Thread: Doctor Who: Fall 2013 Board: Limbo / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=001198
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
Seeing as the old thread appears to have gone the way of Oblivion (and I think the Anniversary episode is coming up), here's the news that some videos of Patrick Troughton-era Doctor Who have been found in Nigeria, including that of "The web of fear".
Article in Guardian
[ 30. December 2014, 00:59: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
Amazing! I remember the yeti in the underground story from when it was first shown. It really freaked me out. The nearest impact I can compare it to is the "don't blink" angels - which was REALLY freaky.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
I see the DVDs are being rushed through production and will be out around the time of the 50th birthday, with episode 3 of The Web of Fear as a reconstruction featuring audio and still screenshots.
This is extraordinary news. If I had to make a list of Troughton stories I'd want to see recovered, I think only The Power of the Daleks would come higher on the list than these two. There are those that hail Enemy of the World as a particular treasure, because it features Troughton playing two very different roles. He really was an exceptional and subtle actor.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
If I had to make a list of Troughton stories I'd want to see recovered, I think only The Power of the Daleks would come higher on the list than these two.
I might have wished for The Macra Terror and/or Evil of the Daleks in addition to The Power. But yes, those two will do.
Posted by Ronald Binge (# 9002) on
:
Delighted, but have to wait for the DVDs to come out as iTunes in Ireland is an inferior product that doesn't do TV programmes. But hey I could buy and download the Peter Cushing "Dr. Who and the Daleks" movie ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
I can't cope with downloading and stuff (sad but true) so I've just pre-ordered the DVDs. Great news ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
!
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
Yes, Dafyd, The Macra Terror is an intriguing one. When late '60s tv was good, it was very very good. I'd really like to see it. And of course, Fury from the Deep, notoriously scary.
The BBC have put trailers for the new discoveries on youtube:
The Enemy of the World
The Web of Fear
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Oh. My. God.
Nine episodes of Troughton in one hit? NINE????
*falls off chair*
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
I have a strange compulsion to drop everything, fly to Africa and spend the next goodness knows how long travelling around from TV station to TV station, looking in dark corners and seeing how many more missing gems there are to be found....
Ship expedition, anyone?
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
This is wonderful, but I was really hoping for some more Hartnell. The story I most want to be found is The Myth Makers, where there are no episodes surviving - as far as we know.....
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
I have a strange compulsion to drop everything, fly to Africa and spend the next goodness knows how long travelling around from TV station to TV station, looking in dark corners and seeing how many more missing gems there are to be found....
Ship expedition, anyone?
There is actually a website where someone compiled all the known information about each copy of a serial that the BBC sent overseas, including the ones that went from country to country in Africa. Truly staggering stuff, and it gives you somewhere to pick up where the trail led circa early 1970s.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
I have a strange compulsion to drop everything, fly to Africa and spend the next goodness knows how long travelling around from TV station to TV station, looking in dark corners and seeing how many more missing gems there are to be found....
Ship expedition, anyone?
If you did, you might find yourelf pitted against Phillip Morris, the Indiana Jones of the film world. He's the person we have to thank for this.
I was going through some of Philip Sandifer's blog, Tardis Eruditorum, for his thoughts on the two "new" stories. I've always found him fascinating, and mostly agree with his assessments. His entries on these two back in 2011 were, of course, based on reconstructions. You can read them here (Enemy) and here (Web). He's now seen the rediscovered and restored episodes. The short version of what he thinks of them is that Enemy is the classic he believed it to be, and then some (largely thanks to Troughton); and Web perhaps isn't quite the turkey he thought it was.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
The BBC have put trailers for the new discoveries on youtube:
The Enemy of the World
The Web of Fear
I didn't actually look at the trailers initially, but the crispness and clarity of Enemy of the World, especially, is astonishing. Fantastic work on the remastering.
[ 12. October 2013, 11:36: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
and Web perhaps isn't quite the turkey he thought it was.
He doesn't think it's a turkey; just that he doesn't think it's one of the towering heights of Doctor Who and other people, whom he wants to argue with, do.
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
Hey. I haven't seen it since it was first shown on the Beeb. I can't comment on whether it was a "classic" or not. All I can say is that both my wife and I (independently) remember it as something that scared the shit out of us at the time. At the end of the day - THAT's what Dr Who should do. If more children were scared shitless on a regular basis, this country would be a far better place. (BTW - that's not my opinion - it's my daughter's firmly held and frequently articulated belief)
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
Okay, "turkey" is too strong (although I'm sure I remember Sandifer using the word somewhere). Interestingly, he mentions the theory of how some lost stories gained their classic status: either through the novelisations, or through nightmares. It seems to be a popular opinion that Terrance Dicks's novelisation of Web is pretty good (I don't think so: I think Dicks was much better when he was given the time and a sufficiently generous word count to indulge his imagination). But what seems to have contributed to Web's status is its nightmare factor - there are some key moments and images that are just brilliant, and haunt the imagination. Even when I watched the trailer, the scene where the foam/fungus is filling the mouth of the Underground tunnel is somehow scary. And there's the truly creepy sequence right at the beginning of episode 1 where the Yeti comes to life (accompanied by the same eerie piece of Bartok that Kubrick used in The Shining!).
I notice, by the way, that the DVD of Web will be released in February, three months after Enemy - and there's already speculation that this means they're commissioning an animated version of episode 3, rather than a reconstruction. ![[Yipee]](graemlins/spin.gif)
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
Web also has the advantage of having the first appearance of Lethbridge-Stewart (before he is promoted to Brigadier) which is enough to make the story "classic" for some. Like, ummm, me.
An animated version of the missing episode would be great. I just finished watching The Ice Warriors with two of the 6 episodes animated.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Sandifer has a bee in his bonnet about season 5 as a whole that pushes him into some exaggerated statements. I'm aware that this is a reaction to other people's statements about season 5 (how wonderful it is and how great 'bases under siege' are) - and in fact Sandifer himself sometimes discusses how fandom worked as it developed in the 1980s and no-one could actually see episodes for themselves - but I still think some views of season 5 on both sides are caricatures. Half of the claimed 'bases under siege' either don't involve a 'base' or don't involve a 'siege'.
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
...how some lost stories gained their classic status: either through the novelisations, or through nightmares.
Works for me.
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
Photos released from 50th anniversary show.
John Hurt in the Tardis!
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
Did anyone see the speculation going around on Facebook that the pictures of John Hurt in the TARDIS showed him wearing the Ninth Doctor's jacket over the Eighth Doctor's suit?
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
Actually now that I see the photos more closely that doesn't even seem like speculation or a theory, that pretty much seems to be just what he's wearing.
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
A link to the Guardian from that page brought up this which I found interesting. If the episode is already written (anyone know if they have filmed yet?) that is some scary stuff from Mark Gatiss. I mean Web of Fear would not have been found when it was written?
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Presumably he saw it first time round - is he old enough? Or else read the book. Or else is being economical with the actuality and is really referencing a bona fide Holmes story involving the Underground.
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
The other day Mr Marten and I watched 'The Aztecs' (Hartnell) which I'd recorded from Watch channel (currently showing a season of Who episodes and related interviews etc.). I don't recall seeing it first time round, although we did used to view every week, but what struck me were:
a) Barbara's spiritedness and strength of character
b) the Doctor's inventiveness and anger
c) the fact that a female character immediately fell in love with the Doctor (so - not a new feature of the stories ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
)
d) the Doctor's insistence that they should not interfere and rewrite history
e) the ham acting of the man playing Tlotoxl, which looked like he'd seen every bad production of 'Richard III'
An interesting and thoughtful story. Anyone else wallowing in Watch's season?
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
Oo, I didn't know Watch were screening old episodes. I must look out for them. The Aztecs is one of my favourite stories - obviously a bit slow by modern standards, but a brilliant script, nicely acted. I even like Tlotoxl, who really does ham it up like crazy. I think the character works because he's so obviously the opposite of everything that the High Priest (Tonila?) is - quiet, rational and dignified.
I treated myself to a DVD copy of The Tenth Planet last week. Hartnell's last story, and the Cybermen's first. I like it - it's very good in places - but I wouldn't call it great. It's a pity Hartnell isn't in it very much, because when he is, he's on excellent form, playing against Robert Beatty as General Cutler. Both characters assume they're in charge, and the scenes where they're competing to demand respect are excellent.
Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
I treated myself to a DVD copy of The Tenth Planet last week. Hartnell's last story, and the Cybermen's first. I like it - it's very good in places - but I wouldn't call it great. It's a pity Hartnell isn't in it very much, because when he is, he's on excellent form, playing against Robert Beatty as General Cutler. Both characters assume they're in charge, and the scenes where they're competing to demand respect are excellent.
It's just a shame about the Cybermen - Charles Hawtrey in silver bodystockings.
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Okay, "turkey" is too strong (although I'm sure I remember Sandifer using the word somewhere). Interestingly, he mentions the theory of how some lost stories gained their classic status: either through the novelisations, or through nightmares. It seems to be a popular opinion that Terrance Dicks's novelisation of Web is pretty good (I don't think so: I think Dicks was much better when he was given the time and a sufficiently generous word count to indulge his imagination). But what seems to have contributed to Web's status is its nightmare factor - there are some key moments and images that are just brilliant, and haunt the imagination. Even when I watched the trailer, the scene where the foam/fungus is filling the mouth of the Underground tunnel is somehow scary. And there's the truly creepy sequence right at the beginning of episode 1 where the Yeti comes to life (accompanied by the same eerie piece of Bartok that Kubrick used in The Shining!).
I notice, by the way, that the DVD of Web will be released in February, three months after Enemy - and there's already speculation that this means they're commissioning an animated version of episode 3, rather than a reconstruction.
As prepration for the 50th Anniversary edition, I've been reading the anniversary novels the BBC has bunged out. First Who books I've read since the 80's. Terrance Dicks wrote for 6 - Players - and it's excellent. As are the ones for 2 and 5. The others are okay, but I'm only up to 6 so I'll report back.
Tubbs
PS New, vintage Who. That's Christmas sorted.
Posted by Sparrow (# 2458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pine Marten:
....e) the ham acting of the man playing Tlotoxl, which looked like he'd seen every bad production of 'Richard III'...
BTW don't you think that Matt Smith would be an excellent choice to play Richard in any new dramatisation following the events of this year? He's the right age, and certainly got the hair, the nose and the jaw!
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
I have just been watching The Ice Warriors and The Krotons. I have watched one episode of the Krotons before - it was on television between Tom Baker and Peter Davison.
Conclusion: the Ice Warriors is by far the more competent script, the Ice Warriors are better villains, the actors are all excellent, and it's just all a little dull. The Krotons by contrast - the script's got holes a mile wide, the Krotons are actually not bad, some of the actors are just reciting their lines, and um... it's just a whole lot of fun. They should have got that scriptwriter in again - once he's got a bit of practice he might turn out quite good.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
The BBC website has a vote for the best Doctor Who villain feature at the moment. (There is obviously only one answer to that. And no, it's not the Weeping Angels.) What strikes me is the choice of villains for the shortlist. The Sontarans and the Yeti / Great Intelligence have not made the cut, unlike such new series classics as er... the Ood, those clockwork robots from Girl in the Fireplace, and the Judoon. (Certainly, the clockwork robots are brilliant one-off monsters - with the emphasis on one-off.) It could be worse I suppose - twenty-five years ago we might have got the Valeyard or the Vervoids.
Posted by The Great Gumby (# 10989) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
The BBC website has a vote for the best Doctor Who villain feature at the moment. (There is obviously only one answer to that. And no, it's not the Weeping Angels.) What strikes me is the choice of villains for the shortlist. The Sontarans and the Yeti / Great Intelligence have not made the cut, unlike such new series classics as er... the Ood, those clockwork robots from Girl in the Fireplace, and the Judoon. (Certainly, the clockwork robots are brilliant one-off monsters - with the emphasis on one-off.) It could be worse I suppose - twenty-five years ago we might have got the Valeyard or the Vervoids.
![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
I was under the impression that the Ood and the Judoon, while both being used as "Special Guest Monster" on a regular basis, were actually good guys, just hampered by unfortunate alien quirks, such as looking creepy or being Vogonifically officious in doing their duty. If they're being described as villains, that's even more wrong than the total absence of any monster that hasn't appeared in NuWho. Presumably the Sontarans don't make the cut because they're officially potato-headed comic relief now.
Still, at least they didn't include the bloody Slitheen.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
The BBC website has a vote for the best Doctor Who villain feature at the moment. (There is obviously only one answer to that. And no, it's not the Weeping Angels.)
Well, what is the "obvious" answer? I'm hesitating between three. The Daleks or the Master if we're thinking across all the decades, and the Silence were quite creepy in the new series. The Weeping Angels could have had it but lost the plot in later episodes. To win the accolade it needs to be a long-term enemy rather than a one-off.
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
Photos released from 50th anniversary show.
John Hurt in the Tardis!
He seems to had a good rummage through the Doctor's old wardrobe. Is that 9's leather jacket?!
Did anyone else spot Kate Stewart, daughter of the Brigader in the background?!
Tubbs
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Well, what is the "obvious" answer? I'm hesitating between three. The Daleks or the Master if we're thinking across all the decades, and the Silence were quite creepy in the new series. The Weeping Angels could have had it but lost the plot in later episodes. To win the accolade it needs to be a long-term enemy rather than a one-off.
The Silence have only appeared in two stories, both in the same season. They don't count. Besides, they're obviously stand-ins because Moffat didn't want to use the Weeping Angels again.
As for the Master: evil masterminds who are villainous counterparts to the hero are not exactly unique or even original to Doctor Who. The best Master story - Survival - is partly about what a rubbish villain he is. I don't think the Weeping Angels have lost the plot, but they're still only runners-up. It has to be the daleks. How could it not be the daleks?
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Whether or not it's the Daleks depends very much on who's writing them.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
Did anyone else spot Kate Stewart, daughter of the Brigader in the background?!
I'd forgotten who Jemma Redgrave would be playing.
Posted by Hawk (# 14289) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
and Web perhaps isn't quite the turkey he thought it was.
He doesn't think it's a turkey; just that he doesn't think it's one of the towering heights of Doctor Who and other people, whom he wants to argue with, do.
0:41 in the above youtube link:
"London, in fact the whole of England might be completely wiped out!"
"...Oh dear."
Anyone think this episode might have been lost on purpose?
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
I went into Waterstone's to buy my nephew a book token, and was sidetracked by a very low down display of Dr Who books. Only 2 from the 50th set, plus Douglas Adam's Shada, but also "Summer Falls" bound with a detective story "by" Melody, and a Victorian melodrama "by" someone else, with linking parts "by" or about Amelia Williams, and what look like hints.
Didn't buy it - going to look for e-versions. Summer wasn't that marvellous.
Spent too much on the latest science collaboration by Pratchett et al, and the folk thing about Discworld as well.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Whether or not it's the Daleks depends very much on who's writing them.
I doubt that there are any monsters that are proof against bad writers.
Posted by Rev per Minute (# 69) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
I doubt that there are any monsters that are proof against bad writers.
Well, there's the Cybermen, but only if the writers don't have gold pens. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
I've gone back to watching 'classic' Doctor Who, namely the first 2 seasons of the Pertwee era.
I'm up to The Claws of Axos and it's just flat out strange. I know the creatures are supposed to be strange, but that doesn't necessarily mean the editing and dialogue should be so peculiar as well.
I did thoroughly enjoy The Mind of Evil. And I was impressed by Inferno too. Nothing like watching the world be destroyed to create a sense of doom.
Posted by Hugal (# 2734) on
:
A Tom Bakerite here. The earlier Docs are brilliant but still stick to him. I am not alone as 'The Talons of Weng Chiang' and 'City of Death' regularly vie for the top spot in 'best of the classic series' polls.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
I saw the first episode of The Enemy of the World the other evening, courtesy of a friend who bought the iTunes version. It was utterly superb. In fact I think I'd say it's the best single Troughton episode I've ever seen. What surprised me most (and made me smile) is how flirty the Doctor is with Astrid! I'm really very much looking forward to the DVD release.
I assume we've all seen the trailer for The Day of the Doctor? Superb montage - it's the sort of thing I find myself wanting to watch one frame at a time!
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
I assume we've all seen the trailer for The Day of the Doctor? Superb montage - it's the sort of thing I find myself wanting to watch one frame at a time!
I've been playing the "Match the sonic screwdriver to the Doctor" game with that.
Posted by HCH (# 14313) on
:
Is there any word as to what will be done when we lose the 12th Doctor? Presumably that's the end of the character, but one notion might be to bring back the Doctor's daughter and have her inherit the Tardis. What do you think?
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
They'll just pull some elaborate timey-wimey trick to break the 'rules'. I mean, in recent years Doctor Who finales are absolutely FULL of that kind of stuff.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by HCH:
Is there any word as to what will be done when we lose the 12th Doctor? Presumably that's the end of the character, but one notion might be to bring back the Doctor's daughter and have her inherit the Tardis. What do you think?
The "twelve regenerations" thing (by which we get thirteen Doctors, not twelve) was a plot device used by Robert Holmes in The Deadly Assassin to explain why the Master couldn't regenerate out of his decayed form. Holmes seemed to enjoy stuff like that - potentially big ideas thrown away on details of plot that could have been solved any number of ways. (Either that or - my theory - he only did it to annoy the Doctor Who Appreciation Society, who were very annoyed by The Deadly Assassin.)
We won't lose the Doctor. It'll be re-fudged somehow. After all, the Master seems to have been blessed with a new regeneration cycle. One of the most popular ideas in fandom is that among Time Lords, twelve regenerations is an imposed limit rather than a natural one - so with the Time Lords gone ....
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Thanks to a wonderful friend, who gave me Lost in Time, I am currently on a Hartnell tour, working my way through the DVDs (where they exist) and the excellent audio reconstructions (where the pictures have been lost). Those early episodes are wonderful, with a haunting quality that gets lost later on. However, the word on the time stream is that there are a lot more missing episodes due to be unveiled soon; the nine that have just come out are not the end.
In addition, I'm going to the big celebration at Excel on 24th November. Will any other Shipmates be there?
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
That's my birthday! Raise a screwdriver for me, willya?
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
Robert Armin - nope, but I'll no doubt be watching the attendees on the Friday and enjoying their costumes. That was the joy of Comicon last weekend. (The Fox @ Excel is near enough to w*rk to be a w*rk pub)
You can buy a Dr Who wallet from the BBC shop, amongst other things. It has all the Doctors' faces printed on it. (There is a physical shop inside the Media Café at BBC Centre at Portland Place, which is opened when there's an audience there to be enticed.) The Tardis and a Dalek were there for ages too, and everyone seemed to go for the compulsory photograph in front of them, but I can't remember if they were still there when I was there on Monday.
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
We won't lose the Doctor. It'll be re-fudged somehow. After all, the Master seems to have been blessed with a new regeneration cycle. One of the most popular ideas in fandom is that among Time Lords, twelve regenerations is an imposed limit rather than a natural one - so with the Time Lords gone ....
If there's no limit with the Time Lords gone how could River Snog give the Doctor ALL hers.
But it doesn't matter. Even in the classic days Who was full of plot holes, inconsistencies and contradictions. That is the nature of the Whoniverse.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Heck, it even took several years until all the writers were completely on board with the notion that he was an alien.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
If there's no limit with the Time Lords gone how could River Snog give the Doctor ALL hers.
True. I don't like the unlimited concept, but even back in classic Who (the Trial season) it was expressly stated that the High Council of the Time Lords could bestow a new regeneration cycle on a Time Lord if they so chose. Perhaps that will be one of the reveals of the forthcoming anniversary story. Maybe the mysterious Hurt Doctor was actually the regeneration after Paul McGann and maybe he was given a new cycle of lives, so that the New Who Doctors are New 1, 2 & 3 of the new cycle of 13 (or more since there were still a few lives left in the old cycle unless the Tennant Doctor burned a few with his partial regeneration tricks).
[ 02. November 2013, 17:47: Message edited by: Hedgehog ]
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Still trawling through the Pertwee Years...
Day of the Daleks. Basically a very interesting 'consequences of time travel' story somewhat derailed by the producers' late decision that it needed to have Daleks in it.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Day of the Daleks. Basically a very interesting 'consequences of time travel' story somewhat derailed by the producers' late decision that it needed to have Daleks in it.
I'm not entirely sure about that. Terminator opens with some model shots to show just how awful the future is; but I don't think the Doctor Who budget would have stretched to that. The easiest way for Doctor Who to signal that the future is awful is daleks.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Day of the Daleks. Basically a very interesting 'consequences of time travel' story somewhat derailed by the producers' late decision that it needed to have Daleks in it.
I'm not entirely sure about that. Terminator opens with some model shots to show just how awful the future is; but I don't think the Doctor Who budget would have stretched to that. The easiest way for Doctor Who to signal that the future is awful is daleks.
Well, the original script, as I understand it, would have had notions of military dictatorship.
Having Daleks is all very well, but they don't actually DO anything. I think it was Philip Sandifer's blog that pointed out they only average 2.5 minutes per episode. They're simply not in it enough to be a key element of the plot. And all the evidence indicates that they're only in the story because they wanted to be able to advertise Daleks as a gimmick to get people tuning into the new season.
The most useful thing the Daleks do is be a handy source of time travel technology to steal.
As a story I think it's quite good. As a Dalek story it's pretty hopeless.
[ 09. November 2013, 11:00: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
As a story I think it's quite good. As a Dalek story it's pretty hopeless.
I agree it's not really a dalek story, any more than The Big Bang is a dalek story. Yes, it has daleks in the title so to that extent it's guilty of misleading advertising. But I think daleks make a more effective future that must be averted at all costs than a generic military dictatorship would do.
It's much better to be a good story and a hopeless dalek story than the other way around.
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
There's a new advert for the anniversary special.
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
Ok, booked two tickets to the local flea-pit for the 50th anniversary in 3D. One ticket for me and one for my hubsand (he needs to catch up on his sleep )
Obviously I will also be recording it at home so that I can watch it again when I get back in case the cinema was noisy and I missed something. (I feel I am getting quite old now as I think Matt Smith, glorious as he is, speaks too fast.)
Now the only question is....to costume or not?
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
I watched "The Indian Doctor" this week, and, would you believe it, they managed to squeeze, in a plot which operated in ignorance of the workings of the NHS, the NCB, and the planning process for road building, a 50th anniversary reference to Dr Who! (Well, given the period, it wasn't to the 50th, but the beginning.) It was the only reference to the world outside so it stuck out like a sore thumb. Not even the two lads indulging in a bit of sabotage led to a reference to Plaid Cymru.
(And they called the spoil heaps, slag heaps, and they were all beautifully controlled and grassed over.)
[ 10. November 2013, 12:05: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posted by Eigon (# 4917) on
:
tessaB - yes, I think Matt Smith speaks too fast, too. And of course you should wear costume to the cinema!
A few weeks ago, there was a Doctor Who day organised by BBC Radio Hereford and Worcester, and I went wearing a dark blue silk jumpsuit with a heavy duty belt, from which dangled my sonic screwdrivers - I said I was a Tardis engineer! It was very much aimed at children, with lots of colouring in type activities and so on, but I had great fun.
Posted by Ronald Binge (# 9002) on
:
I'm saying nothing, but you really should watch this:
http://www.doctorwho.tv/whats-new/video/mini-episode-the-night-of-the-doctor
You may now squee.
Posted by Eigon (# 4917) on
:
Definitely!
Stephen Moffat has done something awesome here!
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
Squeee.
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on
:
I hope so. (I can't be the only person who's occassionally sat there after a Doctor Who episode moaning that all the good bits were in the trailer ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
).
Tubbs
Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Eigon:
Definitely!
Stephen Moffat has done something awesome here!
Indeed.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ronald Binge:
I'm saying nothing, but you really should watch this:
http://www.doctorwho.tv/whats-new/video/mini-episode-the-night-of-the-doctor
You may now squee.
What? What?? ... and ... I mean ... WHAT???
Oh, and ... squeeeeee!
[ 14. November 2013, 16:57: Message edited by: Adeodatus ]
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Ooh. Oh. I'm speechless.
(ETA for the sake of any fans with bandwidth concerns, this runs for 7 minutes.)
More please!!
[ 14. November 2013, 17:22: Message edited by: Ariel ]
Posted by Sparrow (# 2458) on
:
Fantastic!
Posted by Sparrow (# 2458) on
:
Missed the edit window.
But ... if John Hurt comes between McGann and Eccleston, then surely that makes Capaldi no. 13, which means that Capaldi has to be the last Doctor?
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
There is no last. For the Doctor is immortal and defieth Time itself and cometh back from the very dead many times.
Regeneration looks awfully painful these days, with all those bursts of blinding light and figures writhing. It used to be a much more discreet process.
Posted by Kitten (# 1179) on
:
Wow
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sparrow:
Missed the edit window.
But ... if John Hurt comes between McGann and Eccleston, then surely that makes Capaldi no. 13, which means that Capaldi has to be the last Doctor?
"Could be", there's no doubt they coud find loopholes (and indeed have hinted at them, note in the short another 'rule' is edged towards being a mere convention).
Personally I'd hate for them to close and wrap it up completely. Though perhaps a rest after the 13th Dr would be appropriate.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
Though perhaps a rest after the 13th Dr would be appropriate.
They had rests after the 7th and 8th. That was quite enough to be getting along with.
Posted by Ariston (# 10894) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
quote:
Originally posted by Sparrow:
Missed the edit window.
But ... if John Hurt comes between McGann and Eccleston, then surely that makes Capaldi no. 13, which means that Capaldi has to be the last Doctor?
"Could be", there's no doubt they coud find loopholes (and indeed have hinted at them, note in the short another 'rule' is edged towards being a mere convention).
Personally I'd hate for them to close and wrap it up completely. Though perhaps a rest after the 13th Dr would be appropriate.
And how many times has the Master been killed off once and for all? How many sets of new regenerations has he mysteriously been able to con his way into getting? How much of the joy of Who is watching them find new ways to make a deus ex machina look plausible?
I about audibly squeed when I saw the credits. McGann would have been great if he'd only had a proper screenwriting team behind him. Yes, the episode was heavy on the "wise figure telling the Doctor who he is, complete with overacting," but somehow, it worked.
Also, great reference to a past, classic episode. Luv.
ETA, as I watch it again: "I'm a Doctor, but probably not the one you expected." So works on multiple levels.
[ 14. November 2013, 22:26: Message edited by: Ariston ]
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sparrow:
But ... if John Hurt comes between McGann and Eccleston, then surely that makes Capaldi no. 13, which means that Capaldi has to be the last Doctor?
Since, so far, I am batting 1.000, I will repeat what I said back on Nov. 2:
quote:
I don't like the unlimited concept, but even back in classic Who (the Trial season) it was expressly stated that the High Council of the Time Lords could bestow a new regeneration cycle on a Time Lord if they so chose. Perhaps that will be one of the reveals of the forthcoming anniversary story. Maybe the mysterious Hurt Doctor was actually the regeneration after Paul McGann and maybe he was given a new cycle of lives, so that the New Who Doctors are New 1, 2 & 3 of the new cycle of 13 (or more since there were still a few lives left in the old cycle unless the Tennant Doctor burned a few with his partial regeneration tricks).
Now that part of my speculation (okay, admittedly the most obvious part) seems true, I am feeling pretty good that the rest is true: the Doctor gets a new regeneration cycle so that the New Who Doctors are, in fact #1-3 (and soon 4) of the new regeneration cycle.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
The celebrations are kicking off - on BBC3 tonight, from 19.05 to 22.30, the first four of ten "Doctor Who: Greatest Monsters & Villains". Probably fairly predictable stuff, but I'll be watching just for fun.
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
There's a fairly major party happening in London next Saturday as part of this. I got the notification email and tried applying to get a mesge saying fully booked. So they went very very fast.
Posted by sophs (# 2296) on
:
I have facial blindness and watched the trailer thinking "ooh, that looks like 9's clothes, I wonder if 9 will be in this, how exciting!" I carried on thinks until the end credits came up...
It has now been pointed jot to me that his name was in the opening credits.
I feel very foolish...
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
It really is bigger on the inside.
In other news: A Radio Times poll shows that David Tennant as the most popular Doctor, with Matt Smith second. Tennant? I found him good at first, but he became irritating before he left. Smith hasn't irritated me yet. Better to leave on a high note.
The poll shows that there are people who do not remember the classic series voting. My top five would be- Troughton
- Tom Baker
- Smith
- Davison
- McCoy (acting better than scripts)
Radio Times list.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
There's a fairly major party happening in London next Saturday as part of this. I got the notification email and tried applying to get a mesge saying fully booked. So they went very very fast.
If you mean the official celebration that's been sold out for ages. I've got tickets for the Sunday and am going with a friend, and am hoping it will be really good. So far I'm optimistic; that mini adventure was awesome and completely unexpected. Both of which are qualities I want to see in abundance over the next few days (and which were sadly lacking in the rather dull program on the Science of Doctor Who a few nights ago).
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
The poll shows that there are people who do not remember the classic series voting. My top five would be- Troughton
- Tom Baker
- Smith
- Davison
- McCoy (acting better than scripts)
Radio Times list.
Largely in agreement with you balaam, but my list would be:
1) Hartnell
2) Troughton
3) Baker, T
4) Eccleston
5) Davison (and completely agree with you about McCoy)
[ 16. November 2013, 11:41: Message edited by: Robert Armin ]
Posted by Barefoot Friar (# 13100) on
:
1. Tennant
2. Smith
3. Baker (So many good stories, too many to list)
4. Davidson (Caves of Androzzani is my favorite, but there are others)
5. McCoy (although his scripts weren't good, his acting was)
[ 16. November 2013, 11:52: Message edited by: Barefoot Friar ]
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
So I just watched the mini-episode...
...That was bloody brilliant, wasn't it?
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Why do people think that Tom Baker was good in the role? I'm serious about asking this. My memory of him shortly after the regeneration was that he came across as a clown and the series went quite silly. I stopped watching it because of him (and the jellybabies and that annoying scarf). It felt as if it had all dumbed down, as it did with Colin Baker. My top five wouldn't feature either of the Bakers at all.
1. Tennant (he is ex-RSC, after all, and it shows)
2. Davison
3. Hartnell
4. Troughton
5. Eccleston. I didn't particularly like him, but he was good at what he did.
ETA I want to put McGann in there. I wish they'd given him a regular slot.
I used to be a Pertwee fan, but looking back on it think he was one of those actors who always played himself, whatever role he was in.
[ 16. November 2013, 12:01: Message edited by: Ariel ]
Posted by Ronald Binge (# 9002) on
:
My own top five Doctors would be:
1. Patrick Troughton. For me, the Original
2. Sylvester McCoy. Yes most of his first season was appalling but that wasn't due to his acting. The Curse of Fenric is probably the best serial in the Original Series.
3. David Tennant and 4. Matt Smith
with 5. Peter Davison.
I really would have loved to see more of Paul McGann though.
With the companions, I would go with
1. Sarah Jane Smith. Especially all of the second Tom Baker season.
2. Jamie McCrimmon. What a double act Troughton and Hines were. "Yes, it is a big one, Jamie".
3. Ace. Sophie Aldred and Sylvester McCoy worked fantastically well together.
4. I'll go a punt on Clara. Still want to see more of her but really loved the sparkyness of Oswin in Asylum of the Daleks.
5. River Song. Every straight male Doctor Who fan's ideal woman. At least when she's on.
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
No, there's an after show party, that only went up on the BBC tickets site on Friday morning. The e-mail went out at 11:12am. I tried applying at about 12:10pm, could get in to apply, but while I was completing the application form and sending it, those tickets went to "fully booked".
Chatting about the Excel event at work on Friday, saying it was Dr Who 50th anniversary next week, I'm not sure how close I'll get, because one of my colleagues is married to one of the actors on Midnight and he was going to check if she's going to be there signing autographs.
I wasn't that impressed by Tom Baker either, although I saw him at the Dr Who convention that must have been for the 20th anniversary. Someone I knew got in because he'd built his own full size Dalek - which was a bit unusual then. I think I managed to be part of the team manhandling it in (or opening all the doors).
I don't really remember William Hartnell or Patrick Troughton and John Pertwee is the first one I really remember.
Posted by Spawn (# 4867) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
ETA I want to put McGann in there. I wish they'd given him a regular slot.
McGann is my favourite Doctor - Fantastic radio series of the eighth Doctor and Lucie Miller.
2.Tom Baker
3. Ecclestone
4. Tenant
5. Davison.
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
Let's decide this once and for all.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
- Troughton
- Tom Baker
- Smith
- Davison
- McCoy (acting better than scripts)
Of McCoy's eleven scripts, I'd say six feature on any serious list of must see Doctor Who stories. Tom Baker, Tennant and Smith have more, but they have a lot more stories overall. McCoy's acting is excellent at some things, and a bit weak at others. He can't do shouty unless he's subverting it - there are a lot of Tennant scripts that McCoy just couldn't pull off. But then, you might say that reflects worse on the Tennant-era than on McCoy.
My favourites:
1. McCoy.
2. Troughton.
3. Smith.
4. Tennant.
5. Tom Baker.
(McGann would probably beat Tom Baker if he'd ever had a decent script of any length. Davison is burdened by a script editor who neither understands nor respects his character.)
Best companions:
1. Barbara.
2. Ace.
3. Leela.
4. Zoe.
5. Rory.
Posted by Yonatan (# 11091) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
So I just watched the mini-episode...
...That was bloody brilliant, wasn't it?
It certainly was, and perhaps more importantly, ensures that Paul McGann is and always will be a cannonical Dr. It's amazing how resistant some die-hard fans have been to this fact, in face of all the evidence. Usually because they don't like the reference to his being half human on his mother's side.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
It's also because of the line in Queer as Folk: "Paul McCann doesn't count," which was written by Russell T, of course.
My companion list would be:
1) Susan
2) Jamie
3) Sarah Jane
4) Martha
5) Turlough
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
As previously mentioned, I've been watching the old series. And to be honest I found Jamie rather annoying a lot of the time. Plus not half as sexy as Ben...
Barbara was definitely excellent. I liked Vicki quite a bit as well I think... and Zoe was fun... and Liz Shaw. Poor woman, she was basically considered to much of an 'equal' - smart and scientific - and so they decided to ditch for someone they could treat as ditzy. Although a couple of seasons in, they've made Jo rather more competent.
In modern times, Alex Kingston as River Song absolutely lights up the screen. One does not need to be a straight man to appreciate her!
[ 17. November 2013, 04:10: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
In modern times, Alex Kingston as River Song absolutely lights up the screen. One does not need to be a straight man to appreciate her!
No one doesn't. Though Billie Piper as Rose Tyler, Freema Agyeman as Martha Jones and Karen Gillan as Amy Pond are in the running for me as well.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
Alex Kingston is on my, um, list.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ronald Binge:
I'm saying nothing, but you really should watch this:
http://www.doctorwho.tv/whats-new/video/mini-episode-the-night-of-the-doctor
You may now squee.
Impressive - and the implication in the age of the final image about the duration of the Hurt Dr is clever. (Could they have chosen any other actor for that interpolation? With that name?)
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
In modern times, Alex Kingston as River Song absolutely lights up the screen. One does not need to be a straight man to appreciate her!
No one doesn't. Though Billie Piper as Rose Tyler, Freema Agyeman as Martha Jones and Karen Gillan as Amy Pond are in the running for me as well.
A companion is part of a double act, so you can only judge a companion as to how they react to the Doctor they are with. I think River Song and #10 is better than River Song and #11.
My favourite Companion/Doctor relationships have to be Romana2/#4 and Ace/#7 (despite poor script quality.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
My favourite Companion/Doctor relationships have to be Romana2/#4 and Ace/#7 (despite poor script quality.
Ace/McCoy have one or two poor scripts among the classics, and Romana / Baker have two classics among the duds.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Although a couple of seasons in, they've made Jo rather more competent.
Robert Holmes structured Jo's first story around Jo turning out to be more competent than she appears. Is there a more useful skill for a classic series companion to have than escapology?
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
My companion list would feature:
1) River Song. Scene-stealing, sophisticated, capable, confident, wonderful River. OK she's Amy Pond's daughter, but she can't help that.
2) Jack Harkness. Scene-stealing, sophisticated, capable, confident, lively and fun.
3) Tegan. Not everyone liked her but I thought she did the "trying to be tough but actually quite vulnerable" thing fairly well.
4) Wilf. A vote for the oldies - he was lovely, and capable in the role.
5) Turlough. What a pity we didn't see more of him. One of the more intriguing characters and a good actor as well.
[ 17. November 2013, 14:20: Message edited by: Ariel ]
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
In modern times, Alex Kingston as River Song absolutely lights up the screen. One does not need to be a straight man to appreciate her!
No one doesn't. Though Billie Piper as Rose Tyler, Freema Agyeman as Martha Jones and Karen Gillan as Amy Pond are in the running for me as well.
A companion is part of a double act, so you can only judge a companion as to how they react to the Doctor they are with.
Though perhaps this is a good guideline, it certainly is not required. And, no, this is not meant in a libidinous way.*
One can separate the two. Anthony Hopkins and Bob Hoskins did Othello. My brain still refuses to remember them together as Hopkins was horrid and Hoskins sublime.
Yes, the Doctor/companion relationship is more directly intertwined, but one can evaluate them somewhat separately.
* Well, not completely.
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
5) Turlough. What a pity we didn't see more of him. One of the more intriguing characters and a good actor as well.
He would definitely be in my top 5, such an interesting, unpredictable character. Actually, my list is similar to yours but I'd have Martha instead of Jack
[ 17. November 2013, 15:32: Message edited by: Heavenly Anarchist ]
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
Hm ... Doctors and companions. A lot depends, of course, on whom you remember and how much you know. For instance, the more I see of Troughton, the more I like him. But the more I know about Tom Baker (not his characterisation, but, say, his on-set behaviour towards the end of his time), the less I like him. Having said that, Tom Baker was the actor who made Doctor Who for me. In his first few years - under Hinchcliffe and Holmes - he was amazing. There's a line in one of the Wife In Space reviews where Sue says something like "He's daring us not to take this seriously" which says a lot about what he did with the part. There are many, many moments from, say, Ark in Space through to Seeds of Doom where he defines what fans mean when they say they wish the Doctor had more "gravitas" these days. (Look at his anger in Seeds - I don't think you get anything of that quality again till Smith's chilling performance in the "Colonel Run-Away" scene of A Good Man Goes to War.)
There's also the question of how the actor managed to work with the production team. Colin Baker had a lousy production team and, in my opinion, a pretty uninspiring companion, and he wasn't quite good enough to make something good of the part in spite of that. McCoy worked far better once Andrew Cartmel settled in as script editor than he did during his first few chaotic stories. Eccleston, I think, never seemed quite to feel at home with Davies's scripts, which is a pity because he's a great actor and Davies is a great writer. Davies's writing seems to fit David Tennant better than it does Eccleston.
And then we have Mr Smith. He's suffered from confusing story arcs and variable writing, and he still shines. There are moments in virtually every one of his stories where, for me, he's utterly magnetic. He's a subtle and generous actor, and easily wins my vote for "Doctor most likely to actually be 1200 years old" (Moffat said in an interview the other day that Smith was like "a young man assembled by old men, from memory").
I can only sum up by quoting that most amiable of companions, the Brigadier: "Splendid fellows - all of you!"
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
Companion list? That's tricky.
It has to start with (1) Sarah Jane. Always. People talk about their "first Doctor", but Sarah was my first companion and nobody else quite measured up.
(2) & (3) Barbara-and-Ian. Really, they should be just one. Barbara was different from every other companion. Ian was a perfect counterpoint. The early series didn't go in for so many jokes, but to hear Ian come up with a plan and ask to borrow Barbara's cardigan, only to have her complain "Again?" was brilliantly funny.
(4) Ace. Started out very, very rough, but her later stories are solid ("Ace, let me have some of that Nitro-9 that you aren't carrying!")
(5) Adric--No, just kidding! Actually, (5) would be Rory. Was there ever a more basically heroic companion than him?
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
Rory I didn't like as a companion, despite several times when Arthur Darvill acting everyone off screen, no mean feat with that cast. Darvill was great, Rory was irritating.
But what about Wilf? Why has no one mentioned Wilf?
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
But what about Wilf? Why has no one mentioned Wilf?
I mentioned Wilf. First post, top of this page. He was my 4th choice for companion.
Posted by The Great Gumby (# 10989) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
My companion list would feature:
1) River Song. Scene-stealing, sophisticated, capable, confident, wonderful River. OK she's Amy Pond's daughter, but she can't help that.
2) Jack Harkness. Scene-stealing, sophisticated, capable, confident, lively and fun.
Oh dear. We're not going to get on. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
I don't like to try to rank characters like this, because they all have their good points, depending on what you're looking for, and I think it takes a while to see how they stand the test of time, making all of NuWho fairly tricky to assess. But these two are both ridiculously over the top and written as too-perfect caricatures instead of rounded characters. I'd cheerfully see them both run over by an intergalactic spacebus, but they'd still somehow escape in some implausible way with a snappy one-liner.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
On a different note, BBC radio and Iplayer are broadcasting Big Finish again. Currently up, Protect and Survive, which appears to be a Seventh Doctor-lite drama with Ace. It seems to have a good reputation.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
Rory I didn't like as a companion, despite several times when Arthur Darvill acting everyone off screen, no mean feat with that cast. Darvill was great, Rory was irritating.
I liked Rory; Amy was the irritating one. Interesting to see that no one has included her in their list of favourites, even though Adric (often considered the most annoying companion ever) has had several votes.
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
Is everybody aware of this ?
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
I liked Rory; Amy was the irritating one. Interesting to see that no one has included her in their list of favourites, even though Adric (often considered the most annoying companion ever) has had several votes.
Amy is my number 7, after Liz at 6.
You did notice that the Adric vote was a joke?
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Most Annoying Companions
1. Peri
2. Amy
3. Adric
4. Rory
5. difficult choice... Jo, or Romana II?
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Most Annoying Companions
1. Peri
Otherwise known as "that annoying high-pitched background noise that affected the programme's soundtrack in the mid-80s".
(Not really Nicola Bryant's fault: even a good actress can only go so far when all the script requires her to do is whine and complain.)
Posted by Ronald Binge (# 9002) on
:
Most annoying companions: God this is so easy.
5. Susan. Starts off smart and mysterious, then ends up always on the brink of screaming.
4. Steven. Peter Purves' delivery couldn't be more wooden than a particularly boxy tea chest.
3. Leela. The one major misfire of the Philip Hinchcliffe era.
2. Both Romanas and K9. I restarted watching once they were gone.
Joint first: The one-two knockout punch of Peri and Mel. Nuff said.
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
Peri would definitely top my list of most annoying.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
An aside - as an addition to your celebrations on Saturday, you might like to eat Dr Who cupcakes from a Dalek cakestand, with all the other ephemera from Lakeland.
Make, Bake, Exterminate Their idea of a slogan, not mine! What are they planning to add to the recipes?
They currently have a competion - find and photograph a Dr Who enemy at a Lakeland shop and submit it to them via Twitter or Facebook. For adults. At Bluewater, the flipping angel was at the doorway, not hiding at all. Couldn't take my eyes off it!
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Most Annoying Companions
1. Peri
2. Amy
3. Adric
4. Rory
5. difficult choice... Jo, or Romana II?
Peri and Amy definitely. Adric annoyed me at the time but looks better when I rewatch old episodes. Rory I really liked. Apart from them, I think I'd want to add Ace and whoever Bonnie Langford played - but there must be others who have been blotted from my mind by the merciful passage of time.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
(Not really Nicola Bryant's fault: even a good actress can only go so far when all the script requires her to do is whine and complain.)
I often feel the same about Colin Baker (who, last I look, was well in the "lead" for least favorite Doctor over on the poll). He was saddled with poor scripts; ridiculous costume foisted on him by the producer; upper BBC management insisting that there be no violence in an adventure show; a script editor who didn't appear to actually like the show at all; etc. etc.
quote:
Originally posted by Ronald Binge:
Joint first: The one-two knockout punch of Peri and Mel. Nuff said.
Oh, right. And he was saddled with Peri and Mel.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
I'm not going to comment on the companions of seasons 10 onwards of the classic series until I've watched them again. So that leaves me with agreeing that Susan could be thoroughly annoying.
As previously mentioned, I'm not as in love with Jamie as many people either.
I don't think I've ever particularly disliked any of the companions on the new series. I can understand people not especially loving Amy, but if anyone annoyed me a little it was Rose. Not so much because of who she was but because she was of vital importance to the universe a bit too often.
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on
:
Bring back Ace ![[Axe murder]](graemlins/lovedrops.gif)
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Ace was commenting on the history of the programme programme last night. She's grown up well - any possibility of another spin off in the manner of Sarah-Jane would be good.
Colin Baker has not aged well. He clearly feels the same inside, but the mannerisms don't work well now. He wanted to dress rather like Ecclestone, apparently.
Ultimate Guide
I think I might be going to find Clara a bit irritating.
[ 19. November 2013, 08:19: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
Ace was commenting on the history of the programme programme last night. She's grown up well - any possibility of another spin off in the manner of Sarah-Jane would be good.
Apparently there were plans for Ace to appear on the Sarah Jane Adventures before Liz Sladen died.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
I rather enjoyed the "Ultimate Guide" last evening - a cut above average for this kind of show, I thought.
This week I've set myself the very enjoyable task of watching a story of each of the Doctors from my DVD collection. On the list are:
The Aztecs, The Invasion, The Daemons, Genesis of the Daleks, Kinda, Revelation of the Daleks, Ghost Light, The Night of the Doctor*, Father's Day**, The Impossible Planet/The Satan Pit*, The Snowmen***.
* Because it's the only McGann I've got access to!
** Odd choices, because I've recently seen both my favourite stories from Eccleston & Tennant - Dalek and Midnight.
*** Odd choice, but I think it's charming, and I like a bit of charm.
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Yonatan:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
So I just watched the mini-episode...
