|
Bicyclops posted:Some of the problem here is that I already did ten rounds on this specific case the last time it came up, and rewatching it, I really hate the episode for unrelated reasons, so I'm not going to go into a contextual line-by-line on how I feel about some side characters whose story was kind of half-ignored anyway, but some of the way you argue this at all is so obstreperous that it abstractly condemns all discussion on this topic in its entirety. Like, seriously: The differences we seem to have are you believe racism doesn't have to be intentional. It can be accidental, by well meaning people who don't realize they are being racist, but their actions are horribly damaging. So therefore something *IS* racist if you say it is. And if I don't start with that premise and fully accept it and agree with it, we can't even begin to have a discussion. My point is we ARE having a discussion, despite post after post of you saying "All you're doing is shutting me down and we can't have a discussion, so once again Astroman I'll condescend to explain to you why you just don't get it..." I do agree that racism can happen unintentionally. I don't believe it happened here though. Give me an example of a time when a black person was portrayed in a negative light, as a villain or flawed character where you DIDN'T think it was racist (if you can)--and I'll show you how somebody, somewhere could argue it's racist.
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:41 |
|
|
I think we can all agree that Doctor Who is just real bad, but Amy and Rory were the best.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:01
|
|
|
Criticism of this sort does two main productive things 1) It lets creators have a quick reminder that what they did wasn't cool, and that they should try to be better next time. 2) It keeps the discussion alive so that people can continue to develop better understanding of social problems and how they're perpetuated. I watched Daleks in Manhattan recently and I can't decide if it's good or not. I feel as if the story would have been much easier to enjoy without all of the bad accents. The whole thing with the humans that are Daleks but they're really humans with tommy gun disruptors is confusing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
Just for one, Simm Master regenerating into Missy happens in an alternate timeline to the one where the Doctor died on Trenzalore, yet it was Simm Master regenerating into Missy which created that timeline in the first place: if Missy doesn't put Clara in touch with the Doctor way back in The Bells Of St John then Clara isn't on Trenzalore with the Doctor and he dies there. So the event which caused the creation of an alternate timeline itself originated within the alternate timeline!
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
2house2fly posted:a big mess of multiple intersecting, sometimes contradictory, self-causation loops Did you mean: Steven Moffat?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:14
|
|
|
Pesky Splinter posted:Incidently, this is one of the audios the BBC put their foot down on being too blatently unofficial Doctor Who audios. And then there's the video series with C. Bakes and Nicola Bryant as The Stranger and Miss Brown where this also happens  
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 05:19
|
|
|
Astroman posted:The differences we seem to have are you believe racism doesn't have to be intentional. It can be accidental, by well meaning people who don't realize they are being racist, but their actions are horribly damaging. So therefore something *IS* racist if you say it is. And if I don't start with that premise and fully accept it and agree with it, we can't even begin to have a discussion. that particular stereotype is an unfortunately common thing, you know? it's not like people are pointing to a random dial on the tardis console and calling it racist. it's not the end of the world or any reason for doctor who to be cancelled or anything, but it is there, it's unfortunate, and hopefully the writers will think more about that stuff in the future. people can accidentally fall into racist tropes, so talking about it can help deal with it, like in the ending of deep space nine: 
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 06:23
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:Yeah, but then he wouldn't remember it because the time lines are out of sync. The first doctor won't be able to learn anything from this. Can still be a good moment. The War Doctor even has a specific line about dialogue about how he appreciates knowing what he really did despite the fact he knows he will forget.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 07:02
|
|
|
Box of Bunnies posted:And then there's the video series with C. Bakes and Nicola Bryant as The Stranger and Miss Brown where this also happens Doctor Who was a mistake.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 08:06
|
|
|
Astroman posted:I don't know how they'll dress her but her enthusiasm in that video gives me greater confidence in her in the role! It goes a long way to assuaging my biggest doubt about her--that she was a non fan and wouldn't "get it." I don't think that's a big deal. Eccleston wasn't into the programme and I don't think he "didn't get" the Doctor. The actor doesn't have to be a fan to do a good job with it. Patrick Stewart had barely even heard of Star Trek in 1987. Wheat Loaf fucked around with this message at 09:07 on Aug 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 09:04
|
|
|
I don't think you'd take that role if you didn't get it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 09:10
|
|
|
Matt Smith wasn't a big fan til after he was cast either, as I understand it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 09:13
|
|
|
TL posted:http://www.bbc.com/news/av/entertainment-arts-40851896/jodie-whittaker-reacts-to-fans-dressing-up-as-her-in-the-new-doctor-who This is incredibly cool  docbeard posted:Matt Smith wasn't a big fan til after he was cast either, as I understand it. Well to be fair, Wendy Padbury hadn't used his Frankenstein body as a vessel to contain the spirit of Patrick Troughton yet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 09:49
|
|
|
Box of Bunnies posted:And then there's the video series with C. Bakes and Nicola Bryant as The Stranger and Miss Brown where this also happens Sweet jesus christ noooo! Fair Bear Maiden posted:The 90s were a mistake.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 10:46
