^ Yeah I tend to agree with that. An axiom (if that is the right word) about writing is write what you know and RTD seems to be good at that.
Moffatt and friend
- Thread starter JRoss
- Start date
Plus the point I made was that having gay characters and casting ethnic minority actors is not at all the same as dealing with it as an 'issue' in a Trek way. Especially not when Doctor Who is produced by an organisation which is supposed to reflect diversity.
It was never made a big deal of by the production team (and rarely by the media) so highly unlikely it was for ratings reasons!
RTD's writing is mostly character rather than issue led, hence why something like Queer As Folk got attacked by all sides.
But hey I'm sure you'll just keep accusing us of calling you a bigot rather than come up with a better argument!
It was never made a big deal of by the production team (and rarely by the media) so highly unlikely it was for ratings reasons!
RTD's writing is mostly character rather than issue led, hence why something like Queer As Folk got attacked by all sides.
But hey I'm sure you'll just keep accusing us of calling you a bigot rather than come up with a better argument!
starkers.. see that is why I love to debate with you..you are mature about fan discussion..in retrospect I may have worded my statement precariously, but the overall sentiment is the same.. yeah RTD may have believed in those issues, but not everyone agrees with that point of view..and not everyone wants to see it always represented..not everyone gets represented in real life.. not everyone is a winner either..it just seems overly "liberal" to me is all..
like I have friends who are gay, but I don't want to hang with them while they are getting it on.. nor would I attend a gay-parade..(they get pretty rowdy) nor do I want my daughter being exposed to that as yet..she is 10 years old..when she gets older I will respect her choices, but for now, she is under my care, and will be raised how I see fit.
like I said, some people may think it is fine, to show that, I do but to a point..I think RTD was a bit overly preoccupied with that point of view..you can disagree, and that is fine..some people just don't see the world the same as others.. and that is also a part of diversity and acceptance..
I am not against gay rights, or interracial couples.. I just don't think it needed to be a focus of the show, is all..
Roddenberry was more of an activist then Berman in my opinion, and so too was RTD to Moffat.. that was all I was trying to say.
Wow...Just Wow. When was this episode of Dr Who shown with Gay people getting it on?
That's pretty extreme that you think 10 years old is too young to be exposed to Homosexuality in the way it's repesented in Dr. Who. Dr. Who does nothing more than acknowledge we exist, and are every bit as normal as heterosexual people (Note: We are not talking about Torchwood, here, only Dr. Who proper, since Torchwood is meant to be adult version of Dr. Who). What is it about this message you are afraid of your 10 year old seeing?
Last edited:
And those people have their heads up their butts. Read actual histories of the JNT era - great place to start is the A Brief History of Time (Travel) website - and you'll see nothing of the sort is true about JNT. He apparently wasn't even that interested in making Tom Baker go away. And as others point out here, the guy tried to leave Doctor Who on several occasions but the BBC, for whatever reason, wanted him to stay. So he compensated by hiring a string of really good script editors, including Andrew Cartmel, who made the last couple of seasons worth watching again.
As for RTD, yeah he really ruined the show, didn't he. Number 1 series in the UK. A pile of awards, including BAFTA, Hugo, Saturn and Constellation Awards. Its stars greeted like rock stars at events not just in the UK, but the US as well. Two very successful spinoffs. Yeah, I can see how he ruined it.
Since I've already found major fault with your argument, I obviously don't agree. Too many cooks spoil the broth - nuBSG's final season being Exhibit A.
The strength in RTD and Moffat's running of the series is in the team they assemble, from script editors to episode writers. RTD - who that website above reveals was first approached to do a new series back in 1999-2000 - could have chosen staff writers from the BBC with no SF or Doctor Who experience. Instead, he chose novelists like Paul Cornell, audio drama writers like Rob Shearman, plus Mark Gatiss who was involved in making independent Doctor Who spinoffs (the PROBE series, for example) since the early 1990s. And he brought in Steven Moffatt, and that seemed to work well.
