Pratchett Attacks Doctor Who

[maninahat]

I kind of like Doctor Who, though there are always lots of nagging little things that irritate me. I'm disappointed by the amount of running around that goes on in every episode. Tennant's doctor seriously got on my nerves with his continuous farting around and goofy behaviour. His and Billie Piper's on-screen grab assery was nearly intolerable.

Then there are the serious bouts of cheesiness with hamper otherwise excellent episodes. I watched the first episode of the new series the other day. I really liked the new doctor, even if he looks like he should be in an indy band. I liked the plot too. Heck, I even liked the sidekick. But then it ends on some seriously cheesy moment where Dr Who berates a giant space eye. It was shit. The alien looked shit, the Doctor was talking shit. That scene was utter shit.

 

[DamienHell]

...Has this guy ever watched sci-fi? They've been doing those things since the original star trek.

 

[oktalist]

So we have the Escapist reporting on an article in the Guardian reporting on an article in SFX reporting on the opinions of an author with early onset senile dementia. Okay, just roll with it...

"[A] god from the machine is what the Doctor now is,"

And has always been.

and saying that it "breaks most of the laws of narrative".

Sometimes when you break those old laws, you get something innovative.

"A decent detective story provides you with enough tantalizing information to allow you to make a stab at a solution before the famous detective struts his stuff in the library."

The Doctor is not a detective. I'd go out on a limb and say he's more like a superhero. But with a cursory glance at any Doctor Who fan forum you would see no end to the number of fans making stabs at the solutions to both specific cliffhangers and more general questions about the mythology of the Doctor.

And there was a nice bit in the otherwise dismal episode a couple of weeks ago...

Spoiler

when he suddenly realises, quite late, that since the alien race that used to live on this planet had two heads... why do their statues have just the one head each? OMG weeping angels! The fact that they had had two heads had been introduced minutes before that, so a sharp-witted viewer might have spotted the inconsistency before the Doctor did.

"Doctor Who replaces this with speed, fast talking, and what appears to be that wonderful element 'makeitupasyougalongeum'."

Yep, even the most die-hard fan is frequently frustrated by the overuse of that particular narrative device.

"I just wish that it was not classified as science fiction," he added.

Luckily for you, Terry, it's not.

Pratchett did admit that he still watched the show however, despite his grievances: "[it's] pure professionally-written entertainment, even if it helps sometimes if you leave your brain on a hook by the door ... I might shout at the screen again, but I will be watching on Saturday," he admitted. "After all, when you've had your moan you have to admit that it is very, very entertaining, with its heart in the right place, even if its head is often in orbit around Jupiter."

So basically, "ignore everything I just said; Doctor Who is great and so what if the Doctor is a deus ex machina?"

 

[vortexgods]

-snip-

Doctor who is science fiction, it has other planets, aliens, space-ships and advanced technology. A basis in science fact or hypothesis is not what makes something science fiction because then you wouldn't count the work of H.G. Wells or Philip K. Dick as science fiction even though they are widely recognised as being some of the leading writers in the genre. A basis in fact only determines if it is hard or soft sf.

No, H.G. Wells based his sci-fi novels on the backward scientific theories of his time (like space travel by cannon) and you cannot accuse blade runner of being inconsistent or too far-fetched.

Space travel by cannon is completely feasible. The whole thing is just increasing something's speed to where it will achieve escape velocity. [a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Bull"]Gerard Bull[/a] was working on such a cannon for much of his life.

Now, if you are talking interstellar travel, well, we don't know how to do that with rockets either. Interplanetary travel would probably be somewhat more difficult with cannons than with rockets but it should be possible.

 

[vortexgods]

Well I understand his frustration, especially in the latest episodes, some elements are illogical, for instance:

Spoiler

if you're hunting an angel whose only weakness is that it stops when being seen, why on Earth would you bring plenty of guns and only a handful of torchlight instead of bringing tons of spotlight and strapping yourself with thousands of tiny creatures with eyes so that even if you're not looking, something else is looking at the angel(s) at all time ?

On another note, I find it sadly ironic how

Spoiler

in the 1996 movie's commentary, they describe the tiny 2 seconds kiss as being their main regret about the movie's story whereas in the new series, he frenched all of his companions and several other characters too.

