Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
new Dr Who info; the Dr may be a woman?
Topic Started: 2 Jan 2009, 10:40 PM (740 Views)
# Digits
Member Avatar
Shadowkin
Fish things were Pescatons I think mate! Could'nt agree more with you Andy! Actually I think Hath were fish like too. Oh, and so were the Fish people!!!
Edited by Digits, 3 Jan 2009, 09:46 PM.
Offline
 
Keravin
Member Avatar
Go post in someone's topic that you normally wouldn't
Fish Things sound like Sea Devils to me.
Offline
 
# Digits
Member Avatar
Shadowkin
Yup, them too. Seems to be a recurring theme - "Fish Like" - see how tired it is!
Offline
 
☺Doghouse
Member Avatar
Captain
I like the new Dr Who format and thought Tennant was really good. It's going to be weird seeing someone as young as Matt taking on the role but from what I've seen of him in the past he's pretty good.
It's strange they announced it so early though. I like the whole hype thing surrounding regenerations but the question is will they stick to only twelve?
Offline
 
Keravin
Member Avatar
Go post in someone's topic that you normally wouldn't
Digits
3 Jan 2009, 09:50 PM
Yup, them too. Seems to be a recurring theme - "Fish Like" - see how tired it is!
As opposed to woods in Canada, cyborgs and androids.

One fish like thing in Nu Who - Hath. Too many bloody Daleks and I would seriously like them to have a rest.

They announced it now as it would have leaked (and indeed actually did) and they start filming in July for Series 5 so this way they controlled the announcement and also gives them time to build the perception of this new Doctor.
Offline
 
# Old Guard
Member Avatar
Entertainment officer...Meet the gang cos the boys are here.....
To be clear I have not said, as you so eloquently put it, its (self censored -not on the floor please). My initial comment related to my belief that the person chosen is, in my opinion, not a good follow up to Tennant. My 'dislike' of the current recent series Dr who is as such an asside which has been expressed as we have 'discussed' the merits and demerits of varying genres of scifi, notablty as a reaction to your apparently horrified reaction that I dont share your obvious passion for Who. Obviously there we do not all aggree what is good and what is bad scifi. As I mentioned Tennant as the Doctor? not a bad thing. My issue is with the programme as a whole, concepts and storyline and how returning to past glories does not always work. And for me it don't...obviously for others... and fair play to them.

I guess it ultimately comes down to what someone is looking for in a good programme of any sort and indeed i think age and memories have much to do with it too, as I said pertwee and to a lesser degree Baker era ,greatly enjoyable TV (yes I did hide behind the sofa with some of the Pertwee ones). I tried, could not and cannot, get my head around the new crop, (one of my daughters thinks its great so yes I have watched some, though not all to be fair) Frankly I think its over hyped and I think its going to dip further than in my opinion it already has. That is my opinion, Free to express it, like it or not. Good discussion does not always come from a 'lets all aggree' stand point. I thought 'Brimstone' was a great concept and programme. Apparently no one else did and it vanished after only one season, so be it. I respect your 'love' of the programme, I dont share it, but that does not mean to say I cant express my own view on the matter. Were that to be the case then the thousands of people protesting today about Gaza have no right to do so. They are not Israeli nor Palestinian so keep your nose out! I have expressed my opinion within the appropriate thread. Had i started a new - 'Dr Who: Bollocks or what?'- thread. I feel sure that you would have commented.

I cant say that I've ever been 'emotionally touched' by any TV scifi unless the behind the sofa or the being creeped out by the Toomes episodes of Xfiles count and on that basis my response to current Who is probably one of 'why?'.

DS9 was an attempt to twist trek in a different direction and therein probably the root of the problem with it. Possibly without the starfleet 'influence' and going on soryline alone there was much there that worked ( i had forgotten about the cardassian tailor who was as a character pretty good). but then again without star fleet you then have Babylon 5 with a different name (actually which came first? was DS9 a reaction to Bab5?)

Can't comment on the novels and wont even try to since I have never read any, but then again I have never read any of the starwars, star trek or other TV based books, My scifi Library tended to extend to Moorcock, Heinlein, Herbert etc.... and always before any one tried to put them on screen (lets not talk Dune here....life's too short- though I like the Mini series) I will take your word for it that, for you, they have provided enjoyment.

