7X02 Dinosaurs On A Spaceship (Grading/Discussion) (SPOILERS!)

[davejames]

Well I just watched it for a second time, and I have to admit...my opinion of it hasn't really changed much, still love it. I found the Mitchell and Webb bots slightly more annoying this time round, but that's really about it.

I have to admit I found it a bit more enjoyable the second time around... although I still don't understand where all the unabashed love is coming from.

But oh well, it's just one episode. Thankfully the next one is sounding like it'll be a bit more interesting and adult...

 

[DWF]

I can't for the life of me understand how anyone could enjoy the Graham Williams years of Doctor Who while claiming that the last couple of seasons were "silly bollocks". Either you like light, fluffy, silly stories or you don't, and it's fine either way I guess, but I can't imagine a frame of reference in which "The Horns of Nimon" or "The Pirate Planet" is seen as quality entertainment and "Dinosaurs on a Spaceship" isn't.

"Either you like light, fluffy, silly stories or you don't"? What nonsense. Some light, fluffy, silly stories are excellent, and some or boring crap. The film Airplane is a masterpiece of light, fluffy, and silly entertainment, while the film Scary Movie is unwatchable crap. "Pirate Planet," while no masterpeice, is clever as hell, in that Douglas-Adams kind of way. "The Horns of Nimon," as you've implied, is awful. But, in general, the Williams era in Doctor Who had a definite vision, a vision shaped by the worldview of Douglas Adams - it constituted highly complex and outlandish science fiction concepts being slapped around with mindless abandon and slapsticky shtick - very much like Hitchiker's Guide. Much of it doesn't quite reach the heights of Hitchhiker's (or City of Death, for that matter), but there was a definite artistic vision behind it, a mind at work. Behind Dinosaurs, all we find is cynicism. There is no artistic vision, or purpose. It's about itself, and nothing else. The only thing the episode has to say is, "Look how much fun we are." That's not content. At least Douglas Adams always had something to say beyond, "Look how funny I am."

It's about itself and nothing else?

Odd that cos I have a sneaking suspicion things that happened in that episode are going to have ramifications so clearly what its about goes beyond itself.

And much as I love classic Who, I think you're bigging up what it was about and the 'artistic vision' behind it way too much, most of the time it was a bunch of people trying to tell a story to fill a timeslot, nothing more.

There's no way I could reduce the 26 years of the old show to that, while some of that is true they did plan the seasons out ahead of time. Williams' idea of a season long story arc was revolutionary and not well recieved by either the writers or the actors. Plus the series at that point in time had to deal with double digit inflation.

What happened when JNT took over was that he had no real vision for the show and it showed, it was up to the script editors to come up with ideas for the season and many times JNT would veto some of the ideas.

 

[Ubik]

This thread has reminded me of some of the snobbery that bubbled up here when Trek09 was released. That too was mindless bollox compared to the 'cerebral' TOS. For some reason though I thought that Dr Who would be above that though, given the show's history and ability to tell absolutely any tale in any style.

Judged as meaningless juvenile crap by a professional art critic upthread, this was the only episode of Dr Who I've ever found controversial. They killed an animal in a family show watched by childrens in the millions. Can they do that? is it appropriate? But that one plot development alone makes it art.

Meaningless juvenile crap? Whatever.

Snobbery? Actually, Abrams' Star Trek was pretty mindless crap compared to the best of TOS, TNG, and DS9, now that you mention it.

And, come on....is it "snobbery" to suggest that this most recent iteration of Doctor Who, as run by Moffat, has only once come close (with the unique and wonderful Doctor's Wife) to the heights of quality set by Blink or Caves of Androzani or City of Death or War Games or Dalek or Family of Blood or Inferno or Snakedance or Father's Day or "Are you My Mommy" (whatever that 2-parter was called) or....well, whole bunches of pre-Matt Smith Doctor Who episodes? That's not snobbery. How can that be snobbery? To me, it's just a fairly obvious common sense observation.