...That was bloody brilliant, wasn't it?
It certainly was, and perhaps more importantly, ensures that Paul McGann is and always will be a cannonical Dr. It's amazing how resistant some die-hard fans have been to this fact, in face of all the evidence. Usually because they don't like the reference to his being half human on his mother's side.
Sorry to go back a bit but I've been away for a few days and only just seen this little episode - and... oh wow, oh my, oh WOW ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
...I shouted at the screen lovely, lovely Paul McGann and lovely John Hurt
Nothing more to add. Carry on.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Hedgehog: quote:
I often feel the same about Colin Baker (who, last I look, was well in the "lead" for least favourite Doctor over on the poll). He was saddled with poor scripts; ridiculous costume foisted on him by the producer; upper BBC management insisting that there be no violence in an adventure show; a script editor who didn't appear to actually like the show at all; etc. etc.
At the time I remember feeling that both C Baker and McCoy were battling against the BBC, who wanted to close the show and were therefore trying to run it down. I hope I get the chance to ask them if they felt the same way, when I go to their panel on Sunday.
As for those who find Susan annoying, well, I know what you mean. At first she was brilliant; especially in the pilot episode of An Unearthly Child, where she is very unearthly indeed. Sadly the BBC decided to tone her character down from the original conception of someone who was super intelligent and super fit, but then had no idea of what to do with her, except have her run around and scream a lot. She is possibly the first victim in Who of death-by-script, but remains special to me for how wonderful she was at first, and should have been. Of all the characters from the past, she is the one I most want to see in Saturday's big show. (Given the number of times over the past few days that we've been shown Hartnell leaving her, but promising to return, I am hoping hard. Yet I've heard no rumours of her appearing, so I'm bracing myself for disappointment.)
Posted by ken (# 2460) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Most Annoying Companions
1. Peri
Otherwise known as "that annoying high-pitched background noise that affected the programme's soundtrack in the mid-80s".
(Not really Nicola Bryant's fault: even a good actress can only go so far when all the script requires her to do is whine and complain.)
Whine, complain, and flash her tits and teeth. While putting on a really dodgy American accent. I was a young man at the time, I didn't mind. Her character was much better than Mel. Though not as gorgeous as Nyssa.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
Whine, complain, and flash her tits and teeth. While putting on a really dodgy American accent. I was a young man at the time, I didn't mind. Her character was much better than Mel. Though not as gorgeous as Nyssa.
I'm a gay man - Nicola Bryant's breasts went right over my head.
(Now why am I getting a recollection of Peter Davison's regeneration scene ...?)
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Nicola Bryant's breasts went right over my head.
That is some image.
Another clip from the special on the One Show this evening for those who don't mind spoilers.
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
Back to Peri and Mel - I can see why the 6th Doctor is many people's least favourite with those companions. Plus the costume.
None of which was Colin Baker's fault.
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
For those in the UK without extensive DVD collections BBC4 are showing An Unearthly Child tonight. I dare say it will be on iplayer afterwards.
I'll be recording and using it in our Dr Who-fest over the weekend. The Roguelings have virtually nil experience of Old Who but really enjoyed the first two episodes of Genesis of the Daleks the other day. We will be finishing that off, watching Unearthly Child and some of the stuff that the BBC have been putting out this week. And we have the Five Doctors somewhere around.
Mrs Rogue is working tomorrow night (Friday) but as she doesn't like Dr Who at all it's our chance to get well stuck in. However, even she will be watching the Day of the Doctor on Saturday although she is disappointed that it won't include all eleven/twelve Doctors.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
An Adventure in Time and Space is some of the most moving TV I've seen in a long time. Warris Hussein and Verity Lambert are my new pin-up heroes. I want to meet them and tell them how much they have given me.
Posted by Roseofsharon (# 9657) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
An Adventure in Time and Space
I thought I saw Jean Marsh, or her doppelganger, in the crowd scene at Verity's leaving party - a non-speaking, uncredited character. Anyone else see her?
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
An Adventure in Time and Space is some of the most moving TV I've seen in a long time. Warris Hussein and Verity Lambert are my new pin-up heroes. I want to meet them and tell them how much they have given me.
That was brilliant. Absolutely ruddy brilliant! Perfect performances, great writing, and a nice little game of Spot the Companion. Actually, it would have been a lovely piece of drama even if it hadn't been about Doctor Who - a story about the magic of television programme making, and of a man, old before his time, struggling with change and loss. Beautiful.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Roseofsharon:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
An Adventure in Time and Space
I thought I saw Jean Marsh, or her doppelganger, in the crowd scene at Verity's leaving party - a non-speaking, uncredited character. Anyone else see her?
Yep. And William Russell - who played Ian Chesterton - playing the BBC commissionaire, too! I think I may have emitted a high pitched squeak at that point.
Posted by Ronald Binge (# 9002) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Most Annoying Companions
1. Peri
Otherwise known as "that annoying high-pitched background noise that affected the programme's soundtrack in the mid-80s".
(Not really Nicola Bryant's fault: even a good actress can only go so far when all the script requires her to do is whine and complain.)
Even though I despaired of Who during the Sixth/Peri full season, Colin and Nicola are really sound and thoroughly enjoy their twitter stuff. Having read the bio of JN-T it has become fairly obvious that the veering of tone during JN-T's tenure: the poles apart approach of Eric Saward and JN-T's on-off quality control had a lot to do with the multiple failures of Colin's time in the role.
[ 21. November 2013, 23:01: Message edited by: Ronald Binge ]
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
Saw Jean Marsh, but not William Russell!
I'll have to go and have another look.
M.
Posted by Alicïa (# 7668) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
An Adventure in Time and Space is some of the most moving TV I've seen in a long time. Warris Hussein and Verity Lambert are my new pin-up heroes. I want to meet them and tell them how much they have given me.
That was brilliant. Absolutely ruddy brilliant! Perfect performances, great writing, and a nice little game of Spot the Companion. Actually, it would have been a lovely piece of drama even if it hadn't been about Doctor Who - a story about the magic of television programme making, and of a man, old before his time, struggling with change and loss. Beautiful.
About to watch this on iPlayer today. It's what having a day off, the day before the 50th anniversary is all about.
In other news, looks like the big search engine is putting on a little celebratory doodle. googledoodle
see it first via australialand
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
Oh great, there goes the rest of my day!
(Is it really, really sad that I have no children or grandchildren, or indeed anybody else's children, to take but I'm still going to see it in 3D on the big screen tomorrow?)
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Stuck on the first O.
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by M.:
Saw Jean Marsh, but not William Russell!
I'll have to go and have another look.
M.
I spotted Jean Marsh but didn't realise it was William Russell until the extra bits after the credits when he was one of those reminiscing.
It was lovely, it made me laugh, and cry, and squeak when the Doctor looked across the control panels of the Tardis and there was Matt Smith! A beautiful touch...
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
An Adventure in Space and Time isn't on in Australia until Sunday night - after the 'encore' screening of the new episode at a sensible time (rather than the 6:50 am simulcast for those who can't wait, which may well be me due to the perils of the internet).
I must remember to watch The Name of the Doctor tomorrow. I kept it from the original broadcast because I felt I'd want to remind myself what was in it just before The Day of the Doctor turned up.
Posted by Ann (# 94) on
:
"I don't want to go ..."
Posted by Eigon (# 4917) on
:
What a wonderful piece of television that was - and I had a little sniffle when Matt Smith turned up at the console, too.
Wasn't it a love affair with the BBC Television Centre, too? All those shots of the building and the corridors before the BBC finally moved out.
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
I shall now wind you all up by saying I turned down a VIP pass (or three or four) to the Dr Who conference at Excel this afternoon. W*rk had taken a trip to the show and had the passes left over. I was offered one to go along and see what was on.
No fun costumes that I saw on my wanders past.
Posted by The Phantom Flan Flinger (# 8891) on
:
Seems as good a place as any to plug my latest blog Link
Posted by cattyish (# 7829) on
:
I really enjoyed An Adventure in Time and Space. Proper good drama with proper acting and a proper bit of emotional involvement.
Cattyish, trying not to spoil it.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Stumbling Pilgrim:
Oh great, there goes the rest of my day!
(Is it really, really sad that I have no children or grandchildren, or indeed anybody else's children, to take but I'm still going to see it in 3D on the big screen tomorrow?)
Not at all. I'm going to see it tomorrow, with another 54 yr old mate.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
Happy birthday, Doctor!
I watched An Adventure again yesterday, and it was even better than the first time. There are so many references to the world of Doctor Who in there, it would take ages to spot and list them all, and every one I noticed was a delight. One of the best of all was the opening scene - a police box on foggy Barnes Common. That's how the first novelisation, Doctor Who: in an Exciting Adevnture with the Daleks (later just Doctor Who and the Daleks) began.
Oh, and there are at least another two former companions in cameo roles.
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
Almost ready to veg out in front of the TV this evening. But first a meal of pasta with darlic bread. I have my jelly babies ready.
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
As a 52yr old woman I really shouldn't be this excited about going to the cinema!
But I am
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
Family trip out to see it in Cambridge this evening
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by tessaB:
As a 52yr old woman I really shouldn't be this excited about going to the cinema!
But I am
Yeah you should! ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Balaam: jelly babies! I knew I'd forgotten something. Sod tomorrow's sermon, I need to find jelly bablies...
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Someone remind me what time it all kicks off on TV please?
Posted by Firenze (# 619) on
:
10 to 8, following Strictly.
Clashes with dinner, so will record it.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Thanks. Will get a takeaway in beforehand.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Firenze:
10 to 8, following Strictly.
Clashes with dinner, so will record it.
Which means that if you want to recap "The Name of the Doctor" you need to start about 7pm ... and if you want to watch "The Night of the Doctor" too, about 10 to 7.
Not that anybody would be that fannish. No. Nobody I know would do that thing, nobody at all ...
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
I'm watching the Grand Prix qualifying session at the moment which is being delayed for rain. Will there be a knock-on effect on the schedule for the rest of the evening?
Posted by Firenze (# 619) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Rogue:
I'm watching the Grand Prix qualifying session at the moment which is being delayed for rain. Will there be a knock-on effect on the schedule for the rest of the evening?
Bound to be. The number of people who want to see murky pictures of a scalextric set in an what looks like an industrial estate in Wishaw as against monsters/time machines/exploding planets/pan-galactic war - no contest. I daresay they can bump the Dr Who episode into an afternoon slot in place of a rerun of 'Coast'.
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
Dr Who tube map for your delectation and delight.
Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on
:
A rare opportunity to read this thread without spoilers for the Americans.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Someone has flipping rung the phone! And with something that needed answering!
Like the scientist with the scarf!
Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on
:
Oh my.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Ooooooh...
Wonderful performance from John Hurt. If only he could have had his own series.
Posted by iamchristianhearmeroar (# 15483) on
:
How awesome was that?!
Posted by alienfromzog (# 5327) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
How awesome was that?!
Very awesome.
Posted by ArachnidinElmet (# 17346) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
Oh my.
Seconded
Posted by iamchristianhearmeroar (# 15483) on
:
Twelve times awesome, no thirteen times awesome!
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
Wow.
I was right to get the jelly babies.
Posted by Alicïa (# 7668) on
:
Wow+ and I think it is a smart move to bring back Galifrey.
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
I loved it. Even Mrs Rogue liked it. And the Roguelings are buzzing.
Posted by Gideon (# 17676) on
:
Fabulous! Funny, thrilling, little bit sad but uplifting. Absolutely loved it.
Posted by Kitten (# 1179) on
:
Loved it
Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Ooooooh...
Wonderful performance from John Hurt. If only he could have had his own series.
He still could!
Posted by Ikkyu (# 15207) on
:
My 9 year's old daughter thinks is the best she has seen.
I also loved it.
Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on
:
Tom Baker, sigh, weep.
Billy Piper very Dark very well done.
Doctors ...... funny, sad, clever.
Pyx_e, slightly overcome.
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
Just back from the cinema and still bouncing off the walls a bit! Trying to avoid spoilers, but a truly awesome climax - and an interesting new spin on 'reverse the polarity'. And I only ducked a few times - not as many times as I punched the air and whooped with delight!
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Having caught up, I think that was a thoroughly honourable piece. Respect due.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
John Hurt had the best lines, I think. And Billie Piper did sinister really well. Loved the in-jokes, even I got some of them.
Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on
:
<Spoilers, although they happened earlier in the thread>
It was great. To not turn the occasion into an drawn out pompous self congratulations but instead to do a major retcon and wittily play off the multiple doctors made this a memorable episode.
So many questions.
How does the Gallifrey retcon affect "The End of Time" episode they reran afterwards. What happened to the Time Lords and the Master by the retcon? Do they fall under the "split time streams" that affected the John Hurt Dr Who and remain unchanged? Do they still happen? Does the painting become Kandor?
[ 23. November 2013, 20:51: Message edited by: Palimpsest ]
Posted by Yonatan (# 11091) on
:
Loved it. Good in jokes, fine acting - especially from John Hurt, and a nice bringing together of all the Doctors at the end.
"Never cruel nor cowardly. Never give up, never give in."
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
I'm not a Whovian, or whatever the term is, but does anyone know whether the 1946 Powell and Pressburger film A Matter of Life and Death was at all an influence on the original concept of Doctor Who? I'm thinking in particular of the character of the medic, played by Roger Livesey, whom we first see observing the village through a camera obscura in a pose rather like the Doctor at the controls of the Tardis, and the (very British) way that the everday and the extraordinary are blended.
[ 23. November 2013, 20:54: Message edited by: Albertus ]
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
Just got back from the cinema. Loved the interaction between the Doctors and all the in jokes. David Tennant typecast as a lothario was funny, as was the banter between him and Smith's Doctor. Clara was good and reminded me of Donna in challenging the Doctor's conscience, though a more gentler version.
Posted by Jammy Dodger (# 17872) on
:
Had to watch at home rather than cinema but loved it all the same. Great fun and very clever. Some nice touches.
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
The party afterwards (UK) was a complete disaster but The Five(ish) Doctors was very funny.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
I enjoyed that. It was a suitable celebration of the 50th anniversary, which was the least it had to be. And it was a whole lot of fun as well, which was cool. Loved the interaction between the doctors, and the idea of "cup-a-soup".
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
Just loved it!!!
I admit I was a bit worried that it wouldn't live up to the hype but oh my word it lived up and then some.
Happy, happy tessaB
Posted by Yonatan (# 11091) on
:
Loved it. Good in jokes, fine acting - especially from John Hurt, and a nice bringing together of all the Doctors at the end.
"Never cruel nor cowardly. Never give up, never give in."
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
Albertus, I'm not sure about direct influences (it's too many years since I saw A Matter of Life and Death) but I'd say it stands in the same tradition of British fantasy that includes such things as Narnia and Gormenghast - eccentric, charming, and scary, with a love of the English language and strong narrative. (I'm not sure I would quite include Tolkien in the same tradition - I think he was trying to do something different and more serious - but the Shire is very close.)
Tonight's episode was just beautiful. A bit messy in places, sure, but it was everything an anniversary story should be - above all, it was a celebration. I whooped when the Curator appeared, laughed at Ten and the rabbit, and was enthralled by every moment that John Hurt was on screen.
Favourite quote:
"Allons-y!"
"Geronimo!"
"Oh for God's sake...".
Posted by art dunce (# 9258) on
:
Loved it. So 11 will die on Trenzalore and 12 will come from Hurt's 8.5 regeneration?
Son slightly disappointed since so much was made of Hurt being a warrior and he was hoping for a bit more of the dark days on Gallifrey and a little less chit chat in London.
Excited to see where this goes.
[ 23. November 2013, 22:36: Message edited by: art dunce ]
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
That was very satisfying. I was afraid when I heard that Rose would be included, but the way it was done was perfect and Billie Piper did herself proud. I in her general direction.
And Tennant and Smith should be put in a show together.
The story and dialogue were superb. I love a special with many quotable lines. Right now, I am going with "It's a scientific instrument, not a water pistol!" But I am sure I will quote other points as time goes on (the rabbit warning scene, for example).
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
<Spoilers, although they happened earlier in the thread>
[edit]
How does the Gallifrey retcon affect "The End of Time" episode they reran afterwards. What happened to the Time Lords and the Master by the retcon? Do they fall under the "split time streams" that affected the John Hurt Dr Who and remain unchanged? Do they still happen? Does the painting become Kandor?
The general (or whatever) mentioned that the High Council was in session. My guess is that the events from "The End of Time" were happening about the same time as this episode. The High Council there believed that Gallifrey was falling to the Daleks, just as it is doing in this episode. They use their stratagem to bring Gallifrey to Earth, but 10th frustrates the plan. That probably happened, ohhhhhh, about 1.278238 minutes (more or less) prior to the "moment in time" that Gallifrey is removed in this episode.
So, yeah, it happened. No retcon needed.
Posted by The Revolutionist (# 4578) on
:
Fantastic! There were a few elements that didn't quite cohere and the Zygons kind of got forgotten, but it was great overall and nicely gives the show a new direction, moving on from the Doctor as the guilty-ridden "last of the Time Lords".
It also neatly opens the way for the return of the Master and the villainous High Council at some future point...
I went to a cinema showing, but it was a bit of a nightmare though. The projector wasn't working and it started around 40 minutes late, and only in 2D rather than 3D. It was also badly handled by the staff, who were less than understanding about why the screenful of Doctor Who fans were so upset, unfortunately. Rather marred the experience, but loved the actual episode when we got to watch it.
Posted by PaulBC (# 13712) on
:
Just saw the program on the 1st Doctor a.k.a.
William Hartnell left me a bit weepy. I remember seeing Dr.Who when it first aired in Canada . It was scarey, the theme and the Daleks. They were the first baddies I remember.
Looking back at how they did the opening with 1 camera shooting into another, the way mod theme it was & is a great show. And some of its villens seem to show up on other shows under different names , cyberermen become Star Trek's Borg, another charecter looks like the Vogon from "A Hitch hikers Guide to the Universe " . Thank you BBC
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
What I can't believe, given an episode that was ostensibly about the Time War, was how hilarious it was.
Honestly, for a large part of the first two-thirds I was positively shrieking with laughter. Most of David Tennant's solo segment (which did a lovely job of filling in some implied material from his own run), and then Tennant and Smith having a go at each other, and then Hurt having a go at both Tennant and Smith...
"what you do in the privacy of your own regeneration is your business" ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
Posted by Og: Thread Killer (# 3200) on
:
Spoilers
The best bit was the rabbit.
Anyways, it was nice to see them get rid of the major bit of angst that was placed in the show in order to make it appeal to modern audiences and bring hope back as a major force in why the Doctor does what he does.
Yes you did x. Do we need to spend every series arc talking about that x? Well, not anymore it seems.
I'm beginning to hope for this show.
I'm slightly disappointed that accent wasn't Scottish.
Posted by Kaplan Corday (# 16119) on
:
I am not into this at all, but my wife is.
It's a bit like living with a JW or a Scientologist.
She and our eleven year-old grandson (another cult member) are just leaving (Sunday afternoon here)for the cinema, she dressed as a blue telephone box, and he with a red fez.
Bah, humbug!
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
Holy crap, that was-- Holy crap. ![[Tear]](graemlins/tear.gif)
Adeodatus, will you please say something wise and erudite? I'm stuck right now.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
And Tennant and Smith should be put in a show together.
Don't they have wonderful chemistry?
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
Twelve times awesome, no thirteen times awesome!
Yeah, how lovely was that? (For those who haven't seen it yet, take care not to miss anything at all during the final battle scene)
[ 24. November 2013, 07:27: Message edited by: Stumbling Pilgrim ]
Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on
:
I'm now wondering if they will sell a new model of the sonic screwdriver toy as used by the John Hurt Doctor.
[ 24. November 2013, 07:31: Message edited by: Palimpsest ]
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
And Tennant and Smith should be put in a show together.
Don't they have wonderful chemistry?
I said that to my other half even before it started, while they were doing the introduction-to-how-3D-works bit. They need a series - don't care what it's about, I'll watch it!
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
Did anyone play the entire Google Doodle? I started when it first appeared but had to leave. Now it is gone.
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
Google is your friend
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
I had no idea that was playable thing until now.
Posted by Yonatan (# 11091) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
I'm now wondering if they will sell a new model of the sonic screwdriver toy as used by the John Hurt Doctor.
My thoughts exactly. For my nephews of course!
Posted by Yonatan (# 11091) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by art dunce:
Loved it. So 11 will die on Trenzalore and 12 will come from Hurt's 8.5 regeneration?
Interesting theory, but I suspect Hurt was regenerating into Christopher Eccelstone and Moffat was giving the fans all the regenerations to view and linking that episode to the first CE one where he checks himself in the mirror.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Don't play the doodle in IE - it works in Firefox and Chrome (though very fast in the latter), but invents extra Daleks and platforms that foul up level 2 in IE.
And I've been all through several times! Losing a great many regenerations in the graveyard.
I've often felt cheated by Moffat's story arcs and red herrings, but this held together properly and satisfactorily. The person I watched with, who has been getting to a state where he would rather not watch, thought it was good, too.
I haven't watched the party yet - the bit after the programme drawing attention to it seemed quite out of kilter with the story. I wanted quiet serious time after it.
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
Ah, great, great! The relief! I loved it. We haven't been able to watch it again yet but will, no doubt, this afternoon. And yes, we had to watch the Name of the Doctor and the Night of the Doctor beforehand....
I had seen the rabbit scene earlier in the day for some reason but the rabbit wasn't right - too big and domestic, not a wild one. I shouldn't worry about that, should I?
We didn't think to get jellybabies, but we did have Dr. Whoumous with Face of Bo bread, Salamander Slices and Donna kebabs to eat while watching it!
M.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
My thought about the rabbit entirely. It was obviously a fake!
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
Don't play the doodle in IE - it works in Firefox and Chrome (though very fast in the latter), but invents extra Daleks and platforms that foul up level 2 in IE.
Dn't try playing it on your mobile or in Opera either. I couldn't get it to work on the mobile and it crashed Opera.
[ 24. November 2013, 10:39: Message edited by: Ariel ]
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
At the cinema my husband and I were chatting to the man sitting next to us. He and I were obviously really big fans and my husband and his girlfriend (not there) are patient with us. Strange man suggested to my husband that they should swap as he said (jokingly I think) that he would love a real Whovian girlfriend!!
Now Dr Who is important but there are limits (I think...... are there?)
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Did anyone see Peter Davison's special, by the way? Great fun - lovely gentle sense of humour and well put together.
Posted by jedijudy (# 333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Did anyone play the entire Google Doodle?
I was very pleased with myself after I won. It took this old lady a while to figure out what to do on the first challenge.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Holy crap, that was-- Holy crap.
Adeodatus, will you please say something wise and erudite? I'm stuck right now.
Sorry, Kelly, you're on your own - I'm still incoherent.
I just watched it again. Chills down the spine at this moment:
"I could retire and curate this place."
"You know, I rather think you might."
(If you've seen it, you'll know what happens. If you haven't, then when you do make sure you have a hanky.)
Ariel - I watched the Peter Davison special last night, just before bedtime. Brilliant! Lots of gorgeous in-jokes, very witty.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Did anyone see Peter Davison's special, by the way? Great fun - lovely gentle sense of humour and well put together.
That was brilliant! Just watched it. Now going back to the special to have a look in the Undergallery.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Forgot earlier - was there not just a touch of Blackadder's good queen Bess about the Doctor's version? Rather than dear Glenda?
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Did anyone see Peter Davison's special, by the way? Great fun - lovely gentle sense of humour and well put together.
That was brilliant! Just watched it. Now going back to the special to have a look in the Undergallery.
Some definite good bits, loved the Tom Baker bit, quite liked the John Barrowman bit, and Mrs Tennent-nee-Davidson on the phone. (hopefully that doesn't spoil too much)
Posted by Jammy Dodger (# 17872) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
Forgot earlier - was there not just a touch of Blackadder's good queen Bess about the Doctor's version? Rather than dear Glenda?
Yes there certainly was...."Who's Queen?"
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
I wonder if we'll find out how the Doctor changed from being Queen Elizabeth's husband to being her mortal enemy.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Rogue:
Google is your friend
I did find that link. But in my Firefox, it did not work. I've script blockers that, even when seeming to allow scripts on a page apparently still block some.
Thank you though, after seeing your post I thought to try it in Chrome.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Rogue:
I wonder if we'll find out how the Doctor changed from being Queen Elizabeth's husband to being her mortal enemy.
I assumed it's simply because he promised to be straight back, and wasn't.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
I loved the episode (and I loved the 50th Celebration in London where there were so many old Doctors and companions). So far no one has talked about the major plothole however; is it worth doing so, or will that kill the mood?
(It didn't stop me from thoroughly enjoying the episode; any thing directed by Moff is bound to be incoherent at some level.)
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Rogue:
I wonder if we'll find out how the Doctor changed from being Queen Elizabeth's husband to being her mortal enemy.
Ummmmm, they were married. What better explanation do you want?
<Hedgehog being horribly cynical...but he's had a bad week>
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
Just watched it online.
I seem to have seen a few links to various Doctors in it: The scarf, the opening scene of the first opening scene; I swear some of the patterns on walls (right towards the end when 11 was alone) and on one of the Tardis' was a hint at something too.
Oh, and that was so Queenie from Blackadder.
[ 24. November 2013, 21:10: Message edited by: Rosa Winkel ]
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Yonatan:
quote:
Originally posted by art dunce:
Loved it. So 11 will die on Trenzalore and 12 will come from Hurt's 8.5 regeneration?
Interesting theory, but I suspect Hurt was regenerating into Christopher Eccelstone and Moffat was giving the fans all the regenerations to view and linking that episode to the first CE one where he checks himself in the mirror.
It looked like Ecclestone to me. (Christbearer Churchstone - what a name that is to carry.)
Re: the doodle - someone elsewhere has investigated the egg in the bush, worth doing, twice.
And what plot hole?
[ 24. November 2013, 21:29: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
It deffo looked like Nine (Ten, now, surely?)
What's this business with the Curator? I mean, why a Curator?
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
So far no one has talked about the major plothole however; is it worth doing so, or will that kill the mood?
Plot holes???? In Doctor Who????? What rubbish is this that you speak?
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
You know what I said upthread about the more I know of Tom Baker, the less I like his Doctor? Forget it. There's an (official) clip on Youtube of his contribution to Day, and I've just watched it three times. Two minutes on the screen, and he owns it. The man is made of charisma. My Doctor!
I haven't spotted any big plot holes yet. Some of the plot is fairly loosely knitted, it's true - things unresolved, gaps left for our imagination to fill in - but no actual holes, I think.
Posted by uffda (# 14310) on
:
I agree that Tom Baker stole the show with his appearance as the curator. Trouble is, I watched him regenerate, so how do they explain his presence as an old man?
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by uffda:
Trouble is, I watched him regenerate, so how do they explain his presence as an old man?
Were so you awestruck by his presence that you didn't listen to his dialogue about revisiting old faces?
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Ah well. I just don’t get the Bakermania but I guess it made some people happy. What about these plot holes then? Do you mean why have three Doctors at all?
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
Is the effort required to re-number the Doctors greater or less than the change to decimalisation?
Posted by ken (# 2460) on
:
I' ve always hated the practice of calling Doctors by number. And now the numeronomists are confounded and utterly thrown over!
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
It does occur to me to wonder how that Gallifreyan picture arrived in England, and why. And how the Zygons got into it.
That it didn't occur during the programme is good. It's when one notices problems during programmes that there are problems.
What I did wonder during the programme was the young blade from the court and his attitude to witchcraft - James' court maybe, but a court in and around which John Dee, Thomas Harriott* and William Gilbert of the magnetic sphere were active might well have had a different attitude to a display of natural magic/science.
*Thomas Harriott has no records of his origin. One could do interesting things with that.
Posted by iamchristianhearmeroar (# 15483) on
:
I think the Zygons were in different paintings weren't they? The ones with the smashed glass.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
I think the Zygons were in different paintings weren't they? The ones with the smashed glass.
You're right. So how did they get in there - and I somehow thought they were more of that sort of thing - frozen moments of time?
[ 25. November 2013, 12:40: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posted by piglet (# 11803) on
:
I'm not really a Whovian, but I couldn't resist posting this from the inimitable Matt in the Daily Telegraph.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
quote:
Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
I think the Zygons were in different paintings weren't they? The ones with the smashed glass.
You're right. So how did they get in there - and I somehow thought they were more of that sort of thing - frozen moments of time?
It was their own technology that produced the little glass cube thing (lovely paperweight, I thought) that froze them into the paintings - probably an extension of their shape shifting technology. They were putting themselves into the paintings so that they could wait until Earth was worth plundering. Pretty cynical of them, really. It was established in the 1975 Zygon story that if there's one thing they're good at, it's hiding.
I think the paintings the Zygons were frozen into were normal 2-d ones; the Doctors got frozen into a 3-d Gallifreyan painting, which the Curator said he "acquired under unusual circumstances" (or something to that effect).
Posted by Avila (# 15541) on
:
Rewatching - memory wipe of humans and zygons to get them into treaty talks and safely ignorable, so why did doctors not get memory wiped?
And Clara wasn't with them in the Tardis to picture to archive room trip - yet there in next scene.
And if time war was time locked as told before how come lots of coming and going into it?
Other than that, a good episode, but loved the fun of the 5ish doctors...
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Avila:
Rewatching - memory wipe of humans and zygons to get them into treaty talks and safely ignorable, so why did doctors not get memory wiped?
Because they are Time Lords. Their brains are a good degree more complicated that those of humans or Zygons. In the recent Cyberman story the Cyber-Controller was remarking on much the same thing. So, basically, they are wired differently and the memory wipe thing didn't have any effect.
quote:
And Clara wasn't with them in the Tardis to picture to archive room trip - yet there in next scene.
Yeah, I wondered about that at the time. I decided she must have been in the picture, but perhaps hiding in a safer spot than the Doctors.
quote:
And if time war was time locked as told before how come lots of coming and going into it?
The Smith Doctor made the same observation. And the Rose-Entity commented that he was clever to notice that. The impression I got is that the Rose-Entity was powerful enough to bypass the time lock and was responsible for getting them in and out as needed.
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Avila:
Rewatching - memory wipe of humans and zygons to get them into treaty talks and safely ignorable, so why did doctors not get memory wiped?
That struck me as a bit odd to have a solution to the memory problem left unused* (although the timey-whimey memory automatic wipe I think also exists in at least a few of the other episodes-though also not in a few others, especially the lighter ones).
I'm also not sure what happens after the inhaler scene (though I liked it), is that a good Zygon, one worried that they may have been through this an odd number of times, or has the human thrown away the earth as soon as the Dr leaves.
In fact what kind of memory wipe (except one going to birth, and then you need to explain for hours) could have that effect, surly you'd need memory implantation.
*obviously it had been used for the other problem.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
I think the paintings the Zygons were frozen into were normal 2-d ones; the Doctors got frozen into a 3-d Gallifreyan painting, which the Curator said he "acquired under unusual circumstances" (or something to that effect).
Hm. No. The Zygons were in 3-d paintings. Not sure how they got their hands on Gallifreyan art. Maybe they'd been taking lessons in art theft from a Jagaroth...
I feel moved to go on a Baker binge. (T., obviously, not C. Sorry, C.) I think between myself and a friend I might have access to every one of his stories. It may take some time.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
The plot hole that does concern me is far bigger than anything mentioned so far.
Hurt is contemplating wiping out his own people, the Time Lords, in order to destroy the Daleks and so end the Time War. The machine that could do this shows him a glimpse of the future in which he does this (why not also the future where he does not?) to help him decide. In doing do he meets two of his future selves.
Why does neither Tennant or Smith tell him this would be a pointless sacrifice? Whatever Hurt does the Daleks are going to survive, so what would be the point of wiping out Galifrey?
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
The plot hole that does concern me is far bigger than anything mentioned so far.
Hurt is contemplating wiping out his own people, the Time Lords, in order to destroy the Daleks and so end the Time War. The machine that could do this shows him a glimpse of the future in which he does this (why not also the future where he does not?) to help him decide. In doing do he meets two of his future selves.
Why does neither Tennant or Smith tell him this would be a pointless sacrifice? Whatever Hurt does the Daleks are going to survive, so what would be the point of wiping out Galifrey?
That presumes that only the Daleks are a problem.
The mini-episode 'Night of the Doctor' makes clear, if it wasn't clear already, that the universe in general regards the Time Lords as every bit as destructive and menacing as their opponents.
[ 26. November 2013, 00:53: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
That actually did flit across my mind briefly -- the fact that the Daleks do survive anyway -- but I was caught up enough in the story that I didn't think about it too much. Just got back from seeing it in the theatre (didn't watch it before the theatre since I wanted that to be the first time through), loved it, have too many thoughts to process right now.
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
There is a point where Clara is coming out of the Tardis and, as Macarius pointed out to me, the arm holding the door open is clearly not hers (I will need to go and have another look to see exactly when/where it is).
Is it just an error? Does Stephen Moffat make errors like that? Am I just reading too much into it?
And I re-watched 'An Adventure in Space and Time' last night and still didn't see Carole Anne Ford - I think she was playing 'Joyce' but I don't know who Joyce is!
M.
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
Ah! Just googled it, should have thought of that before.
Will put it below, so as not to spoil it for anyone.
M.
Apparently, the mother calling children in for supper.
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
The plot hole that does concern me is far bigger than anything mentioned so far.
Hurt is contemplating wiping out his own people, the Time Lords, in order to destroy the Daleks and so end the Time War. The machine that could do this shows him a glimpse of the future in which he does this (why not also the future where he does not?) to help him decide. In doing do he meets two of his future selves.
Why does neither Tennant or Smith tell him this would be a pointless sacrifice? Whatever Hurt does the Daleks are going to survive, so what would be the point of wiping out Galifrey?
If you have two sides locked in an intractable war which will only ever end when there is literally nothing left to fight over - the universe, and time itself, is burning - there are two possible solutions.
Firstly, recognise that it doesn't matter who started it, someone has to finish it. The Time Lords, even if they started out benign, have had to resort to genocidal weapons just to preserve the status quo. Everyone who hasn't previously thrown their lot in with either of the main protagonists is simply collateral damage to deny the enemy an advantage. Using the Moment to destroy both the Daleks and the Time Lords is the only way to keep something intact. Yes, the Daleks survive, as do some of the Time Lords. The point of the Moment is not to kill every last one of them but to stop the Time War. (And in that, the War Doctor isn't killing his own people in order to destroy the Daleks. It's a recognition that both need to go in order for there to be a resolution.)
The second way is to hand overwhelming advantage to one side or the other. The Time Lords could have simply laid down their weapons, have the Daleks kill them all and seize their tech. The universe would be saved, but the Daleks would eventually wipe out all non-Dalek lifeforms from all of time and space. The reverse is unlikely - the Time Lords had thrown everything they could at the Daleks, and the Moment was the MAD weapon at the end.
Since we know that the Time War ended when Galifrey was destroyed along with the Dalek fleets, we know which option was chosen. However, causality can be nuanced - just as long as the result looks the same (and this is where Moffat deserves kudos). By rejecting the use of the Moment, and freezing Galifrey in a slice of time, a third option suddenly appears which was there all along - it doesn't undo the damage already done, but it does prevent the annihilation of the Time Lords while so severely damaging the Daleks, they have to resort to pocket universes to regroup.
And Galifrey is still out there, somewhere.
Posted by The Great Gumby (# 10989) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
The plot hole that does concern me is far bigger than anything mentioned so far.
Hurt is contemplating wiping out his own people, the Time Lords, in order to destroy the Daleks and so end the Time War. The machine that could do this shows him a glimpse of the future in which he does this (why not also the future where he does not?) to help him decide. In doing do he meets two of his future selves.
Why does neither Tennant or Smith tell him this would be a pointless sacrifice? Whatever Hurt does the Daleks are going to survive, so what would be the point of wiping out Galifrey?
That presumes that only the Daleks are a problem.
The mini-episode 'Night of the Doctor' makes clear, if it wasn't clear already, that the universe in general regards the Time Lords as every bit as destructive and menacing as their opponents.
Which is true, but then The Curator said (without actually saying, because oh he's just a poor old man who's sure he doesn't know) the Doctor should go and find Gallifrey. The best we can say is that it ended the war, and that was good. For certain values of good. The Daleks may have survived - so have the Time Lords, we now find - but the war is over, and the net death toll across the universe is much less than what it would otherwise have been. But I do wonder what Baker, T must make of his decision not to kill the Daleks at birth, in the light of this.
And anyway, who cares? It was a charming and moving adventure, which held together much better than the vast majority of Who, and was so packed with silliness and in-jokes that it gave me multiple fangasms. Best of all, it found an elegant way of sort-of rewriting history that wasn't so flimsy that it could have been built of tissue paper.
Did anyone else think the Zygons' plan to hide in the pictures until the Earth was worth conquering was a little reminiscent of Magrathean economic theory? I'd like to believe that was a deliberate nod to Douglas Adams, even though it was also an essential plot point.
Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
quote:
Originally posted by Avila:
Rewatching - memory wipe of humans and zygons to get them into treaty talks and safely ignorable, so why did doctors not get memory wiped?
That struck me as a bit odd to have a solution to the memory problem left unused* (although the timey-whimey memory automatic wipe I think also exists in at least a few of the other episodes-though also not in a few others, especially the lighter ones).
I'm also not sure what happens after the inhaler scene (though I liked it), is that a good Zygon, one worried that they may have been through this an odd number of times, or has the human thrown away the earth as soon as the Dr leaves.
In fact what kind of memory wipe (except one going to birth, and then you need to explain for hours) could have that effect, surly you'd need memory implantation.
*obviously it had been used for the other problem.
Presumably the memory-wipe would make them forget the details of how they were "copied". So the Zygon (who had previously stolen the inhaler) probably thought of herself as the real human, kindly lending her inhaler to the poor asthmatic Zygon.
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Presumably the memory-wipe would make them forget the details of how they were "copied". So the Zygon (who had previously stolen the inhaler) probably thought of herself as the real human, kindly lending her inhaler to the poor asthmatic Zygon.
But didn't the escaping (real) Osgood pick up her inhaler when the Zygon copy dropped it as she fell? In which case she really was extending an act of friendship to the former enemy - er - or something ... ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
And was anybody else slightly puzzled by the way she kept praying to the Doctor?
[ 26. November 2013, 11:34: Message edited by: Stumbling Pilgrim ]
Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Stumbling Pilgrim:
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Presumably the memory-wipe would make them forget the details of how they were "copied". So the Zygon (who had previously stolen the inhaler) probably thought of herself as the real human, kindly lending her inhaler to the poor asthmatic Zygon.
But didn't the escaping (real) Osgood pick up her inhaler when the Zygon copy dropped it as she fell? In which case she really was extending an act of friendship to the former enemy - er - or something ...
Ah yes - I had forgotten that. But maybe she had too!
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Stumbling Pilgrim:
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Presumably the memory-wipe would make them forget the details of how they were "copied". So the Zygon (who had previously stolen the inhaler) probably thought of herself as the real human, kindly lending her inhaler to the poor asthmatic Zygon.
But didn't the escaping (real) Osgood pick up her inhaler when the Zygon copy dropped it as she fell? In which case she really was extending an act of friendship to the former enemy - er - or something ...
And was anybody else slightly puzzled by the way she kept praying to the Doctor?
My interpretation went this way: yes, the real Osgood (hmmmmm, another "Os...."name to add to Oswin, Oswald...) anyway, Osgood did pick up the inhaler. Of which there was only one. So, alone of the group, she knew she was human. And when she loaned it as an act of kindness to her duplicate, she let the duplicate know that it was a Zygon. And then Osgood put her finger to her lips: Shhh!. Keep the secret.
Why? Because the Doctor's solution was imposed on human and Zygon alike, and it promised peace rather than war. But Osgood and her Zygon could have screwed up the process. Instead they both freely chose to keep quiet. They freely chose (symbolically on behalf of both their races) to have peace.
And why does Osgood do this? Because she is devoted to the Doctor and his ways. Because she aspires to be like him (I mean, UNIT history knows about the Doctor's scarf--that wasn't coincidence, but a sign that she was a fan of him.). So it follows that, when in danger, she would beg for the Doctor's help. Yes, it came out sounding more like a prayer, but it was also an expression of...hope. Hope for a peaceful solution. Which she got and, ultimately, ensured would happen.
Or maybe I am reading too much into it. Maybe she is just a rabbit after all.
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
My interpretation went this way: yes, the real Osgood (hmmmmm, another "Os...."name to add to Oswin, Oswald...) anyway, Osgood did pick up the inhaler. Of which there was only one. So, alone of the group, she knew she was human. And when she loaned it as an act of kindness to her duplicate, she let the duplicate know that it was a Zygon. And then Osgood put her finger to her lips: Shhh!. Keep the secret.
Why? Because the Doctor's solution was imposed on human and Zygon alike, and it promised peace rather than war. But Osgood and her Zygon could have screwed up the process. Instead they both freely chose to keep quiet. They freely chose (symbolically on behalf of both their races) to have peace.
And why does Osgood do this? Because she is devoted to the Doctor and his ways. Because she aspires to be like him (I mean, UNIT history knows about the Doctor's scarf--that wasn't coincidence, but a sign that she was a fan of him.). So it follows that, when in danger, she would beg for the Doctor's help. Yes, it came out sounding more like a prayer, but it was also an expression of...hope. Hope for a peaceful solution. Which she got and, ultimately, ensured would happen.
Or maybe I am reading too much into it. Maybe she is just a rabbit after all.
Yes - yes, I like that. Maybe it was a case of WWTDD? And when she worked out what he would do, she did it in his name. And thinking about it, it was she who heard the Tardis ringtone at the very beginning - the sound that 'brings hope wherever it goes'. (And now I want a Tardis ringtone!)
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
I wonder if they checked the meaning of Old English name elements.
Os is a generic word for god, cognate with Norse As as in Asgard.
Oswald is god-power or rule. Oswin is god-friend. And Osgood could mean god-goodness, but the most serious sources I found have god-Geat (as in Beowulf's group) from the original spelling.
An interesting choice, if they checked.
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Stumbling Pilgrim:
And was anybody else slightly puzzled by the way she kept praying to the Doctor?
My teenaged daughter, who is the biggest Doctor Who fangirl imaginable, said, "Wasn't it cool how they had a fangirl as one of the characters?" That was sort of how I saw Osgood too -- like the most rabid Doctor Who fan, wearing the scarf and all -- only in her world, the Doctor is real and can really come help them. I thought her presence there, wearing the scarf and all, was a definite shout-out to fans.
Posted by art dunce (# 9258) on
:
I saw it again last night in the theater in 3D. The show was sold out and there were people of every age and type there...it was grand.
When I saw Baker as the a curator I thought he was the Doctor from the future and that Osgood was actually calling to him. I don't think it was a coincidance that she was wearing his scarf.
I thought we were to hope that eleven doesn't end up fighting and dying on Trenzalore but retires and becomes the curator and it is the new line that begins with 8.5 that will go and fight just like River describes in Forest of the Dead.
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
Surely though John Hurt's Doctor deserves a full number? I mean, the other Doctors called him Doctor. What I don't get is how he aged. I don't know if the Time War lasted that long.
I have heard complaints from some people my age or older that Doctor Who's turned into a children's programme. John Hurt's (Nine's) complaint about "timey-wimey" was a shot at such complaints, I believe.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
I have heard complaints from some people my age or older that Doctor Who's turned into a children's programme.
It always was a children's programme. New Who got a bit more raunchy and lively, aimed at getting the previous generation, who had been children at the time of the first Classic Who series, to re-engage and watch it with their own children. John Hurt was great in that role - he said a few of the things I'd been thinking.
"Allons-y!"
"Geronimo!"
"Oh, for God's sake!"
[ 26. November 2013, 18:44: Message edited by: Ariel ]
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
I have heard complaints from some people my age or older that Doctor Who's turned into a children's programme. John Hurt's (Nine's) complaint about "timey-wimey" was a shot at such complaints, I believe.
Possibly. I rather thought his comments that the later Doctors should "grow up" was a way of bracing us for the fact that the next Doctor is going to be played by an older actor (Capaldi).
Although that does remind me of another favorite bit: Smith Doctor uses the phrase "timey-wimey." The Hurt Doctor is contemptuous of such childish language. The Tennant Doctor quickly comments "I don't know where he [Smith Doctor] gets that stuff."
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
Although that does remind me of another favorite bit: Smith Doctor uses the phrase "timey-wimey." The Hurt Doctor is contemptuous of such childish language. The Tennant Doctor quickly comments "I don't know where he [Smith Doctor] gets that stuff."
That was one of my favourite bits too
Posted by Og: Thread Killer (# 3200) on
:
They did seem to want to please the old dude, didn't they.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
"Allons-y!"
"Geronimo!"
"Oh, for God's sake!"
![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
YES.
Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
Although that does remind me of another favorite bit: Smith Doctor uses the phrase "timey-wimey." The Hurt Doctor is contemptuous of such childish language. The Tennant Doctor quickly comments "I don't know where he [Smith Doctor] gets that stuff."
I assume Tennant's Doctor came from the pre-Martha bit of his timeline, as that's when we first learned that QE1 is furious with him. It was during the Martha era that he first used the phrase "timey-wimey" (in "Blink"). Therefore he might have actually got this from Smith's Doctor ...
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Jestocost:
I assume Tennant's Doctor came from the pre-Martha bit of his timeline, as that's when we first learned that QE1 is furious with him.
No, he has to be from POST-Martha. If he'd done this before, then when QE1 is furious with him he'd know why she was furious.
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
In fact, can't we date fairly precisely which part of his timeline the Tennant Doctor comes from? He meets up with the Smith Doctor while he's out romancing QEI, and that happens a very short time before his own regeneration. Isn't it in one of the specials near the end of Tennant's run that he mentions he's been travelling around a bit and mentions getting married and spending some time with QEI who can now no longer call herself the Virgin Queen? (I can't remember if he actually says he married QEI, or if getting married and hooking up with her were mentioned as two separate things). I think we can safely assume that at the time of this story, the Tennant Doctor has already had most of his adventures and is close to regenerating into Smith.
