• 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!

Spoilers Hot Take: Chibnall didn't obliterate Doctor Who's continuity. He actually fixed it.

I like some Doctors more than others, and I'm not a great fan of Whittaker sometimes, but irrespective of how I feel about particular Doctors I'd never suggest they aren't the Doctor. I may not particularly like Six, but he's still the Doctor, and so is Whittaker and I haven't seen her do anything out of character with what other Doctors have done. Yes she's a trifle more passive at times, in the same way some Doctors have been more gung ho.
 
jaime said:
What can I say, I like my chosen ones with an American accent, and my adventurers who choose to do good to speak the queens English. Or something like that.
I would prefer if neither ran their fingers through their blonde hair whilst sending people to Nazi death camps.
I do not recognise anything of the character that was extant for fifty plus years below the very surface details applied to this iteration, and the landscape of fiction is all the poorer for it.
Click to expand...

In the words of Colin Baker, she IS the Doctor... whether you like it or not.

You can hold whatever opinions on Jodie's era that you want, but those opinions are not absolute.

The Timeless Child lore is just one more thread in the huge tapestry that makes up the Doctor Who mythos, and you can either take it or leave it. However, it ultimately doesn't matter whether you accept the Timeless Child lore or not; it's still valid regardless.
 
Starkers said:
I like some Doctors more than others, and I'm not a great fan of Whittaker sometimes, but irrespective of how I feel about particular Doctors I'd never suggest they aren't the Doctor. I may not particularly like Six, but he's still the Doctor, and so is Whittaker and I haven't seen her do anything out of character with what other Doctors have done. Yes she's a trifle more passive at times, in the same way some Doctors have been more gung ho.
Click to expand...

Never cruel or cowardly.
There are bits where other Doctors have stories where they let this idea down. (Capaldi with the child in the ice was a new low at the time) but none so consistently badly as what happened under Chibnall.
This Doctor is cruel.
This Doctor is cowardly.
 
dupersuper said:
How so??
Click to expand...

Spiders.
Nazis.
Cancer conversations. (Or lack thereof)
Death Particle.
Daleks v Daleks *as a plan*

They are the first things that pop to mind. They have nothing to do with the actress portraying The Doctor, or what she’s got under the (badly designed) clothes, and everything to do with bad writing that attempts to emulate surface characteristics without getting the ‘why’. Bad, bad writing. Even if it wasn’t Doctor Who, someone should have thought about ‘hey, we have a nice blonde woman handing an Asian or two over to the Nazi’s in this episode, can we maybe not do that?’

What this means in terms of continuity, is that the character — usually by the standards of the day in which it is being written — is consistent in key areas. Their inherent Doctorishness. It lacks in Chibnall’s writing and under his aegis. When the Ninth said ‘Coward every time’ he wasn’t being cowardly. When the exact same moment was aped in TC, she was cowardly.

There’s that 5 hour analysis on YouTube which is an excellent watch, and pretty much impossible to disagree with.

Edit:
And thinking about it, the spiders always had a neat little two minute fix that would have been clever. The Doctor just has to take them away to live out their lives somewhere giant spiders can be… if only there had been some kind of clue in the shows past that could have suggested something… probably some obscure little line or something no-one had heard of to do with Spiders, on a Planet. The number 3 keeps springing to mind for some reason. Anyway, this is Chibnall, he would never attempt to depend on some thing from the seventies on which to hang anything…
 
Last edited:
I disagree on the spiders. When Graham asks if they're just going to leave the spider, the Doctor responds "absolutely not", implying that she had some sort of plan beyond letting the spider suffocate. But then Robertson comes in, shoots the spider, and it doesn't matter anyway.
 
jaime said:
Never cruel or cowardly.
There are bits where other Doctors have stories where they let this idea down. (Capaldi with the child in the ice was a new low at the time) but none so consistently badly as what happened under Chibnall.
This Doctor is cruel.
This Doctor is cowardly.
Click to expand...
jaime said:
Spiders.
Nazis.
Cancer conversations. (Or lack thereof)
Death Particle.
Daleks v Daleks *as a plan*

They are the first things that pop to mind. They have nothing to do with the actress portraying The Doctor, or what she’s got under the (badly designed) clothes, and everything to do with bad writing that attempts to emulate surface characteristics without getting the ‘why’. Bad, bad writing. Even if it wasn’t Doctor Who, someone should have thought about ‘hey, we have a nice blonde woman handing an Asian or two over to the Nazi’s in this episode, can we maybe not do that?’