As for the ratings well...yeah...and? Ratings Schmatings, all that says is that there is a significant number of people who like it (never said there wasnt) but equally as a result theres an awful lot of people who dont. Wallace and Gromit this Christmas? did you or did'nt you? If you apply the ratings concept alone then we come back to why soaps?

So gentlemen we dissagree, such is the way of things you are at leisure to try to convince me I'm wrong, in fact i welcome it, but likewise i may seek to convince you that you are wrong.


Dave: it could be a generation thing!

Yeah! Sea devils that's the badgers!
Edited by Old Guard, 3 Jan 2009, 10:50 PM.
Offline
 
Keravin
Member Avatar
Go post in someone's topic that you normally wouldn't
I've watched Who in all forms from Troughton through to current day. Sure I've seen some Hartnell, but then again what I have seen means I don't want to actively go looking to see any more.

OG I've not seen anything where you've actually stated problems with the new show. Hardly helping to the discussion. I've discussed various flaws I see in the current show, but I'm hoping that some of those will get dealt with by the change in head of show. Return to old glories - well I have problems with old villains coming back, but my appreciation of the new show is when it does new stuff - The Pompeii episode, Human Nature, The Library two parter this year, Empty Child, Girl in the Fireplace etc.

It is a show and format that offers the opportunity to tell virtually any story/genre that you can go with. It does mysteries, love stories, thrillers, alien invasions etc etc. At its heart is the basic concept of a stranger coming into a place and becoming involved in events. I've seen stories where the Tardis etc were not mentioned - just a man arrives and things start. So what precisely is the problem with the concept?

Yes it did reinvent itself. The format for storytelling is very different - a lot faster now, with a lot less running down the corridor to use up some time. The basics of the setup have changed - adding the family dynamic helped sell it initially to a new audience, but has been overused and hopefully will be ditched or lessened in future. It has storylines running through series now which came from Buffy. Continuity is more important than it ever has been before - if you don't believe me then you should look at the book A History which attempted to reconcile all Doctor Who continuity into a timeline. With 3 different versions of Mars and a few Atlantises. So yes they did do a lot more than you seem to have noticed. Oh and managed to sell it to a lot more people than they ever have done before. It's a kids show, but it offers a lot more than that.

Star Trek as Roddenberry envisaged it is saccharine nonsense and I say that as someone who has seen every show of it with the exception of later series of Voyager (because frankly that crew could have died horribly and the universe would have been better for it). DS9 came about after JMS pitched the Star trek people B5, but they ended up going about things differently in some aspects, whilst very similar in others. DS9 is also largely disliked because it did what BSG does which is focus on a single storyline so it doesn't allow for dip in dip out like Trek normally does. Guess where BSG's showrunner came from?

Yes and I've read all the authors you've noted. Some I like, some I don't. And I read them a long time before movies or tv shows had appeared based on them.

So far you've offered Battlestar Galactica, Invaders, Space 1999 (christ talk about crappy production values), Quatermass (again paranoia and cold war focus - prefer the novels) and I'm sorry Brimstone (Reaper does it better and funnier) up as better than Nu Who. BSG I've already agreed with because it is phenomenal tv. So still waiting to see anything to argue that it's the poor cousin of Sci Fi tv.
Offline
 
# Old Guard
Member Avatar
Entertainment officer...Meet the gang cos the boys are here.....
Ok Sorry about the break, but it was late and i needed my sleep.

