| Author | Message | ||
     Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.49 |
2 days and 4 hours and counting... Has anyone else realised, this is the first time since it returned that we've gone into a new series of Dr who with the same central cast as the previous series... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
I must remember to tape this on Saturday as I'm planning an all day Easter soiree! | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
I'm getting excited already ... | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 92.232.184.206 |
One slight change - I think Rory is a fully fledged companion this time, though I could be wrong (avoiding all spoilers!). I'll be gutted if Amy leaves at the end of this season. She's my favourite companion since Romana II. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.150.135.208 |
Rory was central cast for more than half the series last year. I was actually quite upset when they killed him off. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Rory is my favourite and I think the most likeable of the modern companions to date. Amy is okay but I wouldn't be too upset if she left. I felt the same about most of the other new companions - functional without being particularly memorable characters. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
I think Amy is my least favourite of the new companions so far - and, believe it or not, Donna Noble was my favourite!  But Amy is just plain dull - with her, it's back to using companions purely as eye candy for the male viewers IMO (sorry, Stephen). | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.176.15.88 |
Amy's my favourite - I think I whinged on here several years ago about the fact that the doctor had all of space and time to travel, yet each companion ended up being from present day Essex, with estuary English, glottal stops and all. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
I was really put off by Catherine Tate as a companion. Perhaps my second least favourite after the execrable Bonnie Langford. My fav companion of all remains Jo Grant closely followed by Sarah Jane Smith (still can't believe she's gone). | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 92.232.184.206 |
Donna was my favourite of the new series companions too, Caroline - till now, at least. I'm probably the only person in the UK hoping we get a season of James Corden in the Tardis... | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
For me, Ace has to be the best ever companion. The Seventh Doctor and Ace were the perfect pairing. OK, list time. Top 10 favourite companions (old and new series - including UNIT personnel): 1. Ace 2. The Brigadier 3. Sgt Benton 4. Sarah Jane Smith 5. Jo Grant 6. Jamie 7. Harry Sullivan 8. Donna Noble 9. Rory 10. Martha OK I know there are a lot of men in there compared to relatively few male companions, but then I am a girl! BTW I reckon it's time we had an *alien* companion - I'm fed up of humans as companions. Had it actually worked technically (and also had the actor who voiced him not died suddenly), I reckon Chameleon was a great concept. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
I'm probably the only person in the UK hoping we get a season of James Corden in the Tardis... Jesus H. Christ!! That would be one way of killing the show stone dead! | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Nice list, Caroline. Here's mine: 1. Jo Grant 2. Sarah Jane Smith 3. Sgt Benton 4. Brigadier Lethbridge-Stewart 5. Harry Sullivan 6. Liz Shaw 7. Romana (first incarnation) 8. Zoe Heriot 9. Jamie McCrimmon 10. Peri Brown (oh, momma! - she kept me watching the show long after the quality had waned dreadfully, how I sobbed when she left...) | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.38.47 |
Yeah, I like Rory: perhaps the only character left who isn't smugly overconfident. | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 92.232.184.206 |
"Jesus H. Christ!! That would be one way of killing the show stone dead!" I think that's what most people would say... But then they said that about Catherine Tate too! I just think it would push the Doctor into different situations, different conversations. I loved the first episode of Logopolis where it was just the Doctor and Adric. Best companions: 1. Amy 2. Ian 3. Romana II 4. Donna 5. Sarah Jane 6. Ace 7. Jamie 8. Zoe 9. K9 10. Jo But I could jumble most of those up completely and be just as happy with the list. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
K9! How on earth did I manage to forget K9! OK put the lovely little doggie in at no. 4 on my list and shuffle everyone down a slot. BTW my sis-in-law and her hubby just popped in from shopping - had a "saw this and thought of you" moment as they bought me a Doc Who Easter egg with mug. I haven't had a nice, silly kiddie-style present like that in years!  | ||
| Seanmcd (Seanmcd) Username: Seanmcd Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 86.174.203.215 |
"I was really put off by Catherine Tate as a companion. Perhaps my second least favourite after the execrable Bonnie Langford. " lol! What have you got against redheads Stevie? Seriously, Bonnie's screeching WAS terrible though. Any female companion worked for me. Yes, especially Peri. | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.178.84.71 |
So what did folk think? I wasn't too sure for the first ten minutes or so, but it grew on me and I'm looking forward to next week's episode. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.145.129.77 |
I loved the way the alien killed that woman. and the whole thing with forgetting them as soon as you turn away, that's one of the best concepts the show's given us in a long time. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.145.129.77 |
Favourite line - River Song "I can be a screamer though... there's a spoiler for you." | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.253.77 |
I thought it was okay - entertaining, enough, but absurdly overblown, and suffering, as usual, from a lack of genuine peril. And, oh no, another case of the Doctor having to save the entire universe... he saves the universe every week. Must be tiring. The monsters were cool, but thet turning away and forgetting them is surely a variation on the stone angels in "Blink". | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 220.138.167.42 |
I've loved Doctor Who since I was a child, but, like Zed, I find the new series increasingly silly, overblown, bombastic, and lacking in any real sense of threat or menace. The 60s and 70s series had this feeling of peril, but they didn't rely on a lot of loud music and running around punctuated by one-liners or irritating speeches about what a badass the Doctor is and not to mess with him (honestly, he seems to do this all the time now). The older series may not have had CGI and loud music, but it did at least have atmosphere, some real characters, genuine, often touching humour, and suspense. By contrast, the more over-the-top the new series gets, the more hollow it feels. | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.178.84.71 |
I think one problem in recent years is this thing of "the Doctor's going to die" or, as Zed says, "the universe is going to end". No he's not and no it isn't - this gives some interesting twists and turns but you know it's all going to be ok. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.31.24.131 |
Did I really see Best Companion lists up there? I'm not looking again. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.253.77 |
Yep, that's my main problem with the show, Mick. I prefer the much quiter episodes, where the entire universe isn't in pretend peril. Sadly, there are hardly any of these now. Moffat seems just as bad as the old guy for this kind of camp, bombastic melodrama. I think I'll just rewatch The Brain of Morbius instead... | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 92.232.184.206 |
Almost too good - other TV seems so pallid and workaday in comparison. Joyful, ambitious, brilliant. Hard to believe I've got this and Game of Thrones to look forward to for the next six weeks when a month ago I was happy to have a new episode of V to watch... Glad Rory made it to the title sequence as I thought above - even if...! And once again Steven Moffat creates a great new game for kids to play. Doctor Who has always done so much to enrich childhood, and he's keeping that up with bells on. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.145.129.77 |
"The monsters were cool, but thet turning away and forgetting them is surely a variation on the stone angels in "Blink"." Weeping angels, get the name right... I wouldn't say so. It's almost a complete opposite. When people look at the angels, they're no longer dangerous. People know the angels are there and how much danger they're in. With the Silents, they appear to be most dangerous when you can see them but the characters have no idea how deep they are the second they turn away. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.253.77 |
Weber...sorry, but I'm not dorky enough to get the name right; and I had sex before I was out of my teens.  What you just described are variations on a theme. As I noted above. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 86.165.36.129 |
This 1969 Whovian episode - as well as LOST - keeps showing to me how both depend on influence from the gunslinging DARK TOWER by Stephen King. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.145.129.77 |
Even if they are they're pretty distinct variations on a theme though (so distinct as to be almost opposites). Daleks and cybermen are just variations on a theme as well - last of the species transformed into emotionless monsters -Daleks created from the Kelads and cybermen from the Mondrians. Does it matter? It's a saturday afternoon family TV show. It's guaranteed to be generic to a point. The early days you wax so lyrical about weren't really that much better. You. like me, were just a child and a teenager when they were on. the light of nostalgia makes it seem better than it was. The sense of peril you talk about, if you'd seen those episodes first as an adult, you wouldn't be claiming it was there. As an adult, we always know the Doctor will win in the end. Opening the show by definitively killing him and burning the body in a viking service is an intriguing way to start a series... Yes we know that using the whole timetravel and time can be rewritten thing he'll be OK in the end but it's a good enough hook for me to dangle off willingly | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.145.129.77 |
How is the Doctor going to have to save the universe in this one? There was a joke about interacting with his former self.. when warned by River of dire consequences... Amy - "but he's done that before, and it turned out alright" Rory "yes but to be fair, the universe did explode" Which I thought was a brilliant line. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.253.77 |
Horses for courses. But I think the current incarnation of Who is a pale echo of when RT Davies first took over - I fell back in love with it then. Now it's like a persistent ex girlfriend who keeps making booty calls to me when she's drunk. | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 92.232.184.206 |
"Daleks created from the Kelads and cybermen from the Mondrians." That explains why the cybermen have such a good eye for design - gives a new meaning to neo-plasticism...  | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.178.84.71 |
 | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.145.129.77 |
I had the book The Tenth Planet when I was a kid. that was the first ever cybermen adventure. Also had books of the first ever dalek story (Will hartnell's second story I think - possibly the first) and the Genesis of the daleks. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.156.233.116 |
Well, to harp on about my projector again I have to say this looked utterly fantastic on the big screen at 9.00 at night. I don't know if it added to the atmosphere or not but it felt so palpable in this ep viewed this way - almost adult horror. I for one think this ep showed some ironing had been done. There was less barnstorming for me, less cheap jokes, Amy was better and more rounded as a personality than she has ever been and Rory just made you long for a time when it's just him and the Doc for a while - he's really very good, and really has changed (and has grown less happy, I've noticed). The problem with Who is how can it go back? It has to keep topping itself again and again to keep the viewers watching, all the while alienating old fans who like the chamber piece episodes (though they still happen). I reckon the Daleks have built a Tardis meself (you can tell who had a shag in their teens...  ). | ||
| Greg James (Greg_james) Username: Greg_james Registered: 04-2011 Posted From: 92.16.64.196 |
I would say my reaction to it was middling. It was okay but it was the Doctor's darkest hour again, he didn't regenerate properly again and the Silence/Silents looked like The Ood's in-laws, which I hope is intentional in some respect otherwise there's a severe lack of imagination in the design. It was interesting viewing because of the complexities in the plot but I wouldn't say it was captivating. | ||
| Barbara Roden (Nebuly) Username: Nebuly Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 142.179.12.225 |
I thought it was a cracking episode - the right mix of horror (the Silence/Silents; and the scene with Joy in the washroom was pretty horrific), action, drama, and humour ('These are my operatives: the Legs, the Nose, and Mrs Robinson' / 'How many Canton Everett Delawares can there be? Well, three, anyway' / 'Canton, on no account are you to follow me, and shut the door behind you'). I've loved Alex Kingston as River Song since 'Silence in the Library', and while she's clearly having a blast with the character, she's such a good actress that she's able to make the quietest lines/scenes resonate; her talk with Rory while she's picking the lock was wonderfully done (and Arthur Darvill's Rory showed more sensitivity/nuance in that one scene than in almost all the rest of his appearances put together). A few questions (SPOILERS, if you haven't seen the episode yet): Is the person in the spacesuit who kills the Doctor at the beginning River Song? We know River Song is in prison for killing the best man she ever knew, and when the figure raises the visor on the suit the Doctor says quietly 'Go ahead, I know who you are' (which, if it is River, is a neat twist on the first time the Doctor saw her - in the series, anyway - which was when she was wearing a similar outfit, and he DIDN'T know who she was). And immediately after, when River empties her gun into the spacesuited figure with no effect, she mutters to herself 'No, of course not': does that mean she acted out of reflex, and then realised of course it wouldn't have an effect? How could she know? Plus she implies, in her talk with Rory, that when she first met the Doctor she was a young girl - any tie-in to the young girl in the spacesuit at the end of the episode? The machine they find is the same one that was in 'The Lodger' last series. How does it get from Florida in 1969 to London in 2010? And if, as is rumoured, James Corden (Craig in 'The Lodger') is back as Craig this season, does that tie in somehow? The Silence/Silents tells Amy that there is something the Doctor must know, and something he must not know. Immediately after, while all hell is breaking loose, Amy insists on telling the Doctor she's pregnant. Now, if she was nine months pregnant and her water had just broken and the contractions were two minutes apart, yeah, kind of important news to impart regardless of what's going on at the time. But to stop everything to tell him oh, yeah, she's pregnant (with the baby not due for 6+ months) - why is that so urgent? Does it tie in with the bit about something the Doctor must know/must not know? And if so, which of these two things is this news? And if Canton Everett Delaware III is so important a character that he warrants an invitation to the Doctor's 'death' (and how cool is it that the actor playing old Canton is the father of the actor playing young Canton?), does this mean the character is going to be of ongoing importance through the series? | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.145.129.77 |
"and the Silence/Silents looked like The Ood's in-laws," They look to me like a nightmare version of the Grey men we're so used to these days... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
Sorry to say I found that first episode a bit of a shambles. Far too rushed and confusing with too little exposition imo. It came across more like a final climactic episode which tend only to work because of the long build-up beforehand. This asked far too much of the viewer's patience and is a worrying sign of hubris from Moffat & Co. On the plus side the new monsters (whatever they're called) were amongst the most genuinely frightening in the show's history and promise much! Obviously they are a twist on the Angels - keep looking at them or they'll get you - but visually represent a much more disturbing menace. If it wasn't for the scenes in which they appeared I'd have written this opener off as a complete failure but as such would give it a half-decent 6/10. Now here's hoping the second part, and the rest of the series as a whole, shows a little more restraint... | ||
| Seanmcd (Seanmcd) Username: Seanmcd Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 86.174.203.215 |
