• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

CURSE YOU, STEVEN MOFFAT!

JRoss

Commodore
Commodore
I just finished watching A Scandal in Belgravia, and I have to wonder why Doctor Who cannot be that good?

It was a masterpiece, the best installment of Sherlock yet. I truly did not guess any of the surprises, and I'm very good at puzzling out the plots of almost any mystery I watch or read.

All of Series 6 my wife and I would speculate on Doctor Who. I told her, "River can't be Amy's daughter, it's too obvious," episodes in advance, I said "'The Question' seriously will not be 'Doctor Who," as that is too obvious."

Time and time again I was disappointed. I thought that maybe I had expected too much from Mr. Moffat, but A Scandal in Belgravia proves Moffat's ability. For whatever reason he simply is not bring his best to Doctor Who.
 
Well when you count this episode of "Sherlock" as episode 4 the second episode wasn't really good.

And we have two more episodes to go. Who knows if they're even good.

I'm basically looking at the big picture.



Although I do have to comment on Moffat's "Sherlock" and "Doctor Who" cliffhanger being resolved in the most simplistic ways.


-How will the doctor survive? Easy a robot suit

-How will Sherlock survive? A phone call to Moriarty takes top priority.
 
The second episode, The Blind Banker, wasn't written by Moffat. A Study in Pink and A Scandal in Belgravia both were written by Moffat.
 
I just finished watching A Scandal in Belgravia, and I have to wonder why Doctor Who cannot be that good?

It was a masterpiece, the best installment of Sherlock yet. I truly did not guess any of the surprises, and I'm very good at puzzling out the plots of almost any mystery I watch or read.

All of Series 6 my wife and I would speculate on Doctor Who. I told her, "River can't be Amy's daughter, it's too obvious," episodes in advance, I said "'The Question' seriously will not be 'Doctor Who," as that is too obvious."

Time and time again I was disappointed. I thought that maybe I had expected too much from Mr. Moffat, but A Scandal in Belgravia proves Moffat's ability. For whatever reason he simply is not bring his best to Doctor Who.

To each their own, but unless and until Daleks start battering down Baker Street and Moriarty start intoning "You...will...obey...me" you can't really compare Sherlock with Doctor Who. In my opinion Moffat has done outstanding work in both series and I've yet to be disappointed in anything he's done for Doctor Who.

Also, let's also put things in perspective. A Scandal in Belgravia is not an original story, being based on Conan Doyle's A Scandal in Bohemia. Discounting the special case of A Christmas Carol, I don't see any indication of The Wedding of River Song or The Impossible Astronaut being based on any short stories by authors dead nearly a century.

And as far as any sort of telegraphing how the Doctor was going to survive, the season provided several possibilities besides the robot suit - the gangers being the obvious one that everyone assumed. So it wasn't that predictable (indeed of the possible options the robot suit was the most difficult to pull off). River being Amy's kid was not as obvious as you would think, if you pay attention to the interviews and all the online speculation that went in other directions.

Alex
 
Let's put things in another perspective. Sherlock is a deviation from Doyle's canon. They've put in enough twists to keep things interesting. And my point was made about a certain plot point, which I won't reveal here due to spoilers, but which would have been impossible for Doyle to write, as the technology required was decades off.

River being Amy's kid was obvious enough for me to figure it. So was the Tesselecta. Not only the plot, but the characterization. I actually care for Sherlock, John, Mrs. Hudson and Molly Hooper. I even cared about Irene. Contrast this with River and Amy. Can't be moved to feel for them, despite even Alex Kingston's fine acting. They have no realness.
 
IMO, he really needs to leave DW and devote all his time to Sherlock so that we can get an entire season worth of episodes instead of just three measly movies.
 
IMO, he really needs to leave DW and devote all his time to Sherlock so that we can get an entire season worth of episodes instead of just three measly movies.
You're not going to get more episodes if Moffat worked on just Sherlock. The reason for three 90-minutes probably isn't because of workload duties but probably because of budget and creative reasons. Frankly, I much rather have three awesome 90-minute episodes instead of 13 episodes in varying range of quality.
 
Effectively Moffat writes on 90 minute episode of Sherlock per series, as opposed to a minimum of four 45 minute episodes of Who (plus a Christmas special). And people just don't get the fact that part of the reason Sherlock can be so good is purely because the series is only 3 tv movies long!

