THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Fun Stuff => ENJOY => Topic started by: LookingIn on 14 Nov 2013, 04:35

Title: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 14 Nov 2013, 04:35
50th Anniversary is coming very shortly and thought it might be OK to start a discussion about the show, both classic and current editions.

There was a mini-episode released in conjunction with the 50th Anniversary episodes that surprisingly stars the 8th Doctor and a group last seen in "The Brain of Morius" and answers a couple of unanswered questions that weren't addressed yet but still leaves things open for future exploration...

edit: bad link fixed. Never try to do two things at once...especially when you are copying/pasting links. :roll:
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 14 Nov 2013, 11:43
Getting an error message for that Vid
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Azumas_Revenge on 14 Nov 2013, 11:54
Getting an error message for that Vid

Me too actually, though I've seen it several times already.

Without spoiling anything I will say that its well worth the watch.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 14 Nov 2013, 13:12
There are already two different Doctor Who threads
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 14 Nov 2013, 15:30
Yeah, but at least one is about a specific season so we might as well just have a general one.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 14 Nov 2013, 15:46
is there any reason not to just merge them all into one comprehensive thread?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 14 Nov 2013, 17:50
Getting an error message for that Vid

Sorry, fixed it now.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 14 Nov 2013, 17:51
There are already two different Doctor Who threads

Sorry, thought that was just about discussing the 12th...but if they were to be merged no big deal to me.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 14 Nov 2013, 18:19
There's no need to merge.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 15 Nov 2013, 11:10
11-23-2013 @ 14.50 !!!
                                 11-23-2013 @ 14.50 !!!
                                                                  11-23-2013 @ 14.50 !!!

11-23-2013 @ 14.50 !!!
                                 11-23-2013 @ 14.50 !!!
                                                                  11-23-2013 @ 14.50 !!!

11-23-2013 @ 14.50 !!!
                                 11-23-2013 @ 14.50 !!!
                                                                  11-23-2013 @ 14.50 !!!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 15 Nov 2013, 11:33
Wait, is it an actual thing to use periods instead of colons for time? (14.50 instead of 14:50)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 16 Nov 2013, 03:52
I always do. I have always assumed that the colons are an American thing, but actually I don't know if that's true.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 16 Nov 2013, 09:30
Colons for time and periods for money are an American thing.

GAH! The 50th anniversary is showing at a theater near where I live (they aren't showing it at very many of them where I live) and I can't wait to see it! I am stupid excited for John Hurt.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 17 Nov 2013, 06:13
Time and the punctuation thereof are irrelevant. Especially in a Dr. Who thread.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 17 Nov 2013, 12:49
I can't imagine anywhere where time would be more relevant.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 17 Nov 2013, 13:48
I can't imagine anywhere where time would be more relevant.

Wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey thing, it goes into style then gets replaced by something more complicated then gets dropped altogether when English becomes the international and interstellar standard during the First Glorious Earth Empire  :-D
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 18 Nov 2013, 03:26
Irrelevant, because impossible to follow.

http://io9.com/doctor-whos-strax-delivers-a-field-report-on-queen-eli-1466185464
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: pwhodges on 18 Nov 2013, 04:37
I always do. I have always assumed that the colons are an American thing, but actually I don't know if that's true.

I've always used colons.  I don't have my copy of the Oxford Guide to Style (aka Hart's Rules) to hand; but Oxford University's style guide (http://www.ox.ac.uk/public_affairs/services_and_resources/style_guide/numbers.html#atimes) says this (which I had no idea of):

Quote from: Oxford University Style Guide (http://www.ox.ac.uk/public_affairs/services_and_resources/style_guide/numbers.html#atimes)
use either the 12- or 24-hour clock – not both in the same text. The 12-hour clock uses a full stop between the hour and minute; the 24-hour clock uses a colon
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 18 Nov 2013, 11:04
Actually yes, that makes sense. I pretty much only use the 12 hour clock but I would, come to think of it, use a colon in the 24 hour one.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 18 Nov 2013, 20:43
The 24-hour clock isn't used much in the States (although I like it and my phone's clock uses it). Although speaking of full stop/period, I'm curious.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: pwhodges on 19 Nov 2013, 00:29
Of course not -
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 19 Nov 2013, 00:35
Now I have to post this:

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 19 Nov 2013, 00:51
ha, looks like calvin got a sister
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 21 Nov 2013, 06:42
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aaron-sagers/exclusive-tom-baker-to-ap_b_4295773.html
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ankhtahr on 23 Nov 2013, 10:06
sitting in the tram on my way to the anniversary special. I'm excited. Also note that this is the first time that I get to see an episode right at the release.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ankhtahr on 23 Nov 2013, 13:39
So fucking awesome!

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 23 Nov 2013, 13:50
So fucking awesome!

Damn, Wiki contributors will have one hell of a night.

They can rewrite how the 8th and 9th came into being now, finally put a rest some of the Time War stuff.

Quote
(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

Quote
(click to show/hide)
(click to show/hide)

Quote
(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 23 Nov 2013, 17:10
Did anyone manage to watch An Adventure in Time and Space? I heard it was pretty good.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 23 Nov 2013, 19:55
loveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditlovedit
loveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditlovedit
loveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditlovedit
loveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditlovedit
loveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditlovedit
loveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditloveditlovedit!!!!!!!

!!!!  :D  SQUWEEEE  :D  !!!!!!!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 23 Nov 2013, 22:50
^ What 'e said.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: pwhodges on 24 Nov 2013, 03:52
It was good.  I haven't followed Dr Who regularly since the hiatus (though I've watched some odd episodes) - but having watched the original broadcast of the first episode, I felt honour-bound to watch the 50th anniversary one, and I was not disappointed.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 24 Nov 2013, 08:45
Did anyone manage to watch An Adventure in Time and Space? I heard it was pretty good.

Not so bad of a movie, this would have made a great miniseries though as it sped through the years pretty fast in the second half and didn't give much emphasis on the companions' lives outside three scenes.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 24 Nov 2013, 09:28
Now that the 50th has aired the BBC released this tongue in cheek parody webisode, written, directed, and starring Peter Davidson. Not sure if this is a joke about the media's pestering of them for the last year or if it was a true way of getting the
(click to show/hide)



Whole webisode (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01m3kfy)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 25 Nov 2013, 15:56
Heading to the theater to see the special! WOO!

Edit: I loved it! Also there was a Sontaran special message about not using cell phones or recording devices and it was hilarious and I wish it would be shown before every movie ever from now on.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 26 Nov 2013, 05:59
This episode relit a fire of joyous youth in my heart, the same kind of geeked-out, childish excitement that I had when I saw Avengers Assemble the first time. Like all great, warm-hearted art, it didn't require me to have any real investment in the characters to understand the beauty and simplicity of something that just says 'look how fucking awesome it is that we have all these doctors in one place.'

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 26 Nov 2013, 09:52
I don't think it was a body double - I think it was clever CGI? I didn't notice anyway. I liked the episode  but I didn't completely understand it. Then again I never do!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 26 Nov 2013, 11:06
I think there was too much CGI at the ending.

and not enough living Doctors made an appearance.

but it was still AWESOMESAUCE!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 26 Nov 2013, 11:45
I don't think it was a body double - I think it was clever CGI? I didn't notice anyway. I liked the episode  but I didn't completely understand it. Then again I never do!

It was CGI and from clips from the show mixed together.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 26 Nov 2013, 15:14
I still don't get why Eccleston couldn't take ten thousand quid to show up for fifteen seconds. (I don't know how much they offered him or if they even asked but yeah)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 26 Nov 2013, 16:26
apparently he met with moffat and considered coming back, but decided against it.

has it ever been stated definitively why he left after only one season? i'm wondering if he might have been fired & is still pissed about it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 26 Nov 2013, 18:17
I'm pretty sure he just only wanted to do one season. He might have too busy with Thor 2 coming out. I know actors usually have to travel around a lot for promo stuff and maybe his schedule just didn't line up.

In my understanding, I thought Eccleston, while appreciative of his fans, did not want to be known for just being The Doctor. Which I completely understand, because Doctor Who is very different than anything I've ever seen him in. He's a very dramatic, serious actor and tends to play darker roles.

There are also other Doctors that are also still alive that didn't make an appearance, such as Sylvester McCoy (who might be busy with Hobbit related stuff). I would have expected to see more of them at the end during the thank yous from cast, but whatevs. I was pleased with how it ended, even if it was CGI.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 26 Nov 2013, 18:26
I still don't get why Eccleston couldn't take ten thousand quid to show up for fifteen seconds. (I don't know how much they offered him or if they even asked but yeah)

The same reason Tom Baker didn't show up in the 20th anniversary special "The Five Doctors"- he claims he has moved on from the part or something like that.

But think about it, if he really was involved the whole story would have been different. At least we know that they left it open that he could have appeared at any point if he changed his mind, but he didn't...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 26 Nov 2013, 20:35
Yeah, but you can also explain the older Doctors not appearing by "they've aged too much".
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 26 Nov 2013, 22:05
Yeah, but you can also explain the older Doctors not appearing by "they've aged too much".

No, the aging is explained in a trick they used in the past: meeting your future self ages the younger self...it was used to explain why Patrick Troughton looked much older in The Two Doctors. Plus given the storyline, they weren't really needed in the special. It might have been nice to have them appear with new voiceovers for their old footage but that is about all they could really contribute to the special without drastically altering a carefully crafted story that spanned all seven previous seasons of the show.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 27 Nov 2013, 01:16
I believe there was some bad feeling between Christopher Ecclestone and the production team of the series he was in, but I'm not sure.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 27 Nov 2013, 01:58
The gist of it from his own mouth was that he didn't enjoy the environment the actors and production staff had to put up with  (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10312426)which was an issue with the BBC more than anything.  Given that they screwed up his announcement and led to the same uncertainty about the reason for leaving that is being discussed here he was proven right in his mind.

It was the BBC's own fault for giving him a three year contract like the others, they erred on the side of caution and lost a great actor for the series in the process.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 30 Nov 2013, 16:17
I think he's going to regret that eventually.


Meanwhile, time for a musical interlude.


Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 01 Dec 2013, 21:04
wish there were events like that here in the USA.

for a fictional character...

that. is. so. Emotional.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 02 Dec 2013, 17:24
Yes


And it's not the only one


Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 02 Dec 2013, 19:17
(http://31.media.tumblr.com/9a4a6deff0578016e108062608d43e62/tumblr_mfeapbGedC1qzc0gco1_r1_500.gif)

(http://24.media.tumblr.com/e005f56fbf4fd9d612b992788aca7590/tumblr_mfeapbGedC1qzc0gco2_500.gif)

(http://24.media.tumblr.com/e75cef57bd9b9035712880683cf3b162/tumblr_mfeapbGedC1qzc0gco3_500.gif)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 03 Dec 2013, 04:14
http://www.dorkly.com/comic/56745/the-12-types-of-doctor-who-fans
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Azumas_Revenge on 03 Dec 2013, 06:08
Oh dear, I believe I'm #8...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 03 Dec 2013, 07:38
I'm a few of those (#8 amongs them) and...wait, there are people who exist who don't like Martha Jones? :psyduck:
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 03 Dec 2013, 08:14
I'm a few of those (#8 amongs them) and...wait, there are people who exist who don't like Martha Jones? :psyduck:

They are called Rose Tyler lovers, irrational people who can't see past her being the replacement to give Martha a legitimate reason for not being a good companion
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 03 Dec 2013, 09:24
I'm a few of those (#8 amongs them) and...wait, there are people who exist who don't like Martha Jones? :psyduck:
I thought she was a bit meh, actually.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 03 Dec 2013, 10:26
Are you sure you aren't thinking of Donna?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 03 Dec 2013, 10:30
Scarf?  Check.
Umbrella?  Check.
Vegetable?  Check.
Sweater vest?  Check.

yeah. I'm a Number 1.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 03 Dec 2013, 10:32
I'm numbers 3, 8, 9 and I guess sometimes 10 and 11. (11 only in the sense that I would love to hear the Doctor say "fuckwad", I know nothing of Capaldi's other work)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 03 Dec 2013, 10:42
I know he makes an appearance in the movie 'World War Z'.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: dps on 03 Dec 2013, 19:50
I guess I'm a combination of 1 and 10, mostly.

Special was great.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 03 Dec 2013, 23:56
Are you sure you aren't thinking of Donna?
Completely sure. After Rose and before Donna, Martha feels ... superfluous.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 04 Dec 2013, 00:00
wish there were events like that here in the USA.

for a fictional character...

that. is. so. Emotional.

PBS used to have them with "Evening at the Pops" but they stopped making that show...now the best you can get is "Kennedy Center Honors" but it's not the same.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 04 Dec 2013, 01:21
I'm a few of those (#8 amongs them) and...wait, there are people who exist who don't like Martha Jones? :psyduck:

They are called Rose Tyler lovers, irrational people who can't see past her being the replacement to give Martha a legitimate reason for not being a good companion

They can also be called Gareth and just think she was bland, boring, pointless and a med student who never did any medicine to anyone ever.

In other news, I never stop finding this funny:
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ankhtahr on 04 Dec 2013, 01:30
Martha was fucking great. To me she seemed to have been the only new Companion who really did some things on her own. She acted on her feelings for the doctor, she walked the earth for a full year, telling everybody about him, during the Utopia arc, and I still consider her to be my favourite Doctor Who companion.

About the link: I don't really like Moffat's style, loved David Tennant, didn't really like Matt Smith, and look forward to Capaldi.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 04 Dec 2013, 02:07
I would like Martha a hell of a lot more if she had not had 'med student' as one of her definable characteristics.

It's like wossisname's rifle. You don't show the rifle and then not use it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 04 Dec 2013, 06:45
Chekhov's gun?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 04 Dec 2013, 06:47
Chekov's gun.

Martha was just bland. Also, the whole, 'Martha falls in love with the doctor' felt like a repeat performance. It was making me look forward to Martha on Dalig Ulf stranden.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 04 Dec 2013, 07:27
Chekhov's gun?

That's the bastard.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 04 Dec 2013, 15:15
(http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/star-trek-stun-gun-bg.jpg)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 04 Dec 2013, 21:14
Does it shoot nuclear wessels?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: dps on 10 Dec 2013, 09:35
I would like Martha a hell of a lot more if she had not had 'med student' as one of her definable characteristics.

It's like wossisname's rifle. You don't show the rifle and then not use it.

Yeah, just like ClassicWho companion Mel was supposed to be a computer programmer.  Well, that should be a useful skill for a companion, but they never showed her doing anything with computers, so what was the point.  At least we occasionally got to see Rory do nurse-like stuff.

Of course, some companions haven't had any obviously useful skills.  Take Tegan--she was a stewardess.  What good is that--it's not like the Doctor is going to have her make in-flight announcements aboard the Tardis.  (Though it would have been funny if he'd kept her busy bringing him and the other companions tea and coffee.)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 10 Dec 2013, 12:41
" [...] The exits are here, here and here. In the event of boarding by animate dustbins, please do not make eye contact but proceed directly to the nearest flight of stairs."
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 10 Dec 2013, 17:18
Yeah, just like ClassicWho companion Mel was supposed to be a computer programmer.  Well, that should be a useful skill for a companion, but they never showed her doing anything with computers, so what was the point.  At least we occasionally got to see Rory do nurse-like stuff.

Of course, some companions haven't had any obviously useful skills.  Take Tegan--she was a stewardess.  What good is that--it's not like the Doctor is going to have her make in-flight announcements aboard the Tardis.  (Though it would have been funny if he'd kept her busy bringing him and the other companions tea and coffee.)

Remember the episodes that she was in from Series 3: exactly how many of them outside of the first had situations where she as a doctor would have been needed? Not many if any. She appeared in a medical capacity during the next series and in Torchwood, so the whole "the doctor who didn't practice medicine" thing is pure garbage because she did.

And the Mel thing was probably due to needing a backstory for Mel, since she was smart and had a great memory that probably seemed like a good fit at the time. It's no different than what they did with Dodo in the 60s, but unlike Dodo it wasn't a total change for the character.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 10 Dec 2013, 17:33
I still don't see why her being a doctor should have been a major part of her character.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 11 Dec 2013, 01:25
Was it? It always seemed to me that a major part of her character was that she was travelling with the doctor, despite having a career she loved. It'd be a bit odd if we didn't know what someone's previous life had involved at all.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 11 Dec 2013, 05:06
Remember the episodes that she was in from Series 3: exactly how many of them outside of the first had situations where she as a doctor would have been needed?

Which, again, makes the character trait pointless.

She appeared in a medical capacity during the next series and in Torchwood, so the whole "the doctor who didn't practice medicine" thing is pure garbage because she did.

Torchwood is a different series even if it's set in the same universe, that doesn't just give them a pass. Mork from Happy Days was a real character rather than a dream sequence in Mork and Mindy, that doesn't make him a well-written character in Happy Days.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 11 Dec 2013, 07:29
Being a doctor was simply a vehicle for explaining her presence in the hospital when they first met. If she'd been a patient she wouldn't have been able to go travelling; if she'd been a relative/friend she'd probably not have felt free to go travelling.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 11 Dec 2013, 07:35
All of this only makes sense if you consider the circumstances set in stone*. The Doctor could've met a relative of hers too and the relative could've been all 'yeah sure go with The Doctor it's an amazing adventure!'

*edit: rather than this being a show that someone wrote.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: blacksinow on 12 Dec 2013, 04:05
I "like" the idea of the show, but I also feel that it is a tad bit over rated. My favorite episodes had more to do with traveling to other worlds, then merely time travelling. Which is why Gridlock is perhaps my most favorite. Not to say it isn't a good series, but I think alot of people give it too much hype.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 13 Dec 2013, 06:43
I think even the staunchest proponents of the show will concede there are some pretty bad episodes, and that the show spends some time in the cheesy SF realm.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 13 Dec 2013, 12:29
This is true of pretty much any long-running sci-fi show. Star Trek had Spock's Brain, ST:V, and Into Darkness.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: blacksinow on 13 Dec 2013, 17:05
Well, time travel just seems to be overdone. I think that was the one thing that I actually liked about the next generation, there was always something new going on. Not like, thirty billion dalek or cybermen episodes, or borg and romulan in the case of star trek.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 13 Dec 2013, 19:02
You do have to wonder what's gonna happen with the Borg in the Abrams ST universe...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 13 Dec 2013, 21:59
i figure we're gonna see them sometime around movie 5; just as soon as all the iconography's been milked out of the original series.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: blacksinow on 14 Dec 2013, 00:04
I LIKED the Abrams star trek, it was unique and different enough to NOT be the star trek that we grew up with. Besides, Kirk never encountered the Borg, it was Jean Luc Picard who encountered the borg thanks to Q.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 14 Dec 2013, 04:23
I think even the staunchest proponents of the show will concede there are some pretty bad episodes, and that the show spends some time in the cheesy SF realm.
Love&Monsters. I'll defend anything Whovian but there's just no excuse for that abomination.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 14 Dec 2013, 04:29
I rather liked that episode. It was different to usual, certainly, but there were good reasons for that, and it is nice to have a bit of a change sometimes. You can get bored of running and yelling and emoting.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 14 Dec 2013, 04:35
One of the main characters ends up as a pavement tile.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 14 Dec 2013, 04:57
The monster was designed by an 11 year old, what were you expecting?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 14 Dec 2013, 05:39
... pavement tile!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 14 Dec 2013, 07:08
And then they make a sex joke about it


Finally watched the Day of the Doctor, and yeah it was kind of dissappointing
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: blacksinow on 14 Dec 2013, 08:04
I hated that episode about as much as I hate the episode with the little girl and the crayons.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 14 Dec 2013, 13:29
You guys care to elaborate on why that is?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 14 Dec 2013, 15:36
The episode may have stunk but it did lead to the next year's episode that featured The Weeping Angels.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: blacksinow on 14 Dec 2013, 20:23
You guys care to elaborate on why that is?

