Rate "Knock Knock"

For discussion of series 10 of Doctor Who starring Peter Capaldi

Rate "Knock Knock"

10
4
5%
9
10
12%
8
20
23%
7
18
21%
6
6
7%
5
13
15%
4
3
3%
3
6
7%
2
1
1%
1
5
6%
 
Total votes : 86

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby Rowls » Sun May 07, 2017 3:03 am

Thought that was an excellent episode.

Suchet was superb. The script very good. Mood and lighting also pitch-perfect.

As such, I'm willing to ignore the glaring plot holes and forgive the rushed ending.
Rowls
 
 
 
Posts: 133
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 9:51 pm

Thanks to donations from members I've been able to move Planet Mondas to a faster server. But I'm still working on further improvements. Ad Revenue covers the server fees, but not my time, so if you like you can buy me a coffee, which will help fuel me! Thanks in advance! Mat Sadler (matjkd)

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby Sid Rat » Sun May 07, 2017 3:08 am

cyberlad wrote:
therefore isn’t the fresh blood the show is crying out for.


You aware that Mike Bartlett the writer of this episode is new to the series right? As for the rest of complaints it's the usual why can't the show be like it used to be when I first watched it? Also Broadchurch used a season long arc.

I don't see what the writer of this particular episode has to do with a general point about the format of the show, which falls under the purview of the showrunner.

You've also missed the point about Broadchurch, which was that it was gripping television with a story that ran over a number of episodes that kept people keen to watch the next one. Doctor Who's current obsession with single story episodes with a loose season long arc doesn't accomplish this because the arc isn't the focus until the last episode or two. Nor should it be because Doctor Who is all about 'adventures in time and space' which can take place anywhere and anywhen. Unlike Broadchurch you're not telling a story featuring the same group of people in the same setting for an entire series.

Doctor Who is 'episodic' in nature, it's just that stories longer than a single episode generally make for better stories because there is time to explore the new location and make the supporting characters at least 2 if not 3 dimensional. Trying to set up new locations and characters when you have only 45 minutes to tell the story makes everything feel rushed and inconsequential. You often learn nothing about the characters at all and are therefore not invested in what happens to them, which results in a complete lack of depth to the storytelling.

Under RTD, the programme compensated for the lack of character development time with the recurring inclusion of the companion's family. This wasn't always popular but it did provide some more rounded characters because of the screen time they were given across multiple stories.

So far this series there hasn't been a single truly memorable guest character because there's never any time to make them in any way memorable and Knock Knock didn't change this trend.

As for the 'rest of the complaints', what would you do to address the flaws in the current version of the programme that are apparent to many? What is wrong with taking the best elements of the 'Classic' series and suggesting they be applied to the 'New' series? They were very much a part of what made it so successful for so many years. I believe they would help reinvigorate the show, which has begun to feel very stale of late.

In my opinion and speaking generally, the 'Classic' period was full of good quality stories let down by the production values of the day whereas the 'New' version is full of good quality production values frequently let down by lacklustre stories. (Both have given us some truly great stories and some truly awful ones.) What I would really like to see is an amalgamation of the two so that we get higher quality stories to go with the high quality production values. By definition they can't make a classic every time but they can make consistently good stories most of the time and I for one just don't think they've been achieving that with Moffat in charge.

For me Knock Knock is just the latest in a long list of mediocre at best efforts, hampered in no small part by the time allotted to tell the story.
Sid Rat
 
 
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 4:08 pm

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby iank » Sun May 07, 2017 9:06 am

Beautifully put. I thought the whole idea of the new series was to combine the storytelling strength of the original series with modern production values, not throw the baby out with the bathwater and make something that seems to blatantly ignore the series' former strengths and end up with a lot of pretty pictures signifying nothing.
(Doctor Who) has been hijacked and redefined as a lucrative modern franchise. They've literally taken a square peg and painfully made it fit a round hole by taking enormous liberties with much of its fundamental essence. There's no turning back now.

- ozymandias, The Leisure Hive 2010
User avatar
iank
 
 
 
Posts: 6046
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:40 am

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby shuzbot » Sun May 07, 2017 9:06 am

Couldn't get into it myself. Something about the atmosphere wasn't quite right plus the lack of explanations which I think are very important in SF. Last week they didn't explain the fish but got away with that, it was only one thing after all. But there were so many questions around the ending of this that don't seem to make a great deal of sense.

Even though I agree with Nonotthemindprobe that the tonal balance of the series has been a lot better, this episode just felt wrong from the start with the comedy skit and then the convoluted conclusion undid a lot of the good work it had done before that. Too fairytale, everybody resurrected and too many things weren’t properly explained.

