An example of a perfect call back to me, is in Tooth and Claw where the Doctor has a Scottish accent and uses the alias James McCrimmon It's not integral to the plot, If you don't know who Jamie is it doesn't affect the story, but for Classic fans it's just a great little nod Great video by the way
I did say in the video, there's nothing wrong with references now and again. The problem is when the call backs and lore changes overshadow the telling of new stories. RTD pretty much never put a foot wrong in this regard.
A point well made. Lore is not a substitute for an actual story and relying on nostalgia as a crutch is causing the show's ability to write something outside of a nostalgic bubble to wither away like an atrophying muscle.
What bothers me the most is how Modern Who seems to view the Classic Series. Rather than being the history of the Doctor's adventures and the History of this universe, the Classic Series has been treated as cheap fanservice to be randomly sprinkled throughout episodes in the hopes of baiting interest from a waining audience (looking at you, Hell Bent). As Modern Who progressed, it rarely took the effort to actually build on what came before (Empress of Mars is a rare instance where Modern Who actually further developed worldbuilding started in the Classic era). What's even more infuriating than the constant pointless references to its own history, is when it would get those references blatantly wrong (everything they've done with Rassilon). It really makes it seem like the writers don't care and are getting their Classic Who lore by glancing at the wiki. And, personally, I'm really salty that Modern Who's show runners kept endlessly trying to completely rewrite and demystify the Doctor and Gallifrey's history in ridiculous and contradictory ways, yet we STILL couldn't get a Lungbarrow adaptation? Come on! They'll do this nonsense about the Doctor leaving Gallifrey because of a hybrid prophecy, but looms go too far? Like I said, this one's just a personal gripe. I love the Cartmel Master plan and Lungbarrow, and it's always felt like this big unresolved plotline that all Modern show runners have refused to pick up on in favor of their inferior versions of the Doctor's/Gallifrey's past. Either build upon what's already been set up, or just leave it alone! Anyway, sorry for the rant. Great video!
Don't apologise for the rant, you're absolutley right. Dioctor Who's lore and past has became a cheap gimmick for showrunners to exploit to artificially generate interest in their stories which can't actually stand on their own two feet. All we want are new and exciting stories.
Honestly I couldn’t agree more. Like there’s a reason the most popular era of Who was Season 12-14 because there were no returning monsters for two years.
Cheers Jacob, I absolutley agree eith you there. Hinchcliffe and Holmes focussed purely on the quality of stories they could tell and it is consistently excellent.
Some individual points made in this video I don't agree with (I'm a notorious Timeless Child apologist, for example), but the general message and core point is something I can understand and get behind. Doctor Who is one of the longest running TV shows ever and is therefore allowed to flex its history every now and then, but I fully agree that the Moffat era overdid it, not only with the large storylines, but also with the small in-jokes and references which I totally see being jarring for casual audiences. The larger problem, however, is that there are two types of Doctor Who fans: The ones who just want fun Sci-Fi adventures and want the show to look towards its future (usually general audience members, but also minority fans like you and me) and then there are the fans who are super proud of the show's heritage/history and seek reward for knowing what an Omega or a Thal is, making them actively demand more callbacks and references like they did after Series 11 came out. The creatives behind the scenes have to juggle the two styles to keep long term fans happy, while also keeping the interest of the casual audience. I absolutely cannot imagine that being an easy task, which is why I'm more inclined to give Moffat and Chibnall the benefit of the doubt. I personally want each Doctor Who era to create its own iconography and be confident in its own fresh ideas instead of relying on nostalgia and fanwank, but the megafan part of me is definitely interested in seeing the overarching story of the show (if there even is one, but that's up for interpretation) develop and grow into its own thing, and that's exactly what I think Chibnall is doing. Unlike the Moffat era and some of the RTD era where the storyline of the show was just kinda running in circles, Chibnall is actively pushing the story forward and opening up many new corners of the DW universe for us to explore in the coming decades. Destroying Gallifrey, turning all remaining Time Lords into Cybermen and extending the story potential for the Doctor's past indefinitely is an exciting new status quo for the franchise and I'd hate to see the next showrunner just erase that (or worse, for Chibnall to give in to the hate and erase it himself) because we'd just be back at square one again. For all we know, Chibnall seems to be doing one last hurrah for the celebration of DW lore and leaving the future of the franchise to be inherited by the next generation of fans, this time totally unbound and with less restrictions than ever before. A fresh, revamped sandbox for us future writers and showrunners to play with. Our wish of looking to the future might be the way being paved by the current creative team right now.
You're absolutely right; one of the biggest issues with the Moffat era was his desire to both pander to fans and make an imprint on the show. The result was Moffat changing things that didn't need to be changed, and getting a ton of references wrong. Though this was most prevelant then, I'd argue that RTD had this problem as well, and don't even get me started on Chibnall.
I'd say up until series 7 myself but yes even though it isn't my thing at all, I can't deny the early Smith stuff is fresh and original. (I still think series 6 is shit though).
