You and I may prefer "interesting failures" ... but we seem to be something of a minority
But we're still licence fee payers (OK, to be pedantic, I live in a licence fee paying household; the principle is the same). Why shouldn't we get catered for too? I understand why the production team want to avoid total failures, but there's playing safe and there's playing safe. I felt series one and two had enough innovation and experimentation to keep my interest through the dry patches. Series three didn't. Maybe that's just personal taste.
Your defence of Gridlock makes sense, but I'm not sure it's what was on TV. However, as I haven't seen it since the night of broadcast, and have no intention of doing so in the near future, I'll take your word for it.
It was about the nature of being a companion; existing and operating within the Doctor's shadow. About how independence and ability are subsumed by his personality and ultimately can only really manifest in his absence.
Again, that would potentially be interesting, but it's just not what was said. Martha wasn't talking about that at all, she was talking about friends who'd had crushes on flatmates.
I don't think we'll get it since it would fundamentally change the show into an ensemble show (which its not been since Ian and Barbara left)
I think it was actually an ensemble show through the sixties, of necessity. The companions had to be able to hold an episode when Hartnell or Troughton was on holiday. True, the Doctor gradually moved further towards the centre stage throughout the Troughton era, but I think it was really only with Pertwee that the title character became the primary protagonist. Making him a near-immortal Time Lord in The War Games made him uniquely important in a way he hadn't been as a mysterious old man.
Funnily enough, the Tylers made it more of an ensemble show than it had been for a while, although not as much as it had been in the sixties. Note how Jackie gets written out properly, rather than just left behind.
no subject
But we're still licence fee payers (OK, to be pedantic, I live in a licence fee paying household; the principle is the same). Why shouldn't we get catered for too? I understand why the production team want to avoid total failures, but there's playing safe and there's playing safe. I felt series one and two had enough innovation and experimentation to keep my interest through the dry patches. Series three didn't. Maybe that's just personal taste.
Your defence of Gridlock makes sense, but I'm not sure it's what was on TV. However, as I haven't seen it since the night of broadcast, and have no intention of doing so in the near future, I'll take your word for it.
It was about the nature of being a companion; existing and operating within the Doctor's shadow. About how independence and ability are subsumed by his personality and ultimately can only really manifest in his absence.
Again, that would potentially be interesting, but it's just not what was said. Martha wasn't talking about that at all, she was talking about friends who'd had crushes on flatmates.
I don't think we'll get it since it would fundamentally change the show into an ensemble show (which its not been since Ian and Barbara left)
I think it was actually an ensemble show through the sixties, of necessity. The companions had to be able to hold an episode when Hartnell or Troughton was on holiday. True, the Doctor gradually moved further towards the centre stage throughout the Troughton era, but I think it was really only with Pertwee that the title character became the primary protagonist. Making him a near-immortal Time Lord in The War Games made him uniquely important in a way he hadn't been as a mysterious old man.
Funnily enough, the Tylers made it more of an ensemble show than it had been for a while, although not as much as it had been in the sixties. Note how Jackie gets written out properly, rather than just left behind.