|
He's not really portrayed as being in the right when he says that(this is right after he says that what he's going to do is so bad that he's going to have to pick a different name) so I'm fine with it. Also it's just a pretty messed up situation in general. Also I'll give Moffat this, he starts foreshadowing his poo poo way in advance, intentionally or not. His second episode in charge and he mentions the Doctor's name being something he chose that he might not feel entitled to call himself if he does something horrible enough. Edit: I was going to mention in the other thread as well, but figured it'd be too spoilery, that "basically run" isn't just a cool way to end the first episode but another step towards the finale, where the Doctor gives a big showy speech to all his enemies about how many times he's beaten them, and they agree and lock him away in the universe's most secure prison. 2house2fly fucked around with this message at 06:43 on Jan 6, 2015 |
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 06:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:16 |
|
|
I just watched The Beast Below recently, and it certainly doesn't fit together like the 'clockwork' moffat stories do (Why are naughty children automatically sent to their 'deaths'? Is the whole 'we'll stop if 1% protest' thing just a bullshit excuses to feed objectors to the whale, the rest of the system seems to work as stated even if it's kinda messed up? What are the winder/human things even really for? Did they not even see if the whale would move them on its own before torturing it to make it move?) And some of the emotional thrust is a bit more bluntly done - the comparison between the whale and the doctor could have been less obviously stated, for instance. But the setting, premise and the acting of the main parties were really well done and the climax does feel earned despite the shaky foundations. It's funny that fallout was brought up in the toxx thread, as there's some similarity between New Vegas' Vault 11 and this episode with the premise of 'everyone votes to perpetuate a horrible act for the greater good that turns out to be completely unnecessary'
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 09:00
|
|
|
2house2fly posted:Edit: I was going to mention in the other thread as well, but figured it'd be too spoilery, that "basically run" isn't just a cool way to end the first episode but another step towards the finale, where the Doctor gives a big showy speech to all his enemies about how many times he's beaten them, and they agree and lock him away in the universe's most secure prison. quote:the acting of the main parties
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 09:39
|
|
|
2house2fly posted:Man, remember when Moffat thought that being rushed and terrible and making no sense were bad things in stories? I like the ending to BB, because its 11 trying to put on the judgmental 10 act and gets thoroughly owned by Amy. He gets his act together after this. That's good writing, and its so ironic Moffat dismisses it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 10:33
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:TellTale game Choose one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 10:49
|
|
|
My first watch of The Beast Below I didn't REALLY get all the Doctory bits. (It was only the third episode I had watched). By the time I re watched it, the Moffatisms bothered me too much to really enjoy it for what it was. I think occ and the real world got it at the perfect time. I voted C; I didn't think this much about it when I voted. I was going to just give everything an A and be done, but I picked a few that didn't stand out and C'd them. I F'd Vampires in Venus not because it's an F, but because it's the weakest of the lot. I also had no connection to Who fandom until a few months ago, and now it's just these three threads, so I wasn't influenced by them on my likes/dislikes of beast below(and other episodes). RodShaft fucked around with this message at 13:05 on Jan 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 12:56
|
|
|
I voted A for The Beast Below, but I'm not entirely sure why. Put it down to gut feeling and it having a really strong ending. I couldn't bring myself to give anything in Series 5 anything below a C, because even the bad bits are nowhere near as bad as RTD's bad bits. Paul.Power fucked around with this message at 13:18 on Jan 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 12:59
|
|
|
The main problem with "The Beast Below" was that the Demon Headmaster was underused in it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 13:54
|
|
|
Blasmeister posted:
I'm pretty sure that's why he mentioned it. I think The Beast Below gets all so much crap because Moffat himself sort of said it was a bad episode. I remember liking it when I saw it but I think it had some dull bits in the middle, maybe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 15:25
|
|
|
I recall not being impressed with it, hence my guessing it at a C, but I also admit I haven't seen it in years. Could be I had anti-nostalgia glasses on or something? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
jng2058 posted:I recall not being impressed with it, hence my guessing it at a C, but I also admit I haven't seen it in years. Could be I had anti-nostalgia glasses on or something? I did the same. I remember it being okay, but nothing really special, so I gave it a C as well. That might be just because it followed The Eleventh Hour though, so apparently I made a terrible mistake.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
RodShaft posted:My first watch of The Beast Below I didn't REALLY get all the Doctory bits. (It was only the third episode I had watched). By the time I re watched it, the Moffatisms bothered me too much to really enjoy it for what it was. I think occ and the real world got it at the perfect time. I voted C; I didn't think this much about it when I voted. I was going to just give everything an A and be done, but I picked a few that didn't stand out and C'd them. I F'd Vampires in Venus not because it's an F, but because it's the weakest of the lot. I'm not going to argue that vampires of Venice is a high point of series 5 or anything, but in what possible way is the weakest of a season which includes the hungry earth/cold blood? I think season 5 is easily the strongest overall series of the revival, but those 2 episodes just arent very good on any level. Vampires of Venice is slightly bleh with a couple of really good bits, the Silurian 2-parter is dull as hell except for the last 4 minutes of the second part. I like the Beast Below fine, its a good enough episode, albeit not as strong as Eleventh Hour. Plus it was the first real hint of Moffs sinister Scottish agenda. ("The Scottish got their own ship" "Course they did, good for them", which is a slightly funny line which later becomes hilarious when you realise that means the scots must have literally hosed off and left the english to die).