Oh, and for the record....I thought the season premier, Asylum of the Daleks, was actually quite good, one of the better and less obnoxious episodes of the last 2 or so years.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

To me, it's just a fairly obvious common sense observation.

"Common sense"? It's a value judgment and there's nothing wrong with that, but common sense has very little to do with individual opinions. You don't like the show and you're expressing it quite eloquently, but that doesn't magically turn your opinion into an objective statement.

 

[Peacemaker]

Of course, Blink and The Empty Child/Dr. Dances were, in fact, written by Moffat.

 

[Ubik]

Of course, Blink and The Empty Child/Dr. Dances were, in fact, written by Moffat.

Oh, I am very well aware that Moffat wrote better episodes before he ran the show. Perhaps that's part of why I find his tenure so offensive - because I know he's sooo much better than this; because I know he's written 3 or 4 of the best damned episodes the franchise has ever seen, (man, Blink and Doctor Dances were good). and yet he chooses now, as showrunner, to give us this zany nonsense instead. To write down to his audience as if they were all hyperactive 8 year-olds is an intellectual choice on his part, rather than a limitation in his skills as a writer, and that is precisely why there is absolutely no excuse for it, and why it makes me so angry. I'm glad you brought that up. Wouldn't the show be so much better now if, instead of the tone of Dinosaurs, we regularly got something of the tone of Blink, Doctor Dances, or Girl in the Fireplace? I know the writing over 2 seasons couldn't sustain that level of quality, but at least the tone, the approach, the courage to go to those emotional places, to ask those interesting questions and actually deal honestly with the answers....this discussion is making me nostalgic. Honestly, don't you guys miss the old Moffat?

Oh, and Mirrorball Man, as for my stating my opinions as objective fact - that's just the way I argue. Pay no attention. If you want to perceive "I think" before every of my statements, that's fine with me.

 

[Peacemaker]

Wouldn't the show be so much better now if, instead of the tone of Dinosaurs, we regularly got something of the tone of Blink, Doctor Dances, or Girl in the Fireplace?

No, but then I'm not a pretentious git who fancies himself a professional art critique capable of passing judgment on the show runner of a 49 year old cultural icon and hides his talent by wasting paragraphs trying to convince us poor plebeians here on a Star Trek message board instead of manning up and putting himself out there in much more visible publications. I've just been a fan of Doctor Who since I was 8 years old - that's about 35 years now, whose watched it in both the US and the UK, and is content to sit back and simply enjoy it and the immense variety it provides, whether it be Underworld and The Creature from the Pit or (Insert Name of Somebody Else's "Loser" or "Classic" here), and doesn't feel an obscene need to have his opinions validated by a group of complete strangers on the internet. while sounding like I need to get out of my parent's basement and get laid.

PS, I generally get my feelings of internet validation from Facebook or contributing to inane stories full of random humor in the Trek 5 and 7 word thingies here along with cooleddie74 and I have an ex-boyfriend who lives 4 hours away but we do occasionally snog because we both also do P90X, look the part as it were, and frankly are lot of fun as well as marvelous friends. Step away from the keyboard and live at little, Dude.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

Oh, and Mirrorball Man, as for my stating my opinions as objective fact - that's just the way I argue. Pay no attention. If you want to perceive "I think" before every of my statements, that's fine with me.

I have no problem with that and I would not have said anything, but when you're deputizing common sense you're crossing a line. That's a fact.

 

[Starkers]

Being just a "bloody Yank", the "Mitchell and Webb" references were lost on me. I just thought they were meant to be comical in a Douglas Adams sense, like the assault robots Marvin encountered in the original radio series of Hitchhiker's Guide.

Thus, if Mitchell and Webb have any kind of "stigma" associated with them, I didn't catch it.

