From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv
shawn <
nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
Fri, 22 May 2026 09:26:24 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
I just posted an interview to RAT Facebook
He says he would come back as Doctor Who if and I quote
Sack Russell T. Davies
Sack Jane Tranter
Sack Phil Collinson
Sack Julie Gardner
And I’ll come back
I don't know any of them other than RTD but if they are responsible
for what the show became in the last few years then I agree. When Matt
Smith was there the show was still good but it started to change when
the character went through a regeneration. The idea of the character
being able to be female and having had an entire forgotten life felt
like a complete change that didn't fit with any of the previous story.
If for no other reason than someone would have noticed and mentioned
it over the years.
I would love to see Eccleston come back to the show but I don't ever
expect it to happen.
Eccleston had some pretty terrible scripts.
The Matt Smith years were interesting because the multiple-season story
arc was reasonably well planned and I think Steven Moffat pulled it off.
Also, Amy Pond was so damned much fun and even much put upon Rory
Williams turned out to be a better character than the cardboard sexual
role reversal in the initial set up. But once the story arc was
completed, Moffat had no use for Amy and Rory and they were poorly used
in one episode after another till they got a dreadful writeout.
The best version of Clara was, of course, Souffle Girl. The writing was
not as good after Amy and Rory were written out, and I could never accet
the mother figure relationship with Peter Capaldi. Clara, too, got a
dreadful write out.
I didn't care about the sex change. The writing got even worse after the
Peter Capaldi era. I wasn't enjoying it but watched it out of habit till
it was yanked off BBC America.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2