|
|
Post by rushy on Feb 6, 2024 7:51:50 GMT
To be kind, I do really like season 23. It's perfectly fine. It's the hysterical season 22 take that really doesn't work for me.
And ofc the Doctor overcoming the trauma of the Time War and becoming overreliant on Rose is more depth than Colin ever got, but that's not his fault
|
|
|
|
Post by RobFilth on Feb 7, 2024 8:12:09 GMT
Only if you cross at cynical ruthless streak and type in shouty colorblind buffoon It wasn't Sawards fault he had to compete with JNT's garish pantomime sensibilities undermining his vision. With RTD however, the only person which was his own worst enemy was himself. |
|
|
|
Post by rushy on Feb 7, 2024 8:15:14 GMT
Saward was a script editor. He's not supposed to have a vision. That's the producer's job.
And JNT worked fine alongside both Bidmead and Cartmel.
|
|
|
|
Post by mott1 on Feb 7, 2024 11:07:39 GMT
Getting back to the original thread question, I think the worst thing which can be said about Eric Saward at the time was that he was a cheap mans Robert Holmes, where as compared to Russell T Fathead, he IS Robert f*cking Holmes. I'm just glad RTD hasn't remade The Godfather films. If he did he'd probably have Tennant play Sonny, and the character would come back as floaty Jesus to forgive the mobsters that gunned him down at the causeway. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Feb 7, 2024 11:49:33 GMT
Getting back to the original thread question, I think the worst thing which can be said about Eric Saward at the time was that he was a cheap mans Robert Holmes, where as compared to Russell T Fathead, he IS Robert f*cking Holmes. I'm just glad RTD hasn't remade The Godfather films. If he did he'd probably have Tennant play Sonny, and the character would come back as floaty Jesus to forgive the mobsters that gunned him down at the causeway. Also everybody would be gay and it would be set in Wales. Was there ever a Welsh mafia? Apart from RTD himself LOL. |
|
|
|
Post by iank on Feb 7, 2024 20:54:31 GMT
Saward was a script editor. He's not supposed to have a vision. That's the producer's job. And JNT worked fine alongside both Bidmead and Cartmel. Both of whom had distinct visions. Yeah sorry, but you really are talking BS now. The script editor in the real show was absolutely supposed to have a vision, that was very much part of the job in those days, as indeed they ALL DID on the original show. It's not like now where the script editor is basically there to transfer RTD's crayon writing into computer text and fix his spelling. |
|
|
|
Post by rushy on Feb 7, 2024 21:31:30 GMT
Saward was a script editor. He's not supposed to have a vision. That's the producer's job. And JNT worked fine alongside both Bidmead and Cartmel. Both of whom had distinct visions. I wouldn't say they had distinct visions so much as they had their own style. But regardless, their work exists within the confines of what JNT wanted. JNT is the producer. The script editor is his number two. The job of the script editor is to bring the producer's show to the screen. Now in a perfect world, the two are a partnership because they both understand and respect each other's input. But at the end of the day, they don't have the same rank. And Saward just couldn't cope with that. All he does is complain, complain, complain. JNT wouldn't let him do this, JNT wouldn't let him do that. If he had a scrap of humility, he would've accepted that or silently parted ways. But no, instead we get four-five seasons of passive aggressive bullsh!t while the show floundered. Then lo and behold, suddenly everything's a well-oiled machine when a totally inexperienced young man takes over the editor job and magically conjures up new writers. Because "JNT was humbled". Sure, I buy that. The contrast between Saward's incompetence and Cartmel's raw talent is staggering. |
|
|
|
Post by RobFilth on Feb 9, 2024 7:29:47 GMT
Both of whom had distinct visions. I wouldn't say they had distinct visions so much as they had their own style. But regardless, their work exists within the confines of what JNT wanted. JNT is the producer. The script editor is his number two. The job of the script editor is to bring the producer's show to the screen. Now in a perfect world, the two are a partnership because they both understand and respect each other's input. But at the end of the day, they don't have the same rank. And Saward just couldn't cope with that. All he does is complain, complain, complain. JNT wouldn't let him do this, JNT wouldn't let him do that. If he had a scrap of humility, he would've accepted that or silently parted ways. But no, instead we get four-five seasons of passive aggressive bullsh!t while the show floundered. Then lo and behold, suddenly everything's a well-oiled machine when a totally inexperienced young man takes over the editor job and magically conjures up new writers. Because "JNT was humbled". Sure, I buy that. The contrast between Saward's incompetence and Cartmel's raw talent is staggering. Cartmel couldn't script edit to save his life. He shuffled the script pages into random orders, removed pages and made them completely narratively incomprehensible before littering the scripts with a shopping list of characters all babbling nonsense and staging mental breakdowns because he thought it would make it like his favourite programme "The Prisoner". At least Sawards characters were acting upon coherent motivations instead of running around back and forth like headless chickens without rhyme or reason. |