What this means in terms of continuity, is that the character — usually by the standards of the day in which it is being written — is consistent in key areas. Their inherent Doctorishness. It lacks in Chibnall’s writing and under his aegis. When the Ninth said ‘Coward every time’ he wasn’t being cowardly. When the exact same moment was aped in TC, she was cowardly.

There’s that 5 hour analysis on YouTube which is an excellent watch, and pretty much impossible to disagree with.

Edit:
And thinking about it, the spiders always had a neat little two minute fix that would have been clever. The Doctor just has to take them away to live out their lives somewhere giant spiders can be… if only there had been some kind of clue in the shows past that could have suggested something… probably some obscure little line or something no-one had heard of to do with Spiders, on a Planet. The number 3 keeps springing to mind for some reason. Anyway, this is Chibnall, he would never attempt to depend on some thing from the seventies on which to hang anything…
Click to expand...

doctor-who-graham.gif
 
Last edited:
jaime said:
There’s that 5 hour analysis on YouTube which is an excellent watch, and pretty much impossible to disagree with.
Click to expand...

Not sure I have much time for anyone who could spend five hours whinging about a TV show, or anyone who'd watch someone whinge about a TV show for 5 hours. Way better things to do with my time.

Whittaker's Doctor is poorly written much of the time, but I've yet to see her do anything manifestly worse than other Doctors (Six literally murders Shockeye with poison, Ten imprisons his enemies for eternity in mirrors/scarecrows/black holes, Eleven nuked David Bradley, Twelve possibly throws robot man to his death, and as you stated Twelve is also showed zero empathy over the death of a child, and lets not forget the First Doctor being moments away from caving someone's skull in)

I'm not sure getting Daleks to kill other Daleks is a terrible thing, I mean isn't that exactly when Ten, Eleven and the War Doctor did in DotD?

Unmasking the Master was very clunky, but at the end of the day A/It's the Master and she knows he always escapes and B/The Nazi's had an actual Indian Legion, I think they'd be more concerned that the officer wasn't who he claimed to be than his race. Bad optics but, you know, fictional character and all that.

As for the awkward cancer conversation, this is the Doctor! I've seen the Doctor have many awkward conversations with people over personal matters, look at Eleven over Amy and Rory!) Most people struggle to know what to say in such a situation, why shouldn't that extend to a 2000 year old Timelord?
 
Starkers said:
Not sure I have much time for anyone who could spend five hours whinging about a TV show, or anyone who'd watch someone whinge about a TV show for 5 hours. Way better things to do with my time.

Whittaker's Doctor is poorly written much of the time, but I've yet to see her do anything manifestly worse than other Doctors (Six literally murders Shockeye with poison, Ten imprisons his enemies for eternity in mirrors/scarecrows/black holes, Eleven nuked David Bradley, Twelve possibly throws robot man to his death, and as you stated Twelve is also showed zero empathy over the death of a child, and lets not forget the First Doctor being moments away from caving someone's skull in)

I'm not sure getting Daleks to kill other Daleks is a terrible thing, I mean isn't that exactly when Ten, Eleven and the War Doctor did in DotD?

Unmasking the Master was very clunky, but at the end of the day A/It's the Master and she knows he always escapes and B/The Nazi's had an actual Indian Legion, I think they'd be more concerned that the officer wasn't who he claimed to be than his race. Bad optics but, you know, fictional character and all that.

As for the awkward cancer conversation, this is the Doctor! I've seen the Doctor have many awkward conversations with people over personal matters, look at Eleven over Amy and Rory!) Most people struggle to know what to say in such a situation, why shouldn't that extend to a 2000 year old Timelord?
Click to expand...

Everyone became experts on the Nazi’s Indian legion after that episode. I mean, they aren’t in the episode, but fuck me did people research the shit out of it for a defence.

That five hour vid though?
I thought the same as you.
Except, I was wrong, and it is an extremely well put together piece of Media Analysis. It is literally educational. And it is entertaining for it’s full runtime. It doesn’t come from a position of bias so much as… knowledge and love. And that’s what is great about it. It’s JayExci, and it is genuinely worth a watch, even if you go into it ready to disagree with every point it makes.

Edit: and forgot to mention, eleven nuking David Bradley was… Chibnall. I didn’t like it then either.
 
