TheObsoleteMan
Super Freak
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2005
- Messages
- 9,951
- Reaction score
- 12
That bit with him trying all the different foods almost had me wanting to change the channel. Even Tom Baker would've cringed at that sort of over the top nonsense.
Doctor Who - Spoilers!
- Thread starter Memnoch
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
As long as the Tennant-isms are gone by the end of the series I don't mind who else he channels.
The overuse of the word "Brilliant!" and the overly exaggerated cry of "You Beauty!" were by far the worst moments of yesterdays story.
TheObsoleteMan,
I somewhat agree on the bit with the food testing going on a bit too long though I did laugh when he threw the bread out the door.
So far I think the humor has been pretty good, definitely a step up from the old regime's style as the actors seem to deliver it much more naturally.
That was the part the me and my kids loved the most.
Exactly - it plugs straight into a 9 year olds mind, especially when he spat stuff out.
ProgMatinee
circlesendwheretheybegin
Not to really rag on it, but my wife's first comment was that the first episode was only just slightly less juvenile than a Sarah Jane Adventure episode.
Bread throwing rules!
Next time we get a pushy salesman at the door I shall attempt to fend him off with nothing more than a biscuit
Thanks!, WilliamShatnersToupee made it for me. If I can resize it I might make a sig with the text "The 10th Doctor. Just Say No!"
I think the story was another that would have benefitted from the old school serial approach as everything was so rushed there wasn't time to establish anything properly.
Thanks!, WilliamShatnersToupee made it for me. If I can resize it I might make a sig with the text "The 10th Doctor. Just Say No!"
I think the story was another that would have benefitted from the old school serial approach as everything was so rushed there wasn't time to establish anything properly.
Perhaps a two-parter? The first could end when the new Daleks come out of the machine...
That would work, then more time could have been devoted to seeing just how capable the new Daleks were,they could've taken out an enemy position or something like that.
A return to Classic style 4-6 part stories wouldn't work with today's audiences but I think that the new production team should try a series that consists of mostly 2 parters and a 3 part finale.
ProgMatinee
circlesendwheretheybegin
You do realize that old episodes were on;y 20+ minutes long and new episodes are over 40? 4 part story would be about 3 hours and a 6 part story would be over 4 hours! Do stories really need to be that long?
Personally, I find the DVDs of classic Who that are under 2 hours are much better than the ones that are almost 3 hours. The longer ones have a lot of repetition and really drag.
I wish the classic DVDs had an option where you could play the a whole story without the intros, recaps, and end creds. I remember when the PBS stations here tried editing them so they were continuous. It was great!
Read my last post properly.
I said a 4-6 part story format WOULDN'T WORK in today's environment and instead suggested a series with all stories being 2 parts of 45 minutes with a 3-part finale.
And no, I didn't realise each part of a Classic story was only 20 plus minutes ( usually 24 to be exact ) I only own 62 of them on DVD
ProgMatinee
circlesendwheretheybegin
yeah, the intros and recall of the previous episode gets annoying. its no surprise classic Who had to use 4-6 part storys, the episodes are like already only 23 minutes but about 4 minutes of that are credits, intro, and "last time on" type recall of the previous weeks ending.
I think today's episodes could stand to go a little longer if they wanted to, because there seems to be so much rushing, but there could also be better editing, IMO. Such as, how many foods exactly did the new Doctor need to try for us to enjoy the joke? They probably could have cut 30 seconds from that scene and spent them on the scene where the Doctor uploads the virus on the computer, which seemed rushed to me. Its really about picking your spots more than making the show longer.
I think today's episodes could stand to go a little longer if they wanted to, because there seems to be so much rushing, but there could also be better editing, IMO. Such as, how many foods exactly did the new Doctor need to try for us to enjoy the joke? They probably could have cut 30 seconds from that scene and spent them on the scene where the Doctor uploads the virus on the computer, which seemed rushed to me. Its really about picking your spots more than making the show longer.
