (heck, the previous set didn't even have a door to go anywhere else!). The Silurian city LOOKS huge, varied and colorful, instead of a bunch of generic tunnel set pieces with greenscreened windows. Etc.

Mark

 

[DWF]

The sets certainly were. Moffat has had a few hiccups in set choices since he took over (the incessant re-use of the Temple of Peace for one, and trying to make a basement & curtains look like a Dalek ship, which fooled NO ONE), on the whole he's made the sets look deeper, more detailed, and more complete than before. I think you can best put it that RTD Who sets were designed and shot very theatrically, while Moffat Who sets are shot more cinematically. HD probably has a lot to do with it, as you can't get away with as much cardboard in the set as you used to be anymore.

Mark

Many of the decisions you're placing at Moffat or RTD's feet are the responsibilty of the directors, production designers and lighting people. But the sets do have to lit differently and built in greatere detail because of the HD filming and that's really the big difference to me. IMO Phil Colinson was the best production designer/producer the new series has had so far, the work he in the Globe Theater and on Fire Of Pompeii was excellent in my mind.

 

[Mark_Nguyen]

Didn't both of those stories leverage existing sets, though? The Globe was filmed in a recreation of the original, which was already in operation as a proper theatre; and Pompeii was largely filmed on the existing sets of "Rome". Both episodes DID have great ancillary rooms, etc. that were constructed for the episode; however you are referencing historical locations, which on IMO are easier for a TV show to make accurate enough, versus various future-placed episodes which can look cheap and flimsy OR expensive and awesome. Who has done both in spades, under either producer.

Regardless, the buck DOES stop with RTD and Moffat, who have the responsibility of balancing creative control versus the budget they're given. I think their skill and experience as producers has as much to do with the physical look of the sets as the production designers who do the actual sketching and construction. Likewise, someone approved the use of an undisguised basement as a Dalek ship, or of whichever disused industrial location as the spaceship / prison / hospital planet of the week.

Mark