Still gonna continue watching though

Spoiler

Remember they did think it was just the one angel in the beginning of the episode, though

 

[UsefulPlayer 1]

No doubt Pratchett. But it allows them to spin some entertaining stories right? You said it yourself.

I died alittle inside when I realized there is no sound in space. No more pew-pew.

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

The solution is obvious: Terry Pratchett should write an episode for the new series, and show us all how it's done.

Exactly, in fact since Neil Gaiman is doing one too, I'd love to see a Good Omens sequel set to the backdrop of Doctor Who.

Wait, Neil Gaiman is doing an episode of Doctor Who? The same Neil Gaiman responsible for The Sandman and the Neverwhere books? ...Excuse me while I change my pants.

 

[Hexenwolf]

For the most part I agree, and think that simply because he writes fantasy books doesn't mean he's not allowed to have an opinion on the ridiculousness of other's writing.

Now, if you want to say that such methods diminish the storytelling, that's a whole other discussion, and one that I think has some merit. But to say that the show is doing something wrong by, for example, whisking Martha's hospital to the moon...who cares that it's a silly set up? It made for a fun episode, didn't it?

Discworld creator Terry Pratchett has taken umbrage at the storytelling of Doctor Who, calling it "ludicrous", and saying that it "breaks most of the laws of narrative".

...

Pratchett did admit that he still watched the show however, despite his grievances: "[it's]pure professionally-written entertainment, even if it helps sometimes if you leave your brain on a hook by the door ... I might shout at the screen again, but I will be watching on Saturday," he admitted. "After all, when you've had your moan you have to admit that it is very, very entertaining, with its heart in the right place, even if its head is often in orbit around Jupiter."

*cough cough*

[small]Please don't ban me[/small]

 

[Bad Bullet Ballistic]

If you compare his original blog on http://www.sfx.co.uk/2010/05/03/guest-blog-terry-pratchett-on-doctor-who/ to the Guardian article you can see it's carefully edited to leave out quite a few of the good things Terry has to say about Dr. Who.

Also if you take into account the fact that he's guest editor for SFX this month it's not random that's he commenting on Britain's hottest sci-fi(?) program. It's in no way as if he's suddenly taking a poke in the press.

P.S: When the late great Douglas Adams (who used to write for Dr. Who) had aliens move a building to a desolate planet he had it crash there properly.

 

[Baggie]

I have to go with Pratchett on this one, I regularly shout at the screen when I watch it. I mean it's still fun, but it irks me how they first point out the holes in the science and then cover them up with either an explanation that doesn't work or an explanation that you wouldn't understand what's behind it.

 

[LANCE420]

I'm sorry, BSG is a good Sci-Fi show. Dr. Who was decent when they had the first and second actor Mr. blah bleedle and frank tagwhoever and only three dumb earth bimbos following him
But what are they on now? the 11th Who and the billionth bimbo? Want soft sci? Go with a good stable one, like Lexx or Farscape.

Some shows need to know when it's time to die.

Opinion isn't fact, saying something IS good (and yes I like BSG) doesn't make it so, same with Doctor who. You think it needs to die, I think the opposite.

It's fun for me, it's not too preachy and up it's own ass with constant moral dilemmas and such.

As long as people watch a show, it has no need to die. I liked Farscape, didn't like Lexx so much, but they are a different form of science fiction, with different kinds of stories.

Your right that opinions aren't fact, but I never made the distinction.

I disagree, Lexx, Farscape, and Doctor Who all fall into the same category. Think about it, the shows are the same, but the characters and premises are different. They all explore different planets, each with it's own antagonist. I stated that it should go from my own artistic standpoint. If I was the intellectual owner of Doctor Who, it would have had three seasons and the first movie. After that, it's time for a new direction. Especially since the story seemed to close on the movie.

 

[Count_Zer0]

I think TP has a point. Ive felt, particularly in the more recent episodes, the Doctor has become a sort of all purpose Deux et Machina for whatever problems arise. Im getting a little tired of the Doctor facing up the alien challenge of the day and telling them that he is the last of his race and that the aliens had better watch out because he is a time lord and will kick their arse to last tuesday because he has done it a thousand times before. A little humility and vulnerability would add a bit more drama to to the series. Im also a bit tired of magic TARDIS golden fairy dust saving the day at the last moment. Its getting to be the equivalent of the time travel/alternate reality story-lines in Star Trek.