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
I liked The Beast Below more than The Eleventh Hour, except (or perhaps because of) the Star Wars style wipes all the way through.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:I liked The Beast Below more than The Eleventh Hour, except (or perhaps because of) the Star Wars style wipes all the way through. Beast Below is great, but I think Eleventh Hour edges it out for me by dint of the rooftop scene. It absolutely nails everything I like about Who, and completely seals Smith in the role. Star Wars wipes are sweet though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
I just rewatched The Beast Below, and it is much better than I remembered it being. The one thing I didn't like was the action movie Queen, complete with terrible quips ("I'm the bloody queen, mate. Basically, I rule."). That was just too stupid (in the wrong way) for me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
Diabolik900 posted:I just rewatched The Beast Below, and it is much better than I remembered it being. The one thing I didn't like was the action movie Queen, complete with terrible quips ("I'm the bloody queen, mate. Basically, I rule."). That was just too stupid (in the wrong way) for me. This is pretty much me (I also started rewatching series 5 after that review of 11th Hour in the other thread). I think the plot of Beast Below doesn't make much sense, but the big emotional moment at the end hits really well. Kind of the opposite of a normal Moffat episode, no wonder he doesn't like it. And yeah the Queen was terrible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
What the gently caress am I listening to in No More Lies? I'm not really enjoying the Eighth Doctor Adventures when it's like this. Edit- Oh my god stop cutting back to old lady singing. GonSmithe fucked around with this message at 18:06 on Jan 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
I might like The Beast Below more than The Eleventh Hour, if just barely. But that is just an amazing one-two punch to start off Series 5. Shame about Mark Gatiss though. I think I gave Victory of the Daleks a C in the game, but after that drop in quality after the first two I fear it might be lower. Anyway, so now that there's another nine months or so until the next episode, is it time to talk about this non-lovely Doctor Who wiki? I'll be honest, I'm mostly interested in it so all y'all's reviews could be collected in a convenient place.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
Proposition Joe posted:So looking at the recent posts in the Review thread, do people think that The Beast Below was a bad episode or something? I thought it was great and it's certainly more in line with the overall quality of season 5. It's Victory of the Daleks that I'm expecting the first negative reaction from frankly. The Beast Below has a lot of rough edges. The climax is fantastic but a lot of the rest of the episode is confusing and muddled. MikeJF posted:It does bother me that they kinda ignored that Space UK is still a dystopian nightmare society that enslaves children at the end. And throws them down elevator shafts accompanied by a creepy nursery rhyme for not turning in their homework. It's really hard to escape that theme of Moffat wanting to terrify children to death, isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
GonSmithe posted:What the gently caress am I listening to in No More Lies? I kind of liked No More lies, although I will admit it is very confusing and the relationship between Lucy and the Doctor seems to take an enormous friendly leap in the middle of nowhere. The production value sort of raises it above the mediocrity of the writing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
I don't see how you could expect anything other than an A for an episode with a good emotional climax.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
All that said, Series Five also includes "Victory of the Daleks". I know I didn't like that one! The Bomb Professor, the candy colored Super Daleks who are given supervillain introductions then never seen again? Spitfire in space? That one's still poo poo, right? Because if he likes that one too, I'm pretty much hosed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:I don't see how you could expect anything other than an A for an episode with a good emotional climax.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
jng2058 posted:All that said, Series Five also includes "Victory of the Daleks". I know I didn't like that one! The Bomb Professor, the candy colored Super Daleks who are given supervillain introductions then never seen again? Spitfire in space? That one's still poo poo, right? Because if he likes that one too, I'm pretty much hosed. The bomb professor, however, did not.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
howe_sam posted:Spitfires in space own. This is pretty much correct. Except the bomb professor himself was a good character, it was just the bomb being defused by love scene that was poo poo. It's actually pretty hard to pick out a bad episode from series 5, though there are plenty of bad moments (like most bits with River, that bomb scene, some of the more questionable decisions they made with the angels and the silurians).
