|
Or one regeneration removed from Oxygen. Chibnall is simply a bad person.
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 15:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:30 |
|
|
The Doctor doesn't really instigate revolutions anymore, do they. Revolution of the Daleks. Did one spin in circles? gently caress right off.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 16:41
|
|
|
There were fun bits in Kerblam - the Doctor's excitement at getting a delivery was a charming character moment, as was the Fez gag, Lee Mack was a good guest star, when they bothered with the satire, some of it worked, and the delivery bots had that classic Doctor Who "half creepy, half endearing" design. Also, Big Finish are having a Master themed sale right now, as well as a Dalek one. I got the Master trilogy for a tenner.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 16:44
|
|
|
Chibnall's run is definitely the Hillary Clinton of Doctor Who tenures (no, not because the lead is now a lady), and that's the reason I can't really watch it anymore (I got to the Master revealing he'd destroyed Gallifrey again and that was the final straw). I would really love it if someone like Mathieson took over next and brought in an overtly poo poo-kickin' lefty liberationist Doctor, but tbh Chibnall's wet liberalism is realistically the best we can even expect anymore given basically the entire BBC management are now Actual Tories. EDIT - vaguely relatedly it's a shame JW's entire run is going to be, well, this. She deserved so much more (so much more)
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 16:47
|
|
|
ConanThe3rd posted:Wouldn’t it be hilarious if 13th regenerated into a man and it turned out all this time that, no, the show going to pot had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with The Doctor’s gender and everything to do with the idiot running the show into the ground? The fandom at large will hail the man-generation as a return to greatness and ignore the continuing problems Chibnall brings to the show. Someone mentioned the idea of the Doctor regenerating into TWO people and I love that idea.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 16:54
|
|
|
Barry Foster posted:Chibnall's run is definitely the Hillary Clinton of Doctor Who tenures (no, not because the lead is now a lady) To be fair, it's now appropriate for the beige-grey Biden era as well. quote:I would really love it if someone like Mathieson took over next and brought in an overtly poo poo-kickin' lefty liberationist Doctor, but tbh Chibnall's wet liberalism is realistically the best we can even expect anymore given basically the entire BBC management are now Actual Tories. Just a tragic waste of her talents, and time. It's also strange what this series has done to my perception of time -- though it could just be my deep ambivalence, it just feels like the last two series have just sort of slid by in a flash, barely existing, while the first two Smith and Capaldi series, for all their bumps, still felt so much more weighty and substantial. Even the poo poo episodes couldn't slow that sort of momentum too much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 16:59
|
|
|
usenet celeb 1992 posted:To be fair, it's now appropriate for the beige-grey Biden era as well. True, the kind of deathly gothic atmosphere of Biden era liberalism definitely fits the flat, dour tone of Chibnall's run. And yeah, I thought exactly the same thing when I read that today. I suppose it doesn't help that 2020 was essentially an un-year.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 17:12
|
|
|
Yeah, the year where people have been binging content like madmen and finding new series to obsess over (in my case, Expanse, The Boys, Mandalorian, etc.). Besides the quality difference, it just really heightens the frustration involved in the pattern of DW new-series releases (a year-plus of nothing, then a rapid deployment of disappointment). The problems run deeper than Chibnall and have for some time, but replacing him sure as hell would be a substantial first step. But short of the Earth opening up and clawed hands dragging all the Tories into Hell, the rest is a bit harder.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 18:00
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/bbcdoctorwho/status/1346139661375303686
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 18:23
|
|
|
Cleretic posted:I still think that Kerblam had a good message that it had no loving clue how to hit home. If you squint you can see its intention as being against enormous corporations and automation, and empathizing with the terrorist without condoning his methods, they just picked... not the worst way to articulate it all, but not far above it. One thing to note about the special was that scenes were filmed way back in October of 2019 so a bunch of the climactic elements were already done before the pandemic and the 2020 BLM protests. How much else, idk
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 18:27
|
|
|