Hope next week's is better.
De omnibus dubitandum (René Descartes)
User avatar
shuzbot
Space Commander
Space Commander
 
Posts: 13548
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 9:42 pm
Location: Timbuktu

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby Amyiszygon » Sun May 07, 2017 10:13 am

I think the Little Mix music thing sort of sums this episode up for me. A bunch of sad old crap trying too hard to be cool. That and anyway you're going do story about house owned by guy who hasn't gone out for 42 years, wouldn't The 1975 make for much better soundtrack ? Seriously there's band everybody should be listening to. So good... :D
Amyiszygon
 
 
 
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 11:31 am

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby chap with wings » Sun May 07, 2017 10:30 am

Weakest this year, never really got going & just a little dull and formulaic.
"It can become a kind of franchise where it's not a real character at all, but just an amalgam of elements that people think are Doctor Who: a scarf, a bow tie... I wanted to be the actual Doctor Who." - Peter Capaldi

Follow me on Twitter at: https://twitter.com/BlogFinish

My Big Finish Review Archive is here - http://blogfinishplanetmondas.blogspot.co.uk/
User avatar
chap with wings
Senior Member
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3651
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 12:51 am
Location: Colwyn Bay, North Wales

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby Hartnell's Wig » Sun May 07, 2017 10:31 am

I thought it was very good and then they wimped out with the ending. So I scored it a six.
The key to usable HUMINT (Human Intelligence) is distinguishing the real, highly placed sources from the bullsh*tting wannabes who pretend they’re highly placed sources by making sh*t up

“What Brussels doesn’t understand is low power vacuum cleaners are no good if you want to put your willy in them."

So unprotected oral sex is responsible for the rise of super gonorrhea.. that's it then. I've given my last blowjob!
User avatar
Hartnell's Wig
 
 
 
Posts: 2063
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 2:13 pm

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby StellarX » Sun May 07, 2017 10:56 am

Quite enjoyed that. Suchet was excellent. perhaps not a 'classic' to be re-watched but it did enough to be genuinely spooky first time around. Just a shame people rarely stay dead in this series anymore.
User avatar
StellarX
 
 
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 9:38 pm

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby Servorobot » Sun May 07, 2017 11:40 am

I didn't mind that. It did sort of finish a bit quickly, but was overall rather good I thought.

David Suchet was excellent.

A 7 this time from me.
Stone the bleedin’ crows, Something Who goes Down Under!
Fair dinkum it should be essential listening for all you flamin’ kids.
https://somethingwho.podbean.com/e/episode-8-down-under/
Follow Something Who on Twitter https://twitter.com/something_who
User avatar
Servorobot
Head of Security
Head of Security
 
Posts: 9356
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2014 11:50 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby JPS » Sun May 07, 2017 12:21 pm

Sid Rat wrote:
cyberlad wrote:
therefore isn’t the fresh blood the show is crying out for.


You aware that Mike Bartlett the writer of this episode is new to the series right? As for the rest of complaints it's the usual why can't the show be like it used to be when I first watched it? Also Broadchurch used a season long arc.

I don't see what the writer of this particular episode has to do with a general point about the format of the show, which falls under the purview of the showrunner.

You've also missed the point about Broadchurch, which was that it was gripping television with a story that ran over a number of episodes that kept people keen to watch the next one. Doctor Who's current obsession with single story episodes with a loose season long arc doesn't accomplish this because the arc isn't the focus until the last episode or two. Nor should it be because Doctor Who is all about 'adventures in time and space' which can take place anywhere and anywhen. Unlike Broadchurch you're not telling a story featuring the same group of people in the same setting for an entire series.

Doctor Who is 'episodic' in nature, it's just that stories longer than a single episode generally make for better stories because there is time to explore the new location and make the supporting characters at least 2 if not 3 dimensional. Trying to set up new locations and characters when you have only 45 minutes to tell the story makes everything feel rushed and inconsequential. You often learn nothing about the characters at all and are therefore not invested in what happens to them, which results in a complete lack of depth to the storytelling.

Under RTD, the programme compensated for the lack of character development time with the recurring inclusion of the companion's family. This wasn't always popular but it did provide some more rounded characters because of the screen time they were given across multiple stories.

So far this series there hasn't been a single truly memorable guest character because there's never any time to make them in any way memorable and Knock Knock didn't change this trend.

As for the 'rest of the complaints', what would you do to address the flaws in the current version of the programme that are apparent to many? What is wrong with taking the best elements of the 'Classic' series and suggesting they be applied to the 'New' series? They were very much a part of what made it so successful for so many years. I believe they would help reinvigorate the show, which has begun to feel very stale of late.

In my opinion and speaking generally, the 'Classic' period was full of good quality stories let down by the production values of the day whereas the 'New' version is full of good quality production values frequently let down by lacklustre stories. (Both have given us some truly great stories and some truly awful ones.) What I would really like to see is an amalgamation of the two so that we get higher quality stories to go with the high quality production values. By definition they can't make a classic every time but they can make consistently good stories most of the time and I for one just don't think they've been achieving that with Moffat in charge.