I find I can't talk about the new Doctors using numbers at all anymore, I'm too confused.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Somewhere someone must have a timeline, not only for the Doctors, but also for the Universe(s) - how has all this recent stuff affected the reboot, for example? If only for the writers to keep up with. I wish they would publish it.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
I don't think the reboot is affected. The War Doctor will forget ever meeting the others, and will believe that he destroyed Gallifrey just as we've seen he does from 2005 till now. It's only Matt Smith's Doctor who'll remember the events of The Day of the Doctor. "War" and "Ten" both said "I won't remember this" - because "the time streams are out of sync". (The same memory-loss thing happened in The Three, The Five and probably The Two, but I don't think it was ever talked about.)
As to why the other Doctors didn't try to dissuade the War Doctor from destroying Gallifrey and the Daleks - when they're being held in the Tower, the Moment tells him that "they think your future is fixed". They think he has to destroy Gallifrey. (And Ten is aghast, later, when Eleven suggests changing that.)
And I'm pretty sure Ten must have come from somewhere between The Waters of Mars and The End of Time - it's in the latter that he mentions to the Ood that he's been spending time with Queen Elizabeth (and implies that "spending time with" might be something of a euphemism!).
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
And I'm pretty sure Ten must have come from somewhere between The Waters of Mars and The End of Time - it's in the latter that he mentions to the Ood that he's been spending time with Queen Elizabeth (and implies that "spending time with" might be something of a euphemism!).
My memory may be wonky, but in The End of Time doesn't he actually say he married Elizabeth...followed by muttering "That was a mistake!" Which, now, we know it was--he thought that he was proposing to a Zygon...
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
I thought the biggest plot hole was that they didn't explain WHY the Hurt Doctor would have no memory of the events of "Day of the Doctor." It's obviously necessary, because the anguish that Eccleston's, Tennant's and (earlier) Smith's Doctors felt over destroying Gallifrey has to be real. They have to really believe they did that, or it invalidates an awful lot of what's happened and who the Doctor is in the new series. So they obviously have to not remember what happened, but is there an actual in-story reason given why they wouldn't remember? I just recall Hurt saying, "I'm not going to remember any of this, am I?" and Tennant saying something like "I won't remember it either," but no real explanation as to why they wouldn't. However, it didn't bother me; I just accepted it as a necessary plot device.
Posted by Ferijen (# 4719) on
:
I have to say that I enjoyed The Five(ish) Doctors almost as much as the main event... what about anyone else?
Posted by Rev per Minute (# 69) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
I thought the biggest plot hole was that they didn't explain WHY the Hurt Doctor would have no memory of the events of "Day of the Doctor." It's obviously necessary, because the anguish that Eccleston's, Tennant's and (earlier) Smith's Doctors felt over destroying Gallifrey has to be real. They have to really believe they did that, or it invalidates an awful lot of what's happened and who the Doctor is in the new series. So they obviously have to not remember what happened, but is there an actual in-story reason given why they wouldn't remember? I just recall Hurt saying, "I'm not going to remember any of this, am I?" and Tennant saying something like "I won't remember it either," but no real explanation as to why they wouldn't. However, it didn't bother me; I just accepted it as a necessary plot device.
Trudy - see Adeodatus above. As it turned out, the Hurt Doctor barely had time to forget, as we saw him begin regeneration (into Ecclestone - probably) just after dematerialisation.
(I think that I think about this too much... ![[Help]](graemlins/help.gif)
Doesn't help that I've turned my daughter into a mildly obsessive fan as well)
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rev per Minute:
Doesn't help that I've turned my daughter into a mildly obsessive fan as well)
Only mildly obsessive? You're not trying hard enough.
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
Probably another stupid question - if Kate was horrified to discover the Doctor was still inside the Tardis when she had it airlifted off to London, where did she think he was, and how did she expect him to find it and get to London to reclaim it? Why did she want it without him in it anyway?
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
And another one: Why did Hurt (Nine) regenerate? He didn't need to.
Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
And another one: Why did Hurt (Nine) regenerate? He didn't need to.
Didn't he mutter the "body wearing thin" line, first quoth by Hartnell? We don't know how long he had been in that body or what internal damage he had suffered or ...
Oh, hell, because plot, that's why.
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
Well yeah, coming back to my earlier question about how he had managed to age.
Why there needed to be a mystery about who he regenerated into is beyond me, other than that Chris Eccleston and the production team had a fall-out and he didn't want to work with them and therefore be in the episode.
Either that, or it leaves options open for Another Doctor.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
Why there needed to be a mystery about who he regenerated into is beyond me, other than that Chris Eccleston and the production team had a fall-out and he didn't want to work with them and therefore be in the episode.
Eccleston has repeatedly said that he doesn't want to appear in Doctor Who again. He says that he doesn't like to reprise parts.
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
I think the whole thing would have been much stronger (not that it wasn't great anyway) if they had been able to get Eccleston on board. His absence was a bit of a gaping hole. With the comment about the ears it was pretty clearly set up that Hurt was regenerating into Eccleston, but there really was no immediate death/crisis that made his regeneration necessary.
I assumed Hurt had aged so much because he'd been the War Doctor through years and years and years of fighting that we didn't get to see. While he did a great job, I'd have been quite happy to see the whole War Doctor storyline (going right back to the mysterious appearance at the end of Name of the Doctor) played out with the older, more hardened-looking Paul McGann that we saw in the Night of the Doctor minisode -- I think he would have done a great job with that, without requiring us to re-number our Doctors by throwing in a new one. But given how happy everyone was with John Hurt's performance (and it was great) I can see how that would be an unpopular opinion.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
Anyone planning a visit to Bonham's on 18 December?
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
And another one: Why did Hurt (Nine) regenerate? He didn't need to.
I thought he regenerated because he had been artificially generated into himself to fulfill a function. (Oh Lord, how my old English teacher would have hated that sentence.)
Anyhow....as he had completed his task i.e. ended the Time War, that particular regeneration was no longer needed.
Posted by Hawk (# 14289) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
What I don't get is how he aged. I don't know if the Time War lasted that long.
The Time War occurred outside of normal space time and it's unclear how long it was for the participants. Especially considering one of the strategies used was to rewrite time to reverse the effects of lost battles on occasion so millions died, were resurrected and died all over again. In a time locked war, waged by time travellers, some participants could have been fighting for many thousands of years, others for only a handful.
Which is a way of saying, the doctor had aged as much as the plot needed him to.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by tessaB:
I thought he regenerated because he had been artificially generated into himself to fulfill a function. (Oh Lord, how my old English teacher would have hated that sentence.)
Anyhow....as he had completed his task i.e. ended the Time War, that particular regeneration was no longer needed.
Oh, that's nice. I hadn't thought of that. My problem with the regenerations was that I couldn't really see why they needed Hurt's Doctor at all (apart from the fact that he's a brilliant actor and quietly stole every scene he was in). Wouldn't McGann have sufficed for the "War Doctor"? (Or wasn't McGann available?)
As to Christopher Eccleston, I think his reluctance to be associated with the show is simply him being a good jobbing actor - he doesn't want to be defined by the role, which would be a danger if he continued to revisit it. For the fans, it's unfortunate, but for the actor it makes perfect sense, and we've just got to get used to the fact that he's unlikely ever to appear as the Doctor again, except in archive clips or as a CGI effect.
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
Um - why did Eight not regenerate spontaneously anyway? And now attempting to answer my own question - was it anything to do with the Tardis being in ruins (again)? Does he need her energy as she needs his to function properly? Or was he so distressed by Cass's reaction to him, representative of that of the remaining universe, that he chose not to? (I'm assuming he can make that choice, since the Master once did just to spite the Doctor.)
And edited because I've just thought some more about that - IIRC the regeneration from Seven to Eight took a long time, with unfortunate consequences. Perhaps it was going to happen in due course anyway but the Sisterhood headed it off so they could control it (didn't look like it though), and it's because of what they did that it now happens so quickly? I dunno, what does everyone think?
[ 28. November 2013, 16:21: Message edited by: Stumbling Pilgrim ]
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
My problem with the regenerations was that I couldn't really see why they needed Hurt's Doctor at all (apart from the fact that he's a brilliant actor and quietly stole every scene he was in). Wouldn't McGann have sufficed for the "War Doctor"? (Or wasn't McGann available?)
Yes, that was exactly my though too (see above). After seeing what McGann was able to do in that short minisode, I would have loved to have seen him as the War Doctor.
Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ferijen:
I have to say that I enjoyed The Five(ish) Doctors almost as much as the main event... what about anyone else?
yes yes - I loved the dream sequence near the beginning...
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
My problem with the regenerations was that I couldn't really see why they needed Hurt's Doctor at all (apart from the fact that he's a brilliant actor and quietly stole every scene he was in). Wouldn't McGann have sufficed for the "War Doctor"? (Or wasn't McGann available?)
Moffat says he thinks McGann's Doctor is just too nice. He can't imagine him pushing the big red button.
Tennant was the Doctor four times as long as Eccleston and his career seems to have moved on alright.
Posted by Panda (# 2951) on
:
I loved it when the Tardis was re-setting itself and briefly looked like a much earlier version - 'The circles - I loved the circles.'
'What are they for?'
'No idea.'
[ 29. November 2013, 13:28: Message edited by: Panda ]
Posted by Rev per Minute (# 69) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
quote:
Originally posted by Rev per Minute:
Doesn't help that I've turned my daughter into a mildly obsessive fan as well)
Only mildly obsessive? You're not trying hard enough.
She has gone beyond me and is obsessive over 'Sherlock', 'Avengers' and 'Supernatural' as well. My work here is done... ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Stumbling Pilgrim:
Um - why did Eight not regenerate spontaneously anyway? And now attempting to answer my own question - was it anything to do with the Tardis being in ruins (again)? Does he need her energy as she needs his to function properly? Or was he so distressed by Cass's reaction to him, representative of that of the remaining universe, that he chose not to? (I'm assuming he can make that choice, since the Master once did just to spite the Doctor.)
And edited because I've just thought some more about that - IIRC the regeneration from Seven to Eight took a long time, with unfortunate consequences. Perhaps it was going to happen in due course anyway but the Sisterhood headed it off so they could control it (didn't look like it though), and it's because of what they did that it now happens so quickly? I dunno, what does everyone think?
It is possible to kill a Time Lord before he can regenerate. Cut of his head, for example. It is possible for a Time Lord to be so badly damaged that they simply cannot regenerate. For example, if one happened to be in a spaceship that just crashed into a planet. That could kill one deader than a dead thing that is deceased. Unless the Sisterhood happens to be around and can temporarily restore life functions long enough to allow the Time Lord to regenerate. Which is exactly what happened with 8th.
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
I wonder if the next Doctor will have circles.
Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on
:
This is maybe a terrible thing to say but... wasn't the... uh.... the, you know, the...
![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
Valeyard
supposed to be an amalgamation of the 12th & 13th Doctors' "dark side"? Or is a "let us never speak of this again" thing?
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
This is maybe a terrible thing to say but... wasn't the... uh.... the, you know, the...
Valeyard
supposed to be an amalgamation of the 12th & 13th Doctors' "dark side"? Or is a "let us never speak of this again" thing?
The Valeyard got mentioned in 'The Name of the Doctor' (ie the last episode before this one) so I don't think they've forgotten about him.
I finally got around to watching The Five(ish) Doctors, which was an absolute hoot. Those guys were extremely willing to make fun of themselves. And then I watched An Adventure In Space And Time, which I found extremely touching. Didn't spot any of the cameos even though I knew they were in there.
Thought it was quite funny saying what a pity it was that Marco Polo wasn't in colour, because the reconstruction by Loose Cannon is in colour, based as it is on on-set colour photographs which were, for a long time, the only thing known to have survived from that story.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Ohhhhhhh.... and there are rumours as of just a week ago that Marco Polo footage might have been recovered?
Not that the Mirror is an especially reliable source for these things.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/doctor-who-missing-episodes-seven-2839102
Posted by Dormouse (# 5954) on
:
I am so desperate to read this thread but still haven't had time to watch The Day of the Doctor yet!!!! It WILL happen soon!
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
The Valeyard got mentioned in 'The Name of the Doctor' (ie the last episode before this one) so I don't think they've forgotten about him.
I'm largely of the school that the only canonical Colin Baker stories are on audio.
The new series can invent a character called the Valeyard if they wish. They can even give him some backstory in some unrecorded adventure with the Sixth Doctor. It doesn't mean we saw it happening on screen.
Posted by Ronald Binge (# 9002) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Ohhhhhhh.... and there are rumours as of just a week ago that Marco Polo footage might have been recovered?
Not that the Mirror is an especially reliable source for these things.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/doctor-who-missing-episodes-seven-2839102
Gallifrey Base has shut down discussion of this and other missing episode rumours over the last ten days - last time this happened The Enemy of the World and The Web of Fear surfaced. Interesting times ahead.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
The Valeyard got mentioned in 'The Name of the Doctor' (ie the last episode before this one) so I don't think they've forgotten about him.
I'm largely of the school that the only canonical Colin Baker stories are on audio.
The new series can invent a character called the Valeyard if they wish. They can even give him some backstory in some unrecorded adventure with the Sixth Doctor. It doesn't mean we saw it happening on screen.
Personally, I have always taken the description of the Valeyard as an "amalgamation" of all that is evil in the Doctor literally: he is not a regeneration of the Doctor, but a separate distillation of the Doctor's darker side. I view him as being a Block Transfer Calculation, such as populated Castrovalva, but a BTC that has been embued with the knowledge and darker aspects of the Doctor's personality.
Or, in short, he is just a computer program with delusions of grandeur.
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
Why there needed to be a mystery about who he regenerated into is beyond me, other than that Chris Eccleston and the production team had a fall-out and he didn't want to work with them and therefore be in the episode.
Eccleston has repeatedly said that he doesn't want to appear in Doctor Who again. He says that he doesn't like to reprise parts.
I've just finished reading Liz Sladen's autobiography. She says Eccleston knew he was leaving when the first episodes etc started broadcasting but it wasn't announced until much later. The implication is he only ever signed up for one season. Makes sense - do the reboot with a big name, get it established and then regenerate and off you go ... Tennant wouldn't have worked as the first brand new doctor as he wasn't well known enough. But he was prefect for taking the show to the next level once it was up and running.
It's a shame Eccleston didn't do the episode, but it seems completely in character. Moffat says they asked him, they'd have loved him to do it, but he refused very nicely. He's never, to my knowledge, done multiple seasons of anything where he's a regular cast member week in, week out. And he's probably sick of being asked about Who. Sounds dull, but maybe it is ...
Tubbs
[ 02. December 2013, 19:39: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
Posted by Rev per Minute (# 69) on
:
Memory says that Ecclestone's departure was announced the week after the first episode was aired, i.e. between Rose and The End of the World. There was a marked drop in the audience between episodes 1 and 2, which the BBC put down to better weather on the second Saturday but some commentators blamed on the announcement. They also announced that series 2 was being commissioned, just before announcing his departure.
Posted by Ramarius (# 16551) on
:
Should the history of the Dr prior to Christopher Ecclestone be denominated as BCE?
I thought he only did one series because the Beeb only initially contracted him for one on the basis that the new series might not get further than that.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
"History" is a tricky word when dealing with a Time Lord.
Actually, another favorite line from the Day of the Doctor. The Rose-Image states that she took her form "from your past. Or future. I get those confused."
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rev per Minute:
Memory says that Ecclestone's departure was announced the week after the first episode was aired, i.e. between Rose and The End of the World.
Wasn't it leaked, rather than announced?
Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Wasn't it leaked, rather than announced?
Leaked, then announced because the cat was out of the bag, I think. As I recall they made a brave effort not to let it out, so that the regeneration into Tennant really would have come as a surprise. Alas you can't do that nowadays.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
It's a shame Eccleston didn't do the episode, but it seems completely in character. Moffat says they asked him, they'd have loved him to do it, but he refused very nicely. He's never, to my knowledge, done multiple seasons of anything where he's a regular cast member week in, week out. And he's probably sick of being asked about Who. Sounds dull, but maybe it is ...
Tubbs
I think the broad consensus of fandom gossip would agree with this. There is some murmuring that he didn't like some of the dynamics in the production team, but I doubt that would have much effect on his appearance or non-appearance now that there's a completely different team. He did the job, and he moved on. He hasn't reappeared, and he doesn't do conventions, but by all accounts he's proud of his involvement with the show and will say so if asked.
He's not an isolated case here: Tom Baker turned down the offer to appear in The Five Doctors, and Colin Baker refused to come back even to film his own regeneration scene (unsurprisingly, given the shoddy treatment of the show by BBC senior management at the time).
I wonder if they had Eccleston's agreement to use the clip of him, or to use his CGI likeness?
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
It's a shame Eccleston didn't do the episode, but it seems completely in character. Moffat says they asked him, they'd have loved him to do it, but he refused very nicely. He's never, to my knowledge, done multiple seasons of anything where he's a regular cast member week in, week out. And he's probably sick of being asked about Who. Sounds dull, but maybe it is ...
Tubbs
I think the broad consensus of fandom gossip would agree with this. There is some murmuring that he didn't like some of the dynamics in the production team, but I doubt that would have much effect on his appearance or non-appearance now that there's a completely different team. He did the job, and he moved on. He hasn't reappeared, and he doesn't do conventions, but by all accounts he's proud of his involvement with the show and will say so if asked.
He's not an isolated case here: Tom Baker turned down the offer to appear in The Five Doctors, and Colin Baker refused to come back even to film his own regeneration scene (unsurprisingly, given the shoddy treatment of the show by BBC senior management at the time).
I wonder if they had Eccleston's agreement to use the clip of him, or to use his CGI likeness?
Probably. I'm guessing that Ecclesston's contract means that the BBC can use images of him as 9 in publicity material and merchanidise for the show.
Thing is, fans love a bit of gossip and Eccleston refusing to return due to some massive fallout is way more interesting than it's just not something he does.
I'd forgotten that Baker wouldn't come back ... But if you peer at McCoy's first episode, it's obviously him lying on the ground in a really bad wig due to the difference in shape. That whole thing was completely daft. Baker was happy to stay, but Nathan Turner was desperate to leave so of course they sacked one and insisted the other carry on.
Tubbs
[ 09. December 2013, 15:36: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
Posted by Rev per Minute (# 69) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
I'd forgotten that Baker wouldn't come back ... But if you peer at McCoy's first episode, it's obviously him lying on the ground in a really bad wig due to the difference in shape. That whole thing was completely daft. Baker was happy to stay, but Nathan Turner was desperate to leave so of course they sacked one and insisted the other carry on.
I thought Baker C. was removed because Michael Grade insisted on changing the Doctor before agreeing to further series?
BTW, I thought that Colin Baker made quite a prat of himself insisting that all the surviving Doctors should have had a role in the anniversary episode. He seemed particularly aggrieved at the fact that Tom Baker made an appearance when none of the others did. Even the 'Five-ish Doctors' film and a voice-over for one of the 'making of' shorts didnt seem to calm him down. Did he really think that he could really have a cameo without looking ridiculous?
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
Was all that stuff about Colin Baker being upset meant to be taken seriously? I completely believed it (though thought it was a bit over-the-top) until I saw him in the making-of short. At the end when you see him and he says, "I'm Colin Baker" he virtually winked at the camera, and I took that to mean the whole hissy fit about not being in the special was a big fake-out so that fans would be surprised by his appearance in the making-of. And of course by the Five(ish) Doctors, which I haven't seen yet but am dying to (anyone have any discreet suggestions as to how a person in North America who can't access BBC iplayer might see it? The Canadian station that carries Doctor Who, Space, has every single thing connected to the anniversary on their website to view, except for that).
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rev per Minute:
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
I'd forgotten that Baker wouldn't come back ... But if you peer at McCoy's first episode, it's obviously him lying on the ground in a really bad wig due to the difference in shape. That whole thing was completely daft. Baker was happy to stay, but Nathan Turner was desperate to leave so of course they sacked one and insisted the other carry on.
I thought Baker C. was removed because Michael Grade insisted on changing the Doctor before agreeing to further series?
BTW, I thought that Colin Baker made quite a prat of himself insisting that all the surviving Doctors should have had a role in the anniversary episode. He seemed particularly aggrieved at the fact that Tom Baker made an appearance when none of the others did. Even the 'Five-ish Doctors' film and a voice-over for one of the 'making of' shorts didnt seem to calm him down. Did he really think that he could really have a cameo without looking ridiculous?
Might have been that Grade wanted a new doctor before re commissioning, but Nathan Turner definitely wanted out and the BBC made him stay ... Which was bonkers.
The BBC could have done what they did with Adventures In ... and given stars of the Classic show walk ons - spotting them would have been fun!
Tubbs
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Trudy - I'm afraid I can't help you, but I am very much hoping that the Fiv(ish) Doctors will be released on DVD, and the sooner the better. Everyone sends themselves up, including Russell T Davies, and its clear that the old Doctors are very much tongue in cheek.
Sadly Tom Baker doesn't appear in it; although a delightful person in many ways he seems dismissive of the classic Doctors who followed him. He only went to one day of the big 50th Celebrations, and then pointedly ignored Davison, C Baker and McCoy when on a public panel in front of thousands of fans. Friends who were there said that bit of the day was really rather embarrassing.
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
It would be nice if they released an anniversary DVD with the anniversary episode, the making-of, An Adventure in Space and Time, The Fiveish Doctors, and a bunch of other extras on it ... but it seems a bit much to hope for.
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
There were a number of the anniversary shows on DVD in the BBC shop ~ can't remember if the Five (ish) Doctors was one of them. (Actual physical shop in the Media Cafe. ) I haven't got tickets to anything currently to go back and check.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Trudy, this is the web page where I was able to watch The Five(ish) Doctors and avoid geographical location problems.
It's an Australian site but I hope it works for you too.
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
orfeo, you are better than the best, thank you.
Posted by The Revolutionist (# 4578) on
:
So, Doctor Who Christmas Special trailer... excited?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njNnTDiLOd4
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
The silence, weeping angels, daleks! Oh my cup runneth over.
Posted by Rev per Minute (# 69) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by tessaB:
The silence, weeping angels, daleks! Oh my cup runneth over.
And wooden Cybermen! One site has suggested the appearance of a Sontaran ship in one of the promotional pictures. Are we going to see another story like the end of Matt Smith's first series (the Pandoricon) where every single enemy turns up?
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
This is suggesting that Matt Smith is actually Dr number thirteen. Did I miss something?
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
Missed Moffat rewriting history for story effect? I don't think it's a stretch to consider Smith canonically the 12th doctor now, but saying he's the 13th because of something Tennant's Doctor did, is pushing it a bit. But whatever it takes to create the emotional impact needed for the Christmas special, I guess.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
I worry for the guy, I really do. I mean, being the Doctor is culturally fraught enough to be an opportunity for various identity crises, but now he's got to worry about WHICH Doctor he is? Good grief.
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
Missed Moffat rewriting history for story effect? I don't think it's a stretch to consider Smith canonically the 12th doctor now, but saying he's the 13th because of something Tennant's Doctor did, is pushing it a bit. But whatever it takes to create the emotional impact needed for the Christmas special, I guess.
Indeed, it's probably largely to build up the hype, although apparently the argument goes that even though he only managed to regenerate into himself, it used up a full regeneration's worth of energy which now is no longer available. Although the trailer specifically says eleven and twelve, but that might just be because 'twelve' is easier to rhyme than 'thirteen' or 'fourteen'.
But what is perplexing is - was Smith Doctor (fed up with numbers now) aware that Capaldi Doctor was going to be present at the rescue of Gallifrey? If he was, then surely he knows he isn't the last, so he has less reason to be so disturbed by going to Trenzalore, but if he wasn't then his presence would have messed up the calculations. I probably think too much sometimes ...
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
Missed Moffat rewriting history for story effect? I don't think it's a stretch to consider Smith canonically the 12th doctor now, but saying he's the 13th because of something Tennant's Doctor did, is pushing it a bit.
I seem to recall that, back when Tennant was shot down by a Dalek and triggered the regeneration effect (just in time for the closing credits), which Tennant Doctor then redirected into his spare hand, I recall some discussion about whether that counted as using up a regeneration. And the general response was that that was an issue to be addressed when we got to the end of the allotted regenerations. With the inclusion of the War Doctor, we are now at that point. I have no problem with Moffat taking the bull by the horns and addressing the issue. It has been an issue hanging out there ever since the Faux Regeneration happened. It either used up a regeneration or it didn't, but now is the time to find out whether it did.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
That Christmas trailer actually makes a reference to 'Eleven', in a way that strongly suggests Matt Smith.
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
I think people will probably always refer to Smith's Doctor as 11 because we've known him that way for so long.
So, he's the eleventh and last in a series of twelve doctors, on his thirteenth regeneration. Nothing confusing about that.
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
It's just wibbley-wobbley timey-wimey stuff.
I love reading this thread
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
Radio Times talking about Steven Moffat rewriting folklore is a bit rich, considering it was Robert Holmes's rewriting of folklore that got us into this mess back in 1976. I suspect - in fact I hope - what Moffat is doing is actually to kill off the whole "twelve regenerations" thing once and for all.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
Moffat could always claim that the Doctor didn't inherit the regeneration limit because one of his parents was half human.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Does anyone really expect Moff to explain anything? He's shown time and time again that he only cares about making a big immediate splash, and isn't bothered about logic, continuity or consistency. He needs to go, and be replaced by someone who cares about the show.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Does anyone really expect Moff to explain anything? He's shown time and time again that he only cares about making a big immediate splash, and isn't bothered about logic, continuity or consistency. He needs to go, and be replaced by someone who cares about the show.
Having watched most of the first 10 seasons from the 60s and 70s, the show has never been run by people who bother about logic, continuity or consistency to the level demanded by fans. (Perhaps you'd like to tell me when the UNIT stories are set, hmmm? Or who destroyed Atlantis? I've seen Atlantis in trouble 3 times, now.)
And no TV show ever has. Many TV shows eventually have a dig at this by introducing a character who obsesses over every tiny detail of possible inconsistency. Usually only for an episode, because they're too annoying for any longer than that.
Fans are the kind of people who want to check and cross-check every single line containing a reference to either past or future tense - problem enough in any context, really bad for a show about a time traveller. As if the whole thing is real to the point where it's being lived out.
Allusions to previously seen adventures or comments are really nice, yes, and obviously some major points have to be kept straight (but note that on several occasions in the 60s the writers appear completely oblivious to the fact the Doctor isn't human), but I think that when people come and watch the show armed with a printout of a Doctor Who wiki it's rather unfortunate.
Also, declaring Moffat to have no interest in continuity whatsoever is rather rude when he's just shown you Tennant's Doctor getting married to Queen Elizabeth.
[ 12. December 2013, 21:38: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
I have, not intentionally, stumbled across Philip Sandifer's take on the 12 regenerations subject and, as is frequently but not always the case, he puts if far better than I could.
quote:
Because The Deadly Assassin says so. You get twelve regenerations, and then you're dead. And this is, for some reason, taken enormously seriously. Russell T. Davies tried to retcon it with a line in The Sarah Jane Adventures and... failed. It didn't stick. He admitted it was just a throwaway line.
What's bewildering, of course, is that it's a throwaway line in The Deadly Assassin too. And yet for some reason, that line is taken as gospel by a significant number of people - as some rule that demands that Doctor Who is, with Matt Smith, coming perilously close to its end.
...
I mean, if we're being remotely sane, of course the show will survive. Writing your way around the twelve regeneration limit is as trivial as Holmes dropping it in is. The bewildering thing, though, is that when the time comes and [X] regenerates into the Fourteenth Doctor there are going to be fans who are upset. Somehow, this story has led to the phenomenon of fans who want the show dead, and who will be terribly upset if it doesn't die.
It should be noted at this point that Sandifer himself is just as guilty, on other occasions, of trying to find in-world deep-and-meaningful explanations for things that are far more easily explained by the writers doing something that suited them/made life easier for them at the time, or just plain forgot some obscure point that obsessive fans decades later expected them to address. The last time I called him on it was his entry for The Day of the Daleks when he went through some enormous waffle about why the Daleks failed to recognise the Pertwee version of the Doctor.
[ 13. December 2013, 02:34: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
I think the core problem with the regeneration limit is that if the Doctor can regenerate indefinitely, he is effectively immortal (like Tolkeins elves, still subject to irreparable damage, but otherwise immortal). That changes his perception on life and reality. If he was immortal, I think he would have taken more risks at all sorts of points. If he is just very long lived, through regeneration, he still needs to take care and not waste the regeneration.
I think Moffat will find a way to get around the limit, and make sure that it is able to be made consistent. As we all know, the entire timeline is not completely consistent - and whovians are quite happy to accept the most extreme explanations. That is not the point - it has to seem consistent, so it will.
Lets be clear - he has a time machine. There are going to be inconsistencies.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
The last time I called him on it was his entry for The Day of the Daleks when he went through some enormous waffle about why the Daleks failed to recognise the Pertwee version of the Doctor.
I think he only does that when he thinks that the waffle is interesting. That is, he's telling you what thoughts Doctor Who has provoked in him rather than insisting that this is the only way the program makes sense. If another program, such as, say, Asylum of the Daleks is incompatible with his idea about daleks being able to recognise the Doctor he won't be upset.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
I think the core problem with the regeneration limit is that if the Doctor can regenerate indefinitely, he is effectively immortal (like Tolkeins elves, still subject to irreparable damage, but otherwise immortal). That changes his perception on life and reality. If he was immortal, I think he would have taken more risks at all sorts of points. If he is just very long lived, through regeneration, he still needs to take care and not waste the regeneration.
You do realise there are quite a lot of numbers between 12 and infinity, don't you?
No-one takes the Bible's statement about limiting the lifespan of man to 120 years to mean that if you've lived past 120, you've cheated death and will now be immortal.
Posted by The Revolutionist (# 4578) on
:
The reason that the 12 regenerations rule shouldn't be ignored is:
1) You shouldn't just disregard any rules that the audience remembers. It's fine to ignore plot points from old stories if no-one except the relatively small number of dedicated fans will notice. The 12 regenerations rule has passed into the mythology of the show in a way that, say, the circumstances of Atlantis's destruction haven't (3 times and counting... let's have an Atlantis crossover and make it 4!)
2) More importantly, you can get good mileage out of a story about how the Doctor cheats death. If the writers just ignore it or explain it away with a throwaway line, then it's a missed opportunity dramatically.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Fair enough. But I think Sandifer is right to at least raise the question of why the audience remembers something that wasn't actually flagged as a great big important issue at the time.
I think it's having a number, as much as anything. A nice, concrete number. Geeky fan minds tend to remember things like that.
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Does anyone really expect Moff to explain anything? He's shown time and time again that he only cares about making a big immediate splash, and isn't bothered about logic, continuity or consistency. He needs to go, and be replaced by someone who cares about the show.
Nooooooooooo! Moffat, Gattis et al do care about the show, but maybe not in the same way as the fans. As it's their job, they care about telling good stories that get ratings so the show gets recommissioned or they get asked to do other things. They have a living to earn just like the rest of us. (And we may have never got the marvellous Sherlock if Who hadn't done so well. ) Continuity and logic are fine, but not if they get in the way of the other things.
It's the fans who get worked up about continuity and logic etc. But all the big TV SF / Fantasy universes have holes that you could drive a bus through! Thanks to the Simpsons, we have an explanation for those. The elves did it. *
Tubbs
* 10th Halloween episode, the Collector. It was on the other night!
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Does anyone really expect Moff to explain anything? He's shown time and time again that he only cares about making a big immediate splash, and isn't bothered about logic, continuity or consistency. He needs to go, and be replaced by someone who cares about the show.
You mean like Davies? No, you obviously don't mean Davies - since when did Davies care about logic, continuity, or consistency? Davies didn't care about the show - he only brought it back from cancellation.
How about Ian Levine? He cared about logic, continuity and consistency, when he was continuity advisor. He cared so much about the show his interventions got the show cancelled.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Totally accept that Who has never been entirely consistent; I suspect that would be impossible for any show that's lasted so long. But since Moff took over it's been downright silly - every season has thrown up huge questions that have never been answered. It seems to me that he's bored with Who, and not giving it his full attention.
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
I've just come across this on Facebook - two of my favourite men ... it's quite lovely
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
Brilliantly done - and now I want to see this happen sooooo much ...
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Totally accept that Who has never been entirely consistent; I suspect that would be impossible for any show that's lasted so long. But since Moff took over it's been downright silly - every season has thrown up huge questions that have never been answered. It seems to me that he's bored with Who, and not giving it his full attention.
You could say the same about Russell T. And people did. . Anyway, remember it wasn't them. Elves.
Tubbs
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Does anyone really expect Moff to explain anything? He's shown time and time again that he only cares about making a big immediate splash, and isn't bothered about logic, continuity or consistency. He needs to go, and be replaced by someone who cares about the show.
You mean like Davies? No, you obviously don't mean Davies - since when did Davies care about logic, continuity, or consistency? Davies didn't care about the show - he only brought it back from cancellation.
How about Ian Levine? He cared about logic, continuity and consistency, when he was continuity advisor. He cared so much about the show his interventions got the show cancelled.
Wasn't he the reason that first half of the Eighth Doctor pilot is McCoy setting the scene and blathering on about the Master and Skaro rather than actual plot ...?! And, given how good McGann's cameo for the 50th was, the more annoyed I am that the pilot was too useless to be picked up. Must hunt down some of the Big Finish stuff McGann did.
Tubbs
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
How about Ian Levine?
Wasn't he the reason that first half of the Eighth Doctor pilot is McCoy setting the scene and blathering on about the Master and Skaro rather than actual plot ...?! And, given how good McGann's cameo for the 50th was, the more annoyed I am that the pilot was too useless to be picked up. Must hunt down some of the Big Finish stuff McGann did.
I don't think Levine himself had any influence on the series beyond the Davison and Colin Baker years. But his habits of thought live on among fandom in less structured form.
On Big Finish, Season Four of the Lucie Miller series is perhaps the best constructed Doctor Who series ever. Otherwise I've just dipped in. Chimes of Midnight has people who think it's the best Doctor Who story ever. (I think that's a bit strong.)
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
Something else I've just picked up on Facebook: this. I'm quite prepared to give Capaldi a chance and am eager to see what he makes of it, but oh Matt! I don't want you to go ...
Posted by Sparrow (# 2458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Dr Who tube map for your delectation and delight.
That is so cool! But it's not the London underground is it?
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
No. It's done in the style of the Tube Map but it lacks, as you have correctly noted, the loop that is the Circle Line, and a few other things aren't quite what they should be either. Just put it down to the timey-wimey wibbly-wobbly effect.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pine Marten:
Something else I've just picked up on Facebook: this. I'm quite prepared to give Capaldi a chance and am eager to see what he makes of it, but oh Matt! I don't want you to go ...
Why did I click that? I saw that going around yesterday and I said to myself: Kelly, don't click that, you'll only torture yourself.
![[Waterworks]](graemlins/bawling.gif)
Also Spot on.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
(Just to add: I have said this before but I will keep saying it: I hpe whatever Mr. Smith has in store in the future includes working with kids, because he has really got the knack. I stake my professional opinion on that. If I ran a school of my own, I would hire him on the spot.)
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
Yes. Absolutely. Yes.
Posted by ArachnidinElmet (# 17346) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
(Just to add: I have said this before but I will keep saying it: I hpe whatever Mr. Smith has in store in the future includes working with kids, because he has really got the knack. I stake my professional opinion on that. If I ran a school of my own, I would hire him on the spot.)
He's just started playing Patrick Bateman in the American Psycho musical, so maybe the project after next
[ 19. December 2013, 22:40: Message edited by: ArachnidinElmet ]
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
FUCK.
He will hit that out of the park.
[Gratuitous edit: How the hell do you make that a musical???)
[ 20. December 2013, 02:27: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
And anyway, I wasn't necessarily talking about an acting gig. One can become involved with youth theater workshops by day and dismember one's yuppie co-workers by night, can't one?
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
News just in... The Doctor has had a female incarnation.
Posted by Eigon (# 4917) on
:
I love Strax!
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
News just in... The Doctor has had a female incarnation.
Hmmm - I wouldn't build too much on that. In the same report Strax also describes Rose as "an earth boy". I'm not sure human gender is his strong point.
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
News just in... The Doctor has had a female incarnation.
Hmmm - I wouldn't build too much on that. In the same report Strax also describes Rose as "an earth boy". I'm not sure human gender is his strong point.
Yeah, it sounds as a misunderstanding of Paul McGann's long hair* (I did wonder till Rose if it was an extended universe story, and before watching of course wondered if it made Fatal Death canon). Mind you it is still another chip in the wall.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
News just in... The Doctor has had a female incarnation.
Hmmm - I wouldn't build too much on that. In the same report Strax also describes Rose as "an earth boy". I'm not sure human gender is his strong point.
I'm quite sure human gender ISN'T his strong point. It's been a recurring joke.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
ADDENDUM: And in Strax's report on Christmas, he calls Jenny a boy. Again.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
Well, SOME of us have been celebrating it!
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
No thanks. The Doctor should always be male. Start changing his gender and you lose one of the essential qualities that makes him the Doctor. It just becomes a role that can be played by any actor. He might just as well regenerate as a Sontaran next time, or that warty green lizard woman who keeps popping up.
Meanwhile, here's the average face of the Doctor - it's a curious mixture that looks oddly familiar, yet (even though you know why) it isn't easy to place why, exactly.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Meanwhile, here's the average face of the Doctor - it's a curious mixture that looks oddly familiar, yet (even though you know why) it isn't easy to place why, exactly.
This might just be me, but I think it looks like former companion Ian Chesterton.
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
Adeodatus, Ian Chesterton was my immediate thought when I saw it, too.
So now we know the truth. And the Doctor's name.
And I'd always hoped that the Doctor's real name was indeed John Smith.
M.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
Ariel, I'm guessing you didn't click my link, because you seem to be riffing off of something I didn't say. Or didn't think I said.
[ 24. December 2013, 18:32: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Did anyone click the link? It was a subject change.
Your link? Yes. I got sort of caught up in the Matt Smith article.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
Oh, I thought you were responding to my post with your last.
(sorry folks, I edited to make my question more clear.)
[ 24. December 2013, 18:33: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
I did click your link and I did read the Matt Smith article and I did wonder what this had to do with celebrating the Doctor being a woman, though I couldn't see it explicitly, and then my mind sort of drifted to that concept which is why I posted what I did because I assumed you were celebrating the idea of the Doctor being a woman, and (as there was nothing particularly controversial in the link) my mind moved away from the link and towards the concept instead.
[ 24. December 2013, 18:37: Message edited by: Ariel ]
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
I should have put in something explanatory. As it was =,the thread had been dormant for several hours, and I just leapt in where it left off, figuring the topic could change.
Really,while they were deciding, I had opinions, but why would I dredge up all that while we are all kind of bonding over the finale? I am currently too consumed with Doctor Grief to get on any soapbox.
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
No one is celebrating the Doctor being a woman. If you were to click my link from a few days back you would find Strax assuming that the eighth doctor was female because of the long hair. My comment that the Doctor had had a female incarnation was me riffing on that. Sometimes people can be too literal.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
Anyway, the article I linked was wonderful, and made me a little wobbly and sentimental, and what made me smile that while the author is proclaiming to the world that every body is missing this wonderful secret about Smith, some of us have been discussing said secret-- which I will call, "The Kid Thing"-- since Season One. 'Bout time you got with the program, BBC editorialist.
Sorry my enthusiasm caused me to be obscure.
[ 24. December 2013, 19:56: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
I should have put in something explanatory. As it was =,the thread had been dormant for several hours, and I just leapt in where it left off, figuring the topic could change.
I clicked it, and I think it's absolutely spot on, and the clip at the bottom with the little girl is just , but like you I'm a bit too at the moment. I keep telling people 'if I don't watch it, it won't happen'.
*breaks out new box of tissues*
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Stumbling Pilgrim:
I keep telling people 'if I don't watch it, it won't happen'.
*breaks out new box of tissues*
You, too??
I wish I could figure out a way to link to the despondent bitstrip I made after one too many heartbreaking tributes.
[ 24. December 2013, 20:14: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
It's Christmas, Kelly. Don't worry about it. I should have had my brain in gear, paid more attention and not tried to see your post as following on from Orfeo's.
Merry Christmas.
(I feel slightly despondent that we'll never get a decent run of John Hurt episodes. He's just usurped McGann and Davison as my favourite. Capaldi had better be good.)
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
(I feel slightly despondent that we'll never get a decent run of John Hurt episodes. He's just usurped McGann and Davison as my favourite. Capaldi had better be good.)
'Tis true, John Hurt was awesome. But Capaldi will be good. He won me over with half a second of an angry look in The Day of the Doctor.
Meanwhile, I think I've posted this before, but ... Merry Christmas from Strax. (All sing along, now.)
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
]Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Merry Christmas from Strax.
[ 25. December 2013, 11:35: Message edited by: Stumbling Pilgrim ]
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Stumbling Pilgrim:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
I should have put in something explanatory. As it was =,the thread had been dormant for several hours, and I just leapt in where it left off, figuring the topic could change.
I clicked it, and I think it's absolutely spot on, and the clip at the bottom with the little girl is just , but like you I'm a bit too at the moment. I keep telling people 'if I don't watch it, it won't happen'.
*breaks out new box of tissues*
I get this totally. I'm dreading watching it, even though I'm very happy with the next actor.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
(Regarding the little girl clip-- I just said this on FB)
I avoided clicking that link because I was afraid, via a couple descriptions of it, that the conversation turned into a heroic Doctor moment, but the real magic is Smith admitting that he is scared of the Angels and he kind of likes being scared of the Angels. And he's kind without talking down to the little girl. The man gets kids.
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
***
spoilers
***
You were right, Smith was brilliant with the children.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
OK, I'll start. Underwhelming last episode. I may be alone in this but I felt it dragged on a lot, had a fair amount of padding and lacked originality. Looking forward to Capaldi taking over, though.
Posted by Yonatan (# 11091) on
:
I enjoyed it, but I agree it dragged slightly. As sometimes happens, everything got cleared up a little too neatly and quickly at the end. Is there anything regeneration energy can't do - even allowing for the fact that it was energy +++ and granting him a whole new cycle.
However, I did find the last 20 minutes genuinely moving and poignant and have the satisfaction of knowing that my prediction regarding how the Doctor would carry on was correct. Also a nice allusion to the (in)famous Doctor knock knock joke.
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
I thought it was awful.
M.
Posted by Late Paul (# 37) on
:
It was everything that's both good and bad about Moffat. Some great moments, some funny lines but an eye-wateringly convoluted plot and callbacks which are either fun or annoying depending on your pov. I liked about 50% of it.
Oh and someone's got some serious issues about Church/religion/sex. ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
Also underwhelmed. Of course there were some good bits but it seemed like a episode for tidying up some loose ends and passing on the Doctor baton rather than a good story.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
In terms of story, it was not too great. That is so often the case for changeovers. But I was impressed by the passion and emotion shown by Smith as he knew his time was coming to an end. I think he was sad to leave to role, and some - most - of that emotion was genuine.
Posted by Jammy Dodger (# 17872) on
:
Likewise a bit underwhelmed - some nice touches and details but overall thought it felt like a mash-up of previous episodes rather than anything original.
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
With all the big End-of-the-universe-as-we-know-it stuff it was quite a small story about relationships. The Doctor and Clara, the Doctor and the space nun whatever her name was (cool costume). The Daleks, Cybermen, Silence, stuff was all trimings in the end.
I liked the small relational story, and I liked the big story. I just feel the two stories could have fitted together a little bit better.
Can't wait to see how the 12th/14th Doctor turns out.
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
I'm going for 13th. John Hurt counts and David Tennant just once - I'm sure he said he terminated the regeneration before it completed although if I watch the episode again I will look out for it.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
I thought the whole thing was rather silly, I'm afraid. Was it any more than Moffat trying to establish himself in Who-history as "the man who solved the regeneration problem"? Smith has only just been bumped up to 12, why make him 13?
ETA I think we were told that 10 regenerated but kept himself looking the same for reasons of vanity. If Hurt is now 9, Eccleston would be 10. Is there a moment we saw that might count, and does Eccleston-Doctor seem a likely victim of vanity?
[ 25. December 2013, 22:07: Message edited by: Robert Armin ]
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
It was supposed to be a serious piece about dying and moving on, and it did that part rather well. I don't think it will ever be one of my favourite episodes. The comedy bits fell flat. I'd have liked Clara's Christmas dinner to have had more to do with the rest of the plot. But the emotional bits worked well for me.
Posted by George Spigot (# 253) on
:
Good grief that was awful.
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
I think we were told that 10 regenerated but kept himself looking the same for reasons of vanity. If Hurt is now 9, Eccleston would be 10. Is there a moment we saw that might count, and does Eccleston-Doctor seem a likely victim of vanity?
I think if he said 10 (can't remember)it's a bit of dodgy counting - the reference was to the Doctor-formerly-known-as-10, ie Tennant, when in 'The Stolen Earth/Journey's End' he halted a regeneration after healing his body by diverting the remaining energy into his old severed hand thoughtfully provided by Captain Jack, thus (accidentally, I think) replicating himself. I believe the logic is that although it was an incomplete regeneration it used up a full complement of energy, therefore counting as one of his quota of 12.
As for the episode itself - I'm inclined to agree with those who feel the plot was secondary to the relationship stories, and about Clara's faith in him - faith that eventually moved a mountain in the shape of the Time Lords. On that reckoning it was very moving, and a worthy send-off in that it gave Matt Smith a golden chance to show what he can do, which he grabbed with both hands. Matt - not one of my favourite episodes, but definitely one of my favourite performances by any Doctor ever.
