Doctor Who Is Bad At Mysteries (But It Always Has Been)

[@ScrewdriverGaming]

Episodes with Daleks are always called things like "March of the Daleks" and then still write the episode like it's going to be a surprise that there are Daleks

[@AMannAmongMen]

I'm always surprised when they do that, but that's just because I try really hard to forget the title during the first commercial break 🧠🧠🧠

[@Melt_d]

Commercial break?​@@AMannAmongMen

[@uomoafide6539]

Everytime it happens i immediately go with my mind to Alistair Beckett King's skit on the average Doctor Who episode with the Dalek saying "It's us again!"

[@mega20able]

I started watching classic who from season 1 not too long ago Since that one still named episodes individually instead of by serial and I didn't pay attention to any watch guide before starting, I was not ready for one of those to show up in the second major story arc. The moment felt amazing, because it's built up like a horror reveal and you only get to see a glimpse of a plunger right at the end of the episode. I was genuinely shocked because I didn't know daleks were there from so early.

[@thechineserussian]

The worst case is Dalek in Manhattan where The Doctor solves the mystery of the Daleks being involved investigating the sewers and making a complicated machine to identify the green brain thing he finds, only to discover the genetic code is from Skaro. This is all well and good for a mystery, but he does this with 20 minutes left in the episode and at this point we've seen the Daleks about 20 times in the episode and know their plan of using humans to evolve. The Doctor's realisation is played as a triumphant discovery but comes off as a disappointing inevitability, like we've been waiting impatiently for The Doctor to figure it out so we can advance the plot.

[@GrandArchPriestOfTheAlgorithm]

I starting to think that "Who are their parents?" should not be used as a mystery. Edit. Just something I find funny: The problem with Rey's parentage, is that it should have been contained to TFA (so it didn't sacrifice her arc for a mystery box). So Davies' solution was to drag it out over a season.

[@ajax4887]

It's gonna get quite boring

[@EllieInTheRain]

I think "Who are their parents?" rarely works as a twist because there will only be a small pool of characters of the right age and gender to be candidates (obviously excluding the reveal that said parent was trans), and it's easy to rule out candidates based on the story timeline and other factors

[@OneWingedRose]

I thought the Rey parents plotline was actually pretty good in Episode 8. That's how you do it. Sure, there were a lot of things that weren't very good in Episode 8, but Rey's parents being nobody special and the resolving of the will-they won't-they for her and Ren with "no, they won't, and he's fully committed to 'evil' now and Rey to 'good'" were pretty great.

[@gregvs.theworld451]

@@EllieInTheRain To be faaaaair, in a time travel story if set up well the question of "Who are their parents?" could become a lot more interesting. In a time travel story theoretically someone's parents could be Albert Einstein and Marie Antoinette.

[@GrandArchPriestOfTheAlgorithm]

​@@OneWingedRose Because the problem isn't in TLJ, it's in TFA. Rey's arc of letting go of the past and embracing the path of the jedi can't land for the audience because we know that her past has to be part of the sequel. Meaning she is able let it go, but we can't.

[@PlatinumAltaria]

Given that the most acclaimed episodes of New Who tend to be those with no established connection to prior lore (Human Nature, Blink, Heaven Sent, Wild Blue Yonder, etc.) I feel that the obsession with what came before stifles the show. Doctor Who has repeatedly tried to reset itself, but it never commits to it, always finding a way to go back to the old classics. And I'm not saying I don't want episodes like World Enough and Time, but it always has to be in service of the characters here and now, not fanservice for lore nerds. The problem with the Ruby mystery is that the hype is disproportionately large compared to the answer. The way it SHOULD have been is Ruby mentioning it to the Doctor casually, not having major villains draw attention to it. Compare the Harold Saxon mystery, which was isolated in the background and one-off lines to give space to the stories we were there to see that week. When everything is so tied together it makes the world and characters feel small.

[@jackdriffill2394]

It’s a frequent problem with Davies, all his finales are predictable because he always brings back a classic villain, season 1 daleks, 2 cybermen, 3 the master, 4 Davros and the time lords, 14 Sutekh

[@PlatinumAltaria]

@@jackdriffill2394 It's not even that bad for old villains to come back; everyone likes Missy. But that's because it does something new with the character. They aren't just a generic evil guy/evil empire that the Doctor has to fight.

[@hannabelphaege3774]

The speech about the things we give importance to is so good and I wish it made any goddamn sense in the context of the show. I think Sutekh was a mistake. Pyramids of Mars is is one of the few classic episodes I've seen and I had no memory of him. But more than that, I think having a death god who is evil and only wants to kill the universe is weak shit after the Toymaker and the Maestro. I liked some of the imagery but being a big dog puppet holding the Tardis like a plushie is not enough to save this.

[@alexjames7144]

Yeah I thought it was a bit bland after the epic build up, and too simple for it to just be death. Music and games are such complex and random things to be a god of, and the next one is just death?

[@christianwise637]

@@alexjames7144 And I also think having the character just be a big CGI creation prevents the actors from being able to convincingly react to it, as opposed to an actual human performance like we got from Neil Patrick Harris or Jinkx Monsoon

[@sarafontanini7051]

fun fact: you may not remember sutekh cause they completely redesigned him. He's notfucking Anubis like he is in this season, he was obviously more based on OSIRIS and the cool mask looked way cooler anyway

[@mystic-malevolence]

I'd normally be against death god = evil, but in Sutekh's case I think it works because he is not a traditional god. He doesn't have a domain, he has a goal, and has gained the power to achieve that goal by a cosmic accident on his part. He's not the God of Death, he's the God that Brings Death.

[@joan6249]

the biggest piece of bizarre misdirection was ruby's mum wearing a cape despite being a 15 year old girl in the year 2004. i got so stuck on that part that i missed a lot of other details because it is just so deeply baffling as a costuming decision - especially considering the greater focus on costuming this series (eg more interesting historical elements)

[@sidiwvwhi]

tbh i was walking around as a 14 year old in 2021 wearing a capelet but i am autistic so yknow

[@1065chris]

She was excited for Revenge of the Sith’s release and cosplayed.

[@thirdcoinedge]

I mean, Meet the Robinsons did the same thing with Louis' mom, so I think it's just a dramatic choice of "ooh, ~mystery person~" to tease the audience, with logic not really playing as big of a part as some people would like to think.

[@iloveyourunclebob]

And pointing to a street sign in the hopes it's being poorly recorded onto VHS and someone will know it was meant to name her.

[@strawberrylotlizard]

Yeah you're good, they didn't know what to write either

[@ShinyVaati]

As someone who enjoyed Empire of Death *a lot* more than most, I have wondered if the biggest issue is the fact the reveal of Ruby's mother doesn't tie to resolution of the main plot. This is despite the fact these are literally given a clear link (Sutekh's is so also interested in who Ruby's mother is!), the reveal itself is given like an epilogue. Had it be woven into their plan to trap and kill Sutkeh, I think it could have made "her mother isn't anyone special at all actually" feel more satisfying. It feels like it starts going in this direction with Ruby's fake out of trying to tell Sutekh, but then it goes for the easy route rather than the more interesting one.

[@tenhayz1889]

The issue is that your "clear link" is dumb. Why would Sutekh care when his goal is to kill all and get his revenge and why was he unable to know anything if he had reasons to care when he clearly has godlike powers

[@Adventist1997]

​@@tenhayz1889 Better question is, why wouldn't he know who she was. It was a plot twist for the sake if having a plot twist. Merely thinking about her made it snow. That implies a power of some sort. Nothing like that has ever happened before, so do others just not believe hard enough that their mum is special?

[@sarafontanini7051]

@@Adventist1997 exactly, you can't jsut go "well she's jsut a perfectly ordinary random person" after doing a bunch of WEIRD SHIT like "LITERALLY REWRITE A MAN'S AMEMORY OF AN EVENT". THat's just DUMB.

[@Adventist1997]

@@sarafontanini7051 Donna was the special ordinary done right... Until she became super smart and thought she was better than the Dr. because that's when they ruined her character and growth.