Honestly? It sounds like something that Mike Meyers would put his name on. The episode with the kid and crayons, I don't like child antagonists of any kind. They bore me to no end.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 14 Dec 2013, 23:52
And that still was better than love and monsters. I object to the whole 'girl as pavement stone' thing, mainly because I think it's an un-doctorly thing to do. The doctor makes the hard decisions. He would have realized that her life would be terrible and would have let her go. But here he did not think at all and took the cowardly way out and it ends up terrible. Also; there's very little doctor in the episode (once in a while they do a doctor-light show to give him a break in the taping schedule (Blink was another)) and the characters that are in there are terrible. And the monster is terrible.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 15 Dec 2013, 08:26
It's not so much to give him a break, it was that they were filming two episodes at the same time. Which I think is a daft thing to do, but still. I feel it's unfair to criticise a show which unashamedly targets children as part of its audience for having children as the main characters.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 15 Dec 2013, 09:09
I thought that episode was okay. Nothing spectacular but nothing wrong either.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 15 Dec 2013, 10:10
Actually I wanted to know what the issue was with Day of the Doctor...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 15 Dec 2013, 10:19
Nothing. There's nothing wrong with it.

Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 15 Dec 2013, 10:23
BK seems to disagree.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 15 Dec 2013, 10:33
... yeah, well ... there's one in every group?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 15 Dec 2013, 10:35
Well yeah, but I mean Gareth is curious (and so am I) as to why he didn't like it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 15 Dec 2013, 16:09
To quote a friend of mine:
Quote
It was overly happy and cheeky (even by the shows standards), and lacked epicness and emotional depth
I thought it was ok, but should have been better for an anniversary episode. I mean why have Billie Piper if you're never actually gonna use Rose? And the big time line changing thing they did didn't really affect anything aside from the latest Doctor
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 16 Dec 2013, 04:35
I think even the staunchest proponents of the show will concede there are some pretty bad episodes, and that the show spends some time in the cheesy SF realm.
Love&Monsters. I'll defend anything Whovian but there's just no excuse for that abomination.
That was exactly the episode I was thinking of.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 16 Dec 2013, 04:37
To quote a friend of mine:
Quote
It was overly happy and cheeky (even by the shows standards), and lacked epicness and emotional depth
I thought it was ok, but should have been better for an anniversary episode. I mean why have Billie Piper if you're never actually gonna use Rose? And the big time line changing thing they did didn't really affect anything aside from the latest Doctor
I do NOT understand the general fascination with Rose.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 16 Dec 2013, 04:39
She's the only companion the Doctor has ever admitted to loving.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 16 Dec 2013, 04:55
And she and a version of the doctor sailed off into the sunset.

I just never warmed to her I guess.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 16 Dec 2013, 04:57
She (the actress) is hot and went on to play a prostitute.

That unfortunately plays into that whole thing as well to some people.

On a more personal level I like Rose a lot more than, say, Martha, because she got the ball rolling again, Rose being the first person we focus on in rejuvenated Who. She's funny and brilliant, I love her accent and she was awesome as Bad Puppy Rose. She does the whole conscience of the doctor'-thing very well, especially in the first season as a companion to PTSD Doctor.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 16 Dec 2013, 05:06
I'm not really interested in getting into an internet discussion of levels of attractiveness of women, but Billie Piper is not my type.

I actually liked Martha more than Rose, because she was smart, opinionated, and chose to make a life for herself.

I do think we need another male companion.  In general, they've been more consistently good than the female companions.  Though not Mickey, obviously.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 16 Dec 2013, 05:10
Yeah, discussing attractiveness is not really a good discussion point. But it does matter for a large slice of the population. Tons of people didn't like Donna because she was old and stuff. Never mind that she was consistently fun and managed the dramatic bits very well, too.

Jack Harkness can sign up again at any time, as far as I'm concerned.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 16 Dec 2013, 05:47
I liked Mickey. I liked Mickey shitloads.

And I hated Donna because it was fucking Catherine Tate.

Seriously, I'm not sure Americans understand how much generally intelligent society loathes Catherine Tate. We're talking about an equivalent of 'The new companion for The Doctor is... Dane Cook!'
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 16 Dec 2013, 05:53
Yeah, Catherine Tate and her shows are annoying. But Donna was pretty good, I thought.

Jesus, her shows are awful.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 16 Dec 2013, 05:55
I liked Mickey. I liked Mickey shitloads.
Same.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 16 Dec 2013, 06:07
While it might look like I pan the earlier episodes, since I'm dissing mickey and rose, I loved Jack, and I thnk Eccleston might me my favourite of the new doctors.

The best part about Donna was that she wasn't in love with the doctor.  That was so bloody overdue.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 16 Dec 2013, 06:15
I liked Donna more than Martha more than Rose. Rose was OK. I liked Donna  because she was a much better conscious and holy cow was it refreshing that she wasn't in love with the Doctor.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: blacksinow on 16 Dec 2013, 06:42
I think that I liked Rose more for some reason, but the Doctor droning on about her for countless episodes after her leaving I could've done without.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 16 Dec 2013, 07:25
That was good, though. It showed that stuff matters. That change happens and it matters and that if you're almost eternal that it hurts.

I really didn't like Martha being in love with the doc, too. It felt a bit much, post-Rose.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 16 Dec 2013, 07:30
Seriously, I'm not sure Americans understand how much generally intelligent society loathes Catherine Tate. We're talking about an equivalent of 'The new companion for The Doctor is... Dane Cook!'

Gareth, you don't speak for me - and it may be arrogant but I consider myself to be part of generally intelligent society. I think Catherine Tate's comedy work is pretty funny and fairly insightful, and she's an excellent actress. I really liked Donna as well.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: blacksinow on 16 Dec 2013, 07:58
I actually used Donna as an example of a "red-headed moment" once to a friend.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 16 Dec 2013, 08:05
... what is a red-headed moment?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 16 Dec 2013, 08:07
To quote a friend of mine:
Quote
It was overly happy and cheeky (even by the shows standards), and lacked epicness and emotional depth
I thought it was ok, but should have been better for an anniversary episode. I mean why have Billie Piper if you're never actually gonna use Rose? And the big time line changing thing they did didn't really affect anything aside from the latest Doctor
I do NOT understand the general fascination with Rose.

I don't like Rose, her long run on the Doctor wore me out with her. I just thought it was odd that they brought back Billie Piper to play someone that was just using her image, especially when 11 knew Bad Wolf. For me Donna and Martha were way better than Rose
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 16 Dec 2013, 08:16
Seriously, I'm not sure Americans understand how much generally intelligent society loathes Catherine Tate. We're talking about an equivalent of 'The new companion for The Doctor is... Dane Cook!'

Gareth, you don't speak for me - and it may be arrogant but I consider myself to be part of generally intelligent society. I think Catherine Tate's comedy work is pretty funny and fairly insightful, and she's an excellent actress. I really liked Donna as well.

Okay, I was obviously stereotyping, and I apologise for any offence - it was based on my own prejudices, namely that I've only ever met idiots that liked her, but you aren't an idiot, and you like her, so I withdraw what I said.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 16 Dec 2013, 09:11
One of the things I like about her is that she's funny without always being crude (I know she often is crude, but in those situations she's usually funny AND crude, rather than crude as a shortcut to humour). Did you see the Red Nose Day special with David Tennant, where the schoolgirl character starts reciting Shakespeare at Tennant's teacher character who has made an assumption based on a stereotype? I thought it was witty, incisive and hilarious. Obviously your mileage may vary but it strikes me as being more intellectual than a lot of comedy, which is normally based on upholding stereotypes rather than challenging them.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 16 Dec 2013, 09:36

It's worth repeating and there is that YouTube embedding thing so ...



... and two more.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 16 Dec 2013, 09:43
I am useless at finding stuff, I can't ever remember names or anything - so thank you for finding it for me!

I'm also a big fan of the French episode too.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: blacksinow on 16 Dec 2013, 10:13
... what is a red-headed moment?

A momentary and intense display of irrationality, bad temper, insanity, or any combination thereof.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 16 Dec 2013, 10:27
Huh. Might that be upsetting to redheads?

French episode? The Girl in the Fireplace?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 16 Dec 2013, 10:28
And don't forget some of the best parts of Donna's run

(http://24.media.tumblr.com/77785529034a3c4365363a176f7c53b7/tumblr_mxqtzcSQ2R1rj7z7ro2_250.gif) (http://25.media.tumblr.com/29fa9862acc171b080c661fb61b67ec6/tumblr_mxqtzcSQ2R1rj7z7ro4_r1_250.gif)

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/a44b2b6e9ad0f1f2fbdd95dcc62d32ae/tumblr_mxqtzcSQ2R1rj7z7ro1_r1_250.gif) (http://31.media.tumblr.com/19f95ae10ecaaedab44da58e4ab39da9/tumblr_mxqtzcSQ2R1rj7z7ro3_r1_250.gif)


(https://31.media.tumblr.com/c0741a4a6c0e3b88fbbfee3ac8edad85/tumblr_mxpqly1Bxp1r5efcdo1_r1_400.gif)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: blacksinow on 16 Dec 2013, 10:35
Huh. Might that be upsetting to redheads?

French episode? The Girl in the Fireplace?

I've known a few redheaded people and this seems to be fairly common. I imagine this is one of the reasons that gingers get so much "attention" from people in general. But I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 16 Dec 2013, 11:19
By French episode I meant of the Lauren Cooper stuff, not Doctor Who.

Blacksinow, replace the word "gingers" with "blacks" and you'll see why your statement is offensive. The colour of your hair (like the colour of your skin) doesn't have any bearing on your personality.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: blacksinow on 16 Dec 2013, 11:32
Actually, I've heard that there are specific genes that are common with different haircolors. I've heard different things about genetics, so I wouldn't be shocked if there were common characteristics that did effect mood swings in red-haired people.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 16 Dec 2013, 11:40
I'm not all that interested in the category of things that surprise you.  If you're going to sling around characteristic traits that may be held by people who read here, or their friends or family, you'd better bring documented, scientific genetic proof or correlation.

In other words, you were told what you said is offensive, and rather than apologize you generalized.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: blacksinow on 16 Dec 2013, 11:42
It isn't any different then a blonde moment.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 16 Dec 2013, 11:45
No, you're right, that is another phrase which makes an offensive generalisation about people based on their physical appearance.

You've been on this forum for long enough to have realised by now that offensive generalisations are against the rules; equally, it's advisable not to make statements based on science you don't understand.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: blacksinow on 16 Dec 2013, 11:52
No, you're right, that is another phrase which makes an offensive generalisation about people based on their physical appearance.

You've been on this forum for long enough to have realised by now that offensive generalisations are against the rules; equally, it's advisable not to make statements based on science you don't understand.

How is it any different then people saying they were born gay?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 16 Dec 2013, 11:53
... I honestly have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: blacksinow on 16 Dec 2013, 11:55
You've NEVER heard someone mention that they were born gay? You watch television don't you?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 16 Dec 2013, 11:57
Of course I've heard people say that. I just haven't got a clue why you think it's relevant to the fact that saying that red-headed people are irrational, bad tempered, or insane is offensive.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 16 Dec 2013, 11:57
No, you're right, that is another phrase which makes an offensive generalisation about people based on their physical appearance.

You've been on this forum for long enough to have realised by now that offensive generalisations are against the rules; equally, it's advisable not to make statements based on science you don't understand.

How is it any different then people saying they were born gay?

Told being offensive twice, argued without apology.

This is going well, isn't it?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: blacksinow on 16 Dec 2013, 12:00
Ofcourse I won't apologize. The whole argument is stupid and petty. I don't throw a fit everytime someone makes a generalization about the visually impaired.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 16 Dec 2013, 12:02
Whether or not you do, this forum has rules and you keep breaking them.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: blacksinow on 16 Dec 2013, 12:13
Scienfically, there is evidence to support the idea that your personality CAN be effected by genetics. You are having a redheaded moment, that's all.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 16 Dec 2013, 12:18
Where is this evidence? I haven't come across - please cite your sources so that we can all read it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 16 Dec 2013, 12:26
You are having a redheaded moment, that's all.

'Hoo boy, I am done attempting sane arguments with you.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 16 Dec 2013, 12:30
Moderator Comment @ blacksinowWhile we encourage debate here, there comes a point where your argument can wander into offensive and unacceptable behavior and, in some cases, can be considered Trolling. You are reminded that, while we are a tolerant bunch here, there are some lines that cannot be crossed.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 16 Dec 2013, 13:06
Ofcourse I won't apologize. The whole argument is stupid and petty. I don't throw a fit everytime someone makes a generalization about the visually impaired.

Global Moderator Comment The moderators would stop that too. Back down.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 16 Dec 2013, 13:27
Some people just want to watch the world burn.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 16 Dec 2013, 13:33
Some people just want to watch the world burn.

Some people do it without a choice, unless presented with an oddly brilliant choice from his/her future selves that coincidentally also leads to saving millions of lives in the present  :-D
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 16 Dec 2013, 13:37
Stand back people, we just landed back on topic!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 16 Dec 2013, 13:48
If you could choose to be the Doctor's companion for one episode (one that has already aired, although you wouldn't have to be the companion that was in that episode), which one would it be and why?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 16 Dec 2013, 14:32
Thoughts:

In terms of meeting historic personages, The Unicorn and the Wasp
In terms of stellar travel/location, Smith and Jones
In terms of meeting fictional future characters, The Waters of Mars

EDIT:  Having said all that though, I think I'd choose The Impossible Astronaut/Day of the Moon.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 16 Dec 2013, 14:55
Oh, yeah, Lauren Cooper. I forgot she was called that. Possibly to do with my hair colour.

Shouldn't have said that.

Anyway ... To be a companion for one episode ... Day of the doctor is epic but you're not doing much ... Bad wolf rose? You get to kick dalek arse ... The pandorica opens?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 16 Dec 2013, 15:20
Has the Doctor ever met Jane Austen yet? I know I said episodes that have actually happened, but I'm breaking my own rules now :P I'd LOVE to be the companion for that encounter.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 16 Dec 2013, 15:26

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frostfire

Try again. Yes, doc met Austen. In a big finish audio thing.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 16 Dec 2013, 15:41
I don't get it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 18 Dec 2013, 18:33
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/8ae844f8db01582f8f44798d93e284c1/tumblr_mxwxcdctqe1qz4dtlo1_500.gif)

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/e23e64e4448fa04021211306c137792e/tumblr_mxwxcdctqe1qz4dtlo2_500.gif)

(http://24.media.tumblr.com/1099e3b8facbd118b5ebcc0aeedac0ba/tumblr_mxwxcdctqe1qz4dtlo3_500.gif)

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/cb969886144e88cd51d879509b70e363/tumblr_mxwxcdctqe1qz4dtlo4_500.gif)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 18 Dec 2013, 21:55
HA!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 18 Dec 2013, 21:57
THAT IS THE BEST THING EVER
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 20 Dec 2013, 18:44
AWESOME!!!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: dps on 22 Dec 2013, 22:16


And I hated Donna because it was fucking Catherine Tate.

Seriously, I'm not sure Americans understand how much generally intelligent society loathes Catherine Tate. We're talking about an equivalent of 'The new companion for The Doctor is... Dane Cook!'

As an American, I'm sure that I don't understand how Brits, intelligent or otherwise, fell about Catherine Tate.  If I did, though, what would it matter?  If a new companion is a well-writen character, and the person playing the role does a good job with it, why should I let the fact that I hadn't liked the performer's prior work keep me form liking their work on Doctor Who?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 23 Dec 2013, 02:51
Oh if they do a good job their previous work becomes irrelevant of course, but I can't even stand the voice she used because I was already sick of it. It's not her real speaking voice.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 23 Dec 2013, 04:00

Have a Buzzcocks with Tennant and Tate. That's what she sounds like. And that's how little she knows about the show she starred in.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 23 Dec 2013, 15:11
FYI

Get an 'Embedding Disabled By Request' on that one Beo.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 23 Dec 2013, 16:25
Well, fuckles. I get to see it ... hmmm ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTFaCw9KvcA

Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 23 Dec 2013, 20:13
Meh, still liked her better than Rose.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 25 Dec 2013, 14:19
So, that happened ...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 25 Dec 2013, 18:38
Yes, it most certainly did.  :'(
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 25 Dec 2013, 19:47
The crack sealed up, but is it really gone? Moffat wouldn't link the crack and the return of the planet without using it again especially since the new guy will have his own ideas for Series 9.

Of the regenerations, this one has to be the most interesting since it's the third that was forced on him but the first that was forced by choice.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 25 Dec 2013, 19:51
I'm not really sure what you mean by that.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 26 Dec 2013, 08:17
Clara is a bit sexy, I gotta say.

I cannot wait to see what Capaldi does with his Doctor. I'm hooked into the show for the first time since Rose left.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 26 Dec 2013, 12:57
"Do you know how to fly this thing??"

THAT'S an interesting start for the new Doctor.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 26 Dec 2013, 14:34
I'm just going to post again that Clara is sexy, because... Clara is sexy.

Yes I found that interesting. I also enjoyed that Capaldi has lost none of his Tuckeresque nightmarish intensity stare.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 26 Dec 2013, 15:08
Would not kick her out of my bed.

Mostly because if she's there, I'm sure she's sleepy and I wouldn't want to be rude. Still ... Bit fit.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 26 Dec 2013, 15:19
She's sexydorable. A word I invented a long time ago.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 26 Dec 2013, 15:23
My girlfriend hates her. Tooclever by half and too mysterious, last season.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 26 Dec 2013, 15:24
I dispute that it's possible to be "too clever".
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 26 Dec 2013, 15:37
I guess she meant in relation to the doctor ... But, yeah ...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 26 Dec 2013, 15:55
That's probably why she works better with Matt Smith than she would have with Tennant (aka "Clever Doctor")
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 26 Dec 2013, 16:07
And there is part of what pissed me off about Tennant's Doctor.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 26 Dec 2013, 16:34
The doctor will always be the cleverest person in the room. How is that annoying?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 26 Dec 2013, 16:35
Because Tennant's Doctor was very aware of being the most clever person in the room. That's why I call him "Clever Doctor".
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 26 Dec 2013, 16:39

Please find enclosed, Charlie Brooker's point about David Tennant's Doctor that I agree with entirely.

Ecclestone was dark, angry and cynical and when something broke through his shell, like in the WWII episode, he had a childlike wonder that he clearly felt he'd lost.

Smith's Doctor was so ridiculously youthful looking that he often SEEMED immature, not in an irritating fashion (although I did sometimes find him irritating in general) and I felt like he was always learning about things, constantly discovering new aspects to the universe.

Tennant, though, was just... 'oh it's one of these, they still work by pressing this button? *beep*'
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 26 Dec 2013, 17:02
One of Tennants best bits was the whole blood control thing from his first ever episode.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 26 Dec 2013, 17:10
In fairness, I am expressing opinions about something I've not seen in seven years.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 26 Dec 2013, 17:12
I enjoyed Tennant's Doctor enough, but to be fair I sped through those, and Matt Smith was Doctor when I caught up.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 26 Dec 2013, 18:33
I'm not really sure what you mean by that.

Moffat is leaving the show after series 8, the new producer will have his or her own ideas about the storylines, new characters, and new situations just as Moffat had his own storylines, characters, and situations that are vastly different from Russel T. Davies'.

So bringing back the crack and linking it to the Time Lords and to the fact that they are missing and not destroyed he links loose ends together allowing the next producer to have a clean slate as he did. This was done previously with "The End of Time" special when RTD ended his run, tying up all his loose ends in the closing minutes before the regeneration.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 26 Dec 2013, 18:41
Wait, he announced that he's leaving? Has series 8 even started yet? I wonder why he's going.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 26 Dec 2013, 18:52
Wait, he announced that he's leaving? Has series 8 even started yet? I wonder why he's going.