Sincerely,

Bill

I wouldn't say its stigma really, if it'd been announced beforehand I'm not sure there'd have been the sort of angry reactions that came out when it was announced Catherine Tate was gonna be a companion. People do/don't like them but they are aknowleged as a fine pair of commedians. Pesonally I'm a big fan and have been for a long time.

Of course, Blink and The Empty Child/Dr. Dances were, in fact, written by Moffat.

Oh, I am very well aware that Moffat wrote better episodes before he ran the show. Perhaps that's part of why I find his tenure so offensive - because I know he's sooo much better than this; because I know he's written 3 or 4 of the best damned episodes the franchise has ever seen, (man, Blink and Doctor Dances were good). and yet he chooses now, as showrunner, to give us this zany nonsense instead. To write down to his audience as if they were all hyperactive 8 year-olds is an intellectual choice on his part, rather than a limitation in his skills as a writer, and that is precisely why there is absolutely no excuse for it, and why it makes me so angry. I'm glad you brought that up. Wouldn't the show be so much better now if, instead of the tone of Dinosaurs, we regularly got something of the tone of Blink, Doctor Dances, or Girl in the Fireplace? I know the writing over 2 seasons couldn't sustain that level of quality, but at least the tone, the approach, the courage to go to those emotional places, to ask those interesting questions and actually deal honestly with the answers....this discussion is making me nostalgic. Honestly, don't you guys miss the old Moffat?

Oh, and Mirrorball Man, as for my stating my opinions as objective fact - that's just the way I argue. Pay no attention. If you want to perceive "I think" before every of my statements, that's fine with me.

But you couldn't sustain Blink every week, and don't forget, when it was commisioned nobody expected Blink to be a classic, it was written to fill a particular slot, to tell a story sans the Doctor for the most part.

And again you keep going on about asking difficult questions and going to emotional places. The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances is effectively a love conquers all story, the same as Closing Time.

TGITFP is about lost opportunities and, effectively, a girl who waited...same as, oh the 11th Hour, the girl who waited and a whole host of other Smith episodes.

Blink is a timey/wimey parlour trick of an episode, same as The Big Bang.

For my money The 11th Hour, Vincent and the Doctor, The Doctor's Wife, The Girl who Waited and God Complex are as good as anything from the pre Smith era. And yeah only one of them's a Moffat tale, so what, the best episodes of the RTD era were rarely RTD episodes.

I think people forget as well that Moffat used to write one/two episodes a year, and didn't have the added stress of being show runner. Whatever your job try cranking out 3,4,5 times as much work and maintining the quality (and yes I fully appreciate that he doesn't have to run sherlock as well but RTD didn't have to juggle SJA and torwchwood, and Whedon didn't have to juggle Buffy Angel and Firefly).

 

[Ubik]

Wouldn't the show be so much better now if, instead of the tone of Dinosaurs, we regularly got something of the tone of Blink, Doctor Dances, or Girl in the Fireplace?

No, but then I'm not a pretentious git who fancies himself a professional art critique capable of passing judgment on the show runner of a 49 year old cultural icon and hides his talent by wasting paragraphs trying to convince us poor plebeians here on a Star Trek message board instead of manning up and putting himself out there in much more visible publications. I've just been a fan of Doctor Who since I was 8 years old - that's about 35 years now, whose watched it in both the US and the UK, and is content to sit back and simply enjoy it and the immense variety it provides, whether it be Underworld and The Creature from the Pit or (Insert Name of Somebody Else's "Loser" or "Classic" here), and doesn't feel an obscene need to have his opinions validated by a group of complete strangers on the internet. while sounding like I need to get out of my parent's basement and get laid.

PS, I generally get my feelings of internet validation from Facebook or contributing to inane stories full of random humor in the Trek 5 and 7 word thingies here along with cooleddie74 and I have an ex-boyfriend who lives 4 hours away but we do occasionally snog because we both also do P90X, look the part as it were, and frankly are lot of fun as well as marvelous friends. Step away from the keyboard and live at little, Dude.