Too confusing for the average viewer. Too much asked of the viewer so soon. Brilliant monsters though. The Dr helping the President smacks of a blatant attempt to woo the BBC America audience. Officially the lowest rated opener of new Who so far.. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.148.242.13 |
"Obviously they are a twist on the Angels -keep looking at them or they'll get you " the girl who was got WAS looking at them... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
Yes, they're more or less Angels that can move whether you're looking at them or not but looking at them gives you at least a fighting chance of survival. Great monsters, shame about the implementation... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
Counting the Christmas special that's two duff episodes in a row. Early days but they really need to pull their finger out already to rescue this series. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.148.242.13 |
The Christmas special was the first actual christmas story they've done. I really liked it. All RTD's were just Aliens attack earth on Christmas day... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
After watching the first episode again I'm now even more confused... make that 5/10. They really need to pause for breath and look up the meaning of the word "subtlety" or the phrase "less is more" because, at the minute, 'Doctor Who' is buckling under the weight of Steven Moffat's labyrinthine ambition. For God's sake, let's see a return to basics, man!! | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.152.198.50 |
"Now it's like a persistent ex girlfriend who keeps making booty calls to me when she's drunk." I'll say this for you, Zed - you've lived! The characters still lack suffer from smug overconfidence. From my extensive study of the British people (i.e., watching Come Dine with Me and bits of the Noel Edmunds box game show whose title escapes me), it seems that Britain has adopted the high-five, the man-hug and the sort of "I'm fabulous" bluster that belongs in the end zone at an American football game. None of which has any connection with genuine self-confidence and assertiveness. Doctor Who himself (and I'll continue to call him that until he behaves) has been the worst offender lately. However, I enjoyed this ep more than I thought I would. Some points: - I think the two female characters (actors?) are the weakest of the four and could be expunged. - the aliens were possibly intended to be a amalgam of the Greys and Men in Black? - Was this a location shoot? If so, it was a horrendous waste of money for one short scene and a couple of others that looked like they were filmed on a beach rather than a desert. - "Therefore, since brevity is the soul of wit..." I doubt that Shakespeare was advocating merely speaking faster, as the Doctor is particularly prone to do. - "...And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes,". Those outward flourishes are the overly complicated plots that Moffat favours. I still have NO CLUE what last series final ep was about. - Stop adding "-ie" and "y" to the ends of ordinary words. They stopped making cute neologisms in Buffy The Vampire Slayer about 15 years ago. It's a verbal tic that's rubbed a part of my brain raw (or should I say my "brainy-wainy sort of thingy"). | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.152.198.50 |
Ack, always a typo. "The characters still suffer from smug overconfidence." | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.152.198.50 |
Oh I just watched the Christmas Special too and thought it wasn't too bad - probably the best one since The Christmas Invasion. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.152.198.50 |
Brilliant idea about the daleks building a Tardis, Tony. Have the daleks ever time-travelled before, though? | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 92.232.184.206 |
They had a time machine in The Chase, did it with mirrors in Evil of the Daleks, used a time corridor thingy in Resurrection of the Daleks, had emergency temporal shifts in more recent episodes and plucked planets out of time in The Stolen Earth. I don't think it's a dalek Tardis though. I think it's a character in itself, a new enemy, a time lord Tardis that's gone a bit mad. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.6.115 |
Why do we think there's another Tardis out there at all? I must have missed something. Oh, and I did like that he made the Tardis invisible. Finally! | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 92.232.184.206 |
I'm pretty sure the Doctor said it was a Tardis in The Lodger. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 2.24.19.84 |
And the landlady thought he was just walking funny. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.6.115 |
We're ready for CARRY ON TIME-TRAVELLING. "Ooh, ain't he got a long one!" [i.e., scarf], "It's bigger on the inside". | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.6.115 |
The threshold for double-entendre has lowered to the point that any reference to the size of something (anything) is one. | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 92.232.184.206 |
"We're ready for CARRY ON TIME-TRAVELLING." That would be wonderful. Although River Song is rather bringing the Carry On to Doctor Who - "I'm quite the screamer!" | ||
| Mark_lynch (Mark_lynch) Username: Mark_lynch Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 92.40.253.31 |
Saying the plot's too complicated for other people to follow is a bit like saying AV's too complicated a voting system for the masses - but I understand it, so you'd better vote no for it. ;-) For what it's worth, I enjoyed Who cos I wasn't expecting much, but thought the pre-sequence bit a bit silly and a waste. | ||
| Skip (Wolfnoma) Username: Wolfnoma Registered: 07-2010 Posted From: 216.54.20.98 |
Not a Donna fan. Loved K9 and Sarah Jane. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
It's not even that the plot is ridiculously complicated but the fact that the storytelling is so muddled and rushed. I found whatever enjoyment I got from the scenes with the new monsters negated by all the faffing around with tangled plot threads. Old 'Doctor Who' gave us one story at a time spread over several episodes and was a hundred times more gripping and enjoyable as a result. These convoluted series long plot arcs have become tiresome and distracting imho. | ||
| Rosswarren (Rosswarren) Username: Rosswarren Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 86.129.140.48 |
I enjoyed it, but it did feel a bit like a showcase of all Moffet's writing ticks. Creepy Kid voice - check Monster you can't turn away from - check Great to see Mark Shepperd making an apperance, hope he gets more to do in part two. However I think my five year old summed up the problem with new who when the Doctor died he said 'Well he will be fine by the end' ; There is a lack of peril for the main characters, they should have properly killed off Rory to give a sense that anything could happen | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Arghhhh! I forgot to record Doctor Who last night! Anyone know if it's on again today - time and channel? Cheers. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
Last night's episode was a bit of an improvement on last week's but still hopelessly muddled imo. At least the characters were allowed to stand still long enough for some of the old chemistry to show through but all sense of threat from The Silence sadly evaporated due to having to tie that storyline up far too quickly to be convincing. A frustrating 6/10 for me making 11/20 for the two-parter as a whole. 7.00 on BBC3, Caroline! I'm curious to know your thoughts on the new series so far. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.147.136.75 |
I'm not sure it is tied up though. I'm sure they'll be back later in the series. They were surely tied in with the astronaut girl that killed the doctor in ep 1. that's not been answered yet. It's all tied in with the lodger episode as well | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.147.136.75 |
Series long plot arcs aren't new to the recent Who anyway - Trial of a time lord (Colin baker)... E-space/quest for the key of time (Tom Baker) | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
>>7.00 on BBC3, Caroline! I'm curious to know your thoughts on the new series so far.<< Cheers Stevie! Haven't had time to think about it so far. I'll record this 2nd episode tonight, hopefuly get the chance to watch it later in the week, and then make some comments on it. Meanwhile, I'll try to avoid this thread. I will say though, I did find those "silent" monsters quite scary last week. If I'd have been a kid, I reckon I'd have been behind the sofa - just like the good old days! | ||
| Seanmcd (Seanmcd) Username: Seanmcd Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 86.163.30.77 |
Didn't think much of it myself. Roll on Neil Gaiman's episode! | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 86.165.36.129 |
I've never read any Gaiman. Is he any good? As to the first Whovian story this season; it seemed to me forumula 'gas-mask' Moffat gone negatively garbled rather than constructively askew. | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 92.232.184.206 |
Caroline - watch it as quickly as you can. There's a jolly big surprise in the episode and you wouldn't want it to be spoiled before you see it. I'm really enjoying watching this series completely fresh - I haven't bought the Radio Times, haven't read any previews, seen any behind-the-scenes information or spent time on any fan forums. Just watched the episodes themselves. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 86.165.36.129 |
I like that 'intentional fallacy' approach. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
Stephen, I'm with you! The only way to watch 'Doctor Who' is without all those spoiler previews - no matter how temptingly presented. Does anyone know when the new series of 'Psychoville' starts? | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.176.183.221 |
Does anyone know when the new series of 'Psychoville' starts? Thursday 10pm BBC2. Ah, except Northern Ireland... | ||
| Greg James (Greg_james) Username: Greg_james Registered: 04-2011 Posted From: 109.154.147.1 |
I was much more impressed with the second episode. In terms of structure for the two parter, I think they had things back to front. The first part was exposition-heavy whilst the second had plenty of action and suspense, which might have been better distributed across both episodes. Also, I think part two proves monsters work much better enshadowed than in a brightly-lit toilet. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.143.133.40 |
Oh, it's too 'clever' now, is Who. By that I mean I no longer feel elated or frightened in its presence, just rather feel poked along a maze by some stick from above. I hate the big arcs. I think. All of my favourites have been the one-off episodes. It's sad, but in my mind RTD is winning the Who race now. The Moffatt eps used to be the ones that shone, but now they have the patina of lead about them. I was saying to Mark that RTD seemed to understand telly, whereas Moffatt seems to enamoured by the Doc - his Doc. Des - I read one Gaiman short twice, once in my brain and the other time aloud to the kids - it actually worked better aloud (in a rented cottage in Ireland (I don't know if that's the way to read everything by him....).). On the whole I've never really fancied his stuff from the bits I've dipped into. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.143.133.40 |
And I have to say, what's scary about a baddie that's been around forever just watching us? 'Ha! We rule your world - but we won't get in your way or anything...' | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.53 |
Neil gaimans work in comics is legendary - The Sandman canon represent the best of what the comic format is capable of. His novels IMO are very good indeed. He doesn't write straight horror though he can be horrific in the extreme when he wants to. I never liked the sound of Stardust but when I actually rerad it I loved it. American Gods is a minor masterpiece - I had to read the last 200 pages in one sitting as I literally could not put it down. Anansi Boys is based on similar themes to AG but plays it more for laughs. He did of course also co write Good Omens with Pratchett which remains probably the best Omen spoof in literature. He's also responsible for the TV show (and novel) Neverwhere and the film Mirrormask. I'm really excited for his episode!!! in case you hadn't guessed | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.37.199.45 |
Neil Gaiman spent his formative years as a bright young thing in British horror and SF fandom. I still have that "the boy done good" thought whenever I see his name. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 86.158.237.58 |
Thanks, for all info on Gaiman. I've seen some people on-line comparing Gaiman with King in his 'Dark Tower'.... And I notice both are influenced by the Robert Browning poem, CHILDE ROLAND, King's Roland of Gilead and Gaiman's Charles Rowland... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
I've found anything I've read of Neil Gaiman to be good without being outstanding. Apart from 'Good Omens' which is a one-off comic horror masterpiece. I've only read that, some short stories and comics though... | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.49 |
Comic-wise, check out the graphic novels he did with Dave MacKean... IIRC they include classics like Violent Cases and The Day I Swapped my Dad for Two Goldfish. Not sure if I've got the title of the second once correct. I think one of my favourite of his books has to be Coraline... children read it as a fairy tale while adults tend to find it nightmarish... as it says in one of the quotes on the back - "You'll never look at buttons the same way again". | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
I have 'Coraline' on DVD and yet to watch it. Looks great! I had a first edition of 'Violent Cases' and sold it for a small fortune on e-Bay a few years back. My mate, Sean, has the complete run of 'Sandman' the jammy bugger! | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.176.183.221 |
Neil Gaiman always seemed to be at FCons in the 'eighties, alongside Terry Pratchett in his leather trousers! | ||
| Seanmcd (Seanmcd) Username: Seanmcd Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 86.163.30.77 |
Gaiman's 'Black Orchid' illustrated by Dave Mckean is also rather good. As a horror fan my favourite issue of Sandman has got to be the one set during a convention for serial killers. Or it could be the one titled '24 Hours' where a half dozen unlucky customers are trapped inside an all American diner with a rather nasty psychopath... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
I had all the issues of 'Black Orchid' as well, Sean, and sold them. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
Last night's episode was a marked improvement on the first two, having one setting and a story that could be followed without inducing dizziness, but was still only an average adventure I'd give 7/10. The pay-off was well executed but there were a few too many incongruities in the action for my liking. I mean if the Tardis was about to dematerialise itself surely the last thing the Doctor would do is run out of it in a panic thus stranding them forevermore in the 17th Century! Still, I could detect the chemistry starting to click back into gear with this one and hopefully it bodes well for the rest of the series... fingers crossed. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.253.77 |
I thought it was a bit poor - fun, in parts (for example, Amy Pond swordfighting), but the big reveal was a bit dull (and obvious) and what was going on with that character simply being forgotten about? The guy who used to be in Press Gang. He just seemed to dissapear without anyone mentioning him, and then turned up again on the alien craft at the end. Also...Rory nearly dies again. I wish they'd stop doing this. Lack. Of. Peril. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
I thought the one bit that really worked well was the "rational" explanation for the Siren at the end, with a bit of a steal from 'Star Trek : Voyager'. The rest of it was a bit middling but at least the characters were given a chance to show their stuff again instead of being buried in plot minutiae. Here's hoping the upward curve of improvement continues... | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.147.137.23 |
I did wonder what happened to the guy that the little boy cut... We didn't see (or hear) him get taken. Trailer for next week looked pretty good... Have you thought Zed that maybe the Lack of peril thing you mention might be because you're 40 years old and watching with adult eyes... We know none of the cast named in the opening credits are ever going to die for good. Dr Who's always been like that (except for Adric). Even intelligent kids will recognise that fact. The fun is in finding out how they all survive the certain death situations. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.147.137.23 |
Have we got a psychoville thread? | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.179.195.21 |
http://www.knibbworld.com/campbelldiscuss/messages/1/2175.html?1302942487 | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 195.166.117.210 |
Weber - you're probably right. I think I've just grown out of Who. But it is getting very repetative. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.57 |