|
|
|
Post by rushy on Feb 9, 2024 9:47:08 GMT
I suppose that's a matter of opinion
|
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Feb 9, 2024 11:44:40 GMT
I wouldn't say they had distinct visions so much as they had their own style. But regardless, their work exists within the confines of what JNT wanted. JNT is the producer. The script editor is his number two. The job of the script editor is to bring the producer's show to the screen. Now in a perfect world, the two are a partnership because they both understand and respect each other's input. But at the end of the day, they don't have the same rank. And Saward just couldn't cope with that. All he does is complain, complain, complain. JNT wouldn't let him do this, JNT wouldn't let him do that. If he had a scrap of humility, he would've accepted that or silently parted ways. But no, instead we get four-five seasons of passive aggressive bullsh!t while the show floundered. Then lo and behold, suddenly everything's a well-oiled machine when a totally inexperienced young man takes over the editor job and magically conjures up new writers. Because "JNT was humbled". Sure, I buy that. The contrast between Saward's incompetence and Cartmel's raw talent is staggering. Cartmel couldn't script edit to save his life. He shuffled the script pages into random orders, removed pages and made them completely narratively incomprehensible before littering the scripts with a shopping list of characters all babbling nonsense and staging mental breakdowns because he thought it would make it like his favourite programme "The Prisoner". At least Sawards characters were acting upon coherent motivations instead of running around back and forth like headless chickens without rhyme or reason. Cartmel was ten times the script editor Saward was. He managed to gather a team of new and interesting writers with distinctive styles like Marc Platt, Rona Munro, Ian Briggs and Ben Aaronovitch. Saward never managed that because he was too lazy and relied on Bob Holmes. Even then he actually, Androzani aside, got the worst out of Holmes. He was such a fanboy he didn't touch a word of Holmes' scripts and the result was Holmes becoming too self indulgent. The likes of Barry Letts and even Hinchcliff would have taken out Oscars death in The Two Doctors for instance because it's just so ridiculous it fails to be funny or horrifying. Cartmel managed to create and develop the best companion since the 70s. Okay I'm a little biased as Sophie is my leading lady LOL. Still Ace obviously was a better character. She was kind of a precursor to Dana DeLorenzo, Eliza Dushku types I think who became very popular in the 90s, 00s and 10s. I'm not saying she inspired them per say, but she basically is that type of character ten years before it became mainstream in sci fi and fantasy shows. The tomboy, down to earth badass with a vulnerable streak, some hidden nerdy interests like Ace's love of Dinosaurs, Faith's love of classic rock, that little girls could relate too more, and little boys could find more accessible as a pin up LOL. Even though they're all played by gorgeous leading ladies, the fact that these types of characters are more down to earth means little girls can imagine being them, and little boys can imagine being friends with them at least. Also these types of characters always have to have a bisexual side to them, whether that's Ace and Karra, Faith's interest in Buffy, or Dana and Ruby's almost romance in season 2 etc, which gives them a whole other large fanbase as well. Not surprisingly these characters are ALWAYS the most popular, like Kelly in Ash Vs Evil Dead, and Faith in Buffy etc. Hell even the bits with Ace that are a bit dated, like her totally radical dialogue, that's something we'd still see in later characters like Faith LOL and gives them a bit of charm as it adds to their dorkiness and vulnerability of trying to look cool but coming over as lame. What's cringier Faith's "get down and dirty B." Or Ace's habit of calling everything by her name? Ace as a companion was ahead of her time even when she cringey, whilst Peri and Mel were painfully out of touch even by late 60s companions standards. Compare them to Zoe for instance and you'd see them as a huge step back. It wasn't the actresses fault either, both of whom are amazing in the Big Finish audios. It was entirely the scripts that made them seem wimpy and useless. Granted this is not all Saward's fault. The wimpiness of Peri and Mel was because JNT hated his feminist critics and wanted to piss them off by making the female companions wimpy and useless. Why he wanted to do that, I have 0 idea as he just gave them all the ammunition they wanted. Still even then Saward still deserves some of the blame, in that he wasn't strong, or forceful enough to complain about this to JNT. People say JNT was too arrogant at that time and I don't doubt that the huge success of the Davison era had gone to his head, but ultimately I think part of why he became so arrogant was Saward not confronting him. Colin mentions how Saward would only ever bitch about JNT to him. Pip and Jane Baker and even Nicola Bryant all back this up, saying none of them ever thought there was anything wrong with JNT and Saward's relationship. (Nicola has less reason than anyone to