Are you talking about me? Where did that come from? That sounds a bit much. Did I hurt your feelings in some way?

I don't "fancy myself an art critic" - I said earlier in the thread that I critique art for a living, and that's true - I'm a lit prof. I specialize in science fiction. I'm married with two wonderful daughters, spend the vast majority of my time off the internet, (I've joined, maybe 3 or 4 threads in the last year or two; I don't have a Facebook or Twitter account), haven't slept in my parents' basement for several decades, and I do, indeed, have stuff written in "more visible publications." (My real name, believe it or not, is not Ubik.) But then again, we aren't talking about me, are we? Or anyone else. We're talking about a television show. If you're as old as you say you are, then you should know better than to make ad hominem attacks on people, or to assume you know anything about, as you say, "strangers on the internet." You'll notice I attacked nobody during the entire discussion. I have full respect for everyone, even if I can't agree with their aesthetic opinions. A little respect would be a lot more fun and...peaceful. Don't you think, "Peacemaker"?

 

[Ubik]

Being just a "bloody Yank", the "Mitchell and Webb" references were lost on me. I just thought they were meant to be comical in a Douglas Adams sense, like the assault robots Marvin encountered in the original radio series of Hitchhiker's Guide.

Thus, if Mitchell and Webb have any kind of "stigma" associated with them, I didn't catch it.

Sincerely,

Bill

I wouldn't say its stigma really, if it'd been announced beforehand I'm not sure there'd have been the sort of angry reactions that came out when it was announced Catherine Tate was gonna be a companion. People do/don't like them but they are aknowleged as a fine pair of commedians. Pesonally I'm a big fan and have been for a long time.

Of course, Blink and The Empty Child/Dr. Dances were, in fact, written by Moffat.

Oh, I am very well aware that Moffat wrote better episodes before he ran the show. Perhaps that's part of why I find his tenure so offensive - because I know he's sooo much better than this; because I know he's written 3 or 4 of the best damned episodes the franchise has ever seen, (man, Blink and Doctor Dances were good). and yet he chooses now, as showrunner, to give us this zany nonsense instead. To write down to his audience as if they were all hyperactive 8 year-olds is an intellectual choice on his part, rather than a limitation in his skills as a writer, and that is precisely why there is absolutely no excuse for it, and why it makes me so angry. I'm glad you brought that up. Wouldn't the show be so much better now if, instead of the tone of Dinosaurs, we regularly got something of the tone of Blink, Doctor Dances, or Girl in the Fireplace? I know the writing over 2 seasons couldn't sustain that level of quality, but at least the tone, the approach, the courage to go to those emotional places, to ask those interesting questions and actually deal honestly with the answers....this discussion is making me nostalgic. Honestly, don't you guys miss the old Moffat?

Oh, and Mirrorball Man, as for my stating my opinions as objective fact - that's just the way I argue. Pay no attention. If you want to perceive "I think" before every of my statements, that's fine with me.

But you couldn't sustain Blink every week, and don't forget, when it was commisioned nobody expected Blink to be a classic, it was written to fill a particular slot, to tell a story sans the Doctor for the most part.

And again you keep going on about asking difficult questions and going to emotional places. The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances is effectively a love conquers all story, the same as Closing Time.

TGITFP is about lost opportunities and, effectively, a girl who waited...same as, oh the 11th Hour, the girl who waited and a whole host of other Smith episodes.

Blink is a timey/wimey parlour trick of an episode, same as The Big Bang.

For my money The 11th Hour, Vincent and the Doctor, The Doctor's Wife, The Girl who Waited and God Complex are as good as anything from the pre Smith era. And yeah only one of them's a Moffat tale, so what, the best episodes of the RTD era were rarely RTD episodes.

I think people forget as well that Moffat used to write one/two episodes a year, and didn't have the added stress of being show runner. Whatever your job try cranking out 3,4,5 times as much work and maintining the quality (and yes I fully appreciate that he doesn't have to run sherlock as well but RTD didn't have to juggle SJA and torwchwood, and Whedon didn't have to juggle Buffy Angel and Firefly).

If you reduce every episode to one high-concept line, sure, most episodes sound the same. But you and I both know that The Doctor Dances is far more than a "love conquers all" story. It has a very well-conceived London-during-the-Blitz setting, which the production staff do their darndest to make as realistic as possible. It has a truly heartbreaking and heartwarming mother-son relationship at the centre of it. It has a slow pace, and takes its time with characters, even the small ones. The Doctor himself has a fantastic character arc throughout. The kids with the gas masks are intensely effective and memorable. The whole thing just screams class, and originality, and tension, and emotion - it's a great hour of science fiction. Nowhere does it wink at the audience or act zany for no reason. There is no sense that it's pandering to a particular demographic. It's telling its story slowly, confidently, and with a lot of heart.

I think the point is, with this particular era, my beef is less with the actual plots (the one-sentence synopsis, say), and more with the storytelling approach, the attitude, the tone, and the pace. Even the basic plot of Dinosaurs was great. A guy who throws an entire crew into space to steal dinosaurs has the potential to raise lots of tension and drama. It was the attitude of the episode that I found so off-putting, and the fact that its interesting plot was used as a set-up for more zany running scenes, rather than an end unto itself.

I could give the same kind of response to the other episodes you mentioned. Blink is obviously more than a timey-wimey parlour trick. It's sad, very sad, and it's about the nature of time, and how our entire lives and relationships are basically at the whim of where and when we are in time - it offers a suggestion that we're all trapped, and have far less choice in our lives than we think. That's my reading, anyway. You may have a different one. But that's the point - the episodes can sustain a critical analysis, and people could actually disagree about the themes, because they are presented with subtlety and ambivalence, and aren't screamed out at you as often. There was a confidence in the material and the premise before, and a tone, and a mature attitude, during those earlier episodes that are largely absent now, I think. Not all "love conquers all" episodes are created the same.

 

[Neroon]

Excellent discussion so far, even when it's become a bit heated. However, a few folks are getting too personal, with a bit of namecalling here and some commentary on each other's behavior there.

The forum's been a good place for a while now; let us all take steps to keep it that way.

 

[Kismetrickarma]

I agree Neroon. After all, the point of these forums is intelligent discussion of different views and opinions.

I'm pretty sure no one here on this forum actually wrote, co-wrote, produced or acted in any of these episodes so the extreme emotionally charged personal attacks go beyond what I see as normal.

We all know anyone who gets frustrated by failing to communicate anything in words and then goes ahead and attacks people personally they do not even know by making absurd comments may need a few lessons in behaviour.

I too, after reading the ridiculous insult aimed at my husband choose to assume the woman who wrote it has a few key negative character traits which compel her to communicate that way, but because I can't see her in person, I choose not to assume those things. Or maybe I'll just be an adult and keep it to myself.


-Wife of someone who supposedly lives in his parents basement.

 

[Jim Steele]

I can't imagine a frame of reference in which "The Horns of Nimon" or "The Pirate Planet" is seen as quality entertainment and "Dinosaurs on a Spaceship" isn't.

I want to kiss you for this beautifully succinct summing up of how I feel about the entire Moffatt era vs fans situation.


On topic, I loved the episode. One of those mental adventures that *only* this show can pull off.

 

[davejames]

For my money The 11th Hour, Vincent and the Doctor, The Doctor's Wife, The Girl who Waited and God Complex are as good as anything from the pre Smith era. And yeah only one of them's a Moffat tale, so what, the best episodes of the RTD era were rarely RTD episodes.

Agreed. I just rewatched Eleventh Hour for the first time in awhile, and it's an absolute marvel of an episode, with some of the most thrilling and inspired writing Moffat has ever done.

