Pratchett Attacks Doctor Who

MasterKirov

New member
Nov 8, 2009
148
0
0
I've said it before, and I'll say it again - go and watch another Science Fiction show if you expect anything serious from a show about a man who travels though time and space in a Police Box.

On the other hand, I can see Mr Pratchett's voice, especially during the Russel the T era, where the plot's and their resolutions got sillier and sillier (and consequently, worse and worse) as time went on, with one or two exeptions (The Waters of Mars for example). It's too early for me to comment on the Moffat era, but the stories are a lot better than Season 3 and 4 (and most of the specials, namely Planet of the Dead and The End of Time) combined.
 

DMonkey

New member
Nov 29, 2009
333
0
0
I agree with Pratchet...
The science behind anything the Doctor does is hilariously ridiculous. AND it is a great, fun show.

The true "winner" in this argument would be MST3K who's theme song ends on a very warm, and friendly reminder that can be applied to Doctor Who:

"If you're wondering how he eats and breathes
And other science facts,
Just repeat to yourself "It's just a show,
I should really just relax"
 

Blackbird71

New member
May 22, 2009
93
0
0
KeyMaster45 said:
If there is one thing Doctor Who (the new series) is riddled with its plot holes. I think that's what makes me love it so. (other than the pure awesome excreted by the doctor every time he opens his mouth) Take for instance the latest angel episode where there's a scene with an army of weeping angels, and none of them have their faces covered. Rewind to the original blink episode and its explained not even they can look at each other (that's kinda how they stopped them) So what happened there? Why the sudden change?

Does it aggravate me on a certain level? Of course cause I know my friends and I will begin dissecting the episode bickering amongst ourselves about why this is possible. Sometimes suspending belief is necessary for a show, and the fact Doctor Who doesn't bore us with 75% of the episode filled with science terms we don't understand allows them to cut the crap and focus on story.

I disagree with Prat, Doctor Who is most certainly sci-fi, I think he's just angry he didn't realize you could cut the usual sci-fi BS and still have a successful series. :p
Spoiler warnings, please!!! This episode doesn't hit the U.S. til next week! (at least on my stations, ymmv)
 

the1ultimate

New member
Apr 7, 2009
769
0
0
Well, deus ex machina is usually a complaint people have about sci-fi. Doctor Who has definitely been guilty of it in the past, but I feel that the most recent series has mostly avoided this, even to the point of dropping too many obvious hints.

That said, perhaps the ending of the most recent episode was kind of out of nowhere.

But still, like Pratchett I'll still watch the show because I find it to be one of the most interestingly written things on TV at the moment.
 

Necromancer1991

New member
Apr 9, 2010
805
0
0
Sorry but you're attacking Dr.Who of all series when it come to explaining itself, it's a show about an immortal alien traveling through time in a phone booth (yes I'm a fan and it pains me to put it that bluntly), they left logical scientific explanations at the door when the show was first made. I'm also going to point something out Star Trek are the absolute master at techo-BS (as the attached music video points out), where as Dr.Who at least attempts to give a remotely plausible explanation as to why their stuff works the way it does.

 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
Blimey said:
Is he fucking serious?

He makes his living writing fantasy novels, with clairvoyants, magic, and all that shit.

And yet he calls out Doctor Who?

What a lunatic.
You didn't even read the article, did you?
 

Z(ombie)fan

New member
Mar 12, 2010
1,502
0
0
laryri said:
This is exactly why Blink is still the best episode of the new series. The solution was completely comprehensible.
is that the one with the angels?

oh god... that gave me nightmares...

i mean, jesus christ, they want to kill you, you have no weapons, and they can move whenever you're not looking at them. ok not to scary but hey they can move 50 miles a split second so make sure to stare them down and never blink again.

when you take into account that eventually someone is going to want them moved...
 

Straz

New member
Jan 10, 2010
195
0
0
Quaidis said:
Pratchet needs a hobby. Like collecting buttons. Give him something better to do than look for faults in a random television program.
He writes books, in case you weren't aware of that.
 

Straz

New member
Jan 10, 2010
195
0
0
R0cketsauce13 said:
Im a doctor who fan, so i think pratchett is a fucking twat
I'm a fan of both, and I think the same of you.

tghm1801 said:
Half the fun of Doctor Who is the absurdity and the complete unrealism of it all.
The Doctor is supposed to be able to explain away things with one line, and who cares if some things are absolutely impossible?
How can you coin Star Wars as Science Fiction but not Doctor Who?
In Star Wars they do completely unrealistic things that are completely impossible, yet it is still Science Fiction.
Terry Pratchett's books are absurd anyway, I think they make a point of being so.
However, I believe what he is saying is that Doctor Who just follows goes by the "A wizard did it" principle when dealing with pretty much everything.
And I don't believe they mention anything[i/] about Star Wars in that article, so perhaps you'd do best not to mention it.


lacktheknack said:
Blimey said:
Is he fucking serious?