For me Knock Knock is just the latest in a long list of mediocre at best efforts, hampered in no small part by the time allotted to tell the story.



Totally agree with everything you say. Its so frustrating that great production values and fabulous actors are wasted because of no explanations and not enough time to develop anything.
JPS
 
 
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 2:41 pm

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby Truronian » Sun May 07, 2017 12:42 pm

Assumedly the prisoner in the vault is Chris Chibnall waiting to get out and get on with running the show.
User avatar
Truronian
 
 
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 10:38 am

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby cyberlad » Sun May 07, 2017 12:44 pm

You've also missed the point about Broadchurch, which was that it was gripping television with a story that ran over a number of episodes that kept people keen to watch the next one. Doctor Who's current obsession with single story episodes with a loose season long arc doesn't accomplish this because the arc isn't the focus until the last episode or two. Nor should it be because Doctor Who is all about 'adventures in time and space' which can take place anywhere and anywhen. Unlike Broadchurch you're not telling a story featuring the same group of people in the same setting for an entire series.


So you want the show to be gripping and keep the audience coming back for more, but you don't want the show to be based on a series arc. Mate you've just contradicted yourself there. As for the rest of your complaints there just the standard classic good new bad that are ten a penny on here.
You don't have to hate the new series here but it helps.
cyberlad
Banned From Forum
Banned From Forum
 
Posts: 876
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:29 am

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby Heccypoo » Sun May 07, 2017 1:24 pm

cyberlad wrote:
You've also missed the point about Broadchurch, which was that it was gripping television with a story that ran over a number of episodes that kept people keen to watch the next one. Doctor Who's current obsession with single story episodes with a loose season long arc doesn't accomplish this because the arc isn't the focus until the last episode or two. Nor should it be because Doctor Who is all about 'adventures in time and space' which can take place anywhere and anywhen. Unlike Broadchurch you're not telling a story featuring the same group of people in the same setting for an entire series.


So you want the show to be gripping and keep the audience coming back for more, but you don't want the show to be based on a series arc. Mate you've just contradicted yourself there. As for the rest of your complaints there just the standard classic good new bad that are ten a penny on here.


One thing I've noticed cyberlad, is that you never actually write what you liked/disliked about a particular story.

Most of your posts are in defence of NuWho. You never (as far as I have seen) post a review...

How about saying what you think of a story, rather than slag of others opinions?
Lawks-a-lordy, my bottom's on fire...
User avatar
Heccypoo
 
 
 
Posts: 4837
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 9:09 pm
Location: Tracy Island

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby The Wooksta! » Sun May 07, 2017 1:29 pm

Image
"It's basically a cure... for not being an axe-wielding homicidal maniac... the potential market's enormous!"

"Please dial *617 at this time"

"Now then, Butch Harry. Tell us about Fulham..."

"Don't be told what you want. Don't be told what you need." - John Lydon
User avatar
The Wooksta!
 
 
 
Posts: 2451
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 9:07 pm
Location: There - but I like it here

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby Heccypoo » Sun May 07, 2017 1:34 pm

The Wooksta! wrote:Image


:floorroll:
Lawks-a-lordy, my bottom's on fire...
User avatar
Heccypoo
 
 
 
Posts: 4837
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 9:09 pm
Location: Tracy Island

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby paulhickling » Sun May 07, 2017 1:47 pm

What a shame. The first dud. My problem started when David Suchet started emoting far too early for me to feel anything for him, and it went downhill from there. The was no spookiness to wooden mama's reveal. The kids all magically reappeared after being taken out. It all felt like a two-parter edited down to the highlights to fit 45 mins. Both the characters and the scariness needed time. The Mail and Telegraph raved about it, while The Mirror felt as I did. The first part should have ramped up the creepiness, with the wooden mum being a cliff-hanger, and then all the sweeter reveals should have come in the second part, with Suchet's eventual breaking down taking place where it would have supported his great acting.

Suchet was great, but wasted. Capaldi was his usual (for this series) excellent self, though I found Bill's embarrassment with The Doctor a bit annoying after the build up of her relationship with him over the last three weeks. Typical Moff. Thinks it's funny, just like the slaps and insults from his previous female characters. Somebody PLEASE tell him this stuff is NOT endearing.

Direction and lighting was excellent too. Production values were great as ever. The story itself was fine. I was genuinely surprised by the reveal that Mrs Woodentop was the mother not the daughter. The bugs were great. But it all went too fast, and there was no time for explanations.

