• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Doctor Who [Spoilers]

I'm just about to go orf to explore some Time And Relative Dimensions In Space - who fancies coming along?

IMG_3481 (Copy).jpeg
 
Anyone going to have nightmares after tonight’s episode?
It was a good one. Very unnerving stuff. I liked that they maintained a high degree of secrecy about it. That made me feel quite on edge all the way through. Very fine performances from the two leads as well. I will let you know if I have nightmares, Angel.
 
Very smart episode last night. The ones that invite you to guess what's happening always engage, plus there were nods to Adams, PK Dick, Ridley Scott, and apparently a Mari Lwyd ship's captain. The two leads are strong enough to carry the narrative, which has been the issue - being careful here not to reignite stuff, but too often the principal cast are blamed for weak storylines, but I'd argue they're all very, very competent actors, it's been the script and production that have let them down: when you have a central protagonist that changes shape, they have to have a strongly defined character mapped out quickly or it can drift (though in the case of McCoy that was a good thing, as his character evolved cleverly). I would argue that the success of Tennant was as much down to rock-solid storylines and definition of character as anything, and that Smith, Whittaker and Capaldi were frequently badly served by both script and direction. Jo Martin nailed it, in her very brief appearances, because her character was sketched properly.

Anyway, hopefully the soft reboot will calm everything down, and if there are more stories like last night's then this can only be a good thing.
 
Very smart episode last night. The ones that invite you to guess what's happening always engage, plus there were nods to Adams, PK Dick, Ridley Scott, and apparently a Mari Lwyd ship's captain. The two leads are strong enough to carry the narrative, which has been the issue - being careful here not to reignite stuff, but too often the principal cast are blamed for weak storylines, but I'd argue they're all very, very competent actors, it's been the script and production that have let them down: when you have a central protagonist that changes shape, they have to have a strongly defined character mapped out quickly or it can drift (though in the case of McCoy that was a good thing, as his character evolved cleverly). I would argue that the success of Tennant was as much down to rock-solid storylines and definition of character as anything, and that Smith, Whittaker and Capaldi were frequently badly served by both script and direction. Jo Martin nailed it, in her very brief appearances, because her character was sketched properly.

Anyway, hopefully the soft reboot will calm everything down, and if there are more stories like last night's then this can only be a good thing.
I’d have loved it if Jo Martin was a proper Doctor I feel she was wasted.
 
Loved this episode, definitely was delightfully creepy. And that final scene brought a tear to my eye. But I will say it's the first time I have to agree with those folks complaining about the music. Genuinely at times I couldn't make out what was being said because of the music.
 
Loved this episode, definitely was delightfully creepy. And that final scene brought a tear to my eye. But I will say it's the first time I have to agree with those folks complaining about the music. Genuinely at times I couldn't make out what was being said because of the music.
The previous episode we thought the music was too loud for the talking.
 
The previous episode we thought the music was too loud for the talking.
I have been having serious issues for a long time with dialogue being drowned out by music and/or background sound. Drives me nuts. Very distracting if you are straining to follow the dialogue and you're thinking "what did he say? Never mind, I'll have to see if I can catch it when I re-watch". It hasn't been too bad on the 2 most recent Tennant/Tate episodes, but in recent years it has often been a real annoyance. Can't understand why they can't sort it out.

Subtitles aren't a solution. If I put them on I am reading them all the time, not watching the programme. And often the dialogue is very fast and intense. I shouldn't have to resort to subtitles. I don't have hearing issues in any other areas of my life.

I have been told that it is a problem with the settings on my TV not being correctly set up, but I've tried all the settings I can find and nothing seems to help. Just tone down the music and noise, guys. Let the dialogue sing, as it should.

Rant over.
 
But Doctor Who doesn’t have to tread a fine line. It certainly isn’t at the moment. If the show was supported by advertising it would have been cancelled after series 1 of Jodie Whittaker’s effort. The fact is that the BBC hasn’t a captive audience for Who but it does have captive financiers and backers in the form of the licence paying general public and added Disney. While the scripts endlessly hammer us over the head with some current agenda, I miss the escapism and clever storytelling which has been replaced by some very contemporary fashionable concepts that are pretty far away from a Time Lord who is feared throughout the Universe, a destroyer, a saviour - a hope for those here, in the future as well as the past. And she lectured him on pronouns. That’s how bad it is now.
But don’t take my word for it…

View attachment 71778
That’s from BBC‘s own Culture site.

https://www.bbc.com/culture/article...0th-anniversary-special-is-a-whimsical-affair

And before I get another warning about introducing gender to this subject, I didn’t start it.
100% correct.
 
