HGervais wrote:Demons is pretty awful.
HGervais wrote:RTD has never been good at structure but excels in character based dialogue which is why I think this pretty much summed up his run on the show. Lots of great little bits and touching moments that don't hang together as a whole. The goodbyes didn't bother me and the one with Verity Newman at the book signing especially got me teary eyed. I think the Claire Bloom character that appeared to Wilf was pretty clearly Donna in a future version. To that end I guess I liked how RTD left the door open for Moffat as far as Donna & the Time Lords are concerned. I for one would be really happy to see Wilfred Mott again. Bernard Cribbins owned these two specials. My main complaint with these two-parts, and in fact with all the specials and with a lot of Tennant's run in general is how much self-pity the Doctor displays. And if this special proved anything to me it is that when it comes to Doctor Who proper we would have all been better off if Davies had taken on some co-writers during the run. Gareth Roberts & especially Phil Ford with "The Waters of Mars" did wonders for Davies. As noted Davies is a great dialogue guy but he is also a great big ideas guy....he just needs the help of another writer to help shape & mold those great ideas into a coherent whole.
If I got anything off of Matt Smith's two minutes of screen time is that this will be a Doctor who is a bit mad...shades of 1st & 4th versions but also one with a spirit of adventure & fun...3rd Doctor. We will see. Bearing that in mind I loved the preview for Matt Smith's Doctor. Hot Scottish redhead, River Song, Daleks, hot vampires and was that a Ice Warrior I spied? Four short months that will seem awfully long.
Polynikes wrote:I suspect in the fullness of time that David Tennant will be remembered as a "better" Dr Who than Matt Smith, as the latter looks a bit young to me and lacks sufficient gravitas to be able to carry it off as successfully as Tennant did. However, it is still a good change, as Tennant had really nothing new to add to the role, and seemed to be acting on auto-pilot towards the end of his long run - still very good, but lacking freshness. A change of personality might reinvigorate the character of Dr Who.
HGervais wrote:Polynikes wrote:I suspect in the fullness of time that David Tennant will be remembered as a "better" Dr Who than Matt Smith, as the latter looks a bit young to me and lacks sufficient gravitas to be able to carry it off as successfully as Tennant did. However, it is still a good change, as Tennant had really nothing new to add to the role, and seemed to be acting on auto-pilot towards the end of his long run - still very good, but lacking freshness. A change of personality might reinvigorate the character of Dr Who.
I don't know how anyone can say that based on the 2 1/2 minutes we have seen on Smith as The Doctor and it's worth noting there is always this kind of trepidation about a new actor taking over the role. For many Tennant is "their" Doctor and they just can't imagine anyone else in the role....until they actually see someone else in the role. It's the beauty of Doctor Who...there is always a new Doctor lurking somewhere in the background to renew the role & the series. As I've noted a few times, I have probably seen more of Smith's outside work than most people and I can see what Moffat saw in him. He has an ability to come off as both very young & very old at the same time. I too tired of Tennant towards the end, or maybe I just tired of RTD's writing of him but either way I think we are in for good times.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest