The Gamer's Quarter Forum Index The Gamer's Quarter
A quarterly publication
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

What's this? A Doctor Who thread?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Gamer's Quarter Forum Index -> Quarterly Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That was pretty great. The closest the show has come to real science fiction in ages. Burstin' with clever ideas! And it's interesting how, in theory, they provide structure for all of the emotional stuff. The only problem is, there isn't nearly enough room to do the emotional arcs justice. They just zip by, characters getting attached then traumatized by separation within a few minutes. It's like Curse of Fenric.

I know it's a cliche about the new series -- and one that I usually brush off -- that 45 minutes isn't enough time to tell the stories they want to tell. And usually that is nonsense. This year is different, though. So far we've hit two episodes that I think are lessened for their run time. This, and the Pompeii episode, each by rights should have been a two-parter.

Anyway. Hey, look, more terraforming. And another race or two (as such) fast-track repopulating itself.

Never mind all the business about the Doctor, and his apparently multiple children, all of whom seem to have died. And I'd have to watch it again, but did he imply that this happened "before anything" -- before An Unearthly Child? Or was that just more generally about when he had the kids?

Tonally, this feels more like a Tom Baker-era episode than anything we've had to date. And it's not just the mouse in the pocket...

So hold on. Partners in Crime is trademark Russel T Davies. Pompeii is Hartnell. Planet of the Ood is... pre-Tom Baker, anyway Elements of Hartnell, Troughton, and Pertwee. The Sontaran two-parter is like Pertwee by way of Eric Saward, sort of. This is like Tom Baker. Will the next episode be like a Davison story? And then the Moffat... well, no. His will be like a Moffat story. Will "Midnight" be like a Colin Baker one, then? Reading in stupid patterns, yes. Interesting, though.

On that note, there are a couple of ways to read the "She's too much like me" line. It seems like it was written as more of a character or existential observation, yet it was delivered as if there were more significance. Probably silly to read too much into it, but... what could that mean? The Doctor has trouble regenerating? Well, yes he does. But That the Doctor doesn't really regenerate properly, I mean? That there's something wrong or unusual with him, in that regard?

Or maybe that her being an extrapolation of him in particular means she doesn't have the biological resources to regenerate? Going out on a limb here, that might explain why she regenerated into... herself. Or it could just be because she's a girl, and -- well, we've seen Romana do her thing.

Anyway. Pretty good episode!

EDIT: OH! And Donna continues to be fantastic, both as written and as played. Turkey baster, indeed.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Harveyjames
the meteor kid
the meteor kid


Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 3636

PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 3:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eric-Jon, will you put warnings out when there is a Moffat episode due? I haven't really been watching the show, but I will gladly set aside time to watch the Moffat episodes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 5:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Three weeks. Next week is a Gareth Roberts thing. Not expecting lots from it, though I imagine it'll be genial enough. The following week is off for Eurovision. At the end of next week's episode, I expect an extended "back half" trailer rather like this one from last year.

Basically, from Moffat on, the season is in "serious mode" where everything begins to pull together and the tone should start to become kind of crazy-grim and continuity-drenched.

The first seven episodes are sort of a warm-up, establishing the themes and the players. The ride up. The Eurovision week off is the crest; then it all comes racing down. Last year the break was placed a week too early; it really should have come after episode seven, as it's happening this year. The first real break in series three comes after "42". That's also where all of the setup is finally complete. Martha is in it for the long haul; she gets her own key and an upgrade to her phone. Significantly, whereas the first seven episodes follow straight on from each other, there is a huge gap in time between each of the following stories.

Anyway. Yeah. Week after Eurovision.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 6:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Regarding the qualitative dynamics from series to series and within each series, here's a handy dandy chart.

A LIST:
Steven Moffat **+@$$
Russel T Davies ********++++++@@@@@@$$$$$$
Paul Cornell *@@
Robert Shearman *

B LIST:
Stephen Greenhorn @$
James Moran $
Keith Temple $
Gareth Roberts @$

C LIST:
Toby Whithouse +
Matt Jones ++
Helen Raynor @@$$
Matthew Graham +

D LIST:
Tom MacRae ++
Mark Gatiss *+
Chris Chibnall @

* = Series 1 (12 A; 1 D)
+ = Series 2 (7 A; 4 C; 3 D)
@ = Series 3 (9 A; 2B; 2 C; 1 D)
$ = Series 4 (8 A; 4 B; 2 C)

Series 1 is almost exclusively by "A" writers (most of that Davies himself), with one relative dud by Gatiss. And lo, it's pretty excellent; even Gatiss' episode is redeemed in retrospect. And it plays its larger role well enough, even if it's boring on its own.