And never mind Moffat, I'd rather Gatiss wrote Who as well as he did Sherlock, cos even Moffat's poorest eps tend to be entertaining at least.
 
Not sure? Why not? He strikes me as possibly being a bit pretentious and a proper ac-tor but I quite like his work (I'm glad he is Sherlock and Smith is the Doctor though.) He has quite a good range judging by the things I've seen him in, although his characters do often appear a bit cold (another reason he's a better Holmes that the Doctor, Smith is much warmer)
 
You're not going to get more episodes if Moffat worked on just Sherlock. The reason for three 90-minutes probably isn't because of workload duties but probably because of budget and creative reasons.

I suspect there won't be any more episodes, period, with Cumblebunny being big in demand in Hollywood (and just taking the main villain role in JJ Trek 2).

Which is probably why they did the three "big" stories in this Series.
 
Not to mention Watson spending a lot of time in New Zealand!

That said if its only three tv movies every year or so they might still be interested...

Let's put things in another perspective. Sherlock is a deviation from Doyle's canon. They've put in enough twists to keep things interesting. And my point was made about a certain plot point, which I won't reveal here due to spoilers, but which would have been impossible for Doyle to write, as the technology required was decades off.

River being Amy's kid was obvious enough for me to figure it. So was the Tesselecta. Not only the plot, but the characterization. I actually care for Sherlock, John, Mrs. Hudson and Molly Hooper. I even cared about Irene. Contrast this with River and Amy. Can't be moved to feel for them, despite even Alex Kingston's fine acting. They have no realness.

But if his escape had been something left field that hadn't been telegraphed earlier like the Tesselecta/Ganger/the two Amys episode, people would have moaned that Moffat just pulled it out of his bottom. He isn't perfect but sometimes he just can't win no matter what he does. Compared to the Doctor Donna Metacrisis baloney the Tesselecta at least makes some sense!

As for the true identity of River, well that was always going to be a dissapointment because there were, again, only so many options short of Moffat making some ramdomness up, and you know what, even though I knew beforehand (thanks internet) the bit where River said it to Amy still sent shivers down my spine.
 
Last edited:
Am I the only one in the world who doesn't like Bendedict Cucumberpatch?

Yes. Very probably. :p


I suspect there won't be any more episodes, period, with Cumblebunny being big in demand in Hollywood (and just taking the main villain role in JJ Trek 2).

Which is probably why they did the three "big" stories in this Series.

Thats my biggest fear as well, that both actors are going to catch the Hollywood bug. Good for the actors, but terrible for those of us who love good tv.
 
I doubt we will ever see another series - both actors are now commanding far more than the BBC can pay for far less work.
 
You do know some times Actors will take a lower pay for a role they enjoy playing or would like to play.

Plus it also depends if they are contracted to do another series.
 
You do know some times Actors will take a lower pay for a role they enjoy playing or would like to play.

Plus it also depends if they are contracted to do another series.

And Cumberbatch and Freeman might just *gasp* like working on smaller projects like "Sherlock"

-Do one big Hollywood movie

-Go back to the England and film three more Sherlock episodes.


Cumberbatch has "The Hobbit" "War Horse" and later "Star Trek"

Freeman has "The Hobbit"

It should keep both busy till the end of next summer.
 
Well I liked the new Doctor Who when it first came out here in 06 but they really jumped the shark with the storylines they came up with afterwards. I like to think the David Tennant Doctor is still out there somewhere travelling with Rose Tyler.
 
You do know some times Actors will take a lower pay for a role they enjoy playing or would like to play.

Plus it also depends if they are contracted to do another series.

And Cumberbatch and Freeman might just *gasp* like working on smaller projects like "Sherlock"

-Do one big Hollywood movie

-Go back to the England and film three more Sherlock episodes.


Cumberbatch has "The Hobbit" "War Horse" and later "Star Trek"

Freeman has "The Hobbit"

It should keep both busy till the end of next summer.
It's my hope that they love making 'Sherlock' as much as we love watching it and they'd do it not for money or bigger fame but because they actually like it. It certainly hasn't harmed their careers so far. But I imagine the chance for seeing them in the likes of Doctor Who as a villain has passed with them taking on these bigger movies.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top