It felt like my heart stopped when I read he was leaving. I thought I had died and gone to heaven. The bane of Sci-Fi is gone. Hopefully this is a permanent decision for him.
Ubermetalhed said:
Also thankgod we've finally got someone who feels like a Doctor, sorry Tennant you felt like you belonged somewhere else.
I know it is your opinion, but I'm curious about what made you feel like Tennant wasn't a Doctor?
I've watched episodes from all past Doctors, and Tennant definitely feels like the Doctor. Tennant is the reason I like the 5th Doctor, Peter Davison, because Tennant has quite a few characteristics of Davison's Doctor.
Heck, they even made a special short that pointed it out.
Beyond that, if I use comparisons of other Doctors, Matt Smith for me gives off vibes of 2nd Patrick Troughton, 6th Colin Baker, and 7th Sylvester McCoy.
I consider Smith's Doctor to be quite crazy, almost too crazy at times. I myself explain that by the possibility that because Tennant's Doctor held on so long before regeneration and that he didn't want to go, he sort of messed up the regeneration, and poof wacky-zany Doctor.
It's a stretch, but I like to think it is plausible.
While it is true that RTD's visible contributions to Doctor Who and Torchwood have been, to be fair, appalling (though I couldn't bear watching more than a few eps of Torchwood, for all I know it became a watchable show at some point)...the only Moffat stuff that wasn't also was with RTD in charge. The latest series of Doctor Who was as bad on average, and often worse, than what came out when RTD was in charge.
Gah...I'm defending RTD...though "Midnight" was quite reasonable, IMHO.
I know it is your opinion, but I'm curious about what made you feel like Tennant wasn't a Doctor?
I've watched episodes from all past Doctors, and Tennant definitely feels like the Doctor. Tennant is the reason I like the 5th Doctor, Peter Davison, because Tennant has quite a few characteristics of Davison's Doctor.
Heck, they even made a special short that pointed it out.
Beyond that, if I use comparisons of other Doctors, Matt Smith for me gives off vibes of 2nd Patrick Troughton, 6th Colin Baker, and 7th Sylvester McCoy.
I consider Smith's Doctor to be quite crazy, almost too crazy at times. I myself explain that by the possibility that because Tennant's Doctor held on so long before regeneration and that he didn't want to go, he sort of messed up the regeneration, and poof wacky-zany Doctor.
It's a stretch, but I like to think it is plausible.
Interesting points. Especially the fact you feel Smith is too crazy, I feel completely the opposite. I found Tennant to over-the-top, to deus ex machina and to soft and emotional. Smith has the air about him that underneath the eccentricity there is in fact someone wise and experienced. A good doctor can pull off eccentric and also serious effectively. When the Doctor becomes serious you should feel that there is an underlying reason, one resonating from past experience. When I see Smith it feels like he has the wealth of the previous Doctor's knowledge behind him, Tennant never had this.
If I am honest though, it isn't really Tennant's fault. It is the writing. The character and the situations he was placed in were awful. My main problem is the fact the Doctor seems to have relationships with his companions. As you have said you've seen the classic series, note the dynamic between Doctor and companions. The Doctor is the protector of the companions, he is the hero and is somewhat detached from them; he is a Timelord not a human. The companions, and yes there are usually always two others, they usually have the emotional relationships. Note the recent series, they've restored this and for the better. In fact at times it is almost like they are mocking Davies for changing the dynamic in the first place!
Furthermore Tennant's death/regeneration was a farce. I believe he is the only Doctor to have his death sequence last twenty minutes, it was ridiculous. Also the short you pointed out, while watching it I felt that the divergence between Peter and David was vast, you can perhaps point out some similarities but Davids performance was just so 'childish' in comparison to Peter whose voice carried a certain depth to it, again you can hear an implied experience in his voice. Also hearing Peter say 'timey wimey blah blah' made me cringe.
Of course that's how I see it, I better stop here or this post will be catastrophically long. I have alot more to say but I'm interested in your response first.
Interesting points. Especially the fact you feel Smith is too crazy, I feel completely the opposite. I found Tennant to over-the-top, to deus ex machina and to soft and emotional. Smith has the air about him that underneath the eccentricity there is in fact someone wise and experienced. A good doctor can pull off eccentric and also serious effectively. When the Doctor becomes serious you should feel that there is an underlying reason, one resonating from past experience. When I see Smith it feels like he has the wealth of the previous Doctor's knowledge behind him, Tennant never had this.