So, what is my problem with Dr Who? well following our discussions here I have been giving that more thought. Now i should state here and now that for ANY programme/film to work for me it has to feel right, I'm not talking about historical accuracy ' the M24 Chaffe wasnt available to US troops in mid 1944' kind of thing, though very poor attempts do get to me (Patton for example, fantastic acting by George C Scot, film total hogwash due to not even attempting to get the right gear used - which of course was more abundant at that time than it is now. Lazy film making) No, what I mean are things like ...well you may remember that I had an 'issue' with the Dark knight. The plot, Great, the characters and their portrayal superb! But it wasn't Gotham! thats what I mean ( rewatched it since focussing solely on the people and it totally works as a story but i still cant quite shake off that feeling of its not quite right). 'We we're Soldiers', again an example, a storyline and portayal everybit as good as platoon and/or Hamburger hill. But they filmed it in southern California! it was like watching 2 battle re-enactment groups who had got their hands on live Ammo slugging it out at the county fair.
Ok so whats that got to do with what we are talking about here? well this is problem number 1 for me, lets take the Pompeii and the christmas Cybermen episodes. the latter looked like they had filmed it on the set of Scrooge or Oliver but without bothering with getting the lighting right or the atmosphere/smog call it what you will right its like it was 'on stage' if you know what I mean. You go to the theater knowing that the scenerry is all on wheels and painted on 2 dimensions to try to look like 3 and you can tottally accept that, but that doesnt work on screen Its as if because its scifi everything has to be clean shiny and bright! Pompeii again did not feel right (good scenery making dont get me wrong effort was put into building that lot....for 'Rome'!) BBC, Taxpayers money must make sure we get maximum use out of the sets well I can accept that IF you go that little bit further to get the right feel. Its almost insulting to the viewers- its kids watching it so slap 'em in toga's or make them all look like the fella on the front of the old Quality street tins and it will be allright. You are about to try to get people to believe that at a time when people were thrown to the lions for being a bit different, some fella turning up in a blue box with a flashing light on top (that in itself being witchcraft) will just be accepted. Ok thats a stretch right there but if you do that by making the period a pastiche then agin it smacks of lazyness.
I mentioned earlier that I felt that as soon as you start throwing in time travel into the storyline then you are running out of ideas. The current series is like 'a spacemen at the court of king Arthur' its silly. Put asside the language issue (something which is a problem with most Scifi and to its detriment i feel. _ in Space everyone speaks microsoft English!!!) As I mentioned above, 21st century man in the 1800s or ADwheneverPoompeiiwas stands out like a turd on a billiard table. If its going to work some effort , however token, needs to be put into it. At least in some of the startrek time travel sagas (yes due to the joys of the prime directive) they tried to blend in and it worked all the better for it. Now part of the problem with the current batch of who is that it seems to be increasingly relying on this historical flipflopping ( well he is a time lord so...) For me it works best when set in the 'now' I can acccept his 'presence' far more than i can in the half assed period dramas it just turns me right off. One of the recent ones which did 'work' for me was the one on the shuttle where the entity has got into one of the passengers? know the one I mean?that was just a simple set, you accept that its a scifi setting, (despite the el cheapo set) and get on with it and its the performances that carry it.
That takes me on to casting- problem 2 or is that 3 now? just seen one of the publicity shots on Matt Smith as Who and the first impression is -fashion and kids they might as well have got Russel brand to do it, the kids would love that!!! oh wait no he's a bad boy with the beeb no can do.
I'm not sure if its the casting or the material that they are given but I find most of the characters 2 dimentional this partly by casting either pretty people or in the case of Tate (cos theres nothing pretty there) a known and hip face. In fact her casting as the assistant has been one of the greatest turn offs for me. The Master, there we go the old fella with the goatee- proper villain. the newer one...oh i know lets make him like a citybanker, looks like a nice bloke but really hes a real B....... Come on ! its been done to death and better elsewhere. that was a great dissapointment.

I take your point about how it has been used as a platform to explore a range of stories, not just 'shoots the aliens' and as a concept that is great if you can carry it on that alone, but it cant because the stories are ultimately tarnished by the all the bells, whistles and shinies they bought in the Pound shop. You are quite right that Roddenberies vision of the future is a little bizarre. In fact i personally think that his vision has tarnished people's perception of real world notably this concept that the good guys are ALL good and only ever shoot in self defence. Or that you can pinpoint your target and only that gets hit without 'collateral damage'(more BS terminoligy to make dead civilians palatable). Sorry but its not like that!

pleasantly surprised you knew Brimstone, I like reaper it works, it is funny maybe that's how it should have been done in the beginning, but I find myself regretting the passing of Brimstone as i felt it was not given the oportunity I think it deserved. 99 Well yes its not necesseraly top flight but, the concept-good, the characters-yeah I can live with that, the feel- well... Damn ! 70's fashion (but when I saw it when it first came out that worked too) but the look of the base and the Iconic (and believable as a ship) Eagle (still got a model of one somewhere) totally work.