We spotted the credit for the contortionist Tommaso Di Vincenzo in the Blue Yonder episode.
I'd noticed when watching how convincing the action was; just a touch of CGI for the mocking dialogue. Brilliant.
 
Why do various characters keep lamenting about the time they are away with the Doctor? "Oh dear! X will be wondering where we are we've been gone hours." Type of comments. You're in a time machine. If you aren't back two minutes after you left something's gone wrong.
 
I think people are taking a rather rosy view of history and classic television.
When Doctor Who and Star Trek first aired, things like desegregation were hot button "contemporary fashionable concepts" here in the states.
The writing was progressive for it's day, and it could vary between subtle and clever and beating the audience over the head with the point.
A lot of it doesn't stand out as much when watched later, either because we were either much younger when first watching the show, or we grew up in the times that followed.
Patrick Troughton and Frazier Hines played their characters as gay as possible for the time, by their own admission. Which was pushing the envelope for the 60s.

Yet another bit of "contemporary fashionable concept" admittedly more subtle.

Doesn't mean the show is always on the mark, or approaching it well. But it has always dealt with "contemporary fashionable concepts" and hopefully will continue to. I'd hate it if the show stuck to subjects I was confortable with around 2000, for example.
And certainly according to whom, gay marriage wasn't fully recognized here in the states until 2015. And many of my fellow Americans still feel that was a mistake.

But I'm very happy we had Jack Harkness added to the cast as early as he was. And I'd hate for concepts to have to wait until they're accepted to be added to Doctor Who.
How many good stories and characters would we be lacking if we waited until the topic was no longer decided to be "fashionable"
 
But I'm very happy we had Jack Harkness added to the cast as early as he was. And I'd hate for concepts to have to wait until they're accepted to be added to Doctor Who.
Very much doubt Captain Jack will be back though, due to John Barrowman's sexually inappropriate behaviour on set.
 
Fascinating Reddit thread, about the war over a lost episode - and it covers loads of ground, including the fascinating fact that the police lost a court case to have the rights to the blue box, which now belongs to the BBC! Son of one of the original writers has a "lost" episode and lots of other drama. Many lost episodes were fished out of bins by lowly BBC workers, all sorts of shenanigans. And mention of Waris Hussein who directed "An Unearthly Child", a British-Indian director who was then the youngest director at the BBC and directed early episodes. Which is why it's so funny when Dr Who is accused of being suddenly "woke" or "box ticking". One of its earliest directors was an Asian gay guy.

 
Well if RTD revives 'Torchwood', Captain Jack might come back. He can be as sexually inappropriate as he likes in that.
Too much potential fall-out to re-employ him, I'd guess - same with Noel Clarke, even if allegations were proven unfounded, it would not be good optics, possibly? I think spin offs might be totally new stuff, maybe not Torchwood? It's the safer route to go.

Am loving the new Dr Whos and many of the more provocative things feel like easter eggs. Fingers crossed for the next incarnation. It feels lighter and more comedic but simultaneously (if this is possible) darker and back to the more eerie stuff that if well written, works well. I stopped at Matt Smith even though I like all the actors that followed - the writing let it down terribly. Feeling some hope now, though.
 
Too much potential fall-out to re-employ him, I'd guess - same with Noel Clarke, even if allegations were proven unfounded, it would not be good optics, possibly? I think spin offs might be totally new stuff, maybe not Torchwood? It's the safer route to go.

Am loving the new Dr Whos and many of the more provocative things feel like easter eggs. Fingers crossed for the next incarnation. It feels lighter and more comedic but simultaneously (if this is possible) darker and back to the more eerie stuff that if well written, works well. I stopped at Matt Smith even though I like all the actors that followed - the writing let it down terribly. Feeling some hope now, though.
I was an an acting class where Noel asked us to undress and heard of a dodgy audition someone I knew did for him, which also involved undressing. So I feel they aren’t unfounded. I feel John was just stupid and inappropriate.
 
I was an an acting class where Noel asked us to undress and heard of a dodgy audition someone I knew did for him, which also involved undressing. So I feel they aren’t unfounded. I feel John was just stupid and inappropriate.
Interesting. Yes, I did wonder. Sure I read somewhere that Clarke was cleared, Barrowman I dunno about.
 
IMO, it's actually preposterous to describe our more progressive politics as trivial or agenda-driven; after all, what is the point of us being communal creatures, living together in towns and cities - and families - if we aren't going to encourage communal harmony? If we aren't prepared to 'tolerate' and consider views and lifestyles which may be different to our own? What is the point of our existence if we're either stubbornly solitary or else forever hovering, uncommitted, between community-spiritedness and blithe self-interest? These aren't, despite appearances, strictly political points...