I'll be watching again to see if I feel the same second time 'round. But so far it seemed a waste of everyone's talent.
They should get Suchet back and put him in a good 'un. He was wonderful. Suchet for next Doctor! Suchet for next Master! He'd be amazing as either.
paulhickling
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2539
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 7:53 pm

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby paulhickling » Sun May 07, 2017 1:48 pm

Truronian wrote:Assumedly the prisoner in the vault is Chris Chibnall waiting to get out and get on with running the show.


I like that. Might use it myself elsewhere!
paulhickling
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2539
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 7:53 pm

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby Sid Rat » Sun May 07, 2017 5:46 pm

cyberlad wrote:
You've also missed the point about Broadchurch, which was that it was gripping television with a story that ran over a number of episodes that kept people keen to watch the next one. Doctor Who's current obsession with single story episodes with a loose season long arc doesn't accomplish this because the arc isn't the focus until the last episode or two. Nor should it be because Doctor Who is all about 'adventures in time and space' which can take place anywhere and anywhen. Unlike Broadchurch you're not telling a story featuring the same group of people in the same setting for an entire series.


So you want the show to be gripping and keep the audience coming back for more, but you don't want the show to be based on a series arc. Mate you've just contradicted yourself there. As for the rest of your complaints there just the standard classic good new bad that are ten a penny on here.

There’s no contradiction at all. A series arc does not automatically equal ‘gripping’ and it only keeps the audience coming back for more if it is. The arcs in Doctor Who aren’t gripping because they aren’t the focus; they’re usually tacked on to individual stories and merely exist to provide a set up to the series finale. We don’t tune in each week because we’re desperate to find out what happens next in the series arc do we? Therefore the arcs are not essential. If they are the reason you watch each week then you must be disappointed each time when the arc aspect warrants only a single scene and is barely advanced.

You can make gripping TV that keeps viewers hooked without needing an arc that runs for the entire length of a series. For example, the original Taggart starring Mark McManus used to tell single stories over three episodes, which had real depth and intrigue. When one story was complete they moved on to the next. Classic Doctor Who was similar. A good story would hook viewers and leave them wanting to see how it played out over several weeks. The cliffhangers played a key part in that; we couldn’t wait to see what happened next.

As for your accusation that I’m simply arguing that the Classic series was good and the New series is bad, nothing I’ve said supports that at all. You are misrepresenting my views, have completely ignored the reasoning I’ve given and have not offered any alternative perspective.

As I said in my last post, both Classic and New Series have given us great stories and awful ones. I still maintain that the general quality of storytelling was higher in the Classic series and that a key reason for this is because they were longer. Longer stories provide the time for locations to be established, characters to be developed, tension to build and loose ends to be properly tied up.

For me the strongest stories of the new series have often been two-parters, for example The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances, which is one of my all time favourites from across both Classic and New Doctor Who, and Human Nature/The Family of Blood. A 45-minute story can work; Blink is a prime example, Midnight would be another. But all too often I find myself left with the feeling that a single episode story would have been so much better if it had an extra episode. Knock Knock is no exception.
Sid Rat
 
 
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 4:08 pm

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby paulhickling » Sun May 07, 2017 7:05 pm

Knock Knock IS almost an exception.

It CRIED OUT for a second episode. There is so much good material in that story. Let down by the fact that there wasn't TIME to explain ANYTHING, there wasn't TIME to let Suchet's character be what it should have been, and there wasn't TIME to let the wooden woman be as really good as she had the potential to be. She seemed to be stood around like an ordinary cast member in the end. That AMAZING prosthetic SUIT needed to be admired within the context of the pretty good story, and ended up looking good but left me thinking mmmmm....

Such a shame.
paulhickling
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2539
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 7:53 pm

Re: Rate "Knock Knock"

Postby Rob Ocelot » Sun May 07, 2017 7:22 pm

Gave it a 7.

Some nice Cartmel era vibes and Capaldi was being very McCoy-like. However, they wasted way too much time on the setup/buildup of renting the house and getting sorted and left precious little for the real meat and explanations. As others have said, it needed a second part or needed the opening bits trimmed or shunted back into earlier episodes (it would have been perfect padding material for THE PILOT).

Next week, oh dear... Moffat really needed to go two years ago, didn't he?

Can just imagine his pitch to the writer's room:

"A garment turns people into zombies, maybe an apron, ballcap, or a gasmask...no wait... I got it! A SPACESUIT! Best idea ever. Lets make them repeat a catch phrase over an intercom, because I bet that will make the kids wet their sofas. I swear, mums everywhere will be sending us their cleaning bills! You guys write the rest. Remember, you need at least one 'Bill is a lesbian' reference per hour of screen time. If anyone needs me I'll be at the pub."

<cue multiple rolling eyes>
User avatar
Rob Ocelot
 
 
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 1:38 pm

PreviousNext

Return to SERIES 10

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest