What would you change about the current series?

[SiHart]

There seems to be a general feeling that this current era of Doctor Who is not up to scratch. For many fans, the Moffat era hasn't turned out to be a classic one, or indeed the one that was imagined when he took over.

So what is it that needs changing to make the show great again? Or do you think Steven Moffat is doing a good job?

[Perry Vale]

So what is it that needs changing to make the show great again?

Better writers. More of the quality of Curtis, Nye and Gaiman. If having written 'Luther' makes you suitable for the job, I still don't understand why they don't give Uncle Tewwance a go....

That's the *only* problem as far as I'm concerned. I loved, loved, loved S5, and the first half of S6 (generally), but it took a serious dive after LKH for my tastes. Only 'The Wedding of River Song' and 'Dinosaurs' have stood out from the bland stories around them. Everything else I'm happy with, FX, music, production, cast....just the writers need to up their game.

A normal companion might have helped too, this 'Impossible Clara' is gatecrashing stories far too often for my liking.

[Alex]

There seems to be a general feeling that this current era of Doctor Who is not up to scratch. For many fans, the Moffat era hasn't turned out to be a classic one, or indeed the one that was imagined when he took over.

So what is it that needs changing to make the show great again? Or do you think Steven Moffat is doing a good job?

I couldn't disagree more, I've loved his era as a showrunner, Matt as the Doctor, and in general couldn't be happier with the direction it's taking.

When you say "General feeling", where do you get that from Si? As most of the episodes have been well received over here (if you go through the polls the majority seem to like the episodes) and other forums I visit / facebook, etc, seem to love the show too. Indeed it's only since Moffat took over that it really took off in America...

Of course there have been some lesser episodes, and I've a couple of minor issues with some choices, but I think that applied to the RTD era, if not more so than Moffat's.

[Zbigniev Hamson]

If I could change anything about this season, I'd make it Season 8

[Jeff]

I'd make them do a 13 episode series + Christmas special every year at the same time. If HBO can make all their 13 episode series come out regularly and with excellent quality, not to mention all the US series that have 22 episodes a season quite often with the same cast sometimes for 5 to 10 years, I don't see why it is so impossible to put out a 13 episode series every Spring.

As far as quality, I think that is just a bad combination of nostalgia and expectations. I know people will disagree, but that is what I think. What era didn't have it's critics. It's not as if no one ever complained about the RTD or JNT etc. eras.

[SiHart]

There does seem to be a lot of complaints about the Moffat approach to the show- maybe I'm exaggerating it a little and certainly it's not something I truly believe myself. I've long doubted that he deserved the reputation he had during the RTD years- I've always been vocal about that- but I have liked the way he's approached the show. The fairytale feel of S5 was amazing, and it was a really strong season- possibly my favourite of the new series and I've liked how he's pushed the show as far as it could go into the heavy arcs, but I'm not sure he's managed to pull it all off. It doesn't always feel coherent, and often it feels like it's all been made up in the spot rather than carefully planned.

Maybe it's the old thing of the vocal minority making their presence felt, or else the feeling of pessimism that comes after a disappointing episode.

[Jon Masters]

As most of the episodes have been well received over here (if you go through the polls the majority seem to like the episodes) and other forums I visit / facebook, etc, seem to love the show too.

That may well be because some of us who aren't may have given up rating things and posting about our thoughts because it's a bit depressing for us to write and for others to read . (though it has been interesting to see some PS members apparently going through a similar process to how I felt 2 or 3 series ago)

My 3 wishes would be
a) Write proper stories, not scenes that 'look cool' but don't actually fit together properly

b) Write stories about the situations, not obsessing with how the companion feels about them (and how the Doctor feels about their reactions).

Paraphrasing badly, in The Writers' Tale RTD says about not writing about people from the planet Z who are menaced by the A people, because you can't care about them.
Well, I don't care about Amy and Rorys' "journey", I don't give a toss who River Song is, I didn't worry about the Doctor being dead, I'm not losing sleep over what Clara might be and f@c# off to what 'Doctor Who' really means.
Making almost every story subservient to these things is booooooorrrring. (and the chances of your being right are minimal at best).

c) If you stop obsessing about (b), then maybe we could have some characters within the actual story that we could really care about (and that excludes family members of companions). Can anyone think of a genuinely interesting supportng character from the last 2.5 series ? (I can think of 2)

Oh, and make a series of all two parters.

[Si Hunt]

When you say "General feeling", where do you get that from Si? As most of the episodes have been well received over here (if you go through the polls the majority seem to like the episodes) and other forums I visit / facebook, etc, seem to love the show too.

I think you're deluding yourself. 90% of people on this forum couldn't bring themselves to rank this weeks episode higher than 7/10. I've barely read one good report about it - everyone on Facebook hated it. Most people on here wern't impressed. My parents have been distinctly dissapointed in the show in recent years - my Mum says it's too confusing. People I randomly talk to in the street, like my Hairdresser, visiting tradesmen, are torn between thinking it's not as good as it was and thinking it's not on as much as it used to be (the impression seems to be they only do odd episodes now). Sadly, but inevitably, a lot of female viewers left with Tennant.

Anyway. What to change? Gosh, where do I start?

Okay, let's narrow it down to a few pet peeves. As has often been remarked, Moffatt has favourite "themes" and they seem to crop up again and again; this is true of many writers, but sometimes you wonder if he's not so much overdoing his obsession with "things happening in the wrong order" (commonly known as "timey wimey") but slaughtering the concept with a meat cleaver. Two companions in a row the Doctor is having a simultaneous friendship with in their "child" version. Twice in a row the companion is a weird temporal event rather than a person. Every episode seems to centre around a child character.

So I'd drop the whole timey wimey thing now. I'd also bring back more straight forward adventures. There was the hint of this when it looked like they were making the Doctor a mystery again, but every episode still seems to start with the Doctor in the middle of something we know nothing about, doing something weird, like being dressed as a monk. I think I'd like to see the viewer taken on a journey WITH the Doctor again, rather than ending each credits sequence thinking "what on Earth is going on?!". I'm cautious of wanting to go back to the seventies because I know TV HAS to be more complex and challenging now, but most pre-Moffatt adventures began with the TARDIS landing somewhere, and it never did any harm then.

Let's not attack just Moffat here - the "reasons to have a kiss without any narrative justification" was tedious back in 2005, and to an extent they still do it every year. I think I'd rather the Doctor have a genuine romance rather than just snog every companion in some feeble belief that it will guarantee female viewers will stick with it for the season after watching this badge-of-honour moment. At least then it would be justified.

So anyway. Stories that have a start, a middle and an end; that are challenging, interesting and clever like the best of Doctor Who but don't howl smugness and chuck you in half way through; no more of this not explaining things and promising to reveal them at some point in the future. Focus on good stories, well told, that make sense. Some of the scripts lately have been shocking; these are professionals, people like you or I should not be able to pick huge great flaws of logic in them.

Every year I'd like to see a nice mix of future stories, historicals and contemporary set adventures; have plot arcs if you like, but make them subtle and threaded through the season - not as simple as tedious mentions of something like RTD used to do, maybe just little clues or a recurring character that lead up to a clear season finale. Have a companion who is real, has a background, a history but don't make her a massive spacetime event, or in love with the Doctor, or have some weird temporal significance. We don't need to meet her out of order, and the Doctor doesn't need to keep meeting her as a child. Above all, make her vulnerable and scared; she needs to be our identification point. No smugness in the face of the monsters. Have someone trying to think up some new "classic" monsters for the future. Have the TARDIS arrive at each new planet and adventure with us knowing as much as the lead cast, so we can follow along and discover it with them.

Above all, proper stories, a nice mix of settings and times and places each series, and less things that don't make sense.

Si.

[Nyder]

Wow, there's not a lot left to say after that Si :-)

I too would like to see more 2 parters - it gives the stories more room to breathe.

Less sonic.

Less Doctor emoting.

And can we have a smooth TARDIS journey once in a while please? All it does is lurch violently and belch out smoke & explosions these days!

What I wouldn't change is Matt Smith's performance. I think he's really nailed it now.

[Dino]

I know Si posted about less Doctor emoting... but how great would it be if for just one series, he didn't have a companion but instead relied on the people around him in the episode... and they all died at the end of their stories.
So you'd have a Doctor yearning for companionship, but really scared of getting his fingers burned again.

[Simon R]

I'd like to see a less cocksure and over confident companion. Let's have someone stumble into the TARDIS and reluctantly be forced to travel for a while. Even Donna was all go hung-ho after the first adventure. Make the TARDIS not work again so that it can't be used as a plot device so often. In short, make it like the early Hartnell days.

[Alex]

I think you're deluding yourself. 90% of people on this forum couldn't bring themselves to rank this weeks episode higher than 7/10. I've barely read one good report about it - everyone on Facebook hated it. Most people on here wern't impressed. My parents have been distinctly dissapointed in the show in recent years - my Mum says it's too confusing. People I randomly talk to in the street, like my Hairdresser, visiting tradesmen, are torn between thinking it's not as good as it was and thinking it's not on as much as it used to be (the impression seems to be they only do odd episodes now). Sadly, but inevitably, a lot of female viewers left with Tennant.

It's obviously something we'll have to agree to disagree on, but I've genuinely found that most people I know still love the show as much as ever, and Smith's Doctor too. I know this week's episode didn't go down well with a lot of people, and it does seem to have had the worst response since Love and Monsters, but The Bells of St John was largely warmly received, and going through the threads for the first part of the season suggests about 70% of the folks who post liked the episode, with some very highly rated.

I guess I'm just a bit defensive as I love the show so much right now. It is capable of the odd weak episode, as ever, but I think if anything it's better than ever right now.

[Perry Vale]

I too would like to see more 2 parters - it gives the stories more room to breathe.

Back in 2005 I would have agreed, I don't now. The two parters since (The Empty Child) have largely been among the weakest, imo. Daleks In Mahatten, Hungry Earth, Rebel Flesh and Impossible Planet didn't "breathe" any more than the single episodes around them. There were no "characters" within them that 'came to life'. Again I think it is down to the writers. A good writer will write a great single episode, if that's what they're asked to do. Amy's Choice, Vincent, Blink or The Doctor's Wife were all excellent examples of the single episode, again IMO.

[Si Hunt]

I agree!!

Si.

[Jon Masters]

I agree that most of the 2 parters we've had have been shocking, and I agree that's mainly tha fault of the writers (and looking upwards, the production team) - because the main mistake they make is making them have the same frenetic pace as the single episodes, so just packing in twice as much rushing around and derring-do.

In contrast, if they were treated as an extra long story and written properly, they would have room to develop characters properly, have a bit more mystery about them , and as Si said allow us to follw the Doctor's discovery of whats going on from start to finish, not middle to finish.
The Flesh ones almost got it right, IMO, but needed to be brave enough to cut out all the pointless running about and final monster. The Hungry Earth etc got it very badly wrong by forcing characters to behave in certain ways for no apparent reason just to drive the action along.

[Paul Monk]

I agree 100% with Alex. I've enjoyed this era loads and it seems the general public still love it. Tabby and William love every episode and lets face it, they're age group are probably the best critics and ultimately make up a large proportion of the audience.

[SiHart]

All the children I speak to at work about the show still love it too.

[Paul Monk]

And judging by the crowds in Trafalgar Square, its certainly not any less popular!

[SiHart]

Or indeed by the ratings, which despite the best efforts of the press to tell us the opposite, are actually incredibly healthy.

There's a very telling quote in the new issue of DWM, where one of the writers says that all the audience wants is the Doctor doing cool stuff and nice imagery. People aren't interested in the plots. I'm not sure that's necessarily true, and even if it is, the writers shouldn't be pandering to it. There's any number of souless, cool shows and films that can satisfy that demographic. I always hope that Doctor Who is aiming higher than that.

[Jon Masters]

There's a very telling quote in the new issue of DWM, where one of the writers says that all the audience wants is the Doctor doing cool stuff and nice imagery. People aren't interested in the plots.

