|
What do you think of the new international distribution deal? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Hate it |
|
12 | 16.90% |
| REALLY hate it |
|
16 | 22.54% |
| Hello, my name is Bob Chapek |
|
43 | 60.56% |
| Total: | 71 votes | ||
|
Watched The Image of the Fendahl last night and that was really a masterpiece in padding. That could have easily been a three parter. The old lady was the best character though and I love her dearly
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2023 09:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 20:01 |
|
|
Carbon dioxide posted:Have you all watched Good Omens, the show based on the novel by Neil Gaiman and the late Sir Terry Pratchett? The adaptation is decent, but it’s very Gaiman in style. I’m a couple of episodes into season 2, and that’s even more Gaiman-esque than Pratchett*. I’ll finish it though, it’s still lots of fun. *anyone who ever had me as their secret Santa will know why this stings
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2023 09:58
|
|
|
The first season of Good Omens which adapts the book is pretty good, teetering on the edge of great. As a massive fan of the book I have some nitpicky issues with it (IF YOU HAD TO PICK SOMETHING TO CUT WHY WOULD YOU MAKE IT THE OTHER FOUR HORSEMEN? Also why have you dyed Tennants hair like that, it looks ridiculous) but I accept no adaptation would ever be entirely perfect compared to whats in my head when I read the book, and its still good, gets the heart of the book across pretty well. The second season... Is okay. Its fine. Gaiman says that its based on ideas that Terry and himself had discussed for a sequel to the book and while I do believe him that those discussions happened, actually watching it becomes clear that they literally were just rough ideas they knocked around, they never progressed as far as making any kind of actual plot outline. "Wouldnt it be kind of funny to see the story of Job from the point of view of Aziraphale and Crowley?" "Would it be interesting to explore how angels and demons deal with morally complex things, like grave robbing to survive?". These bits in the show are generally pretty fun. The overarcing plot of the season (the stuff set in the modern day) was kind of threadbare though. The nature of the threat/stakes wasnt terribly clear a lot of the time, although I will fully admit that it would be hard to come up with new engaging stakes in a sequel to a book about literal armageddon. It also felt kind of strange that Crowley and Aziraphale were the only viewpoint characters. One of the things i loved about the book was the different viewpoints between the Them, the angels and demons and newt (and all the short glimpses of other characters here and there) and S1 already cut a lot of that for time (Adam and the Them barely featured for example), S2 pretty much dispenses with it entirely. its the Aziraphale and Crowley show start to finish, no non-divine/demonic characters recur from the book (and no plot elements are picked up other than those introduced in the last 20 minutes of the last episode of S1) and the new human characters introduced are fairly one note. Tennant and Sheen are extremely good actors who are obviously enjoying themselves and I enjoyed spending more time with those characters but S2 just doesnt live up to the first season. Still worth watching though, and if it gets a third season to finish it off I'll still be watching that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2023 10:51
|
|
|
SiKboy posted:The second season... Is okay. Its fine. Gaiman says that its based on ideas that Terry and himself had discussed for a sequel to the book This is not true. Gaiman said that he realized that jumping into their sequel idea straight from season 1 wouldn't work, so he wrote season 2 as a way to bridge the gap. Season 3, if it ever gets made, will be the fleshed out version of the sequel idea.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2023 11:39
|
|
|
Carbon dioxide posted:This is not true. He's said both. And in media res would solve that "problem" fairly easily anyway. The choice he made was milking the hell out of the material, and resulted in one of those poorly serialised seasons of television where nothing happens until the very end.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2023 12:11
|
|
|
Carbon dioxide posted:Have you all watched Good Omens, the show based on the novel by Neil Gaiman and the late Sir Terry Pratchett? Huh???? I never noticed peter davidson 
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2023 13:40
|
|
|
alexandriao posted:Huh???? I never noticed peter davidson He was Job
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2023 14:04
|
|
|
The_Doctor posted:He was Job Well, yes, he's had many Jobs, but who was he????!