defend JNT that way, considering he spat in her face!) To me Saward just wasn't cut out for the role of script editor as he wasn't forceful enough with his ideas, hence why when he left he did that infamous interview where it all just exploded after years of built up frustration. Cartmel also did have a clearer vision for the show. He took it down a more paranormal, supernatural route, but not in a way that undermined the sci fi, which is an extraordinarily difficult thing to do. Again you can see how Cartmel actually did have his finger on the pulse more than Saward, as again when you look at the next two decades, you can see that fantasy and the supernatural is beginning to dominate the world of television more. Buffy, Angel, Xena, Hercules, Ghost Whisperer, Supernatural, all the biggest original genre hits of the decades after, all focused on the paranormal. Even the X-Files one of the few original sci fi series to match the likes of Buffy in terms of influence, still dabbled in the occult. Indeed a lot of the things these shows did that were seen as original 10, 20 years later, Cartmel and his team did back in the 80s. The idea of hell being another universe, or universes, with different physical laws to our own that makes up the mythology of Buffy? Battlefield did that with the Destroyer. The idea of vampires being the creation of ancient evil, with the task of freeing said evil so it can take over the world, but said evil doesn't actually care about its creations, and will happily destroy them when they are of no further use, making them the ultimate chumps? This is the origin for vampires in Being Human, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Blade films and for Demons in Supernatural, and it's pretty much the relationship between Fenric and the Haemovores (vampires) in Curse of Fenric. There's even a bit where one of the vampires realises this and turns on Fenric and takes them both down, which is again something we see in a lot of these later series. Supernatural had a whole arc about Crowley realising the Demons would be toast and fighting it out with Lucifer, their creator. Meanwhile Ace's story arc, a young girl who is presented as a down to earth, relatable character from a broken home, who was taken for a delinquent and even burned somewhere down, whose life ends up being derailed by a dark supernatural evil, that maps out her destiny for her, who is an action babe that kicks the shit out of monsters that sent previous female characters running away scared, like Daleks, Cybermen, vampires, whose mentor is a stuffy old, Mr exposition who leads her further down the life of being a hero/renegade, who loves her like a daughter, but who is also manipulative and keeps things from her and is quite ruthless all of which leads to really explosive arguments and the two falling out? Oh and she also has a supernatural love interest who is bad, but redeemed by her love for her in Survival. I'm sorry we talking about Ace/7 or Buffy/Giles here LOL Also might add the idea of using the supernatural as a metaphor for characters exploring their sexuality, where its viewed as a liberating thing, or a way for women to get together that we'd see become very prominent in things like Xena and Buffy via Willow and Tara was also in Survival too with Ace and Karra. Again obviously I'm not saying that Buffy was even inspired by Ace, as Joss Whedon surprisingly hated DW, Really I think it's more just a case of for whatever reason, that's the way the genre was headed and DW evidently was the first big genre tv show to really catch onto that zeitgeist. Arguably though it did so a bit too early. Between McCoy and Buffy there was a period were in contrast, hard sci fi like Next Generation would really dominate, but still again that just made DW ahead of the curve, and the McCoy era a victim of Lost in Space syndrome when the panel show c*nts mocked it. Saward in contrast didn't really have any kind of clear vision for the show. He just wanted to make it more violent and a bit darker. Okay that sometimes did work like Earthshock and Resurrection of the Daleks, but ultimately you need more than that. Holmes and Hinchcliff for instance wanted to make it a bit darker, but they also had the idea of bringing in the gothic horror thread. To me Saward was a bit aimless. That said Saward did I think do a better job of making the villains seem more formidable. The Cybermen are crap in Silver Nemesis, and he was really the last writer to treat them as star villains. Also even the Daleks whilst Remembrance is a better story, and does finally conquer an old weakness, the Daleks themselves I think are a bit too easily disposed of at certain points, unlike Resurrection where the cost to stop them is huge. Still overall Cartmel was definitely more creative, more clear in what he wanted, worked better with JNT and really did update the show. |
|
|
|
Post by rushy on Feb 9, 2024 12:19:00 GMT
Even making the companions more feminine and "wimpy" could have worked in the hands of a decent script editor who didn't constantly fall back on "make Doctor and companion argue for no reason" scenes
|
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Feb 9, 2024 12:31:41 GMT