Have we got a psychoville thread for the new series? | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Bugger, I missed the first episode of 'Psychoville'. When is it repeated?! | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.39 |
Not now silent singer... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Ah balls! The same thing happened with me missing the first few of Series 1 and having to wait until the DVD came out. There must be some way of seeing Episode 1 before Thursday!! | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.49 |
i player | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.158.58.252 |
Why did he break the mirror to try to destroy the reflections? surely that just makes a thousand more reflections... it would have made more sense to smear dirt on it or in some way cover it... | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Finally got around to finishing the first three episodes - not very impressed so far. On the positive side, the monsters in the first two-parter were nicely scary (the scene in the old orphanage was particularly good). As a kid, it was the monsters - that delightful feeling of being scared but enthralled at the same time - which hooked me on Who in the first place, and these Silents were of the same calibre, I felt. But that's about where it stops for positives. The story seemed to be all over the place, and the continual running around in different times and places reminded me of "Mawdryn Undead"!  As for the thing about Amy - is she pregnant or not and, if so, who's the father? - well, I yearn for the days when there was no question of any hanky-panky in the TARDIS and the Doctor was a-sexual. And the second pirate story left me completely cold - I got nothing out of it at all. Poor Rory (who is impressive this series) seems to only be there to have near-death experiences in every story now. I hope it improves somewhat. When's the Gaiman story, and has Mark Gattis written a story for it this time? | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.37 |
Neil Gaiman's story is this saturday. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Great - something to look forward to. The trailer for next week didn't grab me either though. Maybe I'm just feeling too old for Doctor Who as well ..? | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
I'm more or less in agreement with you, Caroline. This series has started really poorly which has come as a great surprise after the promise of last year with Matt Smith's excellence in the role and the chemistry between the assistants, particularly Rory, who is very likeable. The problem this series is all with the execution. I'm starting to wonder if putting the show in the hands of lifelong fans, like Moffat, is a bad thing as it removes their ability to be objective. Kind of like letting a kid loose in a sweet shop. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Yes, I think you've hit the nail on the head, Stevie. And, talking of Matt Smith's excellence in the role, I've always thought he was a brilliant Doctor (even when the stories aren't so good), but in the latest pirate one he looked absolutely hopeless. He didn't look comfortable at all. The only bright spot - a real Doctor-ish moment - was when they dashed to their loved ones in the hospital, ie. Amy to Rory, the pirate captain to his son, and the Doc went and hugged the TARDIS. Pure brilliance! So it still has its moments, but, for me, they're too few and far between to make it worthwhile. The thing is, the "classic" series wasn't hot on special effects, had cheap sets, some hammy acting, and so on, but the overall impression you were left with was that everyone put their heart and soul into it to make it entertaining and imaginative. Now, it's just too polished at the expense of doing something imaginative IMO. When are they going to get back to exploring other planets for example? | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.53 |
This weekend... | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Ah, now I'm salivating. Neil Gaiman on another planet - wonderful ... | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.169.183.53 |
This has been the worst series of Who yet, the pirate one perhaps the worst episode of the whole lot. I watched the end of Hand of fear last night; so understated, so moving - especially that last freeze-frame. That's the way to do it, folks, Mr Moffatt... And I hate the music now; it's being used to fill in all the gaps that good drama should have. And Zed - you haven't outgrown Who - Who has just got bad. I've been moved by little cartoon birds on kids telly, and always well up at the end credits of In The Night Garden. Good telly is just good telly, whatever the age range. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.35 |
Even the Corden episode didn't plumb the depths of the Peter Kay episode. That has to rate as possibly the worst 45 minutes of TV I've ever watched. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.169.183.53 |
At least it had laughs, and strange bits. This pirate one had not a single good moment of any kind. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Tony, I didn't think the pirate one was anywhere near that bad. It was weak, yes, but I've seen much worse episodes in the RTD years. Still this has been the poorest series, after three episodes, so far. Only scoring 18/30 by my reckoning. Neil Gaiman needs to pull out all the stops to get things back on track! | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.147.136.184 |
I don't care what anyone says this week. I bloody loved this episode!! Biting is good, it's like kissing but there's a winner... | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
I'm with you Weber - not re the biting and kissing though!  I have to say that was one of the best Who's I've seen, ever. Tremendous stuff. Let's look at what we had: - A small cast of characters, each one most memorable, and each one played to perfection by the actors concerned (Suranne Jones as Idris - she used to be in Corrie, didn't she?!) - Minimal sets (at least, minimal for this day and age) - A weird and creepy storyline; I just love any story where things aren't quite what they seem - Lots of nods to classic Who: an old scrapyard ("An Unearthly Child", "Remembrance of the Daleks"); mind games ("The Mind Robber" and countless other classic Who stories); a chase through corridors; companions separated from the Doctor and in peril. - An imaginative storyline and some wonderful ideas (I love the idea that the TARDIS stole the Doctor rather than the other way round). Basically, I thought this was absolutely brilliant. Well done Mr Gaiman, sir. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.147.136.184 |
Don't forget, an alien planet built in a quarry, just like the old days | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.178.81.136 |
I really liked this one too - best in a while, I thought. | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 82.24.1.217 |
Well, it was all right. But once again the good ideas were blitzed by over-kinetic production. With all the shouting and running about and corridors corridors corridors, I'm starting to wish that silence bloody well would fall - if only for a few minutes so we can get some respite from that intrusive soundtrack! Maybe I'm out of touch with the target audience... | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
>>Don't forget, an alien planet built in a quarry, just like the old days<< Yes, of course! And some humour and a touch of pathos. I can see where you're coming from, John, re the intrusive soundtrack and all the running about, but this week I didn't find the soundrack as intrusive as usual. I guess that was because I was so engrossed in the story. And the running about in corridors was so reminiscent of classic Who that I loved it! Still, each to their own. It'll be interesting to hear what others thought of it ... | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.253.77 |
I thought it was the best one so far of the latest series, but still no more than okay. Blink represents the absolute pinnacle of 'New Who'...it's never going to be that good again. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.142.192.37 |
RTD did some things right - his characters used to be amazed by their surroundings and adventures. I miss that. And I really do hate it always being so rushed now, and puzzling. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 2.24.37.206 |
I saw 'Blink' a while back, and thought it was good but a really obvious steal from The X Files – and even without that, it would have been only a slightly above average episode of The X Files. Because it's Dr Who it's being talked about as some unique and historic masterpiece, rather than as a well-crafted episode of the standard that one should be able to expect from SF. | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 82.24.1.217 |
I haven't seen 'Blink' since it was originally broadcast, but thought it was fantastic at the time. I think my personal favourite episode(s) of New Who were the ones that made up the 'Family of Blood' two-parter, which I think broadcast just before or just after 'Blink'. That was an excellent story, and telling that they were based on an old novel... | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.147.136.184 |
"Really obvious steal from the x-files"? It must have been from late on because I can't recall anything similar from when the x-files was still good. The quality really dipped for me in about season 5 and I pretty much stopped watching it. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
Just watched last night's 'Doctor Who' and was quite blown away by it! Exceptionally good and easily the best episode of Matt Smith's tenure to date - which makes it also the best episode of new Who period imo. The show is right back on top form again thanks to Neil Gaiman's inspired and fearless handling of the mythology. For me this was the work of a true fanboy with the talent and imagination not to be overawed by the show's history. 'The Doctor's Wife' was original, thrilling, scary, poignant, touched with that true magic that marks all the best Who episodes and had a stirring cinematic quality that made me forget I was watching a TV show. Quite brilliant and a resounding 10/10 for me!! | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
Weber, I have all 9 Seasons of 'The X Files' on DVD and rewatched it all a few years back. The show remained a cutting edge sci-fi/horror production until the very end and the whole alien clones/bounty hunter/black oil story arc was brought to a conclusion shortly after you stopped watching. Believe me you missed some of the scariest TV ever made if you didn't watch Seasons 6-9. You'll also have missed the whole tie-in with the satanic horror plot of 'Millennium' - which was frequently terrifying. There were loads more episodes as scary as 'The Calusari'. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.91.248 |
The trouble with DW at the moment is that any drama is instantly undercut with quips. If the characters don't take threats seriously, how can we? Bring back Sarah Jane and her patented "face of fear". This was an improvement but the directing let it down - am I going blind or was everything under-lit? | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.91.248 |
Top ten numbers: 10. 9 (This ugly squiggle has been standing between us and double digits for millennia now) 9. 1 (A surprise low scoring for the concept of existence, which is so ubiquitous that it's sadly overlooked.) 8. 6 7. 8 6. 4 (The ugliest thing in the world, said David Hockney, is four men sitting in a car.) 5. 5 4. 10 (Perfection? Not quite, according to our poll.) 3. 7 (A fave of occultists everywhere) 2. 2 (Where would anything be without duality?) 1. 3 (Ah, sweet mystery of the holy trinity, giver of structure to jokes and stories, absolute delimiter of motion picture sequel integrity.) | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 86.168.21.43 |
I wasn't too impressed with the latest episode, for all the negative reasosn some people gievn above. Quite intressting though that some of its ideas were prefigured in the first few William Hartnell episodes, eg about the Tardis being a person etc. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.147.136.184 |
The doctor who confidential had a montage of clips where the doctor talks to/about the Tardis as if it was alive. it included bits from all the doctors except for Troughton | ||
| Barbara Roden (Nebuly) Username: Nebuly Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 142.179.28.58 |
I agree with what Stevie said a few posts back, about being blown away by last night's episode. I thought it was a wonderful WHO episode, as well as being uniquely Neil; I suspect I'd have guessed he wrote it even if I hadn't known that fact in advance. There was a real NEVERWHERE vibe about it: the detritus-strewn landscape, people scavenging for (and being scavenged from) spare parts, the crazy patchwork costumes, the eccentric inhabitants who can go from funny to sinister in a heartbeat, the claustrophobic sets: all it needed was the Marquis of Carabas to turn up (and perhaps the Corsair filled that role a bit). Poignant without being soppy (Idris: 'There's something I didn't get to say to you.' The Doctor: 'Goodbye.' Idris: 'No. I just wanted to say - hello'), leavened with just the right amount of humour ('What could possibly go wrong?' [something falls off the console] 'That's all right, that always happens'), at its heart it's a love story between a couple that's been together for 900 years, sharing their ups and downs, good times and bad, but always needing and being able to rely on the other, and always, always understanding each other without either one having to say a word (just as well, really). 'You didn't always take me where I wanted to go,' says the Doctor, to which Idris replies 'No; but I always took you where you needed to go.' And Suranne Jones was brilliant as Idris. I'd seen her in CORRIE, but had no idea she could be so good. Like Carey Mulligan in BLINK, she once more raises the bar for guest stars in DW. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 86.168.21.43 |
Was that Suranne Jones erstwhile from CORRIE. Seriously, thanks for pointing that out, Barbara. I didn't recognise her. I need to watch this episode again. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 2.24.18.110 |
Weber, the episode I'm thinking of had something to do with a bank robbery. It was in season 6 or 7 I think. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 2.24.18.110 |
"'You didn't always take me where I wanted to go,' says the Doctor, to which Idris replies 'No; but I always took you where you needed to go.'" ...which is a classic parental/employer chestnut that goes back more than the 900 years of the relationship in question. It was neatly inverted by Bob Dylan: She said, your debutante just knows what you need But I know what you want | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
She was brilliant in this episode, believably kooky and touching. The chemistry between Karen & Steve McDonald is what kept me watching Corrie at that time (the only soap I have any time for). In fact they all shined here, including Amy, and the sense of threat and genuine weirdness was back. I'm a sucker for all-powerful disembodied voices as villains, and this one was done to perfection. 'The Doctor's Wife' will go down as a major plus on Neil Gaiman's CV. Well done indeed, sir. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 86.168.21.43 |
The chemistry between Karen & Steve McDonald is what kept me watching Corrie at that time (the only soap I have any time for). ================= Indeed. Watched Corrie since 1960 but gave up in recent years, post Suranne Jones. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
>>Was that Suranne Jones erstwhile from CORRIE. Seriously, thanks for pointing that out, Barbara. I didn't recognise her. I need to watch this episode again.<< I said that a few posts up too, Des! | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
In fact, here's an interview with her about that episode: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s7/doctor-who/tubetalk/a318548/doctor-who-qa-a-ch at-with-suranne-jones.html Just noticed that she was "trending now" (ie. top search) when I went to check my Yahoo mail. I get the feeling a lot of people are doing internet searches about her and talking about her since last night's Who. Watch it again Des (and anyone else who didn't see much in it first time round) - you might feel differently about it the next time. An absolute classic story IMO. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 86.168.21.43 |
Sorry, Caroline. Missed that, too. Just watched the episode again. And it is better than I thought, much better. And is the reference to an umbrella Mrs Gamp? | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
No worries, Des - this thread's getting a bit long to take in all the posts on it!  I'm not sure about the reference to the unbrella - I didn't get that one myself. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Whooops, that should say "umbrella" of course. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.158.60.210 |
I remember an x-files episode about a bank robbery where it went all groundhog day, the bank blew up every time and Scully woke up again and had to relive the whole thing. I don't remember any with scary statues that sent people back in time | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 86.168.21.43 |
