| Author | Message | ||
     Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
Neil Gaiman has been confirmed as a writer for Matt Smith's second series as Doctor Who Woo-Who | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.156.233.165 |
Ooh -noo!  | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.153.33 |
Ooh-noo. For real. Smuggest man on the planet. | ||
| Barbara Roden (Nebuly) Username: Nebuly Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 216.232.190.19 |
Neil? Smug? I've met him several times over the years - mostly at the Baker Street Irregulars weekend in New York - and he's been unfailingly friendly, good-humoured, and great fun to talk to; if he's smug, he's kept it well hidden. Three years ago, in Minneapolis, he learned that Tim (then 9) was a huge DOCTOR WHO fan, and had a nice chat with him, during the course of which he advised Tim that he HAD to make sure he watched an episode called 'Blink', which hadn't yet aired in North America. Neil's words were to the effect that 'Blink' wasn't just one of the best DW episodes he'd ever seen, it was one of the best TV shows he'd ever seen, full stop. (As a side note, that episode starred a then unknown British actress named Carey Mulligan, who's been nominated for a Best Actress Oscar this year.) I, for one, can't wait to see what Neil does with a DW script. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.156.233.165 |
Hmm... it's not smugness, rather that Pixar quality, an impression of smugness that can't be pinned down. It's tricky, and not entirely unpleasant. Think of it as being like that thing some distant older male relatives do, of always striving to be entertaining and nice, us always feeling like there's a man behind the curtain in the corner. I know someone like this, and he's not nasty at all - in fact - Bluh... I have no idea what I'm going on about. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
Even if he was smug as a person (which, judging from the 3 times I've met him, he isn't) it wouldn't make any difference to his writing talent which IMHO is extremely good. If you want to match a material to a writer, matching Dr Who to Neil Gaiman is a fantastic choice. | ||
| Jonathan (Jonathan) Username: Jonathan Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 91.143.178.131 |
I had that Paul Cornell at my party the other week, and he confirmed as much before the official announcement. HAH! I WIN THE GEEK TOP TRUMPS. OH THE HEADY SENSE OF POWER! For the record Mr Gaiman is a very nice man and a very good writer. I've never ever known him to come across as smug, | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
Just out of interest Proto, have you ever met Neil gaiman? And what was your basis for claiming him to be the smuggest man on the planet? | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
Woo-Who! I'm with you too, Weber! Brilliant news, that.  And I've never met Neil Gaiman, so I've no idea what he's like as a person. Hmmmm, I wonder if he'll start to turn up at Doctor Who conventions soon?  | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.134.188 |
"Just out of interest Proto, have you ever met Neil gaiman? And what was your basis for claiming him to be the smuggest man on the planet?" Yes, I've met him twice. He was smug. Not evil, not dripping venom from fangs, just smug. | ||
| Clive (Clive) Username: Clive Registered: 10-2009 Posted From: 81.104.165.168 |
He has also just got engaged to the wonderful Amanda Palmer from the band Dresden Dolls. Perfectly entitled to be smug i'd say! I do know what you mean though as i know a lot of people who seem quite annoyed by him. I think it has to do, in part, to the type of 'cult' writer he is and the fans he attracts. It's a strange one certainly but i can see how in some of his work he can come across as smug. I really love a lot of his earlier comic work particularly the stuff he did with Dave McKean; Mr Punch, Signal To Noise, Violent Cases etc and Sandman is pretty wonderful for the most part as is a lot of other smaller stuff (Miracleman, Hellblazer etc) but a lot of his later comic writing is a bit too self-congratulatory and, um, smug. There was one horrible one off semi-biographical comic which told of how on evening he was taken out by his 'celebrity' friend Johnathan Ross to see a circus show. It was a horrible read. I also seem to remember him incorporating his young daughters crayon drawn stories into one piece. These sort of things come across as horribly smug i think. I've got his most recent comics work, Batman, on the to read pile so i think i'll get through them tonight and see how those are. His Eternals wasn't too bad. I haven't read a lot of his prose work though. Some short stories were okish i guess but i've always been put off his novels after a a couple of chapters. I'm sure he'll do a great job with Dr Who though! | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.251.97 |
"There was one horrible one off semi-biographical comic which told of how on evening he was taken out by his 'celebrity' friend Johnathan Ross to see a circus show. It was a horrible read." As a comic, that sounds unintentinoally hilarious. A bit like Patrick Stewart on EXTRAS. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.251.97 |
Speech bubble: "Hello Jonathan Ross!" Speech bubble:"Hello, Neil Gaiman, my friend!" | ||
| Coral (Coral) Username: Coral Registered: 10-2008 Posted From: 90.216.127.4 |
I was only in it to ogle David Tennant, but I DO think that Mark Gatiss writes the best DW. Gaiman's too pop. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
>>I was only in it to ogle David Tennant<< Yes, sadly that particular perk from watching it is no longer available.  | ||
| Coral (Coral) Username: Coral Registered: 10-2008 Posted From: 90.216.127.4 |
Shame, I've seen the new chap, he looks about twelve years old. I'm possibly getting old, gripe, gripe! | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
The new chap is 26 or 27. I think we need to trust Moffat. He has written the best 6 episodes - Blink, The 2 about the boy with the gasmask, The clockwork robots episode and the Library episodes. He clearly knows what he's doing. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
Why would Gaiman being smug as a person (a claim which is refuted by most on this thread) affect his ability to write a Dr Who script? | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
I was impressed with Matt Smith from the regeneration scene in The End of Time. Reminded me of Sylvester McCoy's first appearance - though I'm aware that comparison might put some people off! | ||
| Coral (Coral) Username: Coral Registered: 10-2008 Posted From: 90.216.127.4 |
Probably none whatsoever, Weber, nobody can like everybody. I didn't know you were so into Dr Who, you really know your onions, and so does Caroline, so I'm prepared to be guided by you and give the new one a shot. But there's still a tiny corner of my heart that will stay forever Tennant... | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.84.197 |
"Why would Gaiman being smug as a person (a claim which is refuted by most on this thread) affect his ability to write a Dr Who script?" Because, as was pointed out, it infects his writing too. | ||
| Nathaniel Tapley (Natt) Username: Natt Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 78.146.213.182 |
Not sure they're the six best episodes. They're all very good, but Paul Cornell's 'Family of Blood' episodes are surely better than 'The Girl In The Fireplace', and I liked the one where Billie Piper went back in time and saved her own dad. (Just checked, 'Father's Day' was by Paul Cornell as well.) Overall, the quality of the writing looks to be excellent in the upcoming series, with six Moffatt episodes, one by Paul Cornell, one from Simon Nye, one from David Renwick, one from Mark Gatiss, and one from Richard Curtis (if you want to avoid smug writing, the Richard Curtis one is probably a good bet...). Unfortunately Gareth Roberts, who wrote two of my least favourite (and bizarrely popular) episodes ever: 'The Unicorn and the Wasp' and 'Planet of the Dead', is down for an episode. But one dud out of 13 isn't bad... | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
The Girl in the fireplace is in anyone with standards' top ten if not in their top 6. It can't be denied that Moffatt has the best record of any of the writers. I love the thought of David Renwick writing one. One foot in the grave and Jonathan Creek are two of my favourite programmes. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.191.138 |
I can never understand why RTD quite rightly gets slagged off for writing overwrought soap opera and hideously unfunny comedy on Dr Who yet Moffatt gets a free pass on The Girl in the Fireplace despite it being soppy as hell and featuring the Dcotor playing at being drunk. Ugh. Cornell's Father's Day was pretty dire too. YMMV. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
YMMV? I know it's possible to argue that the episode is just Tom's Midnight Garden in space with a monster thrown in, but it's a damned scary episode despite the sentiment. The clockwork robots are the second best new monsters in Who. "What's that ticking? the clock's broken" the best are obviously the Weeping Angels... | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
Didn't Father's day feature a remote control that the Doctor used to bring the Tardis to him? That would be very useful in several other episodes but has never reappeared... | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
When RTD throws in the sentiment, he tends to forget to make the episodes scary or exciting. Just sentimental. Moffatt managed to get a good balance between the different ingredients in that episode. that's why he gets the free pass on it. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.191.138 |
YMMV = Your Mileage May Vary. Okay, the clockwork monsters were pretty good but Moffatt diluted their threat wtih the scene where the Doctor is drunk with a tie around his head. And The Girl in the Fireplace didn't really work for me on the sentiment front as not only is it OTT but the Doctor's trying to cop off with Madame Pompadour while he's supposed to be in love with Rose. And it goes all style over substance with the horse/mirror scene. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.191.138 |