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
Victory of the Daleks is just a bad version of Power of the Daleks with weird World War II patriotism thrown in, but I do really love the "Alright, it's a Jammy Dodger!" bit. It probably has some other very good early Matt Smith moments. Season 5 also has the Angels two parter, which somehow manages to both tread carefully and be boring, and throw everything at the wall and find that none of it sticks. I don't even like that monologue Matt Smith says about who you never put in a trap. And then it has the Silurian two-parter, which I seem to hate less than most people, but definitely agree runs way too long. The vampire fishwomen episode was okay, I like Amy's Choice and love Vincent and the Doctor, The Lodger is fun despite the sitcom characterization,a nd the finale is great.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
howe_sam posted:Spitfires in space own. Also I crack up a little every time I think of "WOULD YOU LIKE SOME TEEEEEEAAAAA?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
Well it's not like we can actually watch Power of the Daleks, so this will have to do as a kind of WW2 style make do and mend substitute.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
See, I saw Victory of the Daleks first, and obviously when I "watched" Power of the Daleks, it was looking at a couple of stills here and there while the sound played over it, but even with the terrible presentation, it's incredible how much better it is. Power is downright creepy. Victory is goofy, often in a fun way but mostly in a just plain goofy way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:See, I saw Victory of the Daleks first, and obviously when I "watched" Power of the Daleks, it was looking at a couple of stills here and there while the sound played over it, but even with the terrible presentation, it's incredible how much better it is. Power is downright creepy. Victory is goofy, often in a fun way but mostly in a just plain goofy way. Power had the advantage of playing out long term so the Daleks could slow become more and more threatening while people refused to listen. Plus when they finally turn there's that great scene where they essentially treat the guy who had been their patsy as completely irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
Does anyone know for sure who was ultimately responsible for that Dalek redesign? I know Moffat wanted to tweak them, but Wikipedia only mentions that he wanted them taller. The candy-colored shells seem like toy deal gone horribly awry more than a creative decision.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
I really don't think the technicolor is the problem with them, considering the same design basically looks great in the Dalek movies. I think it's mostly that they're too tall and too fat. Daleks were never eye-stalk level with the main cast before, and even if Matt Smith and Karen Gillian are kinda tall, it's fine if the Daleks stay the same height. The movie Daleks are probably tied for my favorite Dalek design with the original revivial Dalek design. The movie Daleks get a big pass from me because they're the first to have a light shining out of the Dalek eyestalk instead of a goofy eyeball decal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 19:50
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:Does anyone know for sure who was ultimately responsible for that Dalek redesign? I know Moffat wanted to tweak them, but Wikipedia only mentions that he wanted them taller. The candy-colored shells seem like toy deal gone horribly awry more than a creative decision. I don't think anyone outside the BBC knows 100% for sure, but the departments responsible for licensing stuff for toys and poo poo are completely separate from the programme making bits of the beeb, there's pretty much no way Moffat did that under pressure from toy makers. It's not like the show gets a bigger budget if they sell more poo poo (in fact the opposite happened- the show got a budget cut at the start of series 5, around the time the show was spreading to more and more markets worldwide).
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
From Wikipedia, for what it's worth:quote:Gatiss wrote in the script for the Daleks' redesign to be "big buggers...bigger than we've seen them before". The eye stalk was designed to be level with Smith's eyeline. Moffat and Gatiss wanted the new Daleks to be very colourful, similar to the Daleks of films from the 60s.[7][14] Gatiss originally wanted there to be a green Dalek, but he decided that green "just doesn't seem to work somehow".[14] Nick Briggs, who voiced the Daleks, planned to counter their bright colours with a more vicious voice.[10]...
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
It's bizarre, because of course, it absolutely could not have been a toy marketing decision, but boy howdy, does it feel like it was a toy marketing decision.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:It's bizarre, because of course, it absolutely could not have been a toy marketing decision, but boy howdy, does it feel like it was a toy marketing decision. Maybe they should just give the Doctor some kind of Whomobile. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
The idea of making them taller and more menacing was cool and good, but my god did they go about it the worst possible way. It's pretty telling that they dropped that design almost immediately (except for the white one, which was the least egregiously toylike of the lot). Also, The Beast Below is Smith's most Troughton-y episode - to the point where I wonder whether they told him to tone it down afterwards - and that's why it is very high in my affections.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
I do think it's pretty hard to turn something that is basically a huge salt shaker with a plunger and a whisk coming out of it into anything menacing. They do as good a job as they can with some of the gold, silver and red designs (the lights help), but a lot of credit has to go to Nick Briggs for the voices, which is both the scariest thing about them and the easiest thing to play up for humor when they want to go that route.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
I actually thought Victory of the Daleks was okay. Not good, but another middle of the road Mark Gatiss episode. I really liked the idea of the Daleks requiring the Doctor's testimonial, and anyone who doesn't like spitfires in space is an awful person.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:16 |
|
|
The new Dalek paradigm models have been repainted to be darker shades and look a bit better, but they haven't been used on screen yet, just in promotional materials.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 20:30
|
|