Potential spoiler in this paragraph:
And as for me - I managed to last until I saw the fish fingers and custard, and pretty much lost it at 'Raggedy Man - goodnight'. Did she have to say goodnight?
Posted by ACK (# 16756) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Stumbling Pilgrim:But what is perplexing is - was Smith Doctor (fed up with numbers now) aware that Capaldi Doctor was going to be present at the rescue of Gallifrey? If he was, then surely he knows he isn't the last, so he has less reason to be so disturbed by going to Trenzalore, but if he wasn't then his presence would have messed up the calculations. I probably think too much sometimes ...
OK, obviously Capaldi was in The Day of the Doctor because (for me at least) his 2 seconds in it managed to steal the show.
But, I finally worked out how it can fit in logically with Smith not knowing that there would be at least another regeneration.
He forgot.
The Doctors before him all forgot about saving Gallifrey, and since Capaldi is in Smith's future, he likewise forgot about him. All this forgetting being hand-waved by some comment from Hurt and Tennant about things being out of sync (and maybe all that forgetting technology in the Tower).
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
Watched it again now, completely sober. Perhaps 'awful' was a bit strong but still really poor. I can't see all the emotion some are talking about.
The Christmas dinner scenes seemed to have little to do with the rest of the plot - it could have been any device to keep Clara's timeline short compared to the Doctor's; the humour fell completely flat (what was the nudity stuff about? It was just childish); I don't think Matt Smith was convincing as a old man; I couldn't care less about the town of Christmas; the regeneration went on for ever and, at the end of the day, it was quite boring.
M.
Oh, and why did they use a blonde girl for the young Amy?
[ 26. December 2013, 11:56: Message edited by: M. ]
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Agreed M - there was lots of stuff that didn't go anywhere: nudity, Christmas meal, baldness, aging, truth field. In any story the details should do something - advance the plot, develop character, whatever - and these didn't. I'm afraid it confirms my feeling that Moff is a lazy writer (on Who; Sherlock is a different matter) and it's time for him to move on. How do I apply for the job?
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Add me to the list of the underwhelmed. I found it strange, meandering and basically very unsatisfying.
Which is such a shame after finding both of the last 2 episodes (Name of the Doctor and Day of the Doctor) to be excellent.
I know it wasn't trying to be funny all that often, but there was probably only one joke that really made me laugh. On the emotional side... the part about everyone being different people, I liked. Most of the rest just seemed to drag on with no real form.
There was also the typical recent tendency to have a lot of dialogue packed with dense ideas and name-checking previous stories which gave me the urge to pause and rewind, most of which probably didn't make much sense other than for the sake of sounding twisty and providing name-checks of previous stories. Which again annoyed me, because in The Day of the Doctor I finally got witty dialogue that didn't make me go "what? let me hear that again?".
(It fundamentally annoys me because I'd actually like to think I'm a highly intelligent viewer who can grasp clever dialogue that doesn't spell everything out for me. I mean, I loved the movie Inception and kept track what was going on the entire time. No other show causes me to keep reaching for the rewind anywhere near as much Doctor Who does in recent years.)
Mind you, they did at least pay themselves out: talk fast, hope it works out and then claim credit. Yup. You've been doing it a lot. Please stop, try a new approach with a new lead actor.
Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on
:
Loved it.
All of it.
P
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Agreed M - there was lots of stuff that didn't go anywhere: nudity, Christmas meal, baldness, aging, truth field. In any story the details should do something - advance the plot, develop character, whatever - and these didn't. I'm afraid it confirms my feeling that Moff is a lazy writer (on Who; Sherlock is a different matter) and it's time for him to move on.
Yes. All of those. I don't know how these things work but it's a shame that someone doesn't have a quick look over the script once it's worked out and say "Hang on a minute, this won't work/what does this lead to".
I think what got me particularly was the line up of all the Doctor's enemies. I mean, "here we go again". We already had the grand parade of massed Daleks, Sontarans, Cybermen and everyone else the Doctor has ever annoyed in some previous episodes. It wasn't necessary to introduce it again, the novelty had worn off. Sometimes, less is more and a more minimalist, understated approach would have worked better. I'm afraid that was the point at which I got bored enough to catch up on the news headlines on my phone while waiting for the grand denouement. That stuff with Clara was just silly (especially her wandering round with a roast turkey after the plot had clearly moved on and decided not to include any more of the dinner).
On the plus side, Matt Smith was quite convincing as an aged Doctor and the first sight of Peter Capaldi was quite unnerving. I'm looking forward to seeing how he turns out. As an older man, he isn't going to have the energy to do all those frenetic dashes through corridors so we might actually get some more plotlike plots, and hopefully there will be fewer lovelorn companions.
Moffatt has probably been putting much of of his time and concentration into Sherlock. That shows, but IMO it also shows that not much has been left over for Who.
[ 26. December 2013, 12:53: Message edited by: Ariel ]
Posted by Starbug (# 15917) on
:
I was confused, not least by the fact that I thought the crack in the wall was a Very Bad Thing Indeed in previous episodes, but suddenly it became the Thing That Saved The Day. Very strange.
The Christmas dinner was a waste of time. Why get Madge-from-Benidorm to play the granny and then only give her a couple of lines? She had a very emotive starring role in Call the Midwife last year, so was wasted in a bit part. And what's with the unseen nudity?
Oh and more daleks (yawn).
Having said all that, I loved Handles the Cyber-head. And the last 20 minutes were incredibly moving. I was sceptical about Matt Smith when he was first announced because I thought him too young, but he proved me wrong - yesterday, I really didn't want him to leave. It was very sad and I'll admit to sobbing through the final scenes.
I didn't see the point of making him age, though, unless it was to introduce the kiddies to the idea of an older Doctor.
I hope they give Peter Capaldi some better plots. He's a writer and director as well, so may be able to challenge some of the weaker timey-wimey stuff.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
I liked Handles too - but add him to my list of things that didn't make sense please.
Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on
:
Just watched it again, liked it even more.
P
Posted by St. Gwladys (# 14504) on
:
I just found the whole thing rather confusing - if you asked me to give a resume of the plot, I don't think I could.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
It's simple. Clara was cooking Christmas dinner for some people we've never seen before and tried to pass the Doctor off as her naked Swedish boyfriend. They then tried to get the turkey cooked in the Tardis to save time. Somehow, they ended up on Trenzalore and Clara got deported back to Earth and was wandering round with the turkey for a while.
Meanwhile the Doctor (now with clothes on) was growing rapidly older on Trenzalore, and regenerated into someone with a pair of really sharp shoes who couldn't fly the Tardis. At this point Clara wandered back in with the turkey.
In between there was something about something else that didn't involve the turkey, nudity or Christmas lunch. It wasn't very interesting though and it didn't really have much to do with the plot so I've left that out.
[ 26. December 2013, 18:23: Message edited by: Ariel ]
Posted by ArachnidinElmet (# 17346) on
:
Me neither. It's a bit baffling that essentially the same team made 'Day of the Doctor'. Good acting all round mind.
Posted by Eigon (# 4917) on
:
I thought it was brilliant - I started crying when Handles 'died' and didn't stop - but that last line made me laugh, and that was the right note on which to leave it. Also, I think that Tasha Lem was a new regeneration of River Song ("You've been fighting the psychopath within you all your life!").
BTW, I see that Gran was also in Vengeance on Varos, watching the torture porn on TV!
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
It's simple. Clara was cooking Christmas dinner for some people we've never seen before and tried to pass the Doctor off as her naked Swedish boyfriend. They then tried to get the turkey cooked in the Tardis to save time. Somehow, they ended up on Trenzalore and Clara got deported back to Earth and was wandering round with the turkey for a while.
Meanwhile the Doctor (now with clothes on) was growing rapidly older on Trenzalore, and regenerated into someone with a pair of really sharp shoes who couldn't fly the Tardis. At this point Clara wandered back in with the turkey.
In between there was something about something else that didn't involve the turkey, nudity or Christmas lunch. It wasn't very interesting though and it didn't really have much to do with the plot so I've left that out.
that about sums it up! I'm another who was rather underwhelmed by it, but I'm going to watch it again to give it another chance. I'm really going to miss Matt, though - but glad that he got to 'dance' again
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
I could forgive a lot for the line when Matt is asking all the other aliens why they were there - "I've got OCD what's your excuse?"
Also, yes, teaching the kids to 'Doctor dance'.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
I'm going to have to watch it again. On Christmas Day I watched it in the company of Not-We (who loved it, by the way, and just sort of went with all the references to the past few years despite not being regular viewers). I thought it was an odd "shape", the pacing somewhat off. I think I might like it better when I can absorb it on my own.
Peter Capaldi is scary. And might there be more to "I don't suppose you know how to fly this thing?" than meets the eye? - A return, perhaps, to more aimless and uncontrolled wanderings for the Doctor?
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
I was struck by how similar the latest Dr. Who episode and the latest Harry Potter film seemed to be. Both very zany, hyper, flitting from time zone to time zone, fighting myriad different threats, but all home in time for tea (well almost...). At times, I found it hard to remember which one I was watching, as they both appeared to be so similar.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
I thought it was an odd "shape", the pacing somewhat off.
This. Most emphatically.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
Having thought about it, I am going to defend the episode a little through the various complaints:
(1) The regeneration took a long time: Yes, but at least the script acknowledged it. The Doctor states that it is taking longer because it is a new regeneration cycle settling in first. So, long, but explained. And, frankly, do you all remember the Tennant-to-Smith regeneration? After he started regenerating, the Doctor went on a global tour to look at every person he ever met (including go off into space to find Captain Jack and then to go back to find Donna's father to borrow a quid to then go and buy a lottery ticket--presumably having gone into the future to find the winning number--and then dropping in at the wedding). Compared to that, the Smith-to-Capaldi regeneration was fast!
(2) Now regeneration energy can do anything including wiping every stinking Dalek off the face of the planet: Yeah, but, again, the script at least gave a nod to an explanation. When he gets the regeneration energy, the Doctor mentions that "the rules" are off and we have "new science" now. Besides, again, there was precedent: Tennant-to-Smith, the regeneration energy devastated the TARDIS. At the time, I figured that happened because the Doctor had a load of radiation absorbed into his body and the explosiveness was the release of all that energy during the regeneration. Something of the same could have occurred here. Special energy, one-time regen trick.
(3) Moffat went out of his way to be the man who fixed the regeneration problem: Ummmm, no. It is the flipping 50th Anniversary year. What better time to re-boot the regen cycle? Personally, I would have considered it inappropriate to do it at any other time. I expected it to happen during "The Day of the Doctor" but, frankly, there was already rather a lot going on in that episode, so it made sense to hold it over for the Christmas special. But it had to be done this year to celebrate 50 years. Waiting for the 75th anniversary wouldn't have been practical.
(4) Why did the Doctor stay on the planet for centuries?: Again, the script gave an explanation. Maybe a shaky one, but it is not like they ignored the issue. Time Lords are on the other side of the crack and want to come back. But the Nasties (particularly the Daleks) want to stop it. So the Doctor can't bring the TLs back without reigniting the Time War, which nobody wants. But if he leaves, the Daleks will destroy everything to prevent Gallifrey from ever coming back. The Doctor doesn't want that: He wants to bring his planet back somehow. He isn't going to abandon them. As long as he is on the planet, there is a stalemate. Oh, and for at least 300 years, he was there without his TARDIS, so the option of leaving was somewhat limited.
(5) The whole nudity/turkey/boyfriend thing was stupid: Ummmmm. Yeah, okay. You got me there. It was stupid.
And, just as a topper, I am so glad that they FINALLY got around to explaining (sort of) why the TARDIS exploded way back when. I had given up hoping that they would.
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Peter Capaldi is scary. And might there be more to "I don't suppose you know how to fly this thing?" than meets the eye? - A return, perhaps, to more aimless and uncontrolled wanderings for the Doctor?
I rather hope so. Just as the sonic screwdriver has become a little too much of a magic wand solving every problem, having the TARDIS perform with pinpoint accuracy takes away a bit of suspense. In the old days, you couldn't use the TARDIS to make short jumps here and there/now and then because once you took off you had no way of controlling where/when it went. I kind of miss those days. At least one season of being unable to control the TARDIS would be fun.
Structurally, though, my guess is this: the Doctor wants to restore Gallifrey. But it was lost. But he just found it. But now he can't control the TARDIS, so Gallifrey is as good as lost again. That sets up next season of the Doctor trying to regain his ability to control the TARDIS, to then get back to the crack, to then restore Gallifrey in time for next Christmas to set up a plot cycle for the year after that. Fun!
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Regeneration never used to be this much of a spectacle. In the old days, the Doctor quietly morphed into his new appearance and that was that. Now it's all seething flares of blazing golden light and writhing agony as his head dissolves.
Give it a few years more and there'll probably start to be some kind of fanfare and a dance routine before everybody runs for cover and the Doctor explodes noisily in a shower of gold and silver sparks, taking half the surroundings with him.
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
I liked the regeneration. As pointed out, Tennant to Smith took longer. I liked the suddenness of it, suddenly Capaldi's shocked face was there.
The Christmas dinner scene was there because this was a Christmas episode. It didn't have to make sense.
The nudity thing was there to get me, for the first time, to wonder what Clara looks like naked.
You want a crazy Christmas Doctor Who episode? Check out "The feast of Steven" within the "The Daleks' Master Plan" series of 1965/66 which saw Lancashire accents spoken in what was supposed to be Liverpool, utter farce, Buster Keaton and the Doctor speaking to the viewers at the end.
I thought I saw the Master at one point in the episode (the recent one, I mean), walking with a stick in silhouette.
The Cyberman-head dying scene wasn't emotional for me, I mean, he had only appeared that episode and I can't get too emotionally attached to a Cyberman part.
The bit after the Doctor got more lives showed Matt Smith doing excellent stuff, and that's when the tears started.
Can't wait to see the next episode. Do we really have to wait till autumn?
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
The nudity thing was there to get me, for the first time, to wonder what Clara looks like naked.
I think the bolded words here are a fib.
[ 27. December 2013, 15:21: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
My houseguests and I thought it was sentimental schmalz.
Posted by Kitten (# 1179) on
:
I liked it
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
So how do we number Capaldi's Doctor. I go for Number one of the next generation regeneration.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
He would be 13 wouldn't he?
Or is that 14 - I've really lost count, what with John Hurt, Paul McGann and the Valeyard being in and then out and all that.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
Personally, I am just trying to cultivate the habit of using the actor name (e.g., Tennant Doctor; Smith Doctor; Capaldi Doctor) instead of numbers.
But to try to think numerically: McGann counts. He is #8. In terms of regeneration, Hurt comes next, but then we have to address the issue of whether he is a "Doctor." That was Smith Doctor's whole point. Hurt was a regeneration but not a "Doctor" because he betrayed the promise of the name "Doctor." Or, at least, he appeared to until we found out the truth in the Day of the Doctor. So, pre-Day, he would not be in the "Doctor count," but would be in the "regeneration count." Post-Day, I have to say that I personally opt to call him Doctor again, so Hurt Doctor is #9. Eccleston (did I spell that anywhere close to right?) was the Doctor formerly known as Nine who becomes the new #10, Tennant (the Tenth Doctor) is the new #11. And, yeah, he burnt up an extra bunch of regen energy, but he didn't change so we don't count him as BOTH 11 & 12. He is just 11. Smith (the Eleventh Doctor that was) is the new #12, so Capaldi would therefore be...the Doctor.
[ETA: The Valeyard doesn't count at all based on my view of his existence discussed up-thread. He isn't even a real person, much less a Doctor. He is a computer program with delusions of grandeur.]
[ 27. December 2013, 18:26: Message edited by: Hedgehog ]
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
I've just watched it again, and liked it a lot more. The pacing now feels comfy up to the point where we get the very old Doctor. I still don't like how the war, as opposed to the siege, kept going so long.
But I've worked out why the truth field was there - it ties up a loose end from last year, when Dorium Maldovar said something about "when the question is asked, and all must answer truly".
And this time, Matt's final musings in the TARDIS just melted me. "I will never forget when the Doctor was me" - beautiful! He's been bloody good, has Mr Smith.
Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on
:
I fell asleep.
Woke for the last five minutes with no great sense of loss.
My first impressions of Matt Smith, all that time ago, was "I'll wait and see", followed swiftly by "Oh, yes, just perfect in the role", culminating in "Could we have someone a bit more grown up please?" so seeing the regeneration into someone who looks a bit more like The Doctor of old was worth waking up for.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
It's not elements like staying on the planet for centuries that I have a problem with. It's the overall pacing and the arc.
Because we started with this notion of basically every nasty race in the universe turning up. We've had that before, in The Pandorica Opens, and I think it worked quite well in that it was clear what everyone was waiting for... and then there was a neat twist in precisely what they were waiting for.
But this time, I just don't think it worked as well dramatically, because what's created isn't anticipation, it's a stalemate. And a stalemate that doesn't actually require every nasty race in the universe to be there.
I agree with all the observations I've read that argue only the Daleks were actually necessary, in the sense of being mortal enemies of the Time Lords who wouldn't want to see them return (although there's an argument that perhaps everybody would dislike the Time Lords returning because everybody would be affected by a new Time War). But a more serious problem - and one the script weakly tries to acknowledge with the OCD joke (which is nice in itself, but doesn't solve the problem) - is that everybody turns up without any real idea why they are turning up.
People might point to the nudity bit as being gratuitous, and it is, but I actually think having Weeping Angels pop up out of the snow is far more seriously gratuitous and pointless and annoying. We have to have the Doctor's enemies greatest hits turn up because it's a finale? No, no we don't. You certainly CAN have them all turn up, but there's got to be a convincing reason for it.
To go from grand, space opera all-the-enemies-gathered as an opening to a friendly old man teaching the kiddies how to see off passing Cybermen just did not work, tonally. There's nothing wrong with small intimate stories, but there's something quite wrong with giving small intimate stories an opening act that comes from a different kind of story-telling.
And you can, in fact, juxtapose small-scale homely elements with grandeur. Just look at Lord of the Rings for a masterclass in this. But the timing and order of presentation are really, really important to it being successful.
[ 28. December 2013, 01:09: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
I thought that the everyone turned up to see what was going on as it seemed like a big thing. When the Doctor worked it out the Daleks hung around, not to stop the Time Lords getting through but to launch a pre-emptive strike when they came through and everyone else hung around to stop the Time Lords because they didn't want another time war.
This is after watching it just once so far - I may change my understanding after a second go.
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
The Doctor was in Christmas for 300 years and then some. 300 years! That's the Roundheads to the Second World War. And in that time, it seems, that fashions didn't change, the town and its buildings didn't change and technology didn't change. The good denizens of Christmas got to what looked like a sort of kitsch early-mid Victorian period and then stopped.
And the activist Doctor spends 300 years sitting down making/repairing wooden toys (in a tower that never changes in 300 years - doesn't it need maintenance?). Nobody thinks about how they might protect themselves? The Doctor doesn't help prepare any defences, just fights individual enemies as they come along.
It's just somehow lazy.
I'll gloss over the fact that this was a farming community that seems permanently cold with only 2 minutes' sunlight a day - no doubt the crops evolved to flourish under those circumstances.
M.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
I think the reason for the nudity was to make Clara uncomfortable.
And someone clearly wanted to see Matt in the nuddy on set.
The reason for the angels around Christmas, as I see it, was to ensure that they focused on the town, because the surrounding area was dangerous. That would also be why the massed baddies couldn't land and attack from the ground.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Totally agree that the pacing was lazy. To which I would add, there was a great deal of exposition; we had several lectures on why things were happening. That's weak writing, in my book.
Posted by Ceannaideach (# 12007) on
:
What I'd like to know is this: what happened to the Valeyard? If Matt's Doctor was the final incarnation, then shouldn't the Valeyard have made some sort of official appearance? (Dream Lord not withstanding)
I realise, of course, that the source of this information comes from the Master, hardly the most reliable of Time Lords.
I did like the little nod to The Five Doctors. And as for not being able to operate the TARDIS by remote control... Has the Doctor forgotten the Rani and her remote control TARDIS?
For what it's worth I enjoyed the episode and am certainly looking forward to seeing Capaldi's Doctor in action.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
Taking into account Pyx_e's Law, which states, more or less, that Even bad Doctor Who is better than anything else on television, and also that saying this was "bad" Doctor Who would be overstating it considerably, I still think there were significant problems with The Time of the Doctor.
And what they boil down to, I think, are two things:
1. Moffat had loose ends that needed tying up. This is a problem if you've created the loose ends without deciding in advance how they're going to be tied up, and I strongly suspect this was the position Moffat was in. Okay, I think he foresaw all along that Matt's last story might feature the Return of Amy's Crack (sorry - couldn't resist), but I think apart from that he had lots of little loose ends flailing around and created a story to resolve them. That is not good story-writing.
2. The team felt a need to showcase Matt's talent one last time. So they thought, get him to act old, get him to show a good range of emotion, give him a couple of really high quality speeches. Matt, of course, knocked everything they threw at him out of the park. But again, doing this doesn't make for good story-writing.
Matt's "moments" were pure gold, and genuinely moving. Jenna, too, played beautifully opposite him. But even so, they couldn't dispel the feeling that these were gorgeous set pieces withing a rather messy story.
I hope Moffat has learned a very important lesson from the last few years: don't overcomplicate. Complex, timey-wimey stories were great when he was writing Coupling, and work well for individual episodes of Doctor Who, but they become boring when they turn into season arcs and multi-season arcs. Nearly four years on, I don't care about Amy's Crack (sorry again); I don't care that "who blew up the TARDIS?" was unresolved at the end of that season. I don't really care that there were things unresolved relating to Madame Kovarian and The Silence. I wouldn't have minded much if we'd never seen Trenzalore again, and could have forgotten about it till he'd regenerated, say, another dozen times.
Still, in spite of all that, I liked The Time of the Doctor, mainly because I like Jenna Coleman and I think the show has been singularly blessed by the presence of Matt Smith.
And Pyx_e's Law still hold good.
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
There is nothing wrong with unresolved loose ends. The twenty seventh Doctor could always do something with them.
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Taking into account Pyx_e's Law, which states, more or less, that Even bad Doctor Who is better than anything else on television, and also that saying this was "bad" Doctor Who would be overstating it considerably, I still think there were significant problems with The Time of the Doctor.
And what they boil down to, I think, are two things:
1. Moffat had loose ends that needed tying up. This is a problem if you've created the loose ends without deciding in advance how they're going to be tied up, and I strongly suspect this was the position Moffat was in. Okay, I think he foresaw all along that Matt's last story might feature the Return of Amy's Crack (sorry - couldn't resist), but I think apart from that he had lots of little loose ends flailing around and created a story to resolve them. That is not good story-writing.
2. The team felt a need to showcase Matt's talent one last time. So they thought, get him to act old, get him to show a good range of emotion, give him a couple of really high quality speeches. Matt, of course, knocked everything they threw at him out of the park. But again, doing this doesn't make for good story-writing.
Matt's "moments" were pure gold, and genuinely moving. Jenna, too, played beautifully opposite him. But even so, they couldn't dispel the feeling that these were gorgeous set pieces withing a rather messy story.
I hope Moffat has learned a very important lesson from the last few years: don't overcomplicate. Complex, timey-wimey stories were great when he was writing Coupling, and work well for individual episodes of Doctor Who, but they become boring when they turn into season arcs and multi-season arcs. Nearly four years on, I don't care about Amy's Crack (sorry again); I don't care that "who blew up the TARDIS?" was unresolved at the end of that season. I don't really care that there were things unresolved relating to Madame Kovarian and The Silence. I wouldn't have minded much if we'd never seen Trenzalore again, and could have forgotten about it till he'd regenerated, say, another dozen times.
Still, in spite of all that, I liked The Time of the Doctor, mainly because I like Jenna Coleman and I think the show has been singularly blessed by the presence of Matt Smith.
And Pyx_e's Law still hold good.
It does, but Moffat is pushing it a tad. As you rightly say, lots of good set pieces do not make a coherent story. The excellent bits were excellent - Smith's riff about us all being different people throughout our lives, the battles, the arrival of the new Doctor, Amy's farewell to the raggedy man ... And lots of filler like the Christmas dinner sub-plot.
Although Moffat explained a lot of things, there's still tons left to explore - has the new Doctor forgotten all 11's days and where did the Time Lords go?!
Our TiVo box stopped recording just as the regeneration started so Moffat's grand moment was interrupted by some frantic scrambling around on iPlayer, some muttered cuss words and some chuckling from the cheap seats.
Looking forward to the new season! Moffat says the next set of stories will be simpler - let's hope that's not code for more complicated, convoluted time nonsense stretched over multiple seasons.
Tubbs
Posted by Late Paul (# 37) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
I hope Moffat has learned a very important lesson from the last few years: don't overcomplicate. Complex, timey-wimey stories were great when he was writing Coupling, and work well for individual episodes of Doctor Who, but they become boring when they turn into season arcs and multi-season arcs. Nearly four years on, I don't care about Amy's Crack (sorry again); I don't care that "who blew up the TARDIS?" was unresolved at the end of that season. I don't really care that there were things unresolved relating to Madame Kovarian and The Silence. I wouldn't have minded much if we'd never seen Trenzalore again, and could have forgotten about it till he'd regenerated, say, another dozen times.
But I suspect Moffat cares, and imagines the fans care too. And I can't help wondering whether it's a sign that the stories aren't as good as they could be that people generally don't care. In other words we should care about loose ends because if the stories are strong and tight then any loose ends will unravel key issues of character or plot.
But I think you're right that they need to not focus on that stuff. I think this is part of the mixed blessing of having a hard-core fan as a show-runner. He cares about things the enthusiastic but non-fan viewer doesn't. And those are the viewers that make up the vast majority of the audience that keep it on the air.
Any show that runs for more than a few episodes and is not merely procedural accumulates back-story. You see it all the time that shows in season 4 or 5 try to do things that are new or fresh and have to contradict (explicitly or not) stuff they laid down in season 1 or 2. If the show is a genre show then this earlier stuff is liable to be rules about how the world works. And however much this is true for other shows for Doctor Who with its 50 years of back-story...
I think if you want to pull this off you have to really go for it and make sure that what you get in exchange is worth it, really entertaining. If you're going to break continuity then do so boldly! (to paraphrase someone or other)
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
I finally got round to watching*, and neither my co-watcher, nor I were much impressed, compared with the 50th anniversary episode. It was bitty, and straggly, and not helpfully explanatory. In our opinion.
Having just found the Comic Relief episode starring loads of people afterwards, we preferred that.
*The first attempt at recording stopped shortly before the end, and, I think, Amy**. (I ran through fast to check, as I'd had power cuts.) **And was Amy wearing a wig?
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
Yes, both Karen and Matt wore wigs, as they had shaved their hair for current filming reasons. Moffat is quoted as saying that Karen's wig had been made from her own hair.
Posted by Og: Thread Killer (# 3200) on
:
Every time I wonder why a Dr. Who episode has x or y continuity or logic error, I am reminded that this has always been so.
Some of it was good fun but it seemed rather too crammed with ideas - as if it was written by a committee where every member had to have a bit. i.e. the script needed a good editing.
And the whole "I'm a young female companion so I must be in love with him bit" really really really must stop. If I want a rom-com, I'll get out a DVD of anything involving Drew Barrymore from the last 20 years.
I also thought Moffat had a list of things that happened in the last two regeneration shows and wanted to get some of that stuff in:
Companion that is the bestest ever acknowledged as so - check
Destroying the Daleks, again - check
Making peace with all people encountered - check
Next guy doesn't know what he is doing - check
I still hope for a lot of adventure with the older dude but I have my doubts.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
On a slight aside - I watch Dr Who at the Proms the other day. Most of the music was excellent, of course, but the standard action stuff.
However, the live performance of The Long Song must have disturbed the dust, because I felt something in my eye. It is still stunning, and a good example of how real quality music can be included in good SF shows.
The great story - with huge holes, but still great - and stunning music. that is DW showing what it does best.
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
And the whole "I'm a young female companion so I must be in love with him bit" really really really must stop. If I want a rom-com, I'll get out a DVD of anything involving Drew Barrymore from the last 20 years.
I've never really seen a romance element in Clara and Matt Smith's Doctor, they appear purely platonic to me. She tells her parents he's her boyfriend to get them off her back, she asks him to do it as a friend. Hence her so shocked by his nakedness. It's one of the things I like about Clara, I see her as a return to the traditional companion.
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
When they were under the influence of the truth field, didn't Clara blurt out something about travelling with the Doctor because she fancies him? It went by too quickly for me to catch but I thought there was something about that -- which I found a bit disappointing because up till then I'd been glad the Doctor/Clara thing wasn't getting all romantic. Hopefully bringing in Capaldi will change the dynamic.
On the topic of "tying up loose ends" -- I felt like this episode was entirely structured around the prophecy: "On the fields of Trenzalore, at the fall of the eleventh, when no living creature can speak falsely or fail to answer, a Question will be asked, a question that must never, ever be answered." It was a nice, mumbo-jumbo-y sounding prophecy but a terrible recipe for writing an episode -- especially a regeneration episode -- and especially a CHRISTMAS regeneration episode!
So it has to happen in a place called Trenzalore -- but as it's a Christmas episode, let's make it a town called Trenzalore on a planet called Christmas. And there has to be a war there, because it's the "fields of Trenzalore," and we have to put in a truth field for some reason so no one can speak falsely (although I thought they totally skipped over the "or fail to answer," bit; in essence, all the Doctor did there for 300+ years was fail to answer the question). And then they had to come up with a reason, first, why anyone would ever ask the question "Doctor Who" and second, why it was so vitally important not to answer it ... and somehow it had to all tie in to the "fall of the Eleventh." And ooh, did we mention it's Christmas? So as well as naming the town Christmas, better throw in a turkey dinner!
Once all that had been wedged in and loosely strung together, there wasn't much room left for coherence. I will admit though to crying a bit at Smith's farewell, even though he was never my favourite Doctor. Very glad they brought Amy back to say good-bye.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
So it has to happen in a place called Trenzalore -- but as it's a Christmas episode, let's make it a town called Trenzalore on a planet called Christmas.
Other way around. Planet was Trenzalore (which we'd been to a couple of episodes ago), town was Christmas.
[ 30. December 2013, 10:58: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
...
On the topic of "tying up loose ends" -- I felt like this episode was entirely structured around the prophecy: "On the fields of Trenzalore, at the fall of the eleventh, when no living creature can speak falsely or fail to answer, a Question will be asked, a question that must never, ever be answered." It was a nice, mumbo-jumbo-y sounding prophecy but a terrible recipe for writing an episode -- especially a regeneration episode -- and especially a CHRISTMAS regeneration episode!
...
But Clara answered the question by asking the Time Lords for help. It just wasn't the answer anyone was expecting. The Time Lords sent through the regeneration energy and then the crack shut. I'm totally confused about whether this means Gallifry / the Time Lords are back or not.
Tubbs
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Regeneration never used to be this much of a spectacle. In the old days, the Doctor quietly morphed into his new appearance and that was that. Now it's all seething flares of blazing golden light and writhing agony as his head dissolves.
Give it a few years more and there'll probably start to be some kind of fanfare and a dance routine before everybody runs for cover and the Doctor explodes noisily in a shower of gold and silver sparks, taking half the surroundings with him.
Isn't this the same with everything on TV (and, arguably in most of Western life) these days? It all has to be faster, noisier, more dramatic than ever before, or else it's B-O-R-I-N-G... I for one would prefer to return to a much slower paced life like it was in Dixon of Dock Green days. Now there's a thought for a future Dr. Who's Time Travel!
[ 30. December 2013, 16:13: Message edited by: Chorister ]
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Regeneration never used to be this much of a spectacle. In the old days, the Doctor quietly morphed into his new appearance and that was that. Now it's all seething flares of blazing golden light and writhing agony as his head dissolves.
That's surely because the SFX and CG people can do it ... the electronic smoke and mirrors have got more complex and the budget has presumably grown, too!
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
So it has to happen in a place called Trenzalore -- but as it's a Christmas episode, let's make it a town called Trenzalore on a planet called Christmas.
Other way around. Planet was Trenzalore (which we'd been to a couple of episodes ago), town was Christmas.
Absolutely right ... I knew the difference but I was typing faster than my brain was working!
And Clara may have "answered the question" by asking the Time Lords for help, but she only did that after the Doctor had been there alone for a very long time. My point is just that whatever mechanism ensured that the question MUST be answered, was obviously faulty, to allow him to stay there in the presence of the question but leave it unanswered for such a long time.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
I for one would prefer to return to a much slower paced life like it was in Dixon of Dock Green days. Now there's a thought for a future Dr. Who's Time Travel!
The question is, is the doorway of the Tardis high enough for the Doctor to be already wearing his helmet as he comes out, or will he have to carry it under his arm and carefully position it on his head before saying, "Evening, all"?
In any case, I think that most of the Doctor's assistants are more attractive than D.C. Andy Crawford ... but the ladies might disagree!
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
And Clara may have "answered the question" by asking the Time Lords for help, but she only did that after the Doctor had been there alone for a very long time. My point is just that whatever mechanism ensured that the question MUST be answered, was obviously faulty, to allow him to stay there in the presence of the question but leave it unanswered for such a long time.
But it still had to be answered, before the Doctor could escape. There was no other way through the impasse. It didn't mean it had to be answered immediately, just that once it had been asked, there was no other way out.
That works for me, anyway. I am easily convinced.
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
The question is, is the doorway of the Tardis high enough for the Doctor to be already wearing his helmet as he comes out, or will he have to carry it under his arm and carefully position it on his head before saying, "Evening, all"?
In any case, I think that most of the Doctor's assistants are more attractive than D.C. Andy Crawford ... but the ladies might disagree!
Well, bearing in mind the radio revival of 2008, it might not be entirely beyond the bounds of possibility ... (check out who's playing Andy Crawford)
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
And another thing, a tension in the episode was the uncertainty of whether the Doctor was going to die. We all knew that he wouldn't and, like in many episodes, there was the question of how he would get out of that mess. It would have been better if we hadn't known that there was going to be a next Doctor.
Imagine how boss it would have been to suddenly see Capaldi. We would have been just as shocked as Clara.
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
It would be wonderful if regenerations could be surprises, but I doubt that's possible in today's media world. Imagine if you didn't even know Matt Smith was quitting, much less who was replacing him, and then the shock of having the episode end like that! Was it ever like that in the original series, does anyone know? Or was it always known beforehand when the Doctor was going to regenerate, and as whom?
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
When David Tennant started to re-generate at the end of an episode my first though was "how did they keep that quiet?" and very quickly my second thought was "brilliant!!!!". Then he didn't re-generate which wasn't a surprise, I suppose, but was a small disappointment.
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
I watched Jon Pertwee, Tom Baker and Peter Davison re-generate and did not expect any of them.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pine Marten:
Yes, both Karen and Matt wore wigs, as they had shaved their hair for current filming reasons. Moffat is quoted as saying that Karen's wig had been made from her own hair.
I am getting a great deal of pleasure in imagining them rubbing each other's heads and baldy-bonding in the green room.
Aw, I like Karen. Maybe she didn't fit in with the poised, glamorous vision people had of the Companion,but I think she ans Smith sort of bring the kid out in each other, and I wish someone had capitalized on that.
Lots of people are stunning and glamorous. Not everyone can be glamorous but also shave their head bald and kill 'em on Saturday Night Live and zombify themselves (she talked some makeup folk form Walking Dead into it) and bowl a -- what was it, 265 game? Ah, the sandbagger.
Haters go ahead and hate, but I know a kindred spirit when I see one. Karen is my kinda gal, no matter what she ends up doing.
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
It would be wonderful if regenerations could be surprises, but I doubt that's possible in today's media world. Imagine if you didn't even know Matt Smith was quitting, much less who was replacing him, and then the shock of having the episode end like that! Was it ever like that in the original series, does anyone know? Or was it always known beforehand when the Doctor was going to regenerate, and as whom?
According to Philip Sandifer, the first one was a surprise, and what a surprise at that! Those viewers hadn't heard that Doctors can regenerate.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Rogue:
I watched Jon Pertwee, Tom Baker and Peter Davison re-generate and did not expect any of them.
I remember Colin Baker being introduced on Blue Peter before Peter Davison regenerated. Sylvester McCoy was also introduced on Blue Peter before his first appearance.
Posted by Og: Thread Killer (# 3200) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Heavenly Anarchist:
...I've never really seen a romance element in Clara and Matt Smith's Doctor, they appear purely platonic to me. She tells her parents he's her boyfriend to get them off her back, she asks him to do it as a friend. Hence her so shocked by his nakedness. It's one of the things I like about Clara, I see her as a return to the traditional companion.
She admitted to staying around because she secretly fancied him (I think that was the phrase) when they first encountered people in Christmas.
[ 31. December 2013, 00:12: Message edited by: Og: Thread Killer ]
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
quote:
Originally posted by Heavenly Anarchist:
...I've never really seen a romance element in Clara and Matt Smith's Doctor, they appear purely platonic to me. She tells her parents he's her boyfriend to get them off her back, she asks him to do it as a friend. Hence her so shocked by his nakedness. It's one of the things I like about Clara, I see her as a return to the traditional companion.
She admitted to staying around because she secretly fancied him (I think that was the phrase) when they first encountered people in Christmas.
I hadn't noticed that. Well, I guess/I'm hoping that will be nipped in the bud by the new Doctor.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Does anyone know if "The Five(ish) Doctors" is going to come out on DVD? It would be great if it is, but it hasn't even been on main TV yet, as far as I know.
And now to revert to my normal ming-mong carping. I'm also getting a little bored with the "golden shower" regenerations. And did anyone else notice that the Doctor lied while in the truth field? Once when the little boy asks him if he has a plan, the Doctor says yes, and then turns to Clara and admits he hasn't. And possibly again when he promises Clara he won't send her away again just before he does.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
And did anyone else notice that the Doctor lied while in the truth field? Once when the little boy asks him if he has a plan, the Doctor says yes, and then turns to Clara and admits he hasn't. And possibly again when he promises Clara he won't send her away again just before he does.
On the second one, I think he and Clara were in the TARDIS and it had already arrived at her home--so they were no longer in the truth field. And, technically, he didn't "send" her away: he ran away from her.
But, yes, I wondered the same thing about the "plan" comment. It did seem to be a direct fib. The only (lame) explanation I can come up with is that he then designates as a "plan" the concept of showing up, hoping for the best and taking credit. So he had a "plan"--it was the non-plan plan.
Please note that I already admitted that that is lame. I will cheerfully accept better explanations.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
Just watched it again. Still a few things to dislike (mainly the naked bits) and a lot of things to love.
Posted by Avila (# 15541) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
And did anyone else notice that the Doctor lied while in the truth field? Once when the little boy asks him if he has a plan, the Doctor says yes, and then turns to Clara and admits he hasn't. And possibly again when he promises Clara he won't send her away again just before he does.
On the second one, I think he and Clara were in the TARDIS and it had already arrived at her home--so they were no longer in the truth field. And, technically, he didn't "send" her away: he ran away from her.
But, yes, I wondered the same thing about the "plan" comment. It did seem to be a direct fib. The only (lame) explanation I can come up with is that he then designates as a "plan" the concept of showing up, hoping for the best and taking credit. So he had a "plan"--it was the non-plan plan.
Please note that I already admitted that that is lame. I will cheerfully accept better explanations.
Re the sending away bit I noted the 'again' particularly and took it to be a way of answering truly about the future rather than the immediate act but ambigious enough to reassure her then.
Another vote for the disappointment party. It was as if all resources, ideas and plots went into the anniversary piece and Christmas was cold turkey and stuffing.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Does anyone know if "The Five(ish) Doctors" is going to come out on DVD? It would be great if it is, but it hasn't even been on main TV yet, as far as I know.
I'm keeping an eye on that as I want a copy myself but so far haven't found any indications that a DVD might happen. I've tried playing the iPlayer link meanwhile, but for whatever reason, I can't get any picture, only the sound, like listening to it on radio.
I get the impression this one is being played down in case it overshadows the Anniversary Special - possibly because it's funnier and better put together. But who knows, maybe they'll put both on a DVD at some point, which would be great.
[ 01. January 2014, 06:15: Message edited by: Ariel ]
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
The Cyberman-head dying scene wasn't emotional for me, I mean, he had only appeared that episode and I can't get too emotionally attached to a Cyberman part.
For the poor old Cyberman himself, I agree, though I would have kind of liked to see a bit more of him. It was the Doctor's reaction that got me - trying to make him 'comfortable', and fighting back tears as he finally 'died' - as if it was making him fully realise his aloneness.
Re-watching yesterday, the exchange immediately after that leapt out at me:-
'Why did you send me away?'
'Because if I hadn't I would have buried you a long time ago.'
In that context, following immediately from the loss of a sort-of 'companion', and with the sunset in the background, somehow all the centuries of loneliness and loss were in those few words - reminiscent of Nine's 'You can spend the rest of your life with me, but I can't spend the rest of my life with you'.
Who wants to live forever? (Well, despite all that, apparently he does, as he seems delighted to have a new set of regenerations)
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Does anyone know if "The Five(ish) Doctors" is going to come out on DVD? It would be great if it is, but it hasn't even been on main TV yet, as far as I know.
I'm keeping an eye on that as I want a copy myself but so far haven't found any indications that a DVD might happen. I've tried playing the iPlayer link meanwhile, but for whatever reason, I can't get any picture, only the sound, like listening to it on radio.
I get the impression this one is being played down in case it overshadows the Anniversary Special - possibly because it's funnier and better put together. But who knows, maybe they'll put both on a DVD at some point, which would be great.
I was able to watch it using the link helpfully provided a little further up on this thread. I really wish they would put out a DVD with all the anniversary material on it, including this, but it seems unlikely.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Thanks, Trudy. That link doesn't work for me either: just sound, no picture and no option to choose "lower bandwidth". Hopefully they'll bring out a DVD one of these days.
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
Just watched the regeneration scene. It was when the Doctor threw his bowtie on the floor that set me off.
It's a good thing that Capaldi's kept his accent for the Doctor.
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
Just watched the regeneration scene. It was when the Doctor threw his bowtie on the floor that set me off.
Yes.
And I was just starting to recover when someone pointed me to this . (From about 7:30 - warning, may induce )
It's a good thing that Capaldi's kept his accent for the Doctor.
Yes again.
[ 04. January 2014, 16:57: Message edited by: Stumbling Pilgrim ]
Posted by Hugal (# 2734) on
:
The episode was a bit disappointing. To long and not as tight as they normally are. I agree it is great that Peter C kept his accent.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
What accent? I didn't notice one.
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
Very slightly Scottish.
Posted by churchgeek (# 5557) on
:
Haha! Thanks to Kelly Alves and her BBC America on demand, I'm caught up with the episodes now and can join this thread! First, I must go back and read it...
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
I've just been watching Death comes to Pemberley, and am impressed with Jenna-Louise Coleman as Lydia. I hope they use her range more in Dr Who.
Posted by Justinian (# 5357) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
I've just been watching Death comes to Pemberley, and am impressed with Jenna-Louise Coleman as Lydia. I hope they use her range more in Dr Who.
Re-watch The Snowmen. She's excellent in that. But she's been given absolutely terrible scripts in the series - they've been slotting her into Generic Female Companion and not giving Clara a personality.
As for the Christmas Special, to borrow from a friend it was an experiment to see what happened when you combined a literal plot hole (the Crack) with a literal Deus Ex Machina (the Papal Mainframe).
Posted by Rev per Minute (# 69) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
As for the Christmas Special, to borrow from a friend it was an experiment to see what happened when you combined a literal plot hole (the Crack) with a literal Deus Ex Machina (the Papal Mainframe).
I would have thought that the Mainframe was more deus IN machina ? ![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
Usually it is the Doctor who appears, god-like, out of his machina...
Daughter and I have been worried by the lack of teeth in Clara's lines through the last series - the whole 'Impossible Girl' strand tended to leave her as a question not an answer. She had a better role in the anniversary episode, and was a contrast to Billie Piper's 'not-Rose' character. Let's see where the next episodes, many months hence, take us.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rev per Minute:
Daughter and I have been worried by the lack of teeth in Clara's lines...
Thank you for that delightful turn of phrase. The mental image here of a toothless young actress phtruggling to pronounth her lineth ith one that will thay with me for a while now...
Posted by Rev per Minute (# 69) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by Rev per Minute:
Daughter and I have been worried by the lack of teeth in Clara's lines...
Thank you for that delightful turn of phrase. The mental image here of a toothless young actress phtruggling to pronounth her lineth ith one that will thay with me for a while now...
Thorry, mutht hath been the vithit to the dentitht latht week!
<- with teeth
Posted by The Great Gumby (# 10989) on
:
We suffered the same as Tubbs, with the recording ending just as he was about to regenerate - must have been running late. That means I haven't watched it through again, as I didn't have a complete recording, and didn't want to have to hop over to iPlayer for the last couple of minutes. So my thoughts are all first impressions, albeit filtered through a long period of rumination.
First, the plot - this is probably heresy, but I actually thought it worked well. It tied up multiple loose ends which had been left dangling over the last few years, and managed to be more or less coherent. Letting Matt Smith get rapidly older was the perfect farewell to a brilliant actor, and he more than did it justice. The Truth Field was a fairly clunky way of forcing The Doctor to stay there for so long, but it all fitted quite well, and the massed baddies were much less egregious than I'd been expecting. I can't believe Moffat had this in mind back when he first introduced the crack, but it stood up pretty well.
That's the good, now the bad - is it too much to ask that we could occasionally have a Christmas special that doesn't revolve around some ridiculous Victorian snow-covered cliche of Christmas? When they're even calling the fucking town Christmas, it's time to put down the Dickens and step away slowly. And please, no more mawkish, self-indulgent regenerations - "not as long as Tennant's" is up there with "not as evil as Hitler" on the scale of damnation with faint praise. If you're going, have the decency to die quickly, rather than poisoning my final memory of the character with cloying, excessive sentimentality.
And the ugly - yes, it's the stupid turkey and nudity thing again. I know it's silly "for the kiddies" material, but it was gratingly and gratuitously stupid, and gave the impression that Clara is a total airhead without even the most basic cookery skills (or even the sense to ask someone else) and the Doctor ought to be interviewed as part of Operation Yewtree. Down with this sort of thing!
But the thing that really grated is this - if the regeneration limit is now firmly established as canon, and if 11/12/13/Smith's Doctor* knew that he was on his last turn, as he clearly did, the sweet little chat between him and Not-4 at the end of the anniversary special makes no sense. Not-4 was dropping hints that he was a future regeneration as authority to tell him what to do, so how did Smith think that regeneration was going to happen? Why not comment on that at any point? And why did Not-4 tell him (or rather, pointedly not tell him) to find the Time Lords if that was the one thing he absolutely must not do on this occasion? I enjoyed it very much at the time, but it's tarnished by this unambiguous demonstration that it was just nonsensical fanservice.
I'm interested and slightly concerned by Capaldi's brief appearance, and especially his implied threat to steal Clara's kidneys if his own hadn't started working. I was put in mind of Baker(C), so I do hope someone knows what they're doing. Please don't make the Doctor into a total git.
* - I vote for maintaining the historic numbering, with Hurt classified as either 8a or X, and a grudging acknowledgement that Tennant was both 10 and 10a thanks to handwavy jiggerypokery.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Great Gumby:
I can't believe Moffat had this in mind back when he first introduced the crack, but it stood up pretty well.
I just started re-watching Matt Smith's run, and I think it is pretty clear that the point of the crack altered over (ahem) time. It was in Amelia's bedroom, announcing "Prisoner Zero has escaped"--apparently through the crack. And on the other side of the crack was the Big Eyeball aliens.
Then the crack became the universal memory-wiper, so that people who fell into it were forgotten. Oh, and then we found a blown up bit of the TARDIS even though nobody seems to have forgotten the TARDIS. So "the other side" of the crack was no fixed point. It either took you to NeverNeverLand, or you could reach through time to when the TARDIS exploded.
And then we learned that the cracks were because the TARDIS went kablooey.
So was the Gallifrey crack the same crack or just happened (coincidentally) to look like it? Gallifrey clearly was NOT on the other side calling for assistance when we first saw the crack--the Big Eyeballs were. And the Doctor was near enough to it many times to listen to it and did not get any distress call.
So I am going with the theory that it is just "another crack" that Gallifrey is behind and not the same crack.
Posted by The Great Gumby (# 10989) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
quote:
Originally posted by The Great Gumby:
I can't believe Moffat had this in mind back when he first introduced the crack, but it stood up pretty well.
I just started re-watching Matt Smith's run, and I think it is pretty clear that the point of the crack altered over (ahem) time. It was in Amelia's bedroom, announcing "Prisoner Zero has escaped"--apparently through the crack. And on the other side of the crack was the Big Eyeball aliens.
Yes, it would take a monumental stretch to believe that this had anything to do with how it was eventually explained.
quote:
So I am going with the theory that it is just "another crack" that Gallifrey is behind and not the same crack.
But I'm not having this, saving some clever wordplay about how Moffat imagined them as serving different purposes. In story, the crack is quite clearly the same, because it has the exact same shape, a distinctive shape which has already been held up as evidence that the different cracks ever since the first Prisoner Zero thing have been manifestations of the same rift in space/time.
The Time Lords weren't shouting through that rift, true, but that was then and there. In fact, at that point they possibly hadn't been locked in their pocket universe, depending on how you untangle the mess of timelines. The crack is both specific to location and time, and also throughout the whole of reality, so I can allow a lot of flexibility in when and where that all happens. IIRC, they found that one crack which opened up in Christmas, Trenzalore, and just stuck there for hundreds of years, waiting for an answer.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
So I am going with the theory that it is just "another crack" that Gallifrey is behind and not the same crack.
The Doctor explained this in Time of the Doctor. The TARDIS blew up the universe creating all the cracks in space and time. (The cracks are like wormholes without walls - so it's possible to travel from one crack to another, but you're more likely to fall out the middle.) Then later on the Time Lords looking for a weak spot in the wall of the universe found a left-over crack and tried to come through the left-over crack.
Then Madame Kovarian decided to stop the Doctor getting to Trenzalore and went back in time to blow up the TARDIS, creating the cracks in the first place. She was trying to change her own history so creating an ontological paradox was especially likely.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
<Hedgehog thumps forehead with palm of hand>
Oh, of course! How could I have missed that?!?!
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Great Gumby:
I'm interested and slightly concerned by Capaldi's brief appearance, and especially his implied threat to steal Clara's kidneys if his own hadn't started working. I was put in mind of Baker(C), so I do hope someone knows what they're doing. Please don't make the Doctor into a total git.
Baker(C) may have lacked the humour of Baker (T) but he was far from a Git. Bad writing and bad companions were his downfall. Without those elements we could have a very good, but serious, Doctor. But knowing how good Capaldi (P) is at comedy, I doubt he will be too serious.
Posted by Ceannaideach (# 12007) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
quote:
Originally posted by The Great Gumby:
I'm interested and slightly concerned by Capaldi's brief appearance, and especially his implied threat to steal Clara's kidneys if his own hadn't started working. I was put in mind of Baker(C), so I do hope someone knows what they're doing. Please don't make the Doctor into a total git.
Baker(C) may have lacked the humour of Baker (T) but he was far from a Git. Bad writing and bad companions were his downfall. Without those elements we could have a very good, but serious, Doctor. But knowing how good Capaldi (P) is at comedy, I doubt he will be too serious.
If you're a fan of the Big Finish audios then you do get to see how the character of the sixth doctor develops. There's a reason old sixie was voted the favourite audio doctor.
(No, not because it means you don't have to see his coat!)
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Several people, myself included, have been saying that it's time for Moff to go, and that maybe Gatiss should take over from him. On that line, did anyone else see the MR James' ghost story that Gatiss directed, on Christmas Day? It turns out to be his first stab at direction (which means he is unlikely to get such a high profile as Who) and I didn't think it was terribly good (which makes me hope he won't get Who). The documentary afterwards about James was much better.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
I may be wrong, but it looks like we now have a photo of the Capaldi Doctor in costume(scroll down to the second Dec. 7 entry).
Well, it is either that, or Capaldi REALLY gets dressed up for rehearsals.
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
I may be wrong, but it looks like we now have a photo of the Capaldi Doctor in costume(scroll down to the second Dec. 7 entry).
Well, it is either that, or Capaldi REALLY gets dressed up for rehearsals.
He is looking rather dapper. I wouldn't mind that coat myself.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Heavenly Anarchist:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
I may be wrong, but it looks like we now have a photo of the Capaldi Doctor in costume(scroll down to the second Dec. 7 entry).
Well, it is either that, or Capaldi REALLY gets dressed up for rehearsals.
He is looking rather dapper. I wouldn't mind that coat myself.
Ooh ... I so hate to do this ... but isn't that the Eleventh Doctor's costume, which Twelve is presumably still wearing post-regeneration?
Sorry, really sorry ... but it does mean we can expect pics of the new costume any day now.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Ooh ... I so hate to do this ... but isn't that the Eleventh Doctor's costume, which Twelve is presumably still wearing post-regeneration?
That's what I thought. Matt Smith ran round Eleventh Hour in Tennant's suit frayed at the edges.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Ooh ... I so hate to do this ... but isn't that the Eleventh Doctor's costume, which Twelve is presumably still wearing post-regeneration?
Sorry, really sorry ... but it does mean we can expect pics of the new costume any day now.
Geez. My biorhythms must be at an all-time low. I believe you are right and I should have caught that. Pity, really, because that is a good look for him.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
Pity, really, because that is a good look for him.
Better than on Matt Smith's Doctor, who I think should have stayed in the tweed suit.
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
Pity, really, because that is a good look for him.
Better than on Matt Smith's Doctor, who I think should have stayed in the tweed suit.
Yes, I agree with both of you. I thought it was similar to Matt Smith's styling but hadn't twigged it was the same suit. I prefer the tweed jacket on him.
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
The BBC (quoted in the Guardian) said that that is not costume.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
They mean that's what Peter Capaldi normally wears?
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Several people, myself included, have been saying that it's time for Moff to go, and that maybe Gatiss should take over from him. On that line, did anyone else see the MR James' ghost story that Gatiss directed, on Christmas Day? It turns out to be his first stab at direction (which means he is unlikely to get such a high profile as Who) and I didn't think it was terribly good (which makes me hope he won't get Who). The documentary afterwards about James was much better.
Yes I did see it. I thought it was OK, but without knowing the original story, I have no idea how well he did from that starting point. But it was underwhelming, given how much the Radio Times had plugged it.
Posted by Inanna (# 538) on
:
I do love that Clara is wearing a jumper with lots of bow ties on it though.... cool!
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
The BBC (quoted in the Guardian) said that that is not costume.
The BBC, as quoted in the Guardian, said that's not the Doctor's new costume. My italics.
How is that not the costume the Doctor was wearing when Smith regenerated into Capaldi? Jenna-Louise Coleman is wearing in the photo what Clara was wearing in that scene.
[ 08. January 2014, 19:55: Message edited by: Dafyd ]
Posted by Sparrow (# 2458) on
:
Has anyone heard a rumour that the Master may be back played by Charles Dance?
Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
How is that not the costume the Doctor was wearing when Smith regenerated into Capaldi? Jenna-Louise Coleman is wearing in the photo what Clara was wearing in that scene.
An unexplored side effect of regeneration is that the regeneratee's clothes also change shape to match the new body perfectly. Except for rings (cf. Hartnell -> Troughton).
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sparrow:
Has anyone heard a rumour that the Master may be back played by Charles Dance?
I have now.
Posted by Roseofsharon (# 9657) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sparrow:
Has anyone heard a rumour that the Master may be back played by Charles Dance?
for one insane moment I thought that read "the Master may be back played by Charlie Drake" ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
not so much 'Hello sweetie' then...
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
No, just "Hello my darlings..."
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Sparrow:
Has anyone heard a rumour that the Master may be back played by Charles Dance?
I have now.
That would be amazing.
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
I don't think there's much in it. It was a fan speculation back in November that people seem to think has some truth in it.
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
Surprised nobody's posted this yet - or maybe that's because everyone but me is doing something useful with their time.
Enjoy! (I trust that's not the new costume either ... )
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
Oo-er, I'm getting excited - when's the new series starting?
Posted by Eigon (# 4917) on
:
I've been spending my time listening to some of the adventures of the Eighth Doctor from Big Finish. Max Warp was fun, in particular, basically being Top Gear with space ships, complete with sexist, un-politically correct presenter and a co-presenter called the Ferret.
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
Not sure if this link will be any use to international Shippies.
Was given it by another of the collective who attend BBC shows.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
We've had a couple of links to that upthread, I believe. I can't load any of them: all I get is the sound.
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
I get the sound on that, and I'm not always getting sound on Youtube at the moment.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
Did anyone catch this evening's opening episode of The Musketeers, with Peter Capaldi as Cardinal Richlieu? Confirmed my impression that he is a serious actor - intense, subtle, and sometimes not a little scary.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
I'm planning to watch it on iplayer later in the week. It wouldn't be the first time the Doctor's had an evil double in Renaissance France.
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Did anyone catch this evening's opening episode of The Musketeers, with Peter Capaldi as Cardinal Richlieu? Confirmed my impression that he is a serious actor - intense, subtle, and sometimes not a little scary.
Not sure what to make of it, there were times when I thought it had changed things trying to be funny/dark/'adult'/etc and succeeding well but not as well as if they'd kept to the book (perhaps telling what was shown in the book) at the equivalent point.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Yes, I saw that and enjoyed it – some of it was a good laugh. Not quite sure what direction it’s going in, but Peter Capaldi was pleasingly evil. It bodes well for the new series.
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
I quite enjoyed it too. They said that it wasn't based on the Dumas stories but were new ones, but that's ok. It was fun, easily watchable Sunday evening entertainment (some nice eye candy ) and Capaldi was nicely villainous.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
As the Guardian reviewer suggested, it appears aimed at the same demographic as Merlin and Atlantis. Plus 40 year odd TV reviewers.
So that's at least three young male targeted series, more if you add in Sherlock and Who.
I would welcome something for the Buffy audience - and since some writers have been heard to say that they admire Whedon, I don't see why they can't do it. That audience may like the male eye candy, but we have already been shown the outcome for the women in the stories.
Fidelma, maybe? Or the adventures of the young Cartimandua, a completely open field? Or the story of the Lady of the Mercians (checked out with Michael Wood)? There must be something out there for the grubby buckling of swashes with decent parts for women.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
Photo of clothes. Not quite convinced by the pose.
Posted by Firenze (# 619) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Photo of clothes. Not quite convinced by the pose.
Maybe this is an iPad thing, but the main part of the page is just blank.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
It's probably just an iPad thing. The main part of the page has a black background with text in white letters.
I'm not convinced by the pose either.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
Guardian: same photo but larger.
When I go to the BBC page I linked to now, it's misbehaving as Firenze says.
[ 27. January 2014, 21:18: Message edited by: Dafyd ]
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
Very nice. Hints of the first three Doctors, I thought. And is he wearing French cuffs and a cardigan? Superb! And Doc Marten brogues too. It's a lesson in how to have style without having a style.
But don't you think he looks a bit ... well ... dangerous?
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
I can't work out whether the accompanying music is "You ain't nothing but a Time Lord" or "Let's do the Time Warp again".
Btw, the BBC page is still black with white text but the photo and article have disappeared. Time of page amendment, two minutes ago so presumably someone else found something amiss with it.
[ 28. January 2014, 05:13: Message edited by: Ariel ]
Posted by Firenze (# 619) on
:
OK, they've fixed it now.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Don't like the trousers. Pity they can't have him in Richelieu's leathers.
Do like the jacket.
Back to 17th century France - the writers claim in Radio Times to have written strong part for women. Out of five so far, two are dead, and of the other three, if they do cling in any way to the original, two are going to be dead. Not that good, then. And all of them are exhibiting their individuality and strength by being sexually loose. (OK, the Queen hasn't misbehaved with Buckingham, yet, but has shown signs of adulterous thoughts.) I don't see that Dumas' women were all that different (in being mere eye-candy) - certainly not Milady de Winter.
[ 28. January 2014, 09:29: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
Apparently Doctor Who fans in the know are comparing the new look to Pertwee.
I believe it prudent to hold ones expectations about the new Doctor in check (well, speaking for myself anyway). I believe his class shown acting in previous roles are making expectations so high (I mean, Malcolm Tucker was an utterly excellent character, but nowhere near that of Doctor Who) that it's questionable whether they are realistic.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
Apparently Doctor Who fans in the know are comparing the new look to Pertwee.
I was picking up a hint of Pertwee, too, but I suspect that is, in part, because of the hair color. And they both have distinctive faces. Oh, and Pertwee, too, was made to pose in all sorts of stupid poses.
And, if my memory is working this morning, when Pertwee first started his clothes were pretty similar to the new costume. More sedate and restrained--but then they became more flamboyant over time, with ruffled shirts and green coats, etc., in part because Jon Pertwee could look elegant wearing almost anything.
Personally, I think I liked Capaldi more wearing Smith's last outfit, but if Doctor Who has taught me anything it is to wait and see. I have changed a number of my first impressions once I see the actual shows.
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Very nice. Hints of the first three Doctors, I thought. And is he wearing French cuffs and a cardigan? Superb! And Doc Marten brogues too. It's a lesson in how to have style without having a style.
But don't you think he looks a bit ... well ... dangerous?
Knitted waist coat rather than a cardi?!
Very classy! Nods to the first three - particularly Troughton's comic hobo - and to 10 and 11. And Docs!!! Nine hundred year old one probably. Docs are the cockroach of shoes, survive anything!
Tubbsg
Posted by Sparrow (# 2458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Very nice. Hints of the first three Doctors, I thought. And is he wearing French cuffs and a cardigan? Superb! And Doc Marten brogues too. It's a lesson in how to have style without having a style.
But don't you think he looks a bit ... well ... dangerous?
Not dangerous .... stern maybe. But I like the jacket with the red lining.
Posted by Ronald Binge (# 9002) on
:
Not keen on a closed collar with no tie, but I'm having that red lined Crombie!
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
Good grief, I've just got an email from Amazon saying that season 8 with Capaldi is now available to order on dvd or Blu-ray - give the poor man time to settle into the Tardis!
...and yes, I *did* pre-order Sherlock season 3 before it aired...
[ 29. January 2014, 09:13: Message edited by: Pine Marten ]
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
The coat is nice. The shoes look odd to me, but I'm funny about shoes. It won't matter much when he's in motion and I'm not studying his footwear intently.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
Capaldi gets the boot!
What? You thought I meant something else?
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
Sort of spoiler alert.
Not sure anyone's mentioned this up to now?
New companion
M.
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
I concluded watching "The Evil of the Daleks" yesterday. It contained some absolutely boss moments, such as when a "human source" was added to some daleks, prompting them to start acting like children and questioning orders.
This video contains recon animation, but the original score is a delight.
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
This is the news.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
I am amused that stories 808 and 809 have rumored titles...but nobody confirmed to be writing them! I think it was Gervase Fen who decided to write a book called "A Manx Ca" because he liked the title--but he hadn't decided what the story would be about.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
Next series begins on 23 August - but is the Doctor a good man?
In other news, I finished my Tom Baker marathon the other day. Interesting experience. You can see him develop from being a good actor, trying out the character, to a confident "I am the Doctor" position, and then the arrogance starts kicking in. Even by his fourth season (Horror of Fang Rock to Invasion of Time) you can see him acting up and being a diva. By two years later (Destiny of the Daleks to Horns of Nimon) he's bored and being silly, and then in his last season he's worn out, looks depressed, and by partway through the season knows he's leaving. A great Doctor, though, if you can ignore his widely-alleged vile behaviour towards the people he worked with.
Posted by Carys (# 78) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Next series begins on 23 August - but is the Doctor a good man?
So will Greenbelt screen it live somewhere? Or do those of us there have to wait till we get home (which in my case is over a week later)
Carys
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Carys:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Next series begins on 23 August - but is the Doctor a good man?
So will Greenbelt screen it live somewhere? Or do those of us there have to wait till we get home (which in my case is over a week later)
Carys
I'm not a Greenbelty person, but I've a vague memory it's been done before. I'm sure you'll be able to find it somewhere - Shipmates with a laptop and BBC iplayer?
Meanwhile, the plot thickens. This new 'teaser' from the BBC looks like a colossal spoiler, so I assume there's more to it than meets the eye -
I see into your soul...
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
I don't get how that can be a colossal spoiler.
Don't explain it to me, though, because maybe then it WILL be a colossal spoiler...
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
The actor doing the voiceover has appeared on Doctor Who before, or is doing a convincing impression.
Posted by Late Paul (# 37) on
:
But surely... oh...
*realises there's no way to respond to this without meta-spoiling so backs carefully away*
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
Ack, I've just watched it...no, it can't be...
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
The actor doing the voiceover has appeared on Doctor Who before, or is doing a convincing impression.
Yes, but people returning hardly counts as 'major spoiler' in my book. It's more like standard practice. Occasionally the writers seem more focused on bringing people/creatures back so the diehard fans can go all wiggy about it than on working out what to do with these characters once they're back.
Not that this is a new problem. Having now gone through 11 seasons of the 'classic' show, there have definitely been a few instances of "let's bring those guys back" that haven't been followed up with anyone asking "...why?".
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
I don't get how that can be a colossal spoiler.
That is a spoiler??
![[Snore]](graemlins/snore.gif)
(Unless I've missed something other than the fracking obvious, of course.)
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Wasn't the version shown on TV longer than that? Somehow I was expecting a bit more.
(I've discovered I'm off on Retreat on the 23rd! That is going to be a real sacrifice.)
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
The actor doing the voiceover has appeared on Doctor Who before, or is doing a convincing impression.
Yes, but people returning hardly counts as 'major spoiler' in my book.
Does that mean we can talk about it now?
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
At last, a proper trailer - now we're talking!
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
So - do you think there'll be any daleks in the upcoming series?
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
If only there weren't! The Daleks are becoming as overused in nuWho, as the Master was back in Pertwee's era.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
You forgot to include the sonic screwdriver and lovelorn female assistant...
I'd love it if Captain Jack could come back for an episode.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
The sonic screwdriver is now something the show itself pokes fun at, so I don't mind it too much. Agree about the love interest though - and definitely about Captain Jack!
Posted by Carys (# 78) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
At last, a proper trailer - now we're talking!
Is it me, or did the Doctor say he'd lived for over 2000 years? I thought Matt Smith said he was 900 odd,so have 1000 years just happened for Peter Capaldi or what?
Carys
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Carys:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
At last, a proper trailer - now we're talking!
Is it me, or did the Doctor say he'd lived for over 2000 years? I thought Matt Smith said he was 900 odd,so have 1000 years just happened for Peter Capaldi or what?
Carys
Early on, he may have said 900, but during the "OMG! They killed the Doctor!" season he wandered a lot and got to 1000-some odd (I forget the exact number. Let's say 1200.) Then, in his last episode, he was stuck in Christmas for hundreds of years (I think he may even have said 900 just for that)...so that would put the Doctor over 2000 now.
Posted by Ariston (# 10894) on
:
1. Ooooh. We're getting 7th Doctor Redux! Moral ambiguity is tres sexxxy.
2. We might even be getting morally complex Daleks? A boy can hope that's what "life…prevails" means. It's what I liked most about "Asylum of the Daleks"—taking all the standard Dalek tropes, then subverting them. True, the old Daleks have been pretty much played out. Had been by Davidson's tenure, if we're being honest. Subverting them, making them morally complex—well, that's different. It plays against our expectations, our own ingrained ideas of the tropes.
3. More Vastra. Means more Strax. This is a good thing.
Posted by Carys (# 78) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
At last, a proper trailer - now we're talking!
Is it me, or did the Doctor say he'd lived for over 2000 years? I thought Matt Smith said he was 900 odd,so have 1000 years just happened for Peter Capaldi or what?
Carys
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Carys:
Is it me, or did the Doctor say he'd lived for over 2000 years? I thought Matt Smith said he was 900 odd,so have 1000 years just happened for Peter Capaldi or what?
The age of the Doctor is always tricky to work out because of many contradictory statements. And, for that matter, when we say he is x years old, by what planet are we calculating the years? A year of Earth? A year of Gallifrey?
But, to answer your question, in The Day of the Doctor Matt Smith said he was 1,200 (although he was very vague about that and admitted he might be wrong). Then, in The Time of the Doctor we are told that when he was stranded on Trenzalore, between the time that Clara was first there and the time of her second appearance, 300 years had passed. So that brings the Doctor to 1500. We are not told how much time passed between when Clara was sent away for the second time and she arrives back on Trenzalore at the end, but the Doctor has aged considerably by then, so it is not too much of a stretch to believe that another 500 or 600 years had gone by. That would then make the Doctor about 2000 at the time of his regeneration into Capaldi.
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
Has anyone seen this ?
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by tessaB:
Has anyone seen this ?
Extra footage not on TV is the main attraction.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
It does say it will be made available at a later date.
Question - is it worth paying to watch the extra surrounded by popcorn and noisy people, or watching off air, and then the full version later up on my wall via the projector with our own choice of munchies?
Galaxy Quest was good in the cinema. The audience applauded. Never seen before.
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
We've just booked to go to the Odeon Leicester Square to see it!!!!!!
M.
Posted by Jenny Ann (# 3131) on
:
We've got tickets to see it at our local! I think dr who on big screen should be good!
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on
:
Sadly I'm at a friggin' conference that night
Posted by George Spigot (# 253) on
:
I'm really hopeful that this new series/season will be an improvement. Especially with the promise of no Dr/companion romance.
While I'm on the subject did anyone else find The Time of the Doctor to be mind numbingly bad? I mean I'm hard pressed to think of a worse one. The Twin dilemma maybe? Or possibly the Space pirates?
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
That question has sent me to the synopsis on Wikipedia. Clearly I missed some little references.
The answer is yes. I did actually think so at the time. I'm not going to compare it with anything else, but there was too much new stuff, and silly stuff, and the tying up of ends is like the back of my embroidery. (Clue, the back of embroidery should look as neat as the front.)
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Was The Time of the Doctor Matt Smith's farewell? If so, I agree completely. Unremitting bollocks from beginning to end.
On a tangent, I have just bought myself these shoes. I shouldn't have done, but I couldn't fight temptation any longer.
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
I wantssss them my preciousssss. (Oh sorry, wrong fan hat on)
Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on
:
An interesting insight into a parallel universe: Brian Blessed was offered the role of Doctor Who that went to Patrick Troughton.
Thinks might have been a lot different. And louder.
Posted by TheAlethiophile (# 16870) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Jestocost:
An interesting insight into a parallel universe: Brian Blessed was offered the role of Doctor Who that went to Patrick Troughton.
Thinks might have been a lot different. And louder.
THE DALEK'S ALIVE!!!
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
The Time of the Doctor was bad, I think, although I'm not sure I would say it was one of the worst I've ever seen. Mind you, I don't remember it much.
When thinking about the most recent season/specials my mind instantly chooses to recall The Day of the Doctor (the 50th anniversary show), which was head and shoulders above most of the rest. Also The Name of the Doctor (season finale immediately before it) was pretty good. But 2012-2013 had more than its fair share of weak episodes, or episodes that were ultimately disappointing after promising rather more.
[ 05. August 2014, 13:43: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
I enjoyed the Clara season so far, with the exception of the two Gatiss episodes.
Some people just like being grumpy.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
I enjoyed the Clara season so far, with the exception of the two Gatiss episodes.
Some people just like being grumpy.
It's not as if the 'Clara season' has been that long yet!
Journey to the center of the TARDIS was a mess. Nightmare in Silver was pretty disappointing. I really, really liked Hide until the last few minutes when it decided it had to become feel-good and sappy. We couldn't possibly have a proper monster.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
I enjoyed the Clara season so far, with the exception of the two Gatiss episodes.
Some people just like being grumpy.
It's not as if the 'Clara season' has been that long yet!
Journey to the center of the TARDIS was a mess. Nightmare in Silver was pretty disappointing. I really, really liked Hide until the last few minutes when it decided it had to become feel-good and sappy. We couldn't possibly have a proper monster.
I've found that all of these (possibly excluding "Journey", which really was pretty bad) improve with acquaintance. Same goes for the Gatiss episodes, which I liked anyway, and Time of the Doctor. The main problem of "Time of...", as I may have said here before, was its pacing. It was just the wrong shape. It's possible it needed to be longer, but I think probable that it needed to be shorter, and cut out a lot of stuff about a centuries-long conflict that that little farming community couldn't possibly have survived.
I think one of the best things about Doctor Who in 2013 was Clara herself. I never disliked Amy or Rory, but I think Clara is an absolute star. She seems to have an air of slightly anxious wonderment that I think is wholly appropriate to a TARDIS traveller. I think seeing Jenna Coleman work with Peter Capaldi is going to be an absolute delight.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by TheAlethiophile:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Jestocost:
[qb] An interesting insight into a parallel universe: Brian Blessed was offered the role of Doctor Who that went to Patrick Troughton.
Thinks might have been a lot different. And louder.
THE DALEK'S ALIVE!!!
What an unfair, gross mis-characterisation.
It would have been something more towards THE DALEK'S ALIVE!!!!!! But louder, with more emphasis and flecks of spittle. And veins popping and.....
[ 05. August 2014, 14:33: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
According to a radio programme this morning (BBC London) Cardiff is awash today with costumed fans for a premiere of the first episode.
!!! Thought it was later.
Posted by Eigon (# 4917) on
:
There was a nice bit of dialogue in a clip I've just seen:
Doctor: "She's not my assistant. She's - there's another word..."
Clara: "I'm his carer."
Doctor: "Right - she cares so I don't have to."
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Eigon:
There was a nice bit of dialogue in a clip I've just seen:
Doctor: "She's not my assistant. She's - there's another word..."
Clara: "I'm his carer."
Doctor: "Right - she cares so I don't have to."
Y'see ... when people say things like that, I just have to go looking. This morning's Breakfast on BBC, yes?
I am very very liking everything I see so far. This Doctor has an edge to him - just a hint of Malcolm Tucker, perhaps, as the tv interview suggests. (For any Shipmates who need to google Malcolm Tucker, there are clips from "In The Thick Of It" online, but they're probably not work-safe!)
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
(Though, of course, there is no "In" in "The Thick Of It".)
Posted by Jenny Ann (# 3131) on
:
I went and watched the thick of it in preparation. I shall be most disappointed if there isn't a least a hint of tucker!
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
Tickets booked for the cinema for next Saturday.
Felt a bit sheepish when the ticket seller had to check 'that's two adults then is it?' Yes it is
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
My 'preparation' consists of enfolding myself in seasons 12 and 13 - Tom Baker and Elisabeth Sladen and, behind the scenes, Holmes and Hinchcliffe.
I decided to go through season 12 before the new episodes started, and I enjoyed it enough that I decided to power on through season 13 as well. After all, there was only a very small broadcast gap between those two seasons, and no production gap at all...
It really is fascinating seeing the show evolve and change. Over the weekend I watched Ark in Space, The Sontaran Experiment, Genesis of the Daleks, Revenge of the Cybermen, Terror of the Zygons and Planet of Evil.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by tessaB:
Tickets booked for the cinema for next Saturday.
Felt a bit sheepish when the ticket seller had to check 'that's two adults then is it?' Yes it is
quote:
There's no point being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes.
- The Fourth Doctor
Orfeo, that's some nice prep you're doing - some of the stories you're watching are among my favourites. I'm not doing much prep myself - a handful of stories from Matt Smith's last season is all, finishing with The Time of the Doctor, of course.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
I think one of the best things about Doctor Who in 2013 was Clara herself. I never disliked Amy or Rory, but I think Clara is an absolute star.
I have to agree, much as I loved Amy. Once I got around to watching the season, I was impressed by the way Clara seemed to be so self-directing. And she put her hands on the steering wheel of the TARDIS!
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
It's always fun watching the classic series and seeing something I remember from childhood (albeit it's currently things that I saw when they were repeated a few years later, not when they first aired).
Tonight I'm watching The Android Invasion. Sarah Jane's face has just fallen off. I definitely remember that. Last night it was Pyramids of Mars and I knew well before I got to it that Sutekh would be zapping the Doctor with his eyes. I had bloody nightmares about Sutekh's eyes...
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
Pyramids was the cause of a minor Egyptology craze at my school. Well ... me and a couple of friends, anyway.
But Gabriel Woolf's amazing voice! - also famous for this. (Warning - don't click on that link if you're at work or of a nervous disposition! )
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
I knew almost nothing about Doctor Who. They did show it on Dutch television when I was young, but I wasn't interested in it at the time.
Last week, someone gave me a DVD with Season One (that would be the Ninth Doctor?) I have watched the first six episodes until now.
I'm not getting addicted. Nonono, I can still let go of this any time I want to. Really, I can.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
You'll only be addicted when you start calling it Season 27, rather then Season 1!
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
Phew! I'm still safe then. Now let me watch another episode ...
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
Last week, someone gave me a DVD with Season One (that would be the Ninth Doctor?) I have watched the first six episodes until now.
Fantastic!
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Six episodes. He's seen 'Dalek'. That ought to be just about enough to hook him.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
I'm afraid so. It's brilliant!
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on
:
May I say that I am gutted that on the 23rd I am at a conference. Just gutted.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Zappa:
May I say that I am gutted that on the 23rd I am at a conference. Just gutted.
In this part of the world it's on the 24th.
I've just watched The Brain of Morbius. Pretty good stuff. I'm afraid I'm becoming increasingly disillusioned with Philip Sandifer's blog, though... when he gets on an excited roll he just flatly ignores the actual TV show and declares that it demonstrates things that aren't in the script. His entry on Morbius ends up being built on a statement that is the exact opposite of the the statement the Doctor actually makes.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Zappa:
May I say that I am gutted that on the 23rd I am at a conference. Just gutted.
I'm on retreat. Even though I will record it, that really is mortification of the flesh.
Posted by Starbug (# 15917) on
:
I'm away on holiday. The holiday can't be rescheduled as it involves attending a music festival, so I'm having to record it as well. And presumably try to avoid social media until we get back, to avoid spoilers.
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
Beloved daughter is at Reading festival this weekend. Hope she has a lovely time but I am gutted that I can't phone her when I get back from the cinema for a squealy fan-fest. She has fallen head-over-heels in love with every Doctor from Christopher Eccleston onwards and is ready to fall hard for Peter Capaldi. (Slight age gap as he is three years older than I am, but who's counting?)
Incidentally, I know he is best known for The Thick of It, but does anyone remember a short series way back in the day called Neverwhere? Written by Neil Gaiman it was about life under London. Anyway there was a rather young and pretty (but evil) angel called the Angel Islington in it, played by a rather young and pretty Peter Capaldi!
Posted by Eigon (# 4917) on
:
Oh, he was excellent as the Angel Islington! I actually think he was better than Benedict Cumberbatch, who played the Angel in the recent radio version of Neverwhere.
He was also excellent as the quiet civil servant in Torchwood: Children of Earth.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
He's a multi-talented man, our Mr Capaldi. You can find online his documentary "A Portrait of Scotland" in which he traces the history of Scottish portrait painting. He was a student at Glasgow School of Art and can clearly still wield a nifty pencil. He comes across as having a warm and passionate personality and interestingly at one point describes himself as "an old fop".
Posted by Jenny Ann (# 3131) on
:
he looks better now than when he was Islington.
Posted by jedijudy (# 333) on
:
There was a nice little segment on the news this morning about Doctor Who.
Posted by Sparrow (# 2458) on
:
10 minutes to go!
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
And it begins ..... NOW!!!
Posted by Bene Gesserit (# 14718) on
:
Loved it! Several bits made me laugh out loud and I think we saw that darker side to the Doctor emerging.
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
Best joke by the Doctor was the one about Kereoke and mime. I loved that one.
Well done Jenna Coleman for carrying the show.
Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on
:
Very Good, he's got something. Very Good start. Funny, dark, many possibilities.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Excellent start by Capaldi who gave a superb performance. Finally an actor who's actually convincing in the part and not a lightweight - comes across as more his own man, more the classic type with echoes of previous Doctors, and a hint of a darker side. Let down a bit by a plot with a daft start and silly flirting, but I'm looking forward to this new series much more than I did the last ones.
I also liked the byplay with Clara and her uncertainty about him, though wheeling in Matt Smith to persuade her to give him a chance was a bit much.
Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on
:
I enjoyed it too, and think I'll very much like the new Doctor. But topping it off at the end - Sue White from Green Wing! Oh my.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
I just finished watching. Highly enjoyable. There was a patch in the middle that I didn't think was quite on the same level, but on the whole I found that quite satisfying. The connection with a previous story was a nice touch, and the ending completely threw me but in an interesting way that made me want to know more.
EDIT: Oh, and my nephew and I were talking today about favourite doctors and companions (he's 13 and now thoroughly getting into the modern version of the show). I think Jenna Coleman / Clara is rapidly rising up the ranks.
[ 24. August 2014, 09:39: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
Ten out of ten for Capaldi, but I thought the story was a bit slow in places. Having said that, a slightly slower pace than we've had in recent years wouldn't be a bad thing.
But Capaldi - wow! I loved the anguish he gave us when he needed to have bedrooms explained. And the way his mind was working in the restaurant scene with Clara. And the chill in his voice at "I'm afraid I'm probably going to have to kill you." But then the vulnerability of "I don't think I'm a hugging person now." He's going to be amazing. Already is.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
I thought the story was a bit slow in places. Having said that, a slightly slower pace than we've had in recent years wouldn't be a bad thing.
Yes and yes. I realised at some point that part of the reason I was enjoying myself is that I didn't feel rushed off my feet.
Matt Smith was actually rather good at talking rapidly and being a bit manic. The problem is that once they realised he was good at it, the writers and producers relied on it more and more.
There've been times in the last couple of years where I've felt the need to pause episodes of Doctor Who, and then rewind a little, to give myself a chance to catch up and process what's been said. The only other show where it's happened much in recent times has been Sherlock (and even there it was less of a problem).
I'm pretty quick-witted. I could follow the movie Inception all the way through and loved it. So when a show is repeatedly making me feel like I have to use the pause button, I tend to suspect it's the show's fault.
'Deep Breath' didn't ever make me think about the pause button. There were some great lines and some witty dialogue, but there were also beats and pacing. Heck, even when Capaldi was acting thoroughly bamboozled early on and scrambling people and debating the function of bedrooms, I could still follow the thoughts.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
He's going to be amazing. Already is.
Yep, it's very early days but this has the potential for a classic series in the making. Fingers crossed that he doesn't get too many daft scripts.
And it is good to have an older man back in the Tardis again and a slower pace - perhaps now they'll start to concentrate more on plot.
Posted by Jillyb (# 4610) on
:
It's gonna be good!
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
Can't remember the exact words but Clara's 'There's nothing more important than my egomania' and the look on her face when she realised what she had said was priceless.
Also the Doctor having to tell the dinosaur that he wasn't flirting was good.
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
It could be excellent.
I expect some episodes to be excellent. Others less so. Id all depends on the performances, the production and the writing. I think we can expect the first two as a given, the companion/Doctor scene in the restaurant showed how good the leads are. It all depends on the writing which will vary as ever.
When you don't realise how ridiculous the plot is until after the episode has finished, these are the good episodes.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
I thought the story was a bit slow in places. Having said that, a slightly slower pace than we've had in recent years wouldn't be a bad thing.
Yes and yes. I realised at some point that part of the reason I was enjoying myself is that I didn't feel rushed off my feet.
I agree. It was nice to have time to think about the plot and, therefore, to appreciate the little touches...like slowly finding out that none of the likely suspects put the ad in the paper.
I like the teaser that the Doctor is wondering where he saw his face before. Anybody fancy another trip to Pompeii? (Although I guess the family was in Rome when last we saw them...)
What didn't set quite as well for me was Clara having such a trouble with the regeneration. This is the Impossible Girl...the one who was in the Doctor's lifeline and saw his previous incarnations. The one who, not too long ago, was having tea with three Doctors at once. You'd think she'd be able to accept regeneration a lot easier than the average companion...especially as she saw it happen right in front of her.
As for future episodes, I am a little worried about the next one just based on the title. "Into the Dalek" feels a little too much like "Journey to the Center of the TARDIS"--a clunky title rarely inspires confidence in me. It is to be hoped that I am wrong ("I didn't say that it was your error.").
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Finally seen it. Enjoyed it very much, and hope Capaldi is allowed to be as good as he was here, without being drowned in buckets of Moffat-sentimentality. However, I was not impressed by the new titles, or Tardis interior. Maybe I should start a protest:
"What do we want?"
"Proper Who titles""
"When do we want them?"
"Yesterday!"
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
Never mind that, what does your kid think? I have been eager for his review.
( haven't seen it yet, laid up ill, waiting for sufficient brain cells.)
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Nobody so far has mentioned the new intro and theme tune at the start. I thought the opening sequence was quite attractive, though the music seemed a bit removed from the previous theme tunes.
I liked the new interior - very smart and so much nicer than the previous one.
[ 24. August 2014, 21:56: Message edited by: Ariel ]
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
What didn't set quite as well for me was Clara having such a trouble with the regeneration. This is the Impossible Girl...the one who was in the Doctor's lifeline and saw his previous incarnations. The one who, not too long ago, was having tea with three Doctors at once. You'd think she'd be able to accept regeneration a lot easier than the average companion...especially as she saw it happen right in front of her.
I think, perhaps, it wasn't that she couldn't cope with the concept of the new Doctor. It was that she couldn't cope with the notion that 'her' Doctor was gone - other Doctors were fine so long as they didn't exclude the presence of hers.
Also, I really liked the new title sequence.
[ 24. August 2014, 22:18: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Lothlorien (# 4927) on
:
I also liked the new title sequence, Orfeo.
I watched it last night at the end of a weekend of a nasty stomach bug. I enjoyed it but missed bits due to afore mentioned bug. Some of them floated over my head and left me wondering about where I had seen them before.
All was resolved when I slept. I had a complicated dream of the Doctor rescuing nurses killed when the Marquette was torpedoed. Not only did he resurrect the nurses but he evacuated Anzac Nurses from the island of Lemnos in the Tardis. One big muddle of history and Doctor Who.
I did like first sight of the new doctor.
[ 25. August 2014, 01:10: Message edited by: Lothlorien ]
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Anzac Nurses? Well, I clearly know what other program you watched last night!
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
The new opening graphics were okay. I don't love them, but I don't hate them. The new version of the theme music, though, is poor. I think I can say that I hate it. But, to put that into perspective, I firmly believe that the best version of the theme music was the first one from 1963, so any new version was not likely to impress me.
orfeo, you are probably right about Clara just having problems with losing "her" doctor. That really was the point of both the veil metaphor and Capaldi's "you can't see me" comment.
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
OK, third time lucky. I've written 2 posts and lost them both when I tried to preview them. So this time, it'll be shorter and no previewing!
Macarius & I went to the Odeon Leicester Square to see it. All the extra bits (q-and-a session, extra bit with Paternoster Gang, cyberman roaming the cinema etc) all fun. But episode itself came over much better on tv at home.
I didn't quite believe Clara's inability to accept the Doctor either, but assume Moffat was aiming this at the fangirl audience who didn't want an older Doctor.
I thought the dinosaur in Victorian London was a great idea but more could have been made of it; Moffat said that that was the first bit he thought of, simply as a hook to start the episode. I was genuinely shocked at its fate.
I like the new credits too but for me, no music can match up to the original in its weirdness and other-worldliness. That could be my age.
M.
Posted by The Phantom Flan Flinger (# 8891) on
:
I've put a few thoughts on my blog - link in sig.
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
I quite like the new start and I am told by my son that the new music is more theraminy (sp?)so he likes it.
So far I am loving having an older Doctor. I liked the flirting with, and marriage to, River Song but have never felt comfortable with flirting with a companion for some reason. Peter Capaldi is hitting all my needed Doctor spots so far - a bit manic, impatient with others who don't understand, has a dark side (did he push?) but mainly just really excited by whatever is happening around him.
Sooo looking forward to next week.
Posted by Kitten (# 1179) on
:
My nearly five year old grandson is struggling with the idea on a new doctor, I think it is just that he is different, not that he is older, so we looked together at some pictures of all the previous Doctors and I explained about regeneration. He seemed to accept it but I guess Matt Smith will always be his Doctor, just as his little Brother's will always be Peter Capaldi.
We both enjoyed the episode, I liked it on many levels, he loved the dinosaur and Strax
I really liked the new introduction.
Posted by jedijudy (# 333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by tessaB:
I quite like the new start and I am told by my son that the new music is more theraminy (sp?)so he likes it.
[tangent] Is this what your son means? I think it's fascinating![/tangent]
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
I think so, he loves it ever since seeing Bill Bailey play one. It looks bloody difficult to play so it may just be a synth on the soundtrack!
Posted by Late Paul (# 37) on
:
Just watched.
Capaldi's going to be good but this wasn't great. It was OK. Plenty of jokes. A few too many at times I thought. But the plot was a thin excuse for steam punk zombies and a dinosaur - and why not I guess.
I liked the stuff with Clara struggling with the new regeneration. That's important, a thematic line needs to be drawn. The open secret (the one everyone over 8 gets) is that the new Doctor is a "new" Doctor and the show always inflects itself a little in that direction whilst maintaining the "truth" that he's the same person. Anyway, it was done using some pathos rather than simply humour, which in turn gave Capaldi a chance to show us something.
So overall, it was a fairly enjoyable romp, nothing too special and decent enough introduction to what I'm sure will be a great Doctor.
But it's no Fish Custard.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kitten:
My nearly five year old grandson is struggling with the idea on a new doctor, I think it is just that he is different, not that he is older, so we looked together at some pictures of all the previous Doctors and I explained about regeneration. He seemed to accept it but I guess Matt Smith will always be his Doctor, just as his little Brother's will always be Peter Capaldi.
We both enjoyed the episode, I liked it on many levels, he loved the dinosaur and Strax
I really liked the new introduction.
Tell him Aunt Kelly says " I know! I know!" Given the huge amount of kid appeal the guy has, I imagine there are many kids out there getting the regeneration talk.
As Late Paul says, I do think it helps to be allowed a little transitional pathos-- both in terms if getting over it and acknowledging what the new incarnation faces, in story.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
Capaldi will be good, I think. Still waiting for a female Doctor. (pout)
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
I kind of suspect more timelords ( gender- or even species- nonspecific) are on the horizon, as well as their Tardii.
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
I just never could get into the Matt Smith doctor, but I've ponied up for a season pass on iTunes for the new one. Love Peter Capaldi. "Who frowned this face?" Wow.
Posted by Gill H (# 68) on
:
As a veteran (Tom Baker was 'my doctor') I know how the kids are feeling. At the start of 10, Rose said so bluntly what we all thought every time - "ooh, not sure, can we go back?" I think the phone call in this ep was speaking directly to those distraught kids.
I think Capaldi will be wonderful. I've always found something to love in all the Doctors. Splendid chaps, all of them.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
I don't remember any of the classic series ever having a transitional phase where the previous Doctor appeared to the companion and implored her to accept his new incarnation. My personal feeling is that it was unnecessary. Clara should have pulled her socks up and got on with it like all the other companions - yes some uncertainty was a good touch but she didn't need to have her hand held and a reassuring phone call. IMO.
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
I agree with Ariel and thought it was a mistake to have Matt Smith come back. Clara annoyed me intensely in this episode.
M.
Posted by Late Paul (# 37) on
:
Every Doctor is different and every transition is different. The important thing is to have one. Since Smith's Doctor was very definitely flirty with Clara I think it was a fair call to make an emphatic statement that this is going to be a break from that.
But I guess I can see why some people might not enjoy that. At least it wasn't Tennant's 'long goodbye'!
