I knew this season was going to be a let-down from Moffat, but I guess I was hoping it would be more fun than this is and that I'd be more engaged with the characters. Chibbs has always pretty reliably delivered on both of those fronts, and it's just confusing and frustrating that it's not happening here.
The comedy is missing. Or rather Moffat was better at comedy -- makes sense he came from situational comedy (his first series was Coupling), while Chinbal and to a degree RT Davies are more dramatic writers. I miss the humor.
But, yeah, I'm not here to be preached at by these kinds of shows on the week by week level. If the broader series-wide themes don't appeal to me, I won't watch, but story by story I only really care insofar as it affects the characters I care about.
I've noticed that preaching can occur in the "serial format" and the "episodic or monster of the week format". Just as there are monster of the week series that really aren't preachy at all -- and you have to work to find the theme.(I don't really see Doctor Who as all that preachy...often its theme is buried in the action and fans fight over what it is trying to say. LOL!)
I've noticed that if a show-runner sticks with a show too long, and gets really popular, they have tendency to get preachy or use their series as their own personal soap box. (Doctor Who cycles through show-runners and leads too often for it to get preachy. I'll give it that. Does it have morality plays of the week? Yes. But often the morality gets buried in the plot hijinks...that the fans spend the next two weeks arguing over what it was.)
Debating the intricacies of was X action the right one to do in the situation of the week I couldn't care less about.
Probably wise. 98% of the fan kerfuffles I've seen in fandoms (doesn't matter which one, seems to be the common denominator), are about the moral actions of the characters. Fans are always arguing and getting huffy about whether X or Y was right to do this or that.
I admit I like to argue about the moral implications of the action, but I'm more interested in the motivations behind it. Or what it reveals about the character. Also if X was morally superior week after week -- the show would be boring and unrealistic. That said...what X does may or may not have a greater bearing on the thematic arc. Depends on X's role in the story, I guess, and why the writers went that direction. For example Doctor Who not caring that much about Charlie and more focused on whizzing the others to safety, was in character and made sense. Charlie was impossible to save, and the Doctor has lost a lot of people. I think to a degree the Doctor is struggling with how to process those losses, prevent more, and stay sane. That can be an interesting discussion. But if you waste time arguing over whether this Doctor is more moral than the last one...you've lost me. LOL!
no subject
The comedy is missing. Or rather Moffat was better at comedy -- makes sense he came from situational comedy (his first series was Coupling), while Chinbal and to a degree RT Davies are more dramatic writers. I miss the humor.
But, yeah, I'm not here to be preached at by these kinds of shows on the week by week level. If the broader series-wide themes don't appeal to me, I won't watch, but story by story I only really care insofar as it affects the characters I care about.
I've noticed that preaching can occur in the "serial format" and the "episodic or monster of the week format". Just as there are monster of the week series that really aren't preachy at all -- and you have to work to find the theme.(I don't really see Doctor Who as all that preachy...often its theme is buried in the action and fans fight over what it is trying to say. LOL!)
I've noticed that if a show-runner sticks with a show too long, and gets really popular, they have tendency to get preachy or use their series as their own personal soap box. (Doctor Who cycles through show-runners and leads too often for it to get preachy. I'll give it that. Does it have morality plays of the week? Yes. But often the morality gets buried in the plot hijinks...that the fans spend the next two weeks arguing over what it was.)
Debating the intricacies of was X action the right one to do in the situation of the week I couldn't care less about.
Probably wise. 98% of the fan kerfuffles I've seen in fandoms (doesn't matter which one, seems to be the common denominator), are about the moral actions of the characters. Fans are always arguing and getting huffy about whether X or Y was right to do this or that.
I admit I like to argue about the moral implications of the action, but I'm more interested in the motivations behind it. Or what it reveals about the character. Also if X was morally superior week after week -- the show would be boring and unrealistic. That said...what X does may or may not have a greater bearing on the thematic arc. Depends on X's role in the story, I guess, and why the writers went that direction. For example Doctor Who not caring that much about Charlie and more focused on whizzing the others to safety, was in character and made sense. Charlie was impossible to save, and the Doctor has lost a lot of people. I think to a degree the Doctor is struggling with how to process those losses, prevent more, and stay sane.
That can be an interesting discussion. But if you waste time arguing over whether this Doctor is more moral than the last one...you've lost me. LOL!