Sorry - this is from someone who has been given the privelege of writing for DW ? (or even TV in general ? ) *

We're doomed

(* I never read New Series stuff in DWM until the series is over)

[Mike Saville]

I'd prefer less episodes a year, but longer. 90 - 120 minutes per story, like a TV movie. 45 minutes isn't long enough to establish a setting, give a preamble of what's gone before, introduce the support cast, build the drama and have an intelligent resolution. it's just long enough for the doctor to wave his sonic screwdriver around inanely until the world is better.

More Neil Gaiman. I wanted him as writer as soon as they announced the series' return, and I'm eager to see what he does with each story he picks up. Give him a good budget, a great cast and 90 minutes+

To pick up on what Mr Hunt said, yes, it's lost some of it's female audience since Tennant left. I know some of them. But they weren't Who fans or even Who watchers. They were Tennant watchers. They fancied him. If that's the demographic you think the series should be hanging onto, then you also have to accept love interests and the frisson between him and his companions. I'd prefer to lose that portion of the viewing figures if we can have better narrative.

[SiHart]

But it's not as if we've lost much of the audience without them, looking at the figures. There was a huge spike for parts of season 4, but otherwise the average figures have been fairly even across the years since 2005.

Season 1 7.9 million
Season 2 7.7 million
Season 3 7.5 million
Season 4 8.0 million
Season 5 7.7 million
Season 6 7.5 million
Season 7 7.9 million.

[shada pavlova]

It's a sad fact when piddling little spin-off radio plays made by a couple of bald blokes with a ring modulator are so, SO much better than the television programme that they're supposed to be based on. Since Moffat came to power on TV, on audio we've had To the Death, A Death in the Family, Protect and Survive, UNIT Dominion, the Stockbridge trilogy, I could go on all night. Briggs and company have churned out more absolute classics in the last three years than all of Nu-Who put together.

So, my solution? Give Nick Briggs the keys to the Doctor Who production office.

At least THEY know how to do a PROPER 50th anniversary special.

[Andrew Curnow]

I'm sort of torn (and going to bed in a minute, so will be brief for now) in that I was never a huge Moffat fan - in the RTD era, I never hated any of Moffat's stories (no not even Blink, sorry Mr Hart) but on the other hand none of them were my particular favourites. To this day, I'd still take AOL/WW3 over TEC/TDDances, for example. So I never went into the Moffat era expecting a glorious golden age to replace the rubbishy RTD era - because I enjoyed the RTD days so much, it was really in the main (for whatever reason, mainly down to one's individual tastes I guess) my sort of Who.

With season 6, I really didn't like much of it at all, and other than the final episode I've not yet rewatched any of them. It may be that they will improve on rewatching, but certainly my recollection of Let's Kill Hitler, being the worst culprit, was that I was waiting for it just to end, and that an episode in which four time travellers faff about, and whitter on about their lives, is just not the programme I want to watch.

On the other hand, I still applaud the notion of doing something different - I personally didn't enjoy it, but I know a load of people did engage with that idea of a season long story, of big questions in part 1 coming back to be resolved only in part 13. Doing something different with Who, surprising the audience, has always been part of it - it's what gave us The Web Planet and the Pertwee era!!

I do think, though, there's a tendency to leave too much unexplained. I don't believe we'll ever quite understand why the TARDIS blew up, or how River got to Leadworth, or why the Doctor was locked up in Day of the Moon, or what happened in those three months, or why Madam whatsername (eyepatch lady, you know) concocted such an absurd plan to kill the Doctor, etc, etc, etc. The two parters by Moffat always have a big shift between parts 1 & 2, but that seems to have gone to extremes at times almost out of stubbornness, with the result that the overall story is a bit uneven.

That said, I've enjoyed season 7 (so far) a lot more than season 6 - and to be a bit contradictory, actually The Big Bang and A Christmas Carol were & are two of my favourite episodes ever (although I guess a large part of that is down to Mr Smith).

So in conclusion, to answer the thread title, erm... I don't know!!

[Paul Monk]

I think the problem is that all us Who fans that love the older stuff, generally love other cult tv from that era and that's just not how TV is made anymore. Whilst they don't want to lose us as an audience we're certainly not the main d e demographic the show is aimed any more. So maybe the question should be "How can we change so we can enjoy the show more?"