[@TimbahOnToast]

You always tie your media critiques to a very clear analytical lens and frame of reference. This is another great video

[@satyasyasatyasya5746]

OMG its you! :D hi! love your videos too!

[@Rakath]

For at least the Moffat era repeated memes there's a degree of dramatic irony attached to them that makes the impact stronger, that the incomplete information we get before the reveal makes the full plot clearly defined (and helps the impact be... well, impactful). The Doctor's conversation with Amy while her eyes are closed in the Angels two-parter, and his description of the Pandorica as 'a prison for a trickster god' feel more interesting after you know their meaning from their reveal. It isn't perfect, but there are elements that with hindsight are easy to recognize for their meaning. And that is another thing missing from Season 1 (it's missing from Bad Wolf as well, but I don't think Bad Wolf was a very good meme). Worse, it's the antithetical of it. Like- Snowmen employed fairytale logic in a way that made an internal sort of sense (Psychic snow impacted by the emotional devastation of an entire family sad on Christmas Day) but there's no explanation of that sort with Ruby Sunday. So the sudden snows and Carol of the Bells feel more bizarre at the end, rather than less.

[@haileyshannon7548]

My headcanon is that the Doctor basically time travelled so much, that he’s screwed up history and even his own past changes every time that not even he knows who he really is. Hence the title “Doctor Who”

[@SploshBadger]

I think the sheer number of repeated memes this series was too much. You’ve got the mother mystery, the snow, the woman who appears everywhere, the fourth wall breaks, the “new boss”, the pantheon, ms flood, susan, and the scary noise. it was too much, it might have been because i was a child and not very good at noticing but bad wolf, saxon, missing planets didn’t really draw attention to themselves?

[@crazywhofan6676]

They absolutely did.

[@no-rd5tn]

bad wolf totally did, saxon and missing planets were subtle but still noticeable

[@sarafontanini7051]

@@no-rd5tn except i absolutely missed pretty much all of them until they were specifically pointed out in the show and on the wiki so sucks to be you XP

[@askmeagain43]

Russell T Davies be like: "I hated in Star Wars where they said a chareacter's origins weren't special or important, and then they were those things. so I made a character where we said her origins were important and special, then they weren't those things. I don't forsee this getting any kind of negative reaction whatsoever...

[@leavealoner]

There should have been more emphasis on the 73 yards distance in the finale. The CCTV camera was 73 yards away from the tardis, Ruby's mum was about 73 yards away from the tardis, the perception filter canonically reaches a distance of 73 yards, and "funny things happen at 73 yards" or something. everything was explained perfectly fine, except that the Doctor himself didn't connect these dots. if he had done so, the apparent lack of answers wouldn't have distracted from the thematic significance of Ruby's mum being important for Ruby and who she is, and not for Sutekh and his obsession with mystery.

[@nocturne8333]

Part of the reason I love Moffat’s finales more than those of RTD and Chibnall is that they all end up as an intimate character piece. The Big Bang hones in on Amy and the Doctor, The Wedding of River Song focuses on the Doctor’s self-loathing since A Good Man Goes to War, Death in Heaven and Hell Bent are laser focused on the toxic relationship between the Doctor and Clara, and The Doctor Falls deals with Missy and the Doctor. Also, to be fair, there was a pretty substantial amount of foreshadowing for River being Amy’s daughter. Moffat definitely knew during series 5 due to the Pond and River connection, and The Impossible Astronaut practically spells it out for the audience on a rewatch.

[@MrSukram777]

I miss Moffat now.

[@christianwise637]

Ditto, Moffat finales really are peak (for the most part anyway) because they eschew the grand epic overblown nonsense in favour of lyrical thematic and character-based drama. It's probably a little mean for me to say this, but the last seven years have proven to be immensely vindicating as a long-term Moffat defender

[@nocturne8333]

@@christianwise637 Exactly this, the show has refused to innovate since Spyfall, which is a shame, as Moffat’s run is the most introspective and experimental era of the show in decades (and my personal favourite). I’m dying for another finale like Hell Bent or The Doctor Falls.

[@michaelkindt3288]

@8:46-.-Not necessarily. While surprise is the core appeal to many people, many people get A sense of satisfaction and/or catharsis when they turn out to be correct, AKA the "I knew it" moment. Gravity Falls is a perfect example, because there was A plot twist that the fan base largely predicted (that I will not spoil), but there was no disappointment, because everyone found it A satisfying twist. There's also just something inherently appreciatable too many people about an element of the plot being able to be predicted, and yet not obviously predictable. People find it very interesting.

[@sarafontanini7051]

even a predictable twist can be satisfying if it makes sense and doesn't exist solely to 'surprise'everyone

[@The1Coleberg]

Part of the problem is that there were actually several mysteries in this run, some of which were explained to be linked and some of which don’t seem to have been yet - but the ones that were explained don’t work together satisfactorily. - Mrs Flood - unexplained - Ruby’s mother - just someone. Okay, but how does that thematically or character-fully link to: - Susan Twist is Sutekh - what does the God of Death have to do with a mother giving up her child for her own good? (Besides very very loosely) And why would he care? - It snows around Ruby - okay, loosely connected to the moment imprinting on Ruby - but that’s pretty weak, and is that really connected to Ruby’s mother being “just someone” or to Sutekh being there? - The One Who Waits - why would the Toymaker call Sutekh that anyway, let alone run? He’s from the same pantheon, isn’t he? - the “song” Maestro detected in Ruby - was that one of the above twists? If so, I don’t know how any of them satisfactorily fit Maestro’s description or response. - The Meep’s “boss” - unexplained None of the explanations we’ve had are that bad individually - but because they aren’t satisfying in relation to each other or the rest of the show they can only be gratifying in the moment (like Sue Tech). (FYI note for future - Davies is pronounced “Davis”, same for Alan and Greg)

[@sebastianbrown2270]

Also the Toymaker running from Sutekh doesn’t work as he’s in UNIT HQ when he’s fighting the Doctor

[@5000_People]

I wouldn't mind if you tricked me into watching a video about Blake's 7, perhaps you should make a video about Blake's 7

[@benedictcooper3131]

Seconded!

[@queenofcookie3299]

I have no idea what Blake’s 7 is but i too now want a video about it

[@TheGerkuman]

It's interesting that the only time that Classic Who tried this (Trial of a Time Lord) it was one of those instances where it straddled the line between 'classic mystery' and 'shocker'. Even more interestingly, I think it handled the classic mystery elements (what happened to Ravelox, why are the Time Lords putting The Doctor on Trial and why are they censoring and manipulating the footage) much better than the shocker elements (who is the Valeyard and what does he want?)

[@dantekrux2000]

In regards to 31:09 (I'm saying this before I continue so maybe I'm jumping the gun) The reason people (in my circle, at least) are up in arms about Davies saying that 4th wall breaks won't be explained isn't because we were wondering about it. It's because we've seen davies say three or four times, "Oh we know the answer to this question but we probably won't tell the audience". To me, at least, it feels like he's waving the "Some questions aren't meant to be answered" things in the audience's face like he's the first to think of it, but he hasn't actually answered ANY important questions that he's raised. It's not "It's a new show, we're doing things differently", it's "I know exactly what's happening and you don't lmao get rekt". Which is maybe harsh, but that's how it's coming off.

[@taanwallbanks9841]

This exactly - I was fine with the fourth wall breaks being unexplained, but it's super dumb saying that theres a lore reason but we won't get told.

[@deathcrist2000]

I think with regards to River Song, you're looking in the wrong place. The question "Who are you to me" doesn't climax with A Good Man Goes to War. It climaxes in The Husbands of River Song.

[@nocturne8333]

A Good Man Goes to War is mainly there to knock the Doctor off his pedestal that he’d been put on by RTD in series 3 and 4, and it ends up culminating in The Wedding of River Song with River telling the Doctor that the universe does care about him after all. It’s actually pretty thematically tight looking back on it.

[@deathcrist2000]

Indeed, a lot of the Moffat era "mysteries" ultimately reveal themselves to be pageantry disguising the real interest of the story: The relationship between the characters. A lot of his finales for the 11th Doctor era end up being chamber pieces with a small cast of characters. Hell, the whole point of the Clara arc is that treating people (especially women) as mysteries to solve is wrong. The answer to that being "She did something brave during a somewhat more high stakes adventure" is the point.

[@nocturne8333]

@@deathcrist2000 Exactly this, Moffat’s arcs and finales are some of the most intimate character studies of the revival, which is why they’re my preferred approach to story arcs.

[@deathcrist2000]

@@nocturne8333 On a related note, why is it so hard to actually credit Mark Gatiss for his work on Sherlock?

[@nocturne8333]

@@deathcrist2000 I’m really not sure, maybe it’s because Moffat was a much more polarising writer at the time, with more recognition in different fandoms? Sherlock is definitely one where you can’t separate Moffat and Gatiss like you can Doctor Who stories.

[@hororskull]

Spot on with this critique. I think there is more to be said about the internal logic being flawed, which you did bring up but dropped to focus more on mystery vs thriller. I agree that the presentation of Ruby's parentage as more of a mystery does exacerbate the issue, but whenever the hints don't fit with the answer, it's bound to cause problems. (Also I'm sorry to do this to you, but the series numbers at 35:52 are wrong. Should be S3, S8/9/10 (although Missy does appear earlier than the cliffhanger in each of those), & S10 for the Master, then S2 for that Dalek reveal.)

[@JamesWoodall]

Dang it. I have no idea how that happened. Looks like I copied them from other cards and didn't change them, but I swear I did! Maybe it didn't save.

[@HuntingViolets]

Highly recommend reading the later version of Knox's Rules for writing detective fiction -- with updates because of Christie's remarkable ability to break the rules without breaking them.

[@marcuswalters8093]

As a huge Doctor Who fan of the last 35 years, I am very ready to hear this. 2:40 This kind of twist was brilliant in The Last Jedi. Didn't love it in this case. 10:54 So this is why I didn't love Listen. Because I was never invested in the mystery from the outset. I thought it completely ridiculous that the Doctor suddenly posited the existence of the universes greatest hiders apropos of nothing. Throughout I half assumed there would be no monster at the end. So it was completely unsatisfactory. Don't even get me started on the fact thst we'd already met the world's greatest hiders, introduced far more effectively. The Weeping Angels. 19:54 Yana was satisfying because of that "Of course!" Moment. You Are Not Alone was a great twist.

[@SortedRays]

In regards to whether River’s storyline had a satisfying impact on the narrative, I would concretely say YES definitely. I also have to say I’m glad you said at the end about how people are acting like because the finale was disappointing that means the entire season was actually bad. When I remember a lot of praise for the series as it was happening from basically Boom onwards

[@holyflutterofgod]

I genuinely think it's so unfortunate that the season started and ended on weak notes. I think the sandwiching of great episodes between poor ones brings down the valuation of the great ones; whereas, if the season started strong and ended strong, with weak episodes in the middle, people would probably regard the whole season more favorably!

[@CassidyShadewing]

The issue, to me, is that The Mystery of Ruby Sunday; is presented hard and fast... as a traditional mystery. Where as most previous seasonal arcs I would say straddle the line between Shocker/thriller and Mystery. You're supposed to be curious and be invested as you would a mystery, but you never, imo, feel like you're supposed to solve it. It's not a game to win, nor is it to lose. There are basically two win conditions for a traditional mystery: Either A: You figure out the right conclusion based on the info given or B. You realize why you were wrong, as a new detail makes you see everything in a new light, but it still all makes sense. the Aha moment. While a Shocker is all about wondering where it will go. But alot of this works on the concept of "whodunit" type mysteries. Something like a "Howcatchum", Columbo being the shining example, is a completely different type of mystery. Its not about figuring out the how and why of the crime, its about being given the crime up front and the intrigue there is seeing how the Detective will deal with it and come to the conclusion the audience already knows. That's usually closer to what DW is, its usually not about the audience solving the mystery, its the audience getting invested in how the Doctor will handle the mystery. You want to be satisfied with how it all plays out for the characters, the narrative relevance as you say. We're not given that crime upfront, but largely we're wanting to see how the Doctor will deal with and get out of it. The whole of "The Mystery of Ruby Sunday" falls flat, because even in character... its importance doesn't feel important. As you state at the beginning; Ruby has a loving foster family, she has a good life knowing who her mother is... isn't really going to make much of an impact. Yes, its a big driving force for Ruby... except, imo, out side of the Christmas special and the finale... it never feels /that/ important to her. And in between all those we keep getting "information disguised as clues" So even divorced of how the audience feels... it also just doesn't seem to have much actual narrative weight to it... even Suteck being interested in it... kinda feels like a copout. It feels all very superficial in ways that previous seasons never did. Nothing makes sense, even beyond the confines of the mystery. Like Sutech himself raises a lot of questions, if he's been connected to the TARDIS for so long (we're never given an exact point) that means; why didn't any of these other mysteries make him reveal himself? More so when more then a few of them has the Tardis dying (Stolen Earth has the Daleks trying to destroy it, Pandorica has it exploding, etc.) everything connected to this mystery, starts to fall apart when the resolution is so unsatisfying. And its not just THIS mystery, 73 yards is another mystery episode where nothing makes any sense, shit just happens... and RTD is literally stting there saying "Well, I know; but I'm never gonna tell you." Which then makes stuff like "I removed explanations intentionally" and "I might never reveal some of this stuff" even worse because it makes Davies feel like he's more interested in trying to appear clever then tell a good story. This isn't like the "Time War" where he decided "nothing I show will ever live up to fan's imaginations, and thus will always be unsatisfying" That's a somewhat fair reasoning. But the Time War isn't a mystery. Not even the events are a mystery, we generally know what happened, just not how or just how grand the scope is. But when it feels like you are deliberately hiding, or even lying, about your stories... that's when people start to lose faith and trust in you as the storyteller. But one thing not discussed, that I believe is key to this whole season... is that I feel RTD originally scripted out a tradtional 13 episode season. Why? 1. Order of episodes. We get Devil's Chord that feels VERY MUCH like a mid-season episode/finale But it gets bumped up the the second episode... Becuase its one of the most tradtional feeling episodes of the season. 2. In universe timeline. We never get a sense of The Doctor and Ruby bonding. We're only told they are. The episodes we get... usually have them seperated for some reason or another. Another reason why DC is important as a second episode, its one of the few episodes where they are togeather and tries to set up their dynamic. 3. Random Susans we never see. 4. How the Mystery seems like a back burner for 5 episodes, to suddenly be "Doctor dramatically flies into UNIT for answers" There is a lot of weird narative flow to everything, that in hidsight feels like we're missing episodes that were planned but got dropped once they realized they only had 8 episodes. So they ikely drop the 5 they felt were the weakest, and re-wrote and/or rearranged the remaining to try to preserve the narrative. I bring this up, becuas if this theory is true... then I have faith for Season 2 being better; as it will be written knowing what their limits are and what does or didn't work in season 1. But still my faith in RTD has been dinged, as it does feels like he's more concerned with that engangement, that storytelling, and with making DW a more visually stunning show... that he's not the same guy that brought the show back all those years ago.

[@VariousCreatures]

The idea of more intended episodes is interesting, and watching week to week, it did feel like the order of release was shifted. Although personally, I took the extra Susans to just be one of those throwaway elements Doctor Who uses to imply adventures beyond what we see on screen.

[@gregvs.theworld451]

I am glad James wasn't naive to neglect to mention the homophobia (and racism) seeped into a lot of the discourse about this Doctor. Like I'm not saying you can't criticize Doctor Who, I know several things didn't land in the newest season for me either, but on some level we know why a lot of people are more harsh on Ncuti's tenure, and it's for much the same reason people gave Jodie's Doctor extra criticism and scrutiny.

[@TheGrinningViking]

I always say that I want there to be full and equal representation everywhere so studio executives cant use it as a shield to cover mediocrity anymore. Really I just want representation in things that aren't 💩

[@gregvs.theworld451]

@@TheGrinningViking I think James himself had a similar conclusion in a video awhile back delving into the question of "How much queer representation is enough?, his answer being that it'll be enough when people stop commenting on queer people existing in media and don't think twice when gay people, gay couples, lesbians, trans people, etc. show up in media and we can actually talk about the content of the media in question without treating the mere representation of queer people as a bold and noteworthy concept in and of itself. I imagine the same goes for every other minority group too. To your last comment though even then I wish minority groups could show up in bad media without having their minority status tied in as representation of their entire social group representing a piece of bad media.

[@tinkergnomad]

The problem is, the representation doesn't extend to the writing room. They complain about characters that don't look like them, written by people who look exactly like them. Sometimes we get representation that's deliberately 💩 just so the most basic dudebros can point to the screen and say "see, this is why I don't like this demographic's characters," without ever having to examine the people who made the character unlikable.

[@goosiesmoosies]

Only partway through the vid but I really hope we get some more meaty and interesting episodes next season. This Doctor is so fun and refreshing, not perfectly written, sure, but the performance is very fun and enjoyable and I want to see it paired with better storytelling.

[@LSM1221]

I think whovians are triggered by the mystery box character in general (distinct from a mystery vs a shocker). The LOST style mystery box as a character is really old in Who now. Clara and River are the two most egregious examples, but Moffat loved the trope. The specialest girl who ever was (and flirts with the Doctor). Amy and Reinette even. So when they started with the same "ooh Ruby so mysterious and special look at her magic snow better make some Frozen memes tiktok!" I'm not surprised people were turned off. Also the snow of sadness was wholesale ripped off from Rosario Dawson's alien rain magic from Men In Black 2 and I fully believe Ruby was at one point in development some kind of alien baby.

[@idle_speculation]

I think Clara’s mystery was handled fairly well in Series 7 because: a) The Doctor trying to solve it and treating her like a puzzle isn’t supposed to be a good thing b) Her “special” status is because of something she did herself I’d argue that if you get super mad at retcons the Impossible Girl is much worse than the Timeless Child, and even if you don’t it’s still not perfect, but give it credit where credit is due.

[@Stephen-Fox]

My immediate reaction was very much "Well that sure was an RTD Doctor Who finale" because... They're all like that. Great on thematics and emotional character beats, a bit naff on plot (In fact it was one of the better ones for me, despite dusting the universe reducing the story to 'how will it be undone' which is always a less dramatic question than 'can the villain be stopped', because those great emotional character beats didn't wind up kind of... Pausing the action in a way that just kind of (I think Jackie and Pete's reunion from different worlds in Doomsday is the worst example of this, with it being a multiple-minute scene while there's a huge life and death battle happening just out of frame. This isn't just a Doctor Who thing for Davies, but seems to be a more general sci-fi/fantasy thing for him - Something similar happens with Benny's coming out scene in the Wizards vs Aliens S2 finale - They stop crawling for their in the Nekros tubes to escape the unseen monster down in the pit from which the tubes are in in order to have this dramatic heart to heart.)

[@MrLtia1234]

The War Games has to be the best example of a shocker.

[@serazaydia]

I haven't watched Doctor Who since the 9th doctor lmao but I have watched many KZbin videos about it so, I know roughly what the deal is with the franchise. However I haven't seen the recent season myself so I can't speak on Ruby's reveal personally. However, I would like to point something out as someone who is a huge fan of TLJ and Rey Nobody. Rey's parentage is set up as a mystery box by JJ Abrams, and her being a nobody is a subversion of expectations. But I think it really works a meta on the Star Wars myth, and changes the themes of the franchise in a really good and interesting way. Not only that, but it furthers her character arc in a way that "you're Luke's daughter" wouldn't have. (Not to mention the heroes abandoning Rey to be a slave makes no sense anyway, but not the point.) Star Wars has always focused on the Skywalker family, and there's this strange genetic element to the Force when there really shouldn't be as a result. Giving Rey nobody parents enforces the idea that it isn't only the Skywalkers who are important. Anyone can be a hero. And I think Star Wars really needed that message. It does this without making the story entirely not about the Skywalkers, because Rey's most important relationship and rivalry is with this generation's Skywalker (Ben Solo). As for Rey's arc, what she wants more than anything even in TFA is to be important. She wants to find a place in the world, a family, she wants answers for why she was abandoned and why she has powers she doesn't understand. Giving her important parents would not challenge her as a character at all! It would be an incredibly boring character arc. If the set up to a character arc is "I want to be important" the development must include that idea being challenged. By telling her she isn't important, now she has to face that fact and decide to be a hero anyway, to create her own destiny, identity, and family apart from her birth parents. That is all to say, even if Rey Nobody didn't work in the way that it was disappointing from a reveal perspective, in my opinion the themes more than make up for it. From what I can tell, the same isn't true for the Ruby reveal.

[@davidhildebrandt7812]

You did see episode IX, right? I think Rey as a nobody was actually reasonably well received compared to the later reveal.

[@michaeldallaway1988]

Very fair video. I definitely agree around a lot of points on the finale. I think time will be reasonably kind to the season, but the finale's twists feel unearned.

[@jonathanbrett-warren2031]

I think Davies has already said there will be more to come on Ruby's story in Season 2. Maybe the unsatisfactory conclusion of season 1 was done that way on purpose to keep the audience intrigued. But I agree with you, it raised more questions than it answered

[@TMJW]

My only problem with the Ruby plot was my Moffat PTSD - yet another female character who’s a talking mystery box. I would have actually found it easier to invest if so much of the season/series through line hadn’t seem to hang around this reveal. Overall I did enjoy this start to New New Who tho

[@SalvationKH]

I misread the title as "Doctor who is bad at mysteries". As in, there is a doctor that is bad at mysteries.

[@cleoarbel]

The silence in the library is the best new who mystery to date

[@thomasdegroat6039]

Like you, I am surprised at the turnaround the fans have had with this season. Yes, I also didn't like the finale, but I can also recognize that the rest of the season/series was thoroughly enjoyable. This would maybe rank as one of my favorite seasons so it's crazy that people are now arguing that Chibnall was better.

[@tright6]

I've been pretty dissapointed in the characters, especially in the finale. Like it feels like RTD only inserted them to be fun characters without none of them actually having any direct significance to the plot. One of the worst offenders imo is Rose that really just has no characteristics of her own. We get like one line with her saying she isn't happy with her position in UNIT and then she basically never says anything afterwards.

[@Geadsss]

Ive never watched Doctor Who before going on a full binge with my friend. I knew what Doctor Who was through old memes, being outside the culture and offshoots escaping the fandom. An inside joke started that I kept referencing was "This was the last of the Dalek" as every early episode of them, the Doctor kills all or 99% of the Daleks, but then, miraculously, twice the amount of them appear in a new Dalek episode.

[@sarafontanini7051]

honestly they really should jsut stop saying "all the daleks are dead" if they keep bringing them back.

[@hestia_or_adhdsteph]

I do think that "(mysteries) are a game audiences want to lose" is a bit off, it's going to depend on the person, more accurate would be that they're a game that, so long as they play fair, audiences don't mind losing. When reading/watching mystery stories I do actively try to figure it out, and enjoy it immensely when I do, but so long as all the pieces are there beforehand I enjoy the story just as much when I don't figure it out. Like, for a couple of examples, when I read Sherlock Holmes Adventure of the Yellow Face I actually worked it out before Sherlock did! I was so excited, i got to feel clever and I continued to try to piece together the mysteries in the other stories. It's incredible figuring out what's happening before it gets explained! On the other hand, when I read Elantris by Brandon Sanderson, I absolutely did not consider the big reveal as a possibility when reading, but when that reveal happened I could look back at the rest if the book and see all of the little pieces building to that slotting into place, and it was cool! That "OOOHHHHHH" moment where it suddenly made sense. Some if the audience will want to lose, or not care about playing, and that's fine, but for those who are trying to work it out, we don't mind losing so long as the story plays fair with the clues.

[@jnielson1121]

Hmm - not sure I quite agree about e.g. Amy being a Ganger is just a pulp "shocker" in that it does provide a satisfying explanation for why the TARDIS can't make up its mind as to whether she's pregnant or not. I think there's something about a reveal we couldn't have predicted or guessed but that *does* satisfy various unexplained mini-mysteries along the way e.g. Empire of Death was so unsatisfying because the genuine mystery of how she makes it snow or why the God of Music is afraid of her are *not* explained by Ruby's mother being an ordinary 15 year old. There is absent explanation.

[@kemowery]

I think the key to "fair play" in a mystery isn't just that the clues have to be presented for the audience, but there also has to be a way to tell that the red herrings are, in fact, red herrings. And I think that actually goes for "shockers" as well. Even if we look at the reveal of Ruby's parents not as a mystery but as a last-minute swerve meant to surprise us all, we're still left wondering how the snow and the lack of records and the cloak and the changing memories and everything else fits into this. Like, okay, "Bad Wolf" isn't really a mystery to be solved; it's a Bootstrap Paradox. But Bootstrap Paradoxes still explain things. Rose sending back the Bad Wolf message across time and space explains why it's there, and there's no other questions about it that need answering. Part of the problem with this season's mysteries (and, going back, the Fugitive Doctor and the Timeless Child) is that we, the audience, know certain things. It's okay for the show to reveal to us that we didn't have all the information--like, we didn't know that the metacrisis that 10 underwent counted as a regeneration, or that there was a regeneration between 8 and 9--but there needs to be some explanation of why the things we know and have seen happen in the show didn't happen or aren't important. (Like, why the snow? Or why does the Fugitive Doctor's TARDIS look like a police box?) And that explanation needs to be at least a little satisfying. Saying that all of this weirdness was around Ruby's mother because of the importance everyone else put on it doesn't do that. Even in the world of the show, we don't really have any reason to believe that someone wanting to find their parents creates supernatural phenomena. Really the only reason the characters put any unusual importance is the same reason we as the audience did: we were shown a bunch of weird supernatural things and told they were important, which caused people to start thinking there was some notable mystery to Ruby's mother.

[@Mudcrown]

This summed up my thoughts so well, thanks mate

[@kurathchibicrystalkitty5146]

Isn't there always Doctor Who discourse? 😅🤣Joking aside, this is a great breakdown of why the show's central mysteries so often feel underwhelming. Really enjoyed watching this video. 😀

[@tenhayz1889]

There is a massive issue with this discussion in general. Why couldnt ruby s mom be someone normal, but she was infused or smth with powers as a trap for sutekh? The person putting Ruby at the church could have been anyone. There is so much wasted potential, feels like the season was not thought through completely

[@isabelnecessary5915]

Just a note on personal preference, please feel free to ignore! I found the background “music” pretty irritating and distracting in this video. I personally listen to video essays as a method to relax and prefer to find them sort of soothing, which I found was pretty hard to achieve in this case unfortunately. Only mention this because I get the impression that’s something lots of people enjoy in video essays but this annoyance might be particular to me haha. Otherwise absolutely loved the content of this video so far and your delivery is great as always, will just have to wait to find the time to engage with this was I am feeling more wired than usual for a video like this. Hope I haven’t been rude, love your work!

[@yourneighbourtodoro]

The feeling I came away from series 14 with is that RTD feels like a writer pulled in two directions with Doctor Who. RTD has not lost the sauce by any means, he proved that "Wild Blue Yonder," "73 Yards," and "Dot & Bubble," which all feel mature and bold and fresh, but episodes like "Space Babies" and "Empire of Death" come across as almost obligatory, like he HAS to rush through every concept in the show, like it HAS to be child-friendly, and that the best finale is the biggest one, a redux of Flux but with a god of death. I like series 14 well enough, but it seems like RTD is stuck in an old mode (mystery boxes, shockers, and plot arcs) rather than bringing what he's normally great at (character drama) into a fresh new direction for the show, exemplified by those three episodes I mentioned at the top. I guess what I'm saying is that I want to see what Doctor Who is through the lens of It's A Sin or Years & Years.

[@timrob12]

I guess one mystery that Chibnall set up was the one of the Lone Cyberman with Jack teasing it in Fugitive of the Judoon and there was a shocker effect (to me at least) by the fact that the character already showed up in The Haunting of Villa Diodati as I, at least, was expecting the character to appear when the finale came along, but not sooner.

[@kg30004]

This video popping up right after I watched the Wandavision one where Dr. Who was an example of good mystery gave me whiplash

[@jnielson1121]

...Yes but "why can Mrs Flood break the fourth wall" and "who or what is she really" are not entirely separate questions given the manner she's presented in.

[@ko379]

i think you made a really great point. if the reveal of her mother had made little sense with the clues (cloak, snow, song, etc), but had instead had dramatic consequences and a following story that we spent the finale dealing with, we wouldve been more forgiving. i mean, we still wouldve noticed that he forgot to tie up loose ends, but it wouldnt have been as annoying. as it is, its just anticlimatic. in that way, i think the susan twist thing actually worked better. it may be unfair and not well seeded, but the reveal of who she is was big enough that we spent time dealing with the problem it presented. overall, i think this season wasn't BAD, it was uneven. i think rogue and dot and bubble were good, and boom and 73 yards were EXCELLENT. but in my opinion, it was bookended by episodes that verged on bad, which really sucks!

[@SEiiBUTSU]

I think personally my issue with the conclusion is the lack of emotional authenticity. We're told this young woman is a 15 year old girl, who has suffered great trauma and is now in the middle of a legitimately emotionally challenging moment. Only to suddenly behave in an astoundingly inhuman way. Dramatically pointing at a sign, through a person who was there and in the way. The reveal wasn't bad because she was not actually a person of note in historacally relevant narrative terms, but because it had all of the traits of a writer or writers painting themselves into a dramatic corner and not coming up with a reasonable explanation for an already pre planned solution. If she hadn't pointed, or done so in such an unnatural way, or returned later (seen later in the penultimate episode when Ruby visited the window), the episode conclusion would have been much more pleasing.

[@angryfarfetchd3015]

The whole reveal with Ruby's mother just doesn't make sense in universe, there's so many supernatural things happening around her that then make no sense when it turns out she's just a normal person

[@atharvadeshpande6907]

Haven’t yet watched the video, but I disagree with the title. Doctor Who can be sometimes great with mysteries too 1. The cracks in the skin of the universe 2. River Song reveal 4. Missy reveal (the entire “heaven” and cybermen arc) 5. Master reveal (all 3 of them, including WEaT) 6. Bad Wolf (this one, emotionally only)

[@maxhurst3423]

excellent video, i just have one point. i think the fourth wall breaking not being explained is a valid criticism because attention is drawn to it as part of the character of Mrs Flood. People compare it to Tom Baker looking at the camera in Face of Evil or Fendahl or Capaldi in Before the Flood but those are small instances that aren't made to seem a key narrative point. Not explaining something that is purposely made to look important (ala the silence in Vampires in Venice) is just baiting the audience in my opinion. Otherwise the video was great :)

[@tennenyt5311]

You can see the same thing in 73 Yards, The mystery was so intriguing and the payoff didn't actually explain anything. But the themes and message of that episode was incredible imo, as someone with anxiety and self esteem issues it especially resonated with me, being there for yourself if no one else is and learning to live with your demons

[@MarcosSantos-dj6lk]

this video is a masterpiece

[@satyasyasatyasya5746]

cool! new video! i'll watch later for sure but commenting for the algo :D i would say however, i think DW is a classic example of 'solid family show' but thats what it is. Its all fun and games when you're a kid and some great TV and memories, until yoou grow up into a media criticism nerd... and i think a few too many fans suffer such a transformation haha

[@amazingdisgrace1684]

I really don't want these repeated memes anymore, but they will very likely still be part of the show going forward. It feels like the showrunners have little faith that the show itself will keep people coming back. Like they need to drop in a tease in several episodes that makes people want to get the answer. But I don't think that's necessary at all. Speaking personally, I watch Doctor Who because... I like Doctor Who. Shocking, I know. I would prefer they drop this. If not, I'm just going to do my best to ignore it and treat it like the answer is inevitably going to be unsatisfying. Hell, by doing that, I might even end up being pleasantly surprised.

[@wingnut4942]

James Woodall uploaded 🙏

[@jnielson1121]

RTD whoudl have needed to seed the idea of investing things with importance earlier in the series and ideally had that kind of social construction theme have a genuine in-universe sci-fi allegory.

