Eyes on Final Fantasy Forums > General > The Lounge > Doctor Who

[Raebus]

I never liked Babylon 5.

It was a good episode though, I'm just going to enjoy it instead of breaking out the magnifying glass to pick it apart.

[Loony BoB]

I didn't watch so much of the earlier (ie, pre-2000's) series, so can someone tell me, in these earlier series...

1) Did the Doctor ever try to save a race before doing any damage to it? If so, then I don't see the problem with him carrying on that 'moralist' kind of thing.
2) Did the Daleks (or any 'famous' race) ever come back after being 'gone forever'? If so, I don't see the problem with them doing that again, either.

I think that RTD did something that he was wanting to do, which was for him as much as for the audience. He wanted to get every main character from his time together to end his Doctor Who series, sort of a finale in more ways than just the fact that this particular season is ending. I think it was sort of like a reunion before everyone goes their seperate ways, and I don't think RTD is the kind of guy to want to leave it on a "to be continued" way, but more the kind of guy to leave a clean slate for the next writer. He wrote out every single person but the Doctor, allowing Moffat to set up the Doc's mood, companion, whatever. It's all up to Moffat now, as it should be. If they kept any of the existing companions actively involved, it would have been a bit eh for me if I was a writer.

[Old Manus]

I can't believe you're complaining about contrived plot elements when talking about Doctor Who for chrissakes. The acting is bad, everything is overdramatic, and the dialogue is so bad it reminds me of Resident Evil. I watched a few episodes and now view it as a comedy.

[I Don't Need A Name]

Originally Posted by Loony BoB ^

I didn't watch so much of the earlier (ie, pre-2000's) series, so can someone tell me, in these earlier series...

1) Did the Doctor ever try to save a race before doing any damage to it? If so, then I don't see the problem with him carrying on that 'moralist' kind of thing.

most of the time, no. he very frequently, especially during the later doctors, tried to kill all the enemys. In Rememberence of the Daleks for instance, he sent the Hand Of Omega into a sun, which destroyed the Daleks home planet, and then sent it back to smash into davros' mothership. that seems to be devoid of all morals, so why introduce them now?

[Loony BoB]

I think the reason to introduce them now was that he is, to his knowledge, the last of his race and for that reason he now doesn't want to destroy other things, nor does he like carrying guns etc. Could be wrong, though. I like that aspect, though. Having him not worry about killing off races would make him just another action hero.

[I Don't Need A Name]

i know what you mean i s'pose
he never used to carry guns in the first place btw
it just gets to me sometimes when something has been mercylessly killing innocent people, and he stands there begging for it to survive. it just isnt really believeable. or maybe im just sadistic?

[Quin]

I agree with Jeff. I like the Doctor's "life yey!" attitude, but sometimes it's ridiculous. I liked Eccleston's Doctor because he was fairly nice and everything, but if some bastard thing threatened innocent people, he kicked their arses out their mouths. David Tennant has a great Angel of Death face, and he should get to use it more often. For example, when Daleks are threatening to destory every reality ever.

[charliepanayi]

But surely the point is that that Tennant's Doctor is not the same as Ecclestone's, hence the way they appoach things differently (such as how Tennant's Who likes humans etc whereas Ecclestone would often be exasperated by them and call them 'stupid apes').