|
MrL_JaKiri posted:You're smushing together a lot of stuff here. "The moon is an egg" is a perfectly good idea, but when you get young-ish children getting confused and annoyed over the episode because "that's not how eggs work" (or words to that effect) perhaps you have strayed a little far from the path. There is obviously a difference between that and me whipping out one of the text books that I've got under this monitor (An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory by Peskin and Schroeder and Graph Theory by Bondy and Murty) and flicking through to find exactly the page that details why the episode is inaccurate*. So what if kids know that's Not How Eggs Work? Some of them will get that the biomechanics aren't the point, and those that don't? Well, unlike the adults with the same wonko hang-ups, the kids might grow out of it. Besides, "hard" SF isn't really any more realistic than anything else. Even the most "possible" story is still full of the more subtler unrealities - contrived events, coincidences, and all those other narrative quirks we all agree to ignore because that's the point of storytelling.
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 10:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 08:19 |
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:So what if kids know that's Not How Eggs Work? Some of them will get that the biomechanics aren't the point, and those that don't? Well, unlike the adults with the same wonko hang-ups, the kids might grow out of it. So your answer to that point is "Some children are watching Doctor Who wrong". You've gone off the deep end. DoctorWhat posted:Besides, "hard" SF isn't really any more realistic than anything else. Even the most "possible" story is still full of the more subtler unrealities - contrived events, coincidences, and all those other narrative quirks we all agree to ignore because that's the point of storytelling. Contrived events, coincidences and narrative quirks are probably the most realistic part of storytelling. In real life, things just happen all the time for no reason.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 10:57
|
|
|
Kids are dumb. That's why they're kids. I was an incredibly dumb kid. That said, I don't think there's necessarily a wrong way to WATCH Doctor Who, but I think there are wrong ways to criticize it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 11:04
|
|
|
The biggest problem with the egg, science aside, is that its artificiality is rendered bare. It's wholly and entirely designed as a mechanical plot element, and it strains credulity because of this. It doesn't feel real, it feels like something a writer cooked up to create a certain scenario and have certain effects, and then could be easily tossed away. Also, I mean, the whole life cycle of the drat thing is bonkers. It can't be unique, there was at least one more of the things flying around out there. And does this mean the earth is a fixed point for an extradimensional space dragon ovary? The mind reels.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 11:08
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:Kids are dumb. That's why they're kids. I was an incredibly dumb kid. StatementsThatAreAntitheticalToTheIdealsThatWentIntoProducingTheSubjectOfTheThread.txt
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 11:10
|
|
|
I loved the "oh it's unique and wonderful you can't kill it" idea, as if its lifecycle hadn't caused the death of thousands of species on Earth already.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 11:10
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:I loved the "oh it's unique and wonderful you can't kill it" idea, as if its lifecycle hadn't caused the death of thousands of species on Earth already. Unlike humans?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 11:26
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:StatementsThatAreAntitheticalToTheIdealsThatWentIntoProducingTheSubjectOfTheThread.txt "Kids are dumb" and "kids should be treated as though they were intelligent" are not incompatible statements. That's how the kids get smarter - you make them exercise their minds.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 11:28
|
|
|
josh04 posted:Unlike humans? It's a creature whose lifecycle causes a catastrophic amount of destruction. It's all well and good to say that you shouldn't kill it because it's unique and magical, but by doing so you're dooming a shitload of other stuff that's arguably just as special.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 11:36
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:Kids are dumb. That's why they're kids. I am an incredibly dumb kid. I fixed this for you. Everyone has a phrase where they believe that all art is pure and can only be judged as some higher level emotional and thematic canvas. But it's bullshit. Some art sucks because it's so widely implausible it can invalidate the weight of its own emotions and themes, and some art sucks because they don't even try to make it good. Trust me, only a handful of writers in this industry, and I'm speaking from personal experience, actually think what they do is art, the majority just see it as work, and their basically painting by numbers for a pay cheque. Also, the idea that someone can view art wrongly because it doesn't align to your view point is the most teenage angst faux-deep view its possible to hold.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 11:40
|
|
|
"But the moon isn't make of rock and stone, is it? It's made of eggshell. Which is basically limestone...on second thoughts, nuke the fucker".
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 11:46
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:I don't see what that's got to do with it. Again, unlike humans? The Doctor explicitly makes this comparison back in Deep Breath.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 12:01
|
|
|
josh04 posted:Again, unlike humans? The Doctor explicitly makes this comparison back in Deep Breath.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 12:07
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:I'd have cared a lot less about the bad science in Kill the Moon if they hadn't spent a bunch of time at the start of the episode talking about how the moon was unusually heavy and that the increased gravity was causing tides that caused massive destruction and so on. They made me think about the science at the start and then spent a lot of time ignoring it. rargphlam posted:The biggest problem with the egg, science aside, is that its artificiality is rendered bare. It's wholly and entirely designed as a mechanical plot element, and it strains credulity because of this. It doesn't feel real, it feels like something a writer cooked up to create a certain scenario and have certain effects, and then could be easily tossed away. These two, together, paint the issue for me. The science of the whole thing, ultimately, doesn't matter; the point is that we get to 'the moon is an egg', the actual science of it is completely secondary. And that should be completely fine... Except, of course, for the fact that they put so much spotlight on it before we get to that point. The immense focus on the scientific angle only serves to make us notice the fact that none of the science makes sense. I think what they wanted to do was lure people in with a hard science-based story, and then throw us off with the most insanely fantastical swerve they could possibly manage, and that's a daring move I can't help but like in theory. Unfortunately, since they got the science completely wrong, that maneuver falls flat. The worst part is that it doesn't have to be wrong. I'm sure that there is enough actual science to the hatching of an egg that you could apply it to that early part of the story, not actually change all that much of the plot, and at the very least have a stronger story, if not an actually good one. The sheer wrongness of the science as it is only serves to let the episode down, and while it's okay to have some absurd Non-Science in Doctor Who in general, here it's acting as a poor substitute for Actual Science in a story where there's no reason Actual Science can't be there instead. I should say that I actually didn't mind Kill the Moon all that much, and the science was not my biggest problem with it (the 'lights on/lights off' solution, and the clear questions it raises when we see it, are). But it is a problem I understand, and it's really not one that would have been hard to fix. Cleretic fucked around with this message at 12:16 on Jan 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 12:13
|
|
|
As someone who gives zero fucks about scientific accuracy in my fantasy series about an immortal space wizard, I still thought the egg stuff in Kill The Moon was poorly executed. And that's the real problem. It doesn't matter that that's not how egg-laying critters actually work any more than it matters that time travel is impossible. It matters that the way it was presented serves to distract from, rather than enhance, the meat of the story.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 12:37
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:*In case you didn't know, all post-grad maths and physics text books feature sections in them entitled "Why Doctor Who is mathematically/physically (delete as appropriate for the topic of the book) inaccurate". Sounds like someone skipped Block Transfer Mathematics. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 14:34
|
|
|
Fungah! posted:Other Valhalla facts: It's not very good. Not bad or anything, but I didn't enjoy it much. Just seemed like so much dead air. Finally got around to finishing it, and the CD extras section made it all worthwhile. Summary: Michelle Gomez says that she'd really like to play the Doctor and Sylvester McCoy hopes they eventually cast a Doctor with a thick Scottish accent. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 14:38
|
|
|
Toph Bei Fong posted:I've got a fairly big issue with any television episode where the entire "adventure" could have instead just been the protagonist and their sidekicks sitting around playing cards for their duration and nothing of substance would have changed. Also, I wouldn't hate kill the Moon nearly as much if the following dialogue would have appeared anywhere in it... Person: "you said it's an egg, that's not how eggs work." Doctor: "oh you and your puny human brain. What is it like in there? It's a space dragon who's species is at least as old as the universe itself, it feeds on time energy and converts it to mass. The more time ruptures near it, the heavier and closer to hatching it gets. I'm sorry if it doesn't work like your chickens and come in a dozen on the market shelves." Person: "If it feeds in time energy, why chose earth? It's not like we rupture time time." *Clara looks at the Doctor and cocks her head* Doctor: "Well, something, around earth must. Quite often... probably for really good reasons."
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 14:39
|
|
|
RodShaft posted:Person: "you said it's an egg, that's not how eggs work." I can hear capaldi saying those lines
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:Kids are dumb. That's why they're kids. I was an incredibly dumb kid. DoctorWhat, you do realize that "Suspending disbelief is the wrong way to consume fiction" is an idea that is possibly even more bizarre and alien to the world of criticism than continuity nerddom, right? I like the moon egg, but you do need a proper grounding in "reality," whatever that means for the particular work, for the tone and feel of a story.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 15:00
|
|
|
The problem with the lack of scientific accuracy in Kill the Moon isn't with the inaccuracy itself, but rather that it is used to completely negate the consequences of the decision that was made. Having the moon be an egg all along is fine, it's completely impossible but it's central to the story and introduces an interesting conflict. The whole thing falls apart when the creature lays a new moon with the same size in the same location. This is pretty absurd even by Who standards, but the main issue is it that it breaks the laws of physics so that Clara and co can essentially have their cake and eat it too by saving the creature and having absolutely no effect whatsoever on the Earth. It completely ruins the moral dilemma. Yes, they weren't sure what would happen, possibly nothing, but the way it happened seemed like a major cop-out, and its why the lack of scientific accuracy sticks out like a sore thumb in this episode while it is completely acceptable in others. It would have been way more interesting exploring an Earth that has no moon, but instead the status quo is maintained.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:I don't see what that's got to do with it. The thousands of people killed by it weren't on screen so their mourning families don't get a say. Unless they're in Europe in which case they get to turn off their houselights.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 15:18
|
|
|
Random Stranger posted:Unless they're in Europe in which case they get to turn off their houselights. Please, like the government didn't cut the power for them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
"Space dragon, what are you talking about? I was just going to bed!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
Kill The Moon is the first episode of television where the ridiculous pseudoscience actually offended me. And I say this as someone who has watched hundreds of episodes of Star Trek, Doctor Who, Twilight Zone, X-Files, Fringe, etc. That's how angry this poo poo episode made me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
See that's what I don't get. Why do people have these arbitrary thresholds for scientific accuracy? It's so strange but people seem to cling to these random standards of "acceptability" or have limits to where they can "suspend their disbelief" and I just don't understand the mindset. I can "suspend my disbelief" indefinitely but it seems like other people can't? So that's why I rage against "suspension of disbelief": because so many people seem to be so bad at it that they ought to try approaching media from an angle that they might get more out of.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
I, too, get to arbitrarily decide the standards by which I consume media
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:See that's what I don't get. Why do people have these arbitrary thresholds for scientific accuracy? It's so strange but people seem to cling to these random standards of "acceptability" or have limits to where they can "suspend their disbelief" and I just don't understand the mindset. I can "suspend my disbelief" indefinitely but it seems like other people can't? The only one who's been getting continually smacked down and refusing to examine his arguments is you. Please take a deep breath and consider your views, and possibly your choices in outerwear. I could go into detail about how that script's main fault is that it used "suspension of disbelief" to cheat its way out of its own stakes, but since that'd make it like the fourth time I trotted that argument out I think I'll just let it rest in the hay. That old girl's been put through her paces.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