One of my favourite Whittaker moments is when the Master is all "kneel! kneel before me doctor!" and she just kinda shrugs and kneels. Tennant or Smith would have made a big deal of it, some big clash of wills, and she doesn't give a poo poo because its an entirely meaningless and hollow gesture. I can't think of a half-decent angry-doctor scene she's had though. I'm fine with a much more chill Doctor, but I want some of those moments when we see the proper Time Lord rage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 18:38
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:and what the gently caress how the gently caress did that episode get made?  is how I felt even several episodes after, just kind of a weird stink that hung around. It was really hosed up to hear the Doctor give a moral lesson lecture to the audience but instead of something inspiring and humane it's like "it's good to be trodden by megacorps actually!"I do like this Doctor overall, think I agree that it's just everything around her that isn't as good. This Witch episode was odd, mostly because I don't think I know anything about King James. First time she said it I thought she was making a reference to the bible. Then peewee herman shows up as this freaky royal british cartoon man, and I guess I just somehow missed his involvement in witch huntery? Was there really a pathetic king like that or was it a fun nudge and wink to some local history and myth of that dude? Khanstant fucked around with this message at 19:17 on Jan 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 19:12
|
|
|
Hey anyone remember the episode where adoption is evil and if you put your baby up for adoption you're a lovely person
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 19:48
|
|
|
If Only Murry Gold had gotten this treatment with the last special and the last season 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 20:02
|
|
|
Burkion posted:Hey anyone remember the episode where adoption is evil and if you put your baby up for adoption you're a lovely person I don't, which was that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 20:10
|
|
|
Strom Cuzewon posted:I can't think of a half-decent angry-doctor scene she's had though. I'm fine with a much more chill Doctor, but I want some of those moments when we see the proper Time Lord rage. Honestly, I can't see 13 getting really proper angry about anything. I think the Doctor expended all her rage in her previous few incarnations.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 20:11
|
|
|
Barry Foster posted:Chibnall's run is definitely the Hillary Clinton of Doctor Who tenures (no, not because the lead is now a lady), and that's the reason I can't really watch it anymore (I got to the Master revealing he'd destroyed Gallifrey again and that was the final straw). At this point, I think it's pretty clear that there's a door on Gallifrey leading to an alternate dimension where a bunch of Time Lords are standing next to a switch labeled "Gallifrey Stands" and "Gallifrey Falls" and just flipping it one way or the other from time to time and giggling. I'm not going to get mad at Chibnall for that after Moffat's "Gallifrey Stands, now go look for it" got followed by several seasons of not looking for it, stumbling across it anyway, and another "is it going to be destroyed, or not" plotline, although to give Hell Bent its due, it cares a lot more about Clara and the Doctor than about Gallifrey. For all the faults of The Timeless Children, it represented an attempt to make Gallifrey and the Time Lords interesting again (although it didn't, you know, actually make them interesting yet, it just offered the possibility). And if the Master's latest "I destroyed Gallifrey" is just "I destroyed it after point X in time, but there's still plenty of Time Lords running around to judge from Fugitive of the Judoon" then I'm not really sure it matters much. Although I would love for the Master to be in league with an unknown alien species, open a path for them to enter the universe, and then find out that he's helped restore the Time Lords like the big dope he is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 20:21
|
|
|
Khanstant posted:
Okay, I'm sorely tempted to just try and tease out what you thought the "King James" in "King James Bible" meant. But; Alan Cumming (Who is, by the way, a treasure, and I will no joke fight you. Go watch Plunkett and Maclean and Josie and the Pussycats. He's also been in some good movies but hes having the most fun in those two movies) was playing King James VI (aka King James I). He was a religious man and paid for the first ever translation of the bible into the english language, hence "King James Bible" refering to a particular translation. So yes, he was playing "the bible guy". Also the king Guy Fawkes tried to blow up, if "the gunpowder plot" means anything to you? As for his involvement in witch huntery, well, he pretty much wrote the book on witch hunting. Specifically the book he wrote was called Daemonologie and was (this lifted verbatim from wikipedia) "a political yet theological statement to educate a misinformed populace on the history, practices and implications of sorcery and the reasons for persecuting a witch in a Christian society under the rule of canonical law.". It heavily inspired witch trials/witch hunters in the following century or so.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 20:47