Maybee if Who had not had the gap and that it had evolved over that period (and i take into account the latter doctors of the old series which were going downhill and resulted in it being pulled) i could accept it more. But I find that it does not offer Me what i am looking for, I cant immerse myself into it, I cant find a cosy spot where I can sit and watch it all happen around me. There is no familiarity for me, I cant identify with it, Which i can with many of the other military/quasi military type series or with the ordinary joe who finds himself in very strange surroundings. Over the years it would appear that we have both watched a wide range of scifi and some have left bettre impressions than others i suspect that our To 10 say, would have some similarities but would also have some great differences. Who would not feature on my list and i suspect that the 'paranoia' style would feature quite heavily in mine. Sorry! child born at the end of the baby boom of parents who saw/were involved in WWII and I am a product of that. So make of that what you will its not a Pissing contest 'my scifi is better than yours'. i dont like it and thats not a dismissive statement because i have dipped my toe, foot, a little beyond the knee perhaps but i cant take that step that will have my Goolies up round my throat, just not worth it...in my opinion.
Offline
 
☺Jasevx
Member Avatar
Techmarine
Jesus, who says AB isn't interlectural!

Andy actually agree with you on the doctor, tho I do enjoy watching it because I blank the old series and see it for what it is, prime time family entertainment. I actually prefer Torchwood, which some of lads do as well, its more realistic (if you've been to Cardiff and seen the locals, totally believable), has a continuity about it. I think the main thing that ruins these type of programs now is the actors are scared of being typecast, and don't last long. I can't see that being a bad thing and Billie Piper has shown its possible to take time out and do other things. I honestly think we'll see Tennant return with himself still existing in the alternative universe, that solves the 12 doctors issue for a period.

Space 1999 was superb, Blake 7 at the time broke new ground, its unfair to watch them now and baulk at the special effects, at the time they were immense. I totally loved the Farscape set up, appealed to all ages and the effects department went out on a limb (Henderson at his best), Really got bored with Star Trek, DS9, snore, but Janeway and Jean Luke brought passion and entertainment back into it. BSG is superb, but even then some of the episodes fell on their faces, dragging storylines out to much.
Offline
 
Brambleten
Member Avatar
The Red Hood
Old Guard
 
Can't comment on the novels and wont even try to since I have never read any, but then again I have never read any of the starwars, star trek or other TV based books,


i've read most of the star wars books, and whilst the film books arent as good as the films, the EU (Expanded Universe) books are very good.
Offline
 
Keravin
Member Avatar
Go post in someone's topic that you normally wouldn't
Star Wars is actually a lot better now the further removed it is from George Lucas. The Knights of the Old Republic games were brilliant and that corner of the timeline has now been expanded by comics, games, and rpgs and will be the basis of the new mmporg.

Ok issues with Doctor Who.

First up I'm not arguing it's perfect. I just rewatched season 4, a season my wife says is probably her favourite, and yet I still find 4 episodes I find extremely dull and poor.

The language issue has been a conceit of the show since day 1. Everyone talks English when the Doctor is around due to the Tardis. The new show showed this in the Christmas invasion when the Doctor was out of action and the translator was not working until he came back, also it showed up in the Doctor's Daughter episode (yep one of the clunkers of last season) when Martha was separated from the Doctor and needed to communicate. Partly it's because it helps the stories along quicker, and also because some people don't like reading subtitles or reading fullstop in some cases.

One of the big flaws the show has is it is Humancentric, but that's by design because RTD believes no one cares about that civilization if they are not human. He wants the audience connected and making it about humans means that they don't have to get past prosthetics to emphasise. Midnight - which is the one set episode you were on about - is probably the starkest episode about human frailty that the new show has done. It was about human beings being scared and failing. Not a particular favourite, but its execution was very good and technically it's brilliant. None of the other protagonists have back stories so it really is the Doctor stripped down to being the stranger who arrives.