He won't admit anything, but he is only signed on through the next series and with the loss of Smith he now has to totally redo his work to incorporate Capaldi's Doctor. He has also stated repeatedly that the show is tiring for him...so it hasn't been confirmed but things are adding up to him leaving.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 26 Dec 2013, 18:53
Oh, well you said "after series 8" which is specific enough to sound like it was confirmed. And wait, was replacing Matt Smith not Moffat's idea?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 27 Dec 2013, 01:07
I'm not really sure what you mean by that.

Moffat is leaving the show after series 8, the new producer will have his or her own ideas about the storylines, new characters, and new situations just as Moffat had his own storylines, characters, and situations that are vastly different from Russel T. Davies'.

So bringing back the crack and linking it to the Time Lords and to the fact that they are missing and not destroyed he links loose ends together allowing the next producer to have a clean slate as he did. This was done previously with "The End of Time" special when RTD ended his run, tying up all his loose ends in the closing minutes before the regeneration.
Of course, the whole River Song thing, which started under RTD and with 10ant as the doctor only got concluded two days ago. The time war got the once over in the fiftieth anniversery special. So, you know, loose ends were not very well wrapped up by RTD.

I just have to wonder how far ahead they're planning.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 27 Dec 2013, 01:50
Surely not 50 years from now...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 27 Dec 2013, 04:41
Oh, well you said "after series 8" which is specific enough to sound like it was confirmed. And wait, was replacing Matt Smith not Moffat's idea?

I'm pretty sure it's almost always the doctor actor himself who decides to leave. Exception would probably be McGann and he'd not played the part for nine years anyway.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 27 Dec 2013, 04:45
Colin Baker, perhaps, too?

Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 27 Dec 2013, 04:56
Wait, Matt Smith wanted to leave? The bastard!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 27 Dec 2013, 05:53
Probably a heavy workload, or something, that three years seems to be about the limit for every doctor.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 30 Dec 2013, 13:03
From I09's The Biggest Mistakes, Blunders and Bad Ideas of 2013 (http://io9.com/the-biggest-mistakes-blunders-and-bad-ideas-of-2013-1491643340):

Quote
Very few pop culture characters manage to make it to the esteemed 50-year mark, and even fewer series. So the fact that Doctor Who had been around for (most of) the last half-century was a major cause for celebration. But what do we get? A mere eight episodes, a 90-minute 50th anniversary special that was mostly just David Tennant and Matt Smith palling around, and the docudrama about the creation of Doctor Who, An Adventure in Time and Space. Surely there was more that could have (and should have) been done to celebrate this iconic character. More episodes. A (much) bigger special — maybe one that aired over several nights. Maybe they could have used actor David Bradley (who played the actor William Hartnell in the docudrama) to play the First Doctor in the special, to tie Doctor Who's past and present together. And again, more episodes. The sad part is the most exciting Doctor Who product of the year was the 8-minute minisode featuring the return of Paul McGann's Eighth Doctor. That's not right.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 30 Dec 2013, 16:01
Different strokes for different folks. And some people are just never happy with anything.

Saying that I didn't much care for Time of the Doctor.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 31 Dec 2013, 14:45
That reads a LOT like "people should do more work that I don't have to pay for".
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 01 Jan 2014, 17:03
? I don't know about you, but I do pay for my Cable TV.
ergo..
I AM paying for it, and I wanted MOAR of it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 01 Jan 2014, 17:18
Yeah, what? I don't get that post either.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 02 Jan 2014, 17:13
I saw the special and it was a little long. By the end my girlfriend and I screamed, "REGENERATE ALREADY!"
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 02 Jan 2014, 17:15
Really? I thought they waited too long to regenerate but only because, well...there wasn't any time with the new Doctor. I forget, is that what they did last time?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 02 Jan 2014, 17:22
Really? I thought they waited too long to regenerate but only because, well...there wasn't any time with the new Doctor. I forget, is that what they did last time?

It's common, the new doctor only gets a couple of seconds at the very end and that's it. Only two times has it been done differently, Baker into Pemberton done without Baker at the start of "Time and the Rani" and Pemberton into McGann during the TV movie were done at the start.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 03 Jan 2014, 01:19
Pemberton?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 03 Jan 2014, 09:25
Pemberton?

Sylvester Pemberton, the 7th Doctor.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 03 Jan 2014, 11:43
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvester_Pemberton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvester_mccoy

There's a difference.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 03 Jan 2014, 12:00
Or is there?

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 03 Jan 2014, 13:59
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvester_Pemberton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvester_mccoy

There's a difference.


Well at least I got the first name right  :-o :-D
...I am sorry, I was posting in the Man of Steel thread about Green Lantern, was checking out the continuity of the character and others, and just watched an episode of "Batman: The Brave and the Bold" featuring his teammates so it must have snuck in there...oops!  DC Comics overload!!! :psyduck: :-D
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 04 Jan 2014, 07:55
McCoy was a great doc, though. they had plans for him but unfortunately, Dr. Who went on hiatus.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 04 Jan 2014, 09:43
McCoy was a great doc, though. they had plans for him but unfortunately, Dr. Who went on hiatus.

I am glad that one aspect would come to fruition: he regenerates by being driven insane.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 05 Jan 2014, 16:54
Doctor Who is a BBC show. The BBC is not, to my knowledge, funded by American cable TV subscriptions. It's paid for by British television licences, I think, and maybe government funding? At any rate, not by you, Grognard. Sorry.

I am assuming that I09 is an American website, as that article has a very American tone to it. 8 episode-series are not unusual in the UK, and massive huge hoopla about anniversaries doesn't really happen here. There was not a lot more done for the 50th anniversary of Coronation Street, which is the world's longest-running TV soap opera. Admittedly you can't seem to get away from Strictly Come Dancing when that's on, there are all kinds of side-shows and "documentaries" and interviews and catch-ups but that's not an anniversary special, simply a lucrative brand being milked.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: pwhodges on 05 Jan 2014, 23:35
The BBC is [...] paid for by British television licences, I think, and maybe government funding?

No government funding, except for specifically overseas services which get funding from the Foreign Office.  The World Service has a government grant which will be finally withdrawn from April this year, at which time it will be funded entirely from licence fee income.

Programs are also sold to foreign broadcasters; and to the extent that the sales can be predicted, those sales may be said to contribute to the program funding - so US cable companies may be seen as contributing to the funding of Dr Who to that extent.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 06 Jan 2014, 01:17
Actually an eight episode series is if anything, quite long by British standards. Stuff generally runs for six.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 06 Jan 2014, 03:46
Thanks Paul! I wasn't sure about government funding. I guess it's one of those myths that it's tax-payers who foot the bill.

Even if cable viewers are contributing huge amounts (which I doubt they are - it'll be a tiny fraction of what is paid in cable fees, since it's just one show) I still don't think it's a ground for demanding more from the BBC. Doctor Who is a British show with a BBC character to it, and that's one of the things I love about it. When Torchwood teamed up with an American company, the show changed completely and just wasn't as good because they were trying to cater to two audiences at once and it didn't work.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: pwhodges on 06 Jan 2014, 04:03
Some people view the licence fee as a "tax" on TV viewing, as it is required to be paid for any viewing, whether of the BBC or not (specifically, for operating TV viewing equipment).  However, it does go directly to the BBC (from the collecting agency) without going through government coffers, so they get the exact amount paid (less a minimal collection fee, I believe); but the government determines how big the fee is (for five years at a time, I think, so budgeting is not so hard).

When I was young, there was a radio licence (http://www.radiolicence.org.uk/) as well, for people without a TV!  At one time you needed a separate radio licence for a car radio as well.

(later) I discover from that link that from 1957 to 1963 there was an additional "duty" of Ł1 added to TV (not radio) licences, which was a tax on the licence that went to the government.  No such tax has been applied since then.  Note also that to this day there is a much cheaper licence for receiving in B/W only.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 06 Jan 2014, 04:46
I discovered at university that some other channels actually get TV Licence funding as well granted to them, including Channel 4 and ITV.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 06 Jan 2014, 05:19
My impression was that all the "terrestrial" TV channels (I don't know if that's the right term any more, since the digital switchover, if indeed it ever was) get licence funding and none of the satellite ones do.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: pwhodges on 06 Jan 2014, 06:24
The licence money is paid to the BBC alone.  No other broadcaster gets a penny from it.

The licence fee must be paid in order to watch any live TV service from any broadcaster by any synchronous means.  If you watch over the Internet, you need a licence for watching in real time, but not for watching solely via catchup services such as iPlayer.

People easily get confused because of the difference between the first statement relating to the BBC only and the second relating to all broadcasters.  Also, the BBC paid (http://www.theguardian.com/media/2006/apr/25/citynews.broadcasting1) Channel 4's (but only their's) share of the costs of changing transmitters as part of the digital change-over, which was sometimes stated in terms of Channel 4 getting licence fee money; this did not translate into a continuing commitment or affect program funding.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 06 Jan 2014, 06:52
I assume all that government/license money goes to maintaining the fleets of old cars you see in Downton, Poirot, Marple, DW.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 06 Jan 2014, 11:52
The BBC is [...] paid for by British television licences, I think, and maybe government funding?

No government funding, except for specifically overseas services which get funding from the Foreign Office.  The World Service has a government grant which will be finally withdrawn from April this year, at which time it will be funded entirely from licence fee income.

Programs are also sold to foreign broadcasters; and to the extent that the sales can be predicted, those sales may be said to contribute to the program funding - so US cable companies may be seen as contributing to the funding of Dr Who to that extent.

New Doctor Who is only shown on BBC America, there isn't any sales involved since the BBC co-owns the network with Discovery Communications. They might be getting some money from the sales to PBS stations(the US's version of the BBC) but this is a small amount and not nationwide showings only small single station showings.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 06 Jan 2014, 12:04
Thanks Paul! I wasn't sure about government funding. I guess it's one of those myths that it's tax-payers who foot the bill.

Even if cable viewers are contributing huge amounts (which I doubt they are - it'll be a tiny fraction of what is paid in cable fees, since it's just one show) I still don't think it's a ground for demanding more from the BBC. Doctor Who is a British show with a BBC character to it, and that's one of the things I love about it. When Torchwood teamed up with an American company, the show changed completely and just wasn't as good because they were trying to cater to two audiences at once and it didn't work.

It could be that the person is referring to BBC America which has been showing Doctor Who, Torchwood, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Kitchen Nightmares(US and UK versions), and Top Gear over and over again...we don't get too much new stuff on that channel- Luther, Law & Order, Atlantis, Broadchurch, and Graham Norton in addition to Doctor Who. Everything else sent over here is sent to PBS and I highly doubt the blog writer watches that network and even if so probably only just for Sherlock.

edit- left out a key word that makes it sound less like an insult to the quoted poster...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 07 Jan 2014, 03:43
[...]When Torchwood teamed up with an American company, the show changed completely and just wasn't as good because they were trying to cater to two audiences at once and it didn't work.
On Torchwood: who else thought that Children of Earth was the most vile piece of TV ever?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 15 Jan 2014, 09:18
http://io9.com/peter-capaldi-rides-a-horse-in-his-pajamas-on-the-set-o-1500629499
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 15 Jan 2014, 09:45
Hehe awesome. Have we ever seen the Doctor on a horse before?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: K1dmor on 15 Jan 2014, 13:27
Hehe awesome. Have we ever seen the Doctor on a horse before?

 Yes, we did:

 
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 15 Jan 2014, 13:33
Hehe awesome. Have we ever seen the Doctor on a horse before?

Most recent: 50th special, when Tennant and Elizabeth I come out of the Tardis.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 16 Jan 2014, 09:38
Oh duh, of course. I liked both those episodes, how did I forget them?!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 27 Jan 2014, 11:01
Quote
Drum roll please – here's the first official photo of Peter Capaldi in his Twelfth Doctor costume! What do you think?

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/1176385_810531222294240_1619617419_n.png)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 27 Jan 2014, 11:07
Like.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 27 Jan 2014, 11:19
He looks pretty fucking badass. Low key, but I love it. The outfit doesn't sell him, he sells the outfit.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: LookingIn on 27 Jan 2014, 11:55
Classy yet sophisticated, hopefully they won't use color changes to show where in time they are like the last two doctors.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 29 Jan 2014, 07:14
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/50cdf3b8ef5e5b03ddbf61d3077a8eea/tumblr_n02wnkUShE1s7iucpo1_1280.png)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 29 Jan 2014, 07:38
He would kick Tuxedo Mask's ass, BK.

I like it. He's still got a little bit of the vibe of the past two doctor's outfits (suits with longer jackets), but he is a little classier and rocks it very well.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 03 Feb 2014, 05:40
Been watching some of the classic Who on Canadian netflix.  The special effects are pretty whoa bad.

Also Tom Baker is <3
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 17 Feb 2014, 07:59
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/9f6850b35ee125fc416f8c6ecbc33a25/tumblr_n11vwqew1T1rmqnb5o10_1280.jpg) (http://www.buzzfeed.com/newu456/what-if-doctor-who-was-american-5pxx)
What if Doctor Who was an American show
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 17 Feb 2014, 11:45
How the hell was Nathan Fillion not the Ninth Doctor?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Zebediah on 17 Feb 2014, 15:27
I asked the same question. And then realized that the answer was that Fillion would be Jack Harkness.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 17 Feb 2014, 17:49
YES. That would be the best and only answer.

Also I would watch the shit out of the first four doctors, Sam Rockwell, and Bryan Cranston. I am not very familiar with Donald Glover and while I like the other actors, I think the first four would be wonderful. Particularly Gene Wilder because Gene Wilder.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 17 Feb 2014, 18:47
If Gene Wilder had been the Doctor, I would be a certified Whovian.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Socky on 18 Feb 2014, 16:11
Out of curiosity does anyone listen to the 8th Doctor big finish audio dramas? Ive been slowly working my way through them, I just got up to Time of the Daleks, and I gotta say McGann is becoming one of my favourite Doctors. He's really just nails it.

Some of the stories are hit and miss but they're still fun, a bit cheesey and at times pretty dark, but I recommend checking them out. Unfortunately they're pretty pricey :/
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 18 Feb 2014, 16:52
You could probably find them on YouTube.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 18 Feb 2014, 19:45
so who gets to be john hurt?



I asked the same question. And then realized that the answer was that Fillion would be Jack Harkness.
but he would have to affect a fake british accent
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 19 Feb 2014, 05:37
Link had Harrison Ford.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 21 Feb 2014, 06:15
J, make Harkness Canadian and we're set.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 15 Mar 2014, 09:09
The Doctors as Dogs (The Dogtor? :claireface:) (http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/15/doctor-who-from-tom-baker-as-a-flandoodle-to-david-tennant-as-a-long-haired-chihuahua-all-12-time-lords-and-the-war-doctor-as-dogs-4571926/)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 15 Mar 2014, 10:02
Wonderful!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 15 Mar 2014, 12:58
Yeah, though Hurt and Eccleston are technically out of sequence.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 15 Mar 2014, 13:08
Yeah, I noticed that as well, but as far as mistakes go, could be much worse.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 15 Mar 2014, 15:36
Capaldi. An irish wolfshound.

Away tha fuck.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 15 Mar 2014, 16:39
I think it's based more on appearance than nationality.  :-P And quite accurate, I think!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 15 Mar 2014, 19:49
"Away tha fuck"? I get your objection, but your wording confuses me.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 26 Apr 2014, 05:21
Quote
Christopher Eccleston on the relationship between the Doctor and his companions
(http://37.media.tumblr.com/2810b5796342152fb190a3a2060e556f/tumblr_mgvjiqBITq1rttybko1_250.gif) (http://31.media.tumblr.com/e8dc8dc2a5076067c3e003a6e9c32747/tumblr_mgvjiqBITq1rttybko2_250.gif)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 26 Apr 2014, 06:35
A thought:

A Time Lord's regeneration may have a limit of twelve cycles. The Doctor was given an extra one, and has regenerated 13 times. What happens next?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Neko_Ali on 26 Apr 2014, 07:19
The implication is that he wasn't given another regeneration, but rather an entire new regeneration cycle. So, another 12 Doctors after Peter Capaldi.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 26 Apr 2014, 08:26
Another 50 years!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 28 Apr 2014, 00:32
http://doctorwho.tumblr.com/post/82343796341/a-poem-from-the-doctor (http://doctorwho.tumblr.com/post/82343796341/a-poem-from-the-doctor)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Detachable Felix on 28 Apr 2014, 00:59
Quote from:  First Doctor
No.
bahahahah
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 28 Apr 2014, 10:32
You know that sinking feeling you get when you start to become a fan of something and realise there's too much history to easily catch up on? Yeah, that.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 28 Apr 2014, 11:40
Ignore old school DW for now?  Every doctor is pretty much their own series, you really don't need to know previous doctors backstories to jump in...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 28 Apr 2014, 11:43
I ignore anything pre-Ecclestone, because fuck it, there's loads, and a good portion of it is terrible.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 28 Apr 2014, 12:50
Loads of it is hi-la-ri-ous though.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 28 Apr 2014, 13:25
Ignore old school DW for now?  Every doctor is pretty much their own series, you really don't need to know previous doctors backstories to jump in...

I would, but I have a tendency to prefer - by a lot - watching all of a series from the beginning. Someone at college once bought me season 2 of The Big Bang Theory (Apparently, I'm Sheldon. Make of that what you will.) and wrote along the top "Can't we pretend it's the first?".
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Detachable Felix on 28 Apr 2014, 13:34
You could start at Eccleston as the beginning of the "modern era", but it would take you a *very* long time to get caught up on the older series. Watch a handful of each if you must. Ones that introduce recurring characters/enemies maybe.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 03 May 2014, 06:38
It's really two different series - the old and the new. The new makes use of the old, but the feel is entirely different.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: dps on 29 May 2014, 18:05
It's really two different series - the old and the new. The new makes use of the old, but the feel is entirely different.

In some ways it's probably more that two.  For example, the Pertwee years in many ways have quite a different "feel" than what came before and later.  And heck, even beyond that, there are plenty of tonal shifts within seasons, in both Classic and New Who.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 27 Jul 2014, 12:14
I'm rewatching some of the New Who because it's on Netflix, the first six seasons. I am increasingly reminded how much I loved Ecclestone's Doctor and didn't much care for Tennant's.

Also, the early series of this show are loaded with gay jokes. But then, Russel T. Davies wrote it, so that kinda figures.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Detachable Felix on 27 Jul 2014, 14:50
I always loved Ecclestone's doctor more, it's such a pity he kinda snubbed the show after his regeneration. He brought the series back in such a big way.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 27 Jul 2014, 14:57
He compared working on the show to eating a river of shit.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 27 Jul 2014, 14:59
I'm rewatching some of the New Who because it's on Netflix, the first six seasons. I am increasingly reminded how much I loved Ecclestone's Doctor and didn't much care for Tennant's.

Also, the early series of this show are loaded with gay jokes. But then, Russel T. Davies wrote it, so that kinda figures.
"Does he still have that rubbish beard?

No, well, a wife."
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 27 Jul 2014, 15:07
He compared working on the show to eating a river of shit.

Which only goes to show what a twat he can be occasionally.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: GarandMarine on 27 Jul 2014, 15:19
Tennant remains the Doctor who got me into this whole mess... looking forward to the new season's premier.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Detachable Felix on 27 Jul 2014, 16:08
I'm concerned that I won't be able to see Capaldi's Doctor as anything other than Malcolm Tucker. ( though if he acted like that in Who, it would certainly liven things up)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 27 Jul 2014, 19:45
He compared working on the show to eating a river of shit.

Which only goes to show what a twat he can be occasionally.

I thought it wasn't because of his attitude, but it was because of how he was treated. I keep hearing different things, but I don't think he left the show in the best manner and I don't think it was entirely his fault, which is why he chose not to be in the special.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 05 Aug 2014, 17:32
Brian Blessed was almost the 2nd Doctor (http://io9.com/this-insane-screaming-hawk-man-was-almost-doctor-who-1616564555)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 05 Aug 2014, 20:13
that..
would have been interesting.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 05 Aug 2014, 21:34
Brian Blessed was almost the 2nd Doctor (http://io9.com/this-insane-screaming-hawk-man-was-almost-doctor-who-1616564555)
Isn't it supposed to be BRIAN BLESSED?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 05 Aug 2014, 22:29
That fucking headline.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 06 Aug 2014, 01:23
I've now reached the back end of season 3 of New Who during my accidental rewatching campaign, and I forgot how much better it gets at the end. The episode 42 is properly unnerving, the Family of Blood two-parter has some... issues but is extremely emotional, Blink is flat out one of the best episodes of any TV show I've ever seen and the three parter with The Master... Jon Simm is the fucking man.