Series 2 strips down to 7 episodes by "A" writers (again, mostly Davies himself -- and most of those are amongst his weakest, but never mind), shifts half of the series over to C- and D-string writers. It's by far the weakest, especially in the middle (AAACADDDCCACAA). So half the series (mostly in the middle) is by lesser writers, and most of the half by stronger writers is weak anyway. Mechanically, though: half adept; half not-so-adept.

Series three shifts things back again. A couple more by "A"-writers, and a couple shifted to not-great-but-solid writers, leaving only three in the hands of the lower half. Of course, they're amongst the worst episodes to date. As before, though, never mind that.

Series four... is interesting. At this point in the series (including the Christmas special) the pattern has been AABBCCB. After the obligatory Davies intro, we've got three "B" writer episodes; two "C". Result, a string of episodes that do a pretty good to great job of following and extrapolating the form without actually transcending it and doing something remarkable. This will continue next week, making the pattern AABBCCBB. After that, though, look what happens: AABBCCBBAAAAAA.

So basically, a first half by pretty good if unremarkable writers, then the entire back half by two of the three best writers on the show. Which is... well, compare to last year: AABACCBDAAAAAA. You can see a comparable structure. Presumably this is a concerted effort to avoid the series two phenomenon, and ensure a certain amount of editorial control as the series arc drives toward its conclusion.

It's episodes 2-7 where they differ. BACCBD (2007) versus BBCCBB (2008). Similar, only without the spikes. Neither excellent nor unfortunate writers during this period, this year. It's mostly the B team, with Helen Raynor delivering a much stronger story than she's done elsewhere (either Who or Torchwood). Apparent result: though it all is pretty solid and unobjectionable, it feels kind of structurally safe. Written to spec. Often very well! But then Ikea has a lot of really nice, cleverly-designed stuff...

So. Yeah. Tune in after Eurovision; that's where all the big guns come in, after a long and pleasant holding pattern. I'm expecting it to get pretty crazy.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 6:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What I find interesting is the implication that Moffat and Piers Wenger (the new Julie Gardner) have been at work on series five for a while now, scouting new writers and drawing up plans.

Mind, I haven't the faintest clue who Piers Wenger is or what he's like. But out of the new team (Moffat/Wenger/Liggat), two of them are pretty big yesses. Liggat's production to date has been fantastic, lending a sense of scope and an understated tone, to contrast with Phil Collinson's glossy 1990s primary colored bubblegum approach (which worked brilliantly in series one, mind). She did next week's episode, which, together with Graeme Harper's direction, I'm sure will do wonders at restraining Roberts' hyperactive froth. Which has its places, certainly.

What would a Moffat-shaped series of Doctor Who be like? How many episodes would he write? Who would he hire to write the others? How much structure would he impose? Presumably he wouldn't change things all that fundamentally from Davies' model; still, there will be some subtly huge differences.

I'm guessing he'll try to get Paul Cornell on-board, as the two of them are close friends. (Moffat was fictionalized as a character in the original Human Nature novel). Greenhorn is another clever Scot, so something tells me Moffat would find some kind of commonality there.

Beyond that, I wonder how much he'll dip into the existing Who pool; many of them seem connected more than anything to Davies. MacRae and Raynor, certainly. Gareth Roberts. Chris Chibnall. Davies, for what anything he says is worth anymore, has said once he's gone he's severing all ties, else he'd just feel like he was intruding. So for now I'll assume he won't be contributing scripts either -- though that would be sort of interesting, to see how he worked under Moffat's guidelines.

In Davies' first series, there were only four writers: Moffat, Cornell, Gatiss, and Shearman. I could see Moffat maybe writing six or eight episodes, grabbing Cornell for another two, maybe Greenhorn for another, and then some of Moffat's own friends to fill in the two or four other episodes.

Also, hey, he'll (probably) be writing for Tennant's Doctor -- who... is curiously suited to Moffat's twirly dialog.

Anyway, he's got a lot of time to work on this -- even considering all the other stuff Moffat has on the table right now (Tintin, especially). Though... maybe not so long after all, as I understand that series five is going to be shot in early 2009, immediately after the 2009 specials that are to conclude Davies' part in the show. Even so, a year for Moffat to plan a series of Doctor Who. Consider that he wrote "Blink" as last-minute filler, because he didn't have time to properly sit down and work out something more elaborate.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Harveyjames
the meteor kid
the meteor kid


Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 3636

PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 11:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excellent, sound exciting

Have you seen Moffat's sitcom, Coupling? It's very clever.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Tue May 13, 2008 2:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A couple of episodes, from right at the start. It seemed much like American sitcoms. I've been told several times that it gets better as it goes along.