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:I tried to google this look to remind myself what it looked like but there were enough of the sexy Halloween versions in image search that I had to roll my eyes and close the tab. Well, you guys have given me something to do this morning.  Amelia Earhart, 1928. Picked this one because of long coat and tie. I got nearly got fooled by some cosplay shots, but you can tell those by how tight they are. Real pilots needed something they could wear for hours and move around in, since they were also their own mechanics.  (American goddamn Hero Harriet Quimby) Couldn't find as much crossover with the "Gal Reporter/Adventurer" pulp era as I wanted, I probably wasn't using the best search terms. I did find some non-pulp stuff, though:   By the 40s, even before WWII, the look is more uniform and less iconoclastic, so not as Doctor-ish. But really, I just wanted an excuse to upload this one by Harry Grant Dart of "Why Not Go to the Limit" Awesome Ladies Smoking Bar fame:  (That link also has a clearer of the above pic, but I wanted to show the whole cover.) Okay, now I can go to work with a clear conscience.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 12:35
|
|
|
docbeard posted:Matt Smith wasn't a big fan til after he was cast either, as I understand it. Given the current discussion it's kind of fitting to recall that the episode which got Matt Smith into the classic series was Tomb Of The Cybermen
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 12:49
|
|
|
Astroman posted:I understand that. I just disagree that it exists in every single time it's pointed out. If it is that pervasive, It is. quote:it's impossible to fight, It's actually really simple to fight: Put more minorities in media in absolute terms, and in the same variety of roles we put non-minorities. Simple, but hard. Hard, but not impossible. And harder than it should be because of all the people at all levels throwing their hands up and saying "Well, we can't just do THAT" when, yes, actually, if we just made it a priority we could. quote:because it's literally everywhere at all times and in all things. No matter what, somebody could find some sort of hidden sexism/racism/anti-gay/transphobic/ableist etc message in everything. Yes. Because the pervasive omission of their experiences in our media effects both the majority of places where they are conspicuously absent and the few places they are represented, because absolutely every aspect of the representation is a large part of their total representation in media, and because people tend to take things from the environment that reinforce their worldview and discount things that don't, so the troublesome, stereotype-reinforcing parts are asymmetrically more troublesome than the uplifting, assumption-breaking parts are redemptive. quote:You can't every make that world better without the most extreme measures of censorship or Harrison Bergeronesque measures. Wrong. You make that world better with more representation, as I outlined above. But you don't stop pointing out the problem, because then people will assume it doesn't exist, because that's what they want to be true anyway. We aren't advocating censorship, we're pointing out problems with the already-heavily-censored status quo and advocating relief of that censorship. Forget he Doctor and companions, we need a black female showrunner and a show where the Doctor can meet Marsha P. Johnson and take Harriet Tubman out to fight Daleks and go back to Churchill and call him out for being a murderous colonialist rear end in a top hat. If that offends you, you're not being offended by censorship, you're being offended by the prospect of seeing speech that you find off-putting, which is kind of the opposite of being offended by censorship. And if that doesn't offend you, why does a little "BTW, that one portrayal had some racist bits to it" criticism put you in vigorous opposition for several pages?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 13:30
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:I watched Daleks in Manhattan recently and I can't decide if it's good or not. I feel as if the story would have been much easier to enjoy without all of the bad accents. The whole thing with the humans that are Daleks but they're really humans with tommy gun disruptors is confusing.  It's very bad. One (well, two) of the worst.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 13:32
|
|
|
Astroman posted:The differences we seem to have are you believe racism doesn't have to be intentional. It can be accidental, by well meaning people who don't realize they are being racist, but their actions are horribly damaging. So therefore something *IS* racist if you say it is. And if I don't start with that premise and fully accept it and agree with it, we can't even begin to have a discussion. It's not racist "if I say it is," though. There was plenty of nuanced discussion about the episode last time, some of which was repeated here, including: scavengers are a science fiction trope and would be recognized by genre-savvy people as fitting into that trope rather than as looters; racial tensions are different in the UK than they are in the US; the characters are actually sympathetic and goaded into their actions by the Doctor. I don't agree, in the end, but at least those were discussions, rather than "No, you're just wrong, and suggesting there was racism this time is a slippery slope to everyone being offended about everything!" If you want examples of flawed characters (or, in some cases, outright villains) that I think are good portrayals (by writing), I think The Wire does a good job, and the villains in Luke Cage are also pretty good (although I think the second one is a bit too comic-booky and makes me lose interest in a lot of the second half). If somebody, somewhere wants to suggest there was racism in how Stringer was written, though, I'd like to hear from them, and to hear why, and whether I agree or disagree, I think I'd be better informed from hearing it than not. That people can suggest anything is racist is not a flaw in the fabric of fiction, because the Outrage Police don't really exist, not in any large quantities. Man, if they ditch the hat and tighten the sleeves a little, I could get behind this. I hope it's the same costuming people who worked on Bill, because I bet they'll come up with something great.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 13:43
|
|
|
Pesky Splinter posted:Sweet jesus christ noooo! Why are we fans of this show again?!?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
CobiWann posted:Why are we fans of this show again?!?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 14:06
|
|
|