>>Didn't Father's day feature a remote control that the Doctor used to bring the Tardis to him? That would be very useful in several other episodes but has never reappeared... And Moffatt introduced the idea that the Doctor could open the TARDIS doors just by snapping his fingers which has been completely ignored by all the other writers. Gimmicks like that do seem to be one of the programme's problems; writers are more interested in trying to make the Doctor look cool than in making him interesting. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.191.138 |
To be fair I did enjoy Blink. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
Moffatts episodes tend to hold together well with their internal logic, even something as convoluted as Blink. RTD's tend to fall over when you apply logic to them - eg in Gridlock - there's a job 6 miles away, how do we get there? We can either walk, which will take maybe 2 hours, or we can get on the motorway which might take a year and we'll need to kidnap someone to put in the car as an extra passenger if we want to do it that fast... I wonder which one we'll go for? Is RTD really suggesting that people are that stupid? Admittedly, Ardal O'Hanlon as a cat was quite cool, but that's the only good thing about that episode. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.191.138 |
Yeah, RTD can be shit but I'm not defending RTD, I'm just suggesting that people apply the same critical reasoning to Moffatt. For example, in Silence of the Library/ Forest of the Dead is any explanation given for the trapdoor the Doctor escapes through? For the most part Moffatt appears to be milking the same ideas that he used in Comic Relief's Curse of the Fatal Death all those years ago. Hopefully he'll prove me wrong and deliver the goods when he takes over, I just get a sense of deja vu with the way RTD was hailed as god's gift to Dr Who until everyone had the chance to get bored of him. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
I never hailed him as a god. I got tired of him in his first series - unpronouncable monster names, silly plotting, and an episode set in the big brother house!!! IMHO he's only done one great episode - the one on the plane in the last full series. Everything else he's written has been distinctly average (not counting Waters of Mars which I'm on record here as rating highly because he co-wrote that) | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.191.138 |
Okay, you don't like RTD. I wasn't referring to you directly; I meant "people" as in "Dr Who fans in general" but I can see how I was a little unclear. However we're drifting away from the point of whether Moffatt is given an easy time by Dr who fans. (Paul Cornell is given an easy time as well but I tend to focus on Moffat as he gets more press, is taking over as producer and I've been following his career since Press Gang.) I'm too lazy to track down and analyse plot summaries of all Moffatt's episodes so I'm just going to link to someone else critiquing Silence in the Libary/ Forest of the Dead. The writer in quetion is a professional reveiwer and, I believe, a Dr Who expert so he'll do a better job of it than me anyhow. http://www.andrewrilstone.com/2008/08/48-and-49-silence-in-library-and-forest.ht ml | ||
| Nathaniel Tapley (Natt) Username: Natt Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 78.146.213.182 |
Um, much as there be a tendency towards the illogical and inconsistent in some of Moffatt's episodes, it doesn't begin to compare with the unutterable dreadfulness, and sheer cack-handed story-telling that characterises almost every RTD episode. From the review you link to: "History will record that this was the exact moment at which Doctor Who jumped the metaphorical shark." Really? This moment? Not the end of the series before when, like a magical mixture of Tinkerbell and Jesus, the Doctor is turned from an elf into a Timelord by everyone on earth wishing at the same time? At which point he learns he can fly? Not the Christmas before, when the Doctor, the ostensible hero, lets almost all of the characters on a ship sacrifice themselves so that he and Kylie can survive? Until he lets her do the same? Not the moment at the beginning of the series with The Silence In The Library when he brings back a character (Rose) who had definitely gone for good and was never coming back, thereby undermining and cheapening any emotion he had built into her departure? Not the endless transient pop-culture references that will date the show in a way that makes parts of it (and whole episodes with Anne-Robinsonbots) incomprehensible to our children? I could go on, but my fingers would get tired... Roll on, March... | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 147.252.230.141 |
Moffat works to earn the emotions, while perhaps RTD too often doesn't. Perhaps RTD knows television too well - he knows that production design, acting, effects and music can sometimes disguise a bad script and so doesn't hold his writing to as exacting a standard as Moffat. It'll be interesting to see if The Moff can maintain his standards while producing - he's going to be under the same pressures that RTD was under now. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