Martha's still boring and annoying though!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 06 Aug 2014, 02:14
... hot, though.

But, yeah, after Rose, she gets the short end of the story stick.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 06 Aug 2014, 02:32
I wholeheartedly agree on both counts.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 06 Aug 2014, 03:51
Agree.  Blink is stellar, and Martha was underutilized.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 06 Aug 2014, 14:48
I still liked her as a character.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 06 Aug 2014, 16:10
Brian Blessed was almost the 2nd Doctor (http://io9.com/this-insane-screaming-hawk-man-was-almost-doctor-who-1616564555)
Isn't it supposed to be BRIAN BLESSED?


He'dve probably punched out a Cyberman.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 06 Aug 2014, 21:03
Just one?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 06 Aug 2014, 21:21
I must say, if he had taken the role, he'd probably have been able to overtake Tom Baker as my personal favourite doctor.  And no, I'm not being a hipster here, preferring the old Who to the new one, but I really think that RTD's shitty writing helped hurt the new series in my mind.  I know he's long gone, and there were some good eps during his run, but even now, it seems rather hit and miss for me, especially since each series is trying to out-do the one before it in over-the-topness (sic).  I think the serial format suited the show a lot better, since there was enough screen time to tell the story, and didn't have to end with something potentially earth-shattering (perhaps literally) nasty that had been building up over the previous twelve episodes.

And yeah, I'm sure the whole Who 2.0 thing got off on the wrong foot a bit when my first thought when seeing Rose is "what a chav".
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 07 Aug 2014, 00:01
That joke even got made in the series, so you are not alone.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 07 Aug 2014, 00:34
Oh, I know.  And I know that Billie Piper can act, so it's not a slam on her.  Aside from Martha, (and I haven't seen the current companion(s), it seems as though with Rose and Amy, The Doctor has been travelling with rather immature, selfish, people.  It's rather annoying (and, it seems to me, somewhat sexist) how both Mickey and Rory were the dutiful boyfriends when their SOs are off travelling the universe for some unknown amount of time (gah, they could have at the very least called), and facing whatever, for women who seem to rather prefer being around a strange man in a police box.  No matter how wonderful someone else is in other respects, I'd show someone the door if they treated me like that.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 07 Aug 2014, 08:19
Mickey, oh, certainly. He strated out as a bit of wet rag. Tried to spruce him up later on and the last time we see him he's married to Martha and shooting at ... soemthing or other ... but overall he's a big ol' softie. I feel that Rory was turned into quite the hero by the end of their stay in the Tardis. The whole roman thing, you know. Rory was far more badass than Mickey ever got close to being.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 07 Aug 2014, 11:01
Rory Grew.

Also, which RTD wrote a ton of cheese, including the truly dreadful Love & Monsters, he also co-wrote the Waters of Mars, so I give him some credit.

But yeah, it's a serial with a huge array of writers.  It's never going to be anything other than hit and miss in this format.  And nobody should ever argue that the weaker episodes are in some way superior to most of what's on television these days.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 07 Aug 2014, 11:29
There is no episode of doctor who called Love & Monsters. Nor will there ever be, ever.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 07 Aug 2014, 11:35
Certainly not one that ends with a dick joke.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 07 Aug 2014, 11:51
No. It. Does. Not. Exist.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 07 Aug 2014, 16:13
he's married to Martha
Wait, what? I don't remember this.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 07 Aug 2014, 16:45
http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Martha_Jones

First line.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 07 Aug 2014, 16:54
Weird, I really don't remember them ever mentioning that. Also...WHY? Like, it's not that I don't think the two characters would work as a couple (I don't, but that's not the issue), but why would they just take two characters who were completely separate and then just go "oh, they're married now"?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 07 Aug 2014, 17:20
There's a long sequence just before Tennant regenerates where he visits people from his past.  Mickey is with Martha, but imho he was almost unrecognizable.

Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Detachable Felix on 07 Aug 2014, 18:18
Weird, I really don't remember them ever mentioning that. Also...WHY? Like, it's not that I don't think the two characters would work as a couple (I don't, but that's not the issue), but why would they just take two characters who were completely separate and then just go "oh, they're married now"?

Basically, I think they were just trying to wrap up both Martha and Mickey's stories. Both of them really got the short end of the stick as companions, and having them go off together as married "freelance alien fighters" or whatever seemed like a fitting future for them both. Keeps the option for them to theoretically appear in future episodes, but also wraps it up in a way that we're supposed to be okay with if they aren't.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 07 Aug 2014, 18:32
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: judemorrigan on 08 Aug 2014, 06:41
Mickey, oh, certainly. He strated out as a bit of wet rag. Tried to spruce him up later on and the last time we see him he's married to Martha and shooting at ... soemthing or other ... but overall he's a big ol' softie. I feel that Rory was turned into quite the hero by the end of their stay in the Tardis. The whole roman thing, you know. Rory was far more badass than Mickey ever got close to being.
Yup.  When Rory was first introduced, my reaction was "oh, goody.  A Mickey redux."  But by the end of his run, he may have become my very favorite new Who companion.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 08 Aug 2014, 07:14
Yes.  Give them credit for sure for Rory's evolution.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 08 Aug 2014, 15:25
The last centurion :parrot:
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 09 Aug 2014, 05:23
To be honest, I think I liked Rory more than Amy. But by their powers combined, they made the best Who character, River Song.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 16 Aug 2014, 02:34
Now watching all of the surviving first doctor eps.  I think I'm going to go through all of the classic Who this way.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 16 Aug 2014, 05:37
So Netflix UK had season 1-6 of NuHu on it so I basically binge watched all (most) of it so I was adequately prepped for the new season. Spoilered for some actual spoilers and also for length.

Series 1
(click to show/hide)
Series 2
(click to show/hide)
Series 3
(click to show/hide)
Series 4
(click to show/hide)
2008-2010 specials
(click to show/hide)
Series 5
(click to show/hide)
Series 6
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 16 Aug 2014, 06:45
What about series 7?

Also I also got a little pissed off when they announced things like "this character will leave in this episode". How the fuck is it ok or even wise for them to spoil that for us?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 16 Aug 2014, 06:47
So Netflix UK had season 1-6 of NuHu on it
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 16 Aug 2014, 06:48
Yes, I know, I'm asking how you're going to watch series 7 in time. Also, how the hell does Netflix UK have less of a British show than Netflix US? :psyduck:
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 16 Aug 2014, 06:53
I'm going to fail to do so is how.

And because Netflix UK, while vastly improved since it started and something I love using and do use all the time, sucks a bag of dicks and makes no sense. It's got Saw II, and Saw VI. Doesn't have the others. Also I believe it has Insidious 2 but not the first one.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 17 Aug 2014, 01:49
Yeah British Netflix is appallingly bad compared to US Netflix, there's almost nothing. I've read USians talking about how they have Netflix instead of a TV and that just wouldn't work here, it's got so little decent content.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 17 Aug 2014, 02:14
I'll repeat: there's no episode called Love & monsters in Dr.Who.

Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Detachable Felix on 17 Aug 2014, 04:58
At least you chumps have Netflix. Sometimes it sucks being antipodean.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 17 Aug 2014, 05:48
The whole 'walking-on-your-hands' thing must get pretty boring, too.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 17 Aug 2014, 07:04
At least you chumps have Netflix. Sometimes it sucks being antipodean.
VPN?  I've had no problems using one to access the BBC iPlayer from the US.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 17 Aug 2014, 07:05
Don't VPNs cost money though?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 17 Aug 2014, 07:27
Well, yeah, at least if you want decent speeds.  My provider costs about €10/month for 6Mbps down, and I get a choice of 7 countries that I can "be" in.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 17 Aug 2014, 07:39
Are those 7 ever not enough?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 17 Aug 2014, 08:30
Do you guys have Hulu across the pond? I think they've added season 7 on this side. Honestly we downloaded it because fuck waiting. And, you know, the big special was being shown in theaters, so we had to catch up.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 17 Aug 2014, 20:37
(http://38.media.tumblr.com/53c426849efd7852e7430fd38f73778f/tumblr_memxuw4mId1rz2r65o1_250.gif) (http://38.media.tumblr.com/0dc3dc1dbb59c31351bcac995cf26a3d/tumblr_memxuw4mId1rz2r65o2_250.gif)
(http://37.media.tumblr.com/aa5d8b8dd29bc6c59c4855de5edd4d21/tumblr_memxuw4mId1rz2r65o3_250.gif) (http://38.media.tumblr.com/dfbc9bb89e61589dee73dd4da436f1cf/tumblr_memxuw4mId1rz2r65o4_250.gif)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 17 Aug 2014, 21:03
Are those 7 ever not enough?
They're plenty good, especially when it comes to regional shite.  Also, one of them is in Switzerland, where piracy is legal, so I'm pretty much covered (I also like the fact that the Swiss would happily tell the NSA to fuck the hell off).
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 17 Aug 2014, 21:31
Interesting. What VPN do you use?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 18 Aug 2014, 01:10
yourprivatevpn.com   And even though it's €10 for 6 Mbps, it's only €15 for whatever your connexion can handle, and of course, they give discounts for paying ahead of time for 3+ month blocks of subscription time.  I may not care much about anonymity here, since it's semi-public, but otherwise, I consider my privacy to be worth the price, as well as the ability to bypass a lot of regional locks.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: judemorrigan on 18 Aug 2014, 07:13
Two thoughts:


2008-2010 specials
(click to show/hide)
(click to show/hide)

Quote
Series 6
(click to show/hide)
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 18 Aug 2014, 08:05
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 18 Aug 2014, 08:51
I liked depressed tennant. He's good at that. Doctor, Hamlet, Broadchurch ...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 21 Aug 2014, 12:17
Really nice summary of the first 6 seasons, Gareth.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 23 Aug 2014, 09:18
Thanks brah!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ankhtahr on 23 Aug 2014, 09:54
I use proxy.sh. (They even have Iceland as option!) But for today I have a ticket for a theatre live screening of the episode. Yay!

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 23 Aug 2014, 09:55
I'd LOVE that to happen.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 23 Aug 2014, 13:28
Doctor WHO marathon today on BBC America.

yay.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 23 Aug 2014, 13:32
And if one needs to take a toilet break when watching it, there is the Who Loo http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-28892903
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 23 Aug 2014, 19:29
digging the new cheesetacular intro.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Stoon on 23 Aug 2014, 20:47
Well, Scottish is certainly a different accent than previous incarnations.  Welsh was a little on the incomprehensible side during the British stint of Torchwood.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 25 Aug 2014, 06:15
Gwen was hot.

That is the only good thing about Torchwood.

(I can understand Welsh accents pretty well.)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 25 Aug 2014, 09:52
More Doctor! Hee! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16LaAYMaLYI)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 25 Aug 2014, 12:58
Just watched the new one. Scottish independence jokes everywhere!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 26 Aug 2014, 19:04
vastra, jenny, & strax need to have their own show.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Neko_Ali on 26 Aug 2014, 21:26
Ditto that. So much that. I'm pretty sure Moffat at least wants to do it. He keeps having them show up. That's an awful lot of times for the Doctor to show up in their particular time period, both accidentally and deliberately. Just so they can be on the show and be their awesome selves.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 28 Aug 2014, 17:30
http://imgur.com/gallery/dJenN
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 28 Aug 2014, 20:47
 :psyduck:   :-o   :psyduck:

Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 29 Aug 2014, 14:47
Ya know, somehow I knew there be something like that out there.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 30 Aug 2014, 20:58
oh, you think there's just the one? (http://blip.tv/diamanda-hagan-lecher-bitch/twatty-who-review-doctor-loo-and-the-phaleks-6559068)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 30 Aug 2014, 21:29
No.

And thank you for ruining my Sunday
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 30 Aug 2014, 23:18
it's what i do.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 31 Aug 2014, 00:00
I've got to admit, I found yesterday's episode pretty dull. I feel like the Daleks have been overused now; yes, we get they're the Doctor's biggest enemy, and yes we get they're incredibly dangerous etc. But there wasn't a whole lot of plot last night, despite the attempts to shoe-horn big drama and philosophical pondering into the episode. I'm hoping for a couple of light-hearted, not very important episodes because constant manufactured drama gets tedious.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 31 Aug 2014, 00:22
Daleks have become so iconic that they basically have to have a Dalek episode in every series. Which I think is a bit much.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 31 Aug 2014, 01:20
I remember reading somewhere that the Daleks aren't actually (fully) owned by the BBC and must use them at least once an <interval, not sure what> or lose their rights to them. I don't know how true that is.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 31 Aug 2014, 04:22
https://twitter.com/JDHoare/status/506021133108649984

I don't know if there's a BBCode for having a tweet show up, but, I think my editor at SciFiNow summed it up quite well...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 31 Aug 2014, 04:44
Quote
@JDHoare's Tweets are protected.

Only confirmed followers have access to @JDHoare's Tweets and complete profile. Click the "Follow" button to send a follow request.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 31 Aug 2014, 05:50
Oh!

Well:
Quote
I enjoyed rewatching Dalek last night, but wasn't there supposed to be a new episode of Doctor Who?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 31 Aug 2014, 05:59
Yeah that's pretty much how I felt.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 31 Aug 2014, 06:28
a fair enough criticism, but i still rather enjoyed the episode. it had fun action, and i think did a great job of establishing the doctor as a more overtly morally ambiguous character than he's been in recent years.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 31 Aug 2014, 07:07
I want to know more about Missy or Minty or whatever her name is. There is no way that it's just straight-up Heaven where you go when you die. There's definitely something more going on there.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 31 Aug 2014, 07:21
I still enjoyed the episode, and Capaldi is rapidly catching up with Eccelstone as my favourite Doctor. He is dark as shit and I'm not entirely sure if he's even necessarily the hero of his own TV series.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 31 Aug 2014, 09:40
I want to know more about Missy or Minty or whatever her name is. There is no way that it's just straight-up Heaven where you go when you die. There's definitely something more going on there.
... what gives you that idea?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 31 Aug 2014, 10:02
Oh, I dunno, maybe that she's really creepy?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 31 Aug 2014, 10:13
Per Wikipedia,
Quote from: Wikipedia
Michelle Gomez was later cast as a character described as 'The Gatekeeper of the Nethersphere' and was originally announced to be featured in the series final, however, Gomez has already appeared as an uncredited role in the series' first two episodes as a character named Missy.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 31 Aug 2014, 11:00
Yes but we still don't know who she is. Is she an entirely new character? Is she the reincarnation of a previous character? Is she good? Is she bad? Is she outside this simplistic moral dichotomy?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 31 Aug 2014, 13:28
And perhaps more importantly, is River going to show up at some point and have something to say about calling the doctor her 'boyfriend'
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 31 Aug 2014, 16:22
I'm sure she'll be insanely bad. How can she be anything else? How can anyone called Missy be anything else, ever?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Stoon on 31 Aug 2014, 19:11
I've got to admit, I found yesterday's episode pretty dull. I feel like the Daleks have been overused now; yes, we get they're the Doctor's biggest enemy, and yes we get they're incredibly dangerous etc. But there wasn't a whole lot of plot last night, despite the attempts to shoe-horn big drama and philosophical pondering into the episode.
I agree 100%
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Schmee on 31 Aug 2014, 23:58
I'm just glad they didn't have River Song in this episode, or the Magic School Bus comparisons would be unavoidable.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 02 Sep 2014, 20:02
Still gotta watch the new episodes

(http://31.media.tumblr.com/0ff8447658df9aad7de200127470cf4e/tumblr_nasmu7OlW11ql9uxxo8_1280.jpg)
(http://33.media.tumblr.com/3d9c25354023ba8390b2578e6ccc7df1/tumblr_nasmu7OlW11ql9uxxo6_1280.jpg)
(http://31.media.tumblr.com/27c5c8aea66c3f3e761fc2f158496d7d/tumblr_nasmu7OlW11ql9uxxo7_1280.jpg)
(http://38.media.tumblr.com/8549c13f8ffd9b27a4d2871016cd39c0/tumblr_nasmu7OlW11ql9uxxo9_1280.jpg)
(http://38.media.tumblr.com/d164c1ee3c7b6c77cdaaa0baacf9f96e/tumblr_nasmu7OlW11ql9uxxo4_1280.jpg)
(http://33.media.tumblr.com/9d6837003ed80dd4b9c776add8666709/tumblr_nasmu7OlW11ql9uxxo3_1280.jpg)
(http://33.media.tumblr.com/737f4c000819e91d62f0233c32db72aa/tumblr_nasmu7OlW11ql9uxxo1_1280.jpg)
(http://38.media.tumblr.com/1c8f628d9786530353a93365e20f82ab/tumblr_nasmu7OlW11ql9uxxo2_1280.jpg)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 03 Sep 2014, 15:05
Those are awesome!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: ev4n on 08 Sep 2014, 09:22
Finally watched the first 2 episodes.  Meh.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 08 Sep 2014, 09:38
(http://31.media.tumblr.com/d9ed816857b57b0672c1b73ce7cbce74/tumblr_nbie02ciMN1qz6f9yo1_r1_500.gif)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 08 Sep 2014, 10:28
So The Doctor is John Cena?

I liked this week's episode but really hated that it was called Robot of Sherwood. Spoiler warnings anybodehhhh?

Also I get the impression most people thought this episode sucked.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 08 Sep 2014, 10:56
I found Robin a bit annoying, but I think that was rather the point. Other than that I quite enjoyed it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 08 Sep 2014, 19:04
not one of the better episodes.

considering a new DR., you'd think they'd pull awesomesauce
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 08 Sep 2014, 20:30
it was ok, but not great.

i'm loving how dickish the new doctor is though.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 08 Sep 2014, 21:07
I'm not a fan of him being a massive JERK, just to prove he is different from Eccleston, Tennant or Matt.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Stoon on 08 Sep 2014, 23:54
Truly dreadful episode.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: The Seldom Killer on 08 Sep 2014, 23:56
Bit of a cack episode. Felt like a bit too much of a feeder for the whole Promised Land thing.

OTOH, is anyone else dearly loving the eyes in the opening theme?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 09 Sep 2014, 02:01
Anybody want to elaborate a bit more on what they disliked?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 09 Sep 2014, 05:14
it was more like something you'd see on SyFy than on Dr. Who.
cheesy.  predictable.  wooden acting.  bad CGI.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 09 Sep 2014, 15:56
In other words, classic Doctor Whoish.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 09 Sep 2014, 18:18
hush, you Philistine.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 10 Sep 2014, 13:01
I liked it, I thought it was better than the first episodes. It was fun, it was silly, it took classic historical figures and turned them on their head - that's always my favourite approach (think Madame de Pompadour, Queen Victoria, Agatha Christie, Charles Dickens...) and what Dr Who is really about to me. The Doctor didn't save the world, there wasn't a ridiculous, shoe-horned drama, just a new angle on a story we all know.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: The Seldom Killer on 14 Sep 2014, 05:04
Well that was rather good. A nicely done things that go bump in the night episode.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 14 Sep 2014, 06:09
There was a strange sensation of absence to this episode (and a lot of Moffat's I've noticed) where you don't really feel like the episode has started yet, and you're kinda waiting for the actual plot to kick in.

I am loving Capaldi's Doctor more as the weeks go by though. He is so rough around the edges, unlike cuddly, impish Tennant and Smith.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 14 Sep 2014, 08:55
http://io9.com/theres-not-much-point-in-arguing-about-moffats-doctor-w-1634481730
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 14 Sep 2014, 09:14
Finally watched the first Cappaldi Who episode and my girlfriend and I enjoyed it. It didn't hurt to have the old gang there either
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 14 Sep 2014, 12:30
I may be late to the party on this one, but a friend of mine has a theory about the identity of Missy (other than the Gatekeeper of the Nethersphere).