The commentary on Talons is the only time I've felt uncomfortable listening to Who commentary, like the justification when you're trying to claim there wasn't a good enough Asian actor for the main character but it was ok finding look-alike minions who were also expendable. Remember also in this era, the focus was on sex and violence and the response to Whitehouse which in retrospect looks like a storm in a teacup. That was then, this is now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 14:11
|
|
|
Do I want to know why Nicola Bryant's neck is green, or is the answer something dangerously close to Philip Martin?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 14:31
|
|
|
Here, have some wholesome 6th Doctor news: A couple Big Finish bonus releases that were previously CD only are now available as downloads.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 14:40
|
|
|
Astroman posted:I do agree that racism can happen unintentionally. I don't believe it happened here though. Give me an example of a time when a black person was portrayed in a negative light, as a villain or flawed character where you DIDN'T think it was racist (if you can)--and I'll show you how somebody, somewhere could argue it's racist. This is a circular argument, dude. You're basically saying because opinions on this vary, that no opinions can be valid. And you've been VERY firm on the 'it's not racist if they didn't mean to be' train which is also a non-starter unless you actually believe, say, the Disney people went into Song Of The South thinking "Gosh, we should totally portray those n*****s in a foolish, subservient light to put them in their place!". Very few people THINK they're wrong or set out to hurt others. And as Bicyclops said, no-one is trying to say that one mistake makes Doctor Who into A Bad Show That Is Terrible And Racist Forever! Criticism of this type is not much different than saying the set design was poor or the editing disjointed, while still enjoying the other parts of an episode. Like, I've been watching Futurama again recently and good god is there some really iffy transphobic comedy in there that I found funny 15 years ago, but cringe at now, because I've matured and learned, and even actually know some trans people, so the tastelessness and meanness of those jokes now comes off as offensive. That does not mean that every other joke or episode of the series is worthless, just that you have to go "Yeah, that was pretty bad, if they did it now, maybe do something better", just like you would if you look at anything that has flaws.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 14:52
|
|
|
Hypothetical: Suppose a woman had been cast as the Doctor in, say, the 1970s or 1980s. Realistically (i.e. not unattainable Hollywood movie stars), who would have been a really good casting choice? Diana Rigg is an obvious choice, I suppose. But I have a notion of Anna Carteret as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Here, have some wholesome 6th Doctor news: Oh man, that is fantastic news, if only because it means somebody is looking into making some of the CD-only ones available digitally (I actually had to buy the disc for Her Final Flight). I'm sure it's kind of a labyrinth for them to even figure out who to ask if they're allowed to. Glad to see they're making an effort.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 14:59
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm a digital only BF customer. I eagerly anticipate the early Gallifrey and Companion Chronicles stuff being downloadable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 15:01
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Hypothetical: Stephanie Cole from waiting for God is always my go to for hypothetical 60's-90's Women Doctor's.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 15:04
|
|
|
It might be fun to put together a list of alternate Doctors where the character was always played by a woman from day one. Fourth Doctor (1974-1981): Elisabeth Sladen. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Hypothetical: You guys are hosed in the head. There is only one option worth even considering here: Betty White.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 15:22
|
|
|
Patrick Stewart as all doctors.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Hypothetical: Joanna Lumley, obviously? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 15:31
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:Patrick Stewart as all doctors. I'm kind of amazed they haven't gotten him for an episode. I feel like Patrick Stewart is the kind of guy who would say "Sure, why not? I'll pop over to Wales and play a scenery-chewing villain. I like fun."
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 15:32
|
|
|
Gaz-L posted:Joanna Lumley, obviously? BBC publicity still circa 1979 featuring the Fifth Doctor and her companion, Turlough: 
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
Frances de la Tour was also considered for the role of the Seventh Doctor.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 15:52
|
|
|
After The War posted:Well, you guys have given me something to do this morning. ... Ok! I'll throw some of the ideas I had out there, too! Earlier, I said "like Susan," but that was just really a wider point of reference. My first thought was that they were going to give her something feminine but not prissy or sexy. The problem I have with the aviatrix costume is that it's a feminized version of a masculine style, a bit of a sex symbol (leather  ), and my not at all influential judgement tells me that's the wrong way to go on this (i.e. it suggests too much that 13 is just a crossplay version of a male character).So I started looking up famous stylish women and ended up here-      The Audrey Hepburn casual look a) evokes the early series via Susan, b) is feminine but not erotic, c) is a reasonably practical style for an adventurer. If some iconic bit were added to it a la Tom's Scarf I think it would be a great costume with lots of room for minor variations between episodes and seasons.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Hypothetical: Doctors 1-3 Margaret Rutherford  Angela Lansbury  Deborah Kerr 
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:The problem I have with the aviatrix costume is that it's a feminized version of a masculine style, a bit of a sex symbol (leather Oh, dear. I didn't think of it like that. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 16:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:41 |
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Oh, dear. I didn't think of it like that. It's still a fun idea for a costume, but this is why we need to keep English majors around  Criticism is ok! It's a good thing!
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 16:07
|
|