Is the show an immersive experience? No not always. Sometimes it makes do with sets to sell a place rather than giving you a feel of it. It's one of the things the old format has over the new. It could sell you a location before you were involved in it storywise. True it failed to do it a lot, but I've been watching some Tom Baker Key of Time stories and they sold some dodgy sets with some over the top characters and then plonked the Doctor and Romana in the middle. Sometimes it worked and sometimes it didn't. For Immersive experience though I'll point to two two parters that I've mentioned as highlights again and again. Silence in the Library in the new series which sold a world then proceeded to work through it dealing with various aspects. Simple monster, little bit of hokum (the Doctor superhero bits), but well written, cleverly thought through and an effective use of setting with a good little ensemble cast. Last year it was Human Nature which was the Doctor as a human just before World War 1. Now that dealt with racism, class struggle, bullying, a willingness to let other's die and all around a Doctor as a human who was part of those things. It was a brilliant novel and translated brilliantly to the screen. Though I'd have preferred the original's villains to the scarecrows though they clearly were there to appeal to the kids. Then again Who does more at being immersive than series that have a historical base in that same timeslot. Robin Hood had a bloody strike in the Middle ages and was forever trying to be relevant rather than tell a proper story.

The recent Christmas special was hokum. Glad I don't have to review it because apart from Miss Hartigan and the graveyard sequence I found it extremely flawed and with holes in the plot the size of the Cyberking. One of the prime examples I have that RTD needs someone actually pointing out where HE needs to strengthen a plot and not just say yes this will do. I have a lot more faith in Steven Moffat.

The aside to Gotham. I can see why Chicago got in your way. Having been there and knowing where they filmed it can get in the way. However there was nothing that really didn't work for me as Gotham. Maybe if they'd done more with landmarks - though Batman Begins was stupid in the notion that Arkham was smack bang in the middle of the city. Now to me that's not Gotham. Gotham wants its lunatics hidden away.

I hated Donna or rather Catherine Tate when she was introduced. There's probably some rants for me online on a review I did, but even in the Christmas special I did not find her as bad as expected. Then she was announced as the new companion and I was back in hate mode. I did not want shrieking for 13 weeks. When she came to be in it though I generally liked her. After two lovelorn companions we had a companion prepared to argue with the Doctor and make him change his mind. The Pompeii episode is a prime example. Was she over the top sometimes? Yes. Still she was at least given better dialogue than Martha ever was. Martha is a good character trapped behind crap dialogue and writers (and editors) who just let her moon over the Doctor for most of a season rather than being the capable character we see in a few episodes of season 3. But back to Catherine Tate - I can see why you don't like her. It's a case of persona of actor getting in the way of character. Then again she's not Bonnie Langford or Adric.

John Simm as the Master - again no problem. What Delgado and his successors were were mirror images of their Doctors. Delgado was there to play off Jon Pertwee - hence black to counteract the white of Pertwee. John Simm was about playing off Tennant and giving him something to play against. True I'd have preferred it to be a more nuanced performance, but the Master has always been absolute pantomine - this is a man who regularly maniacally laughs and dresses up. But at least he wasn't the bloody Daleks. This is why I want new villains.

As for Matt Smith I need serious convincing. He's the first potential misstep, BUT the key to this is that the showrunner is now a genius. Moffat wrote Press Gang and Coupling which shows he knows characters better than most people ever will and then his Who episodes have been brilliant. Plus he's bringing back some of the best writers the show has ever had and finally letting some of the other novel and play talent come and play. It may be awful, but Moffat is the reason I've hope for the future.

Who for me is more than is on television. I enjoy the tv show for what it is. It has some atrocious episodes. Usually the first two parter of the year is absolute tosh. I find the seasons cyclical. Good start, fair second episode, rubbish, rubbish, rubbish, Moffat two parter, getting better, rubbish again, season finale build up. It's not exact, but I think it fits most seasons. I enjoy the character and unlike Stargate etc it doesn't always look pretty similar. If we're to discuss immersion then Stargate is a poor example of it. Again I watch it and will have seen it all soon, but it's Boys own adventure which very rarely gets past basic concepts. Far better for me is BSG, Farscape (from Scorpius turning up where it started having consequences and telling a story in a universe rather than just having things happen to propel the story that week), or Supernatural (which delights in taking concepts and twisting them and is now like BSG building towards a fixed conclusion. That's why it works and X Files never ultimately did).
Offline
 