More specifically, there are a thousand - and doubtless many more - lightweight entertainments, throwaway shows that young people can be thrilled and distracted by; Doctor Who could be considered one of these. However, devoted fans would be the first to assure us that Who is actually worthy of serious consideration and near-study, its themes deserving of both celebration and the status of importance. Very often, those constants, those themes are universal - not merely the age-old dramatic devices such as narratives of good versus evil or the virtues of heroes and heroines, but also the true and central themes: those of companionship, team work, intelligence actual and emotional, the common good. What better things could be taught, by such examples, to the young people who will inevitably succeed us? Who is a shining light, essentially a lesson told in love, with a view to promote better things and better lives for future adults.

Like all serious cultural presentations, Who cannot remain unchanging, even if it represents a certain reassuring and nostalgic comfort to many viewers; it has to engage in contemporary matters or, in time, die out; to find itself irrelevant to its potential next audience - those whose convictions and concerns might well differ from our own. Those who might desire something deeper than time-passing, empty entertainment from a show that is renowned for a certain subtlety of thought far distant from its popular image of seemingly tinfoil-dwelling villains and silly scarves and celery. Being young, such new viewers are yet to learn subtlety of thought; and so they require simple lessons. If Doctor Who is - as has been alleged - occasionally heavy-handed in its messaging...is that any wonder, is this method genuinely unnecessary? It's actually vital; because, like the Doctor, the show's creators see the bigger picture and they see that some 'agendas' are worth promoting...for the good and future-good of us all.
 
IMO, it's actually preposterous to describe our more progressive politics as trivial or agenda-driven; after all, what is the point of us being communal creatures, living together in towns and cities - and families - if we aren't going to encourage communal harmony? If we aren't prepared to 'tolerate' and consider views and lifestyles which may be different to our own? What is the point of our existence if we're either stubbornly solitary or else forever hovering, uncommitted, between community-spiritedness and blithe self-interest? These aren't, despite appearances, strictly political points...

More specifically, there are a thousand - and doubtless many more - lightweight entertainments, throwaway shows that young people can be thrilled and distracted by; Doctor Who could be considered one of these. However, devoted fans would be the first to assure us that Who is actually worthy of serious consideration and near-study, its themes deserving of both celebration and the status of importance. Very often, those constants, those themes are universal - not merely the age-old dramatic devices such as narratives of good versus evil or the virtues of heroes and heroines, but also the true and central themes: those of companionship, team work, intelligence actual and emotional, the common good. What better things could be taught, by such examples, to the young people who will inevitably succeed us? Who is a shining light, essentially a lesson told in love, with a view to promote better things and better lives for future adults.

Like all serious cultural presentations, Who cannot remain unchanging, even if it represents a certain reassuring and nostalgic comfort to many viewers; it has to engage in contemporary matters or, in time, die out; to find itself irrelevant to its potential next audience - those whose convictions and concerns might well differ from our own. Those who might desire something deeper than time-passing, empty entertainment from a show that is renowned for a certain subtlety of thought far distant from its popular image of seemingly tinfoil-dwelling villains and silly scarves and celery. Being young, such new viewers are yet to learn subtlety of thought; and so they require simple lessons. If Doctor Who is - as has been alleged - occasionally heavy-handed in its messaging...is that any wonder, is this method genuinely unnecessary? It's actually vital; because, like the Doctor, the show's creators see the bigger picture and they see that some 'agendas' are worth promoting...for the good and future-good of us all.
Very well put, Steven. I totally agree. The narrow minded, non-progressive attitudes of some vocal fans baffles me. I sometimes wonder if they have been watching a completely different show to me. Does the Doctor's own philosophy, which has run through the entirety of the series, not get its message through to them?
 
The thing about The Doctor is you know he is a pacifist; even though he sure can fight.

Unlike certain folks we invariably associate with laser word usage and abusage...
 
I've never been so invested in a show, film or brand that it's ever bothered me.
I might moan about the actual production or treatment of something - such as Branagh's Poirot set - but nothing has made me throw my toys out of the pram.
 
Interesting. Yes, I did wonder. Sure I read somewhere that Clarke was cleared, Barrowman I dunno about.
Last I heard he was going to court to attempt to clear his name. Personally I was glad when the truth came out. It made me sick seeing him treated as the golden boy.

As far as I know, no one actually complained about John it was Noel thought he’d take him down with him.
 
Back
Top