|
|
|
Zaroff posted:As an aside, how come we've all taken to referring to her as Jodie, while the other Doctors usually get referred to by their last name? While I agree, generally, that some of it has to do with uncertainty over the spelling of her surname (God kills a puppy every time someone types "Ecclestone"), I fear that the use of her first name is also rooted in paternalism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 20:58
|
|
|
SiKboy posted:Okay, I'm sorely tempted to just try and tease out what you thought the "King James" in "King James Bible" meant. also, gay as all hell
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 21:06
|
|
|
Cerv posted:also, gay as all hell Also, it is worth mentioning, Gay. As. Hell.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 21:41
|
|
|
Speaking of gay as hell, the Corsair and Thirteen are adorable together in Old Friends
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 21:57
|
|
|
Narsham posted:At this point, I think it's pretty clear that there's a door on Gallifrey leading to an alternate dimension where a bunch of Time Lords are standing next to a switch labeled "Gallifrey Stands" and "Gallifrey Falls" and just flipping it one way or the other from time to time and giggling. Gallifrey being destroyed again is just exhausting, after the show spent a decade having the Doctor mourn it's loss and then eventually see it restored.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 22:33
|
|
|
I kinda wonder how much the show would be improved if they separated the behind the scenes management and head writer duties into two different roles. After Moffat blundered juggling both sides of it so hard in season 5 that it took literally years to fix, it feels like an idea that's long overdue. Chibnall might be good at the managerial stuff, I genuinely don't know there, but he's clearly lacking massively as a lead writer. He's written like one genuinely good episode of the show, seemingly by accident. Having someone else in charge of just the writing, and editing, would help everything from feeling so massively gray and bland on average. e; Like 'em or not, but RTD and Moffat both had very high highs and also very low lows. Chibnall sure seems to manage half of that. Just, y'know, the wrong half.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 22:40
|
|
|
Vinylshadow posted:Speaking of gay as hell, the Corsair and Thirteen are adorable together in Old Friends Anyone else feel like John Bishop has been added to next season to temper the optics of having just 13 and Yaz together?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 22:44
|
|
|
AndyElusive posted:Honestly, I can't see 13 getting really proper angry about anything. I think the Doctor expended all her rage in her previous few incarnations. I could imagine her going "im tired of being angry. I've gotten angry for centuries and now I'm just tired of it, you know? I'm just annoyed now. Exasperated even. "
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 22:49
|
|
|
Dragonatrix posted:I kinda wonder how much the show would be improved if they separated the behind the scenes management and head writer duties into two different roles. After Moffat blundered juggling both sides of it so hard in season 5 that it took literally years to fix, it feels like an idea that's long overdue. That's how it used to be in the original series, you had a producer who handled the behind-the-scenes stuff, budgeting, etc., and a script editor who got the scripts from whichever writers had been commissioned for the season and made whatever changes were necessary to try and keep within continuity and avoid unnecessary problems (sometimes just minor changes, sometimes complete rewrites). And it should be important to note that it wasn't until the last few years of the original series that they started hiring writers who'd grown up on it, were fans of it, and really wanted to try and shape the course of the show's direction; most of the writers who'd done the show in the previous years were either working writers who viewed it as another job, or writers with an interest in science fiction or fantasy but weren't necessarily hardcore DW fans. In some cases that was good because they could approach the series with a more objective eye; and in some cases it was bad because you might get a writer who clearly thought the premise of the show was nonsense (at which point the script editor would usually bin the script, and hope he either had a replacement backup script ready to go, or else call Pip & Jane Baker again). The current way they're doing things is aping the US style of the showrunner being the creative visionary behind a show, which comes with its own set of issues when your showrunner is someone like Chibnall, who seems to basically be "bland fanboy, who also desperately wants to leave their mark on the series' history ".