^ I'm familiar with JayExci, but they don't speak for anyone but themself and their opinion should not ever be cited as being an authoritative commentary on or analysis of who the Thirteenth Doctor - or any previous Doctor - is, regardless of how prominent they are within the Doctor Who online community.
 
Starkers said:
Not sure I have much time for anyone who could spend five hours whinging about a TV show, or anyone who'd watch someone whinge about a TV show for 5 hours. Way better things to do with my time.
Click to expand...
Not sure I even have time for a five hour YouTube video in general. I mean, sweet shit! Five hours? That's longer than most movies, and is close to the length of seven American network dramas (minus commercials).
 
It's probably already been discussed to death (I only got around to watching the last season recently), but while Nazi Germany's Indian Legion and Fascist Italy's Free India Batallion did operate in Europe (mostly in non-combat roles), their units would have been subordinate to white officers. As Retired Lt. Gen. H. S. Panag of the Indian Army writes, "Battaglione Azad Hindoustan and the Indian Legion were not used for active combat duties as both the Italians and the Germans did not trust the Indians and had a very low opinion of their fighting qualities."

Initially, the Indian Legion companies were all under German officers. And then later on some of the Indian Legion's NCOs were commissioned as officers, but it seems that Captain was the highest rank they ever received (and since we may be more used to Starfleet/navy type ranks on this site, an Army captain is equivalent to a Navy Lieutenant) . And of course they were still attached to the Indian Legion. It is highly unlikely that an ethnically South Asian officer from the Indian Legion would ever have been placed or accepted in a high-ranking position of command authority over white officers and soldiers like the Spymaster, who had the rank insignia of a Waffen-SS "Obergruppenführer" (equivalent to Lt. Gen.). Depending on what year it was supposed to be, that was either the highest or the second-highest commissioned rank in that branch! So the Spymaster in his true appearance would not have been taken for an Indian Legion officer who simply got separated from his unit or something.

Kor
 
Last edited:
DigificWriter said:
^ I'm familiar with JayExci, but they don't speak for anyone but themself and their opinion should not ever be cited as being an authoritative commentary on or analysis of who the Thirteenth Doctor - or any previous Doctor - is, regardless of how prominent they are within the Doctor Who online community.
Click to expand...

But… in my educated opinion, they’re right.
 
dupersuper said:
You have a PhD in British sci-fi shows?
Click to expand...

No, but I have about forty years of watching/reading/poring over Doctor Who in particular, and qualifications up to MA level in fields directly related to story, plot, textual interpretation etc. I also watched the video twice, rather than discounting it entirely.
I’d say that makes my opinion educated, wouldn’t you?
 
jaime said:
No, but I have about forty years of watching/reading/poring over Doctor Who in particular, and qualifications up to MA level in fields directly related to story, plot, textual interpretation etc. I also watched the video twice, rather than discounting it entirely.
I’d say that makes my opinion educated, wouldn’t you?
Click to expand...

I'd say your opinion of the content of the video is more informed than that of those of us who haven't watched it, sure. Whether the video itself makes you more informed about Doctor Who, that doesn't automatically follow.

I only have twenty years of watching/reading/poring over Doctor Who, but closer to 50 for Star Trek, so that's some relevant experience. I have a BA in English, which covers textual interpretation, etc., plus a master's in library science and about 35 years of work experience as a librarian, which involves, among other things, assessing the credibility of sources of information. I'm sure a fair number of people here have as many relevant fannish and non-fannish credentials to wave around as you do but hold differing opinions.
 
Steve Roby said:
I'd say your opinion of the content of the video is more informed than that of those of us who haven't watched it, sure. Whether the video itself makes you more informed about Doctor Who, that doesn't automatically follow.

I only have twenty years of watching/reading/poring over Doctor Who, but closer to 50 for Star Trek, so that's some relevant experience. I have a BA in English, which covers textual interpretation, etc., plus a master's in library science and about 35 years of work experience as a librarian, which involves, among other things, assessing the credibility of sources of information. I'm sure a fair number of people here have as many relevant fannish and non-fannish credentials to wave around as you do but hold differing opinions.
Click to expand...

Great, so my opinion is educated. And I have watched the video. Which is what my opinion, in this case, was on. You also have an educated opinion, but your area of expertise is not the video in question, though given your background, you would probably enjoy it. Maybe not agree with it. But likely enjoy it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top