Today I'm watching The Expendables 2 and will consume it in the manner of someone who is orgasmically pleasured by the sight of things exploding near some elderly action heroes. Tomorrow I watch Even Dwarves Started Small, I shall decide closer to the time if I will use the same criteria.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:See that's what I don't get. Why do people have these arbitrary thresholds for scientific accuracy? It's so strange but people seem to cling to these random standards of "acceptability" or have limits to where they can "suspend their disbelief" and I just don't understand the mindset. I can "suspend my disbelief" indefinitely but it seems like other people can't? You really are the perfect person to spearhead a goon wiki project.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:See that's what I don't get. Why do people have these arbitrary thresholds for scientific accuracy? It's so strange but people seem to cling to these random standards of "acceptability" or have limits to where they can "suspend their disbelief" and I just don't understand the mindset. I can "suspend my disbelief" indefinitely but it seems like other people can't? A good example of the problem with this thinking is the movie The Happening, in which, halfway through a suspenseful movie about conspiracies, a person suddenly flies off into the sky and it immediately and accidentally becomes a comedy. Stories (at least many, and certainly Doctor Who), intend to move us through empathy with the characters, and when a sense of unreality forces us to become detached from those characters, it undermines the intent behind the art.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
David Tennant has taken the role of Zebediah Kilgrave (the Purple Man) on Marvel's AKA Jessia Jones, the second of their Netflix series. That's one way to distance yourself from a previous role.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
Basically DoctorWhat, imagine if we had a tense Doctor Who episode where the Doctor could do a number of things supported by the story, but instead, to save the day, he just starts flying around without any build up and then turns all of the bad guys into puppies with the power of SCIENCE LOVE. That's the kind of writing you invite when you go down this path, utter and completely nonsensical trite.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:So that's why I rage against "suspension of disbelief": because so many people seem to be so bad at it that they ought to try approaching media from an angle that they might get more out of. What in the good god are you talking about E: I mean, I've seen some absolutely amazing try-hard efforts to defend some of the dumber ideas in sci-fi in general and NuWho in particular, but basically saying "people just aren't suspending their disbelief correctly" is one of the most out-there ones I've ever seen. Why not just post "just turn off your brain and enjoy it" while you're at it. Sydney Bottocks fucked around with this message at 20:40 on Jan 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
That's a ridiculous slippery-slope argument, Burkion, and I'm sure you know it. The biomechanics underlying the moonegg's life cycle do not constitute a "cheat". Upthread, someone suggested a bit of technobabble to "explain" the increase in mass. If something can be explained like that, then it's not nearly as big a problem as you're all complaining about. You've come up with explanations of your own, the episode didn't need to spell one out with magical science-y words just to satiate you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:I can "suspend my disbelief" indefinitely but it seems like other people can't? I'm pretty sure Burkion was replying to this and was using the magical power of hyperbole
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
I don't want people to turn off their brains. I want them to put them to better use. I get frustrated by surface-level critiques and nit-picks because there's so many other ways, far more interesting ways, to critique and analyze art. And when it comes to "scientific accuracy" in Doctor Who, it's all nitpicks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:That's a ridiculous slippery-slope argument, Burkion, and I'm sure you know it. The biomechanics underlying the moonegg's life cycle do not constitute a "cheat". Upthread, someone suggested a bit of technobabble to "explain" the increase in mass. If something can be explained like that, then it's not nearly as big a problem as you're all complaining about. You've come up with explanations of your own, the episode didn't need to spell one out with magical science-y words just to satiate you. I personally am not talking about To the Moon, which I liked, but about your assertion that the very concept of suspending disbelief is a farce or the wrong way to view fiction, or that believability or in-world authenticity is not important. It's kind of become a slippery slope argument because you tilted the discussion at a 45 degree angle and poured ice all over it, man. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
forgive me for having cold things on my mind, we're getting 2-3 feet of snow in NYC tonight and it's freezing my brain pretty bad already.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 08:19 |
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:forgive me for having cold things on my mind, we're getting 2-3 feet of snow in NYC tonight and it's freezing my brain pretty bad already. Yeah, Boston is getting it too, and I actually have to pick up some food from the grocery store on the way home. When I am trampled to death by those people who horde water before a blizzard, please leave a piece of the coat on my tombstone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:59
|
|