I think it all depends. Remembrance of the Daleks and World Enough and Time/The Doctor Falls have fan service but they tell strong stories. The Deadly Assassin uses its lore to create a compelling story. However Ascension of the Cybermen/The Timeless Children simply exists for the purpose of furthering lore and isn't telling its own story and the Daleks, Cybermen, the Master and the Time Lords keep being brought back just because they are recognisable rather than having an interesting story to tell with them as villains. This has also meant we have had a lack of new and interesting villains for the Doctor to face
Yep that's pretty much my argument throughout the video. WEAT is a particularly good example of bringing an enemy back because you have a reat idea of what to do with them. I'd say TDF fall flat in this regard but oh well. I feel that Rememberance could have been a bit lighter on lore references but it doesn't get in the way of a good story so I won't complain. The difference between something like The Deadly Assassin and The Timeless Children, is Deadly Assassin develops existing lore further as a means for telling a great story. The Timeless Children changes previously established lore just for the sake of artificially generating interest among fans as it doesn't actually tell its own story, it's just an info dump of new lore to take in. There's nothing inherently interesting or compelling about it.
I have to say the Doctor Falls is one of my favorite finales and I have been a defender of the Capaldi era. That being said it still had the annoying habit of unnecessarily rewriting history but it at least did have a lot of strong individual episodes. Whereas almost the entirety of Series 12 is dedicated to the same tiresome story arc all building towards the Timeless Child reveal and the biggest downfall in the Jodie Whitaker era so far for me has been the lack of originality in its storytelling which has made the series feel incredibly stale
Even if you like TDF, you must admit it is annoying they basically ignore the great story that was building up in WEAT in favour of something else. I wanted TDF to finish that story rather than completely changing what the plot was about.
I get your point but I think it more developed and shifted focus for me rather than change what the plot was about. Was all told from Bill's point of view as she witnessed the origins of the Cybermen so her dealing with becoming a Cyberman felt fitting. A majority of the same themes still carry over to the second half. A lot of Moffat two partners shift slightly in the second half which sometimes works and sometimes doesn't but in this case it worked for me. I've never liked the idea of rejecting Cyber programming as it diminishes their threat but with Bill's time under the Monks it made a lot of sense and brought some good character drama. But I do wish they left the flying Cybermen out of the story altogether
Isn't it ironic that my very first Doctor Who story was Attack of the Cybermen? I only saw the 2nd part, but I was captivated by Colin Baker's performance, the cybermen and the gore.
Agree 100% I was really upset about all the changes to the lore, it's not needed and if done well I'd be up for it but it's so badly and horrifically done
Well said. For a show about a vagabond travelling across space and time, a key ingredient to the shows appeal is a sense of wonder of exploring the cosmos. Ecclestons season really captures this as does much of Tennants tenure but it began to wane and rely heavily on callbacks. I was actually excited when Chibnall signaled that his first season would not include any old villains. Unfortunately the results were middling due to weak scripts and a lacklustre cast. I stopped watching as it was clear the show is stuck in neutral. Going back to the classic series for inspiration is fine and in fact there are many overlooked characters and antagonists that deserve a return - the Autons, mechanoids, heck even Sabalom Glitz could be brought back but a good story is still the principal need.
If you quit at series 11 don't bother coming back as series 12 was far worse. It had the shit lore change of the year story arc structure cribbed from Moffat but with the incredibly boring writing style of Chibnall.
This is a topic I'm incredibly passionate about. It depresses me that Doctor Who nowadays seems to derive its identity solely from its own past instead of striving for something new and innovative; it's understandable to do this kind of thing for maybe an anniversary series, but when regular ass seasons have major storyarcs entirely dedicated to obsessing over and subverting 40 year old plot points that only 5% of the audience are going to know about, I feel both disappointment and second hand embarassment. What's worse is that fandom seems to encourage this form of storytelling, and I don't get why - Fugitive of the Judoon isn't even a story in its own right, it's just a massive dangling carrot to lure fans on to watch the finale and stick around for Jack's return, wasting an entire episode slot merely to tease people with the promise of interesting adventures in the future, instead of actually *telling an interesting adventure* with said episode. And yet fandom not only seems to love that episode and consider it a highlight of the Chibnall era so far, but I saw many people taking umbrage with Praxeus & Can You Hear Me? - two episodes that actually *ARE* stories in their own right regardless of what one may think of them - because they didn't continue following up on the fanwanky lorebaiting crap of Jack and the Fugitive Doctor. It depresses me that both the writers and fans of this show seem to have these misplaced priorities.
Couldn't agree more. It depresses me how popular Fugitive of the Judoon is, its just a glorified teaser trailer with no substance of its own. People are suckered in by cheap shocks.
2:31 YEA! Because The King's Demons is literally just The Time Meddler but worse. Watching that serial for the first time just made me want to watch the Time Meddler again. Lol
I love this video and agree. The show should focus on creating great character driven stories rather than hugely relying on nostalgia and the past. Nothing wrong with nostalgia but it should be used to improve or celebrate the stories not be a central focus. Fans as a whole don't want nostalgia, we want good stories. As for the day of the Doctor, beign the 50th special that gets a free pass for being nostalgic... 😋
What's the newest piece of original law? Not changing previous but genuine new lore. Maybe the time war 15 years ago. The show needs to start going down new avenues of the universe rather than tread the old into the dirt. Ultimately the references are ever so cheap that its upsetting how many people are happily lapping them up without realising nothing good is coming from them.
I agree (almost) wholly, I feel like I can see a parallel starting between the classic and modern series, after an aniversary, the show becomes more concerned with pleasing and outraging fans with needless continuity. It's actually rather clever that they made the doctor a woman when they did, as that caused a huge upswing in viewers in series 11, but thats only a temporary solution, and one that can't be repeated. Once again the viewing figures are down, and the show is back to needless fanwanking about the doctor and their past, and once the viewers are gone, they're gone. You can't get them back with quality alone, so even if they up their game in that regard, people have already left. Of course it isn't a one to one comparison, there is a compelling argument that doctor who being constantly moved around the schedules was one thing that led to the end of the show, but even then there is a thousand other shows that you can watch whenever you want, with on demand streaming, and if the general public are convinced that the show is just continuity nonsense, then they will switch off, and start watching something else.
