|
I didn't watch the episode, but based on this thread I'm glad to see that Moffat is still capable of putting out misogynistic, sexist tripe right alongside his usual "story arcs that disappear up their own backside" tripe. 
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 20:21 |
|
|
Frankly, at this point I'm less interested in hearing about whether Moffat is sexist/misogynistic (spoiler: he is) and more about what it is that compels the "I MUST DEFEND STEVEN MOFFAT AND ALL THE STUPID THINGS HE SAYS/WRITES AT ALL COSTS" brigade to pop up every time someone takes issue with one of his (by now all-too-common) duff scripts or lunkheaded statements. Is there some "sunk cost fallacy" thing where people figure that since he wrote a few good episodes back in RTD's era, they have too much invested in him now to even be able to countenance any opinion that isn't praising him to high heaven, or what?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2014 07:28
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:I'm not sure that TV Six and Peri should be the bar we set to crawl over, though. At a convention during the 1980s, shortly after they'd announced him as the Doctor, Colin Baker (along with JNT) said that the Doctor didn't have a British accent, but rather a Gallifreyan one. He said it was just that the average person's hearing was unable to handle the subtle nuances of the Gallifreyan accent, and so just processed it as "British" instead.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:But where would all the toasters go? Given that God is infinite, and that the universe is also infinite...would you like a toasted teacake?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
The_Doctor posted:So we're not putting Capaldi in an internment camp with the rest of the Scots then? It's even worse than that, I'm afraid. 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 10:43
|
|
|
Forktoss posted:But will an independent Scotland still want to watch Doctor Who Well, they're not wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
Spikeguy posted:I wanted to ask ya'll something because I greatly enjoy hearing the responses. Can you list the defining moment for each Doctor? By that I mean, the scene or action or plot point that you think defines that particular Doctor or the thing that you think characterizes the Doctor the most? There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, and the sea's asleep, and the rivers dream. People made of smoke, and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there’s injustice, and somewhere else the tea's getting cold. Come on, Ace — we’ve got work to do!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
Fil5000 posted:It's either that or talking the dalek to death. Or talking down the sniper in Happiness Patrol. Or the bit in Fenric where he's so sure he's smart but turns out to have handed victory to the badguy. I was torn between that bit from the end of "Survival" or this bit from "Dragonfire" where he says goodbye to Mel: Think about me when you're living your life one day after another, all in a neat pattern. Think about the homeless traveller and his old police box, with his days like crazy paving.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 20:19
|
|
|
Barry Foster posted:I'm trying to think of one for Five now... "It seems I must mend my ways." MrL_JaKiri posted:Troughton? The scene in the otherwise poor The Krotons where he tries to beat Zoe at the quiz "You can't kill me...I'm a genius!"
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
Pizdec posted:For much of the show the character of Doctor WHO wore a coat with a question mark on it and clocks are featured all the goddamn time. This isn't Hannibal, the show has never been much for subtelty in its symbolism. You're welcome to propose a less plebeian abstract representation of time though. "much of the show" = roughly 1980 to 1989, out of a run that was roughly 26 years or so (give or take)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:I know Doctor What really loves the coat, but I have to agree with Lalla Ward and Tom Baker that those question marks should never have been on the show. They weren't even on the coat IIRC. Baker, Davison and Baker all wore them on the collar of their shirts, I believe. And McCoy had them on his sweater vest and that umbrella handle (both of which he protested against, in vain). E: Also clocks have never been a recurring motif or whatever in DW now that I think about it, either. There may have been the odd episode here or there where a clock might feature for whatever reason, but I don't remember it being like a thing of DW that clocks are prominently featured.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
Pizdec posted:I was thinking mainly about the fobwatch and the Gallifreyan clockwork-like symbols (the design of which I love by the way). It's not a prominent thing but the symbol has been used so I don't get the criticism. How else would you represent time anyway? 1. The fob watch is an invention of RTD's that was only introduced as a plot point to explain the return of the Master. It was never a thing in the classic series, and has (to the best of my knowledge) not actually been used in the current series since "Utopia". 2. If I'm thinking of the right thing, the Gallifreyan symbol you mention (aka the Seal of Rassilon) was originally used as set decoration for the Vogans in the classic series (in the story "Revenge of the Cybermen"). Then it got re-appropriated a couple of years later for the Time Lords in "The Deadly Assassin" and has been their thing ever since. So (again, if I'm thinking of the right thing) it was never actually designed to represent anything to do with time or the Time Lords or Gallifrey to begin with. As far as how you represent time, I would simply state that the original series and all the seasons of the current series up to this one managed to get by quite well without worrying about representing time or anything like that, and I don't really see the need to do so now. Pizdec posted:So, uh, it looks like it's time for [...] some Pertwee. It is always time for some Pertwee. 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2014 08:58
|
|
|