He makes his living writing fantasy novels, with clairvoyants, magic, and all that shit.

And yet he calls out Doctor Who?

What a lunatic.
You didn't even read the article, did you?
He criticized it for using cheap solutions.
His magic, as far as I'm aware follows a sort of Vancian mechanic, so yeah Blimey just looks ignorant.
He didn't attack the genre, he said the doctor's abilities were getting too cheap.
Read Sorcery (Or Sourcery, I can't remember if there was some sort of pun in the title) by him and as much is explained anyway.
 

DarkPanda XIII

New member
Nov 3, 2009
726
0
0
I can see where Terry Pratchett is coming from, but really it's mostly entertainment, and it's not like its the first one to really go through the 'makethingsupaswegoalong-ous', since really if you look heavily into Star Trek, it has alot of great facts that comes up with stuff that makes you go like "..buahh?" after awhile.

But really, its entertainment, so just enjoy the fact that the Doctor is comical :p
 

AhumbleKnight

New member
Apr 17, 2009
429
0
0
I find myself agreeing with Pratchett here. Both on the part of the story being a bit 'insert perfect solution here even if it doesn't make any sense', and it somehow coming out as an awesomely fun show to watch.
 

seizon

New member
Mar 26, 2009
31
0
0
I will admit that I skipped about 5 pages worth of response, so someone
might have already mention something along these lines, but here is what I
have too say.
K, I so wanted to tear into Prachett for his statements. I really did. Then
I read up and realized, that not only Doctor Who, but a number of other shows/books/
comics fall under an area that has not been defined. So, while I am going to
say that one of my favorite author's is wrong in his statement, I am also saying
it is due too the current way we look at these genres.
First we will define fantasy(according to wiki),
Fantasy : Fantasy is a genre that uses magic and other supernatural forms as a primary element of plot, theme, and/or setting.
Second, Science Fiction. (Again this is the wiki definition)
Science fiction is a genre of fiction. It differs from fantasy in that, within the context of the story, its imaginary elements are largely possible within scientifically established or scientifically postulated laws of nature (though some elements in a story might still be pure imaginative speculation).
You would think that, between those two definitions, you would be able too do whatever
you wanted too with any idea. Apparently not. We seem to have a problem when the elf is
shooting a gun, or the scientist is using an arcane symbol to make his centrifuge work.
Is Shadowrun(Tabletop, not the Vista game) fantasy, or Sci/fi? Is Ad&d(I am talking about
time frame and the arquebus) Sci/fi or fantasy.
Entertainment is supposed to be just that. Something to amuse yourself with. Not
too be taken seriously. If you want to start complaining about some series just
doing whatever worked, let talk Star Trek. How many times did someone say, "Oh, I
wrote my thesis on this very problem at Star Fleet Academy"(Apparently the same
person wrote a thesis a number of times.) Then we have Star Wars. Sorry, a
fantastic "mystical" force is fine. We don't need microbes or whatever the...(not
even going too mention that word) were. Did we need a reason for the dead(Trioxin)
for the dead to come back and start eating people? Don't even get me started
on the Palladium Megaverse(guns, magic, cybernetics, drugs, dragons, and pretty
much everything you can think of).
If there is going to be this much of a problem, then there needs to be a new area
for these to fall under. Call it the "Makestuffupwhenneededit" genre, or call it the
Science Fantasy genre. That is if you have to apply any term too it. Then again,
you could just slap the big old FICTION label on it an call it a day. After all,
fiction does mean(Yet another wiki quote), "A literary work whose content is produced
by the imagination and is not necessarily based on fact"
Night folks.
 

Legendsmith

New member
Mar 9, 2010
622
0
0
Agreed, Pratchectt has a valid point.
laryri said:
This is exactly why Blink is still the best episode of the new series. The solution was completely comprehensible.
YES. Blink was the best.
 

QueenWren

New member
Apr 7, 2010
62
0
0
Blimey said:
Is he fucking serious?

He makes his living writing fantasy novels, with clairvoyants, magic, and all that shit.

And yet he calls out Doctor Who?

What a lunatic.
Yes, but those are fantasy! Fantasy means you don't need a scientific explanation (although Pratchett usually give it a good go) because magic makes it work! Science fiction is fiction based on science.

Personally I don't agree with him that much, I'm normally too busy arguing with my Mum over what's going to happen next to tell you if the science is working. He still watches it though, so he must enjoy it in spite of these flaws.
 

GrinningManiac

New member
Jun 11, 2009
4,090
0
0
Everyone who shouts at Pratchett, read the bottom of the post

Secondly, if ANYONE can have a go at other people for poor writing...if ANYONE has absoloute authority and judgement on a good story and clever plot, it's Sir Terry.

I completley agree with him, and I always return to watch the next excting installment

Still pissed off about the random Miss-Pond-Tries-To-Shag-Doctor thing at the end of last week's episode. That was completley out of the blue, awkward to watch and didn't do anything for me, in terms of entertainment or...erghum...fan service.