Mind you, if you didn't like that aspect of it, well from what Jenna Coleman was saying in that interview linked to earlier, it's not something they're done with yet.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
I don't remember any of the classic series ever having a transitional phase where the previous Doctor appeared to the companion and implored her to accept his new incarnation. My personal feeling is that it was unnecessary. Clara should have pulled her socks up and got on with it like all the other companions - yes some uncertainty was a good touch but she didn't need to have her hand held and a reassuring phone call. IMO.
Yes, when Matt made his phone call, I felt by that time that he was an intruder. But Peter's follow-up line, "Can't you just ... just see me?" was a real heartbreaker. I watched the whole thing again last night, and found my finger twitching on the fast-forward button whenever he wasn't on the screen. He's brilliant.
Posted by Sparrow (# 2458) on
:
I noticed one major script error, right at the end after the android has fallen to his death on Big Ben (which is in Parliament SQUARE) Madame Vastra says they are searching for the Doctor on Parliament HILL which is several miles away!
But maybe Stephen Moffatt isn't a Londoner.
Posted by The Revolutionist (# 4578) on
:
Capaldi was excellent, the story... somewhat less so. I don't think it found the right balance between light and dark - lots of the jokes were very silly (even for Doctor Who), which seemed at odds with the body horror and more serious Doctor.
Vastra, Jenny and Strax are wearing a bit thin for me. I just don't find them believable as characters. The story seemed rather recycled, but redeemed itself by making the Doctor interesting and developing Clara's character properly.
I've written a full review over on the Hodderscape blog: http://www.hodderscape.co.uk/?p=5239
Who do you all think Missy is, by the way?
[ 26. August 2014, 12:25: Message edited by: The Revolutionist ]
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sparrow:
I noticed one major script error, right at the end after the android has fallen to his death on Big Ben (which is in Parliament SQUARE) Madame Vastra says they are searching for the Doctor on Parliament HILL which is several miles away!
But maybe Stephen Moffatt isn't a Londoner.
Possibly it was an error, but at the time my impression was that Parliament Hill was where the balloon landed (a distance away from where the android landed). It would make sense that they were searching for the Doctor in the area of the balloon rather than the area of the android.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
If you'll allow me a tangent of several decades... I'm halfway through watching The Seeds of Doom this week. I know I saw at least some of it in my childhood, but... it's a cracker! This is season 13 of classic Who, and still Douglas Camfield manages to elevate any story he directs.
Posted by Acurisur (# 18151) on
:
I am very much looking forward to Peter Capaldi's tenure in the Tardis. I wasn't a big fan of Matt Smith or David Tennant but loved Christopher Eccleston and I think Capaldi could be very, very good indeed. He kind of reminds me of my own favourite Doctor (the one who was the Doctor when I first started watching), Tom Baker. I do think Capaldi could be as good as "Doctor No.4" if he gets some good scripts. However, I was less impressed with his debut episode, which I thought was weak. Not Capaldi's fault mind, I think the script let him down. But it's only the first episode so I'm sure the scripts will get better.
The new theme tune is rubbish but the graphics were fine.
Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Acurisur:
He kind of reminds me of my own favourite Doctor (the one who was the Doctor when I first started watching), Tom Baker.
I was getting huge dollops of Baker T, starting with the whole rambling flow-of-consciousness post regeneration sequence, very similar to the 4th Doctor's. (Including Madame Vastra's otherwise inexplicable "here we go again"; why would she say that as she's never seen a regeneration before?)
quote:
Originally posted by Acurisur:
The new theme tune is rubbish but the graphics were fine.
Indeed. The tune is the weakest of the NuWho set; not quite on a par with the Trial of a Time Lord travesty, but damn close. Now that we have titles that emphasise the series is about a Time Lord I do hope we get plenty of adventures in which he travels in time rather than hanging around our present day - the biggest weakness of NuWho to date.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Jestocost:
quote:
Originally posted by Acurisur:
The new theme tune is rubbish but the graphics were fine.
Indeed. The tune is the weakest of the NuWho set; not quite on a par with the Trial of a Time Lord travesty, but damn close. Now that we have titles that emphasise the series is about a Time Lord I do hope we get plenty of adventures in which he travels in time rather than hanging around our present day - the biggest weakness of NuWho to date.
Has anyone noted here yet that the new title sequence was actually made by a fan? This is something I never, ever say (well, hardly ever), but ... how cool is that?
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Revolutionist:
Capaldi was excellent, the story... somewhat less so. I don't think it found the right balance between light and dark - lots of the jokes were very silly (even for Doctor Who), which seemed at odds with the body horror and more serious Doctor.
Vastra, Jenny and Strax are wearing a bit thin for me. I just don't find them believable as characters. The story seemed rather recycled, but redeemed itself by making the Doctor interesting and developing Clara's character properly.
I've written a full review over on the Hodderscape blog: http://www.hodderscape.co.uk/?p=5239
Who do you all think Missy is, by the way?
Thanks for posting that link to your blog. I liked it.
I found Missy dancing around the garden very peculiar.
Episodes 11 & 12, starring Michelle Gomez, are titled Dark Water/Death In Heaven, so we are probably going to have to wait to find out - but I very much doubt if the garden is Heaven. In the Radio Times, a thumbnail shows Capaldi and Missy with him gripping her arm in what looks remarkably like a hold I was taught for dealing with difficult children, their heads leaning towards each other, him looking at the camera, half smiling, her with a very fixed expression, and her bracelet in her right hand. There are people passing along behind them. The text says:
quote:
"You betrayed me. You betrayed my trust, our friendship, and everything I've ever stood for. You let me down."
without attributing this to a speaker. It then goes on to say: quote:
In the mysterious world of the Nethersphere plans have been drawn. Old friends and old enemies manoeuvre around the Doctor, and an impossible choice is looming before him. Death is not an end, promises the sinister organisation known only as 3W - but as the Doctor and Clara discover, you might wish it was.
The episode is written by Moffat. Apart from making me thing of sellotape, this sounds irritatingly like Torchwood.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
think
Don't know what happened there - g isn't anywhere near k.
Posted by Sparrow (# 2458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Jestocost:
I was getting huge dollops of Baker T, starting with the whole rambling flow-of-consciousness post regeneration sequence, very similar to the 4th Doctor's. (Including Madame Vastra's otherwise inexplicable "here we go again"; why would she say that as she's never seen a regeneration before?)
It's EXACTLY what Brigadier L-S said at the beginning of an earlier regeneration - Baker to Davison I think.
Posted by Acurisur (# 18151) on
:
Can't wait for next weeks episode. Capaldi vs The Daleks should make for some epic television.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Jestocost:
I was getting huge dollops of Baker T, starting with the whole rambling flow-of-consciousness post regeneration sequence, very similar to the 4th Doctor's. (Including Madame Vastra's otherwise inexplicable "here we go again"; why would she say that as she's never seen a regeneration before?)
I was very much reminded of Davison and how he had to be carried into the Zero Room on regeneration. That of course got jettisoned from the Tardis at some earlier stage, otherwise they could just have put Capaldi in there for a bit.
I agree with whoever said that the Vastra/Jenny/Strax trio were getting a bit tired. Bring back Captain Jack Harkness and River Song, that'd liven it up a bit.
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
There was a WTFness to the episode, reminding me of the changeover to Troughton.
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on
:
Been a while since I've watched Dr Who. Since David Tennant.
Capaldi will be a fabulous doctor, if the writing is up to the challenge. Main thing struck me was the comedy input. It seemed most characters had been given the role of providing regular one-line quips, regardless of the overall plot and action. Which is all very amusing and funny, if you can't survive forty seconds without having something 'funny' to laugh at.
Dr Who originally succeeded because - while it had some humour expressed organically, naturally, by characters - it mainly attempted to be serious sci-fi drama, albeit for kids. What I saw seemed to be a kind of comedy show with everybody wise-cracking in order to keep the laughs coming, with a backdrop of sci-fi drama and the potential for something serious lurking, if only the gags would stop for long enough. Good writing doesn't need to shoe-horn the laughs in to keep people watching.
I want to see the Doctor and the other characters as whole people, rather than be entertained by a series of quips and one-liners spoken by whoever happens to be in the scene at the time. But still good potential for something seriously watchable there.
Couldn't stand the Clara character, unfortunately. She seemed unusually dense and shallow (if that's not a contradiction!). Maybe the character worked better with the former doctor?
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on
:
Oh, meant to say, couldn't get the lizard lady and her weird-looking butler thing. In a society where freaks were put on show or put into asylums the probability of lizard lady conversing openly with Victorians in the street, without provoking a panic or torch-wielding crowd, seems thoroughly unbelievable.
Of course, that version of Victorian London might belong to a parallel universe where such things are normal?
Posted by Sparrow (# 2458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
Oh, meant to say, couldn't get the lizard lady and her weird-looking butler thing. In a society where freaks were put on show or put into asylums the probability of lizard lady conversing openly with Victorians in the street, without provoking a panic or torch-wielding crowd, seems thoroughly unbelievable.
Of course, that version of Victorian London might belong to a parallel universe where such things are normal?
I think that's a given.
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
In a society where freaks were put on show or put into asylums the probability of lizard lady conversing openly with Victorians in the street, without provoking a panic or torch-wielding crowd, seems thoroughly unbelievable.
I've been in love with Madam Vastra for years, I'd probably follow her around London like a lost puppy. Maybe she just has that effect on people?
Posted by The Revolutionist (# 4578) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
Thanks for posting that link to your blog. I liked it.
I found Missy dancing around the garden very peculiar.
Episodes 11 & 12, starring Michelle Gomez, are titled Dark Water/Death In Heaven, so we are probably going to have to wait to find out - but I very much doubt if the garden is Heaven. In the Radio Times, a thumbnail shows Capaldi and Missy with him gripping her arm in what looks remarkably like a hold I was taught for dealing with difficult children, their heads leaning towards each other, him looking at the camera, half smiling, her with a very fixed expression, and her bracelet in her right hand. There are people passing along behind them. The text says:
quote:
"You betrayed me. You betrayed my trust, our friendship, and everything I've ever stood for. You let me down."
without attributing this to a speaker. It then goes on to say: quote:
In the mysterious world of the Nethersphere plans have been drawn. Old friends and old enemies manoeuvre around the Doctor, and an impossible choice is looming before him. Death is not an end, promises the sinister organisation known only as 3W - but as the Doctor and Clara discover, you might wish it was.
The episode is written by Moffat. Apart from making me thing of sellotape, this sounds irritatingly like Torchwood.
Glad you enjoyed the review! Those hints from the Radio Times are intriguing. I had alluded to some of them in my review originally but someone complained about spoilers, so I took them out. I don't count officially released info as spoilers, but people's mileage varies.
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
Oh, meant to say, couldn't get the lizard lady and her weird-looking butler thing. In a society where freaks were put on show or put into asylums the probability of lizard lady conversing openly with Victorians in the street, without provoking a panic or torch-wielding crowd, seems thoroughly unbelievable.
Of course, that version of Victorian London might belong to a parallel universe where such things are normal?
I agree - it felt disconnected from "our" reality. I'd have preferred it if the episode had at least tried to ground itself in a sense of actual historical setting. Compare it to, say, The Next Doctor, which still had a "Dickensian" London rather than an authentically historical one, but used the setting to inform the story and characters to a much greater degree.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
Alan Moore (comics writer) has a story in which Jonathan Harker has dumped Mina Harker because she's been contaminated by her encounter with the dangerous foreign count and no true-born English Victorian gentleman would really maintain relations with a woman who had been soiled in that way. To which the obvious response is that while Alan Moore may be a genius, Bram Stoker and his original readers were Victorians and the least thoughtful of them had a far more realistic grasp of how a Victorian Englishman like Jonathan Harker could be expected to react than Moore ever can.
That is a roundabout way of saying the Victorians would probably be better able to tolerate weirdness like Vastra and Strax than we give them credit for. (Anna Karenina and French novels are probably better guides to how society really worked than English Victorian novels, as the English Victorian equivalent of Amazon was horribly prudish.)
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
It did occur to me that among the observers along the Thames would have been representatives of the Natural History Museum, Arthur Conan Doyle and H.G. Wells. Depending on dates, of course.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
One friend has objected that characterisation took twists previously unseen. Which made me think of all the stuff about Clara being a control freak - great fun, but have we seen any evidence to support the claim.
Overall I thought this was a decent start to what could be a cracking series. On the other hand, I don't think it will be with Moffatt in control.
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
One friend has objected that characterisation took twists previously unseen. Which made me think of all the stuff about Clara being a control freak - great fun, but have we seen any evidence to support the claim.
She's the girl who had to save the Doctor and jumped into his timeline to do so, and she used her mind to defeat the Daleks, I think that would make her quite a control freak.
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
That is a roundabout way of saying the Victorians would probably be better able to tolerate weirdness like Vastra and Strax than we give them credit for. (Anna Karenina and French novels are probably better guides to how society really worked than English Victorian novels, as the English Victorian equivalent of Amazon was horribly prudish.)
Well, not to get into it too much, but I think Trollope and even Dickens would've been better guides to Victorian English society than mainland European writers. And much of non-fiction writing of the time reflecting contemporary mores are certainly more in line with them. I'm quite sure, that the scenes from the film The Elephant Man depicting Merrick being 'visited' by a tremulous and disgusted thrill-seeking society would've been much closer to the truth, or alternately being displayed in a booth down the East End. However, it is true - and as reflected with these and other contemporary English/Irish writers - that with regard to morality and private behaviour, there was much covert acceptance of that which would not have been acceptable superficially.
In an era when physiognomony and skull-bumps were regarded as a science, however, I think the best answer is still that Dr Who was exploring some parallel version of Victorian London in the wider probabilities of the multi-verse!
Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on
:
I have invented a new acronym especially for this thread :
YCPATPATT.
Sigh.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Just finished The Seeds of Doom. Yep, speaking from the perspective of 1976... that's one of the best yet!
[ 28. August 2014, 12:15: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
ADDENDUM: Which is pretty remarkable, as I'm just now reading how it was a late replacement.
http://www.shannonsullivan.com/drwho/serials/4l.html
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Heavenly Anarchist:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
One friend has objected that characterisation took twists previously unseen. Which made me think of all the stuff about Clara being a control freak - great fun, but have we seen any evidence to support the claim.
She's the girl who had to save the Doctor and jumped into his timeline to do so, and she used her mind to defeat the Daleks, I think that would make her quite a control freak.
Just out of interest, how often have we seen Clara save the Doctor? Much as I like both character and actress, we've been TOLD she is the Impossible Girl who saved the Doctor time and time again. The only time I can think of that we've SEEN this is when she was soufflé girl.
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Just out of interest, how often have we seen Clara save the Doctor?[/QB]
We kind of saw her saving the doctor in the 'impossible girl' clips around the day of the Dr. But although it was cool to see, there was an element of them being more tell than show.
Posted by The Machine Elf (# 1622) on
:
JTL and I laughed at the end when the Doctor suggested they get a coffee - the old police box in Buchanan Street is now a coffee kiosk.
The Elf Lass didn't notice the opening sequence. She's started giggling and jumping up and down when season 4's time tunnel comes on; we've just started on Matt Smith now.
TME
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
Ok Pyx_e, I'll bite. What does YCPATPATT stand for?
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
Let me guess, You Can't Point A Toy Pistol At The Tardis."
Am I right?
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
Not long to go before we find out if it is possible to get something new from a Dalek story. The last time they did that was "Dalek" with Christopher Ecclston was the Doctor.
Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by tessaB:
Ok Pyx_e, I'll bite. What does YCPATPATT stand for?
You can't please all the people all the timeie.
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
Hmm. Macarius is out this evening and I said I wouldn't watch until he gets home. Now regretting it a bit !
M.
Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on
:
Could he be more awesome? And next week ROBIN HOOD! Hahahahahahahaaaaaaaaa
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
Echo of Christopher Eccleston's Dalek story - 'You would make a good dalek!'
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on
:
On the whole enjoyed it, a few bits where not sure, but not many sustained duff notes in the story proper. Also a bit derivative but different enough, almost all the big stories have been done in some form.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Underwhelming. It was reminiscent of the Eccleston one with the Dalek, which was gripping stuff, but this wasn't. Capaldi was good and had it not been for him, I don't think I'd have stayed with the episode to the end.
I'm betting that "Danny" turns out to be a duplicate of Journey's lost brother Kai at some point.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Just out of interest, how often have we seen Clara save the Doctor?
We kind of saw her saving the doctor in the 'impossible girl' clips around the day of the Dr. But although it was cool to see, there was an element of them being more tell than show. [/QB]
Sorry - while those clips were fun we never once saw her saving the Doctor.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
And in order to keep up to date, I ought to say I enjoyed tonight's episode. Agreed, it wasn't a patch on the Eccleston Dalek story, but I was glad to see the idea of a good Dalek being explored, at last. The idea of an entire race who are irredeemably evil strikes me as racist - you get it in Tolkein too.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Just out of interest, how often have we seen Clara save the Doctor? Much as I like both character and actress, we've been TOLD she is the Impossible Girl who saved the Doctor time and time again. The only time I can think of that we've SEEN this is when she was soufflé girl.
Yes, she saves him in Asylum. We can quibble whether she saved him in "The Snowmen"--it was tears for her dying that kept the GI from killing the Doctor.
She, of course, saves him in "The Name of the Doctor" by merging with the time line--he was in pretty bad shape until she did that.
She saves him with her leaf in "The Rings of Akhaten"--he didn't have enough history to feed the Old God, which was satiated with the potentialities of the leaf.
She saves him in "Hide" by getting the TARDIS to fly into the pocket universe for him to jump on board.
Really, for the short time that she has been here, that is not too shabby a list.
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
[qb] Sorry - while those clips (of Clara with old Doctors) were fun we never once saw her saving the Doctor.
ok, my lousy memory. I know it was implied she was making a difference and assumed she was shown as doing something.
Posted by Twangist (# 16208) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
And in order to keep up to date, I ought to say I enjoyed tonight's episode. Agreed, it wasn't a patch on the Eccleston Dalek story, but I was glad to see the idea of a good Dalek being explored, at last. The idea of an entire race who are irredeemably evil strikes me as racist - you get it in Tolkein too.
recently read a comic book , sorry graphic novel, set in the Matt Smith era with just that idea. So tonight seemed like that crossed with Fantastic Voyage - and of course I loved it! (as did the Twanglets)
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
I think the Fantastic Voyage reference was excellent. And fun to explore with a Dalek.
I am interested what the Paradise references will turn into - they are clearly an arc.
Posted by Wayfaring Stranger (# 15081) on
:
Capaldi continues to be great, but tonight's was a bad episode. "Let's do a tribute to Fantastic Voyage!" someone thought. The result was utterly nonsensical, with a choppy and incoherent script, plus a clunking insert from the “Missy” series arc, which further derailed the story.
And though the end credits say BBC Wales, this seems to have been a Guardian Films production. Never mind the incredibly blatant product placement, we also had ethnically correct casting (i.e. lots of black actors but not a single Asian, even though Asians are twice as numerous in the UK), a disdain for soldiers (So who else is going to hold the Daleks off – social workers?) and lots of wishy-washy liberal platitudes.
And yes, I read the Guardian myself. But I’m not a Guardian Reader.
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
Important distinction there!
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
I thought it was joyously good old fashioned Doctor Who. And it wasn't just a reference to Fantastic Voyage but the Doctor's been shrunk before of course, with Sarah Jane, to go inside himself, I think, and rescue himself from a giant prawn.
Or something.
And I liked the fairly traditional special effects, too (all that plastic piping).
M.
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
OK, I've checked now and it was actually Leela with the fourth Doctor in the Invisible Enemy, not a bad dream I had after too much cheese (I began to wonder as I was writing it earlier on).
M.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
I'd be happier if Danny did not turn out to be a duplicate. Dealing with the possibilities of actual soldiers arriving in classrooms is an interesting strain to follow and rooted in reality. Not everything has to relate to something else in the story, does it?
It does seem a bit of a repeat of Mickey Smith, though, when other ethnicities are available. (A letter in yesterday's Guardian suggested that all the faces were white unless they were green, which shows that the writer wasn't a watcher!)
Think of the potential of an Indian IT call centre tech support person. I remember Patrick Stewart telling how an Asian had asked him about the absence of his sort of person on Enterprise with the comment "Don't they need IT support?"
I'm finding the ubiquity of Missy odd. How does she do it? Why doesn't she "rescue" everyone? And why have we never seen her before?
I have a feeling I'm not going to like the way that arc sorts itself out.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
I'm afraid I found most of that somewhat dull.
Best bit was the reappearance of Missy. I like that. Enough people die in Doctor Who that she could be in every episode.
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
Not long to go before we find out if it is possible to get something new from a Dalek story. The last time they did that was "Dalek" with Christopher Ecclston was the Doctor.
It struck me at the end that they tried to take one of the iconic moments of that episode - "you would make a good Dalek" - and redo it. It fell flat this time.
[ 31. August 2014, 11:52: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
The idea of an entire race who are irredeemably evil strikes me as racist - you get it in Tolkein too.
They're a species, not a race. There's nothing 'racist' about making RELEVANT distinctions. The entire reason why racism is racist is because it's based on something as trivial as skin colour, when all human beings have the same basic genetic make-up.
Posted by ElaineC (# 12244) on
:
Does anyone else look at Peter Capaldi and see a resemblance to Peter Cushing playing the Doctor in the 1965 film?
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
"Missy" is that woman who used to have the eyepatch, isn't she?
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
"Missy" is that woman who used to have the eyepatch, isn't she?
Nope. Missy is played by Michelle Gomez. You're thinking of Madam Kovarian played by Frances Barber.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
She might have regenerated...
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
There is a similarity though.
And ElaineC - yes.
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
Just back from holiday for a week. Fortunately our cottage had a telly and we were back from a walk in time for the fist episode. However, I was a bit disappointed by it. I agree with others above that Clara of all companions should have been OK with a Doctor regenerating. However, it also seemed to be trying to bring in the idea that the Doctor himself had problems coping with his regeneration and that is an interesting concept.
Yesterday's episode I really liked (we got home in time). Like others I immediately thought of The Invisible Enemy and Fantastic Voyage as soon as I heard the premise but it still had plenty of originality. It was much more about the Doctor doing stuff as opposed to everyone coping with the change. Even though I had read the "Carer" comment on this thread I still laughed when they said it. I was puzzled that the Doctor found the problem that was making the Dalek "good" and then he fixed it. Why not leave it "broken" and use it?
Peter Capaldi is every bit as brilliant as I expected he would be. Usually a new Doctor is met with lots of uncertainty which they have to overcome but my impression is that this time viewers generally looked forward to him. I suppose that he was clearly going to be very different from his immediate predecessors.
I have seen it suggested that Missy is the Master. That would be fun.
Posted by Twangist (# 16208) on
:
quote:
I have seen it suggested that Missy is the Master. That would be fun.
That does seem a fun idea.
Posted by Nenya (# 16427) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
I'm afraid I found most of that somewhat dull.
I'm afraid I agree. I fell asleep partway through.
Posted by Siegfried (# 29) on
:
Wouldn't it be more sensible for "Missy" to be the Rani regenerated? In the TV series, she was still alive after her last encounter with the Doctor, and there had been plans to use her again when the original run got cancelled.
[ 31. August 2014, 19:35: Message edited by: Siegfried ]
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ElaineC:
Does anyone else look at Peter Capaldi and see a resemblance to Peter Cushing playing the Doctor in the 1965 film?
...
He totally looks like Cushing!
Posted by Sparrow (# 2458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Twangist:
quote:
I have seen it suggested that Missy is the Master. That would be fun.
That does seem a fun idea.
The way I have heard it suggested is: Master = Mistress = Missy.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sparrow:
quote:
Originally posted by Twangist:
quote:
I have seen it suggested that Missy is the Master. That would be fun.
That does seem a fun idea.
The way I have heard it suggested is: Master = Mistress = Missy.
Perhaps I am too suspicious, but that smells too much like a red herring to me. Like she was named "Missy" precisely to trick us into thinking that. Perhaps to get us thinking about the Master and ignore (as was suggested above) the Rani.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
The people Missy picks up are those who could be seen to have been misled by the Doctor, not just anyone who has been killed.
I hope that the crew got to eat the cakes.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
I think 'you are a good dalek' is both a callback to Dalek, but also a redemption of it. Because in context what the dalek is saying is that the Doctor is what a dalek would be were a dalek morally good.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
The idea of an entire race who are irredeemably evil strikes me as racist - you get it in Tolkein too.
They're a species, not a race. There's nothing 'racist' about making RELEVANT distinctions. The entire reason why racism is racist is because it's based on something as trivial as skin colour, when all human beings have the same basic genetic make-up.
I'm not sure that this distinction holds up. Certainly in Tolkien you get good and bad hobbits, humans, dwarves, wizards and possibly even elves, but then you get to the orcs and they are all utterly evil. It reminds me of the propaganda put out in WWI (and many other wars, I'm sure) - the Hun are evil child murdering, nun raping barbarians - when the reality was very different. To have an entire species who are all merciless conquering killers, be they orcs or Daleks, seems to me to play into the same blinkered way of thinking.
Posted by Firenze (# 619) on
:
Well, except that Orcs and Daleks are (one hopes) fictitious races. If that is what the original writer(s) decided, then it may make for rather one-dimensional characterisation, but you can't quarrel with it for being unrealistic, being as they are unreal an' that.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Just out of interest, how often have we seen Clara save the Doctor? Much as I like both character and actress, we've been TOLD she is the Impossible Girl who saved the Doctor time and time again. The only time I can think of that we've SEEN this is when she was soufflé girl.
Yes, she saves him in Asylum. We can quibble whether she saved him in "The Snowmen"--it was tears for her dying that kept the GI from killing the Doctor.
She, of course, saves him in "The Name of the Doctor" by merging with the time line--he was in pretty bad shape until she did that.
She saves him with her leaf in "The Rings of Akhaten"--he didn't have enough history to feed the Old God, which was satiated with the potentialities of the leaf.
She saves him in "Hide" by getting the TARDIS to fly into the pocket universe for him to jump on board.
Really, for the short time that she has been here, that is not too shabby a list.
Hmm, I'm still not convinced. Asylum, yes, she saves the Doctor there, and I suppose I have to grant The Name of the Doctor, although it's all so confused I find it hard to be sure of who is doing what and to whom. The other bits you mention seem to me to be standard companion behaviour, doing the best you can and hoping for the best. Given that Moffatt has made a big thing of her saving the Doctor throughout history, I think he needs to demonstrate this clearly. For instance, in all the clips we saw of her apparently interacting with previous generations, surely there must have been one of an earlier Doctor tripping up? If she had been edited into such a scene, to show her tripping the Doctor and therefore a gun missing him, I think the point would have been made. Instead we saw her wandering around uselessly - and let me repeat, this is a character and actress I like!
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Firenze:
Well, except that Orcs and Daleks are (one hopes) fictitious races. If that is what the original writer(s) decided, then it may make for rather one-dimensional characterisation, but you can't quarrel with it for being unrealistic, being as they are unreal an' that.
If you get into the habit of thinking fictional races are one-dimensional, does that not make it easier to think that all Jews / gypsies / single mothers etc are one-dimensional also?
Posted by Firenze (# 619) on
:
I'm seeing the advent of the Carefully Nuanced Fairytale with the understandably upset giant at the top of the beanstalk, and the unfairly ostracised witch in the gingerbread house.
I don't think it works like that: I don't think that conceiving of archetypal monsters prevents us from realising that actual humans are a bit more complicated. That we sometimes make them into the Bogeyman is indubitable, but you can't address it by trying to make the Bogeyman into quite a nice chap really.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
quote:
Originally posted by Firenze:
Well, except that Orcs and Daleks are (one hopes) fictitious races. If that is what the original writer(s) decided, then it may make for rather one-dimensional characterisation, but you can't quarrel with it for being unrealistic, being as they are unreal an' that.
If you get into the habit of thinking fictional races are one-dimensional, does that not make it easier to think that all Jews / gypsies / single mothers etc are one-dimensional also?
Only if one starts thinking that Jews were created by Terry Nation.
If you get into the habit of thinking fictional races are real, I'd say your problems are going to be a lot more serious. Such as, not valuing real people enough because they don't behave in the kind of consistent way you've learned from fictional characters. Real life can be rather disappointing when people don't follow the script.
Might I add that this applies to the Doctor himself. When throwaway lines - like how many times a Time Lord can regenerate - become canonical truths of the universe, it's time to start worrying about people a little. Having recently gone through the series from the 60s and early 70s, and read materials about them, people can get into an enormous tizzy about things that really don't matter for a fictional character with dozens of different writers over the years - like how many hearts he has and exactly when the UNIT stories occur.
[ 31. August 2014, 23:39: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Ikkyu (# 15207) on
:
In the story there was a point made that the Daleks were artificialy made evil. Their mind was modified deliberately so they could not develop compassion.
So underneath there is a "Dalek-Nature" capable of good. So the story was making the opposite point to what some have claimed in this thread.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
The race/species difference is important. The Hun - or whoever - are still human, and treating them as irredeemably evil is dangerous. They are rather like us, but turned bad.
A species can be irredeemably bad. The Smallpox virus seems to be irredeemably bad. There is nothing good about it, and we did a good thing by destroying it in the wild.
There are constant arguments about whether the remaining research stocks should be destroyed, not unlike the Doctors questions this week.
Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wayfaring Stranger:
a disdain for soldiers (So who else is going to hold the Daleks off – social workers?) and lots of wishy-washy liberal platitudes.
That soldier jibe was a jarring off-note in an otherwise good episode. The Doc can blithely use the certain death of the soldier targeted by the antibodies for his own purposes, but someone who is fighting hard to defend everything that is right and non-Dalek is not worthy to travel with him?
A far worthier reply would have been "you are a decent and honorable person - stay here because your time badly needs you."
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
We've been told that Danny Pink is a soldier, so it would appear that both Clara and the series writers think the new Doctor is wrong on this one.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
In the story there was a point made that the Daleks were artificialy made evil. Their mind was modified deliberately so they could not develop compassion.
So underneath there is a "Dalek-Nature" capable of good. So the story was making the opposite point to what some have claimed in this thread.
Well yes, having just watched Genesis of the Daleks a couple of weeks ago, the point is that it was bred out of them. But saying that there is a good "Dalek-Nature" underneath is a bit like saying humans have the nature of one of our pre-Homo Sapiens ancestors underneath. By very definition, we're not the same creature. Daleks are not Kaleds. Whatever made Kaleds capable of good was deliberately taken out of Daleks. A 'good' Dalek is quite literally an ill Dalek.
[ 01. September 2014, 13:00: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
We've been told that Danny Pink is a soldier, so it would appear that both Clara and the series writers think the new Doctor is wrong on this one.
Yes, I read it as a set-up for when the Doctor meets Danny. Which in turn makes me think that Danny is going to turn out to be a very significant character (otherwise why bother with the set-up?).
I really liked Into the Dalek. Capaldi continues to amaze and delight. The Doctor gave us some shock moments - his callousness at Ross' death, for instance - and Clara's actually got some interesting stuff to do now that she doesn't have to be the enigmatic Impossible Girl any more. The story was a nice piece of quite old-fashioned sci-fi, with the obvious homage to Fantastic Voyage. (Quote of the week: "Fantastic idea for a film, dreadful idea for a proctologist.")
Still, though, it wasn't quite hitting 10/10 for me, which this one really should have. Maybe the pacing was a bit slack in the first 20 minutes? - I don't know, but it was something.
But it remains the best thing on telly, by far.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Random crazy thought I had: Danny and Missy are connected.
...No, you're right. That's crazy.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
A 'good' Dalek is quite literally an ill Dalek.
Or further evolving.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Firenze:
Well, except that Orcs and Daleks are (one hopes) fictitious races. If that is what the original writer(s) decided, then it may make for rather one-dimensional characterisation, but you can't quarrel with it for being unrealistic, being as they are unreal an' that.
The racism in Tolkien is in his different races of Man. Some of those fighting for the baddies have melanin, whilst none on the side of good appear to.
However, given the content of his correspondence and his own writing on the subject, I think it not as straight forward as that.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
I think Tolkien and Lewis tended to represent darker-skinned people as the bad men. I think that was not deliberate racism, more a reflection of their own cultures. Aragorn would have been tanned, as would many of the Rohan. But the heroes had hairy feet.
Was it racist? Probably - or at least xenophobic. But not against the culture at the time of writing. In fact, for Lewis to allow a good Calorman would have been quite radical. We cannot judge by modern standards.
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Jestocost:
quote:
Originally posted by Wayfaring Stranger:
a disdain for soldiers (So who else is going to hold the Daleks off – social workers?) and lots of wishy-washy liberal platitudes.
That soldier jibe was a jarring off-note in an otherwise good episode. The Doc can blithely use the certain death of the soldier targeted by the antibodies for his own purposes, but someone who is fighting hard to defend everything that is right and non-Dalek is not worthy to travel with him?
A far worthier reply would have been "you are a decent and honorable person - stay here because your time badly needs you."
There wasn't a disdain for soldiers in the UNIT days. The episode started with an ex-soldier in The school, the one from the first ever episode, and ends with the Doctor refusing a soldier entry to the TARDIS.
There's something hiding in the story arc. I'm not sure what though.
Next week it looks like one of the fun episodes.
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
Was it racist? Probably - or at least xenophobic. But not against the culture at the time of writing. In fact, for Lewis to allow a good Calorman would have been quite radical. We cannot judge by modern standards.
There was an 'Islam in not the same as Christianity' subtext in the Narnia books, especially in The Last Battle. Skin colour seems incidental to that.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
Was there any soldier references in the first episode?
I am sure the soldiers are significant. I am not even going to try to guess how, because there are too many misleading indicators, but they will be significant. Maybe Missy is planting them?
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
There was ambivalence to the soldier priests, wasn't there? Things have happened in the real world since UNIT, and maybe we aren't expected to trust the military so much.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
The Doctor has long had ambivalence about soldiers. Even in the UNIT years, he frequently got mad at the Brig's military approach (see, for example, "The Silurians"). In the Sylvester McCoy years, while he worked with the military in his Dalek story (was it "Remembrance of the Daleks"?) he spent some of his time trying to trick the military in not being near the action...to save their lives because they were badly outmatched by the Daleks. And then there was his great scene where he talks a soldier out of shooting..."It is so easy, isn't it. Pull a trigger, take a life." And then, in the new series, there was "The Doctor's Daughter"--he rejected her at first, in part because she was built to be a soldier.
But this Doctor does seem a little more prejudiced, not even giving the soldier a chance to change. I suspect that is set up to cause friction when Danny comes into the TARDIS. As for Danny, tearing up when asked if he ever killed a non-soldier does suggest the old theme of a soldier who accidentally kills an innocent. Certainly, in reality, that happens rather a lot and many soldiers in real life have trouble dealing with it, so I don't want to slag it off as a television trope, but it is a frequent TV plot too.
This Doctor is edgy. His comment that Clara is his "carer. She cares so I don't have to." is kind of chilling when you think about it. A bit of the First Doctor in that.
[ETA: Jenny reference]
[ 01. September 2014, 21:36: Message edited by: Hedgehog ]
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
OK, the problems I saw, or have had pointed out to me, are as follows:
1) Why would a military group try to save the life of a Dalek in the first place?
2) Why was said Dalek not kept in a secure room, in case things went wrong? (And if you can't build a Dalek-proof room, I really don't think you'd be trying to cure one.)
3) The Dalek antibodies don't attend to the point of "hurt" (the grapnel entering the metal) but go to the person firing the weapon, who might be some way away.
4) Inside the Dalek, one moment our heroes are covered in gunk, the next they are clean and dry. Are there showers and laundry facilities that we did not have time to see?
Having said all of that, let me say again that I enjoyed this episode. Not one of the all time greats, but a decent workaday adventure.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
Those are all fair points. But, continuing to be fair, no worse than the inconsistencies in, oh, how shall I say this, every single Doctor Who story that has ever been written!
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
We've been told that Danny Pink is a soldier, so it would appear that both Clara and the series writers think the new Doctor is wrong on this one.
It looks like the 'disdain' for soldiers is set up to be blown somehow. Though it's too soon to tell, and all sorts of ways it could go off.
I suppose a good Dalek could be seen as another sign of life finding a way.
Although as every third story has Daleks pretending to be good, or becoming good (or human)...we sometimes have to forget.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
1) Why would a military group try to save the life of a Dalek in the first place?
3) The Dalek antibodies don't attend to the point of "hurt" (the grapnel entering the metal) but go to the person firing the weapon, who might be some way away.
1. I suspect they saw the potential of a good dalek - to attack the rest. As the Doctor did.
3. Maybe they are clever dalek antibodies, who attack the real source of the irritation - the person? It does make sense to sort the person out, not just the damage.
Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on
:
I thought the whole "soldier" thing was just an extension of the truth that the Doctor is a pacifist.
Or at the very least that his use of violence is always a last resort and not a first (second or third). The writers of Who have always portrayed this struggle well. Avoiding absolutes and conjuring up paradoxes. Soldiers are the opposite of the Doctor, Daleks an extension of that original thinking.
He carries a screwdriver not a gun, its a big clue.
[ 02. September 2014, 08:03: Message edited by: Pyx_e ]
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Caring for a wounded enemy - in WWI, in the field hospitals, they had tent space for Germans. Some orderlies refused to work with them. My Grandad did. But the overall assumption was that they would be cared for, even though propaganda made them out to be heartless workers of atrocities.
Of course, in that war, the assumption was also that caring for the enemy would be reciprocated, which would not be the case with Daleks.
Meanwhile, in next week's Radio Times, Ben Stiller writes about being the the Sheriff in Robot of Sherwood. Robots? Again? Puhleese. Even if Gatiss does want to reference WestWorld and half-faced Yul Brynner.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
Or at the very least that his use of violence is always a last resort and not a first (second or third). The writers of Who have always portrayed this struggle well.
I'm not sure about always. There are some stories in the Davison and Colin Baker era in which I would say it is not portrayed well. (Resurrection of the Daleks is a particularly awful case.)
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
I realise that I have constructed sentences badly in my last post. My Grandad did work with the German patients.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
OK, the problems I saw, or have had pointed out to me, are as follows:
1) Why would a military group try to save the life of a Dalek in the first place?
Keep it alive, you can get information out of it.
quote:
4) Inside the Dalek, one moment our heroes are covered in gunk, the next they are clean and dry. Are there showers and laundry facilities that we did not have time to see?
Yep. I really wish I hadn't given away my copy of Doctor Who Trivial Facts that I bought in the 1980s. It pointed out, among other things, that nobody does laundry, washing up, or goes to the toilet in the Tardis, and that one Doctor told the Daleks to "spack off". They didn't, and the rest is history.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
So I have been pondering Dalek history. This most recent episode had the Doctor pointing to what was basically a computer bank and he announcing that it is the source of Dalek evil. It is Clara's fiddling with it later that creates the potential for a Dalek-hating Dalek.
But, back in the old series, in Genesis of the Daleks it is stated that Davros was breeding out conscience and morality from the Dalek creatures...that is what led to the revolt of the scientists in the bunker that wanted the creatures to have those qualities. Now, breeding out those qualities would suggest genetic change, not computer attachments.
But that doesn't mean much. Over time, the original Daleks might have started developing those good qualities again, resulting in the computer additions. In fact, in Evil of the Daleks, the Doctor succeeds in installing the "human factor" into a number of Daleks, causing them to question authority (and start a civil war between Dalek factions).
And that brought me back to thinking about Remembrance of the Daleks, which also had feuding Dalek factions. Ace distinguishes the two groups as blobs and blobs-with-bits-added (and hating each other considering the other as not pure in their blobbiness).
Which brings me back to the current episode. This was clearly a blob-with-bits-added. That raises all sorts of questions--were the bits-added versions the winners of the Dalek civil war? Or is this a post-time-war variation that might lead, once again to a pure blob versus blob-with-bits battle? And is there yet another faction that likes to dress in bright colors?
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
What you are saying is that Dalek history has always been contradictory.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
The thing is, the daleks have had a reboot, at least once. Each time they have nearly been wiped out, there has been a chance for some redesign, or modification to the original to address the problem that caused them to be wiped out.
So they might have added mechanical aspects to manage potential genetic issues. So it could serve as a regulator, to manage potential genetic blips.
So yes, the history can change - or rather, the reasons can change.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
What is more, new series daleks have been rebooted a couple of times. There's the daleks from the end of Season one, who were spliced with human DNA. There are the Doomsday daleks who were in a capsule from the Time War. There's the Cult of Skaro from Season Three, and then the daleks recreated by Davros from Season Four. The group in Victory are impure in some way - possibly human daleks from Season One, and they bring back the paradigm daleks, who I think are Time War again. The universe has gone through at least one retcon since then (The Big Bang), so who knows which group the present daleks are descended from. I suspect Moffat is just letting the fans who care about these things sort it all out.
Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
The group in Victory are impure in some way -
I had completely forgotten the Mighty Morphin' Power Daleks from Victory. Looks like Moffat has too, thankfully. Definitely the New Coke of Dalekdom. Let's quietly pretend they didn't happen.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Jestocost:
I had completely forgotten the Mighty Morphin' Power Daleks from Victory. Looks like Moffat has too, thankfully.
I wonder to what extent the BBC or the Terry Nation estate imposed the Victory daleks on Moffat. Nothing about his use of the daleks since suggests to me that he ever thought they were a good idea.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Jestocost:
Let's quietly pretend they didn't happen.
I'd say the show has already engaged in that strategy for some time. Possibly spurred by the large number of people saying "dear God, that was the worst episode in a couple of decades".
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Jestocost:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
The group in Victory are impure in some way -
I had completely forgotten the Mighty Morphin' Power Daleks from Victory. Looks like Moffat has too, thankfully. Definitely the New Coke of Dalekdom. Let's quietly pretend they didn't happen.
Oh, those were ridiculous. When I saw them, I said out loud to the TV, "Duplo tie-in!"
Posted by doubtingthomas (# 14498) on
:
To get back to the soldier thing...
It was definitely a theme in the episode - and I agree that something is being set up between Danny and the Doctor.
However, I think it goes deeper than that, and I think the following is only part of the story.
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
I thought the whole "soldier" thing was just an extension of the truth that the Doctor is a pacifist.
Or at the very least that his use of violence is always a last resort and not a first (second or third). The writers of Who have always portrayed this struggle well. Avoiding absolutes and conjuring up paradoxes. Soldiers are the opposite of the Doctor, Daleks an extension of that original thinking.
He carries a screwdriver not a gun, its a big clue.
It looks to me as if this is what the Doctor would like to be the case, but it is not quite so, I think. Rather it looks as if he is still running from himself (as also exemplified by his question whether he is a good man).
I read his reaction to Ross's death somewhat differently from some comments I've seen (here and elsewhere). His cool acceptance, which allows him to use the situation to save the others, is contrasted with a short desperate outburst when Ross damns himself by firing the anchors: the Doctor does care, but is able to regain his composure with what strikes me as battle-field level self-discpline. Whether this has to do with the time-war, or just the sum of his centuries of experience is a moot point, but I think his rejection of Journey and her profession comes not from disdain, but from a fear of his own demons. And it is in this, that Pyx_e's paradox seems to lie.
(N.B. Apologies for joining so late in the day (er...week..) - I'm only just back from the wilderness (as it were)).
[ 04. September 2014, 23:03: Message edited by: doubtingthomas ]
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by doubtingthomas:
...but I think his rejection of Journey and her profession comes not from disdain, but from a fear of his own demons. And it is in this, that Pyx_e's paradox seems to lie.
I think at this point in the game, the Doctor's (many) demons need to be considered in every pronouncement he makes.
( and Pyx is like the St Paul of Who. )
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
The idea of The Doctor being a pacifist is surely gone now. He engineered the genocide of the daleks in the time war, as well as the resultant genocide of the time lords. That is not the act of a pacifist.
He does look for peaceful solutions before military ones. He is not a warmonger, a militarist. He seeks peaceful co-existence of groups/species. But where a species refuses peace, he will seek to destroy them.
The military strategy - that he rejects - is to simply bomb the enemy to bits with as much ordinance as possible. As a rule, that is a poor strategy, and he rejects it. But if negotiations fail, his response is usual a MOAB approach.
So he is not a pacifist. He is a politician.
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
I reckon we're being set up for a change of heart regarding soldiers for both the Doctor and Clara. Seriously, I groaned internally at both mentions, thinking that we're going to a get a military-love-in in the show.
I am surprised that more hasn't been made of the talk of divinity being seen in the Doctor's mind. Beauty, divinity.....and hate. Perhaps good daleks are Quakers. (I accidentally wrote "perhaps good Quakers are daleks" there)
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
It would be in line with the move towards a militarised society that has been concerning Friends. Military discipline whould be good for school children (check). Unnecessary memorials popping up (Folkestone already had the Road of Remembrance, and the rosemary bushes).
It would be like the way Blake's Seven segued from freedom fighters to terrorists, and the totalitarian government to something tolerable.
On the other hand - Clara had the Guardian in her hand with her school papers.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
It would be like the way Blake's Seven segued from freedom fighters to terrorists, and the totalitarian government to something tolerable.
On the other hand - Clara had the Guardian in her hand with her school papers.
Perfectly legit for a teacher, I would have thought. They publish an Education Jobs section.
Blake's Seven
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
I am surprised that more hasn't been made of the talk of divinity being seen in the Doctor's mind. Beauty, divinity.....and hate.
I guess I missed the use of the word "divinity." Of course, back in "Asylum" we had that bit about the Daleks finding hate beautiful and suggesting that that is why they find it difficult to kill the Doctor--because they find his hatred of them to be so beautiful.
I think the reason the episode left me a little indifferent is that it seemed to draw so much on references to other Dalek stories...but not really adding anything. There was the hate-is-beautiful that we heard before. We had the "you would be a good Dalek" line that we heard before. We have previously had individual Daleks come to reject the Dalek way of thinking (whether it be "human factor" Daleks or the prophetic Dalek that was featured in Donna Noble's swan song who, it turned out, was manipulating things to wipe out the Daleks). The episode all felt too much like "we have seen this before" without any added sense of "oh, that's new!"