Pizdec posted:The watch was also used in "The Next Doctor" and 11th used a non-plot relevant fobwatch. According to the wiki (sorry, didn't watch much of old Who) fobwatches and clocks were A Thing for at least five incarnations. The show never was above exploiting the correlation. Which "five incarnations" were these, because I did watch a ton of old DW and I am 99.9% certain neither clocks nor fobwatches were A Thing on the televised series prior to Tennant (granted there's probably a fair bit of it in other media, though). quote:Nah, I mean the circular design that was introduced in the new series and is even referenced in the opening itself. OK, wasn't sure what you meant. In that case, again it was a thing created for the new series and as such isn't a thing with a long association with DW. Also I should add that I'm not watching the new series at all, so I have no idea what the current opening titles look like to begin with. Thus, I'm probably fussing about clocks and symbols and poo poo for no actual reason.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:gently caress off, you microcephalic, manure-covered mockery of a man. All you seem to do is hit-and-run swipes at posters whenever - I have to assume - the crushing pointlessness of your continued existence drives you to fits of manic, mediocre malevolence. I appreciate your sentiments but you do realize that getting just such a reaction from you and others is what dudes like that practically live for. There's an Ignore feature for a reason, after all.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:I enjoy the practice. It's very self-affirming, knowing that you're right about things. I prefer to take solace in my rightness by using the Ignore feature, knowing that I can safely dismiss whatever nonsense the ignored party is squawking about.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:Irish Joe, as I'm sure you're aware, you've cultivated a general aura of nastiness from your hit-and-run shiposts and shallow, often personal attack-based criticisms. Dude you're falling for it again 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
Burkion posted:Well OK bisexual. Unless the Doctor is going to regenerate into a woman next time... Only if the Queen gets to be played by a man, as Moffat himself once said  E: Moffat is terrible at writing women characters, to the point that I can't imagine anyone is seriously defending him over it these days. The guy is a rabid sexist, bordering on the misogynistic. Yes, he wrote "Blink", but that is basically the exception that proves the rule. Sydney Bottocks fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Sep 25, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2014 00:04
|
|
|
ProfessorLoomis posted:Careful with the attitude, the locals around here get so sensitive. Yes, it is the "locals" who are "so sensitive" around here, and certainly not the Moffat White Knights, who jump at any opportunity to defend the man at even the smallest of perceived slights against him. 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2014 01:27
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:The persistent idea that there is any kind of consensus about what people in this thread think/feel about stuff in Doctor Who never fails to confuse me. This comes up every so often, J-Ru, and it's usually the same two or three posters who apparently view Moffat's run on DW as the absolute creative pinnacle of DW (including the original series as well as the 2005 revival), and for some reason they get really perturbed about others pointing out his flaws and problems and such. Since there are more than a few people ITT who do have problems with Moffat's take on DW, they extrapolate that to mean "everyone ITT hates DW in general and Moffat in particular". They then proceed to gloss over the (usually majority of) people who go "I liked <that week's episode>, myself" and generally have the same ol' back-and-forth arguments with the Moffat detractors, in an effort to score Internet points or something, I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
RTD's problem with his "powerful female characters" was that he jammed every single idea he possibly could into a given story, until there was no room for unimportant little things like "character development" or what have you. This was also a problem with "all the rest of the characters in a given episode", too, so it wasn't just "powerful female characters" that were given short shrift, it was basically "anyone who isn't the Doctor, his companion, and whoever RTD felt like doting on in this episode". Whereas Moffat just has problems writing good female characters in general.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
Pizdec posted:That would imply none of these apply to Moffat and he unfairly spends all of his time on only creating interesting male side-characters. Please list those characters. No? I mean, I don't watch DW under Moffat because I think the series under his watch is a load of wank, so I can't fulfill this request. I think the only interesting character he's managed to create is Rory, so there you go. RTD and Moffat both write lovely minor characters, news at 11. Besides, your attempt at a rebuttal was "well RTD had female characters that dressed all in black and had the depth of a rain puddle, so clearly RTD had the same problem with women that everyone claims Moffat does", which is bollocks, quite frankly. Just because RTD wrote terribly-handled female characters doesn't mean he was operating from the same POV that Steven "Slut It Up" Moffat was. quote:Yvonne, UNIT lady, Cofelia and CyberQueen are all middle-aged and, barring Yvonne, have short hair. Lazarus lady was only allowed to be old because she was featured in an episode about Old. And I hosed up anyway because RTD didn't actually write the episode, but it was already hard to find examples of powerful female villains from that era because I GUESS WOMEN AREN'T ALLOWED TO BE PROACTIVE EH RUSTY?! Pointing out the flaws in RTD's era doesn't negate the ones in Moffat's run, FWIW. Both RTD and Moffat have written a bunch of crap episodes during their respective runs on DW. In RTD's case, there were some real loving howlers aired under his watch. None of that removes the fact that Moffat has some very real and evident problems with women both on and off the show.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
The simple fact that he told writers to "slut it up" when it came to episode titles and ideas really tells you all you need to know about Moffat and his views on women.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