I believe they have too. Have you really heard many non fans talk about Doctor Who since the annaverisary with the exception of Jodie Whittaker becoming the Doctor?
A time I can forgive fan service was in World Enough And Time with the mondasian cybermen. For me, the tenth planet wasn’t the Greatest story. I still like it and the cybermen design is really creepy, but they didn’t explore them to their full potential. So World Enough And Time takes those designs and shows the conversion process, on a character we care about with Bill, and as a result, it creates a fantastic episode which was really unsettling and enhances the cybermen. But there are plenty of instances of bad fan service. Like what purpose do the classic Daleks from the series 9 opener serve? Fan service can be good if you have something interesting to tell, but when done wrong, it alienates casual viewers and frustrates fans. That’s my take on it
In that case it's not really fanservice. it uses an old idea, yes, but it pushes it further than it previously had been and does something new with it as opposed to just wallowing in it. It uses the shows past as a jumping off point to do something new.
My response would be the same as a human being from earth's, if you have an interesting idea to do with an old monster, by all means do it. I did say that in the video. World Enough and Time is a great example of that.
@@LordSlarr oh yeah that’s where I was going with it. Should’ve explained myself better, but it was something which did excite fans for nostalgic reasons, so that’s why I said it was fan service.
I couldn't agree more. In addition to prioritising lore over storytelling, this constant retreading of the past also gives rise to the same types of concepts and stories being told time and time again and it just gets so stale. I mean think of the last great dalek story there was, or the last memorable base under siege or pseudo historical. As you said the main draw with doctor who is that it can go anywhere and do anything, so why are we getting the same sorts of stories all of the time? There's only so much you can do with the same formats and concepts. Also the new series seems to have an obsession with earth and humans. Unless your doing an earthbound series, its really annoying if almost all stories either take place on earth or are about humans. Where's the exploration of brand new alien races and cultures gone? In series 12 for example the only non-human planet / culture we get to see is gallifrey and its not like we havent seen that a million times before.
@@LordSlarr exaclty it makes no sense to me, the one thing chibnall come close to getting right was the dalek in resolution the way it is beaten is silly but thats the most on screen deaths directly from a dalek in over a decade if I remember correctly
Oh yeah, Resolution was a half great Dalek story, everything with the Dalek was pretty good. It's let down by the really shit Ryan's Dad subplot which completely ruins the pacing.
10:10 disagree about TDOTD, it’s been covered in videos other than mine, but I think it comes down to a difference in philosophy about the Doctor in the RTD and Moffat era: looking at the body count. RTD views the Doctor as the oncoming storm, a man bathed and haunted by battle and death trying to save who he could, and Moffat a fairytale like person that he could never see destroying a whole planet of (his own) people like that (hell even 4 couldn’t convince himself to destroy the Daleks) and due to NuWho’s whole only the current doctor remembers, it maintains everything that happens, if the War Doctor thinks he destroyed his people and literally everyone else thinks the time lords are gone, directly molding his future incarnations I just don’t feel it changes anything for me. 13:30 I’m also surprised you didn’t mention the whole soft reboot that was series 10.
If Moffat doesn't have that view of the Doctor that's fine, just ignore the time war as it mostly was set to rest by the end of the RTD era. I just think it gets in the way of good storytelling basing whole episodes around rewriting lore instead of telling a new and unique story. It's also quite disrespectful to what RTD did in his era which has effectively been made null and void. Writers should do what they like in their own era but shouldn't go messing around with others imo. I like series 10 although I disagree with it being a soft reboot. It was pretty similar to the rest of Moffat's Doctor Who.
I'd a feeling that Dr Who had disappeared up it's own arse when Matt Smith was "rebooting" the Universe. But the problem of showrunners stacking up more and more grandiose canon-redefining convoluted arcs goes back to Davies and escalated each season. Chibnall's era was the one where it all collapsed because - as you cogently point out - his writing is shite. Had the show been given to someone more competent than Chibnall, who got back to basic good story telling then it would have prospered. But Chibnall has done too much damage at this stage. He may not have been the first to go down the route of extreme retconning - which is your main thesis - but the thesis is incomplete without the observation that his contribution is the one that makes the show unsalvagable.
RTD finales definitley went way over the top for my taste, but I didn't feel that they messed with the lore particularly. They were at least trying to tell new stories. I still identify this as a phenomena which in new who at least started in the late Matt Smith era. I was happy Chibnall did go back to basics in series 11, but you're right a lack of competant writing, characterisation and energy made it fall flat. Now he's went headlong into the exact territory that made the Moffat era crash and burn in series 12.
@@LordSlarr Yes indeed. Looking back, the tour-de-force first season of Tom Baker was a greatest hits throwback with the Sontarans, Daleks and Cybermen returning in quick succession. However, it did have the Robot (so-so), and the Ark in Space which for me was the defining story of that season (had me riveted when I was 7 watching it). The moral of the story is that you should not be overly reliant on old ideas, and need to introduce fresh concepts - but they need to be engaging and well-written. Good writing holds things together.
