# Why was Dr Who S3 not as good as those before? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [July 1, 2007, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172 "2007-07-01T23:11:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2007, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/1 "2007-07-01T23:11:42Z")
I don’t think this series was as good as earlier ones. While I think the blame in general can be laid at RTD - after all, he’s in charge, I’d like to suggest that part of the problem was that while Martha was the foil for the Doctor, she herself had no foil a la Ricky. Secondly, the series was about Martha’s journey, rather than the Doctor - there was too much focus on her. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2007, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/2 "2007-07-01T23:33:36Z")
I agree it wasn’t as good. Maybe to an extent it’s resting on their laurels; For the first series, they had a lot to live up to. The second series then had a new Doctor that they had to prove was a good choice. The recent series didn’t have any big milestones to cross (besides the return of the Master, but I would say the problem with those episodes was the writing in particular). There wasn’t the pressure to succeed, so maybe they just didn’t turn out their best ideas. I guess on the plus side if my theory is right, the general “meh” towards this series could itself raise that pressure, meaning the fourth could be pretty good. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2007, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/3 "2007-07-01T23:35:29Z")
I think the answer is contained in your thread title. A cheap, three-buck Dr. Who just isn’t going to be as good as one they spent a little money on. Plus, no half-naked chick sidekick. That’s the sign of quality. ---
**Author:** ![cstamets](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/958977/32.png) [@cstamets](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cstamets)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/4 "2007-07-02T00:21:44Z")
[QUOTE=Evil Captor] I think the answer is contained in your thread title. A cheap, three-buck Dr. Who just isn’t going to be as good as one they spent a little money on. Plus, no half-naked chick sidekick. That’s the sign of quality. [/QUOTE] Make Sally Sparrow the new chick sidekick and put her in a Leela outfit? I’d go for that! ---
**Author:** ![NinjaChick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/71c47a/32.png) [@NinjaChick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NinjaChick)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/5 "2007-07-02T00:48:05Z")
Well, I’m still working through the season (American. I need to, uh, obtain individual episodes), and by and large it’s…okay. I agree that it seems like the creative staff doesn’t feel that they need to ‘prove’ anything. The episodes I’ve seen have, for the most part, been a decent way to kill an hour. I like Martha infinitely more than Rose, which has been the only really redeeming quality of some of the eps. That said, I just watched _Blink_ earlier this week, and it absolutely floored me (and creeped me the hell out, too!). In my mind there’s no question that that one episode was a monumental increase in the quality. Everything else has been some variation on the same-old, same-old; it’s like they were saving all their creativity up for one episode. (And did I mention it was _creepy_? I can’t help but imagine that a generation of British kids are now going to grow up with some sort of emotional complex about statues.) ---
**Author:** ![Ms\_Macphisto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b487fb/32.png) [@Ms\_Macphisto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms_Macphisto)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/6 "2007-07-02T04:05:31Z")
I agree with everything **NinjaChick** said. I’m still making my way through the season much the same way she is, and while it’s still a great way to spend 45 minutes and I definitely prefer Martha to Rose, it largely feels like they’ve been stuck in neutral for most of it. As for _Blink_, I’m 28 and I was vaguely creeped out by some statues I saw the other day that reminded me of the ones from the episode, so I can only imagine how kids reacted. I really enjoyed that episode, even if it did also creep me the hell out. ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/7 "2007-07-02T04:37:51Z")
I disagree with the premise. Writing on _Doctor Who_ has always been uneven. Series one had several really shit episodes, as well as the absolutely brilliant “The Empty Child” and “The Doctor Dances.” Series three had a run of mediocre episodes and nothing particularly outstanding until “Human Nature,” but that, “Family of Blood” and “Blink” were among the best _Who_s ever. I thought the next two eps were really good as well, especially “The Sound of Drums.” That makes a pretty spectacular run of five episodes, but the long blah-ness of the first half of the season and the giant let-down of “Last of the Time Lords” make those episodes seem like the exception, even though they make up almost half th series. And only “Gridlock” was really bad like “End of the World,” “The Long Game” or “Fear Her.” Averaged out, S3 might not score as high as S1 or S2, but it’s not outside what would be expected from the unevenness of those series. I certainly don’t think it is indicative of a downward trend. ---
**Author:** ![GuanoLad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guanolad/32/42_2.png) [@GuanoLad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuanoLad)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/8 "2007-07-02T05:36:36Z")
I’ve been reading the [“Making Of” book of the series](http://www.amazon.com/Doctor-Who-Inside-Story-Books/dp/056348649X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-5892350-1512935?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1183354255&sr=1-1) which goes into quite honest detail, and what is constantly referred to is how they are making this show for a family audience, and especially for kids. As adults, and possibly as Whovians, we’re going to appreciate the show on a whole different level to what the kids or average viewers are. One thing I’ve learned in the topsy-turvy world of entertainment, is that things you think fail on several levels for yourself, seem to really resonate with many other demographics quite strongly. It’s really hard to make a family-friendly adventure show that can work on all levels, but Russell T Davies has managed it, and one of the ways he has achieved it is his own writing seems to be at the right level for kids to appreciate. For every episode that you don’t like, that same episode will be someone’s favourite. So it shall ever be. ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/9 "2007-07-02T12:48:15Z")
