Are you seriously talking about building a story on a 46 years old continuity reference? In my opinion, Doctor Who is at its best when it is not plagued by that kind of byzantine, incestuous self-referencing.i have an idea for an anniversary 4 Doctors story, where Susan would appear with the First Doctor, but before AUC. she'd appear to be about 10 or 12 and the Doctror would be look younger than Hartnell, but still older...
I happen to agree with captcalhoun on this matter, bring on the byzantine, incestuous self-referencingAre you seriously talking about building a story on a 46 years old continuity reference? In my opinion, Doctor Who is at its best when it is not plagued by that kind of byzantine, incestuous self-referencing.i have an idea for an anniversary 4 Doctors story, where Susan would appear with the First Doctor, but before AUC. she'd appear to be about 10 or 12 and the Doctror would be look younger than Hartnell, but still older...
These questions and more are reasons I'm looking forward to Big Finish's An Earthly Child in December, when we get to see what happens when the Eighth Doctor checks in on Susan to see how she's getting on.If they could have Susan, I wonder what they would do with her - her age, attitude etc? It would be interesting to have a Susan whose appearance is older than the Doctor's, for instance.
Please, just let it be better than Legacy of the Daleks. Please. Please. Oh pretty please.These questions and more are reasons I'm looking forward to Big Finish's An Earthly Child in December, when we get to see what happens when the Eighth Doctor checks in on Susan to see how she's getting on.
Unfortunately, by saying this, you also agree with John Nathan-Turner.I happen to agree with captcalhoun on this matter, bring on the byzantine, incestuous self-referencing![]()
Are you seriously talking about building a story on a 46 years old continuity reference? In my opinion, Doctor Who is at its best when it is not plagued by that kind of byzantine, incestuous self-referencing.
Well I'm a long-time Who fans and I think the show is at its best when it is made for everyone, including first-time viewers. This should not be made for an elite. In fact, it should not be made for fans.This issue is really what differentiates the long-time Who fans from new viewers like myself.
The former group seems to think that "School Reunion" was a brilliant episode, I thought it was rather dull--the character of Sarah Jane Smith carried no special significance for me, other than that she was introduced as a former companion of the Doctor.
Similarly with "Army of Ghosts/Doomsday"--great, if you've spent a childhood fantasizing about a battle between the Cybermen and the Daleks, but mediocre otherwise.
There's room for both continuity references and new stuff in the series, of course. But yeah, I'm hoping that Moffat will tone down the continuity-heavy style of NuWho a little. And there are good indications that he will.
I don't mind continuity references but the least I ask is that they're properly explained and that they have some emotional weight even for people who don't get the reference. "School Reunion" might have less of an impact if you've never heard of Sarah-Jane Smith, but at least her character is properly introduced in the episode, and you don't need any prior knowledge to understand what it's all about. Besides, "School Reunion" is about Rose, not Sarah-Jane, and the episode centers on her developing feelings for the Doctor. That's fine.
that is the bloke responsible for the 6th Doctors costumer isnt it?Unfortunately, by saying this, you also agree with John Nathan-Turner.I happen to agree with captcalhoun on this matter, bring on the byzantine, incestuous self-referencing![]()
John Nathan-Turner was "Doctor Who"'s showrunner during seasons 18-26, IIRC. He's largely responsible for turning the show into turgid fanwank.that is the bloke responsible for the 6th Doctors costumer isnt it?
well I am in favour of it turning into good fanwan, its a shame Tennant is leaving no one does "Fanboy" better than him.John Nathan-Turner was "Doctor Who"'s showrunner during seasons 18-26, IIRC. He's largely responsible for turning the show into turgid fanwank.that is the bloke responsible for the 6th Doctors costumer isnt it?
I dunno-- Sarah Jane seemingly had enough of an impact that she can support her own children's show. And the kids watching CBBC certainly don't remember her from back in the day!Oh, don't get me wrong, the character was handled well, the episode was well-written. But afterwards, people in this forum in particular fell over each other to express their delight at "the return of Sarah Jane"--an emotional impact that probably wasn't shared by new viewers, or casual non-fans.
Depending on positive reception of continuity references is the road to irrelevancy.
I dunno-- Sarah Jane seemingly had enough of an impact that she can support her own children's show. And the kids watching CBBC certainly don't remember her from back in the day!Oh, don't get me wrong, the character was handled well, the episode was well-written. But afterwards, people in this forum in particular fell over each other to express their delight at "the return of Sarah Jane"--an emotional impact that probably wasn't shared by new viewers, or casual non-fans.
Depending on positive reception of continuity references is the road to irrelevancy.
Eh...You beat me to the punch there--Sarah Jane must have resonated with new viewers to get her own show.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.