|
Speaking of progressiveness, I'll agree that A Christmas Carol is easily the highest quality Christmas special in most regards but the way the woman in it is treated bugs the poo poo out of me. She's not even treated as a person, it's like she's some kind of delicate toy to be brought out and played with on special occasions.
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2014 07:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 02:05 |
|
|
I've only just had a chance to watch it and catch up on the thread. I liked it as an episode but it just didn't feel very Christmas Special to me. I always think the special should be a bit more over the top/silly/magical than normal Doctor Who, that's pretty much how it's always been. RTD ones turned the camp up to 11 and Moffat ones have gone for fairy tales but either way they all have a very different feel to normal episodes (except End of Time which I always forget is a Christmas special). This one just felt like a normal episode, although it was a pretty good one. I found Shona incredibly familiar but couldn't work out why until I caught up with the thread and saw the mentions of Lucie Miller. That's really exactly it and I would totally go for her as a companion with Twelve. Anyway, the one thing that really bugged me was the emphasis on "every second you're asleep a monster is boring into your skull and eating your brains and you're dying you only have a few minutes before it really damages your brain hurry hurry hurry" but the characters still taking their time talking and running around and not seeming to care about that even after they prove to themselves that they're still dreaming. I just felt like yelling at the TV the whole time. I know they did mention something about dream time being compressed compared to real time but even then you'd think you'd want to spend as little time as possible with an alien monster literally eating your brain. I know it's just TV and it wouldn't have made such a good episode if they'd been more efficient about checking their sleep status and waking themselves up but I think the episode could have been better written to handle the issue.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2014 10:03
|
|
|
I remember enjoying the Beast Below, but I also remember reading an interview with Moffat (yes, I know, maybe I'll learn my lesson one day) where he says that he regrets it and it was rushed and terrible and makes no sense. So I guess there is at least one person who didn't like it! Speaking of that thread though: Toxxupation posted:I can't get over how much better this episode is than nearly everything that came before it. Moffat thought everything, everything through script-wise- I remarked to Oxxidation in private that it sure was coincidental that the Atraxi were about to destroy the Earth at the exact same time he returned to it, and not at any time in the dozen years between then- only for Amy to voice that exact same complaint, and The Doctor to explain that it was following him and couldn't pinpoint a location to where Zero was until The Doctor came back. It's stuff like that that that really blows me away, because I was totally expecting that to be just an unexplained "just go with it", RTD-like plothole to make the plot of the episode happen- but no, Moffat took the time to think through every reasonable complaint one could make about the story and explain them. It's honestly loving inspiring, how much care and love Moff put into this script, to make everything make sense. All I could think about reading this paragraph is how unfortunate the review for The Angels Take Manhatten is going to be. I mean, personally I love that episode and think all the emotional beats are perfect but there is not one single aspect of the plot that makes any kind of sense at all.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2015 05:49
|
|
|
egon_beeblebrox posted:It would only really work with most of the River episodes. And even then, it would still be nonsensical as Hell. I'm one of those rare unicorns who actually likes River and I have in fact watched all of her episodes in the order of her timeline and it actually holds together pretty well. It's just about the only time you can get something interesting from watching episodes out of broadcast order. Of course, River's timeline order is different to chronological order, that would still be pretty hosed.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2015 05:09
|
|
|
egon_beeblebrox posted:River's fine. I may try it one of these days. Chronological for River actually working is surprising to me. It seemed to me that it'd just fall apart after series five. I still had the order I worked out lying around in a txt file so here it is in case you do (or anyone else does): A Good Man Goes to War (The Impossible Astronaut) (Day of the Moon) Let's Kill Hitler Closing Time (last few minutes) The Wedding of River Song Bad Night/First Night/Last Night (First Night/Last Night) (A Good Man Goes to War) The Impossible Astronaut Day of the Moon The Pandorica Opens The Big Bang The Time of the Angels Flesh and Stone (The Wedding of River Song) The Angels Take Manhattan (Last Night) Silence in the Library The Forest of the Dead The Name of the Doctor Ones in brackets are for episodes where she's in it twice (or three times, thanks Last Night) over but I wasn't crazy enough to rewatch entire episodes just for that so I just picked one spot to watch them in. I have no idea why (The Wedding of River Song) is where it is but I'm guessing there's a bit I forgot or something.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2015 05:56