Moffat has continued in the same vein, but has also started looking beyond the franchise, bringing in Richard Curtis and Neil Gaiman (Neil Gaiman!) to write for the series. And, funny, after Gaiman announced he was writing for the show, we started hearing about Michael Moorcock writing a novel, and Brian Aldiss, a SF legend, snuck into the Brilliant Book of Doctor Who. And while everyone hates his "Fear Her", most people will only remember that Matthew Graham, back again for Season 6, is the creator of Life on Mars. And if they get Toby Whithouse to do another episode, his Being Human connection won't be underplayed.
If Moffat's "ego" involves continuing to get powerhouse writers to submit scripts (in turn inspiring others to contribute to the expanded universe - and if you like, feel free to credit RTD for Moorcock), and being able to do what a year ago everyone thought was impossible and introduce a Doctor who instantly became as popular as Tennant, if not moreso in some areas, then I say let his ego run wild.
And then someone else will be brought in for their turn in a few years and he or she will be hated, accused of having agendas, ego, etc. as well. It's the natural way of things. Just remember - if you hated RTD, and hate Moffat, there will be another showrunner in a few years (JNT being kept on for 10 years was an anomaly) just as there will be another Doctor.
Alex
This, I don't understand. How was it the FOCUS of the show? Of ANY episode? Was there a very gay episode of Doctor Who that I missed? There was episode that had gay couples, but, they didn't even participate in the plot (Gridlock). I guess there's Captain Jack, who wanted to shag men and women. But, then, he's like Captain Kirk...
And I can only think of one interracial couple, Rose and what's his name. Who broke up early. And I can't even think of an episode that was centered around them as a couple... MICKEY, that's his name.
So, I don't know what you mean by focus, unless you mean them appearing on your TV set as normal people, as every day people.
And, speaking as someone IN an interracial marriage, is there something wrong with interracial couples? Something you don't want your daughter to see? Should I be ashamed?
One more time, I do not hate RTD. Seasons 1, 2, 4 and the specials were brilliant. I think he bungled his handling of Martha and the Master. That's pretty much it.
As for another argument: fans=the public. If fans don't like something, that means low public opinion. I don't agree with whiners or trolls but I do believe that RTD did make some bad choices (a lot of season 3, some of the season 4 finale, Planet of the Dead) and that fan backlash raised enough of a stink to get him replaced.
'Ego' involves forgetting that fans essentially write the paychecks. I don't think that people should cave to what fans want, but look at what happens. JNT may have been a stand-up guy, I certainly know that he treated Colin Baker better than anyone at the BBC ever did. But look at the fact that when you go to A Brief History of Time or The Doctor Who Ratings Guide you find many, many reviews of his era critical of his scripting and story decisions. Network-shafted or not, at the time the public perception was that this man was ignoring what made Who good by focusing on nastiness and violence.
Once again, I like Moffat. He is a fantastic writer. Each of his contributions to NuWho was the highlight of the season (although Dalek was tied with The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances). I'm raising some valid points though. He could have used help fleshing out The Beast Below, he should have demanded a re-write of Victory of the Daleks, turned the Silurian episodes into a single episode and seriously picked up the pace during The Pandorica Opens. You might not like Mark Gattiss as a writer (he did give us VotD
) but look at what he and SM have accomplished with Sherlock. Put together, those two are dynamite.
Moffat's a workhorse, having written the entire runs of shows before, which is admirable. But those series, Press Gang and Jekyll were his vision and his vision alone. He's now working on a show with the longest, greatest pedigree in the history of science fiction. I admire SM's vision, but he really could benefit from an extra perspective.
As for the arguments of multiple runners ruining a show, I can see some good examples being raised. Let me just say then that it must vary from show to show. We've seen where it works and where it doesn't on both sides. I think that it couldn't hurt, though, to have greater input.