If I am honest though, it isn't really Tennant's fault. It is the writing. The character and the situations he was placed in were awful. My main problem is the fact the Doctor seems to have relationships with his companions. As you have said you've seen the classic series, note the dynamic between Doctor and companions. The Doctor is the protector of the companions, he is the hero and is somewhat detached from them; he is a Timelord not a human. The companions, and yes there are usually always two others, they usually have the emotional relationships. Note the recent series, they've restored this and for the better. In fact at times it is almost like they are mocking Davies for changing the dynamic in the first place!
Furthermore Tennant's death/regeneration was a farce. I believe he is the only Doctor to have his death sequence last twenty minutes, it was ridiculous. Also the short you pointed out, while watching it I felt that the divergence between Peter and David was vast, you can perhaps point out some similarities but Davids performance was just so 'childish' in comparison to Peter whose voice carried a certain depth to it, again you can hear an implied experience in his voice. Also hearing Peter say 'timey wimey blah blah' made me cringe.
Of course that's how I see it, I better stop here or this post will be catastrophically long. I have alot more to say but I'm interested in your response first.
I never saw much of a detachment between the Doctor in his companions. And on the the having the two companions thing, I point out the 6th and the 7th Doctors, because every episode I have been able to watch from them, they had only one companion at a time.
I saw nothing childish about Tennant's performance. It says that he learned to lighten up when he was Davison's Doctor. Though I think the writing was messed up with that bit, because they gave Davison a disposition more of his age then than his age when he played the 5th Doctor. I know of course because Davison was much older for that bit, but the 5th did have a lot more energy when he played it when he was younger.
Seriously, I loved and hated Tennant's regeneration. I hated it not because it was bad, but because he was leaving. I admit that I cried when it happened. But it was an awesome and well deserved regeneration segment. It was nice to see him go back and see the people from his past. I didn't care that it was drawn out.
On Tennant being the crazy Doctor, I don't see that. Yes he was emotional at times, but I can't see where it comes from. It was a stage in the Doctor's life where he just wanted to see things go properly he was tired of things going wrong. Besides I can see why he formed more of an attachment with his companions, he was the last of his kind. You think after that, someone is just going to give up on finding love? Yes he has been married before, but that doesn't mean that he can't be again.
I totally enjoyed the 10th Doctor's character, and Tennant pulled it of magnificently. I saw the reasons of what made him the way he was then, and I can believe it. So what if he was a bit emotional. Hero's can't be totally impervious to what goes on around them, there has to be some effect on them. With Tennant, we finally got to see that the Doctor isn't just a rock who can take it all, there is a humanness to him, and that isn't a bad thing. It doesn't matter if he isn't a human, besides, he has traveled with humans for so long, I would be surprised if he has picked up some habits from them as well as a deep connection. I would think it pretty sad if he hadn't.
The thing is, I'm going to be a little biased. They say that usually the first Doctor that you encounter/grow up with, will be the person's favorite Doctor. Tennant was the first Doctor that I saw the most of before I started delving and watching the episodes of every Doctor. In my list of favorites, Tennant is on top. Followed by Peter Davison and then Tom Baker.
Matt Smith's Doctor would have been a little better for me if the series five finale had been handled better. It was too comical for the situation he was in. Doctor Who hasn't ever really been about comedy, it has been relatively serious. Yes there are comical points here and there. But that finale was one right after another, it was too much. It made Smith's Doctor go from kind of wacky at times, to almost the point of plain nuts. It almost had me at the point that I almost swore off watching until they changed to a new Doctor. On top of that the way he survived this was plain bull compared to how Tennant's survived his problems. I can't believe how people have complained about how Tennant's survived some of his situations, but say nothing about how he was saved at the end of series five(the worst ending of a series in my opinion).
Wished back into existence is total and utter bull. It is Sci-Fi, not a magical fairy tale where the wish of a little girl comes true.
I hope they tone down the comedy in series six, and get a little more serious.
You know, I've never seen Queer as Folk or Casablanca, but based on the work he's done for Doctor Who and Torchwood, I'd never look him up.
I don't rate him, without fail all of my favourite Doctor Who episodes were written by other people, Stephen Moffat in particular, and considering his comments about why he killed off most of the Torchwood cast, I can't say I'll miss him.