I think I prefer the "hey, there's a trapdoor I hadn't noticed" escape to the "I've reversed the polarity of the neutron flow which has neutralised your synapses" escape which was the other option. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
You can't beat Classic Who IMHO. | ||
| Clive (Clive) Username: Clive Registered: 10-2009 Posted From: 81.104.165.168 |
I really can't get on with Classic Who for some reason. I keep trying as i feel it is something i should love but i just find myself getting bored by it quite quickly for some reason. Pyramids of Mars, Ark in Space. I've tried all lot of them and for the most part i can't engage with it at all. My Doctor is late Baker/Davidson but even nostalgia can't stop me from turning off. I don't know why i can't get into it as i am such a fan of other 60/70/80ss science fiction. I can watch Sapphire & Steel on an endless loop for example as well as Prisoner and the Avengers. I keep thinking there is something wrong with me. I did enjoy the Pertwee Inferno story though so i guess there is still hope. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.191.138 |
Great. People are criticising RTD's early Who scripts instead of just saying he lost his way towards the end and at least entertaining the idea that while Moffatt is better he isn't the second coming. That's all I wanted. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.191.138 |
Classic Who seems a bit slow these days but I find New Who to be too frantic. | ||
| Clive (Clive) Username: Clive Registered: 10-2009 Posted From: 81.104.165.168 |
True, it does seem slow but that doesn't stop me loving the snail like pace of Sapphire & Steel. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.191.138 |
For the most part I found S&S too slow and repetitive. The four parters were pretty good though. Less padding. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.156.233.165 |
'Not the end of the series before when, like a magical mixture of Tinkerbell and Jesus, the Doctor is turned from an elf into a Timelord by everyone on earth wishing at the same time? At which point he learns he can fly?' I HATED that bit! Old Who can be tiresome now, but back in the day it was on once a week and often very strange indeed - which was enough for this former munchkin. RTD can be lazier than most writers, but has often been very good indeed - indeed if he hadn't been we wouldn't be here now talking about the next series of the show. I think he got tired of it myself. Imagine being told the bouncy castle was all yours, then being told it would be yours to bounce in for the next four years - we'd all lose interest after a while. I hated it when the assistants kept getting carted out again and again, too. It made it a hard show to rewatch. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.156.233.165 |
I've been watching S&S over the past few weeks and much of it is awful, sadly - it almost feels like a collage of weird and random moments with no narrative drive. People walking up and down stairs for ages and a woman's eyes turning mega blue again and again and again. But for much of it there is a lot of oddness to make it worth watching; I for one like the one with the Changeling child in it - it is so strange. Not on with the last one yet, which my best memories are of. I actually think the show should come back. Now we can hold it up and see the bits of it that worked I think it'd be better. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.191.138 |
McCallum and Lumley were brilliant even if I was disappointed in the show itself. I think there's some audio stuff out there with new stories. Possibly with different actors. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.156.233.165 |
They were great - possibly the best stuff McCallum has done. The hardness of his portrayal was quite shocking at times, yet in his eyes we saw other stuff. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.191.138 |
Plus, he did this tune which was later sampled by Dr Dre. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pG_3jZxzlo | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
When I rewatch Classic Who I guess I metaphorically go back in a time capsule myself and watch it again through the eyes of a child. I know that sounds strange, but you really do have to suspend disbelief when you watch it, and try to remember the era in which it was produced so that you can see beyond the dodgy special effects and so on. I love it! I never could get into Sapphire and Steel, even though I had a thing about David McCallum in The Man From UNCLE. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 147.252.230.141 |
I've just one Assignement left of S&S to watch. They're hugely variable in quality, but at their best, have bags of atmosphere. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
I remember loving the House that jack Built storyline. |