I'll preface this by saying I'm in North America where we've only seen the first episode of Season 5, so if you want to discuss plot points, please keep them to that episode, thanks.
One of the more bizarre and, frankly, puzzling criticisms/comments I've seen about the new season is the claim that it seems to be aiming for a younger audience. Aside from the fact it's been considered a children's programme since 1963, I saw no indication of it aiming any lower in age than RTD did. In fact between the Kissogram schtick with Amy, and the Internet porn joke, and Amy getting her look on as Eleven stripped down, it's in some ways aiming a little more adult than usual.
OK, so we had a kid featured in some of the early scenes. And we have a younger actor playing the Doctor. So what? And yes I know Moffat has directly talked about the show appealing to kids, but so did RTD and Eccleston and Tennant and John Nathan Turner and all the others. The only Doctor Who-related show that is explicitly not intended for kids is Torchwood. And even then they started putting out family friendly edits of the first 2 seasons you'll recall.
I know for a fact there are those who want their SF to be nothing but darkness. And I loved nuBSG, so there is lots of good work out there. There are also those who want their SF to be more of the telenovella type, with dozens of interlinked episodes over many years -- Lost comes to mind. Again, fair enough. To those people Doctor Who must be unwatchable, or only a few steps removed from Rocket Robin Hood.
And there are those who remain stuck in the stereotype that unless it's got "Star Trek" in the title, SF in general is for kids anyway. They probably just watched Doctor Who because of Tennant.
So taking away all of that, someone please educate me as to exactly why some people seem to have it stuck in their head that Moffat is aiming the show at a younger audience than RTD? Because based on not only the first episode, but numerous scenes from upcoming episodes that I've seen, I'm not seeing a difference, not in that way.
Alex
One of the more bizarre and, frankly, puzzling criticisms/comments I've seen about the new season is the claim that it seems to be aiming for a younger audience. Aside from the fact it's been considered a children's programme since 1963, I saw no indication of it aiming any lower in age than RTD did. In fact between the Kissogram schtick with Amy, and the Internet porn joke, and Amy getting her look on as Eleven stripped down, it's in some ways aiming a little more adult than usual.
OK, so we had a kid featured in some of the early scenes. And we have a younger actor playing the Doctor. So what? And yes I know Moffat has directly talked about the show appealing to kids, but so did RTD and Eccleston and Tennant and John Nathan Turner and all the others. The only Doctor Who-related show that is explicitly not intended for kids is Torchwood. And even then they started putting out family friendly edits of the first 2 seasons you'll recall.
I know for a fact there are those who want their SF to be nothing but darkness. And I loved nuBSG, so there is lots of good work out there. There are also those who want their SF to be more of the telenovella type, with dozens of interlinked episodes over many years -- Lost comes to mind. Again, fair enough. To those people Doctor Who must be unwatchable, or only a few steps removed from Rocket Robin Hood.
And there are those who remain stuck in the stereotype that unless it's got "Star Trek" in the title, SF in general is for kids anyway. They probably just watched Doctor Who because of Tennant.
So taking away all of that, someone please educate me as to exactly why some people seem to have it stuck in their head that Moffat is aiming the show at a younger audience than RTD? Because based on not only the first episode, but numerous scenes from upcoming episodes that I've seen, I'm not seeing a difference, not in that way.
Alex