You know, I've never seen Queer as Folk or Casablanca, but based on the work he's done for Doctor Who and Torchwood, I'd never look him up.
I don't rate him, without fail all of my favourite Doctor Who episodes were written by other people, Stephen Moffat in particular, and considering his comments about why he killed off most of the Torchwood cast, I can't say I'll miss him.
Sure thing. The link to the interview is here - http://primetime.unrealitytv.co.uk/torchwood-russell-t-davies-tells-why-he-killed-ianto-jones/
"-When asked if it was a risk to kill off such a central character, Davies said:
?Absolutely. There?s a risk that some people won?t come back to watch now that Ianto?s gone. I thank them for watching the show and I recommend they go watch Supernatural, because those boys are beautiful. And don?t tell me they?re brothers. [Laughs] Not in my mind.?
In response to the reported backlash against Ianto?s departure Davies said:
?It?s not particularly a backlash. What?s actually happening is, well, nothing really to be honest. It?s a few people posting online and getting fans upset. Which is marvelous. It just goes to prove how much they love the character and the actor. People often say, ?Fans have got their knives out!? They haven?t got any knives. I haven?t been stabbed. Nothing?s happened. It?s simply a few people typing. I?m glad they?re typing because they?re that involved. But if you can?t handle drama you shouldn?t watch it. Find something else. Go look at poetry. Poetry?s wonderful.?-"
That article and the many others like it are the main gist of why I dislike him so much as a writer, because he's completely flippant about his audience, equally flippant with his cast and he comes across as quite arrogant. I didn't like Torchwood much, but some of the characters were compelling. Then some of them died, and I liked Torchwood less, but the ones left were okay. Then Ianto died and I had no investment left in the show. There's a difference between dark drama and just destroying a fanbase.
He's since tried to qualify his comments in further interviews (I came across them looking for this article) but frankly, the attitude displayed in his writing says enough. Character motivation? What character motivation?
You know, I've never seen Queer as Folk or Casablanca, but based on the work he's done for Doctor Who and Torchwood, I'd never look him up.
I don't rate him, without fail all of my favourite Doctor Who episodes were written by other people, Stephen Moffat in particular, and considering his comments about why he killed off most of the Torchwood cast, I can't say I'll miss him.
Sure thing. The link to the interview is here - http://primetime.unrealitytv.co.uk/torchwood-russell-t-davies-tells-why-he-killed-ianto-jones/
"-When asked if it was a risk to kill off such a central character, Davies said:
?Absolutely. There?s a risk that some people won?t come back to watch now that Ianto?s gone. I thank them for watching the show and I recommend they go watch Supernatural, because those boys are beautiful. And don?t tell me they?re brothers. [Laughs] Not in my mind.?
In response to the reported backlash against Ianto?s departure Davies said:
?It?s not particularly a backlash. What?s actually happening is, well, nothing really to be honest. It?s a few people posting online and getting fans upset. Which is marvelous. It just goes to prove how much they love the character and the actor. People often say, ?Fans have got their knives out!? They haven?t got any knives. I haven?t been stabbed. Nothing?s happened. It?s simply a few people typing. I?m glad they?re typing because they?re that involved. But if you can?t handle drama you shouldn?t watch it. Find something else. Go look at poetry. Poetry?s wonderful.?-"
That article and the many others like it are the main gist of why I dislike him so much as a writer, because he's completely flippant about his audience, equally flippant with his cast and he comes across as quite arrogant. I didn't like Torchwood much, but some of the characters were compelling. Then some of them died, and I liked Torchwood less, but the ones left were okay. Then Ianto died and I had no investment left in the show. There's a difference between dark drama and just destroying a fanbase.
He's since tried to qualify his comments in further interviews (I came across them looking for this article) but frankly, the attitude displayed in his writing says enough. Character motivation? What character motivation?
When I read the part about the Winchester brothers from Supernatural I sighed/huffed. Though at least he is actually bothering to try and pretend they aren't brothers unlike certain members of the Supernatural fanbase.
I can see what you mean, from what your post tells me he does come off as a bit arrogant,uncaring, etc.
Okay, Torchwood was kind of shit- but we owe him, guys. At his worst he was absolutely terrible, but there's been much worse sci-fi and without him we wouldn't have the show. (And Queer As Folk, which was epic.)
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
