|
Dr. Who
Mar 24, 2011 4:48:21 GMT -5
Post by Jet on Mar 24, 2011 4:48:21 GMT -5
TWF: Another guy who doesnt like the fact that Matt Smith (11th) "tries too hard". Isnt trying to do your best a GOOD thing? Would people stop complaining if he said "oh, whatever" and just did a mediocre job? Hell no- Doctor, in whatever form he is, is supposed to be over the top and way above human he meets. Thats the entire point of this series. Speaking of which, saying that someone doesnt compare to Doctor is like saying "you know, Cyclops dude is pretty cool, but he sucks becouse he's not as powerfull as Supermna". Well, duh! Why would I watch a show about Doctor if he was outshined by his sidekicks?
Rant over, I love all three recent Doctors, I havent seen any older episodes, but I'll catch up eventually. My favourite Doctor? Ninth- Christopher Eccleston is just made out of win. Too bad he had only one season and some mediocre episodes.
|
|
|
Dr. Who
Mar 24, 2011 8:10:30 GMT -5
Post by takewithfood on Mar 24, 2011 8:10:30 GMT -5
Not trying to argue, just trying to clarify points as I think you might have misunderstood me:
The "too" in "tries too hard" implies that it's a bad thing. "Tries hard" would be great. "Tries too hard" is bad. I think he overacts a little, and he just doesn't seem perfectly comfortable in the role. I think if he relaxes a little (and I imagine he will, with time), he'll bring more of his own touch to the Doctor. And that's one of the great things about Dr. Who - that each actor brings something unique to the role. It must be a lot of pressure being a young actor almost literally stepping into David Tennant's sneakers, so I totally understand if he's a little tense in the first season.
But yeah, the point is: effort is great, but there is such a thing as too much. The scale of effort might look something like this: no effort > mediocre job > great job > too much > over the top. There's a nice sweet spot in the middle, but the two extreme ends are bad.
And the point about Martha not comparing to the Doctor wasn't to say that it would have been better if she was smarter than the Doctor. The point is that it's hard to make a character shine when the characteristic that makes them unique/special is dwarfed by the main character out of hand. Its like joining a MURPG game only to find out that another character in the party has the exact same power as you, only with double the AN. Sure, you can still be useful, but it's hard to shake the feeling that you'll always be in someone's shadow.
~TWF
|
|
|
Dr. Who
Mar 24, 2011 10:05:39 GMT -5
Post by Jet on Mar 24, 2011 10:05:39 GMT -5
Going by that logic, the only people who would fit Doctor are soldiers and badass fighters, becouse one thing Doctor cant do right, is fight mano-a-mano, instead relying on wits and creativity, which makes this show so good. The entire point of "companion" is having a person that audience can identify with. That is why Rose, Mickey, Martha, Donna, Amy or Rory are outshined by Doctor everytime- they are supposed to be "us", and we arent and never will be as awesome as Doctor. In fact, trying to be like that will usually backfire, as it did many times. On the other hand, being like Doctor isnt really all that great, what with all those hearbreaks, guilty conscience, hard decisions and loneliness, becouse nobody can measure up to him. And one person who did (Master), is his mortal enemy. And maybe River Song, but thats for us to see in future. For the record- Jack was an exception, which is why he got his own show where he can be the greatest.
In MURPG terms, your character is made with 15 maybe 20 stones. Doctor, without TARDIS, is made out of 200. Its not supposed to be fair, never was supposed to be fair and, most importantly, was never supposed to be considered in RPG terms. And if it were- we're Robins, he's a Superman.
|
|
|
Dr. Who
Mar 24, 2011 16:31:44 GMT -5
Post by Pope Mega Force on Mar 24, 2011 16:31:44 GMT -5
I personally hate Matt Smith as the Doctor. I also dislike the writing of the first season with him. They make the Doctor into a fatalist who's willing to give up at the first sign of trouble. Amy Pond, as someone said while easy on the eyes is boring and really contributes nothing to the show. The fact that she fell in love with the Doctor within a few episodes also really frustrated me. The same thing with Martha but Martha made up for it by being useful and interesting. I think some of the best writing was when Donna was about. I enjoyed Donna's presence and she was a good companion throughout an awesome season.
|
|
|
Dr. Who
Mar 25, 2011 8:50:52 GMT -5
Post by takewithfood on Mar 25, 2011 8:50:52 GMT -5
Going by that logic, the only people who would fit Doctor are soldiers and badass fighters, becouse one thing Doctor cant do right, is fight mano-a-mano, instead relying on wits and creativity, which makes this show so good. The entire point of "companion" is having a person that audience can identify with. That is why Rose, Mickey, Martha, Donna, Amy or Rory are outshined by Doctor everytime- they are supposed to be "us", and we arent and never will be as awesome as Doctor. In fact, trying to be like that will usually backfire, as it did many times. On the other hand, being like Doctor isnt really all that great, what with all those hearbreaks, guilty conscience, hard decisions and loneliness, becouse nobody can measure up to him. And one person who did (Master), is his mortal enemy. And maybe River Song, but thats for us to see in future. For the record- Jack was an exception, which is why he got his own show where he can be the greatest. In MURPG terms, your character is made with 15 maybe 20 stones. Doctor, without TARDIS, is made out of 200. Its not supposed to be fair, never was supposed to be fair and, most importantly, was never supposed to be considered in RPG terms. And if it were- we're Robins, he's a Superman. I agree with you, which is why I still think you're missing the point and/or taking it to a pretty extreme place. But that's okay. ^__^ I feel exactly the same way. ~TWF
|
|