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 22:59
|
|
|
The_Doctor posted:Anyone else feel like John Bishop has been added to next season to temper the optics of having just 13 and Yaz together? I think he's there so they don't have to write anything for Yaz At least 13 is nice to her and it's not a 1:1 retread of 10 and Martha
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 23:07
|
|
|
Timby posted:While I agree, generally, that some of it has to do with uncertainty over the spelling of her surname (God kills a puppy every time someone types "Ecclestone"), I fear that the use of her first name is also rooted in paternalism. It's possible there's some of that, but also worth noting that there's another very significant Whittaker in the history of the show.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 23:17
|
|
|
Also its not something I think you'd have to worry about from THIS group of all places. I'd hope
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2021 23:36
|
|
|
Just finished Masterful. I think they did a great job of finding plots for all of the Masters that made sense. I liked Day of The Master but I felt like there was too much going on with all of the characters and the Ravenous plotline. Having a fairly soon cast other than the main actors was definitely a strength for Masterful.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2021 00:00
|
|
|
Rochallor posted:It's possible there's some of that, but also worth noting that there's another very significant Whittaker in the history of the show. Personally as an old  , I find it helpful otherwise I'd wonder why they cast a balladeer as the Doctor:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKdRpDpIR70 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2021 00:45
|
|
|
 This is EXACTLY how the producer/script editor dynamic ran in the latter days of Classic Who. Verbatim.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2021 01:50
|
|
|
Vinylshadow posted:I think he's there so they don't have to write anything for Yaz They could completely revamp Yaz's character and no-one would notice, because she doesn't have an existing character to really change. I think a big part of the problem with Chibnall's Who is structural. Specifically, the 'Fam'. The main character in Who is the companion - we see the world through their eyes, and they're the one's with the big emotional arc. The story isn't the Doctor's - The Doctor is the thing that happens, and our investment comes from seeing the results. (There are a handful of exceptions - Hell Bent comes to mind, but they work specifically because they're exceptions to the rule. You couldn't build a show out of them). Throw in 3 companions, and there's no set perspective, no clear emotional arc to the story. You can do a series with an ensemble and make it work mind - plenty of shows did - but to use a classic example like Star Trek, you handle it by having a 'Picard episode' or a 'Worf Episode' so there's still a clear POV for a given story. Who never really did this, so the stories end up being fairly emotionally unengaged and flat because as a viewer we've got no-one really to see it through. Yaz is just sorta there. Graham is comic relief and that's it. Ryan has an arc, but it largely happens off screen. So we often end up watching a bunch of people we don't really know about do a bunch of things we don't have any reason to care about. There are other ways to write a show of course. You could do the Buffy thing where all the characters are aspects of Buffy's psyche as a way of exploring all her inner conflicts, for example. But that'd involve making the Doctor a protagonist rather than the antagonist, which is a wildly different show from what's come before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2021 02:06
|
|
|
Kerblam would have been turned around a full 180, and everyone would consider it a classic, if the AI had refused to blow up the girl in that room - thereby proving it was more moral than anyone else in the building. But no. That's what frustrates me with the Chibnall era; there's a lot of stories that'd be great instead of middling-to-good, if they'd gone through another round of editing. Or, more likely, gone through a better editor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2021 03:14
|
|
|
Yeah, I kept waiting for the reveal that the Kerblam! AI had just faked killing her but had actually teleported her, and it was going to establish that it did actually have a more moral sense than the terrorist... and it just never happened. It just killed some poor innocent girl as a "lesson" and the Doctor just kind of shrugged that off as a desperation move and not cold-blooded murder.
Jerusalem fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Jan 5, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2021 03:28
|
|
|
LionArcher posted:If Only Murry Gold had gotten this treatment with the last special and the last season Last I was aware, Silva Screen were still waiting for the master tracks from Gold.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2021 05:13
|
|
|
Timby posted:While I agree, generally, that some of it has to do with uncertainty over the spelling of her surname (God kills a puppy every time someone types "Ecclestone"), I fear that the use of her first name is also rooted in paternalism. Don't discount triskaidekaphobia.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2021 05:15
|
|
|
The most recent random story was Day of the Daleks and while it's not perfect it's made incredibly well. Lots of excellent design decisions, great direction, some great supporting performances, also pretty influential (no Day of the Daleks, no X-Men Days of Future Past, for example)
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2021 10:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:30 |
|
|
From memory that was the first ever serial to do the thing where images of the previous Doctors are shown in a sequence to establish/remind that this IS the Doctor, right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2021 10:30
|
|