To be honest, Revenge Of The Cybermen and Sontaran Experiment are easily the weakest of that season and some of the worst stories of the Hinchcliffe era. Season 12 is great because of Robot, Ark In Space and Genesis.
@@LordSlarr Agreed - plus the Cybermen were new to me as they'd never featured in the Pertwee era. They're a good example of recurring monsters that lost their initial impact.
That is certainly a format I'd be in favour of! I myself would actually change it a lot more though. The most popular televsiion today is event television, so what I'd want to do is only make like 3 stories a year but make them long and have a lot of effort put into them. Then they can have the shit promoted out of them with strong cliffhangers helping to spread excitement. Then we could have focussed, well developed stories which are able to capture a much wider audience as each episode would be an event with no room for filler.
Reminds me of the current season of one of my favorite DW fan fictions: WIDWWA aka What Of Doctor Who Wasn't Axed? I recommend you check it out (it's available on WordPress and its own Wiki).
@@LordSlarr The hybrid is the relation between the two characters, not a single entity. Also, in the episode it is said that's the hybrid unravels the web of time (The Doctor broke the web of time by saving Clara), the Hybrid will stand upon the ruins of Gallifrey (they stands on the ruins of Gallifrey in the end of the universe) and that it would break billions of hearts to heals is own (The Doctor kills himself billions time in order to see Clara again) Say what do you want about Hell Bent, it's a great parody of telling a story without using one single piece of lore and to luring everyone about it.
Its a huge problem with the series but its not the only problem by far. However it has pissed me off alot to see the classics shat on by poor writers changing things for no real good reason. In my opinion they have gone too far and there is no going back like in the 1980s
I never said it was the only problem, I think series 11 demonstrated that well given it avoided this issue. But I do think currently it is the biggest the show faces.
@@LordSlarr its certainly a problem, its just too much as you say. The same can be said for the formula of the show, its all way way off at the moment. Personally i think during 2005 they had the perfect formula, just the right amount of everything, yeah there was like little to no classic referrences but i dont personally think the show needs them if its written well, its nice for the odd story. I rememeber round 2006-2009 my main gripe with the show is that it didnt have any classic show laws or ethos or design, it was all new but i came to regret my gripe when steven moffat went overboard.
The RTD era of the show was really competently done and I can't criticise it in that respect but it really isn't my thing at all and I hope the show doesn't go back to that. It would be preferable to the current way it's being done though.
@@LordSlarr what was it about the rtd era you didnt like? For me it was the comedy getting out of hand and taking over and steven moffat type things like the tardis reacting like a car in end of time part 1
I did like series 1 but for me Tennant didn't feel like the Doctor due to how often he acted out of character imo. Plus I found it getting a bit too soapy a lot of the time, like series 3 was based around a rebound relationship not working out! That's not doctor who for me.
Series 11 killed Doctor Who, Series 12 lowered the casket into the grave, and The Timeless Children attached a thermal detonator to the casket and blew the corpse up so much so that the nuclei separated from the electrons, now there is nothing left but rapidly dissipating energy.
If that's the message you got from this video, you're mistaken friend. This is an issue that has been killing Doctor Who since 2013 and isn't just Chibnall's fault. If anything, series 11 was a step in the right direction, just very poorly executed. Series 12 definitley is one of the worst examples of what I was discussing however you're right. But remember, the big problems Doctor Who has today date back to the Moffat era, it's not just a Chibnall thing.
@@LordSlarr All that identity political garbage didn't help, nor did the third wave feminism the 'star' of the show was exhibiting on a regular basis, even outside of the show, nor was it kosher for most of the Series 11 episode themes to be strictly anti white, anti straight, anti male, distinctly anti Trump, alienating the conservative Doctor Who fans, of which there are many. I felt insulted and unwanted so I promptly said, so be it.
An example of a perfect call back to me, is in Tooth and Claw where the Doctor has a Scottish accent and uses the alias James McCrimmon
It's not integral to the plot, If you don't know who Jamie is it doesn't affect the story, but for Classic fans it's just a great little nod
Great video by the way
I did say in the video, there's nothing wrong with references now and again. The problem is when the call backs and lore changes overshadow the telling of new stories. RTD pretty much never put a foot wrong in this regard.
@@LordSlarr Except for the Master being insane because of drums in his head
You got me there, I hated that.
This is easily up there as one of your best videos and another reminder of why you're one of my favorite Doctor Who UA-camrs.
Thank you very much man, that means a lot especially from a long time viewer such as yourself.
A point well made. Lore is not a substitute for an actual story and relying on nostalgia as a crutch is causing the show's ability to write something outside of a nostalgic bubble to wither away like an atrophying muscle.
What bothers me the most is how Modern Who seems to view the Classic Series. Rather than being the history of the Doctor's adventures and the History of this universe, the Classic Series has been treated as cheap fanservice to be randomly sprinkled throughout episodes in the hopes of baiting interest from a waining audience (looking at you, Hell Bent). As Modern Who progressed, it rarely took the effort to actually build on what came before (Empress of Mars is a rare instance where Modern Who actually further developed worldbuilding started in the Classic era).
What's even more infuriating than the constant pointless references to its own history, is when it would get those references blatantly wrong (everything they've done with Rassilon). It really makes it seem like the writers don't care and are getting their Classic Who lore by glancing at the wiki.