I'm not sure about the reference to the unbrella - I didn't get that one myself. ---------------- Doctor Who referred to the Dickensian 'Auntie' as an umbrella he once owned. Mrs Gamp, presumably. Nobody else has picked this up on the internet, if so. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
The only Doctor who owned an umbrella was the Seventh Doc (as played by Sylvester McCoy, of course). I wonder if it was a reference to that? There did seem to be lots of references to classic Who crammed into that story, and it would need someone who's even more of an anorak than I am to spot them all, I reckon! | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Weber, I think my fav 'X Files' episode of all was 'Folie A Deux', episode 19 from Season 5 - scared the crap out of me! 'Redrum', episode 6 from Season 8, was another great one that played with time travel. I think 'Roadrunners' was prob my fav of the later Seasons, though, episode 4 of Season 8. Oh dear, you've got me started now... | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Stevie - give us a list of your top 10 favourite X Files episodes, will you please? (but maybe start another thread for the X Files?) I can't actually remember the names of many of them, but there were some absolute corkers. I always preferred the "monster" ones to the "conspiracy theory/alien abduction" ones. What was the name of that one they did one Christmas? It was done in black and white, and it was clearly a Frankenstein/James Whale tribute. Loved it! | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Caroline, I believe that would be 'The Postmodern Prometheus', episode 5 from Season 5. I always enjoyed the spoof episodes of 'The X Files' and that was one of the cleverest. And with that we're back to postmodernism again... | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
It was, indeed, yes! Brilliant episode! | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 86.168.21.43 |
"I had an umbrella like you once." That's what is addressed to the Auntie character by Doctor Who in the last episode. She struck me as like Mrs Gamp in Martin Chuzzlewit. An umbrella was named after Mrs Gamp. In 'The Unquiet Grave' in 2005, Doctor Who criticised Dickens' book "Martin Chuzzlewit": | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 86.168.21.43 |
Sorry, that should be 'Unquiet Dead' not 'Unquiet Grave'. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
I love 'Martin Chuzzlewit'! The last Dickens novel I read and the one I quote most oftenly to Americans and people who suffer from pathological selfishness. As a young man I went through the very same voyage of self discovery that Martin did and have strived to model myself on Tom Pinch ever since. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 86.168.21.43 |
I love 'Martin Chuzzlewit', too. And there are lots of chuzzlewits on RCMB. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Dickens once claimed it was the finest thing he had written. For me it's a toss-up between 'The Old Curiosity Shop' & 'Barnaby Rudge' (of those I've read). I'm working through them all in chrono order, every year or two, and really must get round to reading 'Dombey And Son'... | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
Have you read Rarnaby Budge by Charles Dikkens, the famous Dutch author with two K's? | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.131.108.154 |
Can I just say, mentally I have mothballed Dr Who now. This series for me has been the most uninvolving since some of the Peter Davison days (dry, cerebral, unexciting). The monsters are now so uniformly unthreatening it's a yawn, and little touches and characters are so familiar (oh, we have scary woman boss again - that's nice! etc - not) it's like we're watching a kind of repeat each week. I'm really sad about this. I used to love it so much. With the RTD run Moffatt was like the odd lovely black olive on a pizza - now it's just like eating a bowl of black olives. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Haven't seen this weekend's episode yet - is it bad? Oh dear, I was looking forward to another "Doctor's Wife" perhaps ... | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.158.60.210 |
I really enjoyed this week's again It's nice to see them aiming to give us sympathy for the monsters as much as trying to scare us with them. it was a good atmospheric episode for me, the precredit hook was great, intriguing and just a little strange. I'm really looking forward to part 2 next week. I thought it was well up to the standards of last weeks. | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.178.81.136 |
This week's did very little for me. Loved last week's - could happily have missed this. | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 82.24.1.217 |
The best thing I can say about this week's episode was that it was a little calmer than the rest of the series so far. Other than that, I'm afraid I found it all a bit plain. The start of this series has been the weakest run of episodes since those grim final days of the RTD era. I can see myself losing interest pretty quickly... | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.143.133.75 |
At least the weakest RTD eps had their moments - these haven't even got those. I'm really sad about this you know. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.143.133.75 |
So I'm guessing it's the copy Doctor who gets melted on the pyre, then. Oh, hang on - I'm not really bothered. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
so much negativity. It's not meant to be high art. It's supposed to be entertaining prime time BBC1 genre television. It's Doctor Who! and for me at least, it's making my Saturday Nights. Yes I know I'm sad. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.155.207.103 |
No - I envy you Weber. I think it's actually me as I find pleasure in little at the moment. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
I really loved the way that the monsters are not attacking out of pure evil, but because they feel threatened - for good reason - by the people we're supposed to side with. It's unusual to throw in that type of ambiguity into a show like Who. They're also quite scary looking when they slip into the melted face look. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
I very much liked this week's 'Doctor Who'. A good solid, serious toned, gripping and quite claustrophobic adventure with an intriguing central idea and creepy monsters with a good bit of depth to them. Rory was especially good in this episode and the whole thing reminded me of a classic Who story, with the cast all playing things dead straight. An entertaining 8/10 for me that only seemed a tad anti-climactic after the excellence of Neil Gaiman's story last week. Things are looking up again for this series. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 147.252.230.148 |
I was just waiting for the story to start when it ended. Some of it was quite badly directed. The scene when Rory gets punched by the long arm was particularly badly edited and confusing. The Flesh could be a good new monster, but we've seen all these moral debates before, I think. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
I don't think the debate has been quite so central to the story before. The Doctor has tried to broker peace before a few times - most notably in the Silurian story from last season - and the humans were the bad guys in the Doctor's daughter episode - but there was no ambiguity in that. the humans were definitively in the wrong in that episode - in this one both sides are attacking because they understand each other too well - we can sympathise with both parties. The flesh boss woman summed it up with the line "That is so me!". I'm really lookig forward to next week. This double bill is by the writer of Life on Mars and ashes to Ashes btw | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Looking forward to next week as well, Weber. There's a nice head of steam building up in this two-parter and thank heavens for a straight story with a limited cast and one location. Is anyone else reminded of the Nestene by this vat of liquid flesh creature? Which reminds me, wasn't Rory transformed into an Auton at the end of last series and could this explain his sympathies being drawn to the gangers? | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.54 |
Time was rewritten right at the end and he's human again. having said that, the eternal centurian makes an appearance in episode 7... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
I still think there may be some kind of Nestene related twist in the offing... | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.38 |
I don't recall the nestene off the top of my head... | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.178.81.136 |
I think the Doctor is turning into a relation of Woody Allen's though, after his "always with the..." remark he made. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
The Nestene were in the very first episode of new Who when the Doctor (Christopher Ecclestone) met Rose. A vast white amorphous being that creates Auton replicas of people made from living plastic, that could morph and stretch their bodies. They first appeared in the Jon Pertwee stories 'Spearhead From Space' (1970) & 'Terror Of The Autons' (1971) - two of the greatest of all 'Doctor Who' stories imo. This Rebel Flesh creature in the vat acts exactly like one of the Nestene and the gangers could well be its Auton offspring. Here's hoping anyway... | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.177.229 |
By debate, I meant the philosophical quandry of what is real when something is copied? Is a perfect copy as valid as the original? That's old hat, unless they come up with a radical, mind-shaking solution such as: "No, the copy is SLIGHTLY LESS valid than the original because a copy is stagnation and the nature of the Universe is to stride forward." What if The Doctor decided there were levels of life - 2nd class life, for instance? We do that all the time but it could have been interesting to see it done on something much closer to the bone. SHOCK me, SURPRISE me, wake me up, Doctor Who. Make me think, make me feel! The whole thing is on rails now. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.145.134.216 |
Expecting a bit much from a prime time family show on BBC1 there aren't you proto? | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
Have you seen the sci-fi film 'Moon', Proto? I think you'd get a lot out of it. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.115.36 |
I think we should expect prime time television to be better than normal, rather than worse. I'm going to seem like a curmudgeon here, but I was baffled by MOON. It seemed to run out of story half way and just putter to a stop. | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 202.73.198.32 |
Not going to be watching much telly (crap) in NZ for a year until we move out of the rented house. I'll catch up with Dr Who then. For now we'll rent DVD'S from the postal rental place called Fatso. I can't believe half of the names they call companies here. Blunt comes to mind. And they swear on commercials which has been an endless source of amusement for Heather. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.145.134.216 |
If you want deep seated philosophical debate then maybe something late night on BBC4 is the place to look rather than Doctor Who. It's just a matter of being realistic with your expectations. They're throwing a touch of moral ambiguity in this week which is already stretching things for the time slot and channel. We should be thinking ourselves lucky that they're giving us any home grown genre stuff at all. After WHO was axed back in the 90's I seem to remember the only home-made genre programming was Red Dwarf. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.132.169.143 |
Ally - wasn't NZ the place that banned the Muppets for being too violent? Thing is, Who did used to feel at least more exciting, and that it was on the brink of being that powerful. Even RTD did this - remember the one where they're stuck in that little bus? I think the show needs to change - its snow is settling. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Well said, Weber. We're going through a bit of a golden period of British genre TV at the minute with 'Doctor Who' at its best since being reincarnated, 'Psychoville' going from strength to strength and 'Sherlock' waiting in the wings. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.132.169.143 |
But Psychoville is less funny! Walking Dead strolled away! Dr Who has turned to a wax model of himself and ... well ... I ordered some excitement and it never arrived. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
You just seem jaded with everything at the minute, Tony. You need to suspend your disbelief and invest in these shows to get the most out of them. Things really are looking up with genre TV at the minute. I'd include 'The Walking Dead' and 'Fringe' as absolute top notch shows currently on as well. When is Series 2 of TWD due to start anyway? | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.132.169.143 |
I hope so. It's like I'm the opposite of the Man with the X Ray Eyes. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.152.230.25 |
"If you want deep seated philosophical debate then maybe something late night on BBC4 is the place to look rather than Doctor Who." So depth and entertainment are mutually-exclusive? | ||
| Jonathan (Jonathan) Username: Jonathan Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 91.143.178.131 |
I think people possibly have too high expectations of Doctor Who. People keep telling me it's not as good as classic Who and has lost its dignity. These are usually people who haven't watched classic Who in a while. The show is more consistently good than it's ever been and while this season, so far, hasn't been as strong as the last, there's still been some great moments. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 147.252.236.62 |
I've watched the old shows and they're mostly hilariously awful, but of great kitsch value. I'm sure we can do better with several decades of progress. By "we" I mean someone else, natch. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 147.252.236.62 |
And I'm not comparing it with a hazy decades-old memory, I'm comparing it with how it used to be 3 or 4 years ago. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
I couldn't disagree more. I always make a point of watching any classic Who repeats, particularly the Pertwee or Baker years, and still get as much of a kick out of the storytelling and performances as I did in the 70s. Obviously the naff costumes, effects and sets are seen with a nostalgically fond "postmodern" eye and a wry chuckle these days but I find that after a short time my sensibilities readapt themselves to the dated visuals and I find myself being absorbed by the intelligence and, yes, gravitas of the story all over again - with just the right levels of subtle character humour (as opposed to the often crass humour of new Who) providing the icing on the cake. The classic years of 'Doctor Who' remain my favourite television programmes of all time and the ones that had the profoundest influence on my life and tastes. | ||
| Jonathan (Jonathan) Username: Jonathan Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 91.143.178.131 |
Don't get me wrong, I adore classic WHO. I revisit it all the time. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.186.66.88 |
In your Tardis? | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
What Stevie says above - couldn't put it better myself. I watched the latest story last night, and enjoyed it. I didn't think it was as good as "The Doctor's Wife", which was one of the best I've seen in years IMO, but it was a great story. It seemed to contain all the best bits of Classic Who - simple sets, small cast of characters, corridor chases - and that wonderful meaning to the storyline, in this case: is all life as valuable? I also loved the sympathetic "monsters" - I've been a sucker for sympathetic monsters ever since I fell for Boris Karloff in his seminal role way back when. Yes, I'm looking forward to the next part of this story too. I can see the possible nestene consciousness link too - ie. a "less technologically advanced" one (was that what the Doc said?). Interesting that it was the Life on Mars guy who wrote this - he must have had a say in casting too as Marshall Lancaster was one of the actors in it. | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 82.24.1.217 |
I'm with Proto on this one. It's not a case of comparing the current run unfavourably with old Who (I really haven't watched much of it at all), it's a case of judging it on its own merits - and this series just hasn't been fun. The strange thing is, it looks like everyone making it is having a ball. But that's just not translating to entertainment for me as a viewer. Most of it seems to be noise and quips, leaving the good ideas at the heart of the story to be skipped over on the way to the next corridor. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.145.134.216 |
"this series just hasn't been fun." I've enjoyed it. My inner geek is happier than he's been in ages. | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 49.227.5.70 |
'Ally - wasn't NZ the place that banned the Muppets for being too violent?' Not sure, Tony. Can't work out this place yet. I'm in a rental and looking across the street at a house which could be described as southern gothic/colonial. At the end of the street the vineyards begin. It is about 20 years behind the times (fun) and yet I'm using a roving broadband device. It's late autumn and warmer than England in May (sorry Gary F :>) And you've probably all gone to bed and it is 11.30a.m. here. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.145.134.216 |