That being said I still love the series, that doesn't mean it couldn't be improved a little. Im also an avid reader of Pratchett.

 

[Ensiferum]

Doctor Who is better defined as "Science Fantasy" then Science Fiction. I think Pratchett would be more fair with it if he was aware of that.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

I'm sorry, BSG is a good Sci-Fi show. Dr. Who was decent when they had the first and second actor Mr. blah bleedle and frank tagwhoever and only three dumb earth bimbos following him
But what are they on now? the 11th Who and the billionth bimbo? Want soft sci? Go with a good stable one, like Lexx or Farscape.

Some shows need to know when it's time to die.

Opinion isn't fact, saying something IS good (and yes I like BSG) doesn't make it so, same with Doctor who. You think it needs to die, I think the opposite.

It's fun for me, it's not too preachy and up it's own ass with constant moral dilemmas and such.

As long as people watch a show, it has no need to die. I liked Farscape, didn't like Lexx so much, but they are a different form of science fiction, with different kinds of stories.

Your right that opinions aren't fact, but I never made the distinction.

I disagree, Lexx, Farscape, and Doctor Who all fall into the same category. Think about it, the shows are the same, but the characters and premises are different. They all explore different planets, each with it's own antagonist. I stated that it should go from my own artistic standpoint. If I was the intellectual owner of Doctor Who, it would have had three seasons and the first movie. After that, it's time for a new direction. Especially since the story seemed to close on the movie.

You stated that something IS good, that sounds like a definite to me. Sorry, it's why I always put I think or something to do with it being my pov on it. Bad habit, sorry.

That's over-generalizing a bit don't you think? Not only that, but if every show only had about three seasons then we would run out of ideas for new shows, or would constantly have to get used to new characters all the time. Don't get me wrong, new things are fine, but what's wrong with a long series? Especially when it is changing all the time and has fun new stories and characters pop up now and then?

 

[jamesworkshop]

perhaps it's the Alzheimer's talking

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7141458.stm

 

[LANCE420]

I'm sorry, BSG is a good Sci-Fi show. Dr. Who was decent when they had the first and second actor Mr. blah bleedle and frank tagwhoever and only three dumb earth bimbos following him
But what are they on now? the 11th Who and the billionth bimbo? Want soft sci? Go with a good stable one, like Lexx or Farscape.

Some shows need to know when it's time to die.

Opinion isn't fact, saying something IS good (and yes I like BSG) doesn't make it so, same with Doctor who. You think it needs to die, I think the opposite.

It's fun for me, it's not too preachy and up it's own ass with constant moral dilemmas and such.

As long as people watch a show, it has no need to die. I liked Farscape, didn't like Lexx so much, but they are a different form of science fiction, with different kinds of stories.

Your right that opinions aren't fact, but I never made the distinction.

I disagree, Lexx, Farscape, and Doctor Who all fall into the same category. Think about it, the shows are the same, but the characters and premises are different. They all explore different planets, each with it's own antagonist. I stated that it should go from my own artistic standpoint. If I was the intellectual owner of Doctor Who, it would have had three seasons and the first movie. After that, it's time for a new direction. Especially since the story seemed to close on the movie.

You stated that something IS good, that sounds like a definite to me. Sorry, it's why I always put I think or something to do with it being my pov on it. Bad habit, sorry.

That's over-generalizing a bit don't you think? Not only that, but if every show only had about three seasons then we would run out of ideas for new shows, or would constantly have to get used to new characters all the time. Don't get me wrong, new things are fine, but what's wrong with a long series? Especially when it is changing all the time and has fun new stories and characters pop up now and then?

Nothing wrong with long shows. Married with Children and South Park are examples of good and long shows. But science fiction shows are largely dependent on the universe they are created in. That in mind, Sci-Fi is limitless in potential stories and characters. I shouldn't have been critical of the Doctor Who series for being too long. But if I was the creative force of Doctor Who, I would have moved on by now. I had a successful show, and its time to use my creditability to make a new show. BEFORE I CANCEL IT, so if it sucks balls I can get a new job while surviving on the show while it becomes like Lost.