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2023 17:05
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, I'm rewatching Impossible Astronaut and one of the Secret Service agents looked familiar and then it hit me, Chukwudi Iwuji! That was unexpected.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2023 23:07
|
|
|
Every time I see him in anything now, I get the image of him telling Nixon not to compliment the intruders and I giggle.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2023 00:43
|
|
|
SiKboy posted:The first season of Good Omens which adapts the book is pretty good, teetering on the edge of great. As a massive fan of the book I have some nitpicky issues with it... I might sound pretty close minded by admitting this but as a massive fan of the book I absolutely can NOT bring myself to watch the show because of a single casting choice. I love everything about the casting of Good Omens, and think I'd enjoy it a lot, but I just can't tolerate Jack Whitehall. LIke, he's presence literally craters any interest I have in the show. From 100 to 0.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2023 10:44
|
|
|
PriorMarcus posted:I might sound pretty close minded by admitting this but as a massive fan of the book I absolutely can NOT bring myself to watch the show because of a single casting choice. I am in a very similar boat, but I watched it anyway and Newt has enough of a blank slate of a personality beyond "unlucky" that Whitehall doesn't ruin it. I still don't know how he keeps getting given chances, it really doesn't make any sense. I mean aside from his dad being a massively influential agent and producer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2023 10:56
|
|
|
PriorMarcus posted:I might sound pretty close minded by admitting this but as a massive fan of the book I absolutely can NOT bring myself to watch the show because of a single casting choice. this is actually fair enough and yes he is the living poster boy for nepotism
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2023 10:57
|
|
|
Fil5000 posted:I am in a very similar boat, but I watched it anyway and Newt has enough of a blank slate of a personality beyond "unlucky" that Whitehall doesn't ruin it. I still don't know how he keeps getting given chances, it really doesn't make any sense. I mean aside from his dad being a massively influential agent and producer. All of this, essentially. I can’t stand Whitehall either, but thankfully the show realises he’s not actually very good, and somehow manages not to feature him a large amount.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2023 11:16
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/DoctorWhoPN/status/1696564474176589894 Series 15 is confirmed to be in production
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2023 15:05
|
|
|
It’s wild, they’ll probably have it in the can before s14 is even broadcast.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2023 15:56
|
|
|
Honestly after half a decade of year-long breaks between seasons I'm excited to actually have some goddamn Doctor Who on television
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2023 16:44
|
|
|
I'm not able to process it and am braced to find out it's delayed or they taped over it to avoid paying royalties or that the real new doctor is the three guys from top gear
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2023 17:24
|
|
|
I’m torn because I could not possibly care less about another year of Tennant specials when we’re already seeing bits of Gatwa’s Doc. Just give me the Ncuti era already, stop stalling! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 02:13
|
|
|
...to be honest, I'm looking more forwards to seeing Catherine Tate back than I am David Tennant 
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 07:40
|
|
|
Big Mean Jerk posted:I’m torn because I could not possibly care less about another year of Tennant specials when we’re already seeing bits of Gatwa’s Doc. Well you might not have to wait till his season to see him in action, if rumours are true
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 09:58
|
|
|
Ncuti is the most famous prior to his season airing doctor right? I'm trying to think of who might come close but I can't.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 11:23
|
|
|
Confusedslight posted:Ncuti is the most famous prior to his season airing doctor right? I'm trying to think of who might come close but I can't. Depends how you'd define famous and in which demographic. Capaldi's meme status has to count for something, for instance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 11:30
|
|
|
I'd never heard of Ncutin before he was announced as the Doctor, but that could be my personal failing. In the revival era, imo it's Capaldi, then Jodie and Eccleston, then Smith and Tennant were both pretty unknown.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 11:43
|
|
|
I don't know what quotient should be used to convert between 1980s BBC fame and 2020s Netflix fame, but Davison is maybe comparable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 11:46
|
|
|
Confusedslight posted:Ncuti is the most famous prior to his season airing doctor right? I'm trying to think of who might come close but I can't. Eccleston was a fairly big name at the time he was announced. Still is, but was then too. Lots of prestige drama, stage work. He was a known name!
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 11:46
|
|
|
Capaldi was probably best known in England at least, given The Thick of It. Eccleston had done some very good stuff but I don't think he was a household name, probably the highest profile popular thing he'd done was his run on Cracker? Tennant had done Casanova which had gotten him some attention, and Whittaker was in Attack the Block and played a pivotal role in Broadchurch. Smith I think had done some stuff but he was also ridiculously young when they cast him (younger than that, since Moffat actually built him in a lab). There was also some rookie actor called John.... Herd? John Heard?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 11:49
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Eccleston had done some very good stuff but I don't think he was a household name, probably the highest profile popular thing he'd done was his run on Cracker? He was in Shallow Grave, Gone in 60 Seconds, Existenz, and 28 Days Later!
