Most annoying and/or overused plot device in classic Who?

For me it has to be the 'turning up in the wrong place at the wrong time' gimmick, which usually results in the protagonists getting accused, captured or threatened with death due to the circumstances they've just walked into.

It's just a way of stringing out events in order to create tension and ensure the development of whatever evil machination needs to be dealt with.

Watching the Doctor and companions find a way of exonerating themselves from tedious circumstantial accusations makes me prone to skipping. For example, I usually skip the dialogue in Earthschlock from the moment Lieutenant Scott encounters the Doctor until the point the androids fire on him. The same goes for the moment Ringway catches the Doctor and Adric stooping over two freshly dead crew mates; I'll jump right to the point where the Cybermen emerge from the silos.

Boofer wrote:For me it has to be the 'turning up in the wrong place at the wrong time' gimmick

There was less of that in the McCoy era thankfully. Another point for Cartmel.

It's almost like it's called writing.

iank wrote:It's almost like it's called writing.

Hackneyed writing.

Pepsi Maxil wrote:There was less of that in the McCoy era thankfully. Another point for Cartmel.

Holy shit, you might just be right.



I was just thinking that this was also one of the better aspects of the UNIT stories of 70s, in that you didn't have to sit through two episodes of the Doctor trying to explain who he was, why here was there and why he's at the heart of the action.

It's also one of the best things about Time Flight. The Doctor's dematerialisation at Heathrow is dealt with within a few minutes via a phone call, as opposed to the usual time-wasting where he needs to prove himself, escape, etc.

The Master.

Should've killed the bastard off years ago.

Tanmann wrote:The Master.

Should've killed the bastard off years ago.

Yeah, I agree with this one.

I believe the original plan was to shelve him at the end of Pertwee's tenure in a clash of the titans (so to speak).

For subsequent Master stories just insert generic villain here: ' '. Or, even better write stories that don't use recurring characters as a substitute for good writing.

Boofer wrote:

Tanmann wrote:The Master.

Should've killed the bastard off years ago.

Yeah, I agree with this one.

I believe the original plan was to shelve him at the end of Pertwee's tenure in a clash of the titans (so to speak).

For subsequent Master stories just insert generic villain here: '    '. Or, even better write stories that don't use recurring characters as a substitute for good writing.

Indeed. Looking back, it's clear the character was never really designed to last beyond the Pertwee era, and certainly not be still around fifty years on.

In hindsight, The Deadly Assassin would've been the perfect final end for him.

By the 80's it was clear Davros had already long superseded him as the Doctor's arch villain.

Tanmann wrote:The Master.

Should've killed the bastard off years ago.

The Master as an idea isn't the problem. I would say that the idea of pure good vs pure evil in a harsh world would have been a great concept for the Doctor and the Master together. The problem is that after Pratt's/Beevers' excellent vampiric performances (which, if you're going to keep the Master, have him be this almost Dracula-esque villain, where he just stops at nothing to becoming evil), they just decided to make him into a pantomime villain that couldn't show any signs of true villainy (until Survival, and yes, The TV Movie, which both had this form of creepiness that the Master should have always had). Quite frankly, I actually think that The Valeyard had more potential to becoming the true evil against the Doctor's pure nature, but sadly he was cut too soon on TV.

SomeCallMeEnglishGiraffe wrote:

Tanmann wrote:The Master.

Should've killed the bastard off years ago.

The Master as an idea isn't the problem. I would say that the idea of pure good vs pure evil in a harsh world would have been a great concept for the Doctor and the Master together. The problem is that after Pratt's/Beevers' excellent vampiric performances (which, if you're going to keep the Master, have him be this almost Dracula-esque villain, where he just stops at nothing to becoming evil), they just decided to make him into a pantomime villain that couldn't show any signs of true villainy (until Survival, and yes, The TV Movie, which both had this form of creepiness that the Master should have always had).

I must say Survival did almost feel like the culmination of a long game with the Master that never actually happened (much like Remembrance did for the Daleks). For most of the 80's though, the Master didn't even seem a character the show could make a long game out of.

So yes I'm willing to buy there was a good idea somewhere in the Master, but for much of the decade the idea of the character seemed to be stretched and drawn out beyond sustainability.