I would have preferred a female galifrayian being introduced into the show and playing off the Doctor. Than eventually getting her own show either as a traveling time lord or maybe an all together different mission from what the Doctor pursues. Oh well Lost Chances.
There was nothing fan wanky at all since Jodie came on board--at least not that I have seen. Fan service is a good thing and Doctor Who was always great at it. The right amount, but not too much. Their 50th was brilliant. But this? They absolutely were going for wokeness. When you refer to being a woman as "an upgrade," that's wokeness. The preachy and over the top episodes were, well, I guess uninspired and hollow are fair adjectives. There is no reason to make the Doctor a woman OTHER than to be woke and pander to those that demanded it. It happened. And after 2 seasons of watching terrible television, it's time to end the run until the show decides to entertain rather than preach. For me, that will at least be the regeneration.
I doubt series 13 will get any better. Series 12 started with promise but that didn't last long. And the preachiness did get worse... There are a lot of critiques of series 12's finale as being claimed to be using excess in pandering to a distinct audience with fanservice, citing most casual audiences wouldn't care about her home planet (much less it being invaded) and the rest of it. I fail to see how that is an invalid claim. Additionally, I will concede that I may have conflated "fanwank" with "fanservice". Additionally, maybe new fans that are unaware of Gallifrey having been invaded and/or destroyed (and/or referenced) umpteen times already, even a slim handful of years prior to Chibnall taking over. Not to mention her wearing a fez (in an attempt to appeal to the Smith fans), bringing back old aliens (which will appeal mostly to established fans, that's just how it is)... ...and, you bet fan service can be a good thing. When deftly used. New fans remain established if the lore is improved upon. Look at Rassilon. Started out as an empty name. Was shown as a figure of mystery and enigmatric awe in "The Five Doctors". As well as taking an established figure (Borusa), letting him be shown after a regeneration and then going mad. So far, so good and with development but I'll get back to Rassilon: He was reduced to a generic thug with stunt casting and lame Star Wars prequel-inspired sets a couple decades later. Fanservice to another franchise at face value, at least to me, isn't appealing. The 50th... there's Tom Baker in it, Capaldi a few episodes early in a genuinely awesome twist moment, and a stupid Hollywood-wannabe stunt with helicopter set on modern day Earth that NuWHO is shamelessly renowned for. It probably had more going on to it with all the incarnations saving Gallifrey and all... The Doctor has often made shade/sarcastic quips/etc about previous incarnations after regenerating. That said, I agree that the word "upgrade" is as hackneyed as it is crass since the Doctor is not an automobile having shiny new spark plugs installed. Or a Cyberman since that's their catchphrase since 2006. But that's just Chibnall's scripting again, drawing by numbers. Even his Silurian storyline from the 11th Doctor was an uninspired retread compilation of Pertwee's greatest hits. I do agree - entertaining is first. Preaching helps if there's consistency, and Stubagful and scores of other youtube channels have pointed out the massive scale of inconsistencies in Chibnall's tenure. To a point that's almost comedic. Stubagful did once mention he went through educational channels and also doesn't come across as one of the "hate channels" or whatever those are called.
Let them finish out. One more season to get it right. They made the mistake that they always do when there's something "different" about a new Doctor. They underestimated Jodi's ability to carry the show and loaded her up with too many companions. Yaz did well this season, but she really didn't have a place in S1. Would have been cool to keep the Ryan/Graham dynamic. Chibnall did well with the Timeless Child reveal. Fantasic. Get rid of the baggage of Gallifrey. There's a reason why RTD and Grand Moff Steve never did much with Gallifrey. It drags down a character who should be a rogue and a runner. Chibby gave us a solved mystery so we don't have to care anymore, and he wiped them off the story. Fantastic. Oh, and we got a new mystery in it's place. From where, exactly, does the Timeless Child hail? He made a missstep by bringing back the Master. Sacha did a good job, but it really undercut the Missy redemption arc. Oh, and Ashad was a BRILLIANT villain. I've always wondered that some folks don't volunteer for Borg/Cyberman assimilation. It's free immortality. Not my cup of tea, but it has to be appealing to at least a few people, right? Chibby never really contributed anything of value to the show before he was showrunner. Like RTD had his down spots, but he was overall much better than people give him credit for. Even rewatching S3 I saw far more standout moments than I remembered on first watch.Moffatt is good when he's a "special treat" that gives one fun episode a season. But the MOFF cannot sustain a story arc. Once Chibby finishes up, I have no idea who could replace him. Like everyone said here, there's no one who's really stepped up to the plate. The good episodes from Chibbo's reign were done by him. THe best one is "Resolution." Maybe Maxine Alderton, who wrote "The Haunting of Villa Diodati?" That said, I'm assuming that the best part of the episode, Ashad, was created by Chibnall, since he was integral to the season's arc and must have been conceived at the outset.
I found that the finale was a massive level of arrogance on the part of Chibnall and these producers. Unless they walk it back and completely undo it, they just retconned the entire series. This is not what the show was meant to be from the start. To have the Doctor originate like that basically makes you wonder why he wasn't under much closer watch. Given the historical importance of that particular "time lord," if he really is one, you would think he could never have got away with stealing the TARDIS and doing what he does. It would like saying Lex Luthor was really a Kryptonian all along. Or that Krypton never exploded. Might make an interesting alternate story, but not in the main continuity. I watched Season 12 hoping that the awful Season 11 woke/preachy attitude would go away. I hoped that the ratings decline and vocal fan hatred would wake them up. The early seasons of the remake were so damn good. The writers were so talented. But I was disappointed. So I think I will skip Season 13--at least in this first run. I will gauge fan reaction, but why put myself through it? That finale basically needs to be reversed, and Chibnall and Whitaker have to go.
It's Chibnall's to retcon. He owns the creative direction of the show. Any other take is just plain wrong. Who cares? Originalism is stupid when applied to constitutions, doubly so when someone tries to make the same argument about a kids TV show from the 60s. It isn't and they won't. Perhaps this show isn't for you.
So it’s selfish to point out that Chiball isn’t going anywhere and that, if the writing isn’t to your liking, perhaps another show might be more to your tastes. But it’s NOT selfish to stamp your feet and demand that the show conform exactly to your desires. Cool.
Absolutely not. Demanding more quality control from your favorite show is not unreasonable, and arguing for improved storytelling is never a bad thing. Telling fans that their opinions don't matter because you disagree with them is as much entitlement as you think telling it to them is. Why would I watch another show? I love Doctor Who. I hate Chibndale is doing to it. I despise the Timeless Children reveal, and I'm gonna say so until my throat is cut off. Telling me YOUR stance is better is fucking selfish, and arrogant too.
I didn’t tell you that your opinion didn’t matter. I told you that, despite whatever tantrum you’re currently having, Chris Chibnall is not leaving the show. You clearly don’t. Doctor Who is currently what Chibnall makes it. You appear to be confused and arguing with someone who isn’t currently commenting in this thread. Perhaps take some time to actually read the posts above and try again. Or don’t, entirely up to you.
Too bad. If there ever was a showrunner that deserved to be fired by the BBC, it should've been him. Doctor Who isn't Chibnuts' property.
Showrunners come and go. It takes a certain level of arrogance to do what Chibnall did, as well as disrespect to all that came before him. He didn't create Doctor Who, so he's just on borrowed time. Why do Doctor Who if you are just going to change 50 plus years of canon? To an extent, you have a point, but there's a difference between evolution and flat out changing the whole thing. This is more like a repeal of a constitution and making a new one. This is like saying Superman was never a Kryptonian. If you take away what the show really is, it's something completely different. At that point, make a new show. I can't argue with that. This show isn't for me. I prefer Doctor Who. This isn't Doctor Who anymore. That's why I have no plans on watching it until Chibnall and Whitaker are gone. And clearly, judging by the abysmal ratings both in viewers and in reviews, I'm not alone. Last I checked, audience satisfaction is the most important thing. Under Davies and Moffat, the show was immensely popular both in ratings and reviews. Since the fans are the people the show is made for, it's not arrogant at all to want quality.
I wonder. Did you think the same when during The First Doctor run that they shifted from him being a human to being an unknown alien race? (Not 100% sure where that turn happened but I assume it was The Time Meddler) Did you think the same of Robert Holmes when he introduced the regeneration limit? Did you think the same of Andrew Cartmel when he introduced a darker presence in The Doctor's history and nature (and I'm only talking about on screen)? Did you think the same of Matthew Jacobs when he introduced the idea of The Doctor being half-human on his mother? (Oh, what's that? It got ignored you say...) Did you think the same of Russell T. Davies when he killed off all of the Time Lords in an unseen Time War? Did you think the same of Chris Chibnall when he cast Jodie Whittaker as The Doctor? ...and so on. Doctor Who has always evolved in its nature, constantly changing, frequently contradicting its own past. That's why so many fans, myself included, have often stressed the fact Doctor Who has no canon and the loosest of continuity. This is not the end of the world or even the end of the show. It's just the current form. It, too, will change. I guarantee that in ten years, we will look back and think "Well, that was interesting how that played out. Now look where we are." Well, at least us more reasonable fans, I suppose.
Hell, some of these revelations about the Doctor's origins and the Timeless Child aren't entirely dissimilar to what would have been revealed about the Doctor's origins had the Cartmel Master Plan come to fruition.
EXCEPT, the Cartmel Masterplan hinted at a secret history. Remembrance of the Daleks didn't stop the action/plot to have the Doctor tell Ace all about the Looms and how he's the Loom of the Other or whatever. It didn't equivocate the Doctor as a rape victim (which is especially bad that it occured during a female incarnation of the Doctor) and totally unaware of his larger destiny until the Master found out about it. It didn't say the Doctor would forever be immortal because he's probably a million incarnations old by now. It didn't make the Doctor the progenitor of his own race, the Chosen One of the Time Lords, and worst of all, it made William Hartnell not the original Doctor. I would argue all the above is worse than anything Cartmel did that ended up on-screen. Or audio - heck, its only been printed in a single book that's been out-of-print forever and only die-hard fans like myself could obsess over. But overall, yeah, not even close.
That's about 40 years before I started watching. There's a difference between a show evolving in its early years and a monster change that completely overhauls a decades old franchise. Example--James R. Kirk to James T. Kirk, or the Trills. A bad example would be the sloppiness of Flashback. Or maybe in something that never happened, making Superman NOT a Kryptonian. Not all of your examples are quite the same. There's a difference between evolving and completely blowing up the premise of the show.
The only difference is you don't like the Timeless Child revelations, or you don't like Chibnall or Whittaker. Or any combination of the three. There's nothing about the Timeless Child that "blows up the show's premise" anymore than any one of other revelations and retcons in the show's fifty year history.
I would felt a lot better about the whole thing if it didn't feel, I don't know, half arsed. I really wanted to like it.
In all honesty, yes, the execution could have been better, at least to the extent they could have presented things better than what was essentially a narrated Wiki article like we got in the episode. But there was nothing wrong with the idea itself, and it certainly does not destroy fifty years of continuity and canon. Hell, Doctor Who never really had continuity or canon to begin with. Or to quote Terrance Dicks, "continuity is only whatever I can remember."