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:In un-chronological related matters, is there ANYBODY who actually liked Kill the Moon? Outside of all the stuff that happens between Clara and the Doctor after the main storyline is resolved? I enjoyed it but only because I just loved the concept of the moon being an egg with a creature growing inside it, despite it making absolutely no sense and nothing about the episode being actually objectively good. So I have no arguments for trying to convince anyone else it was an enjoyable episode, it was a purely personal reaction. I'm pretty sure it has to do with having watched (the old/proper version) of Doctor Dolittle on repeat as a child. It just appealed to the same sense of wonder as everything in that movie does. ETA: Talking about Doctor Dolittle in the Doctor Who thread means I'm obliged to post this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQ8MZzJFZIE Organza Quiz fucked around with this message at 06:34 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2015 06:32
|
|
|
Speaking of Vampires of Venice, it just got announced that Toby Whithouse wrote a double episode for this season (that doesn't count as something for the spoiler thread, right? Oxx's thread has me paranoid about anything to do with anything in future now). I think his episodes have gotten better and better as he's gone and he's still my pick for showrunner to take over from Moffat so I'm pretty pleased.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:Well, it was established that he does age, albeit far, far slower. I really hated that, and especially the Face of Boe thing. I know, I know, continuity means nothing in this show, but as far as I recall the Doctor talks about how he doesn't like looking at or being around Jack because Jack is immortal and he's a fixture of the universe and that feels wrong to the Doctor's Time Lord senses because the universe is about change and an unchanging being shouldn't exist. But if he ages then he's not an unnaturally eternal being and if he's the Face of Boe then he's not even immortal. So what's the Doctor got to whine about?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2015 12:23
|
|
|
I went and looked up a transcript of the exact words since it's been a few years since I saw it and I couldn't remember exactly what was said:Utopia posted:THE DOCTOR: I guess that doesn't mean he can't age, but it certainly sounds to me like he can't ever die. Although I'm okay with the idea of him being the Face of Boe and waking up again a few minutes after the scene where he dies.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:The biggest letdown for me though is in not getting the power dynamic right in the "first" meeting between the Doctor and River - they're pretty much shown as being complete equals with River just getting the upper hand, which really doesn't work with every prior appearance to this. I was always under the impression from her previous appearances that HER first meeting with the Doctor saw him basically being in the position she is usually in, knowing everything about her while she is baffled and confused about who he is. Writing them as equals is laudable to an extent, but kind of wrecks the backwards nature of their relationship and River's enjoyment of actually getting to have the upper hand over him. But the thing is he DOES have the upper hand and she does spend a lot of the time confused and baffled about who he is. It's not an exact reversal of their first meeting, so I can see how you could miss it if that's what you're looking for, but it is still a version of her being young and ignorant and him being older and seemingly all-knowing. She's a weapon who's been raised to kill this terrible figure called the Doctor but she doesn't have any idea of who he is as a person. So she goes through with her training, kills him and then goes off to forget about him. Then he comes back and despite the fact that he's dying in horrible pain, he's kind and compassionate towards her. Not only is he not after revenge, he actually saves her from being tortured. She's never encountered anyone or anything like him before and you can see she is totally confused by him. She might have the upper hand when it comes to physical power and the ability to kill people, but that's not what the Doctor's about.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2015 03:15
|
|
|
Yeah, the name fell completely flat to me, as did the rest of the speech, actually. The rest of the episode was fantastic but for some reason I just find it really hard to buy Capaldi's Big Doctor Speeches (except the one about being an idiot in the finale, that was good). I didn't like the idea of the Doctor bestowing a name on them at all, he's not the one who's been fighting them all episode and at the time it felt like they just needed to have an official name so the BBC knew what to call them when updating their website. I do like it a little more now, thinking of it as a naming something to give yourself power over it thing (although I think traditionally that's using a name they already have rather than giving something a new name).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2015 03:37
|
|
|
A race of unknowable, impossible to understand beings from a universe with rules entirely alien to our own, bent on our destruction? The Divergents.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
