I liked Russell's stuff a lot but the Moff era just hasn't done it for me at all, especially the last season. * rating Smith is good though, shame about how he is written.
Question for the people who aren't so hot on the Moffat/Smith era: Do you perceive it as being as much of a dive in quality as some of the later Doctors in Classic Who?
Considering I think RTD's era was shite as well and that series 5 was a bit of a step up, no. Depends what you mean by later Doctors as well. People have different views of where the rot set in. I prefer Colin and possibly McCoy as a whole to Davo as a whole.
No. The quality is there, it just hasn't been arranged very well. Its clever, its polished, its funny. Smith is a convincing Doctor. It just doesn't work together. My next statement may earn my spot in Hades, but Moffets era is much like Rachel's Trifle.
Well, not so much a dive. More of a slight dip. I sometimes wonder if RTD and Moffat worked better as a team. Moffat coming up with brilliant characters, and off the wall plots, while RTD playing story editor to made sure the stories flowed smoothly and didn't get bogged down by plot twists.
5/5 A vast improvement on RTDs era. I mean, I can enjoy silly brainless fun, but RTD's era was just too silly and brainless. That said, both RTDs Who and Moffats Who generally feel like Saturday morning cartoons.
But Moffat's scripts were some of the few RTD wasn't able to rewrite in any way as far as I recall. Someone may be able to clarify that. I've always said I'd love for RTD to write one episode a series in the same way we had a Moffat episode/2parter under RTD. They are very different yet curiously very similar. Neither let's the (lack of) plot logic get in the way of telling a story, where they differ is in how they hide the plot holes. With RTD it's about dialling everything up to 11, bright, loud, in your face, with Moffat it's smoke and mirrors and misdirection. The problem with Moffat's way is that if you see how the trick's done it can suddenly seem very mundane and annoying. The problem with RTD's way is that all those bright lights and loud noises can get a trifle wearing. After all candy floss is great but you can only eat so much before you start to feel sick... I prefer the Moffat era to RTD's, but not by as much as I thought I would before it started.
It's not that he wasn't able to, it's that he didn't want to. I think one of the interesting things about the Moffat era is that even though he writes wonderful scripts, he's no longer writing the dark, moody, introspective episodes he was writing during the RTD era. He's not producing the "Girl in the Fireplace" or "Forest of the Dead"-ish episodes anymore -- that task has fallen to writers like Richard Curtis, Neil Gaiman, and such.
That's not surprising, though. There's a difference between being the freelancer called upon to write one or two scripts a year within someone else's vision and being the story editor who not only has to write five or six scripts but herd cats on seven or eight more and fit them within his own vision. When people say "What's happened to Moffat?" (either good or bad), it's worth keeping in mind that he's doing a vastly different job than he was a few years ago and his relationship with the program is vastly different. It's not that Moffat has changed as writer. It's that his role has changed.
Fair point! Though I do wish it were possible for him to find the time to turn out another quiet, introspective episode like he did under RTD.
Four stars for me. Love Smith and Amy, love the romantic fairy tale tone, and love Moffat's crazy, inventive, time-twisty storytelling. The only thing keeping it from five stars are the number of dull, non-Moffat two-parters like Hungry Earth and Rebel Flesh, which just feel WAY too conventional and generic next to the other stories. And, yes, the heavy emphasis on River Song, who was really starting to wear out her welcome last season.
Not rewriting, but the two were fairly good friends by all account, and I'm sure RTD offered the ocassional suggestion, or request for a minor tweek here and there. I still enjoy the show, but there has to be some explaination as to why his older stories (IMO at least) were better than his current ones.
I think it's simply down to him writing more episodes. That said given I'm not a huge fan of the library two parter, and don't quite revere TGITFP as much as most people, for me he's written eps as good as those since he took over IMO. I think he needs to lay off the timey wimey stuff a bit more and maybe not overcomplicate everything (it isn't always big, it isn't always clever). That said when he did a fairly straightforward story at Christmas loads of people said it was dull (I quite liked it) so, much like RTD in his day, he can't really win.
I gave up watching after the first half of last season so I guess that's one star, then? I did watch the Christmas special and thought it was ok, though not impressive. I'll give the next season a try. It's weird, Moffat's stories during the RTD era are some of my favourite episodes but I found his era a mess so far.
I rated the Moffat era five stars - Season 5's Pandorica story arc was on hindsight better than Season 6's fixation with River Song, however I found more Season 6 episodes more enjoyable as stand alone episodes. "Let's Kill Hitler" was a mess, but a fun one. I did find Moffat's last Christmas Special smug and a bit dull.
Overall, I give it 4 stars. Season 5 gets 5 stars from me but Season 6 only gets 3, which brings down the average. I just can't come up with enough good things to say about Season 5. In a recent name-your-5-favorite-episodes thread, I was going to do a single list for the entire 2005-present series until I realized that it was almost nothing but Season 5 episodes. (That's when I decided to split it into 1 list for the Eccleston/Tennant years & another for Smith.) "The Eleventh Hour," "The Vampires of Venice," "Amy's Choice," "Vincent & the Doctor," and "The Lodger" are all among my favorite stories of all-time, rivaling such classics as "The Romans," "The Invasion," & "City of Death." Even the duds of Season 5 ("The Beast Below," "Victory of the Daleks," "The Hungry Earth," "Cold Blood") are still oodles of fun thanks to the presence of Smith, Gillan, & Darvill. Season 6 was a bit more uneven. "The Impossible Astronaut," "Day of the Moon," & "The Doctor's Wife" immediately rank among the greats. "Lets Kill Hitler," "The God Complex," & "The Wedding of River Song" are a lot of fun. "The Girl Who Waited" is a heartbreaking story, very well done, but the abrupt ending pisses me off a lot. "Night Terrors" & "Closing Time" are average. "The Rebel Flesh"/"The Almost People" is a good idea but probably shouldn't have been a 2-parter. (If anything, they should have explored expanding "The Doctor's Wife" into a 2-parter.) "The Curse of the Black Spot" & "A Good Man Goes to War" bore me to tears. I'll echo the rest in saying that Season 6 focused too much on River Song. I think she's a fun character and I hope she does come back in Season 7 or 8 but I think Moffat rested too much of Season 6 on her shoulders. Too many plotlines dovetailed into her at once. Amy's mysterious pregnancy, the mysterious girl in the space suit, and the mysterious astronaut who kills the Doctor all turn out to be her. I think he also revealed too much about her all at once. He would have been better off dripping out these details over the next few years rather than cramming them all into 1 season like that. I also think splitting the season in half was a terrible idea. It gave it a really awkward rhythm, particularly when the season is only 13 episodes to begin with. American shows can get away with splitting the seasons because they've got 20 episodes to split. However, I do really love Matt Smith in the role. I love Amy & Rory. Honestly, of all the modern companions, Amy & Rory are the only 2 interesting enough to be able to carry the show on their own. And I love how Moffat makes it a show about time travel rather than just using it as a casual device to set the setting.