BTW, does the BBC have commitment issues? One thing if I ever do get into the TV business, I'll make my actors sign contracts. I won't follow the BBC policy of hiring month to month. They must be exempt employees, like McDonalds.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

Nothing wrong with long shows. Married with Children and South Park are examples of good and long shows. But science fiction shows are largely dependent on the universe they are created in. That in mind, Sci-Fi is limitless in potential stories and characters. I shouldn't have been critical of the Doctor Who series for being too long. But if I was the creative force of Doctor Who, I would have moved on by now. I had a successful show, and its time to use my creditability to make a new show. BEFORE I CANCEL IT, so if it sucks balls I can get a new job while surviving on the show while it becomes like Lost.

BTW, does the BBC have commitment issues? One thing if I ever do get into the TV business, I'll make my actors sign contracts. I won't follow the BBC policy of hiring month to month. They must be exempt employees, like McDonalds.

They do exist to make money, and Doctor Who is a British icon, why throw it away? There's still a whole lot of running to do. It will end when the Doctor can no longer regenerate and that will be when the 12th one dies.

What makes you say that commitment part? Because the Doctor has had a few actors? Christopther Eccleston didn't want to stay on, David Tennant wanted to but felt it was time. The Doctor is a character where people leaving the show doesn't stop it.

I admit it was initially used as a cheap way to keep the show going back in the 60's but they eventually revealed a story element and created regeneration to explain it. It keeps the show from getting stale, and that's one thing Doctor Who has never been in my opinion.

 

[LANCE420]

Nothing wrong with long shows. Married with Children and South Park are examples of good and long shows. But science fiction shows are largely dependent on the universe they are created in. That in mind, Sci-Fi is limitless in potential stories and characters. I shouldn't have been critical of the Doctor Who series for being too long. But if I was the creative force of Doctor Who, I would have moved on by now. I had a successful show, and its time to use my creditability to make a new show. BEFORE I CANCEL IT, so if it sucks balls I can get a new job while surviving on the show while it becomes like Lost.

BTW, does the BBC have commitment issues? One thing if I ever do get into the TV business, I'll make my actors sign contracts. I won't follow the BBC policy of hiring month to month. They must be exempt employees, like McDonalds.

They do exist to make money, and Doctor Who is a British icon, why throw it away? There's still a whole lot of running to do. It will end when the Doctor can no longer regenerate and that will be when the 12th one dies.

What makes you say that commitment part? Because the Doctor has had a few actors? Christopther Eccleston didn't want to stay on, David Tennant wanted to but felt it was time. The Doctor is a character where people leaving the show doesn't stop it.

I admit it was initially used as a cheap way to keep the show going back in the 60's but they eventually revealed a story element and created regeneration to explain it. It keeps the show from getting stale, and that's one thing Doctor Who has never been in my opinion.

Whoa, Whoa, Whoa, Christopther Eccleston did not want to keep doing it? he was the best one!

Look, I don't know if they actually have to replace actors due to the storyline. But if they don't, the BBC has some seriously fucked business strategy. It costs a corporation in the US an average 40,000 dollars to hire an employee, especially more with non-exempt contractors, like actors and CEO's. To hire more actors does not save them any money. It costs alot. But the creators and the network would have stopped if it wasn't profitable.

And whatever, I've only been talking about "What I would have done if I was in their shoes." Obviously, they've accomplished more than I can say I have. I wish I thought of Doctor Who. Of course, I'm a American, and I have my doubts if the general American public would have liked it.

 

[Andronicus]

I love Terry Pratchett, and I can see where he's coming from, but I don't agree with him.

Doctor Who has always been a little camp (can you say Kandyman [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Happiness_Patrol]?); as far as I'm concerned, that's part of what makes it Doctor Who. Still, the story-telling is frankly top-notch, even if the author wants to keep the secrets to himself until the climax, and even if I couldn't see it coming from a mile off, it still always sits right with me.

 

[Legend of J]

In all honestly Pratchett should STFU its tv its not supposed to make sense. So the whole concept of aliens is realistic? I guess we abandand the fact of whats real and what isn't on that note alone. ITS a tv show and its aimed alot of the time at the younger audiances (even though alot of people older still watch it nothing wrong with that).

In simple Pratchett is in an idiot you wouldent watch the tweenies (or whatever kids are watchin these days) and go oh its unrealistic because the dog talks etc etc.

At the end of the day i don't care who great Pratchett thinks he is doctor who is tv its not supposed to make sense just like HIS books arnt at the end of the day doctor who is one of the most watched tv shows in the united kingdom where as Pratchett's books arnt one of the most read books in the united kingdom.