[ SECRET POST #2358 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2358 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.


__________________________________________________



18.


__________________________________________________



19.


__________________________________________________



20.


__________________________________________________



21.


__________________________________________________



22.


__________________________________________________















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #336.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[sparklywalls]

If this is about the latest cliffhanger before the anniversary special...I honestly feel it probably isn't as simple as it looks. It never is with Moffat. I get why you might be feeling pissed off though because regardless of the explanation it is kind of jarring to have a random incarnation/half incarnation/shadow incarnation or whatever just suddenly appear. But I guess the rule of Doctor Who writers ignoring things previously established when it suits them applies here.

Unless it's a Valeyard reference, that's very much not ignoring previous continuity.

[fenm]

it probably isn't as simple as it looks. It never is with Moffat.

Gotta disagree there. When he was doing the whole "Who is River?" thing... yeah, she turned out to be exactly what a lot of people thought she was. And, oh, wow, she was astronaut who "killed" the Doctor, which people guessed with the whole "I'm in jail for killing a good man" thing. Mofat's stuff isn't really that complicated, it's more convoluted; he throws in enough Timey-Wimey and "clever" dialogue to make his stories looks smarter than they are.

[lex_antonia]

It's not that complicated, but if he LITERALLY spells out on screen for you that this new man is totally the Doctor ... he probably isn't the Doctor.

I mean, he doesn't always succeed in making things mysterious, but he usually attempts to.

[fenm]

Oh, I agree with that. I'm just saying that the statement, "it's never as simple as it looks with Moffat" is demonstrably wrong.

[(Anonymous)]

+1 the Hand-Waving is strong with this one, Luke.

[(Anonymous)]

We've already had an intermediate version of the Doctor back in classic Who so it isn't breaking new ground. Logopolis had "The Watcher" and while he didn't interact with the audience, he was no ghost because he had a (filmed through a long shot) conversation with Tom Baker's Doctor in which he filled him in on who he was and what was about to occur; he also traveled from Traken with Nyssa who revealed that while he was mysterious as all get out, he was coherent enough to spin her a yarn about being a galactic traveler.

Timey-Wimey as fuck, and that was the Classic series long before Moffat so any fan rage over whatever happens in the 50th and beyond would be grossly out of place. Plus in the RTD era David Tennant regenerated into David Tennant again, David Tennant yet again, and finally a David Tennant/Catherine Tate hybrid. When it comes to regeneration, the only rule is there are no rules that aren't fit to be broken dependent on story needs.

[(Anonymous)]

I disagree that it shouldn't be criticized. Why not? Just because it has happened before doesn't mean it was good. Or that it shouldn't be avoided in the future.

The 10.5 thing was ridiculous and awful, and the Watcher thing was just dumb and pointless. The Valeyard was kind of cool though, because it had more of a point and was executed better - that's what determines whether it's okay or not, not "well, they did it before so why not!"

[(Anonymous)]

While I agree with you on Ten 2.1 and Ten One Half and Ten in Donna's Brain, the rest... Well going to have to challk that up to subjectivity. Oh, and I loathed the concept of the Valeyard. It was stupid and fans will just not let it die. Of course that is subjective too.

The Watcher was cool and mysterious and served a total purpose; or so the child version of me from the 80s says.

[(Anonymous)]

da

I also much preferred the Watcher to any of Nu!Who's "Ten's never gonna die, and when he does, he's going out kicking and screaming and chewing enough scenery to feed an industrial-sized beaver colony" WTFery.

A lot of people detested Six, but I didn't mind Six...and I was one of the more vocal "Twelve better be the Valeyard!" fans ... until I realized just how terrible Moffat is at writing actual science fiction, and no thank you, Moffat, I really don't want to see you eviscerate what's left of this iconic series, and I wish it was YOU leaving, not Matt Smith. *grumble*

[intrigueing]

The fact that it has been done before doesn't magically make it a good thing to keep doing. And the more rules you break, the more murky and bogged down it gets. Establishing some better and stricter rules about how stuff in the Who universe worked, in order to cut down on continuity overload, was one of the main goals of the revival.

Of course, you can totally make something good out of things that were a bit iffy and troublesome when they were first written, but that doesn't mean you should start writing new overcomplicated headachy twists left and right, IMO.

[(Anonymous)]

Was one of RTD's rules perhaps. Just as JNT had rules, Andrew Cartmel was going to have rules (Bastard!Grade), as Verity Lambert had rules, as John Wiles had rules, as Barry Letts had rules, etc and so on. What I'm saying is every showrunner has his or her own rules for the show and that changes with the era.

Stop pining for the RTD era, it is as dead as a Norwegian Blue. Basically, you don't like Moffat because he is not RTD and is different. The rest of it is just tenuous justification for that. I'd respect you and the rest of the MOffat hate crowd if you were just honest about it.

[intrigueing]

No, I don't like Moffat because I don't like Moffat anymore. And I don't like Moffat because after watching him for some time, I've come to the conclusion that he isn't very good.

In fact, I started out REALLY liking Moffat and actually thinking he was better than RTD back when I first watched season 5. I only started disliking him very reluctantly, after going through quite a long phase of constantly trying to justify or minimize all his flaws and complaining that people who criticized him just didn't "get it". It was only after rewatching his stuff a couple times and thinking about it again that I came to like RTD more than Moffat.

[(Anonymous)]

Well, sorry but you are wrong. There we go, problem sorted, exit is to your left thank you and don't come again.

[intrigueing]

sorry but you are wrong

*blinks*

Wow. Okay, I don't think I've ever seen an answer quite that bold before. Kudos.

I have a different opinion. I don't begrudge you yours. I'd just appreciate it if you didn't try to tell me my opinion is invalid while yours is justified.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

I can't stand ANY of the Nu!Who stuff, with the exception of the standalone episodes with David Tennant and Catherine Tate....and then finding out some behind-the-scenes stuff of how and why Tate got on the show (even though the episodes were eminently watchable), kind of soured me on even that.

So, no, anon, I'm not "pining for RTD" because I wasn't really a big fan of his stuff, either. As for Moffat, having a soap opera/sitcom writer try their hand at science fiction isn't what's turned out so badly; what's turned out so badly is that Moffat unfortunately, is trying to apply soap opera/sitcom techniques TO science fiction...and failing spectacularly at producing anything even remotely engaging, thought-provoking, or emotionally worthwhile.

[(Anonymous)]

is curious, what behind the scene stuff re Tate?

[(Anonymous)]

Apparently she wasn't bovvered.

[(Anonymous)]

oh, you.

[(Anonymous)]

"so any fan rage over whatever happens in the 50th and beyond would be grossly out of place"

pretty sure the fan rage over the 50th is based on Moffat's remarks of "not looking backwards" and intentionally having NO Classic-era Doctors appearing at all, jsyk. Which will be the first major milestone anniversary episode in the half-century show's run where they haven't done that.