[@octosalias5785]

AAAAAAA The reason Ruby Sunday is special is the urban legend of Ruby Sunday. The Doctor made fiction and fable reality, it is in fact important who she is ugh

[@benisaacs2753]

I need to argue against the River Song reveal in a good man goes to war being unfair- because at the start of that episode there is a massive piece of information that is givin to us which does massively hint at the reveal- In the scene with River and Rory in the Prison, the show and River openly tell us that its her Birthday. Im not saying its a perfect clue but its one of those things where on a rewatch its obvious what the show was trying to do

[@primoultimo4272]

Incedible video! You give me words to understand why I liked some mystery boxes more than others. Personally, I agree with your last musing - I think there have been too many repeated memes so at this point, that they no longer leave any impact. I hope the show tries do to at least one season without one soon (not least bc a two-part finale kills an 8-episode season)

[@marnierae3195]

can’t wait to come back to this channel when you have hundreds of thousands of subscribers, i’m so shocked you don’t already!

[@fisheyenomiko]

The revelation of River being Amy & Rory's daughter might have been "unfair", but it was so damn obvious that after they revealed it, I kept waiting for the "actual" surprise.

[@iloveyourunclebob]

Family was such a huge theme of this season it become the words bad wolf with lost/abandoned/left behind children acting as sort of satellite 5 repeat "location" (obviously people and not a location). So this end, while I did love it, just felt like a finale for a completely different season

[@LunaFelton]

Series 5 and 8 work because there were hints you could piece together like people at the end of each ep in Series 8 being dead. Or Series 5, the subtle hints. Ruby Sunday just sucks because we were led to it being something important but.. it wasn;t.

[@laurenbierman548]

I also wonder if the way seasons are shorter now is also a part of the problem.

[@williamgowling847]

Something really landed with me here: you're right when you say that the mystery was not about the identity of her mother, but as to why it was even a secret. If they had revealed, for example, that Mrs Flood is some kind of God-like figure and her presence in Ruby's life sort of bended her life into a mythical mystery, perhaps to destroy Sutekh, THAT could have been satisfying, because otherwise 'she's important because we think she is' is far too conceptual and makes the mystery feel unfinished

[@ojwh1933]

I agree with a lot. - 'Doctor Who' has always been bad at mysteries. Even when they lead to a a satisfying climax, the mystery itself requires a certain degree of not thinking about the logic. For example, I would argue 'The Parting of the Ways' has a satisfying climax. However, the meaning of the words "Bad Wolf" is the season-long mystery, and that doesn't exactly get answered. By that, I mean, Rose sees the words on the ground in 2006 and decides they are a sign of how to get back... Cut To: Rose suddenly having a plan of how to get back to the future [musical cue] involving opening the heart of the TARDIS because they know it can translate thoughts. Rose's plan makes sense. They know the TARDIS can translate thoughts based on a previous episode. > They want the TARDIS to take them back. > They speak to the TARDIS to get it to take them back. - It's a logical conclusion. Furthermore, Time Vortex-infused Rose scattering the words "Bad Wolf" across time makes sense as an explanation of why those words have been appearing (and I know people get stuck on the phrase "makes sense" when talking about fantastical genres, but it is to say it's internally consistent with this fantasy concept of a consciousness with undefined time powers). HOWEVER, the reason for the words physically/verbally being there is less pertinent a question than their meaning (or equally as pertinent if you like, a pertinent point nonetheless), and there is a disconnect between Rose deciding the words have meaning and Rose formulating a plan. Upon seeing the words and deciding to formulate a plan, Rose says "It's telling me I can get back." so their significance as suggested by the plot is giving Rose the hope they need. This is fine in concept, but to put it simply... How? How are those words delivering that message? It doesn't flat-out "not make sense" as is the case with Ruby's arc (see: the snow). We're talking about a conclusion a character reaches, so who am I to question the inner workings of their mind? But I can say that what they are thinking has no logical value. The fact that they are inspired turns out for the best, but the source that is meant to inspire is thin, and for that source to be the conclusion to a season-long mystery is therefore underwhelming. Side Note: The seemingly unlimited and thinly set-up power of the Time Vortex being the resolution to the story's threat is another issue of set-up and pay-off being misaligned in 'Doctor Who' but I'm not going into that as, though connected to the plot surrounding this mystery, it broadens the topic from "How to write a mystery" to just "How to tell a story." - The (non-)reveal of Rey's parentage in 'The Last Jedi' is satisfying because it is a thematically strong choice for the character, and to put it in contrast with Ruby's parentage, the first two Star Wars sequels do not actively mislead the audience. When you find out Rey's parents are not pre-established characters, you might be disappointed based on personal preferences for ways the story could have developed, but it doesn't contradict (either logically or thematically) what has already been established. It is simply a reveal that is not to the taste of some fans. - I am fully in favour of the concept of Fair Play that you talk about here. On the minor note of mystery being a "game the audience want to lose," however, I do believe in a 4-square grid (or whatever you call those charts) for this, with the categories of Predictability and Satisfaction. One can predict the answer to a mystery and be satisfied because the answer was obscured enough that they can feel pride in having made a correct judgement. Equally, one can predict the answer to a mystery and be unsatisfied because they felt it was too easy. Furthermore, one can not predict the answer to a mystery and be satisfied because they are wowed by the hindsight of clues missed. Lastly, one can not predict the answer to a mystery and be unsatisfied because there was not enough set up to allow the audience to reach the conclusion. Just to put this into context, obviously we're discussing the mystery of Ruby Sunday as being in the last category, but-to serve your point-at no point was I heavily invested in the mystery of that or the identity of "The One Who Waits" because I felt (as is standard for this show that I adore) there was no evidence on which to base any theories. Those who predicted Sutekh only had something to go on because of behind-the-scenes slip-ups like the "David Suchet" Doctor Who Magazine incident. It's not that I wasn't interested in the conclusion, but I personally had no investment in guessing because why bother when every guess is baseless? With Ruby, the most evidence for any theory came from 'The Devil's Chord' (very early on in the series), which I would argue made it pretty clear they were the child of a deity ("The One Who Waits" or, at least, their power was present at the night of Ruby's birth, and Ruby can manifest that power now). There are other ways to explain why they had deity-level power, but that would be the occam's razor solution, and there are no clues to suggest anything else through the rest of the series. I don't want to get bogged down on the specifics, but the point is, I was and am tired of 'Doctor Who's approach to series arcs wherein a mysterious thing is mentioned or appears and nothing is done with it until the finale. And that's not me saying I don't like mystery boxes as I see some people saying. I don't have a problem with a mysterious thing in a story. But if it is your sole arc, you need to make it an "arc". There needs to be new information given each time we see or hear about it. And as with any mystery, the answer needs to make sense and feel thought-through in hindsight. It shouldn't feel like you threw a random word or alias in there with no knowledge of where that was going. River Song's identity is an example of this. I have problems with River's characterisation, the writing of their story, and in fact the way in which their identity is revealed (they just come in at the end of the episode to tell the audience, for no in-world reason, because I guess Moffat was bored and couldn't think of a way to reveal it naturally within the story). However, as an answer to a mystery, it is satisfying. The clues were there. Every time we saw River, we learned something new. It doesn't feel like they threw River in with no idea where the character was going or who they were to the Doctor (side note: and it's irrelevant whether they did or not; it doesn't matter if you make something up as you go, but you better be confident you can pull off the conclusion). It's worth noting that even in some scenes where we don't see River, we are being given information that will later contribute to a reveal - I think Series 6 up to and not including 'A Good Man Goes to War' are by far the best 'Doctor Who' has ever written an arc, and that's because there is a lot of information and all of it feels meticulously planned out. ... ^ This is Part 1. I have replied with Part 2 as apparently, I write too much.