Jekyll is half-brilliant, though -- the first half, directed by the guy who recently did the Sontaran two-parter. The second half gets caught up in itself.



Both of these are lousy. The packaging is nice. The only redeeming quality of either, really is the intro sequence to K-9 & Company. And they've remastered it from the original 35mm location film and soundtrack recording! So hey.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
purplechair
.
.


Joined: 28 Mar 2005
Posts: 378
Location: in my pants

PostPosted: Wed May 14, 2008 3:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What?!

- I hate Coupling
- I dislike most of Doctor Who
- I LOVE DOCTOR WHO WHEN IT'S WRITTEN BY THE GUY BEHIND COUPLING?!

World: upside-down.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Harveyjames
the meteor kid
the meteor kid


Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 3636

PostPosted: Wed May 14, 2008 4:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I used to hate Coupling because it struck me as a more shallow, more smarmily middle-class, less funny version of Friends! But, some of the scripts are incredibly clever. You'll have to take my word for it because I can't find any clips to back this up on Youtube Sad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Patrick Alexander
.
.


Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 123
Location: various

PostPosted: Wed May 14, 2008 8:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I remember Coupling being clever but not actually enjoyable.
_________________
Raymondo Person | Eegra | Things
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Harveyjames
the meteor kid
the meteor kid


Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 3636

PostPosted: Wed May 14, 2008 8:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, that's about right

The last episode with the baby being born was pretty good, though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Cycle
Mac daddy
Mac daddy


Joined: 08 Sep 2006
Posts: 2767

PostPosted: Wed May 14, 2008 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jekyll felt far too JOSS WHENDONY for my tastes. Like the guy behind the show was trying to be just like him, I found it very distracting. It was all the worst parts of Whendon's style, too. The guy who played Hyde/Jekyll was pretty great, though.

I remember enjoying Coupling! I only saw a few episodes but thought it was quite alright. Then again, I also enjoy Friends. GUILTY PLEASURE.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Wed May 14, 2008 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think Whedon comparisons are pretty hard to avoid in modern serial-based dramas -- especially fantasy and sci-fi; explicitly metaphor-based stuff. He more or less established what did and didn't work, bluntly enough that a ferret would understand. Since then everyone else has just been trying to find subtler or more interesting ways of covering the same ground.

I guess I can see what you mean here, though. Whedon tries hard to be clever, and sometimes succeeds -- albeit with a big, blinking arrow pointing at what he's done. Look how this narrative device is a metaphor for this character's plight. See that? Really, did you see it? Here, let me spell it out in dialog. Four times. Understand now?

Moffat can comes from the same postmodern school of narrative, and can at times get a little precious with his use of it. The difference, I think, is that he's simply a much more masterful and more confident writer. He reminds me more of Charlie Kaufman than Whedon. Whedon... he has the right ideas, but he's got a really clumsy hand and he's too concerned with proving himself. Moffat is more out to entertain himself. If he confuses other people, all the more fun.

I think the problem with the second half of Jekyll is that he doesn't seem like he's actually having fun; it seems very obligatory to me. Must somehow wrap up everything he's established, and it must be surprising and clever, or people will be disappointed. Let's see...

There were rumors that James Nesbitt would be the Eleventh Doctor. He was asked a few times in interviews, and he sounded perplexed and said he didn't even like Doctor Who. So no, he wouldn't take it even if it were offered. Then Moffat came along and started to bark at people on the forums, telling them to leave the guy alone. He wasn't going to do it, and that was that. So. Sounds like he's not going to do it. Still, he'd be pretty great, wouldn't he!

A lot of people seem to have problems with Nesbitt. Anyone know why? The way I hear people whine about him, you'd think he was the male Catherine Tate.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Wed May 14, 2008 10:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

purplechair wrote:
What?!

- I hate Coupling
- I dislike most of Doctor Who
- I LOVE DOCTOR WHO WHEN IT'S WRITTEN BY THE GUY BEHIND COUPLING?!

World: upside-down.

This might make some sense of things?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xkZhAtjT8U

Wrong aspect ratio. Hm.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Harveyjames
the meteor kid
the meteor kid


Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 3636

PostPosted: Thu May 15, 2008 12:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not sure why people would hate Nesbitt, but he's been around for ever and he's a very visible actor, having starred in long-runing ad campaigns in the UK. Also, he's a housewives' favorite. Maybe he's too populist for Dr. Who fans? I think because of his cheeky-chappy persona there's a worry he'd be too similar to the last two Doctors.