Even making the companions more feminine and "wimpy" could have worked in the hands of a decent script editor who didn't constantly fall back on "make Doctor and companion argue for no reason" scenes I would love a more feminine companion. Feminine obviously does NOT = wimpy. I admit as much as I love tomboys I think sometimes that can be a problem that people think the only way a female character can be badass is if she is a Faith or an Ace IE one of the lads. Buffy was great that way actually by being a feminine and strong character. JNT's idea however I don't think would have worked, as it wasn't even just that he wanted them to be wimpy. I mean you're right Victoria is a bit wimpy and for the time she was fine. Even Vicki wasn't exactly Xena the Warrior Princess and she's one of my favourite 60s companions, in fact she's Hartnell's best after Ian and Barbara. Hell Polly was supposed to be an Emma Peel expy, but it was the actress who insisted on making her a bit more vulnerable so as to be relatable. By all means have a companion who is just a normal person. JNT however actively wanted to piss off the feminists, so his companions were deliberately made to not be able to do the simplest things (like that hilarious bit where Peri pushes the Doctor down a hill when he's strapped to the table in Mark of the Rani LOL, or Mel being unable to overpower two frail old ladies who wrap a blanker over her etc. Here's JNT's character description for Mel when casting her. "Melanie is one of those annoying young ladies who is a 'feminist' at all times, except at moments of great stress, when she relies heavily on playing the hard-done-by, down-trodden, crocodile-teared female."LMFAO it's not surprising that Saward and indeed Bonnie Langford found it hard to do anything with that type of character, as opposed to Cartmel and Sophie with Ace. Still again as we've both been over JNT did listen to his other two script editors, and whilst he may have been somewhat humbled by Saward's betrayal, ultimately I think Saward played a role in him getting so big headed in the first place as he clearly, based on what Colin, Nicola, Pip and Jane all said, NEVER questioned JNT to his face. I kind of felt sorry for JNT to be honest in that respect as he was clearly quite hurt by Saward's betrayal on a personal level. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2024 14:27:41 GMT
No, most classic Who doesn't have "pacing issues". It's just that people's attention spans have been destroyed by decades of flash cutting. Look at Tik-Tok. Most of the generation hooked on that now have attention spans less than a minute. To be honest, Yak, most of the criticisms you throw at classic Who seem to come from a complete lack of understanding of the times in which it was made and the shows it was made alongside. These "flaws" are not flaws at all, just standard program making for the era that no one at the time would have raised an eyebrow at... I've yet to hear any real reason why that style is actually lesser than more modern ones, other than attention span issues on the part of the modern viewer. I watch a lot of old films, some of which get up to 4 hours long consisting of a handful of people talking in a room, yet which are paced perfectly. I can tell you that Classic Who has bad pacing. The slowness isn't the problem. In fact, I love the more contemplative moments in Classic Who where the director lets the shot sit and it moves nice and slowly, like the first part of Survival. But pacing is about more than just fast vs. slow. The pacing is really a result of the editing, which is often slapdash and mercurial. Having a 25-minute slow burner with a cliffhanger at the end is a difficult formula for even a great writer to work around. That's why I almost always watch Classic stories that have been spliced together to create a more movie-like format. This also means that there is a minimum of at least 1 cheap thrill per episode, something I can rarely stand in any media. I also can't stand the cliffhangers in the RTD era, they're cheap and dumb and firmly cement Doctor Who as a baby's show. |
|
|
|
Post by RobFilth on Feb 10, 2024 10:50:34 GMT
Even making the companions more feminine and "wimpy" could have worked in the hands of a decent script editor who didn't constantly fall back on "make Doctor and companion argue for no reason" scenes Tegan channeling the Mara, frequently picking the Doctor up on his morality, showing Lieutenant Scott and his cowardly demoralised troops how to kill cybermen, or Peri bashing the brains out of an aggressive mutant is "wimpy"? Admittedly there wasn't a lot Saward could do with "scweam and scweam again" Elizabeth Violet Bott in the TARDIS in her lolita wear, but then again I doubt ANY script editor could have worked their way around that one. And sorry Burrun, Cartmel was crap. Any script editor who removes important narrative information which affects the stories flow and coherence as Cartmel frequently did, is not suitable as script editor, no matter how good the script is that they are butchering. Dragonfire, Happiness Patrol, Silver Nemesis, Ghostlight and Curse of Fenric all suffer from Cartmels idiotic script editing where the narrative is either reduced down to people babbling cryptic nonsense or a cast of characters all soul searching and having mental breakdowns, or are running around without rhyme or reason or any kind of clear motivations for doing so. |
|
|
|
Post by rushy on Feb 10, 2024 11:21:59 GMT
I'd argue only Ghost Light really suffers from lack of information. The other stories are easy enough to follow.
|
|