This post was started both here and at imdb. I've come to this board because I'm tired of imdb's fans. They are far less mature and intelligent than the fans here, what with all the troll posts and such. I'm enjoying logical rebuttals to my positions greatly. I take a bit of an issue with just dismissing their opinions. Every community of fans represents the viewing public.
As for another argument: fans=the public. If fans don't like something, that means low public opinion. I don't agree with whiners or trolls but I do believe that RTD did make some bad choices (a lot of season 3, some of the season 4 finale, Planet of the Dead) and that fan backlash raised enough of a stink to get him replaced.
'Ego' involves forgetting that fans essentially write the paychecks. I don't think that people should cave to what fans want, but look at what happens. JNT may have been a stand-up guy, I certainly know that he treated Colin Baker better than anyone at the BBC ever did. But look at the fact that when you go to A Brief History of Time or The Doctor Who Ratings Guide you find many, many reviews of his era critical of his scripting and story decisions. Network-shafted or not, at the time the public perception was that this man was ignoring what made Who good by focusing on nastiness and violence.
Once again, I like Moffat. He is a fantastic writer. Each of his contributions to NuWho was the highlight of the season (although Dalek was tied with The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances). I'm raising some valid points though. He could have used help fleshing out The Beast Below, he should have demanded a re-write of Victory of the Daleks, turned the Silurian episodes into a single episode and seriously picked up the pace during The Pandorica Opens. You might not like Mark Gattiss as a writer (he did give us VotD
) but look at what he and SM have accomplished with Sherlock. Put together, those two are dynamite. Moffat's a workhorse, having written the entire runs of shows before, which is admirable. But those series, Press Gang and Jekyll were his vision and his vision alone. He's now working on a show with the longest, greatest pedigree in the history of science fiction. I admire SM's vision, but he really could benefit from an extra perspective.
As for the arguments of multiple runners ruining a show, I can see some good examples being raised. Let me just say then that it must vary from show to show. We've seen where it works and where it doesn't on both sides. I think that it couldn't hurt, though, to have greater input.
This post was started both here and at imdb. I've come to this board because I'm tired of imdb's fans. They are far less mature and intelligent than the fans here, what with all the troll posts and such. I'm enjoying logical rebuttals to my positions greatly. I take a bit of an issue with just dismissing their opinions. Every community of fans represents the viewing public.
Interesting that he hasn't pointed out that Moffat wrote the gayest episode of Who to date (The Doctor Dances, three count them three whole honest to God gay men!) and that the Silurian 2 parter from series 5 features a romance between a white man and an asian woman. As for social commentary, can't beat Moffat's little diatribe on democracy in the Beast Below.
I'm curious as well as to how this was the focus of the show? Trek has race or sexuality as an honest to God plots, Who has off hand remarks, and yeah sometimes they are a bit sledge hammery, but they were mostly blink and you'll miss it.
At the end of the day I believe Moffat is as liberal as RTD (and starsuperion, out of interest, would you be happier if your daughter had Rose, Martha, or Donna as a role model, or Amy the kissagram?)
Excuse me? Do you even have a shred of proof of that? Next you'll be saying Tennant was ousted
RTD chose to leave, same as Tennant did. If the BBC had got rid of him they'd have kicked jim off SJA and Torchwood as well but, nope still in charge of them...I think you overestimate this fan backlash!
^ Yep. That part of JR's post was incorrect. Both RTD and Tennant left of their own free will, because they wanted to. Not due to any pressure from the Beeb. It would have been interesting to see what a series five would have been like from them had there been no change though.
Rose
wow zoom you are really sensitive.. and yeah, none of that is what I meant.. see this is what I mean, you can't so much as mention a single phrase against what some may think is a bit of going overboard on RTd's part without someone going off the deepend and reading into every single word and phrase..
you people?? what do you mean YOU PEOPLE?? HUH? TELL MEEEEE!!!
sheesh! lighten up..
for the record, Red Dwarf is one of my all time favourite shows, and Kachansky with Dave Lister , didn't bother me..so can we put the over reactions away now, please it is getting old..