ProgMatinee
circlesendwheretheybegin
Read my last post properly.
I said a 4-6 part story format WOULDN'T WORK in today's environment where the masses have less attention span than a hyperactive 5 year old and instead suggested a series with all stories being 2 parts of 45 minutes with a 3-part finale.
And no, I didn't realise each part of a Classic story was only 20 plus minutes ( usually 24 to be exact ). I only own 62 of the stories on DVD
Your argument doesn't hold water when you aren't comparing apples to apples. COMPARE MINUTES NOT EPISODES.
Basically you're saying today's audiences are ADD because they don't want to sit for twice as long as 1960s audiences?
3 parters maybe would work, but 4 or 6 parters is just absurd for any audience, not just those with ADD.
What kind of stuff would you ask for in the additional time?
Last edited:
I'm saying today's audiences have little attention span because all modern TV shows are pretty much the same 1000mph format. It's why I hardly watch anything outside of DVD's.
Last edited:
I would agree that today's audience has ADD compared to audiences 30 years ago.
I too am growing increasingly frustrated with the 1 episode story format.... It just isn't enough time for the stories they are trying to tell. I remember when The Doctor's Daughter aired and thought "In there somewhere is a real classics-worthy story that was trodden upon for 45 minutes instead of let out to breathe and develop in a nice 80 minute story."
I too am growing increasingly frustrated with the 1 episode story format.... It just isn't enough time for the stories they are trying to tell. I remember when The Doctor's Daughter aired and thought "In there somewhere is a real classics-worthy story that was trodden upon for 45 minutes instead of let out to breathe and develop in a nice 80 minute story."
ProgMatinee
circlesendwheretheybegin
80 minutes would be great. No arguments there. 120 is a stretch IMO considering you don't need to establish the main characters or a basic premis like you would for a feature film.
I would support more 80 minute stories because it could slow the pace AND add some depth. At 120 minutes they would end up adding a lot of extraneous scenes and goof-offing and it would just get boring...not to mention, they would certainly need to hire better supporting cast and better writers. You can't trust C list supporting actors to make a feature length story strong.
I would support more 80 minute stories because it could slow the pace AND add some depth. At 120 minutes they would end up adding a lot of extraneous scenes and goof-offing and it would just get boring...not to mention, they would certainly need to hire better supporting cast and better writers. You can't trust C list supporting actors to make a feature length story strong.
Again I NEVER said I wanted a return to 4-6 part stories, it's not practical for modern audience trends and with very few exceptions the 6-parters usually started to drag around part 4, the writers themselves have stated this in DVD commentaries.
The modern show should IMO be 2-parts of 45-50 minutes as standard and then a 3 part finale.
As for what I think should be done with the extra time, more dialogue to establish some of the secondary characters would be nice as currently there's barely enough time for the Doctor & companion to have their say let alone anyone else.
Characters like Jago & Litefoot in "The Talons of Weng-Chiang" or Garron & Unstoffe in "The Ribos Operation" are just as memorable as the leads in those stories because they were allowed their time to shine without taking the focus entirely off the main characters and plot.
Nowadays even someone like the Brigadier wouldn't get chance to say more than a "Well done Doctor!" as the modern production style places all importance on the special effects and everything else comes second.
ProgMatinee
circlesendwheretheybegin
AGAIN, modern audiences have nothing to do with accepting 4-6 parters because that would translate to 8-12 parters for the past audiences... how many old Who stories lasted 8-12 parts? Its extreme to assume that anyone can handle 4-6 hours worth of a storyline without wanting it wrapped up sooner.
If you said modern audiences couldn't handle a 3 parter, then your argument would have at least been reasonable.
This I can agree with. I'd like to see more of that as well. I'm not sure 3 parts are needed to do that, just better story writing and editing. Eliminate some of the twists and turns and side tangents. I think a 2 hour story can have plenty of that stuff if they cut some stuff here and there. The 2 hour specials (like The Next Doctor) seemed to have plenty of that.
Similar threads