Certainly the Moffat era is a bit zanier than the previous one, with all the different ways he likes to play with time travel. But the cleverness of his storytelling still comes through as strong as ever. And I for one think it's fun as hell watching him experiment and play around with the standard storytelling format.

I feel sorry for those who just can't seem to get into it.

 

[Peacemaker]

Wouldn't the show be so much better now if, instead of the tone of Dinosaurs, we regularly got something of the tone of Blink, Doctor Dances, or Girl in the Fireplace?

No, but then I'm not a pretentious git who fancies himself a professional art critique capable of passing judgment on the show runner of a 49 year old cultural icon and hides his talent by wasting paragraphs trying to convince us poor plebeians here on a Star Trek message board instead of manning up and putting himself out there in much more visible publications. I've just been a fan of Doctor Who since I was 8 years old - that's about 35 years now, whose watched it in both the US and the UK, and is content to sit back and simply enjoy it and the immense variety it provides, whether it be Underworld and The Creature from the Pit or (Insert Name of Somebody Else's "Loser" or "Classic" here), and doesn't feel an obscene need to have his opinions validated by a group of complete strangers on the internet. while sounding like I need to get out of my parent's basement and get laid.

PS, I generally get my feelings of internet validation from Facebook or contributing to inane stories full of random humor in the Trek 5 and 7 word thingies here along with cooleddie74 and I have an ex-boyfriend who lives 4 hours away but we do occasionally snog because we both also do P90X, look the part as it were, and frankly are lot of fun as well as marvelous friends. Step away from the keyboard and live at little, Dude.

Are you talking about me? Where did that come from? That sounds a bit much. Did I hurt your feelings in some way?

I don't "fancy myself an art critic" - I said earlier in the thread that I critique art for a living, and that's true - I'm a lit prof. I specialize in science fiction. I'm married with two wonderful daughters, spend the vast majority of my time off the internet, (I've joined, maybe 3 or 4 threads in the last year or two; I don't have a Facebook or Twitter account), haven't slept in my parents' basement for several decades, and I do, indeed, have stuff written in "more visible publications." (My real name, believe it or not, is not Ubik.) But then again, we aren't talking about me, are we? Or anyone else. We're talking about a television show. If you're as old as you say you are, then you should know better than to make ad hominem attacks on people, or to assume you know anything about, as you say, "strangers on the internet." You'll notice I attacked nobody during the entire discussion. I have full respect for everyone, even if I can't agree with their aesthetic opinions. A little respect would be a lot more fun and...peaceful. Don't you think, "Peacemaker"?

Why, yes, yes, I am, although there was so tongue-in-cheek involved the first time out. And you can tell the (heterosexist?) wife that I'm not female and don't require my partner to speak for me on the internet.

You have actually leveled personal attacks in your endless chatter trying to convince us mere plebeians here of the rightness of your opinions to whit: mindless crap, lacking wit, full of nothing but cynicism (and that's just a handful of examples). Art criticism is, in my humble and plebeian opinion, largely an exercise in mirror-reading. There's no objective standard for your evaluations, so this comes from nothing more than your subjective perception, and when you call a writer and producer's work full of these things, yes, yes you are personally attacking that author / producer. So, in my humble yet correct opinion (TM), rather than hiding your expertise on the obscurity of a Star Trek message board, publish your review in one of your publications or interact with Mrs. Chibnall or Moffat. Ad homineum is not automatically fallacious. The ad hominem attack can sometimes refute the argument from authority, for a man’s credentials, or lack thereof, may be relevant to his expertise, or lack thereof. At the same time, there are incompetent PhDs as well as competent autodidacts. So, generally, you have to judge a position by the quality of the supporting arguments, and not the resume of the disputant or his opponent. All we have from you are descriptions and personal preferences. I judge them both (a) in need of supporting, objective argumentation, which has yet to be forthcoming and is therefore circular (b) and, given your expertise, better articulated to those who do or have, as your wife above notes, written and produced the episode, since you find them so full of these negatives.