Yeah, hints of bigotry, that sorta does get to me.
Then what did you mean?
You suggested you didn't want to see homosexuals and interracial couples in Doctor Who. That you didn't want your 10 year old daughter to see those things, that when she's older, she can make her own decisions.
Generally, when parents don't want their children to see something, it means they don't approve or they aren't emotionally ready for what they are seeing.
So, what is it? You don't approve of interracial couples or you don't think a 10 year old can emotionally deal with it?
Please, if I've misunderstood, explain what you mean... why don't you want your daughter to see homosexual characters or people in interracial relationships?
You're right, when I read someone suggesting my marriage is something they wouldn't let they 10 year old daughter see, I totally shouldn't call that person out for bigotry.
How is showing two people in a relationship going "overboard"?
Reading into every single word and phrase... Perhaps you should actually read what you write before posting it, then you might not be so surprised at the reaction you get.
Go back, read... you wouldn't let your daughter watch Doctor Who because of homosexual characters and interracial characters, because RTD went "overboard".... it implies there is something WRONG with homosexuality or interracial couples....
If there is something wrong, why don't you just say it. Don't hide behind "I didn't mean that" "You're just reading into what i'm saying" Just say what you think.
A good idea for everyone involved. These are sensitive topics and definitely good material for discussing here. Everyone step back from the edge a bit so you don't cross that line into personal attacks.
Remember that recommendation is for everyone.
Absolutely. I agree. It won't become a personal attack. I'm just curious what starsuperion means. And once he/she answers that, that's fine, I just want clarity.
As others have said - that simply isn't true. RTD chose to leave, he certainly wasn't replaced. If anything the BBC tried to keep him on.
A lot of people weren't entirely happy with the season 3 finale (though in terms of AI it did fine) but it was followed by Voyage Of The Dammed which got modern Who's highest ratings and season 4 which was the most successful series in ratings terms so far. And yeah the fan backlash on the season 4 finale was so strong it was recently voted something like the 12th best Who story of all time in DWM. Hence my point - do you really think a section of fandom being unhappy is going to influence the BBC when overall public opinion of the show looks that healthy.
Hadn't RTD's departure already been announced before Planet Of The Dead - at the very least SM as his replacement had already been decided internally.
Also...and someone can correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Moffat Russell's pick to replace him? I'm sure the Beeb Controller or whatever had final approval but I'm pretty sure I remember reading somewhere that RTD selected Steven to succeed him.
there is no hints of bigotry meant in any of what I said, and to not acknowledge that I may have a different view point on certain social issues is to bigot me, and my personal feelings..are we not to accept all kinds of people, and yet just because my view point differs, and not by much, you seek to get all bent out of shape and worked up..?? come on man..
as for what I meant..
I was merely trying to say that RTD was more like Roddenberry in his presentation of Doctor who, and more so in Torchwood..that with Moffat he is more focused on the universe within the show, still has his activism, but is more like Berman in fostering more of the universal story arc..RTD had an overall story too, don't get me wrong, but I see more of a correlation between the two shows in the man behind them, since the theme and premise of this thread was to say that Moffat needed to pair up with someone else cause he was lacking was what I was trying to relate to..
there were people who had made some references to how awful RTD was, and in previous threads have cited his overt activism, I was merely trying to defend said activism, and explain it as a means to relate to a society that had changed a great deal since Doctor who went off the air, and that the Moffat style was a bit more subdued..
but because I merely suggested RTD was a but more over the top with his shows, I get attacked..
and yea to that other guy who said I am hiding behind the veil of being a targeted as a bigot..
ummmm.. Zoom just said "hints of bigotry" so I don't think my fear and complaint are unfounded.. see I had this discussion with some on here before, and I knew, the second I posted that, they would jump at the chance to find fault and racial strife in that..
there are just people like that always looking for that racist, bigot, or hater..but never truly listening to what anyone is saying..
to me, RTD was a bit overbearing in his show..okay, so sue me..I am not a bigot because I feel that way..
so I can't say it was the focus of the show, without someone thinking that I mean that those actors aren't truly human or some stupid crap like that..