In Ep.1 she refers to someone - presumably the Doctor - as her 'boyfriend', suggesting a previous relationship.
There have been (apparently) hints that a Time Lord can change gender during their regeneration.
Missy could be a shortened form of 'Mistress', the feminine form of 'Master'.
You can see where this is going.

E: The Internet is telling me that I'm very late to the party. So late, in fact, that not only has the party ended, but people are waking up the next morning with hangovers and knowing that they did that thing with the balloons that was so funny last night but that they also have to look these people in the eye and they'll know exactly what went on.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 14 Sep 2014, 13:35
I've heard that theory and I'm just a bit dubious. I very much hope that she is a totally new character, and also that we get a few more hints soon (I suspect we won't know for sure til the end of the season, if then).
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 14 Sep 2014, 20:51
I think it was a good episode: a nice tidbit reminding us that Clara is the 'impossible girl' who touches all of the Doctor's timeline.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 15 Sep 2014, 00:35
I couldn't see anything but the opening scene of Monsters, Inc. when the dream was being explained.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Stoon on 21 Sep 2014, 15:06
I think it was a good episode: a nice tidbit reminding us that Clara is the 'impossible girl' who touches all of the Doctor's timeline.
I'd quibble with that.  After all, she was the impossible girl who touched all of The Doctor's timeline BEFORE his timeline was reset to give him a new regeneration cycle.  She's not part of his timeline any more.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Stoon on 21 Sep 2014, 15:10
I'm feeling dissatisfied with the season so far.  Last night's episode was once again disappointing.  It's like Steven Moffat isn't even trying any more.  The plot was entirely predictable.  Who could coerce The Doctor to rob a bank?  Nobody, except maybe The Doctor.   Also, I'm finding Peter Caraldi to be a not  very good Doctor.  He's really wooden, not charismatic at all.  I'd say he's the second worst Doctor to date.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 22 Sep 2014, 00:15
I though the
(click to show/hide)
was a bit cheap. I'll also agree with you that the Architect thing was rather predictable as well.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 22 Sep 2014, 04:07
sometimes predictability can be enjoyable.
not so much with the bank job.
and the escape key?

:eyeroll:
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 22 Sep 2014, 05:56
I really enjoyed last night's episode; it made perfect sense to me that the purpose of the heist would be to rescue people (the two Teller creatures and the two assistants) and it had some great lines.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 22 Sep 2014, 18:27
i rather liked it. the bank-heist was a neat idea, with a pretty good execution.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 28 Sep 2014, 02:44
http://flashbak.com/meeting-dr-whos-daleks-in-the-1960s-19-photos-20072/
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 28 Sep 2014, 10:52
I quite enjoyed this week's episode. The monster was a bit lame and clearly just a mechanism for the character development to occur (and some of the character "development" was decidedly shaky) but it had some good lines and the ?cameo appearance from the interested child is promising.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: The Seldom Killer on 30 Sep 2014, 14:25
Chris Addison in to bat for the other side. I doubt I'm the only one for a Tucker vs Reeder outtake to crop up somewhere.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 01 Oct 2014, 11:19
I watched the last two episodes back to back because I was busy last weekend.

Season 8:
(click to show/hide)

Netflix UK boasted that they added Doctor Who season seven. This is bollocks. They added the first five episodes of it.

Watched the premier tonight. The actress who plays Clara appeared as seemingly one of her descendants in something that will presumably be explained later, and was... honestly, super hot in it, I've always found the actress attractive but in that outfit and playing the character that way (hyper flirty, super intelligent) even more so. I suspect this was by design. It was also a pretty good episode, quite a blockbuster, and made some interesting choices - the Daleks forgetting who the Doctor is - but it also had some standout shitty moments. For one, when the Dalek is slowly turning on and is taking forever to get 'exterminate' out and Rory thinks it's saying 'egg.' Seriously Rory, no wonder you've died like four hundred times and Amy dumped you. And that's another thing. SYNTHETIC DRAMA! I was quite on board with the idea that those two had broken up to add a new dynamic to the companionship and see where it went, but instead it was mentioned once, a dramatic scene occurred, and then that was it. THAT. WAS IT. What a waste of a plot device, especially given that it's based on Amy's inability to conceive, which is a pretty heavy plot point to just jack off all over the season premiere.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 01 Oct 2014, 12:06
Wouldn't a lot of that be on the BBC iPlayer?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 01 Oct 2014, 12:29
i tend to agree with you re. amy & rory's breakup drama. i really felt that the idea that they broke up because amy couldn't conceive children was somewhat handicapped by the fact that

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 01 Oct 2014, 12:30
Wouldn't a lot of that be on the BBC iPlayer?

No. iPlayer only shows the most recent episode, or if you're really lucky, the most recent series, and then it's deleted until the next time it's shown on TV.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Barmymoo on 01 Oct 2014, 12:40
Only the current series is ever on iPlayer, and sometimes only the most recent episode (in this case, though, all the episodes of this series of Dr Who is available for the entire run).
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 14 Oct 2014, 05:10
Netflix UK boasted that they added Doctor Who season seven. This is bollocks. They added the first five episodes of it.
Netflix Germany has all the episodes 2005+.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 19 Oct 2014, 01:45
i imagine this episode would have looked really cool if i had a 3d tv.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 19 Oct 2014, 12:03
Can I just say that I find the use of Deus Ex Machina in Dr Who somewhat disappointing? EVERY two or more episode story part one ends with a horrible unavoidable cliffhanger, and then part two starts with deus ex machine saving 'em all. I haven't been through all of the episodes yet (I'm at Journey's End, and yes, Mickey appears out of solid space) but at this point I expect none of the cliffhangers to have any sort of significance.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 19 Oct 2014, 13:07
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz I liked Donna Noble, you stupid stupid stupid
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 20 Oct 2014, 12:51
So that was far and away the best episode of this season so far, and I am loving Capaldi as Doctor more and more.

Can I just say that I find the use of Deus Ex Machina in Dr Who somewhat disappointing? EVERY two or more episode story part one ends with a horrible unavoidable cliffhanger, and then part two starts with deus ex machine saving 'em all. I haven't been through all of the episodes yet (I'm at Journey's End, and yes, Mickey appears out of solid space) but at this point I expect none of the cliffhangers to have any sort of significance.

This can happen with a show like Who. I said in a previous reply how I hate how much the show leans on death as a crutch for drama in the Moffatt shows. 'The Doctor is dying in like five minutes!' Yeah, no he isn't because of course he isn't.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 20 Oct 2014, 14:29
A113 :roll:
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 20 Oct 2014, 15:06
it's a bit tough to get drama out of threatening the life of a character who's already died 12 times before.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 20 Oct 2014, 15:11
also, is it me, or is the show really getting off on teasing us with the prospect of a new companion this season?

personally, i'd rather like to have more than one. i love clara, but it'd be nice to give her & the doctor someone else to work off of than each other.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 23 Oct 2014, 20:12
I've really found River Song fascinating as a plot device so far, but they've lost me completely at Melody Pond.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 24 Oct 2014, 08:24
also, is it me, or is the show really getting off on teasing us with the prospect of a new companion this season?

personally, i'd rather like to have more than one. i love clara, but it'd be nice to give her & the doctor someone else to work off of than each other.

Yeah that is getting irritating as fuck now.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 27 Oct 2014, 02:31
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vq4urJp-bUM
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 28 Oct 2014, 03:59
Undecided on this episode.

Honestly this has been quite a weak season, much as I love Clara and the new Doctor.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Neko_Ali on 28 Oct 2014, 04:48
Sadly, they lost me mid season. The focus on Clara has driven me up the wall. I like Capaldi, I think he has the chops to make an excellent Doctor. They just haven't given him enough to work with this season. I'm hopping they will keep him for next season and replace Moffat. I never put much stock into how much he was supposedly ruining the show until this season.. The first time I just don't want to watch Doctor Who.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 01 Nov 2014, 14:09
Well ... That certainly happened. And it was the bestest.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Stoon on 01 Nov 2014, 19:04
Hah!  I knew it!

(click to show/hide)

I think most people figured that one out.  It was kind of obvious.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Stoon on 01 Nov 2014, 19:06
Sadly, they lost me mid season. The focus on Clara has driven me up the wall. I like Capaldi, I think he has the chops to make an excellent Doctor. They just haven't given him enough to work with this season. I'm hopping they will keep him for next season and replace Moffat. I never put much stock into how much he was supposedly ruining the show until this season.. The first time I just don't want to watch Doctor Who.

He's gotten predictable.  Among other things offensive.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 02 Nov 2014, 03:22
I still think Moffat is way, way better than RTD. Some of the best nu-who stories have been Moffat's and he still manages to draw me in and yesterday's episode is a good case in point. I hope he hangs on to the job for another decade.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 02 Nov 2014, 03:44
I also enjoy the Moffat episodes more than the Davies' ones. Davies just made all the characters cry, again and again and again, and that bothered me enough that when Rose met the Doctor at Bad Wolf Bay, I just thought "good riddance". I really enjoyed the Doctor Donna though.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 02 Nov 2014, 13:35
I refer you to the video I posted upthread.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 02 Nov 2014, 13:55
sorry, I tried, but the singing was atrocious.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 02 Nov 2014, 14:00
Meh, the general thrust of the lyrics is summed up in the title.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 06 Nov 2014, 03:45
That episode was dark as shit, genuinely emotional and basically the best episode they've had all season by a country mile. It was fucking brilliant.

I will miss Clara though.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 06 Nov 2014, 04:25
Get better aim.

Also: you expect Clara to go the way of the dodos?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 06 Nov 2014, 06:28
I have complete faith that she's going, Clara was an assistant for Matt's Doctor and they seem reluctant to have companions stick with a different Doctor these days. Plus they have been teasing new companions over and over again.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 06 Nov 2014, 10:36
I did hear talk that she'd be going at Christmas (I guess in a special or something). There was also the teaser at the end of In the Forest of the Night that included the lines "Time can be rewritten" and "I'm not Clara Oswald. Clara Oswald never existed."
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 06 Nov 2014, 11:44
That is the line that made me suspect, honestly.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 06 Nov 2014, 14:18
Well, she is the impossible girl after all.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 08 Nov 2014, 18:13
well, that was a hell of an episode.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 08 Nov 2014, 22:19
I rate this season as a 'D-' grade.  Most of what I've seen is SyFy channel-level DREK.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 09 Nov 2014, 02:41
I loved every minute of it. And then some.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 09 Nov 2014, 16:18
I love that Michelle Gomez kept a lot of the scenery-chewing insanity of Jon Simm's version of The Master. I also much enjoyed the ending although I found it a bit iffy.

The last few episodes of this series really redeemed it for me. Not a great series but I'm looking forward to the next series, most definitely and I still love Capaldi's Doctor.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 09 Nov 2014, 16:52
“Oh, don’t do that, You look like you’re self-concussing... which would explain all of military history, now I think about it.”

Brilliant. Rolling in the aisles.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 09 Nov 2014, 18:06
capaldi is pretty solidly my favorite doctor now. i just love how delightfully dickish he is to everyone.

though i haven't really seen much of the old show, so that might not mean much.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 09 Nov 2014, 18:20
Strax is the best
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 09 Nov 2014, 18:39
capaldi is pretty solidly my favorite doctor now. i just love how delightfully dickish he is to everyone.

though i haven't really seen much of the old show, so that might not mean much.

Tom Baker *is* The Doctor.  All others are imposters.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 10 Nov 2014, 01:05
Quote
A lovely message from Peter Capaldi to my 9 year old autistic son. This arrived just before Thomas' nanny's funeral and helped him to deal with his grief in a profound way. Thankyou Peter so much.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: dps on 10 Nov 2014, 20:37
I still think Moffat is way, way better than RTD. Some of the best nu-who stories have been Moffat's and he still manages to draw me in and yesterday's episode is a good case in point. I hope he hangs on to the job for another decade.

Moffat draws you in because he's good with set-ups.  Resolutions, not so much.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 11 Nov 2014, 00:01
I respectfully disagree. I am fully satisfied with the conclusion to this season. Also: I hope that the master stays the fuck dead from now on.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 11 Nov 2014, 01:05
Are you not entertained by the Master?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 11 Nov 2014, 01:17
*spoilers*
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 11 Nov 2014, 03:40
Are you not entertained by the Master?
Hugely so. By Simms and a little less so by ... the new girl. Can't remember. But I think it's time to come up with new problems to solve, so the next season it would be nice not to see a cyberman or a master and maybe, even, do away with a Dalek for a bit.

Also: I don't think Simms' master can be topped.

Take that sentence anyway you want.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 11 Nov 2014, 07:23
Oh. io9:

Steven Moffat said on Doctor Who Extra that we may not have seen the last of Michelle Gomez as Missy:

"I always rather enjoyed how they handled this problem when the wonderful Anthony Ainley was playing the part in the 80s."

"He would get killed, definitively, at the end of every encounter with Peter Davison and Colin Baker. And then he'd turn up at the start of the next Master story with roughly this explanation: 'I escaped!' Suits me, I'm fine with that!"

"Supervillains don't die, do they?" he added. "I wouldn't trust anything about that character's ability to lie down and stop breathing."
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 11 Nov 2014, 10:58
If you can get UK iPlayer stuff (and possibly even if not), there's a ten-minute interviews/making of programme on there as well. There has been for all of this season's episodes, I think.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: dps on 14 Nov 2014, 23:44
I respectfully disagree. I am fully satisfied with the conclusion to this season. Also: I hope that the master stays the fuck dead from now on.

In all fairness, yes, I have to agree that this season had a reasonably good finale.  I'm just tired of Moffat's season-long plot arcs, which, again, in fairness wasn't as prominent a part of the show this year as they've been at times.  Any really, I don't have anything against seasonal arcs per se, it's just that Moffat has this bad habit of hyping how we're all going to be astounded and amazed by the reveal--and then it's, well, not amazing.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BeoPuppy on 15 Nov 2014, 05:36
Well, ever since he took over Moffat has been putting arc on arc, series after series. Everything is connected. I appreciate that level of writing. Complications make me happy.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 15 Nov 2014, 12:40
I'm rewatching "Time of the Angels" and "Flesh and Stone", and I remembered something that I wanted to post before:

In the future, apparently everybody uses P90's.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 17 Nov 2014, 17:23
So I'm not sure why, but I ended up waiting until the end of the season and watching it all at once (except for the first episode which I watched soon after airing). I think it was a good decision.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 25 Nov 2014, 17:22
I'm finally watching this season and so far I enjoy the Doctor while not really enjoying the episodes. I did like the bank heist though.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 30 Nov 2014, 07:49
Well the way they did Danny was awful, but I did like the elevator reveal.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 30 Nov 2014, 08:45
Danny was a good guy, but did anyone els we feel his only point was to give Clara a Rory?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 30 Nov 2014, 08:52
Naw, honestly he felt more fleshed out than Rory


Also, I'm not a fan of them bringing in UNIT for the first time since last season only to kill them all off



Ok, that ending with Nick Frost made this whole episode
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Stoon on 15 Dec 2014, 16:42
Starting Saturday up here, Space Channel will have a 6 day Dr. Who marathon.  They'll start with Rose and end with the new Christmas special.  I'm kind of sad that I'll have to miss so much due to things like sleep, going out to get groceries, a dentist appointment, etc.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Stoon on 25 Dec 2014, 19:34
Hmmm. 
(click to show/hide)

At least this Christmas special wasn't as cloyingly sappy as some past ones have been.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 25 Dec 2014, 19:35
Oh shit, that was today? Thanks for reminding me, but why wouldn't you put that in a spoiler tag?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Stoon on 25 Dec 2014, 19:39
Oh shit, that was today? Thanks for reminding me, but why wouldn't you put that in a spoiler tag?
Didn't think I gave away too much.  I'll go back and fix it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 26 Dec 2014, 04:18
Haven't watched it yet, but I did watch the 2010 episode (A Christmas Carol). It's incredibly annoying. Plotholes, ho!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 26 Dec 2014, 18:30
But the song is so great.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 26 Dec 2014, 19:54
I watched it. I liked it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 27 Dec 2014, 06:33
I watched it, and the only thing I liked from it was Nick Frost
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: SubaruStephen on 27 Dec 2014, 10:33
Haven't watched it yet, but I did watch the 2010 episode (A Christmas Carol). It's incredibly annoying. Plotholes, ho!

My PBS station is showing that tonight. Again!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 27 Dec 2014, 13:05
Those were some creepy-ass bug things for a Christmas show.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 27 Dec 2014, 22:45
Should a Christmas show be less creepy than a non-Christmas show?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 21 Feb 2015, 17:41
Random Thought: so what if Missy is the Doctors new companion?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 21 Feb 2015, 17:56
Random Thought: so what if Missy is the Doctors new companion?

I would welcome that!  Unfortunately, Clara is sticking around for another season, so Missy will probably remain the main villain for Series 9.  Grumble. 
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: looktall on 21 Feb 2015, 18:43
Missy is not going to be the doctor's companion.
Not ever.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 21 Feb 2015, 18:54
It would make an interesting dynamic, if she became a regular character and showed (or feigned) an interest in reforming, and the Doctor decided that the best way to keep an eye on her was to bring her along on his travels.  A sort of prisoner-companion under house arrest.  As long as he stayed a few steps ahead of her and managed to thwart her plans to take over (and keep her more violent tendencies in check), it could be a lot of fun.

Moffat would fuck things up, of course.  He has that talent.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: looktall on 21 Feb 2015, 19:07
That sounds a bit crap to me.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 21 Feb 2015, 19:25
Yeah, that's why I don't work on the show.

That, and they won't return my calls...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: looktall on 21 Feb 2015, 19:37
Maybe if you stopped calling them at 3am?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 21 Feb 2015, 19:46
But they have a TARDIS!  They can answer whenever they want!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Neko_Ali on 21 Feb 2015, 20:12
(https://scontent-atl.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/1497810_958200364212867_2704220447048811455_n.jpg?oh=4080e56693f307472e5c2c495cb25d52&oe=5554C490)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: looktall on 21 Feb 2015, 20:17
Maybe they have answered one of your future calls but you're just not aware of it yet.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 21 Feb 2015, 20:28
"Can we start another Time War?
After we find Gall-i-frey,
We'll hit the Daleks where it hurts,
Which is just one perk
Of mastering all time and spaaaaace!
Sure, we tried it already,
And got locked away
'Cause you wouldn't let us diiiiiieee....
Can we start another Time War?
It doesn't have to be a Time War..."

(Go away, Missy!)

"Okay, bye..."
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: valkygrrl on 22 Feb 2015, 17:09
"Can we start another Time War?
After we find Gall-i-frey,
We'll hit the Daleks where it hurts,
Which is just one perk
Of mastering all time and spaaaaace!
Sure, we tried it already,
And got locked away
'Cause you wouldn't let us diiiiiieee....
Can we start another Time War?
It doesn't have to be a Time War..."

(Go away, Missy!)

"Okay, bye..."

That is made of awesome. *looks down, digs a toe in the dirt* W-would you like a jelly baby?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 22 Feb 2015, 17:20
It's true!  The Evil One eats babies!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: valkygrrl on 22 Feb 2015, 17:32
I'm not evil....






*pout* okay I'm evil.

Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 22 Feb 2015, 17:58
*sigh*, I hadn't seen that ep in so long that I mangled the quote until I giggled it.  Plus, it's more fun being evil.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 22 Feb 2015, 19:52
First 30 seconds....

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/xn8Eo0oS5sA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: SubaruStephen on 22 Feb 2015, 23:32
It's true!  The Evil One eats babies!
I know that one! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Face of Evil (part 2), the very first Doctor Who episode I ever saw (a rerun on PBS in the mid 90's, but didn't know what it was until 3 years ago when I watched the DVD.)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: looktall on 23 Feb 2015, 01:38
I only have vague memories of watching doctor who as a child ( numbers 4 and 5).
I recalled it as exciting and a bit scary. That was until I tried to watch them as an adult.