And, personally, I'm really salty that Modern Who's show runners kept endlessly trying to completely rewrite and demystify the Doctor and Gallifrey's history in ridiculous and contradictory ways, yet we STILL couldn't get a Lungbarrow adaptation? Come on! They'll do this nonsense about the Doctor leaving Gallifrey because of a hybrid prophecy, but looms go too far? Like I said, this one's just a personal gripe. I love the Cartmel Master plan and Lungbarrow, and it's always felt like this big unresolved plotline that all Modern show runners have refused to pick up on in favor of their inferior versions of the Doctor's/Gallifrey's past. Either build upon what's already been set up, or just leave it alone!
Anyway, sorry for the rant. Great video!
Don't apologise for the rant, you're absolutley right. Dioctor Who's lore and past has became a cheap gimmick for showrunners to exploit to artificially generate interest in their stories which can't actually stand on their own two feet. All we want are new and exciting stories.
Honestly I couldn’t agree more. Like there’s a reason the most popular era of Who was Season 12-14 because there were no returning monsters for two years.
Cheers Jacob, I absolutley agree eith you there. Hinchcliffe and Holmes focussed purely on the quality of stories they could tell and it is consistently excellent.
But didn't Season 12 have the Daleks, Cybermen and a Sontaran, all of which were returning Monsters?
And that was easily the weakest season of Hinchcliffe's run. Only the Daleks had a particularly good story.
@@theoutcastboi “because there were no returning monsters for two years”. Then The Outcast says what about season 12.
@@LordSlarr season 12 was excellent.
Some individual points made in this video I don't agree with (I'm a notorious Timeless Child apologist, for example), but the general message and core point is something I can understand and get behind. Doctor Who is one of the longest running TV shows ever and is therefore allowed to flex its history every now and then, but I fully agree that the Moffat era overdid it, not only with the large storylines, but also with the small in-jokes and references which I totally see being jarring for casual audiences.
The larger problem, however, is that there are two types of Doctor Who fans: The ones who just want fun Sci-Fi adventures and want the show to look towards its future (usually general audience members, but also minority fans like you and me) and then there are the fans who are super proud of the show's heritage/history and seek reward for knowing what an Omega or a Thal is, making them actively demand more callbacks and references like they did after Series 11 came out.
The creatives behind the scenes have to juggle the two styles to keep long term fans happy, while also keeping the interest of the casual audience. I absolutely cannot imagine that being an easy task, which is why I'm more inclined to give Moffat and Chibnall the benefit of the doubt.
I personally want each Doctor Who era to create its own iconography and be confident in its own fresh ideas instead of relying on nostalgia and fanwank, but the megafan part of me is definitely interested in seeing the overarching story of the show (if there even is one, but that's up for interpretation) develop and grow into its own thing, and that's exactly what I think Chibnall is doing. Unlike the Moffat era and some of the RTD era where the storyline of the show was just kinda running in circles, Chibnall is actively pushing the story forward and opening up many new corners of the DW universe for us to explore in the coming decades. Destroying Gallifrey, turning all remaining Time Lords into Cybermen and extending the story potential for the Doctor's past indefinitely is an exciting new status quo for the franchise and I'd hate to see the next showrunner just erase that (or worse, for Chibnall to give in to the hate and erase it himself) because we'd just be back at square one again.
For all we know, Chibnall seems to be doing one last hurrah for the celebration of DW lore and leaving the future of the franchise to be inherited by the next generation of fans, this time totally unbound and with less restrictions than ever before. A fresh, revamped sandbox for us future writers and showrunners to play with.
Our wish of looking to the future might be the way being paved by the current creative team right now.
You're absolutely right; one of the biggest issues with the Moffat era was his desire to both pander to fans and make an imprint on the show. The result was Moffat changing things that didn't need to be changed, and getting a ton of references wrong. Though this was most prevelant then, I'd argue that RTD had this problem as well, and don't even get me started on Chibnall.
How was it a problem in the RTD era? Genuine question as I thought he did a good job at avoiding this kind of thing for the most part.
@@LordSlarr frankly there's only one example, but it REALLY annoyed me; his retconning of Sarah Jane from the character she was into a proto-Rose.
I feel that's more a problem of mis-characterisation than the issues I discussed.
@@LordSlarr I suppose so.
I'd say up until series 7 myself but yes even though it isn't my thing at all, I can't deny the early Smith stuff is fresh and original. (I still think series 6 is shit though).
I think it all depends. Remembrance of the Daleks and World Enough and Time/The Doctor Falls have fan service but they tell strong stories. The Deadly Assassin uses its lore to create a compelling story. However Ascension of the Cybermen/The Timeless Children simply exists for the purpose of furthering lore and isn't telling its own story and the Daleks, Cybermen, the Master and the Time Lords keep being brought back just because they are recognisable rather than having an interesting story to tell with them as villains. This has also meant we have had a lack of new and interesting villains for the Doctor to face
Yep that's pretty much my argument throughout the video. WEAT is a particularly good example of bringing an enemy back because you have a reat idea of what to do with them. I'd say TDF fall flat in this regard but oh well. I feel that Rememberance could have been a bit lighter on lore references but it doesn't get in the way of a good story so I won't complain.
The difference between something like The Deadly Assassin and The Timeless Children, is Deadly Assassin develops existing lore further as a means for telling a great story. The Timeless Children changes previously established lore just for the sake of artificially generating interest among fans as it doesn't actually tell its own story, it's just an info dump of new lore to take in. There's nothing inherently interesting or compelling about it.