Pizdec posted:This. This poo poo right here. How? How does that even follow? It follows because you are literally claiming that because RTD did a thing that Moffat is also guilty of, he must be operating from the same mindset that Moffat is, but somehow is given a free pass from claims of sexism and misogyny. quote:So I'm trying to work out how exactly people are seeing the exact same patterns and decrying "lazy writing" in regards to one set, and "awful sexism" in regards to the other. Because RTD was a lazy as poo poo writer, while Moffat is a lazy as poo poo writer who's also made some stupid-rear end comments about women in the press and elsewhere, while RTD has not. HTH
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2014 04:22
|
|
|
thexerox123 posted:No, I read UNIT lady, and was thinking it was the woman from Army of Ghosts/Doomsday... but then I realized that woman is with Torchwood, not UNIT. I was having my own brain problems. Haha. Watching Torchwood will do that to ya.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2014 04:39
|
|
|
ProfessorLoomis posted:viscous hive-mind Ah, the good old "hivemind" argument, the sign that a poster is safe to put on ignore, as whatever they say from here on out can be safely dismissed without issue. Many thanks 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2014 07:15
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:Oh please, if you had some social awareness you would realise it's not anything like that Seriously, save your breath. You're going up against a viscous lone-mind in this guy. He's formed a little clique (with his imaginary friends) in here, and dissenting opinions are met with "STEVEN MOFFAT RULES SUPREME" responses.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:The most bizarre thing about Something Awful Doctor Who is that in all three threads, there are posters talking about the other threads as though they are an entirely separate culture that they're incapable of interacting with, even though the people posting in all three threads are, by and large, the same and mostly saying the exact same thing in each thread. There are some corners of the universe which have bred the most terrible things. Things which act against everything we believe in. They must be fought.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
This episode really must have been just absolute shite, if even the usual stable of Moffat defenders can't be bothered to turn up and post about how everyone is just part of a Fendahl-like "I HATE DOCTOR WHO" gestalt.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 18:32
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:I think I may have to bow out of this thread. I liked this episode, like this season, think Capaldi's Doctor is an interesting shift and bringing some real tough character conflict in. But here it's "not even the Moffatt apologists can defend this one". If you liked it, that's fine. I'm referring more specifically to the people who tend to denounce everyone in the DW thread as nattering nabobs of negativism, when there's like maybe three people going "I thought that episode was a bit crap" amongst a bunch of "DOCTOR WHO RAWKS  " posts after a given episode.E: also by "Moffat apologists" I refer to (usually the same) people who will willingly, almost gleefully, overlook all of Moffat's flaws (aka the Sandifer Syndrome), usually by attacking those who point them out. I don't recall that you've done that, so you're probably not a "Moffat apologist"? v  v
Sydney Bottocks fucked around with this message at 19:30 on Oct 5, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 19:24
|
|
|
PriorMarcus posted:Basically your referring to this loving dude; Yes, exactly.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:The Terminator is set mostly in the present day and is 1000% science fiction. See also: Close Encounters of the Third Kind, E.T., et cetera
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:Complaining about the science is just empty posturing and dumb sci-fi-fandom myopia No it isn't, it's just as valid a critique as anything else.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
Reading all this stuff about blowing up the moon made me realize that Moffat is reduced to ripping off Mr. Show skits now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Csj7vMKy4EI
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
Myrddin_Emrys posted:Doctor who's The Belcher Test: two women have a conversation that isn't about burgers, butts, boys, or saying "All Riiiiiight!"
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
I did some pondering and decided that since most everyone seems to have liked this episode, that I will say something nice about Moffat for a change: I thoroughly enjoyed the 50th anniversary special. Yes, it was nonsense, but it was the good, fun kinda nonsense that I expect from a multi-Doctor story.  Also I like that he gave Paul McGann a chance to play Eight one more time on TV (well, sort of), and that he had some very nice things to say about McGann in general. I also had no problem with his decision to use a hidden/lost regeneration as the "War Doctor", either. And I liked that he said some wonderfully nice things about Big Finish and how he encourages actors on the show to take part in BF productions and such, too. And he did a nice little job sending himself up a little in "The Five(ish) Doctors", also. There, I said a bunch of nice things about Moffat, to counterbalance my general dislike of the show under his tenure.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2014 20:19
|
|
|
ewe2 posted:I'm a Time Lord, I walk in eternity "A lord of time. Are there lords in such a small domain?"
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
People should watch "The Mark of the Rani" because it has the great line in it from the Rani about how the Master's anti-Doctor plans are so convoluted, he'd get dizzy if he tried to walk in a straight line.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2014 20:16
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Snake? Snake? SNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE! Doctor Who Series 8 (34): Watch Out For Snakes
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Because if you haven't... please watch Black Books. Black Books is really just an alternative version of Doctor Who, where the bookstore is the TARDIS. But instead of having adventures in time and space, they just stay in the bookstore (mostly) and drink a lot (always). You even have a Doctor and two companions! 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2014 01:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 20:21 |
|
|
MikeJF posted:HE'S ALSO A FAN-TAS-TIC SWIMMER HE WILL NEV-ER NEED A ZIM-MER 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2014 08:49
|
|