Maybe he'll take everyone raving about Rory as people trying to misdirect him away from the fact that Rory gets erased from existence a couple of episodes later. Hey Oxx, while you're trying to puzzle out how the time stuff in Flesh and Stone works, think about the fact that from River's point of view the universe has already been reset such that the TARDIS never exploded to cause the cracks.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2015 05:52
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:Forget that, what about the fact that "The Wedding of River Song" prevented River from learning the Doctor's name, which was the entire basis of their trust for the Doctor's initial meeting with her? I've never had a problem with the question of when River learned the Doctor's name. I mean, he could have told it to her off screen literally at any time. I'll admit it would be narratively more satisfying if we actually saw her learn it, but in terms of plot there isn't an issue. Everything we know or assume about "there's only one time I could" is just an assumption or something the Doctor's said and could be lying about.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2015 08:17
|
|
|
The silurian two-parter also commits the cardinal sin of wasting Meera Syal. Although if we really lived in a just world she would be playing the Doctor...
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2015 05:58
|
|
|
The part about "don't take your medication" was bad enough, but what really got me was "don't take these children to safety because it's better that they die with their families than grow up somewhere without parents." I mean yeah, growing up as space refugees would probably suck (although you'd think the Doctor, with all of time and space at his disposal, could find somewhere to put them where they would be taken care of reasonably) but is it really a fate worse than death? It's just glossed over as if it's a perfectly reasonable thing to think.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2015 05:21
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Whenever I think of all those people around the world getting a phone-call and some strange little girl telling them,"Don't be scared of the forest, sit back and wait, the forest will protect you Which reminds me, this is a post-Torchwood: Children of Earth world, although I guess that may have been one of those things swallowed up by the cracks in time. But the point is there have already been alien invaders who have used children as mouthpieces, and it was the start of the storyline and it was intensely creepy.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2015 16:30
|
|
" it reminds me more than anything of the aliens in Stephen King's Dreamcatcher, who send out messages in the voices of various world leaders insisting they're not dangerous, they're not infected with a horrible disease so there is no need to attack them or destroy them, everything will be ooooookaaaaaay. Like I said in my write-up, it seems more like the premise to START an episode, rather than a thrown-in aside to explain how the world didn't take any action that would eventually cost them their own survival.
|
Wait, are you saying Alex McGann's acting in the EDAs is an improvement on his acting in An Earthly Child? I haven't listened to the latter but I have listened to the EDA episodes with him and I can't imagine his acting being worse than it is in those. It was obvious from the start that he had to be someone's son because even the smallest of speaking roles in big finish go to better actors than that.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2015 04:35
|
|
|
I actually think Moffat might be okay writing a female Doctor. His problem is that when he's coming up with his own female characters he tends to go for the same archetype over and over again, but he's quite capable of writing other women. I mean, look at his writing of each of the companions from the RTD years. I think he's enough of a fan of the Doctor as a character that he'd be able to write a woman as the Doctor instead of as a Standard Moffat Female Character. EDIT: Sorry, what? Clara's biggest Thing this season was Danny and not the whole thing about her learning to lie and be like the Doctor and that not necessarily being a good thing?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2015 05:06
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:Tom Baker would almost certainly say something similar if asked. I agree with most of your post, but: Tom Baker in this interview posted:There was for a time persistent speculation that there could be a female Doctor Who? Do you think a woman could take on the role? You underestimate the nature of Tom Baker.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2015 05:54
|
|
|
Whenever people start discussing future Doctor actors in any context on the internet I get confused really fast. Do people actually think there's a chance they'd cast an American in the role? Do people actually want an American to be cast in the role? I can see the Doctor as any gender, any race or any age but surely the Doctor has to be played by someone from the UK.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2015 04:52
|
|
|
thrawn527 posted:This is the only time I will feel legit bad for him. Hopefully he doesn't rage quit. If the next episode wasn't such a great one I'd be worried...