And, before I put her on the ignore list with you.

We all know anyone who gets frustrated by failing to communicate anything in words and then goes ahead and attacks people personally they do not even know by making absurd comments may need a few lessons in behaviour.

That's cute. (A) You don't know me, (B) you, in your response, leveled a personal attack of your own, (C) by your own yardstick, that's an absurd comment reflective of your frustration and inability to communicate effectively (D) and by any standard that's a self-refuting comment, which gets us back to (C). I take it logic is not your forte either.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

And now, back to Doctor Who.

 

[Ghost Bones]

The Pirate Planet's brilliant.

 

[Pindar]

The Pirate Planet's brilliant.

It is, I think I will put it on my Sunday watch list.

 

[Starkers]

Being just a "bloody Yank", the "Mitchell and Webb" references were lost on me. I just thought they were meant to be comical in a Douglas Adams sense, like the assault robots Marvin encountered in the original radio series of Hitchhiker's Guide.

Thus, if Mitchell and Webb have any kind of "stigma" associated with them, I didn't catch it.

Sincerely,

Bill

I wouldn't say its stigma really, if it'd been announced beforehand I'm not sure there'd have been the sort of angry reactions that came out when it was announced Catherine Tate was gonna be a companion. People do/don't like them but they are aknowleged as a fine pair of commedians. Pesonally I'm a big fan and have been for a long time.

Oh, I am very well aware that Moffat wrote better episodes before he ran the show. Perhaps that's part of why I find his tenure so offensive - because I know he's sooo much better than this; because I know he's written 3 or 4 of the best damned episodes the franchise has ever seen, (man, Blink and Doctor Dances were good). and yet he chooses now, as showrunner, to give us this zany nonsense instead. To write down to his audience as if they were all hyperactive 8 year-olds is an intellectual choice on his part, rather than a limitation in his skills as a writer, and that is precisely why there is absolutely no excuse for it, and why it makes me so angry. I'm glad you brought that up. Wouldn't the show be so much better now if, instead of the tone of Dinosaurs, we regularly got something of the tone of Blink, Doctor Dances, or Girl in the Fireplace? I know the writing over 2 seasons couldn't sustain that level of quality, but at least the tone, the approach, the courage to go to those emotional places, to ask those interesting questions and actually deal honestly with the answers....this discussion is making me nostalgic. Honestly, don't you guys miss the old Moffat?

Oh, and Mirrorball Man, as for my stating my opinions as objective fact - that's just the way I argue. Pay no attention. If you want to perceive "I think" before every of my statements, that's fine with me.

But you couldn't sustain Blink every week, and don't forget, when it was commisioned nobody expected Blink to be a classic, it was written to fill a particular slot, to tell a story sans the Doctor for the most part.

And again you keep going on about asking difficult questions and going to emotional places. The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances is effectively a love conquers all story, the same as Closing Time.

TGITFP is about lost opportunities and, effectively, a girl who waited...same as, oh the 11th Hour, the girl who waited and a whole host of other Smith episodes.

Blink is a timey/wimey parlour trick of an episode, same as The Big Bang.

For my money The 11th Hour, Vincent and the Doctor, The Doctor's Wife, The Girl who Waited and God Complex are as good as anything from the pre Smith era. And yeah only one of them's a Moffat tale, so what, the best episodes of the RTD era were rarely RTD episodes.

I think people forget as well that Moffat used to write one/two episodes a year, and didn't have the added stress of being show runner. Whatever your job try cranking out 3,4,5 times as much work and maintining the quality (and yes I fully appreciate that he doesn't have to run sherlock as well but RTD didn't have to juggle SJA and torwchwood, and Whedon didn't have to juggle Buffy Angel and Firefly).

