Who Is Moffat Making The Series For?
- Thread starter StCoop
- Start date
- Status
Does anyone know if BBC will take the ratings from BBC America into account now since the season is airing in sync now?
I mean a 6 million average rating in the US would be extraordinarily high for a genre show like Who due to the huge population difference (just over 62 million people in the UK with there being just over 308 million people in the US). Most genre shows here average around 2 million, the big networks dramas and reality shows soak up the rest.
I mean a 6 million average rating in the US would be extraordinarily high for a genre show like Who due to the huge population difference (just over 62 million people in the UK with there being just over 308 million people in the US). Most genre shows here average around 2 million, the big networks dramas and reality shows soak up the rest.
Even though you know he's not really dead, that was a pretty brutal scene. Violence is tempered when one uses moving cameras, cuts and all the other tricks. A fixed camera coldy focused on someone getting executed point-blank is unnervingly awful. I'm not sure if I had kids I'd want them to see that, then again, a kid probably wouldn't be perturbed by the same subtleties I am.
An extremely well executed scene. You're surprised by the first shot. You expect a regeneration (which would have been shocking enough even if they did undo it), then the camera zooms out, stays still. BAM! he falls dead as a subtle - shockwave effect reinforces the fact that the hero was gunned down alone in broad daylight. However, it appears that some on here had a clue this whole thing was going to happen. I don't read all of the rumors, and had no idea they were going to open this way.
============
As for River, if I were going to introduce the show to someone new, I wouldn't play the Library 2-parter until the end of season 5. Maybe even later depending on how this season turns out. It's the order I saw it in (I saw S5 before going back and watching 1-4) and feels vastly more tragic, because at that point she's more than an actor-of-the-week.
Last edited:
No because they don't pay a license fee, for political reasons, while Doctor Who makes good money from overseas sales, it still has to be a solid performer here - they can't say "sure only three million people watch it here but look at the number of people overseas who do".
Same here, I'll be downloading a HD rip.
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh, I'll do something like that either on Sunday or Monday, but as The Beeb doesn't take into account other sources, I'll download and watch it on iplayer first.
I don't know. I think that the biggest draw in the River/Doctor relationship is the tragedy of the whole thing. Every time they come across one another, they're always heading in the opposite direction. Each one knows where the other's going, but never where they themselves are going. But if you saw it out of order, then yeah, I can understand your point of view, sort of. But since I saw the Library two-parter first, I can't imagine the story having the same impact otherwise.
I think the episode in itself did a good job making you appreciate River Song. It's tragic as a self-contained episode. Plus, the "it'll be the death of me" comment in last week's episode hits even harder because of it.
Yeah...they did play up the tragic aspect last weekend. They really didn't mention it at all last season, in fact out-of-sync aspect was more a source of jokes than anything dramatic. That's actually why I think Forest of the Dead works better if viewed after season 5. It completely corrupts the flippant attitude of the following season, while providing background for several of the lines in Impossible Astronaut.
Going back and watching Season 5 after seeing Forest of the Dead adds a whole new aspect, and in particular, you pick up on some of the more subtle acting by Matt Smith that you will miss without the two-parter. So I don't think I lost anything by having to watch S5 twice, it's a really fun season anyway (aside from the dreadful Dalek episode, but Dalek episodes in general have been really awful aside from S1's "Dalek").
I really can't see it being better the "normal" way, as hard as I try, but I respect the differing viewpoint. It's the difference, after all, of seeing thing's in the Doctor's perspective versus River's.
Going back and watching Season 5 after seeing Forest of the Dead adds a whole new aspect, and in particular, you pick up on some of the more subtle acting by Matt Smith that you will miss without the two-parter. So I don't think I lost anything by having to watch S5 twice, it's a really fun season anyway (aside from the dreadful Dalek episode, but Dalek episodes in general have been really awful aside from S1's "Dalek").
I really can't see it being better the "normal" way, as hard as I try, but I respect the differing viewpoint. It's the difference, after all, of seeing thing's in the Doctor's perspective versus River's.
I have to disagree with the people who say that S5 was wrapped up well. I think that it is absolutely critical that for S5 to make any sense, that S6 will have to explain it. We got little to no payoff from TPO and TBB. Consider:
-Why did Prisoner Zero know that the Silence (or Silents) would fall? I'm honestly getting very, very tired of the whole "random guest character can give a relevant prophecy" cliche.
-Who was building that TARDIS above that rental? We know now, but he didn't finish it in the finale.
-Why can a prison cell made by mundane aliens like the Daleks and a time machine recreate the universe? TBB didn't make much sense, but I suppose that is a different issue.
None of those things make any sense right now. They only will when S6 hopefully sheds light on them.
-Why did Prisoner Zero know that the Silence (or Silents) would fall? I'm honestly getting very, very tired of the whole "random guest character can give a relevant prophecy" cliche.
-Who was building that TARDIS above that rental? We know now, but he didn't finish it in the finale.
-Why can a prison cell made by mundane aliens like the Daleks and a time machine recreate the universe? TBB didn't make much sense, but I suppose that is a different issue.
None of those things make any sense right now. They only will when S6 hopefully sheds light on them.
You do realize that, at the end of the day, it's just a television show, right? And one for children at that.
It's a tv show about a man who can live forever by changing his body's appearance and travels through time and space inside a phonebooth that's bigger on the inside than the outside.
Sometimes, you just have to go with it. Stop over-analyzing everything to death. If you're not enjoying it, watch something else instead.
^ I am enjoying it. I have three relatively minor issues. You mention that this is a kid's show. Well, then shouldn't the writing staff take the time to make it less confusing for the kiddos? Anyway, I know all of what you are saying. I'm simply stating that S5 will make more sense (hopefully) once S6 starts explaining things, like it already has done with the TARDIS clone.
This I thought was explained quite clearly in The Big Bang. The cell has held the "information" of the Universe--there is a theory about a holographic universe, the universe being made up of information (probably a load of bunk)... the Doctor sent it into the heart of the Tardis which was exploding in every point and time in the universe, a new Big Bang with a "code" to rewrite/reboot things as they were.
Now, it's a load of nonsense as far as real physics go--so is a time machine--but as far as the internal logic of Doctor Who, it made sense.
Why? If you were trying to imprison the most dangerous person in the Universe, would you really want him to be able to move around, think, etc? Or would you want him in stasis? A perfect and complete stasis?
I think Moffat overcomplicates things in a similar vein to how RTD used to over simplify things, luckily both tended to lean towards the centre ground for the most part.
I think what's scarier is the people in this thread saying Who isn't made for non sci-fi fans, and that kids make up such a small percentage of the viewership that it isn't significant...
Seriously? The reason the show's been so succesful is that its appeal spans the generations and the whole spectrum of people from hard core fanatics to the "I don't like sci-fi" brigade. I know plenty of people who don't watch science fiction, but who do watch TNG. Frankly I haven't seen a sci-fi show with this kind of appeal since TNG.
I think what's scarier is the people in this thread saying Who isn't made for non sci-fi fans, and that kids make up such a small percentage of the viewership that it isn't significant...
Seriously? The reason the show's been so succesful is that its appeal spans the generations and the whole spectrum of people from hard core fanatics to the "I don't like sci-fi" brigade. I know plenty of people who don't watch science fiction, but who do watch TNG. Frankly I haven't seen a sci-fi show with this kind of appeal since TNG.
Freeze him? I presume in carbonite?
- Status
Similar threads