If you read the bit in the radio times preview of the series about this two parter, the director was injured and hobbling round the set on a walking stick doped up on painkillers for a lot of it and at one point the roof of the set collapsed. Sounds like a miracle they managed to complete it. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 81.155.107.43 |
A cross between THE THING or ROSEMARY'S BABY - or a kids' prime time TV show? Backstories, arcing, reveal... | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Argh!! I forgot to record it again! I'll have to catch it on BBC3 tomorrow ... | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 81.155.107.43 |
There was a time - when Dr Who started in 1964 - when, if you missed it, you missed it. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.145.134.216 |
I liked that. Suddenly some of the stranger aspects of the last five weeks have become a lot clearer. Nice. I won't leave spoilers. But that was an explanation I don't think many people will have seen coming to THAT storyline. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.152.211.224 |
"There was a time - when Dr Who started in 1964 - when, if you missed it, you missed it." Ironic, eh? Now we're all Time Lords. I thought was gooder than the last few eps. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.152.211.224 |
Ha! That last sentence makes me sound like I'm emailing from Russia, looking for rich husband to have. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 81.155.107.43 |
"There was a time - when Dr Who started in 1964 - when, if you missed it, you missed it." Ironic, eh? Now we're all Time Lords. ================= Yes, indeed, and, sorry, it was 1963 not 1964 when I first watched, in real-time, the first episode of Doctor Who. I didn't know it was on before it came on. It just came on. And I did not miss it. Now people miss it at whim, it seems. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 81.155.107.43 |
And is it Nadine of the Silent Runners...? | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
>>Now people miss it at whim, it seems.<< Or because they've got a memory like a sieve - like me! In fact, I'm missing it (deliberately) at this very moment - but I'm going to nip into my TARDIS and watch it after 9pm when it's finished in real-time. This one sounds really interesting ... Des, you've made me reminisce (is that spelt right? Looks odd. My brain's gone funny) about my formative years of watching DW - sitting around the telly with my parents on a Saturday teatime, dad toasting crumpets in front of the open fire, me agog at the scary monsters, and then dashing off to draw scary monsters afterwards, before bed and dreams of space exploration and being a brave monster fighter. I was a strange kid!  | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.152.211.224 |
Christopher Lee remembers waiting for the next Lord of the Rings book to come out. I remember playground arguments about whether Luke really was Vader's son. It was only with Jedi that when Luke accepted it that we could. That may be more interesting in 50 years time. But DW - last night's ep was more interesting - some genuine pathos from having two Doctors and a stark illustration of both how it feels to be at the receiving end of bigotry as well as the sudden realisation that you're capable of it too. It felt like good Trek. | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 82.24.1.217 |
Credit where it's due, there were enough interesting twists and turns and concepts in that last episode to give me a little hope for the rest of the series. I just hope that next week's mid-series special doesn't return to the frantically-paced muddle of the openers. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Oh my! To think I've been saying they're not as good at cliffhangers as they were in Classic Who. That one's got me on the edge of my seat waiting for next Saturday now. After a weak start to the series, I reckon this is shaping up to be one of the best yet. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 81.155.107.43 |
Radio Times just bought - front cover got Amy holding a baby. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.253.77 |
I think they've renamed the show Dr. Meh. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.158.59.89 |
You just don't appreciate good telly Zed | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.158.59.89 |
Apparently Steve Moffatt has promised no Daleks for at least a couple of series because they're too predictable. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.31.139.112 |
Yes, I know they're going to try and kill the Dr every time they turn up. Very predictable. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.43.55 |
"Apparently Steve Moffatt has promised no Daleks for at least a couple of series because they're too predictable." Hmm. If true, that's worrying for the future of the series. People don't seem to know how to use monsters repeatedly. They change the monster in sequels and usually make it worse, when they should leave the monster alone as a force of nature and change the effect on the other characters. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.158.59.89 |
It's more down to the fact that the Doctor must have defeated them a hundred times now - making them the most easily defeated creatures in the DW universe. You'd think as soon as they saw the the blue box land they'd just run away (to paraphrase his RT interview). The cybermen are back in this week's though... | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.132.95.140 |
Damn! My excitement finally turned up but then turned out to be faulty! SPOILEROO - Why did Who zap fake Amy after everything that happened/he'd said? Wasn't she some use? It felt utterly random and lazy. As an aside, I met one of the best Whos ever this week - me and the fam went to see Tennant and Tate in Much Ado About nothing and got to meet them both round the stage door. Both very lovely people indeed, and a fantastic, long-waited-for moment for me, what with seeing Tennant in both Hamlet and at Blackpool, but not meeting him there. Got a great pic of them on my phone. This is making me re-evaluate the Tennant/RTD years. I think they were building to something great, really touching on some stunning themes and ideas, but never quite reached them at their close, and don't seem to be striving for them any more. They feel sort of ... aimless now. I have so many fond memories of the Tennant years, and some of the Ecclestons. I hope they weren't a last golden age, but fear they might be - we used to rush home for every single one then, and apart from the specials they deserved that level of excitement. Now we just record them and don't feel as desperate to watch them as back then. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Finally got to see the latest episode last night and thought it was excellent - 9/10 for me. The promise of the first part was more than fulfilled and this has to be one of the most intelligently scripted and old fashioned of the new Who stories to date. Thankfully the replica Doctor was more than a visual gimmick, being very cleverly used and providing a measure of emotional depth that really raised the bar for this one. And what a cracking head-swiveller of a cliffhanger. It's got me re-evaluating the entire series to date and thinking of all the clues I must have missed. Bit of a shaky start, due to poor storytelling, but 'Doctor Who' is now firing on all cylinders again imho. I'm almost tempted to go back and rewatch the opening two-parter... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Why did Who zap fake Amy after everything that happened/he'd said? Wasn't she some use? It felt utterly random and lazy. It was a completely unexpected moment, Tony, and one that felt inspired to me. Like seeing a cleverly constructed trap sprung on the viewer. The implication is that Amy hasn't been Amy since the reconstruction of the Whoniverse at the end of last series and that everything we've watched in the last six episodes wasn't at all what it appeared to be. I get the feeling something very clever is going on that will shake up the 'Doctor Who' mythology forever more - as in Neil Gaiman's episode. The Doctor zapped Amy because he suddenly realised what was going on, and how he had been duped - next week will be the start of payback time when he lets us all in on the secret. And I still think the Nestene are somehow involved... | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
The Doctor's known for the whole of this series that it wasn't Amy. He said he took them to the island where the last story took place to see the flesh in it's earliest form because he needed to know more about it. Zapping the fake Amy was a) the fastest way to show Rory that she wasn't real and b) possibly a way to remove a spy from the camp - if she could see everything thatw as happeniing with Real Amy, was real Amy able to pass on everything that was going on with Ganger Amy? Looking forward to tomorrow night... but it will apparently be a major cliffhanger till the Autumn. I was forgiving of the odd unexplained bits in the first few episodes purely because I trusted Moffatt to have some damed clever explanations to come. And I wasn't wrong to do that... | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 195.166.117.210 |
They should rename the Daleks the Meh-leks. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
You think so, Weber? Then I'm completely lost, but enjoying the ride! The Doctor certainly hasn't acted like he knew the truth about fake Amy. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
He has, but only subtly. He's tried to ditch them half a dozen times - offered to drop them off somewhere while he does time lordy things. The line about "That's why I came here, i had to see it in the early days" and the references to early technology only have the one meaning I think. There's been several odd (odder) things about his behaviour this season. His knowing that Amy was in real danger the whole time explains a lot of it. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
They should rename the Daleks the Meh-leks. One of the reasons he's resting them for a few series. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
I have pretty mixed feelings about that "semi-finale" episode. It was a complete mess but oddly thrilling at the same time. I sat there thinking "wow, isn't this exciting" and realising I hadn't a clue what the fuck was going on... In the end I can't give it any more than a puzzled 7/10 but with the nagging feeling that something very clever is afoot but I haven't a notion what it is. Poor and shockingly self-indulgent storytelling but the details, or pieces of the puzzle (if you will), have me intrigued and entertained enough to want to see it through to the big reveal. As for the revelation of River Song's true identity... I'm just glad she didn't turn out to be you-know-who. So let's see, for the first half of this series, here's how I'd rank them: 1. The Impossible Astronaut - 5/10 2. Day Of The Moon - 6/10 3. The Curse Of The Black Spot - 7/10 4. The Doctor's Wife - 10/10 5. The Rebel Flesh - 8/10 6. The Almost People - 9/10 7. A Good Man Goes To War - 7/10 That's 52/70 = 74% or say 7½/10 overall. Not bad but not as great as we were hoping for and I, for one, will not be as forgiving of the second half if they fail to tie up all those bewildering plot details! Far too many questions abound for my liking and I can only wonder how young kids are managing to follow all this? | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.158.57.31 |
Probably easier than you because they're not overthinking things... | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.158.57.31 |
And River Song's identity has been pretty obvious since the first episode of this series... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
I've actually stopped trying to think about making sense of the plot, it's got that convoluted and so much is being held back from us, and I'm just enjoying the pyrotechnics... up to a point. I'd love you to go through that last episode and point-by-point make sense of it, Weber, I dearly would. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.132.169.240 |
My oldest walked out of this one saying it was too complicated. I sort of liked bits of it but am now too sick of characters who are basically indestructible and confident to identify with, and that bollocks thread about the Doctor being 'the bad guy'. This one felt like an episode was missing - in fact the whole series has felt like that. The whole thing has become so aloof and self-agrandized it's like pomp rock lurching back up into the pop charts. It's showing us scenes that are meant to be moving but without earning our reactions. RTD understood that most viewers were not into sci fi but needed wonder, and this isn't doing that for me. RTD put Who in your local chippy then led you into time to meet your dad and the stars - I no longer have any idea at all about what Moff is doing. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
That has been the problem with this series, Tony. For all its highs, and the Neil Gaiman episode in particular, too much is being expected of the casual viewer. That's what I mean when I say its guilty of poor storytelling - too many essential plot details are being left out for us to know, or ultimately care, what the hell is going on. I get the impression that Moffett is trying to be Alan Moore but 'Doctor Who' was always at its best when concerned with one-at-a-time, self-contained stories with a beginning, a middle and an end. This isn't the place for the intellectual multi-strand plotting of 'Watchmen' or 'The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen' imho. At one time I thought it would be nice to see that but I realise now that 'Doctor Who' is all about simpler pleasures... | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 86.165.37.187 |
It was an utter mess last night. Pseudo-cinematic finale for its own sake, with merry-go-rounds and pay-offs galore, confusing back stories and spineless reveals. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
There were good moments in it and the sense of something bigger and better behind the scenes but, yes, I have to agree, Des, last night's episode was a complete mess. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.132.169.240 |
Remember when Eccy took Billie back to see her dad? That was Who for me. Van Gogh, the fat guy in the house-share. These were Who stories. Ships full of Daleks circling the earth. We can relate to those things. I went to the Who arena show this year and there was a bit where they showed footage of all the previous Doctors - the cheer that went up for Tennant was so massive I almost blubbed. Those shows were simpler, but only simpler in their execution, not the things they tackled. They had the common touch, something all too often sniffed at but not easy to come by. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
I'm not giving up on it yet, Tony, but my faith has taken a beating. I also think this break for the summer was a bad mistake! Any momentum that was starting to build up in episodes 4-6 has now been frittered away... | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.132.169.240 |
BTW talking of Moore me and my oldest watched the LOEG film the other night and absolutely loved it - it completely pisses on the book but manages to be great fun in its own right. Maybe change the title guys? Some astounding stuff in there. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.253.77 |
Stevie - you thought this this season of Dr Who brilliant last week. What changed? Like I said: Dr Meh. | ||
| Seanmcd (Seanmcd) Username: Seanmcd Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 81.159.205.146 |
Saturday teatime. Doctor Who. I don't want to have to think. I want to be spoon fed quality Sci Fi entertainment. Hadn't a clue who half the characters were much less what was going on, so when the 'big' reveal came about River Song's identity I couldn't have cared less. Once again we have several races wheeled out to say Hi! So when the 'space Spitfires' showed up again that was it for me. Doctor who has lost itself in too many over arcing, multi-threaded, overly complex plotlines which require the viewer to remember minute plot details or characters from not only the start of this season but possibly from last year! The best episodes this season thus far have been the stand alone stories 'The Doctors Wife' and 'The Rebel Flesh'. I don't care one jot for these arcing plotlines now. The same was true for 'The X files'. I stopped watching that around season 5/6 when the mythology episodes just became too regular, cumbersome, tiring and predictable. Right up to the point where I stopped watching altogether. Doctor Who has done the same. Give me one full season of 1 or 2 part stand alone stories. With just ONE grand cliff hanger finale. Just one. Complete rubbish. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