[@ojwh1933]

... Part 2: [Edit: I wrote that before getting to the River section of your video, so I want to respond to a couple of things. I do agree that the reveal in question doesn't answer the mystery as it's presented. The context of River being Amy's daughter who was kidnapped for Doctor-assassin brainwashing gives us more information about River, but doesn't answer who they are to the Doctor by the time of 'Silence in the Library'. The series does answer those questions in 'Let's Kill Hitler' and 'The Wedding of River Song' (by telling the story of River falling in love with and marrying the Doctor), but those answers aren't satisfying because (in my opinion) they're being treated as rushed clear-up to get River back to being a fun side character, rather than the great opportunity to explore a story this mystery originally set out to do. In essence, the answer to the mystery is there, but it's almost as if the 'context' and 'reveal' sections of the story have been reversed. We spend an episode setting up River as an assassin out to kill the Doctor, raising the question from "Who is River?" to "How does River go from an assassin to caring about the Doctor?", only to have River quickly change their mind in the following episode, and later also marry the Doctor because the Doctor needed River to look into their eye. 'A Good Man Goes to War' establishes the answer to the long-running mystery as a character arc we're about to see, but that arc ends up feeling contrived and thus uncredible, and therefore so does the answer to the mystery. I will defend my previous point though by saying there are plenty of clues that point to River being Amy and Rory's daughter. People did figure it out, and watching it back, I feel silly for not being one of those people. There are misleads, of course, but watching Series 6, it does feel obvious in hindsight.] - I made the same point on UNIT being killed at the beginning of Episode 8, rather than the end of Episode 7. And I can say for a fact that casual viewers I know were confused by why the reveal of "Sutekh" was a big deal. I don't know that generating hype within hardcore fans rubs off on everyone else as may be intended to do. I think if you do it to a point where a casual viewer is none the wiser, it works fine (as long as you remember to satisfy those audiences a different way), but if you do it to a point where casual viewers can tell that they're missing something, they may well seek further context but I think the overriding feeling is confusion. I can definitely speak for myself in that department with other franchises. I've seen multiple stories now where my response was, "Huh.. I wish I cared." because I didn't have the relevant context to appreciate whatever feeling the story was trying to evoke in me. - Regarding going forward, I imagine I will love Season 2 as I did 1, but whereas I was tired of mysteries with lacking clues before, I shall now expect unsatisfying conclusions to those mysteries and finales in general. Forget mysteries - Doctor Who Is Bad At Finales. Even in those I like, I can't deny certain criticisms that always come up. I was taking it as almost a given that whoever "The One Who Waits" was, and whatever else happened in the finale, Ruby would save the day with suddenly unlocked deity powers at the end because 'Doctor Who' loves to set up clear threats and then render them redundant with a deus ex machina (ironically, this would have been less of a deus ex machina than others as Ruby was set up to have deity power from very early on). That didn't happen, but we did get whistle deus ex machina instead. On a completely different note, I love the Auryn. ❤😁

[@hazmat7949]

Funny the moment you mentioned not been given the answers my first thought was bbc sherlock. Great video with alot of fair points both ways

[@marcuswalters8093]

31:57 This isn't an open ended episode. It's an unfinished story. It's like if one ended The Three Bears with Goldilocks eating the porridge.

[@stevemc81]

I'm curious, were you a fan of Jonathan Creek? I think they play fair

[@ChristianSpliess]

Uh, „Life on Mars“ - the end of the second season stirred the fans up as well. And you need to watch „Ashes to Ashes“ to understand all it.

[@GeekMasterGames]

The Ruby Road mystery is like a really stupid version of the scene in the Matrix: "What's really going to bake your noodle later on is, would you have broken the vase if I hadn't said anything?"

[@DavidRYates-tk2tq]

31:51 ugh what's wrong with those people? 73 Yards is one of the best episodes ever made of this show, the best show ever made.

[@HuntingViolets]

I'm pretty happy when I figure out a mystery -- or if I don't. But, yeah, I should have the clues. That doesn't mean I should follow the detective when the detective goes to confirm for evidence -- going around with the photo of the murderer they have figured out to check if he's been seen in certain places, for instance -- if we go there, we are being told too early, and we should figure it out, or have the evidence to, without going on the confirmation tour. Sometimes people will say the author hasn't played fair because of things like this, but they are misunderstanding what playing fair is. (This is not really related, though.) Even if the pointing makes sense, no one would know what she meant and Carla would have named the baby she adopted (Carla is a foster mother, but Ruby appears to be her adopted daughter since she has her last name; you don't get your foster parent's last name, even if you don't have one) whatever she wanted.

[@queenofcookie3299]

I was thinking about one of my favorite mystery rug pulls in a point and click game i really love, only to realize they most certainly weren’t playing fair and then i thought about why that didn’t bother me at all and it made me realize that i don’t think any point and click games actually plays fair with their story’s and reveals and while that is likely because the suspension of disbelief is far greater for point and click adventures due to the weird niche they fill in the market and due to how bonkers these stories tend to have to be for their strange puzzles to work, it still made me wonder why that never bothered me before. It could be because i tend to look up the story before hand so even very ambiguous clues can be enough for my brain to be happy with how they teased the reveal because when you look at those clues knowing what they are trying to push you towards you don’t tend to think about how without that knowledge that clue was actually pretty useless.

[@istareatthesun]

Not just a great video about Doctor Who. A great video about writing. As Frank Black once sang: “It’s educational!”

[@SmartAlec86]

The mystery of Ruby Sunday could've been done better. But I like to think that the mystery isn't in who the mother is, but why they were having trouble discovering who is essentially a normal person. Everyone from the members of UNIT, the Doctor, all of Susan Twist's roles and even gods were assuming that Ruby must have a relation to someone significant. This assumption alone hid her mother's identify by preventing them from even comprehending the idea of Ruby's mother being a normal person. And because of the power these entities had, that inability to comprehend a normal person as being Ruby's mother became a force of nature itself. I suppose you could ask why they would assume something like that in the first place. And my answer is that it was a domino affect. And the first domino was simply coincidence. And I mean that literally. The episode that introduced Ruby Sunday was all about the power of coincidences. I agree that it's not "fair play"...yet. If I'm right about my deduction, it's really just a lucky guess and is just a fan theory. But technically, the mystery isn't done yet. Sure, the mystery of Ruby Sunday, though complete, still has several unanswered questions, I think that's because the mystery of Ruby Sunday is itself a red herring. You mentioned that where several red herrings in the mystery. But perhaps that's a misinterpretation, and the the reality is that what we thought was the mystery was itself a red herring and that there's a greater mystery at foot. We're assuming the mystery was solved. But the clues we were given may be to a completely different mystery. Perhaps we didn't imbue importance on Ruby because we expected it, but perhaps we imbued her with importance because we assumed the mystery was about her. I think that most of the other mysteries in Doctor Who are allowed to be unfair by the merit that the mysteries, though there, are usually not the main focus. I think the best example was of Harold Saxon/The Master. The mentions of Saxon were there, but they were so in the background that we didn't pay attention. But after the reveal, people would rewatch that Season and catch the mentions and see something actually happening. It gives it a sense of rewatchability. And with the other mysteries, they either give you enough information where it doesn't need a full Season to answer the question, or the intend to be unfair by design. The mysteries are more of a way to make the audience question what's going on rather than give them the ability to answer it. Would you argue that it's unfair that the show constantly mentions the Doctor's true name without actually revealing it? How the show for 60 years has been dangling that mystery in front of the audience? A mystery that likely will never be answered as lons as there's a shadow of a possibility that the show will continue? The moment we learn the Doctor's true name is the moment Doctor Who ends. No soft reboot like NuWho in 2005, and questionable possibility for a hard reboot or remake. I would argue that a Mystery and a Shocker would can be the same thing. For example, with River Song, the Shocker is who she is TO AMY. The Mystery is who she is TO THE DOCTOR. The Disney deal is basically Disney complaining that Doctor Who wasn't ranking #1 on Disney+. But among live action content, it's in the Top 10. And in England, where the majority of Doctor Who fans live, most of the episodes (with perhaps 1 or 2 exceptions) were consistently in the Top 20 most viewed shows in England. That is a big deal. The only reason why ratings may be lower when it comes to overall numbers is because it was Spring and people were going out and doing other things and enjoying the weather rather than watching TV. This is why EVERYTHING on TV had the same drop in viewership. And if the deal with Disney isn't renewed, that just means that Doctor Who will go to a different platform.