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 13:21
|
|
|
The_Doctor posted:He was in Shallow Grave, Gone in 60 Seconds, Existenz, and 28 Days Later! I've seen all of those and Shallow Grave in particular was fantastic, how could I forget!?! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 13:46
|
|
|
Shallow Grave is an All-Timer. Such a good movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 13:58
|
|
|
Hartnell, Troughton and Pertwee were all well established names before they took on the role. Hartnell had carved out a niche in movies as "grumpy authority figure", he's literally the Sergeant of Carry On Sergeant. Troughton had been all over TV, and Pertwee was massive just from The Navy Lark, even if he hadn't also been in a ton of films (including three Carry On films). Really it's more notable when the new Who is someone out of relative obscurity like Tom Baker or Matt Smith (who had obviously done stuff before but nothing even arguably on the level of recognition of Who).
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 14:23
|
|
|
Fil5000 posted:Hartnell, Troughton and Pertwee were all well established names before they took on the role. Hartnell had carved out a niche in movies as "grumpy authority figure", he's literally the Sergeant of Carry On Sergeant. Troughton had been all over TV, and Pertwee was massive just from The Navy Lark, even if he hadn't also been in a ton of films (including three Carry On films). Really it's more notable when the new Who is someone out of relative obscurity like Tom Baker or Matt Smith (who had obviously done stuff before but nothing even arguably on the level of recognition of Who). I was going to post this as well  Just to round things out, let's not forget that Colin Baker was pretty well known to British TV viewers as the villainous Paul Merroney in the TV drama The Brothers (as well as his appearance as Bayban the Butcher in the third season of Blakes 7). And while Sylvester McCoy wasn't nearly as well known as most of his predecessors, he had done a fair bit of children's TV prior to becoming the Doctor (most notably Tiswas).
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 14:52
|
|
|
It's also important to remember that in the '60s '70s '80s television was sort of a monoculture. If you've been on a drama like the brothers, everyone knew about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 15:02
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:It's also important to remember that in the '60s '70s '80s television was sort of a monoculture. If you've been on a drama like the brothers, everyone knew about it. Oh, for sure. When we hear about City of Death getting an average of 14.5 million viewers back in 1979, we have to remember that was because there were a lot fewer viewing options (and indeed, fewer options for any other non-TV form of entertainment overall) back then. It wasn't even an option to record it and watch it later, as the VCR hadn't yet become the household staple that it would be during the 1980s; it was still a luxury item for well-off early adopters. If you wanted to watch that particular DW story back then, you basically had to stay in and watch it (or maybe hoped to catch it on a repeat). So that's why everyone would know about a particular story or actor or whatnot; because most everyone watched the same stuff at the same time when it aired.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 15:25
|
|
|
Silly question, but does anyone happen to know during which story's production was this promo picture of William Hartnell taken?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2023 23:13
|
|
|
armpit_enjoyer posted:Silly question, but does anyone happen to know during which story's production was this promo picture of William Hartnell taken?
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2023 01:08
|
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:Oh, for sure. When we hear about City of Death getting an average of 14.5 million viewers back in 1979, we have to remember that was because there were a lot fewer viewing options (and indeed, fewer options for any other non-TV form of entertainment overall) back then. It wasn't even an option to record it and watch it later, as the VCR hadn't yet become the household staple that it would be during the 1980s; it was still a luxury item for well-off early adopters. If you wanted to watch that particular DW story back then, you basically had to stay in and watch it (or maybe hoped to catch it on a repeat). So that's why everyone would know about a particular story or actor or whatnot; because most everyone watched the same stuff at the same time when it aired. Wasn't city of death helped by itv (the only other terrestrial chanel) being on strike? There was literally nothing else on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2023 05:37
|
|
|
Ben Soosneb posted:Wasn't city of death helped by itv (the only other terrestrial chanel) being on strike? There was literally nothing else on. It was but the other episodes around the time were still regularly getting 8-10M viewers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2023 07:44
|
|
|
Still, I wouldn’t use City of Death as an example of average Doctor Who viewership in the ‘70s. That’s like saying the average production of a Doctor Who serial in the ‘70s is exemplified by Shada.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2023 09:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 20:01 |
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:I was going to post this as well Peter Davison was fairly well-known for All Creatures Great and Small, as well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2023 14:47
|
|