I have to say the Doctor Falls is one of my favorite finales and I have been a defender of the Capaldi era. That being said it still had the annoying habit of unnecessarily rewriting history but it at least did have a lot of strong individual episodes. Whereas almost the entirety of Series 12 is dedicated to the same tiresome story arc all building towards the Timeless Child reveal and the biggest downfall in the Jodie Whitaker era so far for me has been the lack of originality in its storytelling which has made the series feel incredibly stale
Even if you like TDF, you must admit it is annoying they basically ignore the great story that was building up in WEAT in favour of something else. I wanted TDF to finish that story rather than completely changing what the plot was about.
I get your point but I think it more developed and shifted focus for me rather than change what the plot was about. Was all told from Bill's point of view as she witnessed the origins of the Cybermen so her dealing with becoming a Cyberman felt fitting. A majority of the same themes still carry over to the second half. A lot of Moffat two partners shift slightly in the second half which sometimes works and sometimes doesn't but in this case it worked for me. I've never liked the idea of rejecting Cyber programming as it diminishes their threat but with Bill's time under the Monks it made a lot of sense and brought some good character drama. But I do wish they left the flying Cybermen out of the story altogether
Isn't it ironic that my very first Doctor Who story was Attack of the Cybermen? I only saw the 2nd part, but I was captivated by Colin Baker's performance, the cybermen and the gore.
Agree 100% I was really upset about all the changes to the lore, it's not needed and if done well I'd be up for it but it's so badly and horrifically done
I think it's just best avoided myself. The show needs to move on now and tell new stories.
Tharries recommended your video, and I have to say it is first rate and I really do agree with you on every level.
Subbed.
Thank you very much, always great to have new recruits!
Well said. For a show about a vagabond travelling across space and time, a key ingredient to the shows appeal is a sense of wonder of exploring the cosmos. Ecclestons season really captures this as does much of Tennants tenure but it began to wane and rely heavily on callbacks. I was actually excited when Chibnall signaled that his first season would not include any old villains. Unfortunately the results were middling due to weak scripts and a lacklustre cast. I stopped watching as it was clear the show is stuck in neutral. Going back to the classic series for inspiration is fine and in fact there are many overlooked characters and antagonists that deserve a return - the Autons, mechanoids, heck even Sabalom Glitz could be brought back but a good story is still the principal need.
If you quit at series 11 don't bother coming back as series 12 was far worse. It had the shit lore change of the year story arc structure cribbed from Moffat but with the incredibly boring writing style of Chibnall.
This is a topic I'm incredibly passionate about. It depresses me that Doctor Who nowadays seems to derive its identity solely from its own past instead of striving for something new and innovative; it's understandable to do this kind of thing for maybe an anniversary series, but when regular ass seasons have major storyarcs entirely dedicated to obsessing over and subverting 40 year old plot points that only 5% of the audience are going to know about, I feel both disappointment and second hand embarassment.
What's worse is that fandom seems to encourage this form of storytelling, and I don't get why - Fugitive of the Judoon isn't even a story in its own right, it's just a massive dangling carrot to lure fans on to watch the finale and stick around for Jack's return, wasting an entire episode slot merely to tease people with the promise of interesting adventures in the future, instead of actually *telling an interesting adventure* with said episode. And yet fandom not only seems to love that episode and consider it a highlight of the Chibnall era so far, but I saw many people taking umbrage with Praxeus & Can You Hear Me? - two episodes that actually *ARE* stories in their own right regardless of what one may think of them - because they didn't continue following up on the fanwanky lorebaiting crap of Jack and the Fugitive Doctor. It depresses me that both the writers and fans of this show seem to have these misplaced priorities.
Pavé César, ceux qui ne t'ont pas lu te saluent !
Can we make a list of episodes that aren't episodes? Just teasing and/or exposition
@@REFLEXiw The Timeless Children
Couldn't agree more. It depresses me how popular Fugitive of the Judoon is, its just a glorified teaser trailer with no substance of its own. People are suckered in by cheap shocks.
2:31 YEA! Because The King's Demons is literally just The Time Meddler but worse. Watching that serial for the first time just made me want to watch the Time Meddler again. Lol
I love this video and agree. The show should focus on creating great character driven stories rather than hugely relying on nostalgia and the past. Nothing wrong with nostalgia but it should be used to improve or celebrate the stories not be a central focus. Fans as a whole don't want nostalgia, we want good stories. As for the day of the Doctor, beign the 50th special that gets a free pass for being nostalgic... 😋
Cheers mate!
You are by far my favourite doctor who channel, always so spot on with your points
Thank you very much! That means a lot.
Excellent video man! Couldn't agree with you more!
Cheers mate, glad it is striking a chord with people.
What's the newest piece of original law? Not changing previous but genuine new lore. Maybe the time war 15 years ago. The show needs to start going down new avenues of the universe rather than tread the old into the dirt. Ultimately the references are ever so cheap that its upsetting how many people are happily lapping them up without realising nothing good is coming from them.
You're right, the only new lore that didn't rewrite the past probably was the time war.