That even includes the long stare with the eye-stalk that the Dalek gave the Doctor as the Dalek leaves the ship. Honestly, that felt like I had seen it before...although I can't remember exactly where. Was it from "Victory" when the Dalek was pretending to be a loyal tool of England? And, if it was, should we wonder if the Dalek was faking its whole "kill the Daleks" attitude and, instead, was deciding to get out of the ship with whatever other knowledge it was able to download from the Doctor's mind while they were linked?
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
It would be like the way Blake's Seven segued from freedom fighters to terrorists, and the totalitarian government to something tolerable.
On the other hand - Clara had the Guardian in her hand with her school papers.
Perfectly legit for a teacher, I would have thought. They publish an Education Jobs section.
Blake's Seven
Dear me. I forgot to check if it was a Tuesday. But that wouldn't be the code which the placement conveyed to most people. They could have used the TES for jobs. And, at the end of the day, it was pristine. If she'd been reading it at lunch, it would have been folded differently, less recognisable. That placement was a message to viewers about Guardian readers.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
I think Penny is right. There's no sign that Clara is looking for a new job. Whereas the conversation is about whether Clara is prejudiced against soldiers, which Guardian readers might be supposed to be.
Posted by welsh dragon (# 3249) on
:
how good is this!
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
Posted by welsh dragon (# 3249) on
:
I am wondering how this went down in Nottingham
Posted by Rev per Minute (# 69) on
:
Did the scriptwriters just mine a book of quotations for this week? From 'property is theft' and 'opiate of the people' through 'Who will rid me of this turbulent... Doctor?' Silly, silly, silly - and so much fun. Errol Flynn and his huge... ego would have been pleased (except that the Doctor took too much of the glory)
And never mind Nottingham, who takes Derby and then goes for Lincoln instead of Leicester? No concept of geography.
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on
:
Nottingham, the city with a castle built into a cliff above where the river would have been rather than a moated castle?
It does not matter, the whole thing was based on the Hollywood style legends rather than the actual legends.
It was a fun episode, so I'm not bothered by the inaccuracies.
I loved it.
Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on
:
And I understood it (sometimes I am left bemused)
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
Absolutely brilliant! I can only think that Steven Moffat took Mark Gatiss quietly aside one afternoon and said, "Look, you know your nostalgic love for, and encyclopedic knowledge of, old movies? Off you go and have fun with it." And he did.
Quote of the week: "I don't need a sword. I am the Doctor. And this ... is my spoon!"
(Or it could be -
"And after Lincoln..."
"Worksop?"
"... the world!")
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
I am loving this new series so far! And the new doctor!
M.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
"This is my spoon" was, I suspect, a reference to the Matrix, because the whole episode was a matrix-like reference. None of it was real.
I was less impressed, in all honesty. It was a bit "hollywood", which was the intent, but I prefer the reality - if he had discovered the real Robin Hood*, that would have been more fun for me.
But I accept that it was a bit of fun, and others enjoyed it. It gave Capaldi a chance to develop himself.
*By which I mean, some of the outlaws whose stories gave rise to the Robin Hood legend.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
That was mostly quite silly, but also entertaining.
The playing with fiction vs reality, though... that was nice. Honestly, it felt as if someone had been reading the Tardis Eruditorum blog. The guy who writes it would have LOVED all that. Is Robin Hood real? Well, is The Doctor real? "Finally, something real" he says as he walks into a spaceship.
But in sheer entertainment terms, the one bit that made me laugh very loudly indeed was "can you explain your plan without using the words sonic screwdriver".
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Also... no Missy this week, because in such a light-hearted episode, none of the good characters died.
Posted by Dormouse (# 5954) on
:
Do you know, I'm really not sure I like this new Doctor...but I'm not quite sure why. I really do hope he grows on me. I so want to like him!
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
It would be like the way Blake's Seven segued from freedom fighters to terrorists, and the totalitarian government to something tolerable.
On the other hand - Clara had the Guardian in her hand with her school papers.
Perfectly legit for a teacher, I would have thought. They publish an Education Jobs section.
Indeed - if I was desperate for a new job, I'd look in The times educational Supplement.
But I have been fortunate enough to have the luxury of working in schools with whose ideology I agree - and they are the sort of schools who advertise in The Guardian.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
The order of town taking depends on the way one is thinking. Derby, Nottingham and Lincoln establish a line across the country and command lines of communication between north and south. Leicester is another of the major Danelaw towns, yes, and follows naturally from taking Derby, but that would leave the possibility of John's men using the Great North Road, and possibly Ermine Street to get round behind the Sheriff.
[ 07. September 2014, 15:06: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Also... no Missy this week, because in such a light-hearted episode, none of the good characters died.
No Missy, but a reference to the Promised Land as the destination of the robot ship.
Posted by Starbug (# 15917) on
:
The episode gave us more evidence of Clara's alleged control-freakery. I liked the way both the Doctor and Robin expected to be hauled off to see the Sheriff, but Clara was taken instead.
Posted by Kitten (# 1179) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
"This is my spoon" was, I suspect, a reference to the Matrix, because the whole episode was a matrix-like reference. None of it was real.
.
I thought the spoon was a reference to Alan Rickman's sheriff threatening 'I'll cut your heart out with a spoon'
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dormouse:
Do you know, I'm really not sure I like this new Doctor...but I'm not quite sure why. I really do hope he grows on me. I so want to like him!
Capaldi is a fine actor, who isn't being given a chance to be a fine Doctor. Almost all of his stuff with Robin was adolescent posturing (especially the stuff with the keys) which might have worked with Smith but is very silly here.
And Clara being taken (that is, chosen by someone else) is evidence of her being a control freak? No, not following that. Her being a control freak was a funny line which, I wager, will never be followed up. Typical Moffatt.
Not only am I losing hope for this series, despite its potential, I'm beginning to think that very little of any worth has been made since Troughton left.
Posted by doubtingthomas (# 14498) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kitten:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
"This is my spoon" was, I suspect, a reference to the Matrix, because the whole episode was a matrix-like reference. None of it was real.
.
I thought the spoon was a reference to Alan Rickman's sheriff threatening 'I'll cut your heart out with a spoon'
I thought it was a reference to the recent BBC version of The Musketeers, which featured a swordfight with piece of cutlery, I think a fork; Capaldi was Richelieu in that series - in fact he was the only really good thing in it (although it was still more watchably entertaining than last night's offering - IMVHO...).
[ 07. September 2014, 23:25: Message edited by: doubtingthomas ]
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
The musketeers link makes sense. I suspect the others might have some credence too, but as Capaldi was a musketeer, that seems to be the core reference.
And I never saw any of them, because the reviews indicated it was appalling, but with good hats.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Capaldi was Richelieu. No swashbucklery.
Posted by Erik (# 11406) on
:
I am sorry to say that I really didn't get on with Saturday's episode. I have loved Capaldi so far but I agree with Robert Armin on this week. Too much silly competative stuff between him and Robin which I found quite annoying quite quickly. It felt a bit like a great actor being given substandard writing.
The whole episode was like a collection of references to other things (the fighting on the bridge, the archery contest, the Indiana Jones-style slave revolt, etc) without enough actual plot to tie them together. Maybe I was just feeling a bit too grumpy to properly engage with the silliness. I normally get on quite well with the silly.
Having said all that I have really enjoyed the first two weeks and think the trailer for next week looked great.
Posted by St Everild (# 3626) on
:
Another one checking in to say that I didn't really get this weeks episode...
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
I thought it was a good romp, though the bickering between the Doctor and Robin was a bit tedious and made Clara look even more school ma'am-like. My enjoyment was probably aided by having recently watched several different Robin Hood films with our boys.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
I am amused by the number of theories about the spoon. Upthread, we have had suggestions of it being a reference to The Matrix, Alan Rickman's sheriff and The Musketeers. Reading a commentary on another site, that writer stated quite confidently that it was "obviously" a reference to the 7th Doctor (who played the spoons).
This last theory apparently uses the analytic approach that, if the Doctor ever used a word before, then all future uses of that word must necessarily be a conscious reference back to the prior usage. I bet volumes could be written on his use of the word "the"...
Posted by Dormouse (# 5954) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
quote:
Originally posted by Dormouse:
Do you know, I'm really not sure I like this new Doctor...but I'm not quite sure why. I really do hope he grows on me. I so want to like him!
Capaldi is a fine actor, who isn't being given a chance to be a fine Doctor. Almost all of his stuff with Robin was adolescent posturing (especially the stuff with the keys) which might have worked with Smith but is very silly here.
Not only am I losing hope for this series, despite its potential, I'm beginning to think that very little of any worth has been made since Troughton left.
I suspect you may be right Robert Armin - the bickering was beneath the (Peter Capaldi) Doctor, who I feel requires a tad more gravitas, although it might have worked with Smith or Tennant.
Still, fingers crossed. I feel Capaldi is better when there's serious stuff to be done, whereas the playfulness that suited Smith so well (altho he could do serious too) doesn't sit right on Capaldi's shoulders.
I would disagree with your last statement though as I loved Christopher Eccleston, and much of Tennant before it all got far too lovey dovey. However, I don't remember the earlier Doctors very well at all.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
I bet volumes could be written on his use of the word "the"...
"The definite article, so to speak," as the Fourth Doctor so pointedly said.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Did anyone notice the photo of Patrick Troughton, playing Robin Hood, in the database slide show? (I noticed it was different from the other pictures, but not having my brain filled with all the previous avatar adventures didn't recognise it. I saw it mentioned on another site.)
Posted by Twangist (# 16208) on
:
Any link between these robots and the ones in the first episode?
Did seem like a filler/fun romp from the main story arc.
Also why is the new who Tardis accurately pilotable in old who it would go anywhere anytime randomly (or am I making that up?)
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Twangist:
Any link between these robots and the ones in the first episode?
And why do robots (a) keep crashing ships while (b) looking for the Promised Land? Is Missy's place more like a huge database (like the Library's mainframe back when we first met River Song), making it a natural resting place for robots? But then how do we explain the soldier from the Dalek episode?
quote:
Also why is the new who Tardis accurately pilotable in old who it would go anywhere anytime randomly (or am I making that up?)
Even by the time of the 4th Doctor he was getting better at piloting it. But it isn't all that pinpoint accurate: In the Dalek episode, he was weeks late in bring coffee (or maybe it was tea) to Clara. These days the general rule of thumb is that the TARDIS can be piloted with complete accuracy except for those times when it can't.
Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
These days the general rule of thumb is that the TARDIS can be piloted with complete accuracy except for those times when it can't.
That's how I've always assumed it. Having stolen it and never bothered with the manual - to the point where the Doctor's supposed departure, minus assistants, is the cliffhanger of one of the Meddling Monk episodes because it's such an article of faith that he can't come back for them - he just got better with practice. You have to admit that 50 years of Hartnellesque cluelessness would have got a bit dull.
I also think that half the time he just noodles around the time/space continuum with no fixed plan to see what will happen next, so accurate piloting becomes moot.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
I am amused by the number of theories about the spoon. Upthread, we have had suggestions of it being a reference to The Matrix, Alan Rickman's sheriff and The Musketeers. Reading a commentary on another site, that writer stated quite confidently that it was "obviously" a reference to the 7th Doctor (who played the spoons).
This last theory apparently uses the analytic approach that, if the Doctor ever used a word before, then all future uses of that word must necessarily be a conscious reference back to the prior usage. I bet volumes could be written on his use of the word "the"...
There is only one true spoon.
Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on
:
Heretic!
I liked it: big improvement on the Dalek story. In particular I liked the fact that we got to see more of the fun side of Capaldi's Doctor; we had him post-regeneratively confused in the first episode and then pretty dour and bland (IMO) last week, so it was nice to see a more 'sparky' side to him.
Posted by Justinian (# 5357) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
The idea of The Doctor being a pacifist is surely gone now. He engineered the genocide of the daleks in the time war, as well as the resultant genocide of the time lords. That is not the act of a pacifist.
When, if ever, was he a pacifist? I've been watching some Seventh Doctor recently and he's extremely murderous at times (his scheming leading to one of the many destructions of the Daleks (as well as the first time they went upstairs)). Out of curiosity, how many of the watchers at the time would have recognised that gate and where he actually was?
And the episode? Fun schlock I was in the wrong mood for.
[ 09. September 2014, 15:47: Message edited by: Justinian ]
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
I did find the testosterone powered antler clashing a teensy bit irritating, as in real life. (It's much funnier when one guy is doing it and the other one doesn't notice and metaphorically steps aside to led the antlers hit something else.)
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
A bit of Who trivia. Q Is Capaldi the oldest actor to play the Doctor? A It all depends.
William Hartnell was born on 8th January 1908, and his first episode as the Doctor was aired (as any fule kno) on 23rd November 1963, making him 55yrs and 10 months old at the time.
Peter Capaldi was born on 14th April 1958, and his first episode as the Doctor was aired on 23rd August 2014. That makes him 56yrs and 4 months, beating Hartnell. However, he appeared as the Doctor (other roles don’t count here) in “The Day of the Doctor” on 23rd November 2013, when he was only 55yrs and 6 months – younger than Hartnell.
Does this matter? Not at all, but I hope some other Who-vians will enjoy my research.
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
Also, weren't William Hartnell's shows broadcast live whereas Peter Capaldi filmed them some months ago?
Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Rogue:
Also, weren't William Hartnell's shows broadcast live whereas Peter Capaldi filmed them some months ago?
Semi-live, which is to say, they were pretty well recorded in real time without too much editing and post production, and broadcast almost immediately after. (Still had to be some editing, as getting the Tardis to disappear live in the studio was always a challenge ...) I think only one episode actually went out live - and that was on Christmas Day, so Hartnell ad libbed a "Merry Christmas" to the audience.
But you're right in that there was nowhere near the lead time of a modern production, and the cast were under a lot more pressure to get it right first time.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Rogue:
Also, weren't William Hartnell's shows broadcast live whereas Peter Capaldi filmed them some months ago?
William Hartnell's first couple of years were broadcast almost live, and then only some of the parts in the studio. So like, the parts in Dalek Invasaion of Earth where the Daleks are going across Westminster Bridge, they were filmed beforehand. Likewise, many of Carole Ann Ford (Susan)'s scenes in the Aztecs were filmed beforehand because she was on holiday.
From Season 4 on, it was all recorded, I think.
[edit: ninja'ed!]
[ 10. September 2014, 12:49: Message edited by: Wood ]
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Lord Jestcost: quote:
I think only one episode actually went out live - and that was on Christmas Day, so Hartnell ad libbed a "Merry Christmas" to the audience.
AT the risk of being terribly picky, I don't think you're right about this. The episode in question was "The Feast of Stephen", part of "The Dalek Masterplan", and the entire thing would have been semi-live, as you aptly put it. Wishing the audience a happy Christmas happened quite a bit back in the 60s, and there would have been time to edit it out if it wasn't wanted. (My source is Doctor Who: The Television Companion, sadly out of print but the best guide in existence to classic Who.)
Posted by doubtingthomas (# 14498) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
...it was nice to see a more 'sparky' side to him.
I'm not sure that is what we saw. Rather, it all seemed a bit as if it had been written for Matt Smith's Doctor (who I did like very much as long as he was played by Matt Smith), but accidentally produced a year late. (Robert Armin hinted in the same direction a few days back.)
There were other things I disliked about Robot, too, but the Doctor's portrayal grated particularly with me. On the other hand, I did like his dourness in the previous episode (whatever else was wrong with that story), so it probably all comes down to personal taste....
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Lord Jestcost: quote:
I think only one episode actually went out live - and that was on Christmas Day, so Hartnell ad libbed a "Merry Christmas" to the audience.
AT the risk of being terribly picky, I don't think you're right about this. The episode in question was "The Feast of Stephen", part of "The Dalek Masterplan", and the entire thing would have been semi-live, as you aptly put it. Wishing the audience a happy Christmas happened quite a bit back in the 60s, and there would have been time to edit it out if it wasn't wanted. (My source is Doctor Who: The Television Companion, sadly out of print but the best guide in existence to classic Who.)
I can give a little more detail from Doctor Who The Handbook -- The First Doctor, which gives both production and airing dates for the episodes.
So, just for example, there was a little two-part story immediately after the first Dalek story. It is sometimes called "The Edge of Destruction" and sometimes "Inside the Spaceship." The studio recording of the story happened on January 17 and January 24, 1964 in Lime Grove D. The broadcast dates were February 8 and February 15,1964. So, as Lord Jestocost observed, the stories did not go out live, but there was not much time between recording and transmission. The stories have the feel of a live recording for two primary reasons. First, they were not permitted to have to many cuts in the recording (there is a reference to this in An Adventure in Space & Time, the recent TV movie about the early days of the show). As a result, they would do such things as have Ian & Barbara leave a scene and stay on the Doctor & Susan talking for a bit. The actors playing Ian and Barbara would hurry over to another set and get ready there and then the camera would switch to them--so no cut in recording. This is how a live production would be done as well. The second reason it feels live is that they would not incur the expense of re-filming for minor mistakes or flubs of lines. Thus, the early stories have actors stumbling over their lines as if it were a live recording--but it was all on tape.
As for the "Feast of Steven" it doesn't look like it went out live. It was broadcast on December 25, but studio recording was done on dates like December 10 and 17, with filming at Ealing done on December 23. There is no mention in The Handbook that it was a live episode (and that is the sort of trivia that this book would normally include).
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
The idea that the Merry Christmas was an ad lib has been debunked.
Hedgehog is right, though, about the basic nature of the recording sessions. It's not just for Doctor Who, it's for all television of that period. It was far too expensive to stop and start filming and re-take, so the idea was to carry on through a scene as much as possible. They'd only stop for absolute disasters. And all the line flubs, bumping into 'solid' walls etc. that we see and now laugh at were not considered bad enough. That was an acceptable standard for television at the time.
[ 11. September 2014, 03:10: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Timothy the Obscure (# 292) on
:
I saw a couple of the original (Hartnell) episodes back in the day, and they completely failed to make any impression on me (it was also a comic strip in one of those boy's magazines, and equally baffling). So I got it from Netflix, just to figue out what I'd been missing, and it turned out I was right--it was utterly lame in the '60s. And I actually like watching a lot of old B&W shows--but the first Doctor is the least appealing character ever. And Ian, Barbara, and Susan are nearly as bad. And the Daleks look like gas pumps on roller skates....
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
I don't know. Some of the Hartnell stories are a bit rubbish, but The Dalek Invasion of Earth, as mentioned before, is, for all its hokey daftness, one of the grimmest things I have ever seen. This on a kid's programme: a story that opens on a post apocalyptic riverbank with a guy committing suicide next to a sign that says "it is forbidden to dump bodies in the river"...
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
It should be noted that in the first few Doctor Who stories, the Doctor isn't the goodie. The first Dalek story (which I actually quite rate) is one of those. Within about a year, he was solidly the character we think of him being.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
When considering the early stories, you have to also look at contemporary work, like Quatermass. Production standards and quality was similar.
The era I remember is generally a little later (The series is about as old as me). The Pertwee era had contemporary production standards - I recently rewatched the superb Omega Factor, broadly contemporary, and with problems that are blindingly clear today, but we accepted at the time.
We have to remember that the first public broadcast in the UK was 1929 - that is 85 years ago. Dr Who is 50 years old - over half the age of public television. The techniques have developed substantially since the start, and the early Doctors are actually comparatively early - there is very little from that era that has continued.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
Quite right. In a large way, people in the industry still thought of TV as theatre on film. It's actually impressive how quickly Doctor Who broke a lot of those constraints.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
I was musing, as I do, about what one would come up with if asked to produce a list of one really good and one terribad story for each Doctor. You'd have to exempt Eight (only two televised appearances) and Twelve (not a full series yet) and accept that Six's best stories are merely Ok, but still.
Good:
1. The Dalek Invasion of Earth;
2. The War Games;
3. Spearhead From Space;
4. Genesis of the Daleks;
5. The Caves of Androzani;
6. Revelation of the Daleks;
7. Ghost Light;
9. The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances;
10. Human Nature/The Family of Blood;
11. The Eleventh Hour.
Godawful:
1. The Gunfighters;
2. The Krotons;
3. The Time Monster;
4. The Nightmare of Eden;
5. Warriors of the Deep;
6. Attack of the Cybermen;
7. Time and the Rani;
9. The Long Game;
10. Journey's End;
11. The Rings of Akhaten.
I think I left out some of my favourite stories. Like Kinda is actually my favourite Doctor Who story of all time... But a lot of people don't like it. I suspect the most controversy will surround my Tenth and Eleventh choices, if only because I actually disliked David Tennant's Doctor intensely...
Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
I was musing, as I do, about what one would come up with if asked to produce a list of one really good and one terribad story for each Doctor ...
I'd go with that apart from your Six choices (and noting the point about his oeuvre generally). Surely even "Attack of the Cybermen" was Oscar material compared to "Timelash", which even the appearance of Paul Darrow couldn't save. For "good" Six I'd go for "Mindwarp", because of BRIAN BLESSED and the genuinely shocking way it ended.
And while I'm here, thanks to everyone for clarification on the Hartnell Christmas episode!
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Jestocost:
I'd go with that apart from your Six choices (and noting the point about his oeuvre generally). Surely even "Attack of the Cybermen" was Oscar material compared to "Timelash", which even the appearance of Paul Darrow couldn't save.
Frankly, it was a pretty close run thing.
quote:
For "good" Six I'd go for "Mindwarp", because of BRIAN BLESSED and the genuinely shocking way it ended.
And Sil, as well, granted. But it's problematic because it's got that darned framing sequence...
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
You'd have to exempt Eight (only two televised appearances)
Only one, and that's only if you think five minutes on the internet really counts as televised.
I am restricted in the bad challenge by not having watched a lot of stuff that hasn't got a good reputation of one kind or another. So I'm going for some compromise between bad and overrated.
1. The Time Meddler.
2. The War Games (if we can exclude the last episode; Power of the Daleks if we have to leave it in.)
3. Carnival of Monsters
4. Horror of Fang Rock
5. Enlightenment.
6. Vengeance on Varos
7. Remembrance of the Daleks
9. Empty Child / Doctor Dances
10. The Girl in the Fireplace
11. The Big Bang / The Pandorica Opens
Most Overrated...
1. War Machines.
2. Tomb of the Cybermen.
3. Planet of the Spiders.
4. Pyramids of Mars
5. Earthshock
6. Two Doctors
7. Time and the Rani.
9. Boom Town.
10. Stolen Earth / Journey's End.
11. Vincent and the Doctor.
[ 11. September 2014, 13:24: Message edited by: Dafyd ]
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
You'd have to exempt Eight (only two televised appearances)
Only one, and that's only if you think five minutes on the internet really counts as televised.
Eight minutes, dude. ACCURACY.
quote:
I am restricted in the bad challenge by not having watched a lot of stuff that hasn't got a good reputation of one kind or another.
You are lucky, truly.
quote:
1. The Time Meddler.
2. The War Games (if we can exclude the last episode; Power of the Daleks if we have to leave it in.)
Whoa, whoa, whoa. The last episode of the War Games? The one that most people think is the best bit? REALLY?
quote:
3. Carnival of Monsters
4. Horror of Fang Rock
Both absolute delights. Carnival was a possible for my favourite Third Doctor story.
quote:
5. Enlightenment.
See, this is the other Really Good Fifth Doctor story apart from Kinda and Caves of Androzani, so fair play.
quote:
6. Vengeance on Varos
I very nearly named this one too, apart from the line "You'll excuse me if I don't join you." It is probably better than Revelation of the Daleks though. Sil is brilliant.
quote:
7. Remembrance of the Daleks
Thing about the seventh Doctor is that there are so many more good stories than people remember. At least six good ones, easy. All worthy.
quote:
9. Empty Child / Doctor Dances
10. The Girl in the Fireplace
I am not sure The Girl in the Fireplace is Moffat's finest moment. It... I dunno. A lot of Moffat's worst tendencies are beginning to come out. It is not as bad in that respect as Blink, mind.
quote:
11. The Big Bang / The Pandorica Opens
I do love the bit where he stands on Stonehenge and says to the assembled aliens, come and have a go if you think you're hard enough. One of my other favourites was Hide, also... Oh wait. It's down there.
quote:
Most Overrated...
1. War Machines.
I have not seen it, granted.
quote:
2. Tomb of the Cybermen.
The first couple episodes are cracking, but it really does all go to pot when the Cybermen wake up.
quote:
3. Planet of the Spiders.
Steady on now, though. This isn't one of the greats, but it's a lot of fun.
quote:
4. Pyramids of Mars
Oh my. Really? Really? Pyramids of... I mean, really?
quote:
5. Earthshock
I agree with you here though. I hate Earthshock. It is terrible.
quote:
6. Two Doctors
7. Time and the Rani.
You can't overrate something that's widely regarded as terrible though.
quote:
9. Boom Town.
I am in two minds about this one. it has some great dialogue, but its deus ex machina ending only makes sense in the light of the series finale, so.
quote:
10. Stolen Earth / Journey's End.
Words cannot express how much I hate this story. It's godawful.
quote:
11. Vincent and the Doctor.
OH CONTROVERSY. You only named the remaining one out of my top three.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
There are some damn good Hartnell stories.
Unfortunately, some of the best ones, judging by the Loose Canon reconstructions, are from the period of Season 3 that is largely lost. The Myth Makers struck me as being particularly good, and in fact that whole little run when a new team was in charge just for a little while - Myth Makers, Dalek's Masterplan, The Massacre - would probably be seen as a golden era if anyone was able to view it properly.
Posted by Higgs Bosun (# 16582) on
:
I'm not sure that Archduid Eileen likes the new Doctor.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
[QUOTE][qb]
2. The War Games (if we can exclude the last episode; Power of the Daleks if we have to leave it in.)
Whoa, whoa, whoa. The last episode of the War Games? The one that most people think is the best bit? REALLY?
It has too many pointless escapess, and a despairing final attempt to pretend that the quarks are a credible monster even by the standards of Doctor Who.
quote:
quote:
Most Overrated...
1. War Machines.
I have not seen it, granted.
I was a bit stuck, because it's merely mediocre; but the only other Hartnell's I've seen are rather good.
quote:
quote:
3. Planet of the Spiders.
Steady on now, though. This isn't one of the greats, but it's a lot of fun.
I've been rather selective in the Third Doctor stories I've actually seen.
quote:
quote:
4. Pyramids of Mars
Oh my. Really? Really? Pyramids of... I mean, really?
Three episodes of brilliantly done, if a bit shallow, scares, and then... oh dear.
The most painful bit is when we're asked to believe that a godlike genius imprisoning another godlike genius would use the one guard tells the truth and the other one lies problem.
quote:
quote:
7. Time and the Rani.
You can't overrate something that's widely regarded as terrible though.' quote:
I don't think any of the Seventh Doctor stories are overrated. So this is just the worst. It also gets marked down for fouling up what was possibly the last chance to stop Doctor Who getting cancelled.
[QUOTE] [QUOTE]11. Vincent and the Doctor.
OH CONTROVERSY. You only named the remaining one out of my top three.
Where to start? It has a perfunctory shoehorned in monster, because Doctor Who scripts have to have a monster. What it has to say about art is utterly banal. It has no interest in Vincent van Gogh's actual life. I think Cameron hugging a hoodie has more sincere emotional content.
I don't like it very much.
Everytime I'm disposed to give it the benefit of the doubt I think of Love Actually and then I can't. Objectively speaking, Victory of the Daleks and The Power of Three are perhaps worse. But almost everyone hates them.
On your list I disagree with: Gunslingers (I like it), the Krotons (ok, the alien costumes are terrible and some of the acting isn't much better, but Troughton is having fun, and you can see the writer has potential). I think
I think Rings of Akhaten is ok. I actively like Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS. But then I nearly put Warriors Gate as the best Fourth Doctor story.
In fact, I might retrospectively do so:
4. Warriors Gate.
I first saw it when I was eight.
Posted by doubtingthomas (# 14498) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
There are some damn good Hartnell stories.
Marco Polo!
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Where to start? It has a perfunctory shoehorned in monster, because Doctor Who scripts have to have a monster. What it has to say about art is utterly banal. It has no interest in Vincent van Gogh's actual life. I think Cameron hugging a hoodie has more sincere emotional content.
I don't like it very much.
Everytime I'm disposed to give it the benefit of the doubt I think of Love Actually and then I can't.
...but it also presents a really accurate depiction of a man with suicidal depression. Or at least a man with suicidal depression whose illness was the exact analogue of the illness of a young man whose suicide I foiled, twice (long, painful story). Perhaps that's why I like it. Because it is in that respect utterly real.
quote:
4. Warriors Gate.
I first saw it when I was eight.
I was five I think. It's a hard sell but it's a cracking piece of telly.
Posted by doubtingthomas (# 14498) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
You'd have to exempt Eight (only two televised appearances)
Only one, and that's only if you think five minutes on the internet really counts as televised.
Eight minutes, dude. ACCURACY.
Seven - but weren't they amazing!
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by doubtingthomas:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
There are some damn good Hartnell stories.
Marco Polo!
But how can you know from audio alone?
No one knew that the Enemy of the World was as good as it was or how disappointing Web of Fear turned out to be.
Posted by Gildas (# 525) on
:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Hedgehog is right, though, about the basic nature of the recording sessions. It's not just for Doctor Who, it's for all television of that period. It was far too expensive to stop and start filming and re-take, so the idea was to carry on through a scene as much as possible. They'd only stop for absolute disasters. And all the line flubs, bumping into 'solid' walls etc. that we see and now laugh at were not considered bad enough. That was an acceptable standard for television at the time.
I once saw an interview with the late Caroline John where she revealed that she was advised (I think by Jon Pertwee) that if she fluffed her lines she should blurt out "oh fuck!" or some such as this was obviously unbroadcastable and the scene would have to be re-shot.
Posted by doubtingthomas (# 14498) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
quote:
Originally posted by doubtingthomas:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
There are some damn good Hartnell stories.
Marco Polo!
But how can you know from audio alone?
No one knew that the Enemy of the World was as good as it was or how disappointing Web of Fear turned out to be.
True, you can never know for sure until you see people move, but at least still pictures survive.
There is a Loose Cannon reconstruction based on set photos, some in colour, the rest colourized accordingly. After that was made a near-complete whole set of B&W telesnaps (professional production photos) turned up, which were published as thumbnails in a DWM special last year, and form the basis of a new reconstruction, which I haven't seen yet. Apparently the audio is better in that as well.
[ 11. September 2014, 19:43: Message edited by: doubtingthomas ]
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
It's late and I should be heading for bed, but I can't resist these sorts of lists. OK, here goes for my best and worst for each Doctor (I'm not going for overrated, as I've little idea of what other people think of these things):
1) An Unearthly Child (especially the pilot version)
2) The Mind Robber (my all time favourite adventure)
3) The Three Doctors (Pertwee back, and a glimpse of Hartnell)
4) Pyramids of Mars (now in its rightful list)
5) Mawdryn Undead (return of the Brigadeer, and introduction of Turlough)
6) The Two Doctors (despite its weaknesses, it's great to have Pertwee back)
7) The Curse of Fenric
8) The seven/eight minute teaser
9) Dalek (possibly the only good Dalek story in nuWho)
10) School Reunion (Sarah Jane - need I say more?)
11) The Doctor's Wife (even if Moffatt did undercut it later)
1) Planet of Giants
2) The Underwater Menace (but very few weak adventures here)
3) The Monster of Peladon (so much weak stuff here it's hard to pick only one)
4) The Keeper of Traken
5) Castrovalva
6) I need to leave this blank, as I really don't know Six's canon well enough to comment.
7) Time and the Rani
8) The Movie
9) Boom Town (possibly, but I don't think Eccleston had a weak episode)
10) The Unicorn and the Wasp
11) A Good Man Goes to War (spoilt for choice here)
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
quote:
Originally posted by doubtingthomas:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
There are some damn good Hartnell stories.
Marco Polo!
But how can you know from audio alone?
No one knew that the Enemy of the World was as good as it was or how disappointing Web of Fear turned out to be.
I've only seen the Loose Cannon reconstruction of Enemy of the World, and I already thought it was pretty good.
I don't think "audio alone" is a fair summation of what you've got when someone puts effort into a reconstruction.
They really do a rather good job of conveying as much as possible of what the visuals were like. Some of the descriptions of the research they do and the way they choose images for use are quite impressive.
PS There are other reconstructions around as well, but I found Loose Cannon better than anyone else's, partly because they use the original audio and add captions if necessary, rather than using audio that has had linking narration added.
[ 12. September 2014, 03:03: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
Robert Armin: Mawdryn Undead. Ooh, a brave but interesting choice.
Peter Davison was My Doctor when I was a kid, but in the last few years, watching the stories, it's been... instructive. Some I remember as awesome, like The King's Demons and The Awakening, actually turned out to be massively disappointing. Some turned out to be flat out terrible (Earthshock, Warriors of the Deep, Resurrection of the Daleks). But some are still great. I was asked to write an essay about Resurrection of the Daleks a couple years ago for a book called Outside In.
Anyway, Kinda was my favourite story as a kid. It still is.
YOU CAN'T MEND PEOPLE!
Obviously I am late to the party here, but has anyone talked about the rumour about how Philip Morris, the discoverer of Web of Fear and Enemy of the World, is allegedly sitting on a bunch more lost episodes because he doesn't like Stephen Moffat?
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
Loose Cannon. Is that the ones Ian Levine does?
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
5) Castrovalva
Ah, now I would have picked "Enlightenment" with "Castrovalva" as a close second.
Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
It's late and I should be heading for bed, but I can't resist these sorts of lists. OK, here goes for my best and worst for each Doctor (I'm not going for overrated, as I've little idea of what other people think of these things):
1) An Unearthly Child (especially the pilot version)
2) The Mind Robber (my all time favourite adventure)
3) The Three Doctors (Pertwee back, and a glimpse of Hartnell)
4) Pyramids of Mars (now in its rightful list)
5) Mawdryn Undead (return of the Brigadeer, and introduction of Turlough)
6) The Two Doctors (despite its weaknesses, it's great to have Pertwee back)
7) The Curse of Fenric
8) The seven/eight minute teaser
9) Dalek (possibly the only good Dalek story in nuWho)
10) School Reunion (Sarah Jane - need I say more?)
11) The Doctor's Wife (even if Moffatt did undercut it later)
1) Planet of Giants
2) The Underwater Menace (but very few weak adventures here)
3) The Monster of Peladon (so much weak stuff here it's hard to pick only one)
4) The Keeper of Traken
5) Castrovalva
6) I need to leave this blank, as I really don't know Six's canon well enough to comment.
7) Time and the Rani
8) The Movie
9) Boom Town (possibly, but I don't think Eccleston had a weak episode)
10) The Unicorn and the Wasp
11) A Good Man Goes to War (spoilt for choice here)
Surely you meant Troughton not Pertwee?
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Matt - you're right! Forgive me, that's what comes of posting when I should be in bed.
And I'm surprised at the negative comments about "Web of Fear". Recently I saw it, and then listened to it on CD, and thought it was excellent in both versions. Indeed, it could have gone in my Number 1 slot (but there is so much good Troughton), if not for the historic hold "Mind Robber" has over me. Not only do I remember it from watching as a child, but it was the first recording I bought of Who, and it did not disappoint. It strikes me there was an enormous amount of creativity in the first two Doctor's reigns, a willingness to experiment, which has been lost since then.
BTW, someone asked if I was serious when I said it had been all downhill since Troughton left. Yes, that was indeed hyperbole. There has been a lot of good stuff since then, and I loved all of Eccleston and a lot of Tennant. But there is something about the black and white era, which makes a lot of what came after seem a little pedestrian.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
Robert Armin: Mawdryn Undead. Ooh, a brave but interesting choice.
......
Obviously I am late to the party here, but has anyone talked about the rumour about how Philip Morris, the discoverer of Web of Fear and Enemy of the World, is allegedly sitting on a bunch more lost episodes because he doesn't like Stephen Moffat?
Mawdryn is odd in many ways, not least the alien make up, but I like it. And the rumour I'd heard was that there were indeed a lot more missing episodes that had been uncovered, but that money was the sticking point.
Ariel, I debated between "Enlightenment" and "Castrovalva" - there's not a lot in it, is there?
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
I've neither seen nor heard Web of Fear but I have read the Target book and always thought I would like to see it.
Posted by The Great Gumby (# 10989) on
:
Not going to play this game, because it always ends up with people being irreconcilably locked in an argument over the merits of a particular story.
However, I'm enjoying Capaldi so far. The stories haven't really got going - 1 was more an introduction with a derivative storyline tacked on, 2 was another derivative story which was a pale shadow of Dalek, and 3, while fun and far better than the title suggested, was complete nonsense from start to finish. But the Doctor is getting very interesting, distinctly less Overgrown Kid After Too Many E-Numbers, and I thought his scornfully dismissive certainty about Robin hit the spot nicely.
Pacifism has always been a complicated subject for the Doctor, but especially so since the reboot. 9 was a hardened Time War survivor. 10 was a mopey emo kid, boo hoo I killed everyone. 11 was trying too hard to laugh in case he cried. Now (leaving aside the altered history for a moment) there's a nasty, even ruthless streak, but still also that strong pacifist streak. Or maybe it's more an anti-military streak.
It may be that he's scared of who he is and what he's done, soldiers may remind him of that, he may even feel some degree of contempt for them playing their games and never having to face the sort of decisions he took. They call themselves soldiers and think they're brave, but they don't take the really hard choices. To him, they're just playing games at that scale. All baseless speculation, obviously.
The question of whether he's a good man (or even a good Dalek - repeating that line may be the best thing about a weak episode) is central. It looks like he killed FaceOff Man, and he was incredibly callous towards the doomed soldier. But his actions in both cases can be presented either way. There's a definite theme of moral ambiguity, probably tied up with the Missy thing. (Incidentally, did anyone else notice that the soldier - Gretchen Alyson "Do something good and name it after me" Carlyle - appeared chez Missy with an apparently identical screen effect to when Blue was picked up by the Tardis? May or may not be significant.)
So I'm enjoying it. The plots have been solid but unspectacular, but the dynamic's changed a lot. It's an old idea that the Doctor's dangerous to be around and can be distinctly sarcastic, dismissive and generally unpleasant, but I think this is the first time this has been clearly shown in NuWho, not just stated or hinted at. This pleases me very much.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Great Gumby:
However, I'm enjoying Capaldi so far. The stories haven't really got going - 1 was more an introduction with a derivative storyline tacked on, 2 was another derivative story which was a pale shadow of Dalek, and 3, while fun and far better than the title suggested, was complete nonsense from start to finish.
They've cycled through Regeneration Story, Violent Dalek Story, Comedy Story and this week is Scary Story (I am not sure I can let my daughter see it, in fact*). They are covering the bases.
quote:
But the Doctor is getting very interesting, distinctly less Overgrown Kid After Too Many E-Numbers, and I thought his scornfully dismissive certainty about Robin hit the spot nicely.
He's sort of a mix between Hartnell Baker2 and early Baker1 in his awkwardness. It works.
quote:
Pacifism has always been a complicated subject for the Doctor, but especially so since the reboot. 9 was a hardened Time War survivor. 10 was a mopey emo kid, boo hoo I killed everyone. 11 was trying too hard to laugh in case he cried. Now (leaving aside the altered history for a moment) there's a nasty, even ruthless streak, but still also that strong pacifist streak. Or maybe it's more an anti-military streak.
I think your analysis is bang on. Anti-Military always.
I think the Doctor's Pacifism is best described as "Pacifism Except When It Isn't."
But then, the "Except When It Isn't" suffix is vitally important to understand pretty much every label put upon the show and its characters and themes.
quote:
So I'm enjoying it. The plots have been solid but unspectacular, but the dynamic's changed a lot. It's an old idea that the Doctor's dangerous to be around and can be distinctly sarcastic, dismissive and generally unpleasant, but I think this is the first time this has been clearly shown in NuWho, not just stated or hinted at. This pleases me very much.
I'm reserving judgement, but these are good points.
*Before the broadcast of The Web of Fear, Troughton apparently came on screen in character and advised kids that it would be scary and if it was too much to cope with, hold Mummy or Daddy's hand everso tightly. I thought this was wonderfully sweet.
[ 12. September 2014, 15:26: Message edited by: Wood ]
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Ariel, I debated between "Enlightenment" and "Castrovalva" - there's not a lot in it, is there?
No. A fansite that I saw some time ago suggested they were both among the all-time least favourite episodes of most fans: neither episode really involves lots of rushing about, scary monsters, and the Doctor taking an active, leading, heroic role. Both scripts are also said to have been influenced by Buddhist thought, resulting in two episodes that didn't really fit the classic Who canon and so don't normally appeal to the majority of fans. Interesting that you'd picked one of my two Davison favourites.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Great Gumby:
But the Doctor is getting very interesting, distinctly less Overgrown Kid After Too Many E-Numbers, and I thought his scornfully dismissive certainty about Robin hit the spot nicely.
I liked that too, but then I'd totally vote for John Hurt to come back and do more episodes. He was wonderfully sour and stole the show when he appeared with Tennant and Smith. Capaldi seemed to be picking up on that nicely and including it which I found quite appealing. I like the idea that the Doctor is a complex figure, not a straightforward, one-dimensional boyish sort.
(I'd love to see Capaldi's Doctor meet River Song. That would be an interesting meeting.)
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Ariel, I debated between "Enlightenment" and "Castrovalva" - there's not a lot in it, is there?
No. A fansite that I saw some time ago suggested they were both among the all-time least favourite episodes of most fans: neither episode really involves lots of rushing about, scary monsters, and the Doctor taking an active, leading, heroic role. Both scripts are also said to have been influenced by Buddhist thought, resulting in two episodes that didn't really fit the classic Who canon and so don't normally appeal to the majority of fans. Interesting that you'd picked one of my two Davison favourites.
I would actually say that Enlightenment has a good reputation among the fans I know. It's one of my Top Three Davison stories, certainly.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
I would actually say that Enlightenment has a good reputation among the fans I know. It's one of my Top Three Davison stories, certainly.
Enlightenment turns up in the middle of the fan polls I've seen. Clearly there's a substantial body of people who love it, so there must be equally a substantial body of people who hate it. I imagine they're all the people who like Earthshock.
(For almost every Doctor Who story there is some section of Doctor Who fandom that hates it.
Exceptions: about four or five stories with Tom Baker and Liz Sladen in them, City of Death, and Caves of Androzani. Evil of the Daleks if it actually existed any more. The Empty Child / The Doctor Dances. And the eight minutes on the internet of Paul McGann.)
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
"The Empty Child" is the all-time most frightening episode. I've never been frightened by an episode of Doctor Who before but went to bed that night looking nervously at my bedroom door. Brilliant episode - it tapped into an unconscious fear for many viewers.
Even now someone only has to say in a high-pitched voice "Are you my mummy?" to bring some of that back.
The very first appearance of the stone angels in "Blink" was another classic. After that one aired you could see people looking sideways at stone statues in graveyards and giggling, a little nervously.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
"The Empty Child" is the all-time most frightening episode. I've never been frightened by an episode of Doctor Who before but went to bed that night looking nervously at my bedroom door. Brilliant episode - it tapped into an unconscious fear for many viewers.
Yes - and still my favorite, because it was haunting, so primal.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
The Empty Child really does reward repeat viewing, which is more than could be said for Blink, which I dislike more every time I see it.
I realise this is not a generally held opinion.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
Loose Cannon. Is that the ones Ian Levine does?
I don't believe so.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
Not mentioning Doctor Who to the kids today. Middle Child will not handle an episode featuring things under the bed. Not happening.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Wood:
[qb] Enlightenment turns up in the middle of the fan polls I've seen. Clearly there's a substantial body of people who love it, so there must be equally a substantial body of people who hate it. I imagine they're all the people who like Earthshock.
(For almost every Doctor Who story there is some section of Doctor Who fandom that hates it.
Exceptions: about four or five stories with Tom Baker and Liz Sladen in them, City of Death, and Caves of Androzani. Evil of the Daleks if it actually existed any more. The Empty Child / The Doctor Dances. And the eight minutes on the internet of Paul McGann.)
I think that's a fair analysis. If anyone wants to see my essay on Resurrection of the Daleks btw, i can post it here.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
If anyone wants to see my essay on Resurrection of the Daleks btw, i can post it here.
Just a link, if anyone wants one, thanks.
Cheers
Ariel
Heaven Host.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
It's not online anywhere. I just have it in text format, so I can mail it to people if they want.
Posted by doubtingthomas (# 14498) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
Loose Cannon. Is that the ones Ian Levine does?
I don't believe so.
Here is some info (their home page, http://recons.com does not appear to want to load right now)
Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on
:
Genuinly creepy tonight. I will have to think more on it when the goosebumps have gone down a bit and I have overcome my urge to tuck my feet up on the sofa.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
It was a bit creepy, but the bit that I did find genuinely unnerving was the Doctor smiling. Seriously, he has that cast of face that makes him look quite sinister in some lights. How far can you trust this one?
Otherwise, an episode short on plot, doing its best to evoke an atmosphere. Mostly successful, but not really a classic.
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
Youngest Rogueling said she was scared; middle Rogueling said she wasn't but I reckon she was. There were some great twists and I enjoyed it a lot. Peter Capaldi was brilliant again.
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
Don't read this if you haven't seen it yet!
I started off and ended up unexpectedly Clara becoming the 'impossible girl' again, comforting that frightened little boy by telling him what he, 2,000-odd years on, had just told another frightened little boy - (Is that what's known as a stable time loop?) So much going on there - one of those where you just want to sit quietly and think for a while.
[ 13. September 2014, 19:55: Message edited by: Stumbling Pilgrim ]
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
I thought it was pretty good. I was right not to let my daughter watch it though.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
OMG that was brilliant. That is what I want to see - monsters under the bed, scared children, scared adults.
