Episode Discussion: Wish World

Television Doctor Who (2023-)
, , ,
522

All of this is wild considering RTD claimed the season 1 rebrand was a fresh start and looking to the future not at the past :sob:

11 Likes
523

Haha he lied :sob:

9 Likes
524

And a large amount of this is not the fault of the show, and not something they could have done anything about. The fact that we’ve got this group of people actively trying to kill the show is something they’d have going on regardless, whatever they did. It’s the state of things today, unfortunately.

13 Likes
525

Didn’t they always do that anyway? People who are “big fans” of 12 now used to hate his era :sob:

10 Likes
526

I feel like it’s gotten worse, but they are doing that for a lot of big continuing franchises these days.

It wouldn’t really help if they weren’t referencing classic. The first season of 13 tried that, and 13’s era’s probably the least popular of the revival era


10 Likes
527

There have always been people shouting “Doctor Who is dead”, even during the Tennant era. However, nowadays, people are far more “intense” with their disdain as negativity rules the internet now, among other, more political reasons :sob:.

#AlwaysA12Lover, those fools just don’t understand great storytelling, they lack vision /j

14 Likes
528

Even William Hartnell’s era is very political :sob:

10 Likes
529

Again, it isn’t that they shouldn’t at all, I don’t think anybody is saying that. A rich 60+ year history should be drawn on and celebrated. As a long term fan who understands all the references and returns I don’t notice them so much because I assimilate than as they’re intended.

But they could definitely do with dialling it back a bit if what nearly everybody I know who doesn’t immediately get those references is telling me.

13 Likes
530

I do feel like this comes up every time they make any reference to the classic era that hasn’t already come up in new who, though


4 Likes
531

I need this in my life :star_struck:

8 Likes
532

Really? I’ve never seen anyone find it a problem when one happens in isolation, it’s only the relative avalanche of it recently has made it noteworthy.

5 Likes
533

I. M Foreman wrote the books?

Interference reference confirmed! :partying_face: :laughing:

10 Likes
534

Feels like it to me, but then, my memories like one of those things you strain rice with


3 Likes
535

I’m on a similar wavelength. Even if you scratch out the stuff that was in the 60th, there’s still a decent amount. Old stuff isn’t inherently bad, but the volume of old stuff can be off-putting (especially in an era marketed as ‘new’, Season 1, etc. and where Disney+ viewers don’t have easy access to older stuff).

11 Likes
536

Err, sorry. I am.

3 Likes
537

But does it? Is there any evidence for that?

5 Likes
538

I love the 2005 approach, honestly, even though I think classic fans at the time weren’t enamoured with it. By that, I mean - 2005 gave us a Davros reference, but it didn’t mention him by name, it brought no baggage, it didn’t stop the plot, and was simply a nice character line between two people:

VAN STATTEN: Genetically engineered. By whom?
DOCTOR: By a genius, Van Statten. By a man who was king of his own little world. You’d like him.

Lovely. Simple, to the point. An easter egg for fans who know who Davros is, but anyone – even a brand new viewer walking in for that specific episode – can understand it.

Then we had Autons. Unnamed. The Nestene gets a name-check but it’s kept vague. I feel like, if they had the Nestene now, there’d be swelling Murray Gold music blasting everywhere, a huge “THIS IS MAJOR!!!” sign flashing above it, flashbacks to Spearhead from Space, etc. But in Rose, it’s simply name-checked and you get enough context to understand what it is. You don’t even have to know it’d appeared before. If you do, it’s just a fannish bonus.

We get UNIT. Similar again. There’s no back referencing – it’s just “here’s UNIT, here’s what they do” and it’s easy to grasp.

We get the Dalek Emperor. We’ve had one before in the 60s but there was no need to reference that. It’s presented as a brand new thing, easy to understand, but is also a bonus fannish joy if you know the history of the Dalek Emperors.

There’s a Cyberman helmet. I love this one.

ROSE: What is it?
(The head of a Cyberman.)
DOCTOR: An old friend of mine. Well, enemy. The stuff of nightmares reduced to an exhibit. I’m getting old.
ROSE: Is that where the signal’s coming from?
DOCTOR: No, it’s stone dead.

And that’s it. No need for endless back-references to old stories. No flashbacks. No swelling music. No dramatic zooms or anything. It’s not even named as a Cyberman. You don’t need it, not in 2005 anyway. But if you know what it is, great, bonus fan points. If you know what story it’s from, even more fan points. But your mum sat next to you or the 6 year old who only started watching last week isn’t lost either.

I get the world we live in now is far from 2005. And the show has opened up so much since then, with endless lore stuff and exploration of the past, etc. But I just love that 2005 clean slate approach whereby you can of course do old stuff, but in a way that makes it super accessible for newbies whilst also feeling like a treat for fans if you have further knowledge of the show. It’s sort of become expected now – back then it was a little fan treat.

Sorry for the ramble.

19 Likes
539

Using my sample size of 1, I can confirm he is correct! I’m currently watching The Three Doctors to check out Omega, and let me tell you, it’s a lot of fun so far. I stalled out on my classic rewatch, because binging it is a chore, but these little side quests have been fun and have made me want to continue with my full rewatch. Now if only the BBC could make it easier to get access to Classic :confused:

15 Likes
540

100% agree. Such a better approach to returning elements in the good old days of 2005.

8 Likes
541

MGGA
MGGA1270×1587 123 KB

Nightmare blunt rotation?

3 Likes