I agree (almost) wholly, I feel like I can see a parallel starting between the classic and modern series, after an aniversary, the show becomes more concerned with pleasing and outraging fans with needless continuity. It's actually rather clever that they made the doctor a woman when they did, as that caused a huge upswing in viewers in series 11, but thats only a temporary solution, and one that can't be repeated. Once again the viewing figures are down, and the show is back to needless fanwanking about the doctor and their past, and once the viewers are gone, they're gone. You can't get them back with quality alone, so even if they up their game in that regard, people have already left. Of course it isn't a one to one comparison, there is a compelling argument that doctor who being constantly moved around the schedules was one thing that led to the end of the show, but even then there is a thousand other shows that you can watch whenever you want, with on demand streaming, and if the general public are convinced that the show is just continuity nonsense, then they will switch off, and start watching something else.
I believe they have too. Have you really heard many non fans talk about Doctor Who since the annaverisary with the exception of Jodie Whittaker becoming the Doctor?
Merry Christmas 🎄
Merry Christmas to you too
A time I can forgive fan service was in World Enough And Time with the mondasian cybermen. For me, the tenth planet wasn’t the Greatest story. I still like it and the cybermen design is really creepy, but they didn’t explore them to their full potential. So World Enough And Time takes those designs and shows the conversion process, on a character we care about with Bill, and as a result, it creates a fantastic episode which was really unsettling and enhances the cybermen. But there are plenty of instances of bad fan service. Like what purpose do the classic Daleks from the series 9 opener serve? Fan service can be good if you have something interesting to tell, but when done wrong, it alienates casual viewers and frustrates fans. That’s my take on it
In that case it's not really fanservice. it uses an old idea, yes, but it pushes it further than it previously had been and does something new with it as opposed to just wallowing in it. It uses the shows past as a jumping off point to do something new.
@@ahumanbeingfromtheearth1502 yeah that’s what I was getting at. But it is exciting for fans, and casual audiences can follow it.
My response would be the same as a human being from earth's, if you have an interesting idea to do with an old monster, by all means do it. I did say that in the video. World Enough and Time is a great example of that.
@@LordSlarr oh yeah that’s where I was going with it. Should’ve explained myself better, but it was something which did excite fans for nostalgic reasons, so that’s why I said it was fan service.
I paused the mandalorian to watch your video 😀 worth it
I'm flattered to hear I'm that good! I do enjoy the Mandalorian myself.
@@LordSlarr yeah it’s what’s getting me back into Star Wars. Nearly finished series 2 and I love it. You’re welcome
I couldn't agree more. In addition to prioritising lore over storytelling, this constant retreading of the past also gives rise to the same types of concepts and stories being told time and time again and it just gets so stale. I mean think of the last great dalek story there was, or the last memorable base under siege or pseudo historical. As you said the main draw with doctor who is that it can go anywhere and do anything, so why are we getting the same sorts of stories all of the time? There's only so much you can do with the same formats and concepts. Also the new series seems to have an obsession with earth and humans. Unless your doing an earthbound series, its really annoying if almost all stories either take place on earth or are about humans. Where's the exploration of brand new alien races and cultures gone? In series 12 for example the only non-human planet / culture we get to see is gallifrey and its not like we havent seen that a million times before.
Yeah the saturation of earth based stories is definitley a big issue too.
I completely agree.
Moffat really did the daleks dirty didn't he 😂😂😂
It felt like he didn't enjoy writing for them at all. If that's the case why didn't he let someone else have a chance.
@@LordSlarr exaclty it makes no sense to me, the one thing chibnall come close to getting right was the dalek in resolution the way it is beaten is silly but thats the most on screen deaths directly from a dalek in over a decade if I remember correctly
Oh yeah, Resolution was a half great Dalek story, everything with the Dalek was pretty good. It's let down by the really shit Ryan's Dad subplot which completely ruins the pacing.
@@LordSlarr hope they don't do a similar thing new years day im hopeful it'll blow my low expectations away 😂
@@LordSlarr I really liked into the Dalek personally but Asylum and The series 9 opener are rubbish
10:10 disagree about TDOTD, it’s been covered in videos other than mine, but I think it comes down to a difference in philosophy about the Doctor in the RTD and Moffat era: looking at the body count. RTD views the Doctor as the oncoming storm, a man bathed and haunted by battle and death trying to save who he could, and Moffat a fairytale like person that he could never see destroying a whole planet of (his own) people like that (hell even 4 couldn’t convince himself to destroy the Daleks) and due to NuWho’s whole only the current doctor remembers, it maintains everything that happens, if the War Doctor thinks he destroyed his people and literally everyone else thinks the time lords are gone, directly molding his future incarnations I just don’t feel it changes anything for me.
13:30 I’m also surprised you didn’t mention the whole soft reboot that was series 10.
If Moffat doesn't have that view of the Doctor that's fine, just ignore the time war as it mostly was set to rest by the end of the RTD era. I just think it gets in the way of good storytelling basing whole episodes around rewriting lore instead of telling a new and unique story. It's also quite disrespectful to what RTD did in his era which has effectively been made null and void. Writers should do what they like in their own era but shouldn't go messing around with others imo.
I like series 10 although I disagree with it being a soft reboot. It was pretty similar to the rest of Moffat's Doctor Who.
I'd a feeling that Dr Who had disappeared up it's own arse when Matt Smith was "rebooting" the Universe. But the problem of showrunners stacking up more and more grandiose canon-redefining convoluted arcs goes back to Davies and escalated each season. Chibnall's era was the one where it all collapsed because - as you cogently point out - his writing is shite.
Had the show been given to someone more competent than Chibnall, who got back to basic good story telling then it would have prospered.
But Chibnall has done too much damage at this stage. He may not have been the first to go down the route of extreme retconning - which is your main thesis - but the thesis is incomplete without the observation that his contribution is the one that makes the show unsalvagable.