Zed, read through all my posts and you'll see the honest week-by-week evolution of my opinion on this series. It started badly but gradually gained momentum, peaking with Neil Gaiman's seriously brilliant episode, but last night's was a big disappointment. We're only half-way through, so I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt, but 'Doctor Who' and its makers badly need to find some humility to make this series work as a whole. And as it's already in the bag... I'm now rather worried. I know exactly where you're coming from, Sean, and you have kids to keep entertained to boot lol. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Okay, I finally got to watch 'Let's Kill Hitler' last night and part 2 of this series has started as part 1 ended... in frustration. Again there were good things in there, some nice interaction between the characters and moments when the humour really sparked but the pace was insanely frenetic and the "big plot reveals" whisked by in such a blur as to be neutered of any impact or pathos right at the point of conception. In other words a right mess. Steven Moffat seems at a loss what to do with the 'Doctor Who' universe and, I suspect, finds himself too reined in by the time constrictions of having to tell the kind of dense intricate stories he favours in 45 minute chunks, while continuing the insisted upon story arcs from series to series, and delivering the stand alone episodes in between. As a result this series has been revealed as neither fish nor fowl with not even the charisma of the cast (which still shines through, for me) being enough to gloss over the infuriating inconsistencies and liberties that are being taken with the viewer's patience. Here's an honest fan's reassessment of the series to date: 1. The Impossible Astronaut - 5/10 2. Day Of The Moon - 6/10 3. The Curse Of The Black Spot - 7/10 4. The Doctor's Wife - 10/10 5. The Rebel Flesh - 8/10 6. The Almost People - 9/10 7. A Good Man Goes To War - 6/10 8. Let's Kill Hitler - 6/10 That's 57/80 = 71% or say 7/10 overall. By the lofty standards of family entertainment that I expect from 'Doctor Who' that's not good... Hope to catch up with Mark Gatiss's 'Night Terrors' tonight which looks like a cracking stand alone horror tale. Here's hoping. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
You should enjoy Night Terrors, Stevie - it was good, in the classic Who style. There's a separate thread on it here now - and also a thread on the Hitler story so you can see what others have said about it. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Glad to hear it, Caroline. Isn't Catch Up TV great! | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Was away over the weekend so missed 'Doctor Who' again. But finally got to see 'Night Terrors' last night and thought it was excellent. Easily the second best of the series so far, after 'The Doctor's Wife', imo. Yes it was clichéd and predictable as hell and not particularly scary, for a hardened genre fan, but I found the episode almost perfectly pitched to appeal to younger children and actually quite magical in that respect. Pleasingly creepy rather than nightmare inducing, and ultimately reassuring, I know I would have treasured this story as a nipper, and can see a whole new generation of fledgling fans falling in love with the Doctor, as a trusted banisher of bogeymen, on the strength of it. The transformation of Amy into a "wooden dolly" was a particularly well judged 'Scooby Doo' tactic for making the younger kiddies shudder. Mark Gatiss may have done much to rescue the character from oblivion following the off-putting nature of recent convoluted shennanigans. His structuring of the story had more of a 'Sapphire & Steel' vibe about it, with the Doctor (astutely separated from his assistants early on) being called in to an outwardly normal household to deal with a localised supernatural anomaly, and the show worked so well in that format that it could possibly point to a refreshing change of direction, that could revitalise the entire franchise, if anyone were brave enough to take it down that path. A resounding, and much needed, 9/10 for me! | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
Wow, just watched the latest ep and it was bloody awesome!! 10/10 and then some! Eclipsing even Neil Gaiman's episode that was the greatest 45 minutes of New Who to date. Who the hell wrote it? I actually felt myself filling up with emotion it was that well scripted and played. Now we've got a revival on our hands!! Off to bed now but more anon... | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.147.137.193 |
Tom McRae wrote it. He wrote the two-part story "Rise of the Cybermen" and "The Age of Steel" for the 2006 series of Doctor Who. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Hey, Stevie, do you realise you're on a different thread to everyone else at the moment? We've got a new thread - Doctor's Night Terrors - where folks are commenting.  | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Thanks, Caroline. Being a bit odd I like to have all my comments on the series in one place so I can trace the evolution of my thought processes with a quick scroll. It's also more fun that way, which is what 'Doctor Who' is all about, after all. After 10 episodes the score stands at 76/100 or let's say 7½/10. I'm going to stick my neck out here and state that this weekend's episode, 'The Girl Who Waited' by Tom MacRae, was the single finest story of rebooted 'Doctor Who' to date. For the first time I actually felt myself powerfully bonded with these characters, caring desperately for them and filling up with emotion at the intensity of their plight. This beautiful little drama, on the paradoxical perils of time travel, bears comparison with some of the more poignant episodes of the original 'Twilight Zone' - and there can be no higher praise, in terms of genre TV, than that. I'm now firmly won over to Amy & Rory as the definitive modern assistants. It has been heartening to see them evolve into more rounded, and damaged, characters from the annoyingly feisty Scottish redhead & her loveably geeky boyfriend they started out as. I also feel vindicated in my consistent hailing of Matt Smith as the best Doctor since Tom Baker. This series has been a bumpy ride but the standout episodes; 'The Doctor's Wife', 'Night Terrors' & this last one, in particular, have demonstrated his complete owning of the role and creation of a distinctively complex persona - as sinister and secretive as he is kooky and charming, as dopey and fallible as he is loyal and heroic. That element of the Doctor was lost after the glory years of Hartnell, Troughton, Pertwee (yay!) & Baker but Matt Smith has revived it magnificently, if only the principal scriptwriter would allow him more room to breathe. One ventures with Smith's Timelord at one's own risk, and Amy's last words, after the terrible betrayal the Doctor unwittingly forced Rory into, demonstrate how psychically destructive the journey can be, for all its thrilling adventure. I could never see Tennant or Eccleston being as convincingly nasty as the character needed to be in 'The Girl Who Waited' - that last attempt to fall back on playing the fool halted by "Where is she?". Magnificent television and worthy of every award I hope they heap on it! Well done Mr MacRae... I'll be looking out for your name from now on. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
>>Being a bit odd I like to have all my comments on the series in one place so I can trace the evolution of my thought processes with a quick scroll. It's also more fun that way, which is what 'Doctor Who' is all about, after all.<< No worries, Stevie. I just thought you might not realise we'd all gone over to another thread. I didn't want you to feel lonely here on your own! | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
What did you think of the last few episodes, Caroline? Incidentally, one is always alone on the interweb thingie (as Arthur Bryant would say). | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
I'm worried that they've got David Walliams as a guest star in the next episode. It looks like it could be a good one, but David walliams could easily turn it into another steaming pile of donkey poo like the Peter kay episode. I hope he finishes with a two parter, otherwise he's got too much to do in one episode (incidentally titled The Marriage of River Song) . He needs to bring back carlton wotsit the third, River and The Silence, ditch Amy and Rory and send them the invitations to America etc. His visit to see James Corden again could well be the link back to the Silence - after all he did have a Silence time Machine in his attic... Wasn't David Tennant stuck in 1969 in the Blink episode? Would Moffatt bring Tennant in for a guest spot? And after this last episode, that's 3 fake/alternative Amy's we've had this series so far - the Flesh Amy from the first 6 episodes, the robot replica in Let's kill Hitler and old Amy... When you consider that RTD's idea of an overarching plot thread was the words Bad Wolf appearing somewhere in a handful of episodes, I like the fact that we've got a proper storyline for this series. I just wish A Good Man goes to War had been a two parter - I wanted to know who these interesting new characters were before they all died - (and that the first two episode's story had been stretched over at least one more episode so he could introduce the different storylines at a more relaxed pace). Having to finish the stories in 45 minutes isn't ideal. I think that's the last of my current random Who musings... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
You have me worried now, Weber. I can't stand David Walliams. There's something about his smug bake that makes we want to heave every time he's on the box. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
Only person worse than Walliams is the short fat bald one - Twatt Lucas or whatever his name is... That grin of his just makes me want to commit acts of extreme violence. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
For the first time in a while, on the back of the last two cracking episodes, I'm sat down at home impatiently counting the minutes until 'Doctor Who' starts... here's hoping. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
That's three absolute top quality episodes in a row! 'The God Complex' was scary, original, brilliantly written and performed (even DW was perfectly cast as a rat-faced fink) and packed a completely unexpected emotional sucker-punch of an ending that I'm sure will have kids (and certain receptive adults) up and down the land feeling rather bereft right about now. What was particularly impressive was how the script payed homage to the show's mythology while deconstructing the Doctor at the same time - revealing him in all his vanity and at his most vulnerable (I'm pretty sure I know who he saw in Room 11). The science fiction rationalisation of the ancient myth of the minotaur's labyrinth was also rather inspired. A 10 carat gold corker that goes straight into second place, imo, pushing Neil Gaiman's ep into third - who'd have thought it!! And writer, Toby Whithouse, is clearly a Ramsey Campbell fan. I just hope he gives the great man credit for the ideas he lifted wholesale from 'Incarnate', right down to the 80s hotel décor. | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 82.24.1.217 |
I'm still getting nothing from this series. It just feels like we're flogging the same plot beats over and over again. I'll confess to only ever being a fairweather fan at the best of times, but I suspect that now me and it have moved too far in different directions. Doctor Boo | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 86.159.146.177 |
I liked the 'Shining'-like 80s Hotel. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.122.109.11 |
Maybe the fact it sucks a bit now will turn out to be something to do with monsters being up to something. Tinkering with the fabric of quality, maybe. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.122.109.11 |
BTW this PCs struggling with the length of this thread. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.152.212.198 |
"Tinkering with the fabric of quality, maybe." Ha! I've been doing that for years. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
By God, you people are hard to please! Large swathes of this series have been badly misjudged, imo, but the last three episodes & Neil Gaiman's ep are amongst the finest quality TV productions of any kind I have seen in years. All cracking stand alone episodes! 'Doctor Who' seems to have gone the same way as 'The X Files' on this evidence. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
>>Large swathes of this series have been badly misjudged, imo, but the last three episodes & Neil Gaiman's ep are amongst the finest quality TV productions of any kind I have seen in years. All cracking stand alone episodes!<< Couldn't agree more, Stevie! Although I wasn't as keen on The Girl Who Waited as some folk over on the other thread (the Night Terrors thread), but The Doctor's Wife, Night Terrors and The God Complex have been superb imo. Sorry, got to keep this brief as I haven't got time for more at the moment, but, yes, I'm really enjoying Who again! | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
Thank you, Caroline. Your voice is like a sweet melody making itself heard in a cacophony of nonsense, imo. I don't suppose your hubby has popped his clogs by any chance? One can but dream... Watch 'The Girl Who Waited' again. It is the most sublime episode of New Who to date, in my humble abd indubitably right opinion! Yes, I'm a wee bit pissed. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.150.18.136 |
I just watched The God Complex, I got so engrossed I forgot to do the ironing for the week. Even walliams wasn't too offputting. As for repeating the same plot beats, at least Moffat's not just giving us the daleks for a quarter of the episodes of every season... | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.176.127.208 |
Cybermen appear to be back next week though... | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
For the first time as lead monster since Moffatt took over... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
The series has really picked up in this second half. I have it now at 86/110 or 78% - with three 10/10 episodes: 'The Doctor's Wife', 'The Girl Who Waited' & 'The God Complex'. Next week's looks to be a bit of a backward step but you never know... | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
I was expecting the event at the end of the episode. He has to get the story back round to the events right at the start of the series. I think Moffatt's going to prove all the nay sayers wrong with an ending that will explain all the strangeness so far. Remember how last series the "Continuity errors" (like the doc's jacket on and off in the Weeping angels story)all turned out to be clues to the ending. I still think last year's finale was the best finale we've had since the show was rebooted. a quiet character led piece after everything that had gone on the previous week. | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 82.24.1.217 |
As for repeating the same plot beats, at least Moffat's not just giving us the daleks for a quarter of the episodes of every season... No, we just get Rory and Amy being separated and one or the other dying/growing old/forgetting the other existed etc over and over again, while someone tells the Doctor he's a bad person. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.149.161.148 |
I nearly put on an old Tom Baker ep tonight. So still and atmospheric, no jokiness back then. Is it me or is Who in trouble the more it tries being *about* the Doctor? We must surely know we can never know him by now, let alone try to explain him. It's like trying to explain God. The moment in modern Who that really made me leap up and down like a kid and scream aloud was when the egg opened and a dalek popped out, and we knew the cybermen and the daleks were finally going to fight. I've never been more excited by telly in my entire life. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.149.161.148 |
This show is so tricksy it neglects to give us what we love. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Did no one else here get the blatant similarites between 'The God Complex' and Ramsey's spooky hotel in 'Incarnate', with all the rooms and their nightmarish contents, the stretching corridors and stairwell? Yes, there were references to 'The Shining'/'Burnt Offerings' as well - particularly the photos on the wall - but I'm convinced the writer, Toby Whithouse, must have read and been inspired by 'Incarnate'. Even the 80s décor seemed like a direct acknowledgement, to me. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
This week's is written by Gareth Roberts - who wrote the Shakespeare episode, the Agatha Christie and last year's episode with James Corden. Personally those aren't on my list of favourites but I know Tony loved them. Plus it's got Cybermen. I like the convoluted storyline myself. I appreciate a show trying to do something different and unpredictable. Tricksy for me is something that I love in writing. Predictable is just boring most of the time. For the Amy haters, she's almost certainly out of the show after this season. the RT interview mentioned Matt Smith being away filming the Xmas special but not Karen Gillan. For this series to finish with the return of baby Melody, that kind of writes Amy and Rory out of the show... | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 147.252.230.148 |
"The moment in modern Who that really made me leap up and down like a kid and scream aloud was when the egg opened and a dalek popped out, and we knew the cybermen and the daleks were finally going to fight. I've never been more excited by telly in my entire life." Absolutely, possibly the most thrilling moment in the 50 year history of the programme. And it was a simple joy. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 147.252.230.148 |