Clearly I've been spoilt by sci-fi as an adult because the production qualities are so horrendous I can't even watch old eps for the this is so crap it's good effect.

I wonder If I'll feel the same about the modern series in years to come.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 23 Feb 2015, 21:05
I caught the last 5-10 minutes of "Bad Wolf" (Series 1, Episode 12) while flipping channels on a Saturday morning in 2005 or 2006.  The Weakest Link with robots, a strange pale woman hooked up to a bunch of tubes, a guy with a blue box, and...shouty robots with plungers?  Needless to say, I was very confused, and it was not until I started watching the show in 2009 and saw that entire episode that I understood what was going on...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: SubaruStephen on 24 Feb 2015, 21:42
...The Weakest Link with robots, a strange pale woman hooked up to a bunch of tubes, a guy with a blue box, and...shouty robots with plungers?  Needless to say, I was very confused,

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/08ad50bb61cd3f613b086447f947a8b8/tumblr_mevob48GDr1r65urko1_500.jpg)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 24 Feb 2015, 22:22
Me, 2005: WTF is this shit.

Me, 2009: OMG THIS BEST THING EVER.

Me, 2014: WTF is this shit.

Oh, Steven Moffat and Jenna Coleman, why won't you go awaaaaay?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 25 Feb 2015, 05:31
Why the Eccleston hate?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 25 Feb 2015, 05:42
I see a lot of dislike of Clara online and I really don't understand it.

I mean my penis is partly talking here, but I really like her. What's everyone's problem?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Neko_Ali on 25 Feb 2015, 06:25
My problem with season 8 was that it stopped being Doctor Who for the most part. The show should have been more accurately titled Clara's relationship problems and her wacky friend. I took real issue when Moffet directly said that Doctor Who should be about the companions as main characters....
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Half Empty Coffee Cup on 25 Feb 2015, 12:33
Why the Eccleston hate?
Read his other post. "Gladstone 2005" was flipping through channels, caught part of an episode out of context, and didn't start watching until he became "Gladstone 2009".
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 25 Feb 2015, 13:42
Ohhhhh.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: looktall on 26 Feb 2015, 00:25
Why the Eccleston hate?
He was my favourite, right up until capaldi came along.

I just wish he'd stuck around a bit longer.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 26 Feb 2015, 12:08
Yeah, Eccleston is one of my favorites, too.  Catching the end of an episode without any context whatsoever (I hadn't heard of Who at that point, so was utterly clueless) just wasn't the best introduction to the show.  A friend re-introduced me to it a few years later, and I managed to catch up to the end of Tennant's run just in time for Smith to show up.  Loved Eccleston, liked Tennant, really loved Smith until he got stuck in too many terrible stories, and I'm still a bit undecided on Capaldi.  He's a nice change from Tennant and Smith, feels properly alien, but he's a bit too abrasive for my tastes.  It wouldn't hurt to tone down the verbal abuse a tiny bit.

My problem with season 8 was that it stopped being Doctor Who for the most part. The show should have been more accurately titled Clara's relationship problems and her wacky friend. I took real issue when Moffet directly said that Doctor Who should be about the companions as main characters....

That's my problem, too.  I don't mind a lot of companion-focus, but I want those companions to be actual characters, not Super Special Mysterious Snowflakes.  Rose, Donna, Martha, Amy, etc., all seemed to have established lives before joining the Doctor, and they always had something to return to (although Amy was running from a wedding).  But Clara started out as the Big Mystery, and any characterization just felt tacked on.  The writers did a somewhat-decent job trying to fix that in Series 8, but she still hasn't grown on me, and I really wish she had left permanently in the Christmas episode.  We already had this problem with Rory and Amy staying on longer than they should have and getting stale.  A new companion or two would be nice.

(Still angry about what happened to Osgood in "Death in Heaven."  She could've been a good companion, but nooooo, we can't have nice things.)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: pwhodges on 06 Jul 2015, 23:56
And now, anime Doctor!

Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 12 Sep 2015, 20:13
So I finally caught up on Season 8 and ... WTF. The last two episodes, aside from Missy, were fucking terrible. Missy, completely brilliant and I'm glad they're bringing her back, but really, the rest of it?  :psyduck:
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Neko_Ali on 13 Sep 2015, 07:57
Yeah.. I actually stopped watching about halfway through season 8. The only reason I stuck around that long was hoping it would get better. But for the first time in... ever... I just didn't want to watch Doctor Who. And that's sad. Almost criminal.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 13 Sep 2015, 11:11
Yeah.. I actually stopped watching about halfway through season 8. The only reason I stuck around that long was hoping it would get better. But for the first time in... ever... I just didn't want to watch Doctor Who. And that's sad. Almost criminal.

Yeah, I got that feeling watching the trailer for the upcoming season.  My enthusiasm for the show has been slowly waning over the past few years, but for the first time, I don't want to watch it anymore either. 


Anyone else see that and feel incredibly bored?

Also, apparently River Song is coming back (http://io9.com/river-song-is-returning-to-doctor-who-great-whee-1728203234?commerce_insets_disclosure=off&utm_expid=66866090-48.Ej9760cOTJCPS_Bq4mjoww.1&utm_referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fio9.com%2F%3Fcommerce_insets_disclosure%3Doff%26startTime%3D1441222200750).  Which I might have welcomed at one point, but after Moffat decided her entire story needed to revolve around the Doctor, and Eleven in particular, I just don't see the point in her returning.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 13 Sep 2015, 12:55
They've lost the plot
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 13 Sep 2015, 13:18
If they follow up the 'Quest to Find Lost Gallifrey' story arc, all sins will be forgiven.

That second trailer does have one interesting part in it:

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 13 Sep 2015, 13:57
River Song is coming back
"Hey, we wrote something that could be a genuine surprise for people. LET'S FUCKING SPOIL IT FOR OUR OWN AUDIENCE!"

(I'm not mad at you Gladstone, it probably would've been unavoidable, but shit.)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 13 Sep 2015, 16:14
I hate River.

I also hate that TV shows now announce every guest star instead of letting a story tell itself.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 13 Sep 2015, 16:21
Right? I also find it annoying that people think that a spoiler that's been officially announced isn't bound to standard spoiler etiquette. Sure, they're hard to avoid, but if you share spoiler articles that makes it even harder.

That being said, I had to make myself download and watch season 8 after the fact, I couldn't bother myself to watch it every week.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 13 Sep 2015, 17:00
I guess my attitude towards spoilers is a bit less severe than others'.  I mean, even if Moffat hadn't announced it (and I hadn't shared it), we'd likely find out about it long before the episode aired anyway--like a preview at the end of the series 9 finale, probably, since the series ends a few weeks before Christmas this year.  The Return of River Song seems about as spoiler-y as learning that the 2-parter finale of series 8 has Cybermen in it, when the preview for those episodes clearly showed 'em.

(Although I do kinda agree with Thrillho that keeping some guest stars secret wouldn't hurt.  Imagine if our first glimpse of the Twelfth Doctor had been of his eyebrows in 'The Day of the Doctor,' instead of that giant announcement the BBC aired weeks before.  Surprise!  New Doctor coming!)

(http://emotibot.net/shared/post_media/images/full_sized/79592.gif)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 13 Sep 2015, 17:03
Yeah, I wasn't that annoyed about the River Song thing because whatever. It was the whole "oh hey, Amy and Rory are leaving in THIS PARTICULAR EPISODE" that they did weeks in advance because...well, certainly that wasn't supposed to have any impact at all. (It still did, but not nearly as much as it would have had I not known about it).
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 13 Sep 2015, 17:50
I think it would've had even more impact if they had left much sooner and Moffat hadn't kept them long past their welcome like he's currently doing with Clara.  I like more frequent Companion turnovers.  Keeps things interesting.

(Although keeping the Ponds around for those extra episodes in Series 7 did give us Rory's dad, who was great.  Although he didn't get as much screen time as he deserved.  I will probably never be satisfied with this show.)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 14 Sep 2015, 00:09
[EYEBROWS INTENSIFY]
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 14 Sep 2015, 16:30
I like Capaldi as the Doctor. I like Missy. I like River, but not the idea of her in the current season. Everything else...eh.

I don't like anything else. I really enjoy that the Doctor is now very cranky and that he's dealing with the grey area of his "goodness", but... I got bored. I thought Danny Pink was a good thing, because he was a realistic anchor for Clara's non-time-traveling life and he would have been a great plot device to have the Doctor find a new companion. But no. They killed him off and now we're stuck with Clara for another season, which I'm not too crazy about.

I don't know. I feel like they're running out of ideas. I'm bored.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 14 Sep 2015, 16:40
How could they have had Danny without Clara, though?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 14 Sep 2015, 20:03
Huh? They could have easily left the show together but they killed him and Clara is sticking around. I didn't say anything about keeping him, but not her... :psyduck:
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 15 Sep 2015, 09:19
Sorry, when you said new companion I thought you meant Danny.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Stoon on 15 Sep 2015, 19:23
Will they ever resolve the paradox of Danny Pink?

Don't like Capaldi.

Yes, Moffat definitely has run out of ideas.  His misogyny is shining through as well.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Method of Madness on 15 Sep 2015, 19:24
How so?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 15 Sep 2015, 23:18
So, hot off the press (and relevant to recent discussion on this thread) news about the Doctor's companion (http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/jenna-coleman-quits-doctor-who-6449367)

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 16 Sep 2015, 08:08
Good for her.

Will they ever resolve the paradox of Danny Pink?

That also annoyed me. The time traveller that was related to Pink...his storyline kind of got thrown out the window. Which is sad, because that was actually a pretty interesting episode. (Until the end, anyways. I wish it had ended with an actual alien race that could not be seen and had to live under things.)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 19 Sep 2015, 13:17
So, having not watched the show for the past 2-3 years, I decided to catch the one airing today.  Since a lot of people haven't seen it, I'm not going to spoil anything, but I do think it's better than a lot of the more recent episodes that I have seen.  I actually didn't really notice the time passing until the end.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 20 Sep 2015, 16:52
That was the best episode of Who I have seen since Ecclestone.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 20 Sep 2015, 17:54
Agreed.

Spoiler tags, for a good reason:
(click to show/hide)

I do have a question, though, for anyone else who watched it on the BBC iPlayer.  Were the services slammed in the UK, or is it more likely to be an issue with my VPN or ISP?  There were a couple of pauses for it to buffer.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 20 Oct 2015, 04:11
@Hedgie,

I find that all BBC streams (live and download) are ridiculously slow and glitchy. Despite the fact that we are repeatedly assured that they have Britain's best media website, the best way to deal with a download is to pause the player and let the buffer bar fill up to near to the end. There's no cure for the narrow live-stream bandwidth, though.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 20 Oct 2015, 13:32
Watched the second two parter and despite some predictable moments, WOW.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 23 Oct 2015, 19:32
@Hedgie,

I find that all BBC streams (live and download) are ridiculously slow and glitchy. Despite the fact that we are repeatedly assured that they have Britain's best media website, the best way to deal with a download is to pause the player and let the buffer bar fill up to near to the end. There's no cure for the narrow live-stream bandwidth, though.

That's good news.  In fact, I had been hoping that it was just the BBC, especially since about a week after I posted that, I saw that they'd start cracking down on VPN use to bypass regional restrictions. 
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 08 Nov 2015, 03:09
Despite some creaky moments, this is by far my favourite season since Ecclestone. That last episode, the speech by Capaldi? Wow.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 08 Nov 2015, 04:25
Watching the pre-Moffat episodes right now and I genuinely fell in love with the Madame de Pompadour episode.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 08 Nov 2015, 09:58
(http://40.media.tumblr.com/56efcb0691f509ae9d8d0151d89ee96a/tumblr_moyo8hOf0H1qmn5omo1_1280.png)
(http://41.media.tumblr.com/ecfa99f894e4b995b9da6041698045c1/tumblr_moyo8hOf0H1qmn5omo2_1280.png)
(http://41.media.tumblr.com/65eb358057706112e2d89f41f178b59f/tumblr_moyo8hOf0H1qmn5omo3_1280.png)
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 12 Nov 2015, 10:33
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: chaospersonified on 12 Nov 2015, 16:54
Watching the pre-Moffat episodes right now and I genuinely fell in love with the Madame de Pompadour episode.

Technically that's a Moffat episode, though I know what you mean. It is so confusing to me that he wrote easily the best episodes of the Russel T. Davies' years, yet when he was in charge of the show, he suddenly lost (most) of his skill. If you can't tell, I'm not a huge fan of Matt Smith, rather, I'm not a fan of the writing he was given during his last seasons. Love the guy, love the way he played the character, but somehow, still, did not enjoy much of his run as the Doctor.

He's done well enough with Capaldi, though, I'm loving the Twelfth Doctor so far. Not sure how much of that's the (in my opinion) better writing and how much of that's Capaldi's take on the character, but I don't especially care. I enjoy it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 12 Nov 2015, 18:57
Weird. He's also written the Don't Blink episode, pretty good too.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 12 Nov 2015, 19:22
Fuck, the Empty Child is also by him. As is, unsurprisingly in hindsight, the episode introducing River Song. Huh.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: chaospersonified on 12 Nov 2015, 19:49
Fuck, the Empty Child is also by him. As is, unsurprisingly in hindsight, the episode introducing River Song. Huh.

Like I said, all the greatest of RTD's run, written by Moffat, and then, when they put him in charge, the writing goes downhill. I wish I could understand why.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 12 Nov 2015, 19:58
Well, the more episodes I watch the more I realize I really enjoy this season so far.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: chaospersonified on 12 Nov 2015, 20:08
Well, the more episodes I watch the more I realize I really enjoy this season so far.

I gotta say, though my favorite is Eccleston, my first doctor, Tennant knocked it out of the park. I have my issues with his run, too, I'm critical of all Doctors but my first, but he did an amazing job.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 12 Nov 2015, 20:25
Every time Tennant says "what?!" is a good time, although I can't get over the whole "let's drown the episode in incidental music" approach the BBC had back then. I really really love the DoctorDonna season. In terms of production quality, writing and special effects, the series did a huge jump forward that year (and I wasn't that fond of Martha Jones).
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: chaospersonified on 12 Nov 2015, 20:33
Every time Tennant says "what?!" is a good time, although I can't get over the whole "let's drown the episode in incidental music" approach the BBC had back then. I really really love the DoctorDonna season. In terms of production quality, writing and special effects, the series did a huge jump forward that year (and I wasn't that fond of Martha Jones).

You share my opinion in these matters. Donna was amazing, potentially better than Rose season 2, though Rose's out would be near-impossible to match for sheer level of emotion.

Martha herself, not so terrible. The way they played her character, underutilizing her skills and over-emphasizing her crush on the Doctor... yeah, that's where the problems entered. What she did when the Doctor was gone, if she'd been that character throughout the season, fuck yes, amazing, but they didn't do that, now did they? I was fine with Martha, let down by the writers' choices in using her.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 12 Nov 2015, 23:57
i want to say how much i loved the resolution of the last story.

(click to show/hide)

it's one of my favorite scenes ever from the show.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 14 Nov 2015, 14:33
(http://i.imgur.com/sRQju0P.gif)
This post was sent from Tapatalk inside my phone!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 22 Nov 2015, 00:01
So, I decided to skip this season because I've been getting sick of a certain character, but I just learned from a recap of tonight's episode that I can come back because
(click to show/hide)

Of course, this also means that
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 22 Nov 2015, 20:06
DAMNIT DON'T READ THAT SPOILER
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 22 Nov 2015, 23:03
i really don't get why so many people hate clara.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 22 Nov 2015, 23:20
DAMNIT DON'T READ THAT SPOILER

Well, it is a rather big spoiler about the most recent episode, so you gotta tread carefully. But I just put it inside a second spoiler tag just to keep you safe.

i really don't get why so many people hate
(click to show/hide)

I don't really hate
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: hedgie on 22 Nov 2015, 23:28
DAMNIT DON'T READ THAT SPOILER

Well, it is a rather big spoiler about the most recent episode, so you gotta tread carefully. But I just put it inside a second spoiler tag just to keep you safe.
A double spoiler tag would probably make some people (myself included) *more* likely to take a look.  It's kind of like having a sign saying "do not press the button" followed by another sign with "I mean it, do *not* press the button".   Perfect bait for the insatiably curious.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 23 Nov 2015, 01:52
I want the next Companion to be male and for there to be absolutely zero romantic subtext with the Doctor. RTD overdid it with Rose Tyler and every attempt they've made to 'rediscover the magic' since Billie Piper left has only made it worse.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 23 Nov 2015, 04:51
See, my favorite companion was Donna. No romantic connection there whatsoever. Amy was a somewhat distant second, yet they really fucked up her arc towards the end.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 23 Nov 2015, 06:34
personally, i think they could get a lot more mileage out of the whole part-time companion idea if he had several that they could alternate between for different episodes.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 23 Nov 2015, 06:53
Purely FWIW, I'd love for the Doctor to have a Companion that was totally anti-Doctor. Someone that he has decided to keep around because:
As an example? Look up Douglas Adams' original treatment of 'Doctor Who and the Krikkitmen'. They pretty much anticipate Terminators about 10 years before the James Cameron film - human-looking combat robots but that are true robots rather than androids ('synthetic men').(1)

One idea I had for this never-completed mini-arc was for him to fiddle with the CPU on one of the Krikkitmen using his screwdriver to get its co-operation. Much to his shock, it slowly becomes fully sentient through the length of the arc. His morality prevents him from just destroying it at the adventure's end, so he brings it with him as a Companion, hoping to teach it a method of conflict resolution that doesn't summarise as 'Point gun at problem; pull trigger until problem is no longer there'.

Originally, this story was a Fourth Doctor story so Sarah Jane Smith was the default Companion. I guess I just liked the idea of having someone other than the Doctor on-hand to rescue her whenever she walked into the Monster of the Week.

FOOTNOTE
(1) - In classic sci-fi, androids tend to be more like Blade Runner Replicants than anything else - more biological than mechanical. True robots are those with non-organic 'brains', no matter how many biological components they have.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 23 Nov 2015, 14:58
I want the next Companion to be male and for there to be absolutely zero romantic subtext with the Doctor. RTD overdid it with Rose Tyler and every attempt they've made to 'rediscover the magic' since Billie Piper left has only made it worse.

I loved that scene in The Day of the Doctor when the War Doctor mistook Ten and Eleven for the Doctor's companions.  Little glimpse into what the show could look like.  Mind you, the TARDIS doesn't need to be a complete sausage-fest, but like you say, it would be great to have companions without romantic subtext.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 26 Nov 2015, 18:29
Finished watching the last episode...and man this season is a bummer
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 26 Nov 2015, 23:26
It tells you a lot about the decision makers for Doctor Who that Steven Moffat recently justified Clara's death scene by saying that the show is ffrequently what teaches Children about death.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 27 Nov 2015, 16:31
I think I'll wait on a new show runner before I care about Doctor Who again
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 28 Nov 2015, 13:16
(click to show/hide)

And...

(click to show/hide)

Finally...

(click to show/hide)

Next week's episode may be what The Day of the Doctor could have been but failed to be: Our final and absolute lesson in what The Doctor could be if he lost everything and became a monster.

Quote
"Rules? Good men don't need rules. This is a very bad day to find out why I need so many."
--The Eleventh Doctor
--Demon's Run

Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Zebediah on 29 Nov 2015, 17:17
Damn, but "Heaven Sent" was a damned good episode. Also disturbing as hell, when you think about it.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 30 Nov 2015, 14:17
(click to show/hide)

This series has been hot shit.