Um. And he already said he doesn't like Dr. Who, so there's that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
purplechair
.
.


Joined: 28 Mar 2005
Posts: 378
Location: in my pants

PostPosted: Thu May 15, 2008 3:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I find it hard to really dislike him, but I'm sick of all these 'hard man' roles he's been doing lately. He's like an Irish Ross Kemp.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Cycle
Mac daddy
Mac daddy


Joined: 08 Sep 2006
Posts: 2767

PostPosted: Thu May 15, 2008 5:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Xena did everything Buffy did and better, damnit. Whendon got all his ideas from there. And yeah Jekyll sure got less interesting towards the end! Pretty dissapointing, it started well.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shapermc
Hot Sake!
Hot Sake!


Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 6279

PostPosted: Thu May 15, 2008 12:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok, so I guess that I thought that the episode of the Doctor's Daughter was totally shit. It was probably worse than Fear Her, because that was just boring, the Doctors Daughter fucks with cannon.

I mean, the proper title for this episode should have been called conveniences. Because nothing was set up properly and events happen out of convince to the plot and nothing else. It was pretty shit.

Also, I still don't like Donna.
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932

"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Thu May 15, 2008 2:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cycle wrote:
Xena did everything Buffy did and better, damnit. Whendon got all his ideas from there.

Yeah, nothing Whedon did was really very original, even within TV; he just did it all in such a one-two-three tutorial style, with just the right amount of visibility, at just the right time, as to be incredibly influential. No big surprise he hasn't managed it again! (Though some people like Firefly a lot...)

How does The Doctor's Daughter fuck with canon? By adding this new character?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Shapermc
Hot Sake!
Hot Sake!


Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 6279

PostPosted: Thu May 15, 2008 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aderack wrote:
How does The Doctor's Daughter fuck with canon? By adding this new character?

Yes. Mostly.

The rest of my anger is directed at how conveniently things happen, or are brought back out of seemingly nowhere (i.e: the doctors hand). I was kind of hoping that the hand was a red herring and that it was actually Rose doing this, but nooooooooo.
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932

"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
baron patsy
.
.


Joined: 15 Feb 2005
Posts: 58

PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shapermc wrote:
aderack wrote:
How does The Doctor's Daughter fuck with canon? By adding this new character?

Yes. Mostly.

The rest of my anger is directed at how conveniently things happen, or are brought back out of seemingly nowhere (i.e: the doctors hand). I was kind of hoping that the hand was a red herring and that it was actually Rose doing this, but nooooooooo.


The hand wasn't really brought back out of nowhere, though. It just hadn't been mentioned for a while. And personally, I would've been more peeved if it had been "Rose doing it" instead of the hand.

Overall I didn't really mind The Doctor's Daughter, but I thought the bits about, well, the Doctor's Daughter seemed kind of out of place and unnecessary. It would have been an interesting, fairly clever story without it. And yeah, as Aderack said, feels a bit like a Baker story. Which is completely fine with me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Regarding the Cristie thing: As I was expecting, a bit of genial fluff -- rather like the previous Roberts episode, though a bit better. As with The Shakespeare Code, there were a few references and moments that seemed ill-judged (and not just the charades, which had been done twice before, better, with this same Doctor; often smaller things, like the vocal buzzing).

Probably this has thrilled me the least of all episodes this year. Again, though, it's all right, if nothing particularly amazing. The one thing that did bother me was the trailer for Moffat's episode. That really did not sell it well...

You know what this episode reminds me of? It plays the way the new Doctor Who novels read. Mind, the only redeemable one of those I've read was by Gareth Roberts...

I say, this series has been awfully lightweight so far. I suppose that's what Davies was talking about, when he said not to expect doom and gloom at the start of series four?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ashura
.
.


Joined: 02 Dec 2006
Posts: 109

PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 8:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Moffat as showrunner: I assume he'll at least TRY to get Davies to write a single episode.

Also, I figure Davies will still be the exec producer, even if he's not everything else anymore.


Last edited by Ashura on Sun May 18, 2008 8:24 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, I'd think so. The thing that makes me wonder is that Davies has recently said a couple of times that when he leaves, he plans to sever all times. No use in hanging around, telling people what to do. But then, you know how much stock to put into much of what he says.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ashura
.
.


Joined: 02 Dec 2006
Posts: 109

PostPosted: Sun May 18, 2008 12:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Also, I wanted to say.

The way The Doctor's Daughter is paced seems like what 42 should've been if it was a good episode.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
baron patsy
.
.