Location Earth. Lifeforms detected. Exterminate! Exterminate! | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 213.81.122.224 |
>>I nearly put on an old Tom Baker ep tonight. So still and atmospheric, no jokiness back then. Well, that depends very much on which story you watch. Anyone remember Romana's regeneration scene in Destiny of the Daleks? Even as a kid I could tell that was rubbish. >>The moment in modern Who that really made me leap up and down like a kid and scream aloud was when the egg opened and a dalek popped out, and we knew the cybermen and the daleks were finally going to fight. I thought the actual battle was really pathetic. The whole point was that you'd got the two most dangerous species in the universe going up against each other but as soon as the fighting started the Cybermen turned into complete wimps. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
Douglas adams was script editor for a while when Tom Baker was the Doc. There were loads of jokes. Patrick troughton used to be criticised for being too clowny in the role so a joky Doctor is hardly a new thing... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
Has anyone here read 'Incarnate'? I'm starting to wonder... | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.176.127.208 |
Stevie - yes, but not since shortly after it was first published! Bad point about last week's episode - it was a 'misunderstood' creature. Good point - the folk who died weren't somehow resurrected at the end. They stayed dead. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
I only read it for the first time a few years ago, when I started this chrono order thing. There is a long and very scary sequence near the end, set in a nightmarish hotel that seems to stretch into eternity and has horrible denizens in the rooms, that I was immediately put in mind of watching last week's Who. It was even decorated as an 80s hotel... surely no coincidence!? | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
It was written in the 80's wasn't it? (Incarnate I mean, not the Doc Who episode) | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.176.127.208 |
Yep, 1983 according to Ramsey's bibliography. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Of course the photos in the hall were a direct reference to 'The Shining'/'Burnt Offerings' as well. So if they got a nod why not Ramsey. Toby Whithouse obviously knows his horror, imo. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Got to see the latest 'Doctor Who' last night and it was pretty much a comedy holding action that passed the time pleasantly enough and, thankfully, had a followable self-contained narrative and some nicely judged character scenes of not a little pathos. Subtle it was not, however, and I still find James Corden something of a taste I doubt I'll ever acquire, while the relegation of the cybermen to nothing more than comedy stooges was nothing short of sacrilegious. So not one of my favourite episodes of this series but by no means one of the worst either. In fact it was pretty much as sound a piece of all-round family entertainment as has ever graced a Saturday evening. A grudgingly respectable 7/10 for me. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 09-2010 Posted From: 86.143.98.239 |
I thought it was a slickly acted situation comedy that was quite enjoyable. I'll give it one more mark as it took place in my home town: Colchester. I hear the Christmas Who takes place in Llanelli (cf: Cthulhu) - that was my father's home town. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
I agree, Des. It was very well done situation comedy for all the family. A sound professional job. Matt Smith has revealed himself as a natural comedy actor and I wouldn't be at all surprised if sitcom land is where his future career lies. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
It was nearly a very good episode. I loved little Stormageddon. there were some good lines and situations - but the way the Cybermen were defeated was quite frankly pathetic. The last 5 minutes were a nice teaser for next week. Is that the first time River has appeared in an episode written by anyone other than the Moff? | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.122.108.195 |
As a family viewing it worked very well - we all laughed at the right times and enjoyed the scaryish bits. I'm lucky having kids with me when I watch, I think - it levels the see-saw. And I like Corden - he's sort of warm and soft, and interacts with the Doc better than Rory and Amy. And he likes him to boot! | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.122.108.195 |
It would have made a lovely Xmas ep, extra 15 mins and all. | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 217.20.16.180 |
I didn't mind this episode too much. It was fairly inoffensive, paced nicely, and had a certain melancholy air about it. Agree with the comments above about the relegation of the Cybermen to comedy stooges, and how they were defeated. Mind you, I have much the same reaction when I hear someone else's baby squealing. Corden I find deeply annoying when he's being himself on quiz/panel shows and the like, but when he's given a role that suits him (as this one did) he's generally not bad. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Is there any word about when the new series of 'Sherlock' is starting? That's partly the reason I've been racing through all the books this summer - to avoid inadvertent spoilers. On the strength of last year's wondrous TV movies, and Benedict Cumberbatch rubber stamping his screen presence awesomely well in 'Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy' (he was the best of a plenitude of great things in it, and if you haven't seen it - why the feck not!!), I'm rather looking forward to it! | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
pretty soon after the doc shuts up shop for a year. Meanwhile we've got ep 2 of the Fades tonight... | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.87.43 |
"As a family viewing it worked very well - we all laughed at the right times and enjoyed the scaryish bits. I'm lucky having kids with me when I watch, I think - it levels the see-saw." Some I'm going to have to create some human beings to enjoy this. Hmm. I'll think about it. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.87.43 |
That was phonetic typing. Not "Some", "So I'm..." | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Well, I hate to say it but I thought this latest story was utter tosh. Definitely the worst cyberman story I've ever seen. Yes, it did have some good bits (and Matt Smith is still one of my favourite actors in the role, despite the fact that he's been beset by a lot of bad stories), but overall I found myself thinking "why am I bothering to watch this?" Hopefully, this coming episode (I take it this is the series finale?) will be worth watching. I wonder how they're going to deal with the Doctor's death (or is Smith's contract up for renewal?) | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.158.59.24 |
Well he's filming the Christmas special... | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.87.43 |
"I wonder how they're going to deal with the Doctor's death" Probably lots of parpy flatulent music and the Doctor talking fast, saying that human beings are great and telling monsters they should be scared of him. | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 82.24.1.217 |
He'll probably be swept to safety by a flood of Amy's tears or some such shite. That's generally how this series has gone. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Awww, you guys are a little bit critical, methinks ... I may not have enjoyed this last story, but I quite fancy owning one of these cute little critters: http://forbiddenplanet.com/78272-doctor-who-bump-go-cybermat/?utm_source=Forbidd en+Planet+Newsletter&utm_campaign=b33147bd27-20110927_forbidden-planet-newslette r-new-doctor-wh&utm_medium=email&mc_cid=b33147bd27&mc_eid=f4ab367f7c | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.151.148.89 |
Probably something to do with the death of the last true timelord breaking time itself... But that's just a guess | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
No one has yet mentioned the single greatest moment in that last episode. A moment that even made me warm towards James Corden (who was really rather good in this). And that was his mentioning of the unmentionable in Whovian circles... STAR TREK! It was Matt Smith's wonderfully subtle slight hesitation and almost half blink towards the camera before he said, "Yes, just like that Star Trek thing" that won me over to this episode. Feck it! Let's up the rating to 8/10!! As comedy it was excellent. As an episode of 'Doctor Who' it was all over the place. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.139.154 |
That was a good bit. Maybe they should have mentioned Doctor Who, too, since he's not Doctor Who. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.152.192.231 |
Well, as predicted, that was blow-dried balls. That ender was a truly remarkable thing to watch, beyond "good" or "bad": a writer refusing to pay respect for time, space, logic, consequence or meaning. I reckon after waiting three days, they broke into Moffat's hotel room and found the script written on the walls with lipstick. God, I long to see someone just running away from a dalek in grey corridor. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.150.143.0 |
Well I really enjoyed it. At last we see what happens when someone actually rewrites a fixed point in time. It all made perfect sense to me... | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.152.192.231 |
"At last we see what happens when someone actually rewrites a fixed point in time." Special effects. Then some drinks sitting on Asda garden furniture. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
Another frustrating mixture of good and bad that left me thrilled and confounded in almost equal measure. I'm still waiting for any of it to make sense but was beguiled by the performances, as ever, and hope we have a lot more of Matt Smith to come. Also liked the resolution of the "question hidden in plain view that must never be answered" but does this imply that an answer will ever be forthcoming? Does Steven Moffat know where all this is leading or making it up as he goes along? I'm going to give it a tentative 7/10 for now and sleep on it. Maybe by tomorrow Weber will have posted a full explanation? I can but hope. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.150.143.0 |
Quite simple, they've been talking about fixed points in time that must never be altered for several seasons now, this season we're told that teh Doctotrs death was one of them. River refused to kill him so therefore the fixed point in time - a mooring point if you like - was broken so time broke down and all of time existed in one moment, leading to the pteradactyls and grand high vizier Churchill (or whatever the title was). they had all their high jinks in the alternate timestream and when The doc broke it and returned time to normality he apparently died but didn't in a simple but effective way that I really should have seen coming. What's difficult to undertsand? Certain people here seem predisposed to hating every episode... If you come at it expecting to hate it, you ain't gonna get any good out of it are you? | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
I got all that business with the breakdown of time and the Teselecta twist but how was he able to trick time? Surely the universe is omnipotent! Are they saying that the Doctor himself is God? Is that why the question can never be answered? Have we entered such realms of self-reverence? I'm still confused... But there was more than enough quality in evidence to warrant a niggling 7/10. So here's my final summing up of Series 6: 1. The Impossible Astronaut - 5/10 2. Day Of The Moon - 6/10 3. The Curse Of The Black Spot - 7/10 4. The Doctor's Wife - 10/10 5. The Rebel Flesh - 8/10 6. The Almost People - 9/10 7. A Good Man Goes To War - 6/10 8. Let's Kill Hitler - 6/10 9. Night Terrors - 9/10 10. The Girl Who Waited - 10/10 11. The God Complex - 10/10 12. Closing Time - 8/10 13. The Wedding Of River Song - 7/10 Overall 101/130 = 78% or just about scraping 8/10 for the series. The stand alone episodes and self-contained two parter are what stand out as superlative examples of thrilling family entertainment at its most professionally presented and winningly performed. I found the story arc confusing and self-indulgent but also intriguing enough to make me care about what it all means. I have a suspicion about what Moffat may have in store for the Doctor and I hope I'm wrong... the Christmas Special has a hell of a lot to live up to this year! | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.18.59 |
"Have we entered such realms of self-reverence?" I'd say we exceeded them a while back. So much for the space hobo meekly helping out and stepping off stage with quiet dignity. Does anyone really care what name they make up for the Doctor? Was that ever the point? Everything about the last two series enders in particular has been shrill, but I still can't figure out why the tone is like that, as the none of the revelations seem to merit it. I wish the Doctor would regenerate into Michael Grade. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.150.143.0 |
On the subject of self reverence... Didn't anyone notice the bit at the end where the Doctor admitted that he'd been getting too big and too loud and he was going to quiet things down? | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
That's what I was hoping for with this series, Weber! Maybe next year... if there is a next year. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.169.183.106 |
Sigh. So much of Who behaves like it sad and exciting and moving but it doesn't feel it. Only two episodes have I enjoyed this run. That's terrible, that. Things that ruin Doctor Who; Brave assistants. Girlfriends (River Song). Sex (the doctor should never snog - it's tucking him up in bed while the sun's still up. He's a child playing, not an adult.) Tiny stories. Too much music. Too many lame jokes. Repetitive slogans ('.... are cool', 'I wear ___ now' etc). The use of old favourite monsters as nothingy cameoes. An almost deliberate disinterest in what it can do. Weber - I don't go to Who hoping to hate it, far from it - I just end up feeling flat and sad most of the time. I don't think it knows what it's doing, is unhappy with itself. The Fades feels much more focussed, as did Being Human. Who is also too much in awe of popular culture, keeps wanting to be allsorts of things and appeal to too many people who didn't really like it in the first place. | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 82.24.1.217 |
Didn't anyone notice the bit at the end where the Doctor admitted that he'd been getting too big and too loud and he was going to quiet things down? We can but hope. The first part of the quote would be cruel and untrue, but by and large that season really was "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.158.58.144 |
Well I enjoyed it. For Saturday early evening fluffy entertainment, it was really pretty damned good. Can't wait for Christmas special. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Just got around to watching the season finale. I couldn't follow it at all ... but I rather enjoyed it. I think Weber's "Saturday early evening fluffy entertainment" just about sums it up for me. It wasn't anything really special, not a classic, but it was fun. I loved the dig Moffat seemed to have at himself with the "let's kill Rory again" bit, and I adored the subtle but poignant tribute to an old favourite, the Brigadier. Yes, I'm looking forward to the Christmas special now too. I do hope we keep Matt Smith as the Doctor (Who ever he is) for some time to come - I really do think he's brilliant in the role. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.131.109.162 |
But how come time was fooled by a robot copy of the Doctor dying? It just made no sense. Come on Moffatt, if you're going to be complicated at least get your details right. It's like simplicity is too hard or him to write (which it is, actually). Doctor Who was meant to be mysterious and interesting under Moffatt. I don't think he can hack it. Christmas ep? I don't know if I'll bother - something I never thought I'd hear myself say ever. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.158.58.144 |
Because people believed it and the events that were supposed to happen happened in the right sequence. Dodgy but just about holds together. I think it might have been less iffy if he'd used a Flesh copy of himself... that would have accounted for the attempted regeneration as well which I'm pretty certain the robot wouldn't have managed. | ||
| Skip (Wolfnoma) Username: Wolfnoma Registered: 07-2010 Posted From: 216.54.20.98 |
I thought it was because the Flesh copy of the Dr. was inside the Robot Copy of the Dr.? Although I thought the whole story arc was a bit tedious. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.4.19.77 |
I agree. It was overly convoluted and the pay-off didn't justify the time invested in it. The series was still great fun, however, and 'Doctor Who' remains just about the most entertaining show for all ages that's on the box at the minute. The charisma of the cast pulled it through even the dodgy eps, imo. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.29.252.215 |