By the way what was with the complete non-ending of the sandmen episode? Or was I not paying attention?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 30 Nov 2015, 14:45
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Zebediah on 01 Dec 2015, 09:09
You know, my wife asked that exact same question.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 06 Dec 2015, 11:42
Read a synopsis of "Hell Bent," and I am very glad I didn't bother watching this season. 
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 06 Dec 2015, 11:48
...although the Christmas Special might be fun:


The only thing I hated about River Song was the fact that Moffat decided her entire story needed to revolve around the Eleventh Doctor.  Having her meet Twelve might make her character fun again.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Lines on 08 Dec 2015, 19:54
Ooo! I really like River Song, so I'll definitely be watching that.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: J on 09 Dec 2015, 01:21
i really look forward to seeing her work off of capaldi.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Masterpiece on 13 Dec 2015, 16:31
(https://www.qwertee.com/images/designs/png/42531.png)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Neko_Ali on 13 Dec 2015, 18:00
Biggest selfie I've ever seen...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 22 Jan 2016, 21:00
Good news, everyone!  Steven Moffat is leaving! (http://comicbook.com/2016/01/22/steven-moffat-leaving-doctor-who-after-season-10-broadchurch-cre/)

...in 2017 after the tenth season.  Still, hooray!
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 22 Jan 2016, 23:15
Furthermore, no new episodes this year except the Xmas Special. I wonder if the BBC has finally decreed a root-and-branch reorganization of the Doctor Who production office?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 23 Jan 2016, 23:02
If they were doing that, Moffat would've been kicked out completely, dontcha think?  Instead they're trusting him with the 10th series.  He gets to introduce a new Most Important Companion Ever and half-ass his way through another inane arc that doesn't hold up to scrutiny and is resolved last minute with Timey-Wimey shenanigans and/or The Power Of Love.  The delay until 2017 is apparently due to the Olympics and the Euros (football?).

I hope Capaldi sticks around for at least one Moffat-free series.  His tenure so far has been wasted with bad stories, so I'd love to see him play the Doctor with a different showrunner in place.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 24 Jan 2016, 15:35
Good news, everyone!  Steven Moffat is leaving! (http://comicbook.com/2016/01/22/steven-moffat-leaving-doctor-who-after-season-10-broadchurch-cre/)

...in 2017 after the tenth season.  Still, hooray!

(http://57.media.tumblr.com/6d890381e5e8394ab5be271aed5a17f9/tumblr_o109juFZSZ1saqi8wo1_540.gif)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Gladstone on 23 Apr 2016, 15:52
Pearl Mackie to play the Doctor's new companion "Bill." (http://io9.gizmodo.com/pearl-mackie-is-the-doctors-new-companion-1772638307)


Let's just hope she isn't The Most Important Companion Ever, like Clara was.

Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 24 Apr 2016, 00:05
No, it looks like they're going down the 'unimpressed mouthy street kid who's always trying to burst the Doctor's bubble' path instead.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Tova on 24 Apr 2016, 02:23
Are you extrapolating from a single data point, or is there material other than the video above?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 24 Apr 2016, 05:56
The way I see it, the trailer basically shows us how the production team want us to perceive Bill, at least at this stage of series 11. So, I feel safe in drawing inferences of this nature from it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 16 Apr 2017, 03:12
...Kris Marshall?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 13 May 2017, 19:01
...Uhm. Yeah. Interesting little twist there.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 14 Jul 2017, 15:02
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 16 Jul 2017, 09:07
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 16 Jul 2017, 15:04
Well, it looks like Chris Chibnall has decided to choose someone with whom he is familiar. He worked with Jodie Whittaker on the whodunnit Broadchurch.

My fear? That the producers chose to cast a woman, not on her merits or because it was a story waiting to be told but because they have no faith in the scripts anymore and are hoping that a sensationalist hype train may sustain the show for a few more seasons. Perhaps they realised that they can't just keep killing Companions to easily hold the audience's interest; no, now they're going to start playing around with the fundamental nature of The Doctor.

I hope that I'm wrong but that is my fear.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Tova on 16 Jul 2017, 15:17
I have the opposite views. The show has been stale for a long time, and needed a kick in the guts.  Maybe I'll start watching again.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 16 Jul 2017, 16:22
HOLY CRAP!!!!


That is all
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 16 Jul 2017, 16:49
Faye's English cousin?

Sent from my NXA8QC116 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 16 Jul 2017, 19:01
Opens new creative ground if they choose to pursue it.

Do Timelords get gender dysphoria?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 16 Jul 2017, 23:18
From the final episode of season 9, I got the impression that it is considered to be as much an occupational hazard as coming out with big ears or red hair. The Castilian of Gallifrey did remark that she was glad to be back in a female body.

If anything, the implication seems to be that there is a small statistical likelihood that you will regenerate into the objectively 'wrong' gender and that Gallifreyans had long since learned to accept that as a drawback of their biology.

I have the opposite views. The show has been stale for a long time, and needed a kick in the guts.  Maybe I'll start watching again.

That's the point, though, isn't it? This has the risk of being perceived as tokenism to stimulate audience interest when the right way to stimulate audience interest is to hire decent writing talent and stop the producers from trying to turn the show into a personal ego-driven display.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Tova on 17 Jul 2017, 00:46
I am completely confident that their choice of actor for the thirteenth doctor was driven by her nailing the audition and the promise of giving a female audience a hero rather than change for change's sake, as much as the show needs change.

There will be a be show runner as well, so I don't think there's much reason to suggest that all else will remain the same.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 17 Jul 2017, 16:17
Interestingly enough, this has been something that had been speculated on since the end of  Tom Baker's run as The Doctor,, but no-one really thought that they'd end up going down that route.

It shall prove interesting
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Tova on 18 Jul 2017, 15:10
Interestingly enough, this has been something that had been speculated on since the end of  Tom Baker's run as The Doctor,, but no-one really thought that they'd end up going down that route.

It shall prove interesting

Maybe back in Tom Baker's time no-one thought so, but I am sure I am not the only one who has seen it as almost inevitable ever since they foreshadowed the move with Missy.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Kugai on 18 Jul 2017, 19:21
It was also something they serieously considered towards the end before the  plug got pulled

One has to feel sorry for both Collin Baker and Silvester McCoy, the writing got lazy after Davidson left and they got lumbered with shoe shitty  Plotlines towards the end
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 18 Jul 2017, 23:35
They also decimated the budget. The Baker and Davidson-era costumes and props were getting better and better but those used in the Colin Baker and Sylvester McCoy eras were cheap, poorly constructed and generally awful (apart from one noticeable bright spot in the white 'Imperial' Daleks). There is nothing worse than watching a good show get progressively cancelled by a thousand cuts due to hostility from the executives of the channel over a period of seasons but Doctor Who fans went through that in the 1990s.

FWIW, it is my opinion that Sylvester McCoy's Doctor (and, to a lesser extent, Colin Baker's) set the scene for Matt Smith and Peter Capaldi's very alien and very morally ambiguous version of the character. There was some good writing in the McCoy seasons (The Psychic Circus being a personal favourite) but you could see some of the problems that would plague the reboot - Many stories had a great set-up but failed to follow it through as if the scriptwriters didn't really know how to resolve their own plots.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: JoeCovenant on 19 Jul 2017, 02:53

I've been into Dr Who for as long as I remember (I vaguely recall Troughton, but Pertwee was 'my' Doctor.)

And when it was brought back I 'kinda' liked Eccelstone... the "Run for your life" line gave a good idea of how he was going to play it, and ran well.

Then Tennant came in... And he re-wrote history.
He was a beautiful amalgamation of many of the best, past Doctors, and his sidekick wasn't another, squealing, "I've been captured!" plot device.

...and then Davies began to bring in his showbiz mates as cameos.
...and then there was the "Love Story".

And my interest plummeted.

I saw the first episode of Matt Smith, and nothing else.
I saw none of Capaldi.

My fear now is that after all the 'bravery' involved in creating a 'Female' Dr (Gender isn't quite the same thing in the Who-verse IIRC), that the writing will get lazy, or worse, self-referential to the fact that the Dr is a 'woman'... and god helps us, another love story. ("But we'll make this one with a girl just to stir the pot!")

Maybe I'm being a bit too cynical, but it just seems to have become Style over Substance.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: SubaruStephen on 21 Jul 2017, 17:50
*Sighs*

Still not ginger.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 21 Jul 2017, 19:12
It's incredibly funny. I never got into the original Who back when I was in HS (during the Baker-Davison era), though my friends would throw in occasional references. I always thought it was a snooty PBS show imported from Britain.

And then, years and years later... I got pulled in by some of the Matt Smith shenanigans. For some reason, the new Who stuff made sense, in a way the old stuff didn't. Unfortunately, I came on board during the "dead year" between Clara's departure and this past season.

I found this past season to be intriguing enough, interesting enough, and funny enough to want to keep watching through next season. And I'm also thrilled to see how a super-long-running show does a take on a complete gender swap of the main character.

I do agree with something that Sylvester McCoy said in a YT video clip: the role will completely change Ms. Whittaker's life. It is like no other role in the universe (literally).
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Tova on 21 Jul 2017, 23:02
And then, years and years later... I got pulled in by some of the Matt Smith shenanigans. For some reason, the new Who stuff made sense, in a way the old stuff didn't. Unfortunately, I came on board during the "dead year" between Clara's departure and this past season.

It's interesting you say so, because I recall feeling during the Matt Smith period that their episodes were much more aimed at their growing U.S. market. Various episodes took place in the U.S., and the general feel of the show somehow seemed to cater more to U.S. market tastes (I can't really justify this, it was just my feeling at the time).
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 25 Dec 2017, 20:05
Oh, brilliant.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 26 Dec 2017, 00:27
I honestly disliked that episode and felt that an hour had been taken from me that I should have enjoyed. It could have been the closing five minutes of The Doctor Falls and been several order of magnitudes better.

(click to show/hide)

FWIW, My mother, who is even more of a fan than I, said that The Doctor was hurting badly enough that the producers 'should let him die' rather than force the character to continue to suffer for our amusement.

IMHO, Jenna Coleman's Clara is good enough a character (as well as having her own TARDIS and being functionally immortal) that her 'taking up the mission' after The Doctor's death is plausible way out rather than find artificial means to extend The Doctor's life beyond the character's ability to tolerate continuing to live. Heck, she could even adopt the name and mantle, deciding the universe needed 'The Doctor' as a symbol more than any one actual person (what I call the 'Dread Pirate Robbards/Codename: V' trope).
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 26 Dec 2017, 04:34
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Tova on 26 Dec 2017, 04:42
I thought it was one of Moffat's better efforts, to be honest with you.

How do you feel about the oncoming era of Chris Chibnall?

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 26 Dec 2017, 04:59
How do you feel about the oncoming era of Chris Chibnall?

I don't know. Aside from the odd re-run here and there, I've only watched the last half-season or so of Matt Smith and all of Capaldi, so I've only really known Moffat's writing. I've tried to catch up on Netflix, but I haven't got more than an episode or two into Eccleston.



(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 06 Jan 2018, 14:04
Separate note: a friend of mine just met David Tenant at a comic con in New Orleans.

Jealous doesn't even begin to describe it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 20 Jan 2018, 14:19
Finally saw the Christmas special.

What a shitty episode. No plot whatsoever.

Some lovely bits of acting and writing in it, mind, like Gatiss' speech about being ready for death in the middle. Much better actor than writer, that fella...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Tova on 20 Jan 2018, 15:53
WHY DO YOU PEOPLE HATE FUN

Kidding. I think.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 20 Jan 2018, 18:39
It didn't feel very "special"-ly, to me - but I don't think I'd out and out call it a "####ty episode."

Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Blue Kitty on 21 Jan 2018, 16:56
It was my least favorite Christmas episode and felt like some what of a bad end to Capaldi's run. Also didn't like the, "The Doctor was a product of his time," thing
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: fantasticalice on 18 May 2018, 07:53
Noticed the Who thread has been dead for a bit. I just decided to make a digital subscription to Big Finish's monthly range and 2018 has been full of amazing Doctor Who.

And not just the monthly range. Anyone who's been feeling the Doctor Who itch I cannot recommend checking out BF's radio plays enough. Every monthly release of 2018 has been stellar, Third Doctor and Fourth Doctor adventures have been just impressive and there's a lot of promising spinoffs too.

There's a lot of freebies on the site and two 6th Doctpr adventures with Jago & Litefoot for 99p each right now.

Some of my all time favourite Doctor Who Adventures are books or radioplays and it will be a wee while before The Woman Falls To Earth in season 11.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 18 May 2018, 12:14
It's not dead, it's just that we're holding off on regeneration for a bit. I think this one's gonna a be a whopper. ;)

Seriously, I think any and all Who fans are hoping Jodie and Chris knock it out of the park for Six this upcoming season.

EDIT: Had to keep from mixing US and UK metaphors there.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: fantasticalice on 18 May 2018, 17:17
It's not dead, it's just that we're holding off on regeneration for a bit. I think this one's gonna a be a whopper. ;)

Seriously, I think any and all Who fans are hoping Jodie and Chris knock it out of the park this upcoming season.

I think they will. I grew up with Peter Davison and had never thought I wanted to be Doctor Who. And after seeing Jodie's reveal I wanted to be the Doctor for the first time ever.

It's changed everything about how I watch the series as I find I am relating to the Doctor in multiple plays and episodes and it's beautiful. I relate to Paul McGann's Doctor the mo st and I find myself wondering how many other women are going through the same thing. It's going to be exciting to see what kind of Doctor she is and I'm very excited to see. My current story I'm writing has her being nursed back to health after being beat up and having an axe put through her skull not long after regeneration.

I really need to work on it because I deliberately picked Izzy, the 8th Doctor's lesbian companion, because I wanted to show a strong sense of companionship, loyalty, and dedication between a woman and her mentor. No romance, just a former companion suddenly thrown back into the life of the Doctor who helped her discover who she is as a person.

I'm also super excited about our first Asian companion! There's so many exciting landmarks in the new series I think it will really fly. Also BB is being more cooperative with Big Finish on licencing which is lovely.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 16 Jul 2018, 22:00
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Theta9 on 17 Jul 2018, 12:06
Noticed the Who thread has been dead for a bit.
No, no, it's not dead. It's just resting. Probably pining for the fjords.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Grognard on 30 Jul 2018, 19:59
I'm excited but skittish about the new Doctor.
Capaldi was good, but I felt.... there was something missing in his portrayal of the Doctor.
But I think it was the writing, not the actor.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: pwhodges on 31 Jul 2018, 02:14
But the writing is influenced by the actor it's intended for.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 31 Jul 2018, 02:37
IMO, the writing for 'NewWho' has always been a bit uneven but began to seriously decline after the introduction of Jenna Coleman's Clara Oswald. Capaldi's time was forgettable for me and my concern is the introduction of Jodie Whittaker's incarnation of The Doctor is nothing but a desperate attempt by the BBC to create hype for a show that is creatively losing its way.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Theta9 on 31 Jul 2018, 08:21
IMO, the writing for 'NewWho' has always been a bit uneven but began to seriously decline after the introduction of Jenna Coleman's Clara Oswald. Capaldi's time was forgettable for me and my concern is the introduction of Jodie Whittaker's incarnation of The Doctor is nothing but a desperate attempt by the BBC to create hype for a show that is creatively losing its way.
I blame Moffatt. He wrote great single stories but as a show runner he was ass. A new show runner is what we need now. I'm cautiously optimistic.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Thrillho on 31 Jul 2018, 09:59
Intentions are not magic and for me that cuts both ways. Does it actually matter why we get a female Doctor?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Tova on 01 Aug 2018, 16:49
IMO, the writing for 'NewWho' has always been a bit uneven but began to seriously decline after the introduction of Jenna Coleman's Clara Oswald. Capaldi's time was forgettable for me and my concern is the introduction of Jodie Whittaker's incarnation of The Doctor is nothing but a desperate attempt by the BBC to create hype for a show that is creatively losing its way.

I'm with you when you say that the show has been in decline. It's a reasonable opinion.

However. You must think very little of Jodie Whittaker to claim that creating hype for the show is the sole reason to hire her.

Especially since I would have thought that hiring a new writer is more obviously an attempt to address the creative decline of the show.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Theta9 on 02 Aug 2018, 07:00
Five gets you ten, that when Whittaker eventually bows out, the role is recast as a white guy again.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 02 Aug 2018, 12:04
I'll take that. I think 14 will be a male of African or Asian descent.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Tova on 02 Aug 2018, 15:23
Call me hopelessly naive, but I think the audition process might have something to do with it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Theta9 on 02 Aug 2018, 17:23
Call me hopelessly naive, but I think the audition process might have something to do with it.
You're hopelessly naive.

There's no open casting call for a new Doctor. The producers offer auditions by invitation only.
Who gets invited? Mostly your usual white guys.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Tova on 02 Aug 2018, 19:40
Maybe? Do you know who they auditioned for the role this time? I don't.

Look, I can totally understand your cynicism. It's justified, no question. Casting a white male, not only in this iconic role but also in many others, has long been the norm. Still, to respond to the first ever casting of a female in the role with, "Yeah sure, but it won't happen again" seems churlish. Yes, okay, there's a selection process before they audition, that is so. But I imagine open auditions would be a nightmare.

While I can hardly claim with certainty that it won't be a white male next time, I don't see any reason to dismiss the possibility. I chose to remain optimistic about future casting. If that makes me hopelessly naive, then I'll wear that.

Everyone has their own incompatible designs on who should be cast, each for their own reasons. The only thing I can guarantee about the next casting is that there will be a loud chorus of whining about it from a subset of those whose designs were not met.

Unfortunately, claims regarding the motivations of the people responsible for casting such a culturally significant pop culture figure are unfalsifiable, as none of us can read their minds.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Pilchard123 on 03 Aug 2018, 01:00
Who gets invited?

Well, hopefully. The whole point is to find them.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 03 Aug 2018, 01:18
My concern was that the BBC cast Ms Whittaker simply as a publicity stunt dressed up as inclusivity in anticipation of her drawing in a large young, female audience. Because of this, I fear that she won't be given a fair chance; if she doesn't immediately start brining in enormous ratings, then they may not give her a chance to prove her ability but will be canned in favour of a return to a 'safe' casting.

Lots of in-house BBC productions suffer from this 'old white male pretending to be hip' syndrome.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: JoeCovenant on 03 Aug 2018, 01:36
The only Doctor from the new series who has had to 'audition' for the role was Matt Smith.

Eccleston was handed it.
Tennant's "audition" was down to working with Russel T Davies on Casanova
Capaldi was 'discussed' among the production staff (mainly Andy Pryor, Moffat and Minchin) and given the role after being walked through a reading. (Moffat was "obsessed" with seeing Capaldi as the Doctor)

But the casting of a female Timelord was on the cards almost as soon as Matt Smith took the role on.
Whittaker was called personally and asked to read by showruner Chris Chibnall (who she had worked with before) and whereas She has said she was up against other female's (but she didn't know who) HE has said only that he always wanted her for the role.

Personally I don;t care who plays the Doctor as long as they are good actors.
But if the rumour is true that they are brining in Bradley bloody Walsh as her 'companion'....
As well as a slew of other bog-standard soap actors etc... I'm dreading that it becomes another farce of bringing in the crew's mates and trendies which almost killed it for me in (new) series 3.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Tova on 03 Aug 2018, 01:52
I suppose time will tell on both counts.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Theta9 on 03 Aug 2018, 06:51
Look, I can totally understand your cynicism. It's justified, no question. Casting a white male, not only in this iconic role but also in many others, has long been the norm. Still, to respond to the first ever casting of a female in the role with, "Yeah sure, but it won't happen again" seems churlish. Yes, okay, there's a selection process before they audition, that is so. But I imagine open auditions would be a nightmare.
I live in the USA. After 43 white guys, they finally elected a man of color as President. Need I remind you what happened next? (PS: I just live here.)

