Moffat was an excellent writer of individual episodes who in my opinion was not nearly as good as a showrunner. Perhaps Chibnall will turn out to be a so-so writer of individual episodes who will shine when put in charge. Time (Lords) will tell.
This is my thought, as well.
I remember when RTD left and people were pleased to have someone new at the helm, particularly Moffat who at the time was great with writing individual episodes, most of which were considered fan favorites. But he then proved he wasn't as competent of a showrunner as he was with his stand-alone episodes, leading many people tired at his continued lazy arc writing and "twist" antics. I know that Chibnall hasn't had a great track record with his writing of DW or Torchwood in the past, but some have said he has improved with Broadchurch. So, we'll just have to wait and see how he handles things.
Yeah, it seems like managing a whole show is a rather different beast than writing good individual episodes. I haven't watched Broadchurch, but I know many people thought the first season was amazing. I certainly hope that translates well into success with Doctor Who.
Permanent deaths would certainly be a massive change! And as odd as it is to say, I'd welcome it. Not too many characters, but some. Enough to make us believe that actions have consequences in the world of the show.
Really relieved to be honest. I was okay with Moffat at first, but in my opinion his quality of writing decreased a lot. I'm so sick of the "save the universe every episode!" style. I agree that he's better writing one off episodes, or writing with a partner who can temper his wilder ideas (ie Mark Gatiss in Sherlock). Even without all that, Doctor Who just thrives on frequent change.
I'm so sick of the "save the universe every episode!" style. I agree that he's better writing one off episodes, or writing with a partner who can temper his wilder ideas (ie Mark Gatiss in Sherlock).
Yes! Moffat, like the Doctor, sometimes needs somebody to stop him. When he doesn't get that, he has a tendency to throw too many things into the show not because they improve the story but just because it seemed like a cool concept. He sets up situations where the stakes seem super high every time, but then he also shies away from real consequences like characters staying dead.
When he's at his best Moffat can produce some genuinely fantastic work, but being showrunner of Doctor Who has generally not inspired his best.
Moffat had his strengths and weaknesses as did RTD.
Yes, certainly. I personally found that RTD's weaknesses were mostly things that didn't bug me all that much, while his strengths were things I deeply appreciated. Meanwhile Moffat's weaknesses were things that really pissed me off. But different strokes for different folks, as they say. Not everybody's taste is the same as mine, nor should it be.
I have to remind myself that Clara REALLY is dead.
It was never straight forward with Moffat when it came to deaths. It was like watching Jack dying on Torchwood.
River dies in the first episode she is introduced but at least there was a reason for it. Timey Whimey.
I didn't mind RTD introducing the domestic aspect. Which Moffat abandoned. Unless you count Amy and Rory's marriage in that category. I just wasn't into the "Rose is the best" theme that went on.
Comments 8
This is my thought, as well.
I remember when RTD left and people were pleased to have someone new at the helm, particularly Moffat who at the time was great with writing individual episodes, most of which were considered fan favorites. But he then proved he wasn't as competent of a showrunner as he was with his stand-alone episodes, leading many people tired at his continued lazy arc writing and "twist" antics. I know that Chibnall hasn't had a great track record with his writing of DW or Torchwood in the past, but some have said he has improved with Broadchurch. So, we'll just have to wait and see how he handles things.
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
Yes! Moffat, like the Doctor, sometimes needs somebody to stop him. When he doesn't get that, he has a tendency to throw too many things into the show not because they improve the story but just because it seemed like a cool concept. He sets up situations where the stakes seem super high every time, but then he also shies away from real consequences like characters staying dead.
When he's at his best Moffat can produce some genuinely fantastic work, but being showrunner of Doctor Who has generally not inspired his best.
Reply
Moffat had his strengths and weaknesses as did RTD. Besides repeated deaths, there was the lost of memory trope.
I have to remind myself that Clara REALLY is dead.
Reply
Yes, certainly. I personally found that RTD's weaknesses were mostly things that didn't bug me all that much, while his strengths were things I deeply appreciated. Meanwhile Moffat's weaknesses were things that really pissed me off. But different strokes for different folks, as they say. Not everybody's taste is the same as mine, nor should it be.
I have to remind myself that Clara REALLY is dead.
Well, at the moment she's more UNdead. ;)
Reply
It was never straight forward with Moffat when it came to deaths. It was like watching Jack dying on Torchwood.
River dies in the first episode she is introduced but at least there was a reason for it. Timey Whimey.
I didn't mind RTD introducing the domestic aspect. Which Moffat abandoned. Unless you count Amy and Rory's marriage in that category. I just wasn't into the "Rose is the best" theme that went on.
Mixed bag overall.
Reply
Leave a comment