[@Guruc13]

An excellent explanation to a thoroughly complicated problem! ❤🎉 Thank you so much for your clear explanation!

[@timrob12]

What bothers me about the whole discourse is that the finale is automatically bad because the reveal was bad. And while the reveal was underwhelming indeed, there were a lot of things I enjoyed about the finale like Suthek's surprise return (and being voiced by the same actor from all those years ago), Mel falling under Sutekh's control and the reunion between Ruby and her mother as well as the truth about Susan Triad. It's okay to like something about an episode, but not the episode in it entirety.

[@tennenyt5311]

I think RTD has a problem of concluding series in a different way to Moffat. Moffat's conclusions were so so confusing and RTD were too simple imo

[@zoestaggs5605]

My big issue with the finale was simply that “even the God of death couldn’t see her” because…we think she’s special? Felt like a cop out. Give me a ridiculous pseudoscientific answer Doctor who goddamnit!

[@user-uv2cp1qd1j]

I fucking hate it when people make slurping or chewing sounds in videos.. Which is the reason ive been putting off watching this for two weeks

[@cleoarbel]

The concept of the season 14 conclusion was good. The execution was bad.

[@HuntingViolets]

Ruby's birth mother's resemblance to an older version of Jenny (even an older version of current Georgia Tennant, although Ruby's birth mother is only supposed to be 34) seemed like a last minute red herring (although maybe an unfortunate coincidence, since Ruby also resembles Georgia Tennant). Her name is also similar to one of Big Finish's companions.

[@DavidRYates-tk2tq]

"The reason it didn't work this time is a bit complicated" nah, not really, it didn't work this time because the SOLUTION made no sense. She was just an ordinary human woman? What?

[@Pooter-it4yg]

The classic era was generally more rompy but did have some good moments from the mystery/detective perspective - in short form. The modern era mysteries have been little more than catchphrases, objects and characters sprinkled around, followed by an info splurge at the last breathless minute before something else magically emerges to fix everything. None of the modern writers have been able to produce mysteries on a long term scale. Some have managed it in shorter form - eg the reveal of why the clockwork robots were fixated on Madame de Pompadour and the (scientifically questionable but passable) time differential between ends of the ship in Capaldi's Cyberman swansong. This could be a modern era game of cat and mouse between writers and hivelike cluehound viewers. But I think the modern writers either haven't read Todorov or archly deliberately subvert the genre. In particular, detective fiction works best when the protagonist can be believed to progressively suspect or understand more than they choose to explain. In the modern era there are too many examples of the Doctor remaining as oblivious as everyone else until the last minute wham bang. In addition, clue seeding tends to be rather lazy, relying on the notion that the Doctor's always tossed off random little thoughts and memories that don't have any relevance. As to playing fast and loose with genre, the show's always done it - it's really only ever been a pastiche melange of a few potent elements. The most memorable stories have been "the one where" eg: "Body enhancement technology meets vampirism", "Yeti meet aliens meet Eastern mysticism", "Invasion of the Bodysnatchers meets sentient plastic", "the grandfather paradox meets Daleks", "Devil worship meets aliens", "Dinosaurs meet misguided utopianism", "Egyptian mythology meets aliens", "Fu Manchu meets Sherlock Holmes meets time travel". What matters isn't what's done but how and the modern era has rarely managed to pull that off well. Partially perhaps because the modern run time constraints don't allow enough breathing space. And I'm sorry but Davies' Sutekh return was thin and puerile. The original referenced rich Egyptian mythology and Egyptology, a dash of astronomy, a parallel future and HG Wells, the instability of high explosives, the classic liar logic puzzle and the propagation speed of radio waves. The return had a kiddie's teatime word puzzle (Sue Tech), a spoon and a high tech dog lead. It was like watching children wearing dressing gowns with plastic lightsabers and Dogbacca battling Dad Vader on the planet Backyaad.

[@peterskrobola8753]

I haven’t watched the video yet. But in all seriousness, Invasion of the Dinosaurs is a really fun thriller with two pretty fundamental mysteries that have satisfying answers.

[@TianmingHu-e6f]

the latest season sucks, but honestly, there are several previous seasons quite good

[@sarafontanini7051]

so basically EVERY foster child whose parents aren't known could defeat sutekh there's "RUby doesn't need to be special to be important"and then there's "ruby could be replaced with literally any fucking rando and the whole mystery would still be the same" That's not smart, or subservive, it's PRETENTIOUS. As you say, if it wasn't for all this weird bullshit that doesn't get explained going on noone would even thing there WAS a mystery in the FIRST PLACE. and even IF doctor had a history of not having great mysteries (and I wouldn't really compare the repeated phrases of the post revival series, that's just a really cool and fun thing in my eyes, a unique method of setting up a myth arc, which was better with mr saxon and torchwood anyway since those ARE releavnt phrases used as set up for the main arc and not a random nonsense phrase we associate with the trope 'big bad') that doesn't excuse anything and certianly doesn't excuse all the nonse that doesn't add to the mystery and in hindsight just seems weird and random and nonsensical.

[@AdamGaffney96]

I really enjoyed this season as a whole to be honest. I agree and felt the exact same way where as soon as UNIT all died I was like "ah okay they're just gonna undo it". Then the whole universe died and I knew for certain. I was expecting some more personal stakes though, I thought they might have actually killed off Kate or Mel permanently for some long lasting stakes. However 73 Yards I am very surprised to hear the reaction to. I loved that episode, I thought it was an incredibly cool doctor-lite episode and I really like that its unclear what really happened or why the fae circle was even there. I also liked that it didnt fall into the trope of "crazy person sees invisible creature". The woman following existed and was real and visible to everyone, however nobody could actually approach her. Then of course Ruby uses the power for some good, plus it had some really interesting political commentary of course. Thats an episode I would absolutely rewatch independently of the season as a whole.

[@shaghayeghtehrani6285]

Thank god you are not doing multiply characters and extreme editing. We love you as you are man but that kind of videos even tho its super fun tends to drag so longer than it should. Anyways i love your content and your personality. More ppl should watch your channel

[@katy8887]

The thing that starts to annoy me, and I was disappointed to see in the new series, is when the mysteries are somehow involved in the climax of regular episodes. I don't mind dropping hints and tidbits here and there but I find it very annoying when say a monster goes "oh I'm not going to kill you because you have the thingymagig!" and then the series refuses to tell you what the thingymagig is until the end of the series. I like the individual episodes to feel nice and complete.

[@amaurapond]

To those who are upset about "how fast" the Doctor became attracted to Rogue, three words for you: Madame de Pompadour

[@robinthejumpy8296]

The monster in 'Listen' is IMPLIED to POSSIBLY be just in the doctor's mind. But it was never confirmed and there's still potential that it was real (in universe).

[@strawberrylotlizard]

Also have to correct you on the part about the episode listen, he didnt make up the hiding being, we know it was real but that one instance with clara wasnt one of the beings

[@cameronwebb5621]

Were Sherlock Holmes to kill a hotel room full of three people. He'd enter using a secret door in the hotel that he read about in a book ten years ago. He'd throw peanuts at one guy causing him to go into anaphylactic shock, as he had deduced from a dartboard with a picture of George Washington carver on it pinned to the wall that the man had a severe peanut allergy. The second man would then kill himself just according to plan as Sherlock had earlier deduced that him and the first man were homosexual lovers who couldn't live without eachother due to a faint scent of penis on each man's breath and a slight dilation of their pupils whenever they looked at each other. As for the third man, why Sherlock doesn't kill him at all. The third man removes his sunglasses and wig to reveal he actually WAS Sherlock the entire time. But Sherlock just entered through the Secret door and killed two people, how can there be two of him? The first Sherlock removes his mask to reveal he's actually Moriarty attempting to frame Sherlock for two murders. Sherlock however anticipated this, the two dead men stand up, they're undercover police officers, it was all a ruse. "But Sherlock!" Moriarty cries "That police officer blew his own head off, look at it, there's skull fragments on the wall, how is he fine now? How did you fake that?". Sherlock just winks at the screen, the end. 9:43

[@DrErikNefarious]

The solution to the mystery was that......there was no mystery? Then why did everyone say it was important? So confusing.