All my complaint is that in the future, could you give someone a bit of leeway before you jump their shit?? Geez! I mean most of you I respect here..I don't necessarily agree with all of you but most I agree, but are we so sensitive that mere notion that someone feels uncomfortable with certain "hammers" as some one put it towards RTD's in your face cultural presentations, is somehow devious in nature??
I don't have to accept everything you do, cause it makes me a person who is supposedly more tolerant.. I don't like watching Zombies eat people in movies, or some actors bother me, so yea I am entitled to that and my own point of view..as for homosexual themes and adult attitudes, I think that I want to shelter my daughter from that until she is older.. if it is on TV i can control it, if it is in public, well, we can go somewhere else.
as far as racial things go, my daughter is part Japanese, and I think some idiot on here discounted that once before because it wasn't a black/white thing.. so what ever..that's a bigoted attitude itself..
My current girlfriend is white, her mother white, and remarried a wonderful and quite large black man, I call pop..he is the coolest guy ever.. and we are always hanging out when we get the chance..
so to most of you who do not know me, you really have no F$%^ing Idea about me, and I am really pissed off at how shitty some people can get here without truly paying attention to the true meaning behind a post.. a knee jerk reaction like that can cause people pain, and right now, I am ashamed at how my words were twisted, examined, labeled, and mocked into a complete and utter dump fest..all meant to make some of you feel superior in some regard..
thanks..
thanks allot..
same old internet.. same old shit..
Perhaps if you don't want people to jump on what you write, perhaps you need to learn to be more clear in what you are trying to say. If it keeps happening to you, perhaps you need to look for the common denominator in the equation.
I am certainly not asking you to believe as I do. I can care less. But, if someone is calling interracial relationships wrong, or something that shouldn't be on TV, yeah, I'm going to question that. Because I think that's wrong. I think bigotry is wrong, there is no reason why I should accept hate. You don't have to agree with that, and if you feel I misunderstood you or that your words as you wrote them was unclear, well, the limitations of the internet I suppose, we only have the written word.
As I made clear I felt you were saying that RTD addressed social issues in the stories to the same extent that Roddenberry did which clearly isn't the case and he does it less so than modern Trek so I disagreed with you there.
Then it became clearer that you were suggesting that having ethnic minority actors and gay references meant that RTD was focusing on social issues which again I disagree with. Especially when you didn't actually provide any examples of this supposed focus so is it any wonder people assumed that just the presence of gay or non white characters seemed to be what disturbed you.
Oh and you brought up the supposed bigotry accusation way before Professor Zoom showed up on this thread so that's really only justification in retrospect.
If you knew that people would supposedly react like this maybe you should have taken the time to make your point clearer in the first place.
Then it became clearer that you were suggesting that having ethnic minority actors and gay references meant that RTD was focusing on social issues which again I disagree with. Especially when you didn't actually provide any examples of this supposed focus so is it any wonder people assumed that just the presence of gay or non white characters seemed to be what disturbed you.
Oh and you brought up the supposed bigotry accusation way before Professor Zoom showed up on this thread so that's really only justification in retrospect.
If you knew that people would supposedly react like this maybe you should have taken the time to make your point clearer in the first place.
Nicely put; starsuperion, I think you really need to pay a little bit more attention to what you write, you have this habit of just tumbling thoughts down in a big stream of conciousness that you don't edit/clarify before you post. It sometimes makes your train of thought hard to follow (And I don't just mean in this thread)
Always worth reading through a post and giving it some thought before you actually post it (a lesson I learned with work emails many years ago
)
