Doctor Who Club of Australia

[Greg]

Every month we are aiming create a new Poll and publish the results in our club newsletter Data Extract.

We also encourage you to make comment. A selection of the best comments will also be published in Data Extract with the most insightful published comment being eligible to win a prize. (To win a prize you must be a member of the DWCA).

Try to keep your comments concise and spoiler free as possible. (Up to five lines is ideal for editing responses for the magazine.)

POLL OF THE MONTH: AUGUST

Do you prefer single episode stories or two parters - and why?

Decisions about the potentially prize-winning entry will be made based on posts included in this thread to 31 August 2007.

[Sulp Niar]

I'd have to go for two parters, although to be honest I have no qualms with the single episode format. My reasons aren't based on notions of how long Doctor Who should be, or that 45 minutes isn't enough time to tell a story - in all honesty, I'm just looking at the evidence. So far, there have been better paced two-parters than one-parters.

For one-parters we might have 'Gridlock' and 'The Girl in the Fireplace' - but for two-parters, the first three alone are incredibly well paced, as is the 'Rise of the Cybermen'/'The Age of Steel' double whammy. 'Human Nature'/'The Family of Blood' is another example - whereas 'Blink', brilliant thought it is, has to include a pointless end montage to make up the numbers.

Perhaps the writers are forced to not put a great number of ideas into one-parters due to perceived lack of time, and then are forced to fill their scripts with moments of illogical padding to compensate - I'm thinking of episodes such as 'New Earth', 'School Reunion' and 'Smith and Jones' here, and, just to be fair and criticise who I named as the best writer, 'Blink' is another example.

[Tegan]

My preferred format is single episode stories.

My favourite stories have tended to be double episodes.

I think that if there were a majority of stories in a series that were two parters, then some may tend to excessive padding. (As if padding wasn't already excessive).

If the story can be told effectively in a single part episode, then it should really be done that way. The Girl In The Fireplace is a prime example.

Double episodes are best left for the really big story arcs, particularly the return of classic foes, e.g. the Cybermen in Rise of the Cyberman/Age of Steel and series finales.

[montypython]

It really depends on the plot. If there isn't a lot to it, you don't want it to drag out. But then again you don't want it to resolve itself too quickly. I found this happened with The Lazarus Experiment.

We have to remember that even the 90 minutes that go into two-parters are short compared to the classic episodes, where as many as eight 25 minute episodes could be included in one story!

[Tegan]

[Ickabod]

[montypython]

[SharazJek]

I find I'm pretty old school when it comes to this question.

I prefer the longer, slower paced stories.

[uhumanite]

I'm a fan of both

Love a scary cliffhanger but I have the patience of a heroin addict.

[charlie]

I have to say two-parter. Why? Well I'm going to say because that's what DW should be.

In the classics they used to have a primary half hour of mystery over what is going on and then the rest of the story reveals itself and the action all happened in the final ep. The mystery was what intrigued me about DW. Back when the Doctor didn't know every detail of everything that ever happened to everyone in the universe, they were the good episodes. Who remembers the Caves of Androzani, the Tomb of the Cybermen, Ghostlight, the Revelation of the Daleks, the Daleks? They were great stories with great intrigue.

[montypython]

[SharazJek]

[Chickmacgyver]

This is a very hard question to answer! I would have to say it is very plot specific, e.g. Blink and 42 works best in a single episode format. However, to tell a more complicated tale you have to do it over two or even three episodes. I do tend to enjoy two parters, but you need to have a good tale to make them work well, e.g. Human Nature/The Family of Blood, The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances. Without a good plot and a sustained pace you end up with something like the recent dalek story.

Regards, Izzy

[Sulp Niar]

[KnottyEmily]

I prefer the stories that aren't told at 1000 miles an hour, whether they're 1 or 2 parters. For 1 parters, i think The Girl In The Fireplace wins, and all of the 2 parts are well paced

[Kaileena]

Meh, I'm not fussed. I have the patience of a stoner! lol.

I like TBCs (to be continueds) because they leave you hanging for the next eppy, making sure you want to watch it. I find it a very appealing marketing technique. Two parters are great for stories where you just can't fit all the best parts into one episode, because some 1 parters just seem to be missing something. I'm really not a fussy person.

[Kaileena]

PS. Welcome KnottyEmily!!!!

I love your, "Am I Bovvered?" avii, 2 cute, darling!

[Lungbarrow]

Although I love the format of the new series and one or two part stories suit it's fast pace I still love watching the classic episodes that ran for four episodes or more.