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2015 04:02
|
|
|
Barry Foster posted:That's the saddest part of it, I think - that McGann was good enough to be one of the best Doctors ever, but if his 'series' had kicked off it would've spelled the death of Doctor Who as we know it. At least we have Big Finish now! And I'm forever grateful to this thread for talking about BF enough that I ended up checking it out when I never would have considered it otherwise. Did anyone see what happened in the other thread before the posts got edited out? It looks like it was a genuine accident/coincidence so I'm curious what it was.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2015 03:42
|
|
|
Blasmeister posted:It was a repost of the RTD/Moffat magazine letter page interaction from a few posts upthread. Thanks. I can see how that could be confusing if you haven't seen Day of the Doctor and didn't realise it was a thing, yeah.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:I actually kind of love that in the end they made the decision that the 8th Doctor was the one who kept the flame burning during the darkest days for the character, the guy who fought to the very end to maintain his beliefs. Given that McGann was the face of Doctor Who for most people between 96 and 2005, it was a nice nod to the fact he was the guy who was there when everybody else had basically given up all hope. Yeah, having listened to most of Eight's audio stuff now I absolutely appreciate that it wasn't him who decided to wipe out two species. It literally goes against everything this iteration of the Doctor stands for to even consider it. It's a major part of season four of the EDAs especially. I mean, I know the point of the decision is that it goes against what the Doctor stands for, but Eight in particular is particularly pacifist.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2015 06:37
|
|
|
It's happening it's happening it's happening  Honestly there's a hundred different new who spin offs I'd love to see, but especially anything with Jack Harkness. Get him some non-Torchwood writing and he could be a really great character. Especially if he's teamed up with River being written by someone other than Moffat...
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2015 07:13
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:River and Jack could be amazing. That said I'm kinda sad we wouldn't be seeing them together with the Doctor, because they'd be having so much fun at his expense together. And Alex Kingston and John Barrowman met on the set of Arrow and are apparently now friends and would totally jump at the chance to do it, too.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2015 08:56
|
|
|
This is pretty much why I keep playing it. I like trying to make teams that are both effective and full of characters I actually like (or even remember). I've had Eight as my Doctor for ages so I was so pleased when they added Charley in. She's the first BF-only character that's been in it I think.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 06:43
|
|
|
Pesky Splinter posted:Was having a lazy sunday and attempted to make a visual list thing of the audio series, with a vague idea that it could used as a quick reference to doctor specific audios. Is this sort of thing of any use to anyone at all? That's excellent. I have a text file with McGann audios that has a similar purpose but that's much nicer and easier to navigate. I think one with companions on could be useful for doctors who aren't McGann, where from what I can tell their audios are divided by which companion they have and not necessarily all in one chronological order like Eight's mostly are. I'm a massive spoilerphobe and I'd consider it a spoiler to know which companions are and aren't in Eight's audios since they're designed to be listened to all in sequence anyway. Also there's that one spoiler about one of Six's companions that I'm forever glad I managed not to know about before I reached it. But other than those exceptions I can definitely see it would be useful to know which audios go with which companions.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
I believe this is the most appropriate video for the day: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQ8MZzJFZIE
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 02:05 |
|
|
docbeard posted:This is probably for the best, and I say that as someone who loves them. I honestly think they would work best as a Who-free spinoff, ideally run by Mark Gatiss. You mean Nicholas Briggs.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2015 13:30
|
|