More on the Great Dr Who debate..

[green_amber]

.. from email conversation..

Reasons why people didn't like Love and Monsters

- it's not Who
- the Doctor (and Rose) wasn't the main character
- it "confounds expectations" (as if that was a bad thing!)
- it's like a soap opera, and that's NOT WHO

I think at root what we're seeing here is the naked faaaan mentality - we want it to look like the Who
we remember, monsters, aliens, no characterisation and no emotional development - that's for GIRLS. There's also a lot of gender and class issues floating around in there - Dr Who is above soap opera, and , god help us all, popular culture references - it's POSH and for BOYS. (oddly enough, exactly the kind of boys who will get the ELO references - which makes the hostility all the oddder.)

I do think anyone who could say it wasn't funny has had a complete sense of humour failure- but this seems to include people like Swisstone, so I'm utterly bemused..

It's CHANGE. Like I always say, nobody likes that :-)

Comments

[blue-condition.livejournal.com]

Not to be a pedant but it's Kinvig, and that at least had Prunella Gee in a sort of sub-Sibyl Danning bacofoil outfit, and the rather droll Tony Haygarth and Colin Jeavons.

Nigel Kneale should stick to the grim stuff though.

L&M was rather like an episode of Kinvig turning up halfway through Quatermass. Doesn't fit. Destroys the tempo, destroys the flow.

[lil-shepherd.livejournal.com]

"not to be a pedant but it's Kinvig"

Be a pedant as much as you like [grin]. As you can see from later posts, I have a tendency to type first and consider afterwards. And I never have been able to spell...