Loved it.
Posted by Bene Gesserit (# 14718) on
:
That was the best episode for a very long time.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
Stunning. Right now it's taking up all the space inside my head. There were so many aspects to it. Spooky, complex, romantic, touching. Above all, new. This new Doctor is amazing - monologuing, fretting, obsessive, inquisitive. He wields a powerful stick of chalk and will steal your coffee when you're not looking. He'll go to the end of the universe to face his fear, and pause for a quick game of "Where's Wally?" on the way. He's naive and clever. He'll give you a second chance at a first date, and hide in your bedroom in case you bring your boyfriend home.
This is quality stuff.
Posted by Justinian (# 5357) on
:
Best Moffatt episode not counting specials* certainly since Season 5. Certainly comparable to his three utterly creepy S1-4 episodes (I consider The Girl In The Fireplace seriously overrated).
This is shaping up to be an excellent season - we haven't had this level of consistently good writing since The Pandorica Opens/The Big Bang.
* Qualifiers because both The Snowmen and the 50th Anniversary episode (and the Five(ish) Doctors and the Verity Lambert/William Hartnell special) were excellent. As was The Doctor's Wife.
Oh, and pitching in (and not being an authentic Whovian):
Best episodes I've seen:
1) An Unearthly Child
2) Tomb of the Cybermen (before the Cybermen wake up)
3) Spearhead from Space
4) Genesis of the Daleks
5)
6)
7) The Curse of Fenric (really anything with Ace)
8) The web short
9) The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances
10) Blink
11) The Pandorica Opens/The Big Bang (the only good season finale NuWho has)
Worst:
1) The Aztecs (I know there's worse out there)
2) Tomb of the Cybermen (after the Cybermen wake up)
3) The Sea Devils (I've not seen much of the Third Doctor - it's that, Spearhead, and The Three Doctors)
4)
5)
6)
7) Time and the Rani (clear loser, but anything with Mel)
8) The Movie
9) The Long Game (there are only two possibles - it's that or Boom Town)
10) Stolen Earth/Journey's End (Aaaaggghhhh!!!!)
11) A Good Man Goes to War (bad episode - but no other episode has so much wasted potential; it could have been awesome if it was about Rory and Amy and how distant the Doctor was in some ways)
I've too little info about 4,5, and 6 to make any calls. Suggestions as to what to watch and what to avoid?
Posted by Justinian (# 5357) on
:
Oh, and write in entry: Out of Continuity stories
Best: The Curse of Fatal Death
Worst: Daleks – Invasion Earth: 2150 A.D.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Wow. That was fantastic. Classic Moffat to take something that everyone can relate to and build an episode on it.
But part of why it was so wonderful was how contained it was. At one stage I was reminded of Hitchcock's comment that you don't let the bomb go off - the tension before the bomb goes off is so much more effective.
And then it became downright meditative.
Also, I do love how this was all basically the Doctor's doing. He had to fill his spare time with some kind of investigation.
One of the best episodes of recent years.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
There's, IMHO, an absolutely fabulous (and lengthy!) review of the episode over at AV club.
I could quote an absolute barrow-load of lines from it, but I'll just pick this one:
quote:
The result is an episode that features all the thematic density and twisty storytelling that defines Moffat’s era, placed in service to the kind of warmth and humanity that more defined the work of his predecessor.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
I guess I'm the only one that thought it a bit light on plot and spun out?
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
I loved it. For the first time, I really felt that Capaldi was the Doctor (specifically, the moment when Clara's phone goes off; he grabs it saying "ignore it!" and flings it over his shoulder...for some reason, I saw that and thought "THAT's the Doctor").
And the last line was a tremendous gift for hardcore fans. Did not see it coming. But can't discuss it because it would be a spoiler!
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
OK, I'm with Ariel. This was the best episode of this season so far, but that's not saying much. It seems to me [SPOILERS AHEAD] that the story told us there is nothing under the bed; this is merely a childhood fear of the Doctor's, brought on by Clara. In which case what was it in Rupert Pink's bed? A giant erection? And what was outside the air lock, or wrote on the blackboard (I like the blackboard itself tho) etc? No, looked clever but doesn't add up.
And sorry Justinian, but I couldn't stand the Pandoricon. It was silly. (IMNSVHO, of course.)
[ 14. September 2014, 16:38: Message edited by: Robert Armin ]
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
OK, I'm with Ariel. This was the best episode of this season so far, but that's not saying much. It seems to me [SPOILERS AHEAD] that the story told us there is nothing under the bed; this is merely a childhood fear of the Doctor's, brought on by Clara. In which case what was it in Rupert Pink's bed? A giant erection? And what was outside the air lock, or wrote on the blackboard (I like the blackboard itself tho) etc? No, looked clever but doesn't add up.
I haven't made my mind up on it to be honest. My wife found this episode incredibly frustrating though. It is the best so far of the season.
I'd probably argue that none of the new series have had more than a couple really great episodes each (although the nadir was sometime in New Series 3 or 4, and it's never been quite as bad since).
[ 14. September 2014, 17:04: Message edited by: Wood ]
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
Well, that was rubbish. No monster. What's a Doctor Who story without a monster? I mean, Caves of Androzani - rubbish plot if you call it a plot, saved by the monster. Vincent and the Doctor, even the people who hate it have to admit the monster is brilliant. Kinda, lots of drawn out dull stuff, but at least there's a giant snake at the end.
Yes, I suppose from a certain point of view it was short on plot, which is a bad thing in the same way that Jane Austen is short on action sequences.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Wood - new season 3 or 4? I presume you mean seasons 29 (with the incomparable Martha Jones - a real high spot) and 30 (which was very spotty).
Dafyd - really not fussed about monsters. After all, one of the all time greats was the very first episode, "An Unearthly Child", with nary a monster in sight.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
I could quote an absolute barrow-load of lines from it, but I'll just pick this one:
quote:
The result is an episode that features all the thematic density and twisty storytelling that defines Moffat’s era, placed in service to the kind of warmth and humanity that more defined the work of his predecessor.
I do not understand this. It's true that Davies' work has its heart on its sleeve, but humans do not have their hearts on their sleeves. The thing on the sleeve that looks like a heart is a sewn-on patch.
Which really sums up how I feel about the alleged emotional content of Davies' work. Whereas Moffat's work, underneath the clothes and the skin and the ribcage, has a real human heart beating.
(Warmth? Davies? We're talking about the guy who wrote Midnight and Torchwood: Children of Men.)
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Hmmm, what you see as a real human heart beating, I perceive as saccharine sentiment - fake and not convincing. However, that must mean you're enjoying the present stuff more than I am, so you are probably ahead in the game!
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Wood - new season 3 or 4? I presume you mean seasons 29 (with the incomparable Martha Jones - a real high spot) and 30 (which was very spotty).
I meant series 3 and 4 (as opposed to seasons 3 and 4).
Martha Jones was the best idea for a companion, but man she couldn't act for toffee.
Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on
:
Really liked this episode; best of the new season thus far. Funny, scary, moving, well-acted, etc
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
The review of Listen on androzani.com (which has good, thoughtful reviews) is interesting because of how critical of the sexual politics of it.
I'm not sure though that you can berate Listen for sexism and yet somehow stand it up against Blink on those terms. Blink's sexism is one of the things I hate about that story.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by orfeo:
[qb]
(Warmth? Davies? We're talking about the guy who wrote Midnight and Torchwood: Children of Men.)
Both of which are among the best things he ever wrote.
I don't think it's about warmth so much as about people. I've often said that Davies does characters and Moffat does plots, although that's not quite right either. I do think that none of the truest new series stories in terms in human content have been written by either Moffat or Davies.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
The review of Listen on androzani.com (which has good, thoughtful reviews) is interesting because of how critical of the sexual politics of it.
I'm not sure though that you can berate Listen for sexism and yet somehow stand it up against Blink on those terms. Blink's sexism is one of the things I hate about that story.
What the heck is sexist about Blink?
I didn't even know until recently that people kept berating Moffat for sexism. It strikes me as over the top. Most characters on TV have a gender, out of 2 to choose from. If people are going to see everything that a character does as having gender-based significance, there's a 50% probability at any given moment that a character is going to be doing something that people are going to yell "gender stereotype" at.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
The review of Listen on androzani.com (which has good, thoughtful reviews) is interesting because of how critical of the sexual politics of it.
I'm not sure though that you can berate Listen for sexism and yet somehow stand it up against Blink on those terms. Blink's sexism is one of the things I hate about that story.
What the heck is sexist about Blink?
The entire character of Sally Sparrow is a nerd fantasy. Seriously, she ends up with that guy? Really?
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
The review of Listen on androzani.com (which has good, thoughtful reviews) is interesting because of how critical of the sexual politics of it.
I'm not sure though that you can berate Listen for sexism and yet somehow stand it up against Blink on those terms. Blink's sexism is one of the things I hate about that story.
What the heck is sexist about Blink?
The entire character of Sally Sparrow is a nerd fantasy. Seriously, she ends up with that guy? Really?
Whereas as having a pretty girl fall for a tall athletic type wouldn't be playing into stereotypes at all.
To label that as 'sexism' is ridiculous. Frankly, to look at Carey Mulligan in that story and think 'pretty girl and therefore sex object' is ridiculous. Sexism is when a girl is portrayed as being merely an appendage for a male character who drives the action, not when a fully fledged female character dominates the narrative and one of the things she does is like a male - something that is apparently quite common in real life.
To me that's the epitome of looking for problems.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on that one, lest this thread becomes, through no fault of anyone, a ding-dong yes-it-is-no-it-isn't argument, and no one wants that.
[ 15. September 2014, 10:22: Message edited by: Wood ]
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
That blog's criticism of Clara showing mothering tendencies is silly as well. It's a character that works with children - teacher, governess, nanny. It's a character trait, not a gender trait. It's not an automatic trait of every female character. In the Eleventh/Amy era it was the Doctor - the male character - who tended to show he was good with children.
Posted by Justinian (# 5357) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
The entire character of Sally Sparrow is a nerd fantasy. Seriously, she ends up with that guy? Really?
It's not just that. It's Sparrow and Nightingale.
Cut the epilogue other than Sally meeting the Doctor and leave Sally's fate undetermined and it is very good.
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
That blog's criticism of Clara showing mothering tendencies is silly as well. It's a character that works with children - teacher, governess, nanny. It's a character trait, not a gender trait. It's not an automatic trait of every female character. In the Eleventh/Amy era it was the Doctor - the male character - who tended to show he was good with children.
I'll see that and throw Rory, the nurse and regular damsel, into the mix - and I'm fairly sure which of those two was the good one with kids. Take away the miniskirts and Rory and Amy are almost inversions of their gender stereotypes.
Seriously, there's a lot to criticise Moffatt for with respect to sexism. But making Clara a teacher is not one of them. That Clara is the only female character who is both on-screen and speaking is a minor one - or would be if he didn't do it so often.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
The entire character of Sally Sparrow is a nerd fantasy. Seriously, she ends up with that guy? Really?
It's not just that. It's Sparrow and Nightingale.
Cut the epilogue other than Sally meeting the Doctor and leave Sally's fate undetermined and it is very good.
And the bit at the start with Sally's mate being stalked into marriage by that guy on the hill.
quote:
Seriously, there's a lot to criticise Moffatt for with respect to sexism. But making Clara a teacher is not one of them. That Clara is the only female character who is both on-screen and speaking is a minor one - or would be if he didn't do it so often.
I'll grant that Clara being a teacher isn't a sexist thing. Clara certainly isn't so bad as last year, too, when her entire existence as a character was to be an appendage to the Doctor's existence. At least she has a (notionally) separate existence now.
Having said that, it did annoy me so in Deep Breath when people kept calling her a control freak and narcissist, and not actually showing her present those characteristics in any way that wouldn't be normal for a male character.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Well, that was rubbish. No monster. What's a Doctor Who story without a monster? I mean, Caves of Androzani - rubbish plot if you call it a plot, saved by the monster. Vincent and the Doctor, even the people who hate it have to admit the monster is brilliant. Kinda, lots of drawn out dull stuff, but at least there's a giant snake at the end.
Yes, I suppose from a certain point of view it was short on plot, which is a bad thing in the same way that Jane Austen is short on action sequences.
Posted by Erik (# 11406) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
It seems to me [SPOILERS AHEAD] that the story told us there is nothing under the bed; this is merely a childhood fear of the Doctor's, brought on by Clara. In which case what was it in Rupert Pink's bed? A giant erection? And what was outside the air lock, or wrote on the blackboard (I like the blackboard itself tho) etc? No, looked clever but doesn't add up.
I'm not so sure about this. It told us there was nothing under the Doctor's bed (or rather that it was Clara) but I can't help wondering if the other stuff (blackboard, Rupert's bed, air lock, etc) were something else. Each of those was given a potential non-creepy explanation but each one was a bit weak. Like the kind of explanation you would tell yourself to comfort yourself while not quite believing it. I think it was left deliberately ambiguous so we were left not knowing.
I can't quite decide what I think about the episode as a whole. I really enjoyed it right up until finding Clara under the Doctor's bed. As far as I can remember the Doctor stops looking at this point without actually finding the answer himself. After all, Clara made a point of him not knowing it was her. Just stopping without knowing the answer seems very un-Doctor-like.
I can't help wondering if the 'thing under the bed' is going to reappear later in the session.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Erik:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Robert Armin:
[qb]
I can't help wondering if the 'thing under the bed' is going to reappear later in the session.
I hope not. It'd remove all its force.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
I've too little info about 4,5, and 6 to make any calls. Suggestions as to what to watch and what to avoid?
Great Fifth Doctor stories (imho) are Enlightenment, Kinda and The Caves of Androzani. A lot of people like Frontios and Earthshock, although I think they're both a bit rubbish.
On the other hand, no one likes Time Flight, or Warriors of the Deep. Warriors of the Deep has a monster that has inside it the two guys who played Dobbin the pantomime horse in Rentaghost. It shows.
The best of the Sixth Doctor stories are Vengeance on Varos, Resurrection of the Daleks, and the first two story sections of Trial of a Time Lord. Do not watch Attack of the Cybermen or Time Lash if you are feeling at all not masochistic.
So. Fourth Doctor. Everyone knows about Genesis of the Daleks. That's great stuff. His second and third seasons (everything from Terror of the Zygons to Talons of Weng-Chiang) have no duff stories. None. City of Death and The Pirate Planet, both by Douglas Adams, are highly regarded by fans, although I do not tend to rate the former as highly as many people do (but then I don't like Douglas Adams).
On the other hand, bad fourth Doctor stories include Revenge of the Cybermen, Meglos, The Horns of Nimon, and The Nightmare of Eden.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Just watch 'em all and make your own mind up. That's what I'm doing. Season 14 now. No rush, it's probably several years ago that I started on Season 1.
And I can upload all the Loose Cannon reconstructions of missing episodes for you!
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Just watch 'em all and make your own mind up. That's what I'm doing. Season 14 now. No rush, it's probably several years ago that I started on Season 1.
And I can upload all the Loose Cannon reconstructions of missing episodes for you!
I dunno. I have a close mate who is a much more informed Whovian than me, and we have been going through the highlights of classic Who, along with the ones I remember watching as a kid (some of which are not, it turns out, highlights). It's sort of fun this way.
Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
quote:
Originally posted by Erik:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Robert Armin:
[qb]
I can't help wondering if the 'thing under the bed' is going to reappear later in the session.
I hope not. It'd remove all its force.
Depends how it's used; could be part of the season story arc.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
Great Fifth Doctor stories (imho) are Enlightenment, Kinda and The Caves of Androzani. A lot of people like Frontios and Earthshock, although I think they're both a bit rubbish.
I quite like Frontios, although I remember it from my childhood which may explain it. Earthshock is rubbish.
I agree with Wood's three recommendations, although there are people who disagree with us on Kinda and Enlightenment. More people like Mawdryn Undead than people seem to realise. Snakedance is the sequel to Kinda, and some people think it's even better.
quote:
The best of the Sixth Doctor stories are Vengeance on Varos, Resurrection of the Daleks, and the first two story sections of Trial of a Time Lord. Do not watch Attack of the Cybermen or Time Lash if you are feeling at all not masochistic.
'The best of the Sixth Doctor stories' is a bit like 'the best of Wordsworth's late poems' or 'the best of 90s U2 after Achtung Baby' or...
quote:
So. Fourth Doctor. Everyone knows about Genesis of the Daleks. That's great stuff. His second and third seasons (everything from Terror of the Zygons to Talons of Weng-Chiang) have no duff stories. None. City of Death and The Pirate Planet, both by Douglas Adams, are highly regarded by fans, although I do not tend to rate the former as highly as many people do (but then I don't like Douglas Adams).
From Tom Baker's first three seasons, Ark in Space, Genesis of the Daleks, Terror of the Zygons, Brain of Morbius, The Deadly Assassin, and Robots of Death, are nearly universally admired. (Pyramids of Mars, Seeds of Doom, and Talons of Weng-Chiang are widely admired as well. Talons of Weng-Chiang is one of the classics of Doctor Who; unfortunately, it is exactly as racist as the title makes it sound.)
Horror of Fang Rock completes the run.
Sun Makers is rather good. So is The Ribos Operation. (The Ribos Operation, The Pirate Planet (Douglas Adams), The Stones of Blood, The Androids of Tara, The Power of Kroll, and The Armageddon Factor form a sequence called the Key to Time. The first four is possibly the most consistently good run of four stories in Doctor Who. The last two... have some good bits somewhere.)
City of Death is what Douglas Adams did just after he did the first radio series of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
Warriors Gate is one of my top ten Doctor Who stories ever.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
Re. Talons of Weng-Chiang. I remember Stephen Moffat talking about it on the BBC website last year and saying, "everyone always points out the rubbish giant rat..." and thinking, no, mate. Anyone with a brain points out the yellowface makeup.
It has a lot to commend it, but - and my Whovian mate never seems to understand this - the yellowface is something I can't quite get past.
I should have mentioned this before, so props for bringing it up.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
The Androids of Tara is actually somewhere in my top ten, but I'm so used to Who fans going, HAVE YOU GONE QUITE WRONG?! that I always hesitate to mention it.
Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on
:
I like it; but then I'm a fan of that whole late Habsburg east central European cultural reference.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
I like it; but then I'm a fan of that whole late Habsburg east central European cultural reference.
Also, it's hilarious fun. Count Grendel is a great baddie. He's not a world conquering fascist or a cold psycho. He's just a bit of a jerk.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
A friend of mine who is very anti-Capaldi, says he has problems understanding what he is saying. Moreover, said friend reckons the BBC have been deluged by complaints from Americans who can't understand Capaldi at all without turning subtitles on. Would any of our American cousins care to substantiate or negate this perception?
And Wood, when you say Freema Agyeman can't act you are getting close to pistols at dawn. Sir, you besmirch the lady! This link has a section on the awards she has received and been nominated for, so it's not just my POV. For me, she is far and away the best nu-companion so far, and I wish she'd done more than one season. However, better to have one great run, than go on and on till everyone is desperate for you to go.
[ 15. September 2014, 16:45: Message edited by: Robert Armin ]
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
A friend of mine who is very anti-Capaldi, says he has problems understanding what he is saying.
Where regional accents are concerned I'm usually one of the first to have difficulty understanding them. I find Glaswegian and Newcastle the hardest to understand, especially when spoken rapidly. I was therefore pleasantly surprised to find that Capaldi sounded much more English than I'd expected, with only a hint of Scottish.
If your friend dislikes him, though, he's probably listening out for not-listening, if that makes any sense.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
I once heard a programme on accents in which an elderly lady with a pronounced Received accent herself complained that a certain BBC announcer with a mild, educated Edinburgh accent was incomprehensible. I simply could not understand how she could not hear what was said. Both seemed completely understandable to me.
I suspect some people are prepared not to understand, so don't. Whether this is deliberate or a product of upbringing I cannot tell.
Which being said, I simply could not make sense of what our Glaswegian school caretaker said when he was in a mood not to be comprehensible.
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on
:
Personally, I do have a bit of a problem with Capaldi's accent at times. I can understand a good 90% of what he says, but occasional words get missed. I am expecting this to improve as I get more used to his accent. I figure the fault is more with me than him.
And, to be fair, I often missed chunks of what Matt Smith said as well...not because of accent but because he spoke so quickly!
Posted by Gildas (# 525) on
:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
From Tom Baker's first three seasons, Ark in Space, Genesis of the Daleks, Terror of the Zygons, Brain of Morbius, The Deadly Assassin, and Robots of Death, are nearly universally admired. (Pyramids of Mars, Seeds of Doom, and Talons of Weng-Chiang are widely admired as well. Talons of Weng-Chiang is one of the classics of Doctor Who; unfortunately, it is exactly as racist as the title makes it sound.)
Horror of Fang Rock completes the run.
Sun Makers is rather good. So is The Ribos Operation. (The Ribos Operation, The Pirate Planet (Douglas Adams), The Stones of Blood, The Androids of Tara, The Power of Kroll, and The Armageddon Factor form a sequence called the Key to Time. The first four is possibly the most consistently good run of four stories in Doctor Who. The last two... have some good bits somewhere.)
City of Death is what Douglas Adams did just after he did the first radio series of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
Warriors Gate is one of my top ten Doctor Who stories ever.
The fourth Doctor's reign, like Gaul, can be divided into three parts.
The first part, produced by Philip Hinchcliffe was magnificent with three dud stories (Robot, Revenge of the Cybermen and Android Invasion) and a couple of patchy ones (Weng-Chiang for the reasons stated and Brain of Morbius). After which Hinchcliffe left and he was replaced by Graham Williams who faced two adversaries more formidable than the Master and the Black Guardian of Time, to whit Mrs Mary Whitehouse and Tom Baker's ego. Consequently there are more duds.
Horror of Fang Rock and Image of the Fendahl are hangovers from the Hinchcliffe era, Sun Makers is, as stated, excellent. Ribos Operation, Stones of Blood and Androids of Tara are all pretty good, as is City of Death. It's probably a minority view but I like Destiny of the Daleks and Horns of Nimon. On the other hand you have the Prawn of Peril, Land of the Dodgy CSO, Attack of the Unimpressive Aliens (oh, and the Sontarans) knocked up by Williams in a hurry when the script arrived with a production requirement for Wembley Stadium filled with actors in Cat Prosthetics, Attack of the Giant Squid, The Trivial Nuclear War (with William Squire, the greatest of all the Hunters as a panto villain), Catweazle and the Balloon from Space and A Very Special Drugs Episode. Oh, and Shada which was nixed by the unions. There's also Pirate Planet, which is basically all right but benefits from the undoubted affection in which the late Mr Douglas Adams is held and from the absence of a Target novelisation. (An awful lot of Doctor Who stories suffer on repeat viewing from not being as good as the version in one's head from childhood provided by Mr Terence Dicks.)
Finally, John Nathan-Turner took over and produced Leisure Hive, State of Decay (the final leftover from the Hinchcliffe era), Warriors Gate, Keeper of Traken and Logopolis all of which are excellent; Full Circle, which is basically all right and Meglos which is bloody awful even if it does have Jacqueline Hill in it. (You wouldn't guess from that little lot that the same bloke would go on to produce The Twin Dilemma, Timelash, Time and the Rani and Delta and the Bannermen.)
Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on
:
This family of Canadian viewers always watches Doctor Who (and most other BBC shows) with the subtitles on when possible, just so we don't miss a good line because we were struggling to catch the accent. So it's not just Capaldi.
Posted by Rowen (# 1194) on
:
I live in Australia, and have a satellite TV package. I can understand Who fine. But what I have noticed is that when USA-based channels show programs from other countries, they often put their own sub- titles in. Not just really foreign ones either, but UK and Oz.
I have always figured it just says something not very complimentary about Americans' ability to hear other accents at all.
But then last night, as I flicked through, it was being done on some American show about families in lived in swamp areas of tne USA.
So, who knows!
But oh, I am loving Who!
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
We do have trouble with a lot of them, hearing-wise, I mean. I think that they go in auditory directions we're not used to. For example, I do just fine with Mexican, Southern US, Asian, and Australian accents, but I have a darned hard time with UK accents (most of them). I can only describe it by saying that the pitch sounds more vertical to me, where the first few I listed (bar the Asians) sound horizontal. Which is probably as clear as mud.
Don't mind me, I have synesthesia and I use the visuals to classify sounds. But I haven't worked out what degree of verticality means in actual sound terms. Proper technical terms, I mean.
[ 16. September 2014, 00:09: Message edited by: Lamb Chopped ]
Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on
:
Long ago I knew someone in Boston who had a job creating subtitles for the British drama and mystery shows that Public Broadcasting was showing. It was funded specifically so deaf viewers could watch the show. This was sufficiently long ago that they may have had special decoder boxes to put the subtitles on the TV rather than the feature that is now built in on most televisions.
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
I have no problem understanding Capaldi. (I did, however, turn on the subtitles for the first few episodes of "The Wire," till I got used to the accent.)
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
We watched the latest episode last night, as my husband was away at the weekend and we like to watch it as a family. I enjoyed it, it was thoughtful. I especially found the obsession with Clara's timeline interesting, not just that they could visit within it but that the Doctor almost said her life expectancy; Strax did the same a few weeks ago and I wonder if there is any relevance in this? It struck me immediately the similarity.
The toy soldier also puzzled me. Am I right that she also gave one to the young Doctor? Or am I misinterpreting what happened? Yet, unlike Dan, the Doctor professes not to like soldiers. It seems to have had the opposite effect on him.
My boys went to bed afterwards, the 10 year old, who sleeps below his older brother, said on the way up 'I'm the monster under your bed'
[ 16. September 2014, 07:08: Message edited by: Heavenly Anarchist ]
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on
:
Wood: quote:
Re. Talons of Weng-Chiang. I remember Stephen Moffat talking about it on the BBC website last year and saying, "everyone always points out the rubbish giant rat..." and thinking, no, mate. Anyone with a brain points out the yellowface makeup.
By an odd coincidence, we were watching this the other night and when the Doctor asked Li H'sen Chang if he was Chinese, we started giggling...
On Blink: quote:
...the bit at the start with Sally's mate being stalked into marriage by that guy on the hill.
I think 'stalked into marriage' is a bit OTT. First of all, she was shunted back to the 1930s. Things were different then; what we would now consider sexism was the way most people behaved back then. Are you suggesting 1930s Man should have behaved like 21st Century Man in fancy dress to avoid offending us? All historical drama does this to a certain extent, but you can only go so far with it before destroying the illusion that you are recreating the past.
Secondly, you're assuming she had no choice in whether or not to marry the guy. This was 1930s Britain, not the Dark Ages (and even in the Dark Ages she wouldn't have been forced to marry him). Lazy scriptwriting, perhaps, to have her sending Sally a letter to say that she married the first guy she met and lived Happily Ever After. But I don't see any suggestion that she was coerced into marriage.
I agree with you about the ending, though. The ending is weak. Sally ends up running the DVD shop with her brother's best friend? Really? That's the summit of her ambitions? She could have done so much better... and I'm not talking about the boyfriend's looks here.
That's why I liked Martha (even though she couldn't act); medical student with some gumption. Leaving school with a handful of GCSEs and hanging about practising gymnastics until the Doctor turns up to whisk you away on an adventure is not a good life plan (can you tell I didn't like Rose?)
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
This talk of Capaldi's accent is interesting to me as a Brit; it's not just that I have no difficulty understanding him, but I hardly notice he's got one; it's a very mild Scots; almost RP compared to what you'd hear on the streets of Glasgow.
Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on
:
It's what I'd call (probably wrongly) 'Edinburgh' or 'elite Scots'.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
That's the summit of her ambitions?
I am mystified by the general assumption that, because Sally Sparrow is depicted at a DVD shop at the end of the story, she continued to run it until the age of 65.
Or more broadly, the general assumption that the end of a character's story as depicted as the end of the character. If you're going to treat characters as "real people" in this way and draw all sorts of real world implications about them, that necessarily involves accepting that these characters continue to have a life beyond the end of when you were watching them. Treating the end of their story as the end of change in their entire lives is just wrong. You can only treat a character's own narrative timeline as having ended if you know they've died.
[ 16. September 2014, 10:35: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
This talk of Capaldi's accent is interesting to me as a Brit; it's not just that I have no difficulty understanding him, but I hardly notice he's got one; it's a very mild Scots; almost RP compared to what you'd hear on the streets of Glasgow.
Likewise. Capaldi's other roles show that he can do the full range from really quite effete Englishman to full-on see-you-Jimmah Scot. He tends to gravitate towards this particular accent, though, so I suspect it's his natural one.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
In fact, if you're going to treat Sally Sparrow in this way, it's fundamentally wrong to say "she ended up with the nerd". No, she was with the nerd the last time you saw her. For all you know, 6 months later she finally got sick and tired of him, knuckled down at university and married a surgeon.
That's what happens if you treat characters in this fashion, as having a life beyond the realms of the story you see them in.
Asking writers to provide you with the final life story of every significant character is asking them the impossible. To do so would require an ever-growing list of spin-off shows or for every show to be an ensemble piece. Doctor Who is clearly not an ensemble piece. It has a lead. It has some ongoing secondary characters, most of whom eventually leave the narrative thread.
In fact, fan fiction thrives on the fact that there are all sorts of gaps available to fill in. There's Sally Sparrow fan fiction - I just checked. The reason it can exist is that Sally's future is not defined to the extent that some of you seem to be claiming.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
That's what happens if you treat characters in this fashion, as having a life beyond the realms of the story you see them in.
Wow.
OK. I said upthread I think I was going to have to agree to disagree with you and let you have the last words on the sexism thing, and on this point, I think that goes at least triple here.
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
Elsewhere I've come across criticism of what was deemed to be stalking by Eleven of Clara.
Another issue is the way in which the Doctor is treated. Ten's arse was molested by a woman in "The end of time". One episode (can't remember which, in one of his first episodes) saw Amy forcing herself upon Eleven. Didn't Eleven get unwanted attentions in "The day of the Doctor"? This series has seen Clara give a right clout to (for want of a better word) Twelve.
While mistreatment happens to male and female sexes in the show's history, the mistreatment of the Doctor in the version doesn't appear to find attention in the show itself, even the Doctor hasn't spoke out against it.
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
I agree with you about the ending, though. The ending is weak. Sally ends up running the DVD shop with her brother's best friend? Really? That's the summit of her ambitions? She could have done so much better... and I'm not talking about the boyfriend's looks here.
That's why I liked Martha (even though she couldn't act); medical student with some gumption. Leaving school with a handful of GCSEs and hanging about practising gymnastics until the Doctor turns up to whisk you away on an adventure is not a good life plan (can you tell I didn't like Rose?)
Whilst I agree with you about the sexism issue, as someone from a working class background who left school with a handful of o'levels I have to disagree with this. Having a good life plan does not have to mean leading an academic or professional life and society would be somewhat stuffed without the shop workers. I did become an academic despite my background but most of my family are quite happy and fulfilled having not written an essay since they left school.
And for all we know Sally might be studying part time whilst working, just as I did
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
Elsewhere I've come across criticism of what was deemed to be stalking by Eleven of Clara.
The first five minutes or so of Rings of Akhaten are creepy as hell. No lie.
Posted by The Great Gumby (# 10989) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
This talk of Capaldi's accent is interesting to me as a Brit; it's not just that I have no difficulty understanding him, but I hardly notice he's got one; it's a very mild Scots; almost RP compared to what you'd hear on the streets of Glasgow.
He's certainly no Rab C Nesbitt, a series which might as well be in a foreign language for all I understood. I wouldn't call it mild Scots, though - that would be the sort of "regional accent" you find in BBC newsreaders/presenters, where it's mostly been trained out of them, leaving just enough of an accent to count towards the quota. Mild Scots would be nearer to his very English civil servant in Torchwood:CoE. But yes, any problem understanding him is more likely to be down to gabbling or intrusive music.
I'm sure the possible significance of colours has been commented on - people named after colours is fairly odd, whether or not you count Will Scarlet, and patterns like that are rarely coincidence. Leaving aside the possibility that this is leading up to a game of intergalactic snooker (as the Daleks already tried something similar previously, so it would be another stolen/adapted story), I'm idly musing whether the significance of soldiers called Blue and Pink is the fact that Blue is the woman and Pink the man. An inversion of the norm/custom/stereotype? Probably nothing in it, but I'll mention it just in case.
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on
:
Heavenly Anarchist: quote:
Whilst I agree with you about the sexism issue, as someone from a working class background who left school with a handful of o'levels I have to disagree with this. Having a good life plan does not have to mean leading an academic or professional life and society would be somewhat stuffed without the shop workers. I did become an academic despite my background but most of my family are quite happy and fulfilled having not written an essay since they left school.
And for all we know Sally might be studying part time whilst working, just as I did.
And me (two professional qualifications acquired whilst studying part-time). And come to think of it, my sister left school with four 'O' levels (showing our age here) and is now more highly qualified than I am (BSc, MBA).
Orfeo's right too. I suppose what got up my nose was the fact that *I* would hate to work in a DVD shop (and she doesn't just work there, she is joint owner, suggesting a more long-term commitment than some people are implying). But I am describing my own emotional reaction to 'Blink' here - it doesn't have to be logical
And I REALLY don't like Rose. Although perhaps if I met her in real life and wasn't forced to sit through all the sickly sentimental claptrap about her relationship with the Doctor, I might find her quite entertaining.
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
And I REALLY don't like Rose. Although perhaps if I met her in real life and wasn't forced to sit through all the sickly sentimental claptrap about her relationship with the Doctor, I might find her quite entertaining.
what about Donna? A similar background and as common as muck but her moral compass was usually spot on and she showed great strength of character. Of course, her advantage was that there was never anything romantic between her and the Doctor; she was quite a relief as a companion.
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on
:
Yes, I liked Donna! She reminded me of one of my operatic friends (who says opera isn't for the working classes?)
[ 16. September 2014, 13:16: Message edited by: Jane R ]
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
Donna was the best new series companion hands down. Which meant it was all the more awful what they did to her.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
I think I'd rate Amy and Rory above Donna, but Donna is certainly still my second choice; shame she is in such an overall weak season. (Although Clara after making a poor initial showing is steadily climbing the ranks.)
Martha starts out well, but her character arc never really lets her develop beyond 'nobody can ever measure up to Rose'. And then what dignity her character arc gives her is blown when she gets summarily paired up with Mickey off screen.
Rose depends upon whether she's on screen or off screen. On screen she's likeable enough. Off screen she's a pain.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
The character of Martha was a waste of a terrific actor.
Posted by Justinian (# 5357) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
I think 'stalked into marriage' is a bit OTT. First of all, she was shunted back to the 1930s. Things were different then; what we would now consider sexism was the way most people behaved back then. Are you suggesting 1930s Man should have behaved like 21st Century Man in fancy dress to avoid offending us? All historical drama does this to a certain extent, but you can only go so far with it before destroying the illusion that you are recreating the past.
Secondly, you're assuming she had no choice in whether or not to marry the guy. This was 1930s Britain, not the Dark Ages (and even in the Dark Ages she wouldn't have been forced to marry him). Lazy scriptwriting, perhaps, to have her sending Sally a letter to say that she married the first guy she met and lived Happily Ever After. But I don't see any suggestion that she was coerced into marriage.
Nor me. And there's a definite line in there to indicate that she wasn't - Sally notices that her friend lied about her age, claiming to be a couple of years older than she was. Which indicates she was chasing him as much as he was her - or certainly Sally read it that way. With the minimal evidence we have, assuming stalking is ... uncharitable.
quote:
I agree with you about the ending, though. The ending is weak. Sally ends up running the DVD shop with her brother's best friend? Really? That's the summit of her ambitions? She could have done so much better... and I'm not talking about the boyfriend's looks here.
This. Very much this. The exception I see is if it gives Sally a decent income so she can go and do things like exploring abandoned buildings while doing something she basically enjoys to keep food on the table.
quote:
That's why I liked Martha (even though she couldn't act); medical student with some gumption. Leaving school with a handful of GCSEs and hanging about practising gymnastics until the Doctor turns up to whisk you away on an adventure is not a good life plan (can you tell I didn't like Rose?)
It's also something I have against Amy although she has more of an excuse.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
Ladies and Gentleman, once again I find myself called upon to defend the under-appreciated Martha. She remains the only nu-Who companion to have saved the world the old fashioned way, through grit and elbow grease. She didn't merge with the TARDIS, look into the Eye of Harmony, or split into thousands of Impossible fragments. No, she walked the world - the whole world - spreading the word that saved the world. She showed tenacity and moral fibre even when relegated to servant status and patronised. I am forced to agree that setting her up with other-Micky was a mistake, an over hasty tidying up of two interesting characters, but overall she was magnificent!
I may have to set up a new MMMS - Make Mine Martha Society.
[ 16. September 2014, 14:34: Message edited by: Robert Armin ]
Posted by Justinian (# 5357) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
I think I'd rate Amy and Rory above Donna, but Donna is certainly still my second choice; shame she is in such an overall weak season.
I'd rate Amy and Rory as a group over Donna but Donna ahead of Amy. Despite the Amy on her own episodes being generally strong due to the writing, and Donna having to contend with The Wasp.
quote:
(Although Clara after making a poor initial showing is steadily climbing the ranks.)
Are you kidding? Her first showing, in the Snowmen, was amazing. Her first half season on the other hand? Not so much.
And nthd on Martha being the worst waste of a good actor I'm aware of on Dr. Who since Bonnie Langford. Also on Rings of Akhenaten being very creepy. (I really liked Rose with Nine - and wasn't impressed by Rose with Ten).
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Ladies and Gentleman, once again I find myself called upon to defend the under-appreciated Martha. She remains the only nu-Who companion to have saved the world the old fashioned way, through grit and elbow grease. She didn't merge with the TARDIS, look into the Eye of Harmony, or split into thousands of Impossible fragments. No, she walked the world - the whole world - spreading the word that saved the world. She showed tenacity and moral fibre even when relegated to servant status and patronised. I am forced to agree that setting her up with other-Micky was a mistake, an over hasty tidying up of two interesting characters, but overall she was magnificent!
I'll grant you that the one thing about Martha that made her more heroic than any of the other new series companions: she didn't get superpowers or a Massive Cosmic Significance attached to her. And she left because it was time for her to go, not because of some weird arc.
I wish there were more companions like that.
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
quote:
(Although Clara after making a poor initial showing is steadily climbing the ranks.)
Are you kidding? Her first showing, in the Snowmen, was amazing. Her first half season on the other hand? Not so much.
Seconded. Although she's been given more identity in the current series.
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on
:
Apropos of nothing that's currently being discussed, and I'm only three years late, but why have I only just discovered this ?
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Stumbling Pilgrim:
Apropos of nothing that's currently being discussed, and I'm only three years late, but why have I only just discovered this ?
That was new to me too. Loved that.
Posted by Roseofsharon (# 9657) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Stumbling Pilgrim:
Apropos of nothing that's currently being discussed, and I'm only three years late, but why have I only just discovered this ?
Love that - thanks for the link.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
quote:
(Although Clara after making a poor initial showing is steadily climbing the ranks.)
Are you kidding? Her first showing, in the Snowmen, was amazing. Her first half season on the other hand? Not so much.
I'm ignoring Asylum and Snowmen. The poor initial showing I'm talking about runs from Bells of St John to Time of the Doctor. She's been climbing the ranks since Deep Breath. (I think the potential was always there, but it wasn't being used.) Capaldi's Doctor makes a space she can fit into that Smith's Doctor didn't.
Posted by Gill H (# 68) on
:
I hadn't seen that video either - that was fab.
Little at seeing Lis Sladen in there too. Much missed.
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Ladies and Gentleman, once again I find myself called upon to defend the under-appreciated Martha. She remains the only nu-Who companion to have saved the world the old fashioned way, through grit and elbow grease. She didn't merge with the TARDIS, look into the Eye of Harmony, or split into thousands of Impossible fragments. No, she walked the world - the whole world - spreading the word that saved the world. She showed tenacity and moral fibre even when relegated to servant status and patronised. I am forced to agree that setting her up with other-Micky was a mistake, an over hasty tidying up of two interesting characters, but overall she was magnificent!
I'll grant you that the one thing about Martha that made her more heroic than any of the other new series companions: she didn't get superpowers or a Massive Cosmic Significance attached to her. And she left because it was time for her to go, not because of some weird arc.
I wish there were more companions like that.
I thank you M'Lud. The Defence rests.
And another vote of thanks to Stumbling Pilgrim for that wonderful clip!
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Another thanks for the link -though the Scots is a wee bit inpenetrable......
LC, would your vertical and horizontal accents be in any way connected with the mouth shape necessary to produce them? Only when I hear accents I can feel the shapes in my mouth.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
Might be. I wish I had a couple of representative people round to test out my theory with! (plane tickets, anyone? ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
)
Posted by Late Paul (# 37) on
:
Someone in my Google+ circles posted this re: accents and I'd go along with it not being the accent per se. I'd go further and say it's not necessarily even Capaldi - though perhaps his particular diction style makes it worse.
No, I've been watching Doctor Who with the subtitles on at least since Ten. And whilst this is no doubt in part an age-related hearing drop-off, , I do find there's something about the sound mix on Who in particular that means I was constantly rewinding to catch dialogue. In fact I think I was swearing at the TV through most of that speech.
Re companions - I'm another Donna fan. I don't mind the idea of an underlying sexual tension with the companions but it was nice to see a relationship not based on that. It was also nice to see someone who was her own person without having to become either a Strong Female Character or Great Mystery. I'm not counting Doctor-Donna as that was just the beginning of the end, the way they wrote her out - which I agree was a shame.
Listen - for me it's another Blink - i.e. an episode with a strong central idea, an OK execution and which for some reason almost everyone but me raves about. And another similarity I think the thing under the bed will be the Weeping Angels of Twelve - i.e. it'll return and be progressively less effective. I dunno I'm aware I have some personal reactions mixed up in this. I struggle with anxiety issues and being told Fear is a Superpower doesn't really resonate with me. In fact I think I was swearing at the TV through most of that speech.
Looking forward to next week's. I tend to like heist stories. I'm one of the few fans I know that liked Angel's "Shroud of Rahmon".
[ 17. September 2014, 11:43: Message edited by: Late Paul ]
Posted by Pine Marten (# 11068) on
:
Well, here's another fan of 'The Shroud of Rahmon', an excellent episode .
As for accents, I'm usually lost with broad Scottish accents but find I can understand Capaldi pretty well. And although a fan of Matt Smith's, I got increasingly irritated at his gabbling (and Tennant's, too). So maybe it's speed more than anything.
Donna was my favourite companion - I liked her bolshiness, her strength and the way she talked back to 'space boy', and...praise the Lord, no hint of any romance, which was a blessed relief.
Clara is growing on me .
Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on
:
When there was a romance between Rose and the Doctor, that was interesting because it had never been done before. Martha's quiet hero worship was also touching but, by now, the whole romance thing is very dull indeed. The rock bottom point was Amy trying to drag the Doctor into bed on her wedding night (had it been the other way round everyone would have been screaming rape).
Posted by Wood (# 7) on
:
Nervous about next week's story, because it has "Time" in the title, and stories with "Time" in the title tend to be terrible.
Time and the Rani.
Last of the Time Lords.
Time Flight.
Time Lash.
Closing Time.
The Time Monster.
The End of Time.
It ain't looking good.
(On the other hand, there's the Time Warrior and Time Meddler... but...)
[ 17. September 2014, 14:48: Message edited by: Wood ]
Posted by doubtingthomas (# 14498) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pine Marten:
As for accents, I'm usually lost with broad Scottish accents but find I can understand Capaldi pretty well. And although a fan of Matt Smith's, I got increasingly irritated at his gabbling (and Tennant's, too). So maybe it's speed more than anything.
Similar feelings here - although I barely notice Capaldi's accent at all. I used to live in Scotland, so for a long time, Scottish accents were just what English sounded like.
I went to see Deep Breath in the cinema and thus got to see the 10-minute "Extra", which had clips from the read-through, with Capaldi doing lines we had just heard with something much more like his real accent
(BTW, I can also understand Tennant better if he speaks with *his* real accent,and at half the speed.)
quote:
Donna was my favourite companion - I liked her bolshiness, her strength and the way she talked back to 'space boy', and...praise the Lord, no hint of any romance, which was a blessed relief.
Clara is growing on me .
I definitely second Donna for the modern era, and also now have hopes for Clara.
I also liked Rose with Eccleston - to is easy to forget that there was a time before Tennant, but it I that pre-prettyboy pairing worked quite well..
Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on
:
Just caught up on I Player.
Very very Good, Very funny, very clever, very well acted throughout. So good to see some real venom, wit and thought.
Going to watch it again tomorrow.
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on
:
When it comes to accents it seems that Clara's is wandering around the country at the moment. She used to be pretty south but is definitely (to my ear) travelling north. Will she stop when she meets the Doctor or will she continue on to Iceland and then turn into a polar bear in her last episode?
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
I wish they would let her use her real accent. I think it's adorable.
Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on
:
quote:
Crap spouted by The Rogue:
When it comes to accents it seems that Clara's is wandering around the country at the moment. She used to be pretty south but is definitely (to my ear) travelling north. Will she stop when she meets the Doctor or will she continue on to Iceland and then turn into a polar bear in her last episode?
* keep picking up on her wandering into Lancashire, it reminds me of elderly relatives from my childhood
[ 18. September 2014, 06:38: Message edited by: Heavenly Anarchist ]
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Too much television gives people square eyes.
Thread closed.
Ariel,
Heaven Host.
Posted by jedijudy (# 333) on
:
quote:
Crap spouted by Ariel:
Thread closed.
Ariel,
Heaven Host.
My hero! Yay!
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on
:
Opened just so * can say that * thought last Saturday's episode was really good. Hopefully this will continue!
And closed again. Because * can
Tubbs
Last Saturday? That was days ago.
Edited by Ariel. Becoz.
[ 18. September 2014, 17:42: Message edited by: Ariel ]
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0