Well I've just watched the 'Doctor Who' Christmas Special and it's completed the feeling of the show running out of steam and the team behind it only going through the motions... attention fixed firmly on the forthcoming 'Sherlock' it would seem. This was better than last year's Dickensian overkill but was still sickeningly schmaltzy nonsense for the easily pleased, imo. Matt Smith did his best to hold things together and the production values were marvellous but the Narnia style fantasy they were aiming for wasn't given anything like the running time or the delicacy of touch such things require to draw us in. Bombastic and simple minded in the extreme could this signal the death knell (yet again) for the entire series...? | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.23.67.130 |
It was rubbish. I only ever watch the Xmas specials. That won't change. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.29.252.215 |
Yep, it was half-baked "Christmas entertainment" by numbers. Background TV to have on while everyone was recovering from their dinner and too much wine. Exceptionally poor. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.107.87 |
I did pay it enough attention to be offended by its explicit message on behalf of all the little boys who watch Doctor Who and made it such a success for decades: you're weak. Females are strong, you're weak. Surely we're beyond this nonsense? | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 82.24.1.217 |
Fucking terrible. How many episodes have we had now where the threat has been vanquished, and the balance restored, through the power of "feelings"? It's like watching a science fiction series from a dimension where science never happened. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.29.252.215 |
'Doctor Who' was never intended to be "Christmas entertainment" and over this last few years that has become ever more patently obvious. Talk about shoe-horning a round peg into a square hole! I still think last year's abomination was worse though... it plumbed the depths of fake sugary sentiment for the sake of it. This one at least looked better and had a hint of threat (for a while). But not by much. | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 77.98.13.43 |
Another super episode - one of the highlights of Christmas Day for us. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.29.252.215 |
I'm genuinely glad someone liked it as I don't want to see the plug pulled yet again... 'Doctor Who' is important and ultimately beyond criticism, imho. No other television show engenders more love and good will in me and that has been true for as long as I can remember. I just want to see them get it right - selfish bastard that I am! | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 77.98.13.43 |
Doctor Who is a long, long way from getting cancelled. We already know that, barring disasters, there will be episodes in 2012 and 2013, and you can say that about very, very few programmes currently on television. | ||
| Barbara Roden (Nebuly) Username: Nebuly Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 216.232.188.106 |
It was shown over here yesterday, and we all enjoyed it for what it was: an entertaining Christmas Day show. As a mother - and therefore not necessarily a part of the DW target demographic - I confess I found the central idea of women, and particularly mothers, being especially strong quite a good one; certainly better than the idea that girls/women are there to tag along and/or be rescued. Plus I loved the nod to A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH, one of my favourite Archers films. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.73.207 |
"I found the central idea of women, and particularly mothers, being especially strong quite a good one; certainly better than the idea that girls/women are there to tag along and/or be rescued." Nobody said they wanted women to be labelled as weak. Is it too much to ask that males be treated with the same respect? | ||
| Barbara Roden (Nebuly) Username: Nebuly Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 216.232.188.106 |
No, it's not too much to ask. However, there's a cynical part of me that finds it difficult to feel too sorry for guys getting their knickers in a knot over men being treated in a way that women are all too used to. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.73.207 |
It's true, we all have sides to us which are less than admirable. But I suppose our character is defined by which base instincts we chose to indulge. | ||
| Hubert (Hubert) Username: Hubert Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 178.116.58.156 |
I suppose our character is defined by which base instincts we chose to indulge. Great line, that, Proto. Your own? | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.183.126.98 |
I finally watched the Christmas Doctor Who and thought it was a good seasonal episode, watched out of context from regular episodes. As for that "men are weaker than women" stuff, which I didn't see anything wrong with as it inferred that the strength was due to motherhood. However, what about the opposite? It's inferred near the start that Claire Skinner's character isn't a very good driver, and later on, with the three folk from that walker thing - the one female in the crew can't drive the machine - it's the men that do it. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.121.79 |
Thanks Hubert, it's not really a line, just a thing I said. Mick, a couple of points here: It wasn't about motherhood because the girl was labelled strong, even though she wasn't a mother. It was about gender. As for the the ineptitude of the supporting cast, if your squad leader is a confused looking Bill Bailey, I don't think any of them were crack Bravo Two Zero material. I think they were all supposed to be bumblers, and you can't get more stupid looking that The Doctor, who put his space helmet on backwards. I think it was just lazy slapstick. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.121.79 |
But maybe you have a point. If there are two examples of women being bad drivers, are we watching a writer who hides unconcious implicit sexism against women behind conscious explicit sexism against men? If so, it would reveal the inherent dishonesty at the heart of any such overt right-on-ness. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.155.217.81 |
Surely the reason for the backward space helmet was so she wouldn't recognise him later on because she hadn't seen his face... And surely if you're putting the space suit on whilst in freefall you're allowed an error as you do it... It seems that he had women has strong but fallible so what's the issue with that? And surely the little boy was strong enough to wear the crown. Anyone quoting sexism about this episode just seems to be trying to find reasons to dislike it. For the second year running we've actually had a christmas story for the Christmas doctor Who - much better than RTD's oh so predictable alien attacks on Christmas day with some symbol of christmas turning against people (attacking Christmas trees in DT's first ep, Christmas stars attacking the next year, angelic host as the villain for the really bad one with Kylie in it). I still need to watch this years properly, missed bits because of my 2 year old nephew demanding attention, but I really enjoyed what i saw. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.121.79 |
"And surely the little boy was strong enough to wear the crown." He, and all males, were specifically described as "weak". I didn't list all the reasons I didn't like the programme, only the one I found actually objectionable. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.121.79 |
"Anyone quoting sexism about this episode just seems to be trying to find reasons to dislike it." Mick liked it and still found it sexist. Naughty sexist Mick! | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 77.98.13.43 |
Wasn't the bit about weakness a mistranslation? My take on it was that the trees liked the women because each tree needed a life form to ride in, and each woman's ovaries contained hundreds of thousands of ova for them to piggyback. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.94.118 |
Sure, that might be the plotty explanation, but I think the intended subtext couldn't be clearer if it was wrapped around a brick and thrown through a window. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.155.217.81 |
Intended subtext??? Wow! you really are trying to read far too much into a light and frothy doctor Who christmas story. If that was the plotty explanation, that was the explanation. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.94.118 |
Well, the good news is we're all free to choose whatever version of reality we want. Good luck with your one. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.155.217.81 |
I think you'll need more luck in yours with the evil implicit in every little detail of every family TV show | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.155.217.81 |
http://www.bbcamerica.com/anglophenia/2011/12/doctor-who-tops-modern-family-as-i tunes-best-seller-of-2011/ | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
"Mick liked it and still found it sexist. Naughty sexist Mick!" Mick's quote... "As for that "men are weaker than women" stuff, which I didn't see anything wrong with as it inferred that the strength was due to motherhood. " From what I can gather from this thread, not having been able to concentrate properly on the episode yet, it portrays both men and women as having weaknesses but also strengths... I fail to see an issue. You'll be talking about the corporate greed-is-good subtext inherent in The Very Hungry Caterpillar next. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.153.151.212 |
I just thought it was an uninvolving story, again with the OTT Warner Bros cartoon music. I find my ability to feel anything while watching these episodes of Who. They feel rambling, like dementia-sufferers ramblings, no structure or sense of pace. It's a sad fact that however juvenile Sarah Jane Adventures is it does these things better. Who wastes itself in my eyes now. Did anyone hear the recent Tom Baker stories on 4extra? Much better, more fun, more atmospheric and surreal. | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 77.98.13.43 |
Paul Magrs is probably the best writer of Doctor Who to have not contributed to the TV series yet. Tom Baker really seemed to relish those lines. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 89.19.91.179 |
Are they new stories Tony? Not just adaptations of TV ones? If so, I'll be kicking myself for missing htem. One was called THE CIRCUS OF DOOM. Seriously, THE CIRCUS OF DOOM. | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 77.98.13.43 |
Yes, new stories, not adaptations. They were previously released by BBC Audio as CDs. They're not full cast dramas like the Big Finish productions, but rather narratives told by the Doctor with other characters chipping in with a few lines here and there. Still good, though, and Tom Baker is also doing some Big Finish stories for next year. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.80.167 |
Of all Doctors, he's got to most perfect voice for radio. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Ooo, I didn't know about those radio episodes. I might try to catch those. Finally got around to watching the Christmas episode last night. I don't know about girls being strong, but I was blubbing my eyes out watching that! (funny age, hormones - it's a bit like puberty only more confusing) But I thought it was a good family Christmas episode, though I don't really watch Doctor Who to find myself blubbing my eyes out. It had some really nice touches - one of which you guys haven't mentioned yet was the eco message - "the rain that burns". Yes, it was good as far as what Doctor Who means nowadays - but it's just not my kind of Doctor Who any more. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
I loved the scene in the children's bedroom where the mother told him that her husband was dead. I thought it was really moving and the dialogue was heartrendingly well written. "You don't want to see them happy because you know how sad they're going to be..." | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.66.23.11 |
Is it not a good sign though Caroline, if you don't watch the show to have a good cry, but it does it to you anyway? It shows how versatile the format is. If it was the same every week people would complain about that... if he throws in the variations, people complain... what's a writer to do? | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Absolutely agree with you, Weber. I think cries of "Doctor Who is over" are way off the mark. What they're doing now is producing a Doctor Who for today's audience, for a real family audience. It appeals to everyone - except, maybe, those of us who remember the old days and are watching it from a sf perspective, wanting it to be the way it was all those years ago. | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 77.98.13.43 |
Which period are you thinking of, Caroline? I reckon the current episodes and Doctor are very Troughtonesque... Full of monsters, a daffy clever Doctor, boy/girl companions, epic stories that last two months... | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
A mixture of several periods, Stephen. My first Doctor was Hartnell, but he scared me a little (I was very young!) so the first Doctor I really loved was Troughton. I continued to love it until the later Tom Baker stories, and then had a "second childhood" when Sylvester McCoy took on the role (I thought he was quite Troughtonesque too). Later, I even came to enjoy some of the Peter Davison and Colin Baker stories! So, I guess it's just the "classic years" generally I'm talking about. It was still for a family audience in those days, but we just expected less I guess (no CGI, we were happy with rubber-suited monsters and rickety sets), and no-one really mourned anybody/thing who got killed. And, yes, it's the monsters and "daft" Doctor which appeal to me the most too. I do think Matt Smith is one of the best Doctors ever. | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 77.98.13.43 |
Did you spot the subtle reference to a Peter Davison episode in this episode...? | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
No .. go on, tell me ... | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 77.98.13.43 |
The harvesters came from Androzani Major... | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
Of course! Now you mention it, I recall thinking "that name rings a bell from somewhere". Unfortunately, my brain doesn't function as well as it used to. | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.150.18.97 |
Ah yes, that was where doctor number 5 died wasn't it. My favourite quote from this years Christmas story has to be "This is the safes planet I know. Nothing daangerous ever happens here" Loud thud is heard. "There are some sentences I really must say away from." | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 77.98.13.43 |
Nearly - he died on Androzani Minor, just next door. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
And there I was above saying "no-one mourned when anyone died" in classic Who. The Caves of Androzani was actually quite a poignant one, if I recall correctly. And that "Phantom of the Opera" moment when Peri unmasks Sharaz Jek (have I got the name right? Or even the correct story?) was superb. I'm pining for classic Who now ... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.29.252.215 |
I've been pining for classic Who as well, Caroline, ever since New Who started... much as I enjoy it. The Jon Pertwee-early Tom Baker years are the very pinnacle of popular TV entertainment in Stevie world. And always will be. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.29.252.215 |
You know the one thing I miss most from classic Who, Caroline? The old cliffhangers! Which require longer stories stretched over several episodes of slightly shorter running time. So many really promising New Who story ideas, that only needed fleshing out to be as memorable as any of the classic era adventures, have been frittered away due to the constraints of a single 45 minute running time - and all the frantic running around, over-exposition and bombastic use of music to "pump up the thrills" that go with it. I've been saying this and praying for a format re-think since RTD first ressurected the show. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
I'm totally with you on that, Stevie! | ||
| Weber (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.150.141.209 |
I'll actually agree here. I want to see the cliffhangers come back too. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 92.232.199.129 |
There have actually been a few points in several of the stories where I've thought to myself: "That would have been a perfect place for a cliffhanger". So much so that I've even heard the old cliffhanger music start up in my head! | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.29.252.215 |
Me too, Caroline! So much so that I feel real regret at what the children of today are being denied. There was a good reason we all ran home at a certain time on a Saturday evening (how our parents must have loved 'Doctor Who' lol) and that was because we'd been on the edge of our seats, talking over and debating with our mates how they'd get out of this latest fix, all week long... and it was wonderful. |