If you reduce every episode to one high-concept line, sure, most episodes sound the same. But you and I both know that The Doctor Dances is far more than a "love conquers all" story. It has a very well-conceived London-during-the-Blitz setting, which the production staff do their darndest to make as realistic as possible. It has a truly heartbreaking and heartwarming mother-son relationship at the centre of it. It has a slow pace, and takes its time with characters, even the small ones. The Doctor himself has a fantastic character arc throughout. The kids with the gas masks are intensely effective and memorable. The whole thing just screams class, and originality, and tension, and emotion - it's a great hour of science fiction. Nowhere does it wink at the audience or act zany for no reason. There is no sense that it's pandering to a particular demographic. It's telling its story slowly, confidently, and with a lot of heart.

I think the point is, with this particular era, my beef is less with the actual plots (the one-sentence synopsis, say), and more with the storytelling approach, the attitude, the tone, and the pace. Even the basic plot of Dinosaurs was great. A guy who throws an entire crew into space to steal dinosaurs has the potential to raise lots of tension and drama. It was the attitude of the episode that I found so off-putting, and the fact that its interesting plot was used as a set-up for more zany running scenes, rather than an end unto itself.

I could give the same kind of response to the other episodes you mentioned. Blink is obviously more than a timey-wimey parlour trick. It's sad, very sad, and it's about the nature of time, and how our entire lives and relationships are basically at the whim of where and when we are in time - it offers a suggestion that we're all trapped, and have far less choice in our lives than we think. That's my reading, anyway. You may have a different one. But that's the point - the episodes can sustain a critical analysis, and people could actually disagree about the themes, because they are presented with subtlety and ambivalence, and aren't screamed out at you as often. There was a confidence in the material and the premise before, and a tone, and a mature attitude, during those earlier episodes that are largely absent now, I think. Not all "love conquers all" episodes are created the same.

I think you misinterpreted what I was saying. It isn’t that I don’t think Blink is fantastic, it is, one of the top five of Nu Who episodes in my opinion, I was questioning your assertion that Blink somehow has a deeper meaning lacking in Moffat’s more recent efforts.

You’re completely right, Blink is very sad in part, and is about lost opportunities and also about how people can make the best of horrible situations. What I don’t understand is how you can miss the similarly deeper meaning behind something like Big Bang, in fact the entire of the 5th series?

From the 11th Hour onwards the entire series is about a whole host of things. It’s about the loss of childhood innocence, it’s about running away from your responsibilities, about being afraid of growing up and clinging to your childhood to forestall that process of growing up, and it all comes together in the Big Bang where Amy understands that she can grow up, can marry Rory, and yet still hold onto her childhood. A great message for a show aimed at people of all ages, a show that once had a Doctor proclaim that there was no point growing up if you couldn’t be childish some of the time. And as beautiful as the moment between Sally and the old version of the copper is, the Doctor’s fond farewell to Amy before he goes off into oblivion tugs my heartstrings just as much.

And it’s about love, and about loving someone even if you can’t be together (Rory guards the Pandorica for 2000 years) about loving someone even if you don’t remember them (Amy’s tears for Rory in Vincent and the Doctor). You claim Moffat Who isn’t about anything, when it’s about the girl who waited, the girl who’s still waiting, and oh, look, this deeper meaning is yet again evident in Dinos in space! It’s clear that Amy is still torn. Part of her wants to snip the ties that bind her to the Doctor, whilst part of her doesn’t. She wants to have her cake and eat it, that’s what she’s wanted all along, but it’s becoming clear that she can’t have both lives. Hence the fact that at the start they complain it’d been a while since the Doctor dropped round, yet at the end they want to go home.

It’s actually amazing how much is packed into this ep. The on-going story of the girl who waited, a story about a man going too far (depending on your point of view), hell it even introduces us to Brian and gives him a self-contained little arc!

And by the way, you never answered my question from earlier, how is Moffat’s silly bollocks any different from RTD’s?

Re The Empty child/The Doctor Dances, I’ll give you that, a fab story!