Anyone else bored of "Elizabethan Era" episodes?
- Thread starter thinker
- Start date
What does any of this mean?
I believe so, although there are several other "period" pieces such as "The Unquiet Dead", "Tooth and Claw", "The Girl in the Fireplace", and "The Fires of Pompeii". Those however are decidedly not "Elizabethan".
I'm still trying to figure out when is the "Butler-esque period". that's not meant to be mocking, thinker. I genuinely don't know what period in time you're referring to with that term.
I would like to go back to historical eras, but PLEASE, can we just have a simple historical story? Every event in Earth's history doesn't have to have a CGI monster lurking around in the background.
When I think Butlers, I think Edwardian (Upstairs Downstairs and so forth), and there's only been one Edwardian Who story ever (Horror of Fang Rock, which has no butlers in it).
But it's Doctor Who, it's been that way since the mid-sixties. The chances of having a straight forward historical story are remote.
My Teenage/Chav/other form of lower life form is on the blink at the moment but I think this is the jist of the statement Thinker is making!
I have no problem with The Doctor going to the past, but please would he refrain from heading to a period of time that I personally find boring. In all seriousness I would like that as I can not be arsed.
As I said, my translator is off, but from asking my younger brother, this pretty much sums up the original garbled post.
Yeah man I like totally hate my historical drama being diluted by science fiction tropes. Like, y'know, extra-terrestrials jumping out of disappearing police boxes and saving the day and stuff. Totally ruins it for me, namsay?
Maybe he means like something you'd see on Masterpiece Theater which would apply to the settings of a lot of those episodes (outside Pompeii) and maybe extends to "The Unicorn and The Wasp" and "Human Nature/Family of Blood".
If the stories are strong I have no problem with period pieces. Remember that one of DW's original mandates is to include historical-based stories, so if anything we could probably stand to see more, and I wouldn't mind seeing a non-SF-based storyline like they used to do from time to time in the Hartnell/Troughton eras.
The BBC wrote the book on how to do costume dramas for TV. I love to see them do things like Girl in the Fireplace where they can have a little fun with the format. Someone there is probably wishing they'd been able to get the rights to Pride and Prejudice and Zombies...
Alex
The BBC wrote the book on how to do costume dramas for TV. I love to see them do things like Girl in the Fireplace where they can have a little fun with the format. Someone there is probably wishing they'd been able to get the rights to Pride and Prejudice and Zombies...
Alex
Actually the last one was in 1982, it was called Black Orchid.
And that one was the only one since The Highlanders, all the way back in 1966, unfortunately.
There could be some fantastic historicals, however, they all require one of the companions changing or trying to change something. Or falling in love, which doesn't really work that well in a one-hour show (see: The Myth Makers). That could get old quickly. A two-parter every couple of years or so would be fantastic, though.
I would love to see true historicals again, but I know the likelihood of that happening is slim to none. Marco Polo, The Aztecs, The Reign of Terror, and The Crusade are some of my favorite First Doctor serials. The Black Orchid is also a lot of fun.
I remember reading an interview with Eric Saward where he said that the episodes that got the best ratings/audience response were those that featured aliens in a recognizable environment-- Earth's past. It makes sense; Doctor Who's strength is the juxtaposition of the mundane with the fantastic (a Yeti on the loo in Tooting Bec and all that), so why do a generic time travel story without any fantastic (excepting the TARDIS) elements if you don't have to?
Similar threads