I'm not dismissing the possibility. I just think another white guy is the most likely to follow Whittaker.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Neko_Ali on 03 Aug 2018, 08:09
I don't know if BBC producers are as risk-adverse as Hollywood producers, but I'd say it largely say it depends on how popular Jody Whittaker's Doctor is. If it's all gangbusters and people cheering in the streets, then sure we'll see more non-white dude Doctors. If her reception is less than stellar, then they'll probably rush back to what they know fast enough to give whiplash, the way it usually works. I truly think that Missy was testing the waters for a female Doctor. I think that the show writers have wanted to do it for a while, but to convince the producers they had to show that fans would accept that a Time Lord could change gender and still be popular. If Missy flopped or the push back had been strong then they could have just dropped it all and nothing more said. The next regeneration the Master would have been back to his villainous self and it would have been no more than a blip on the radar. But she proved to be hugely popular and thus, they are willing to try a female Doctor.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 03 Aug 2018, 09:22
Heck, the BBC has wanted to do away with the franchise regularly since they first "canned" it back in 1989. The suits still can't understand why everyone loves the crazy little TV show about an idiot in a blue box with a screwdriver.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: fantasticalice on 14 Aug 2018, 04:37
The only Doctor from the new series who has had to 'audition' for the role was Matt Smith.

Eccleston was handed it.
Tennant's "audition" was down to working with Russel T Davies on Casanova
Capaldi was 'discussed' among the production staff (mainly Andy Pryor, Moffat and Minchin) and given the role after being walked through a reading. (Moffat was "obsessed" with seeing Capaldi as the Doctor)

But the casting of a female Timelord was on the cards almost as soon as Matt Smith took the role on.
Whittaker was called personally and asked to read by showruner Chris Chibnall (who she had worked with before) and whereas She has said she was up against other female's (but she didn't know who) HE has said only that he always wanted her for the role.

Personally I don;t care who plays the Doctor as long as they are good actors.
But if the rumour is true that they are brining in Bradley bloody Walsh as her 'companion'....
As well as a slew of other bog-standard soap actors etc... I'm dreading that it becomes another farce of bringing in the crew's mates and trendies which almost killed it for me in (new) series 3.

Jodie also auditioned. It's been mostly confirmed that it was Just with other women but she did audition.

Also, she has a ridiculous amount of range. Between all her short films she has played gay, straight, bi/pan, a mother, a badass alienhunter, and even someone with gender identity issues(Very short film)

I'm curious who she beat out for the part but she has a real wide variety of.roles to pull inspiration from. Also in Trust Me she was brilliant and a lot of things she did(the way she gets angry) were quite intriguing.

But she DID audition. I've even gathered it may have been against a decent amount of people.

Walsh is an excellent actor. mandip's showreel is very impressive.

Tosin has only played Captain Blokey mcBloke Blokes in the roles I have seen. I trust Chibi but I hope he gets a chance to do some variation. Even something as simple as comic relief would be a departure.

Broadchurch was.phenomenal. And Torchwood consitently had fascinating ideas and I assert that Cyberwoman is actually a very moving story if you ignore her costume(Which was NOT in the script)

I think Jodie will be great. As a North Irish it also excites me to see two characters from the North of England.

The stygma is sadly similar. I don't hear as mich public vitriol on North Irish but we're even rarer than North of England accents on telly.

So both as a woman and someone with a Northern accent that is derided and criticised I feel very excited to be represented.

Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: JoeCovenant on 14 Aug 2018, 05:34
The only Doctor from the new series who has had to 'audition' for the role was Matt Smith.

Eccleston was handed it.
Tennant's "audition" was down to working with Russel T Davies on Casanova
Capaldi was 'discussed' among the production staff (mainly Andy Pryor, Moffat and Minchin) and given the role after being walked through a reading. (Moffat was "obsessed" with seeing Capaldi as the Doctor)

But the casting of a female Timelord was on the cards almost as soon as Matt Smith took the role on.
Whittaker was called personally and asked to read by showruner Chris Chibnall (who she had worked with before) and whereas She has said she was up against other female's (but she didn't know who) HE has said only that he always wanted her for the role.

Personally I don;t care who plays the Doctor as long as they are good actors.
But if the rumour is true that they are brining in Bradley bloody Walsh as her 'companion'....
As well as a slew of other bog-standard soap actors etc... I'm dreading that it becomes another farce of bringing in the crew's mates and trendies which almost killed it for me in (new) series 3.

Jodie also auditioned. It's been mostly confirmed that it was Just with other women but she did audition.

Also, she has a ridiculous amount of range. Between all her short films she has played gay, straight, bi/pan, a mother, a badass alienhunter, and even someone with gender identity issues(Very short film)

I'm curious who she beat out for the part but she has a real wide variety of.roles to pull inspiration from. Also in Trust Me she was brilliant and a lot of things she did(the way she gets angry) were quite intriguing.

But she DID audition. I've even gathered it may have been against a decent amount of people.

Walsh is an excellent actor. mandip's showreel is very impressive.

Tosin has only played Captain Blokey mcBloke Blokes in the roles I have seen. I trust Chibi but I hope he gets a chance to do some variation. Even something as simple as comic relief would be a departure.

Broadchurch was.phenomenal. And Torchwood consitently had fascinating ideas and I assert that Cyberwoman is actually a very moving story if you ignore her costume(Which was NOT in the script)

I think Jodie will be great. As a North Irish it also excites me to see two characters from the North of England.

The stygma is sadly similar. I don't hear as mich public vitriol on North Irish but we're even rarer than North of England accents on telly.

So both as a woman and someone with a Northern accent that is derided and criticised I feel very excited to be represented.

As I Said above...
She was asked in to read. That's an audition.

However, whereas she said she thought she was up against other actresses, she did not know who any of them were.
And the show runner has only ever said they wanted her.

That's not strictly an audition... that's "can you play THIS character as well as all the others we've seen you do?"
It's a required necessity... but not what we would call an "audition" in the normal sense of the word.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Tova on 14 Aug 2018, 06:47
I call BS.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/doctor-who-jodie-whittaker-auditon_uk_59a7d15be4b07e81d3554dee
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: JoeCovenant on 15 Aug 2018, 00:43
I call BS.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/doctor-who-jodie-whittaker-auditon_uk_59a7d15be4b07e81d3554dee

Maybe a mite 'strong' putting it that way...
But you know what, SO DO I !!

(Different website)
"Strevens reveals that he and Chibnall “saw a few actresses for the part,” but couldn’t stop thinking about Whittaker. “She was just so compelling,” says the EP. “In a way, it was a no-brainer. The fact that we were casting a female Doctor disappeared really quickly from our minds. We were just casting the Doctor and she felt like our Doctor.”
Chibnall says that casting Whittaker “was the easiest decision I made in my whole career.”"

That is the only place I've seen someone other than Whittaker say there were other actresses 'seen'.
(I still haven't seen CHibnall say anyone else was auditioned... but I don;t actually care either way TBH)

However, I still maintain that the audition process is still not quite the same as what we might call 'standard'.
Certainly 'not' an Open Audition... and I would imagine limited to less than a handful.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Tova on 15 Aug 2018, 01:33

"Strevens reveals that he and Chibnall “saw a few actresses for the part,” but couldn’t stop thinking about Whittaker. “She was just so compelling,” says the EP. “In a way, it was a no-brainer. The fact that we were casting a female Doctor disappeared really quickly from our minds. We were just casting the Doctor and she felt like our Doctor.”
Chibnall says that casting Whittaker “was the easiest decision I made in my whole career.”"

You really are interpreting these articles differently to the way I am.
You see, that says to me that he auditioned actresses but Whittaker was the strongest applicant.
Not that they didn't audition anyone else and only ever considered her.

Look, I'm not saying their audition was 'open' or 'standard' or whatever. Just that they did audition, and it did play a role in their decision. Otherwise why would they bother?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: JoeCovenant on 15 Aug 2018, 03:16

"Strevens reveals that he and Chibnall “saw a few actresses for the part,” but couldn’t stop thinking about Whittaker. “She was just so compelling,” says the EP. “In a way, it was a no-brainer. The fact that we were casting a female Doctor disappeared really quickly from our minds. We were just casting the Doctor and she felt like our Doctor.”
Chibnall says that casting Whittaker “was the easiest decision I made in my whole career.”"

You really are interpreting these articles differently to the way I am.
You see, that says to me that he auditioned actresses but Whittaker was the strongest applicant.
Not that they didn't audition anyone else and only ever considered her.

Look, I'm not saying their audition was 'open' or 'standard' or whatever. Just that they did audition, and it did play a role in their decision. Otherwise why would they bother?

No, I'm agreeing with you. :)
I might not be making it very clear though.

In a nutshell...
All I had ever seen until the article you quoted was;

-Whitaker saying she had auditioned... and that she *thought* other actress also had, but she did not know who they were.

-Chibnail saying he always wanted Whitaker in the role.

WHich to me says NO audtion, just a pre-requesite reading 'just to be sure'.

BUT - your quote brings Strevens into the equation.
Which I had not seen before.
And he does say others were seen...

So, whether it's true or not - it's two to one against... so I can only accept that! :)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 15 Aug 2018, 05:03
Would SOMEONE please tell the BBC that they NEED to give us a start date for the new season?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: JoeCovenant on 17 Aug 2018, 01:22
Would SOMEONE please tell the BBC that they NEED to give us a start date for the new season?

https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/1003007/Doctor-Who-season-11-spoilers-Jodie-Whittaker-Bradley-Walsh-Return-Date-BBC-Dr-Who


"By October"...  :)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 28 Sep 2018, 18:00
Hey everyone! Remember that "leaked clip" from a few months ago?

It's not "leaked' anymore...

Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 07 Oct 2018, 20:57
Well. That was interesting.

That last bit at the end wasn't exactly... understandable
(click to show/hide)
but it was a nice little episode.

Enough of a hook to want to watch it again next week.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 07 Oct 2018, 23:51
I quite liked it. Ms Whittaker is clearly going to have to grow into the role as all new lead performers must but, generally, it was a workman like episode that makes me think that the new production team know what they're doing.

I really appreciate one thing: No overt gender politics. The casting team and script-writers are just using performers from multiple ethnicities in a believable way, reminding us that all humans have common experiences, feelings, qualities and flaws. Similarly, we don't have a 'Woman Doctor' but The Doctor, the 'crazy old man in a magical blue box' who just happens to be in a female body this time around.

One critic has lambasted the episode for not emphasising Ms Whittaker's 'femininity and sexuality' more and that honestly made me wonder just what he was expecting from the show.

@jwhouk,
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: JoeCovenant on 08 Oct 2018, 00:32

That ending was significant as it reminded us that, ...


Haven't seen it yet - but don;t think that was quite ENOUGH of a spoiler there, Ben.... :(
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Ignominious on 08 Oct 2018, 01:12
Quite enjoyed that and not just because I recognise all of the locations that they used.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 08 Oct 2018, 01:29
FWIW, the way I would have handled it if a requirement from above was a female Doctor would have been to have either Georgia Moffett's Jenny or Jenna Coleman's Clara find out about the Doctor's death (maybe the TARDIS seeks them out because of some homing beacon effect that can be handwaved into existence with a single line of technobabble). Deciding that the universe needs The Doctor, they take up the fallen hero's mantle and name.

Instead of thus risking backlash from established fans, you instead have the possibility of a true 'new Doctor', with her own views and standards of behaviour who is, nonetheless, trying to be true to the original owner of the shoes she is trying to fill.

Clara is, of course, functionally immortal due to Twelve's stupid messing with space and time and Jenny, as a Gallifreyan, probably has the full twelve regenerations. So, in both cases, it is possible to recreate the 'different performer, same character' feature.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Ignominious on 08 Oct 2018, 05:23
I like the backlash from the "established fans".

Mind you, a lot of long running fans seem to have given their seal of approval to this latest incarnation so I think those "established fans" might not be the commanding force they think they are.

Several retcons have already established that the number of regenerations aren't really set in stone and The Master, at least, had already shown that Gallifreyan's aren't tied to a particular gender.

I think that inviting this backlash is quite important in allowing The Doctor and the show to reflect the prevailing social trend that these anachronistic opinions aren't really worth respecting and allowing fans to effectively dictate terms to creators shouldn't be a thing. When I see kids get excited about The Doctor being a woman, I know the show is serving a better audience than if they were appeasing a bunch of middle-aged windbags.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Cornelius on 08 Oct 2018, 08:29
Clara is, of course, functionally immortal due to Twelve's stupid messing with space and time and Jenny, as a Gallifreyan, probably has the full twelve regenerations. So, in both cases, it is possible to recreate the 'different performer, same character' feature.

I think Jenny might work, but Clara, not so much. Being functionally immortal due to being frozen in a moment, is a different animal than regeneration. Though, a bit of clever writing could possibly solve that.

Several retcons have already established that the number of regenerations aren't really set in stone and The Master, at least, had already shown that Gallifreyan's aren't tied to a particular gender.
There's that. And it's not exactly a surprise; if I remember correctly, there's been hints dropped since even before Missy entered. Not to mention that a part of the fanbase did want to see it happen.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Tova on 08 Oct 2018, 14:16
I enjoyed that episode. Whittaker was instantly recognisable as the Doctor. I'm feeling very optimistic after seeing this episode and a couple of interviews with her. I'm happy with Chibnall's writing debut as well.

I'm amused by the proposition that it's even remotely feasible to avoid 'risking backlash from established fans'. It's part and parcel of the role changing hands.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Ignominious on 08 Oct 2018, 15:12
I am highly amused at the amount of whinging that is going on over at twitter about the accents though. These aren't even the hardest ones we've got.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Theta9 on 25 Oct 2018, 07:24
...so, The Doctor might be Banksy? :?
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 25 Oct 2018, 07:42
The Doctor is a notorious name-dropper and braggart. The number of famous people they have claimed to have met or secretly be is too large even for one of their 1500 or so years.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: pwhodges on 25 Oct 2018, 11:24
(Just to remind (https://forums.questionablecontent.net/index.php/topic,28967.msg1276592.html#msg1276592) you)  :wink:
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 26 Oct 2018, 05:12
Now Paul. Just because you have that old Police Box out in front of your flat...
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Theta9 on 26 Oct 2018, 07:28
The Doctor is a notorious name-dropper and braggart. The number of famous people they have claimed to have met or secretly be is too large even for one of their 1500 or so years.
Merlin is confirmed though - see the 7th Doctor story "Battleground".
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 26 Oct 2018, 07:41
The Doctor is a notorious name-dropper and braggart. The number of famous people they have claimed to have met or secretly be is too large even for one of their 1500 or so years.

Merlin is confirmed though - see the 7th Doctor story "Battleground".

Merlin, I suspect, is one of the mistakes that the First Doctor made that led him to decide that stealing an obsolete TARDIS and vanishing from Galifrey was a good idea.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: Theta9 on 26 Oct 2018, 13:26
The Doctor is a notorious name-dropper and braggart. The number of famous people they have claimed to have met or secretly be is too large even for one of their 1500 or so years.

Merlin is confirmed though - see the 7th Doctor story "Battleground".

Merlin, I suspect, is one of the mistakes that the First Doctor made that led him to decide that stealing an obsolete TARDIS and vanishing from Galifrey was a good idea.
Nope, at the end of the novel Lungbarrow he says to Ace that he knows he can't be about to die, because he hasn't been Merlin yet.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: jwhouk on 19 Dec 2018, 08:19
OK, I've posted this elsewhere, might as well post it here too - my ranking of series 11:

10. Arachnids in the UK. The Trump-wannabe was a bit over-the-top, and the whole "how the spiders ended up back at the hotel" was a bit too much to swallow.

9. The Tsuranga Conundrum. It was actually a really good episode... until the Pting (aka "Stitch") showed up.

8. It Takes You Away. A great episode that had three bad moments: the parent just up and leaving his blind daughter; the whole sudden change-of-heart with Ryan towards Graham, and... the frog. The FROG.

7. The Battle of Ranskoor Av Kolos. I think practically everyone guessed who the villain was going to be about a third of the way through the episode. This didn't feel like it should have been a season finale, to be honest.

6. The Woman Who Fell to Earth. The big plus was that it was Jodie's debut as The Doctor. The minuses were that the characters seemed rather mopey on first glance, and the death of Grace just seemed so unnecessary.

5. The Witchfinders. This was one of those episodes that seemed to be targeted more toward the US crowd than the UK, as witch hunts are more "our" specialty. The pull-out that "it was aliens" was a bit... creepy, but it was something of a general tone for this whole series. It wasn't brash and brassy like 11, or old and brooding like 12, or silly and somewhat fun like 10. Oh, and a plus for finally dealing with the 800 lb. elephant in the room: "This was so much easier when I was a bloke."

4. The Ghost Monument. Okay, it was "part two" of the series opener, but it wasn't that bad. The Doctor was doing her usual "the ship's falling apart/Don't worry Yaz it'll be okay" thing, while promptly dealing with the issue of two competitors for a "survivor" prize on a planet designed to kill people. The planet's menace was a bit underwhelming (though Ryan going all "Leeeeeroooyyy Jenkinnnss!" on the sniperbots was hilarious). The best part of this one, of course, was seeing the interior of the new TARDIS.

3. Rosa. Oh, hello BBC America watchers! Here's your episode! Hey, whaddya know, racism still exists in the 25th century! Enough where someone takes a vortex manipulator and sets out to keep Rosa Parks from being arrested on the bus in Montgomery! Who'd have thought? My only complaint was that they avoided the obvious things - using the N word, for one. And what a gut punch for Graham there at the end. But this was probably the best episode of the early ones.

2. Demons of the Punjab. This is what we call "Yaz's Episode." It had layers, along with the whole MacGuffin of the wristwatch, the alien menace who weren't menaces, and "who's the real monster?" who The Doctor couldn't save. It also caused a bunch of Americans to look up the Indian-Pakistani Partition on Wikipedia. Who knew that drawing a line in the sand would be so problematic?

1. Kerblam! This just felt like a Doctor Who episode. The Fez, the secret cry for help, the companions all looking for answers, the bait-and-switches, the morality question, and the just... well silliness of an episode named "Kerblam!" Any one of the recent doctors could have done this episode, and nothing would have been questioned. (Okay, maybe Eccleston couldn't have done this one, but you get the point.)
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 27 Jan 2019, 07:42
I still think it would have been better to kill off The Doctor at the end of Season 10 and have someone else pick up the mantle. Maybe Jenna Coleman's Clara or Georgia Moffett's Jenny. When The TARDIS realises that The Doctor is dead, it flies to the closest match it can find in the time stream.

After an Xmas Special of denial and trying to persuade the TARDIS that she is not the person that she is looking for, the new leading lady in question realises that the universe needs The Doctor as a concept rather than the man himself. So, she takes up the mantle and becomes The Doctor to continue his work of helping the helpless and being the unexpected pebble on the road to universal catastrophe. You could then, as a script-writer, do almost whatever you want as this is a totally fresh character bringing her own perspective to the role of The Doctor both in- and out-of-universe.

Maybe bring back Suranne Jones as the avatar of the TARDIS's main computer, playing the role as the new young neophyte's adviser and mentor.

This would basically mean that show would be radically changed and re-balanced but this would not necessarily be a bad thing. It would be less the Travelling Paragon and more the Young Apprentice trying to fill a very large pair of empty shoes and thus be a kind of Hero's Journey all of its' own.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: TheEvilDog on 27 Jan 2019, 17:44
Doubtful, considering that the TARDIS never liked a lot of the Doctor's companions (in fact, it tried to send Jack to the end of time and it refused to open its doors for Clara). In fact, the only companion the TARDIS ever truly liked was River Song.

Here's the thing about the TARDIS. It is as much the Doctor's companion as it was a vessel to travel through time, space and dimensions. The Doctor claimed they stole the TARDIS, the TARDIS claim it stole the Doctor. The Doctor may change, but deep down at the character's core is the same person who sneaked onto an old Type 40 and set out from Galifrey. Passing the title to someone else, well. It wouldn't be the same for the TARDIS, because no matter what, whoever controlled the TARDIS wouldn't be their Doctor.
Title: Re: Doctor Who
Post by: BenRG on 27 Jan 2019, 23:19
I never suggested that she would like the new Doctor, only that she would recognise that they were needed (both in a broader sense and to give the TARDIS's own existence a meaning).


Fix'd tags