Faye
Member Avatar
Sergeant
i thought this was a thread about doctor who? not a thread about how people shouldnt like doctor who cos some people said so.

its a kids show and its entertaining, who cares if its not 'realistic', what sci fi is? its all fiction at the end of the day. if you dont like it, dont watch it, then you wont have to tell people who do like it, that you think its rubbish and that they are wrong. simple really.

happy fun times for all. looking forward to the future of the show!
Offline
 
Cole
Member Avatar
Second Lieutenant
I just hope its better than the last series.

Not homophobic in the least but to have Russell T "everything has to be about the gay" Davies ramming gay love down our throats nearly every episode started to grate.

Really enjoyed the Moffat episodes, happy hes taken over. Hoping martha "I'm better than the Doctor" Jones stays away and the same goes to catherine tate..Who in my opinion just played catherine tate.

Donna Noble's head should have imploded at the end of the finale.

In fact for that doctor donna farce Russell's head should implode and making them all pilot the tardis while cheesy grinning each other was daft...half expected them to break into a chorus of Kumbaya.
John Barrowman should stay away for awhile, and stick to torchwood.

Just so they can bring aboard some fresh characters and villains, hopefully the tennant/piper chemistry that made it a success will happen again.

Because whatever people think of it must be better than these I'm a celebrity on ice dancing in the big brother house while my wife has swapped the kids to be the next top model after having a 60 minute makeover shows that have destroyed Saturday nights .

rant over, mist fading, calming down...


leaving on ....the new doctor better cut his hair....time traveling hippie.
Offline
 
Daemon-Forge
Member Avatar
Major
@Galikoe3 this is Sig'd "leaving on ....the new doctor better cut his hair....time traveling hippie."

I think when it comes back on telly they better come up with new places and Aliens! i would like the Master to come back and i think he will......
Offline
 
Cole
Member Avatar
Second Lieutenant
lol thank you I have never been sig'd before.
Offline
 
Cole
Member Avatar
Second Lieutenant
Having waiting eagerly for the Easter special and being disappointed by the Christmas special what could go wrong.?


removed

At the time this was written, was extremely sleep deprived and was overly harsh concerning Russell T davies. Very miffed with my self as I have met him and is very nice man.




Usher in the moffet.


Having watched the Easter special me thinkees the master might return in the Christmas/regenerate special.


Edited by Cole, 20 Apr 2009, 01:47 PM.
Offline
 
Daemon-Forge
Member Avatar
Major
Galikoe3
18 Apr 2009, 01:01 PM
Having watched the Easter special me thinkees the master might return in the Christmas/regenerate special.



i agree with you their. as if you lok and reword the next special show "the waters of mars" you get "the master or the masters war" i think he will be back, and meaner than ever.

as for the easter eps i hated it nothing happened.
Offline
 
Keravin
Member Avatar
Go post in someone's topic that you normally wouldn't
Galikoe3
18 Apr 2009, 01:01 PM
Russell has been elevated to "savior of Dr Who" but all he seems to do is rehash and gay up Dr Who.
I thought the Easter special was poor, but that statement is bollocks.

RTD has huge flaws and seriously still needs a script editor who is awake as this special started ok and then went no where.

But he has revitalised the show, he's made it an acceptable part of british culture again rather than something to be sneered at and he hasn't gayed up the show. It's always been a big show for gay fans, so he's just made it contemporary.


As for who is coming back I'm saying nothing.
Offline
 
Cole
Member Avatar
Second Lieutenant
As to what I said about rtd... a bit harsh, I admit. so Apologies.

Did not engage sleep deprived brain before rant.


What do you know about the upcoming specials that we do not.

Edited by Cole, 20 Apr 2009, 01:50 PM.
Offline
 
Keravin
Member Avatar
Go post in someone's topic that you normally wouldn't
Well I've seen pictures showing 5 guest stars so far.

Just found there is spoiler text on here so...

Spoiler: click to toggle


I'd so hope that it doesn't just become let's have everyone turn up. I want a great story to see Tennant out.
Offline
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Banter · Next Topic »