**GuanoLad** , do you have any reason to believe that Davies-penned episodes are more popular with kids than the other episodes? Otherwise you’re just saying that all episodes (and by extension all shows, and all entertainments) are equal. ---
**Author:** ![Menocchio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de053/32.png) [@Menocchio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Menocchio)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/10 "2007-07-02T12:49:55Z")
[QUOTE=Alan Smithee] I disagree with the premise. Writing on _Doctor Who_ has always been uneven. [/QUOTE] I agree. Who has always been incredibly hit-or-miss. If this season wasn’t as good as the first two, then they just happened to miss a bit more. Probably had less to do with the staff or any one creative decision than just the dice coming up snakeeyes more often than they did before. ---
**Author:** ![Baron\_Greenback](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baron_greenback/32/48_2.png) [@Baron\_Greenback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baron_Greenback)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/11 "2007-07-02T13:31:07Z")
[QUOTE=Alan Smithee] **GuanoLad** , do you have any reason to believe that Davies-penned episodes are more popular with kids than the other episodes? Otherwise you’re just saying that all episodes (and by extension all shows, and all entertainments) are equal. [/QUOTE] I don’t think there are easily obtainable\* child-specific stats but the TV polling people in the UK use an Appreciation Index (AI)\*\*. Basically a couple of thousand viewers are asked to grade out of 10 and the average is multiplied up to give a mark out of 100. Here are some figures gleaned from posts on Outpost Gallifrey: The two highest overnight viewing figures of S3, and the two highest AI figures: > [@](#): > > Smith and Jones - 8.20 million - 88\*\*\* > Last of the Time Lords - 8.00 million - 88 Both penned by RTD. The average season AI for all 3: > [@](#): > > Season 1 82.8 > Season 2 84.5 > Season 3 86.4 Averaging the AI indexes for various writers with multiple contributions over all three seasons we get: > [@](#): > > RTD - 84.3 > Moffat - 85 > Cornell - 85 > Gatiss - 82 - there are figures broken down into various demographics but the TV companies pay lots of money for them \*\* the average for a drama in the UK is 77, 85+ is regarded as excellent. \*\*\* The highest ever for new Who was 89 for Doomsday, and the lowest 76 for Love & Monsters ---
**Author:** ![GuanoLad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guanolad/32/42_2.png) [@GuanoLad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuanoLad)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/12 "2007-07-02T13:33:19Z")
[QUOTE=Alan Smithee] **GuanoLad** , do you have any reason to believe that Davies-penned episodes are more popular with kids than the other episodes? Otherwise you’re just saying that all episodes (and by extension all shows, and all entertainments) are equal. [/QUOTE] I wasn’t saying they were more popular with kids _than the other episodes_, but I do believe they’re more popular with kids _than with more discerning adults and fans_. The evidence I have is only to cite the feedback that the makers of the show receive from kids, which they often have commented about in various media: Kids seem to love the RTD eps And I can certainly see why - they cater to what kids like: fast paced action, evil ugly monsters, flashy spectacle, and the Doctor’s wild fizzing enthusiasm. Depending on their ages, I would guess kids definitely would list _Tooth and Claw_ higher up than _Girl In The Fireplace_. ---
**Author:** ![Kal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/9de053/32.png) [@Kal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kal)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/13 "2007-07-02T15:17:52Z")
I disagree with the premise as well. Far as I’m concerned this was the best series of Nu Who. And, yeah, this series was about Martha’s journey to a point. But the first two series were about Rose’s journey far more. Some episodes felt like the show should have been called The Tylers. This series has had far less flipping soap opera. ---
**Author:** ![NailBunny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecae2f/32.png) [@NailBunny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NailBunny)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/14 "2007-07-02T15:34:53Z")
It took a little bit to get going, it felt like, but _Smith & Jones_, _The Shakespeare Code_ and _Gridlock_ were all perfectly wonderful episodes, IMO. Only with _Daleks in Manhattan_ and _Evolution of the Daleks_ did it fall right flat on its face, I felt. And I concur that _Human Nature_, _Family of Blood_ and _Blink_ were three of the best episodes of television I’ve ever seen in my entire life, anywhere. Unfortunately I was not into _Who_ yet and did not watch the second season while it was airing, but I think I’d feel that that season was more consistantly hum-drum than this one. ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/15 "2007-07-02T15:36:30Z")