RTD finales definitley went way over the top for my taste, but I didn't feel that they messed with the lore particularly. They were at least trying to tell new stories. I still identify this as a phenomena which in new who at least started in the late Matt Smith era.
I was happy Chibnall did go back to basics in series 11, but you're right a lack of competant writing, characterisation and energy made it fall flat. Now he's went headlong into the exact territory that made the Moffat era crash and burn in series 12.
@@LordSlarr Yes indeed. Looking back, the tour-de-force first season of Tom Baker was a greatest hits throwback with the Sontarans, Daleks and Cybermen returning in quick succession. However, it did have the Robot (so-so), and the Ark in Space which for me was the defining story of that season (had me riveted when I was 7 watching it). The moral of the story is that you should not be overly reliant on old ideas, and need to introduce fresh concepts - but they need to be engaging and well-written. Good writing holds things together.
To be honest, Revenge Of The Cybermen and Sontaran Experiment are easily the weakest of that season and some of the worst stories of the Hinchcliffe era. Season 12 is great because of Robot, Ark In Space and Genesis.
@@LordSlarr Agreed - plus the Cybermen were new to me as they'd never featured in the Pertwee era. They're a good example of recurring monsters that lost their initial impact.
They forgot what made them work in the first place.
If I ran the show I’d do a series of 5 two parters and ignore a story arch about the lore of the show
That is certainly a format I'd be in favour of! I myself would actually change it a lot more though. The most popular televsiion today is event television, so what I'd want to do is only make like 3 stories a year but make them long and have a lot of effort put into them. Then they can have the shit promoted out of them with strong cliffhangers helping to spread excitement. Then we could have focussed, well developed stories which are able to capture a much wider audience as each episode would be an event with no room for filler.
Reminds me of the current season of one of my favorite DW fan fictions: WIDWWA aka What Of Doctor Who Wasn't Axed? I recommend you check it out (it's available on WordPress and its own Wiki).
Really good video I followed 👍
Cheers mate, glad to have you on board!
The hybrid was the doctor and clara. I know most people dont like it but it was said. The video was great btw 👍
Okay but how’s that a hybrid? It’s two separate people.
How can a hybrid be two separate people?
Cheers glad you enjoyed!
Also didn’t Moffat say that afterwards in an interview?
Yeah I don't rememeber that being said in the episode
@@LordSlarr The hybrid is the relation between the two characters, not a single entity. Also, in the episode it is said that's the hybrid unravels the web of time (The Doctor broke the web of time by saving Clara), the Hybrid will stand upon the ruins of Gallifrey (they stands on the ruins of Gallifrey in the end of the universe) and that it would break billions of hearts to heals is own (The Doctor kills himself billions time in order to see Clara again)
Say what do you want about Hell Bent, it's a great parody of telling a story without using one single piece of lore and to luring everyone about it.
Honestly loved Season 20-22.
I do really like season 22 myself but I can't ignore how elements of it contributed towards killing the show.
Its a huge problem with the series but its not the only problem by far. However it has pissed me off alot to see the classics shat on by poor writers changing things for no real good reason. In my opinion they have gone too far and there is no going back like in the 1980s
I never said it was the only problem, I think series 11 demonstrated that well given it avoided this issue. But I do think currently it is the biggest the show faces.
@@LordSlarr its certainly a problem, its just too much as you say. The same can be said for the formula of the show, its all way way off at the moment. Personally i think during 2005 they had the perfect formula, just the right amount of everything, yeah there was like little to no classic referrences but i dont personally think the show needs them if its written well, its nice for the odd story. I rememeber round 2006-2009 my main gripe with the show is that it didnt have any classic show laws or ethos or design, it was all new but i came to regret my gripe when steven moffat went overboard.
The RTD era of the show was really competently done and I can't criticise it in that respect but it really isn't my thing at all and I hope the show doesn't go back to that. It would be preferable to the current way it's being done though.
@@LordSlarr what was it about the rtd era you didnt like? For me it was the comedy getting out of hand and taking over and steven moffat type things like the tardis reacting like a car in end of time part 1
I did like series 1 but for me Tennant didn't feel like the Doctor due to how often he acted out of character imo. Plus I found it getting a bit too soapy a lot of the time, like series 3 was based around a rebound relationship not working out! That's not doctor who for me.
Series 11 killed Doctor Who, Series 12 lowered the casket into the grave, and The Timeless Children attached a thermal detonator to the casket and blew the corpse up so much so that the nuclei separated from the electrons, now there is nothing left but rapidly dissipating energy.
If that's the message you got from this video, you're mistaken friend. This is an issue that has been killing Doctor Who since 2013 and isn't just Chibnall's fault. If anything, series 11 was a step in the right direction, just very poorly executed. Series 12 definitley is one of the worst examples of what I was discussing however you're right. But remember, the big problems Doctor Who has today date back to the Moffat era, it's not just a Chibnall thing.
@@LordSlarr All that identity political garbage didn't help, nor did the third wave feminism the 'star' of the show was exhibiting on a regular basis, even outside of the show, nor was it kosher for most of the Series 11 episode themes to be strictly anti white, anti straight, anti male, distinctly anti Trump, alienating the conservative Doctor Who fans, of which there are many. I felt insulted and unwanted so I promptly said, so be it.
I'm sorry to say but you're being utterly ridiculous. Doctor Who has never been anti male, straight or white.