Big Mean Jerk posted:

From Toxx's Planet of The Dead review:


The poor bastard has no idea what's coming.

Oxxidation posted:

"Haha, so to speak. Really though, I have a tremendous interest in certain pieces of Mizoyonian architecture, there definitely seems to be a syncretism present between them and other sites throughout the quadrant."

Or maybe she just got her tits out. You never know with universities.

computer parts posted:

People poo poo the moving Angels but I didn't see what was so wrong with the rest of it (it even had Jorah Mormont as a battle monk!).

Disclaimer: that was literally the first time I'd seen Weeping Angels though.

MrL_JaKiri posted:

Oh, so they are basing it closely on Alien

Fucknag posted:

Starting to go through and watch some of the old serials, starting with Genesis. I like how the beginning with the other Time Lord is just:

"Yo help us kill-"
"No."
"-some Daleks."
"...Ok."

Oxxidation posted:

No. I don't care that they ran on fake science, I care that they cheated. Kill the Moon was only able to reach its endpoint by bullshitting past every completely valid reasonable point of argument possible, not even overlooking it, just taking a valid, empirical point as to why its conclusion was erroneous and going "nah, it doesn't actually work like that." When, of course, it actually does. And even beyond that, every single plot beat hit some kind of contrivance that made my nose wrinkle. Why was Chloe smuggling Windex in her spacesuit, was she that neurotic about puking? Where was she smuggling it? Whyfore the fat comic-relief astronauts, when someone that out of shape would have been smeared across their seat by the g-force like a booger on the underside of a desk? Then you had the pointless "world voting" scene, the repeated, ignorant, outright contradiction of exceedingly basic science, the under-explanation of vital plot points, the off-putting abortion-debate analogue, and - most damningly, my same issue with "Journey's End" - the fact that Kill the Moon was a vital point in the season's overall arc, what with that whole Clara-Doctor blowout at the end. Blithe, lazy, insulting trash from start to finish.

Forest of the Night takes those same issues and compounds it with a dozen awful child actors and the aforementioned "meds" moral. Season 8 seems to be a really didactic season - appropriate when the Companion is a teacher and the Doctor comes off as a pissy tenured professor half the time - and teaching false messages, or actively harmful ones, is especially inexcusable in that context.

Thank Christ that those were the only real downbeats for me thus far. Moffat seems to have an awful lot of credits in this batch of episodes and he provides a safe quality baseline, with dudes like Mathieson providing peaks and the liches in charge of those two episodes giving me deep, dark valleys.

Oxxidation posted:

You'd be looking for an awfully long time, because no such posts exist. This is the first time I've piped up on anything related to S8.

Dabir posted:

But I thought neither he nor Kasran knew about it? Until she only told Kasran at the end of the last night she could be out and about.

Jerusalem posted:

You... you've convinced me, I'm going to-
notices small bead of sweat falling down the side of Bicyclops' face

Oxxidation posted:

So Occ, for whatever reason, would like this thread's take on what it would be like to watch the Doctor Who revival chronologically - as in, chronological to the time period of each episode. So Fires of Pompeii et al would be near the beginning, and Utopia would be waaaay at the end.

Answer as vaguely or sincerely as you want, it's a dumbass question if you ask me

Oxxidation posted:

No, what triggered it is that Occ tried watching Lost in chronological order and then thought "hm, this is pretty good, though I only like Lost in the first place because I have the insanity of a manatee. This same manatee-insanity prompts me to enlist Oxxidation to ask the Doctor Who megathread if the revival, too, would be better chronologically, despite spending half of its runtime helmed by the biggest Time rear end in a top hat this side of Homestuck's creator."

At which point I drop the whole mess on your laps and watch what predictably unfolds.

Bicyclops posted:

The best part about watching a completely chronological Doctor Who would be getting to the point where the Earth was destroyed by the sun about three times in a row.

The worst part would be everything, including the best part that I just listed.

Also nonsequential storytelling is a huge part of what drives Lost and gives each episode, at least in the early seasons and the end, a theme. It would be boring as all hell to watch chronologically.

I think I am just going to have to accept that I have the minority opinion on Kill the Moon and somehow live with myself. I still really, really like it!

marktheando posted:

Well on the one hand I thought the moon dragon egg was too stupid for my tastes and this wasn't a good episode. On the other hand time travel is impossible so I can understand people who completely dismiss any concerns about realistic science.

marktheando posted:

Oh great, this argument again. No true science fiction.

BSam posted:

Well it makes a nice change from reading the same post from Burkion five times a page. So I'll take it.

DoctorWhat posted:

Stories don't have to have anything in order to be successful stories. There are very nearly no hard-and-fast rules about what stories Need.

DoctorWhat posted:

gently caress if I know, man.

Fungah! posted:

That's probably for the best, honestly, the cliffhanger'll mean more

marktheando posted:

Flesh is next series.

GonSmithe posted:

Oxxidation posted:

I can verify that this had nothing to do with future episodes, as disturbingly coincidental as it looked

And don't any of you idiots get clever with the next several episodes, i want there to be SOMETHING redeeming about the goddamned Silurian two-parter.

M_Gargantua posted:

I could never figure the exact significance of it being issued in 1990? Crack related? Secretly centurian Rory?


Also,


I saw this, was confused, and started clicking the next buttons...

I'm even more confused now. Then I pressed the start over button. Guess I am reading homestruck? And I didn't even know that was homestruck. All I knew of homestruck was of it getting mentioned in the review thread. I can't even.

MrL_JaKiri posted:

Some of the original run's pacing was really really awful, too. Some of it was really good (even watching the episodes back to back)

DoctorWhat posted:

I thought the dog COULDN'T talk, but could write. At least, that was my understanding gleaned from adverts intruding on Gravity Falls.

Oxxidation posted:

It's like the director knew his audience would go "defibrillation does not work that way" and pre-emptively countered with "THEN LET'S DO IT TO THE WHOLE PLANET, TOO"

Bicyclops posted:

I don't think it's a good episode by any means, if only because it never really feels like there's a threat and the premise is pretty difficult to buy (even for Doctor Who) unless Earth's population is suddenly that of a video game planet. I don't hate it, though. Its principal sin for me is being a bit boring, and it at least has its moments.

Burkion, knowing your issues with it, I'm curious if you've ever seen Harvey or The Curious Savage and what your impressions of that type of fiction are. (That's not to imply that whatever your feelings on them are would excuse your complaints, because both come from a different era and are not dealing with children).

I think you already know my opinion, which is that the writer made an unfortunate and unintentional mistake and did not intend to comment literally on a child's anti-psychotic medication, and that it does detract from the writing, but that I don't feel quite as strongly as you do. But there's just such a plethora of work from the mid 30s to early 50s with similar problems (even for its time) that I have difficulty levying the same complaints against.