[QUOTE=GuanoLad] I wasn’t saying they were more popular with kids _than the other episodes_, but I do believe they’re more popular with kids _than with more discerning adults and fans_. The evidence I have is only to cite the feedback that the makers of the show receive from kids, which they often have commented about in various media: Kids seem to love the RTD eps And I can certainly see why - they cater to what kids like: fast paced action, evil ugly monsters, flashy spectacle, and the Doctor’s wild fizzing enthusiasm. Depending on their ages, I would guess kids definitely would list _Tooth and Claw_ higher up than _Girl In The Fireplace_. [/QUOTE] Well, “Tooth and Claw” **is** clearly the best RTD-penned episode. If they aren’t actually more popular with kids than other episodes, though, then there is no reason to have them, since adults hate them and better episodes are just as popular with kids. But based on **Struan** ’s numbers it looks like _somebody_ likes them. I think it might have to do with the fact that RTD tends to pen the “big” episodes (premiers and finales) himself, and those are likely to have inflated numbers just because of the excitement. But if it is the case that Davies is deliberately (and successfully) writing episodes in that style to appeal to kids, them I might have to admit that he is a genius and not an egomaniacal idiot determined to destroy his own creation with his bloated and incomprehensible plotting. But I couldn’t admit that now-- I just registered with Outpost Gallifrey, and I don’t want to piss everyone off right away! ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/16 "2007-07-02T15:44:34Z")
[QUOTE=NailBunny] It took a little bit to get going, it felt like, but _Smith & Jones_, _The Shakespeare Code_ and _Gridlock_ were all perfectly wonderful episodes, IMO. [/QUOTE] “Gridlock”? _Really?_ Well, there you go. I can’t throw stones, though. I actually liked the two Dalek episodes! ---
**Author:** ![Ximenean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/aca169/32.png) [@Ximenean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ximenean)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/17 "2007-07-02T15:56:06Z")
I really liked Gridlock too. It was like a J. G. Ballard story, except with a happy ending. ---
**Author:** ![Baron\_Greenback](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baron_greenback/32/48_2.png) [@Baron\_Greenback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baron_Greenback)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/18 "2007-07-02T16:04:17Z")
[QUOTE=NailBunny] _Smith & Jones_, _The Shakespeare Code_ and _Gridlock_ were all perfectly wonderful episodes, IMO. Only with _Daleks in Manhattan_ and _Evolution of the Daleks_ did it fall right flat on its face, I felt. And I concur that _Human Nature_, _Family of Blood_ and _Blink_ were three of the best episodes of television I’ve ever seen in my entire life, anywhere. [/QUOTE] This pretty much sums up my view as well. > [@Alan Smithee](#): > > But based on Struan’s numbers it looks like somebody likes them. To try and give a little UK perspective on those numbers - Dr Who is only regularly beaten in viewing figures by the long running soap operas, and even then it often beats individual episodes. Only once has it fallen out of the top 20 most viewed shows in its week of broadcast (the other time it was placed 21st). At it’s regular broadcast time of 7 pm(ish) on the main BBC channel it gets between 36 and 39% share of all viewers. To combine this with such high AI numbers certainly indicates that RTD is doing _something_ right. > [@](#): > > But I couldn’t admit that now-- I just registered with Outpost Gallifrey, and I don’t want to piss everyone off right away! Heh, good luck! There is a very vocal group of RTD haters over there as you will no doubt notice in the most recent “Rate this” thread. But check the actual votes cast first. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Angel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d26b3c/32.png) [@Johnny\_Angel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Angel)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/19 "2007-07-02T16:16:48Z")
I thought the season was overall excellent, especially the latter half. The Last of the Time Lords story arc was ultimately more satisfying than that Bad Wolf business, and they seriously raised the stakes in the story, putting everybody through hell. And holy shit, Sam Tyler as The Master. I did have grumbles, though this season seemed to me less dependent on certain kinds of bullshit I dislike such as fantasy tropes jammed into a science-fiction premise and inventing new and unrepeatable technological possibilities to resolve each episode. I have been a Dr. Who fan most of my life, but overall I’ve developed a taste for harder science fiction. I dislike the way that The Doctor is ascending into godhood, and rather than simply giving him the respect he deserves, people are actually fawning over him. I mean, yes, obviously the guy is awesome. But we recognized that people knew this for years from simple, terse praise and from the way people came to rely on him. We didn’t need to see people strapping on knee pads and putting on chapstick. But what the hell? At least he hasn’t yet gotten the ass-kissing Honor Harrington gets. As for the sidekick issue, Martha kicks Rose’s ass. They don’t go in for simpering companions whose job it is to blunder into trouble because they’re too stupid to do what they’re told anymore, and even as an ordinary girl Rose proved quite competent, but Jones was very good even compared to that. And frankly, I thought she was really hot. Rose was hot, of course, but I began to feel that we were seeing more makeup than face after a while. I disliked Jones’ pathos in constantly having to mention how much she was pining for The Doctor. Some pathos in a character is alright, but I saw it as tying into the general deification of The Doctor that was going on in the season, especially the way it was more than once framed in the language of _belief_ and took the character of proselytizing to others how awesome The Doctor was. ---
**Author:** ![Harmonious\_Discord](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/74df32/32.png) [@Harmonious\_Discord](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harmonious_Discord)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172/20 "2007-07-02T16:32:34Z")
This season has been great. The other two seasons had good points, but some really bad ones too. The first Rose episode really was bad. Please no more living plastic ever. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-dr-who-s3-not-as-good-as-those-before/410172.md?page=2)