Joined: 15 Feb 2005
Posts: 58

PostPosted: Sun May 18, 2008 12:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hmm. "Ginger beer" is apparently English slang for a homosexual person.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Shapermc
Hot Sake!
Hot Sake!


Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 6279

PostPosted: Sun May 18, 2008 4:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

baron patsy wrote:
Hmm. "Ginger beer" is apparently English slang for a homosexual person.

English as in British? Because there really is Ginger Beer here in the states and it's pretty good stuff*.






*not homo.
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932

"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
baron patsy
.
.


Joined: 15 Feb 2005
Posts: 58

PostPosted: Sun May 18, 2008 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shapermc wrote:
baron patsy wrote:
Hmm. "Ginger beer" is apparently English slang for a homosexual person.

English as in British? Because there really is Ginger Beer here in the states and it's pretty good stuff*.






*not homo.


Yeah, apparently it's "cockney slang". This was only brought to my attention in the Something Awful Who thread, when a bunch of people were scoffing at the "latest gay joke" and it was revealed to be the Doctor grabbing the gay houseboy and shouting "GINGER BEER!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
vision
.
.


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 57

PostPosted: Sun May 18, 2008 10:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

--

Last edited by vision on Sun Jul 10, 2011 9:39 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sun May 18, 2008 11:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Raspberry tart = fart
Cobblers' awls = balls

I just watched a marathon of Voyage of the Damned through Unicorn in the Wasp with someone who hadn't seen any Who since last year, and when strung all back-to-back like that I was struck with how consistent it all feels in tone and quality. And the repeated themes and details really begin to glare out as obvious patterns. Way more than the past two years, it feels like a pretty consistent narrative that's building somewhere. Probably more than series one, even, as things didn't really start to add up until somewhere around Boom Town. (And I don't just mean Bad Wolf.)

Also, the running gags like the "we're not a couple" business, seem funnier in rapid succession like this -- whereas just having them in every week's episode, in its own right, seems kind of repetitious.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Shapermc
Hot Sake!
Hot Sake!


Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 6279

PostPosted: Mon May 19, 2008 8:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

baron patsy wrote:
The hand wasn't really brought back out of nowhere, though. It just hadn't been mentioned for a while. And personally, I would've been more peeved if it had been "Rose doing it" instead of the hand.

At least if it had been rose the build up from her making a cameo or being mentioned in every episode this season would have led up to this. Unlike ... say, the hand which hasn't been brought up or shown this season yet (I don't think).
Ashura wrote:
The way The Doctor's Daughter is paced seems like what 42 should've been if it was a good episode.

Wait, ok I've read this a few times and, which one was the good episode and which one wasn't? I actually quite liked 42 (not that I think it could be pulled off again), and the pace of it was so breakneck that it made up for some of the weaker story elements.
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932

"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Ashura
.
.


Joined: 02 Dec 2006
Posts: 109

PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 10:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

42 was the awful episode, in my mind. The only thing worse in that season was the Dalek two parter.

It was like a less interesting version of The Satan Pit two parter from the year before. It did nothing really new to go along with its 'theme' (a real time episode). It was about an entity infecting people's minds on a space station, and that was pretty much it. The only interesting part was the pulp culture questions on the door locks, and even that was tertiary.

The Doctor's Daughter could've been done/billed in the same manner (IE: real time), what with its breakneck pacing, and been more interesting than 42. That is to say, I liked the Doctor's Daughter as an episode quite a bit, despite the pacing issues.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shapermc
Hot Sake!
Hot Sake!


Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 6279

PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I completely disagree with you actually. I liked 42 and the Daleks in Manhattan. Granted that DiM didn't really need two episodes, and the americans were... well stereotyped in all the wrong ways, but I liked it. The Doctor's Daughter is probably the worst episode since Fear Her, which is possibly the worst episode ever on the new Series if for no other reason than it's terribly written, paced, and acted. It's a filler episode and a terrible one.
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932

"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Dracko
.
.


Joined: 10 Oct 2005
Posts: 2613

PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 3:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/may/20/bbc.television2

This means I might actually start giving a fuck about this otherwise horrible, horrible series you should all feel bad about for liking.

P.S. When is Whedon going to fall into a woodchipper feet first already?
_________________
"This is the most fun I've ever had without being drenched in the blood of my enemies!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 3:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello, sunshine. Where's that backrub you promised?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Dracko
.
.


Joined: 10 Oct 2005
Posts: 2613

PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 3:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

More like belt sanding.
_________________
"This is the most fun I've ever had without being drenched in the blood of my enemies!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Shapermc
Hot Sake!
Hot Sake!


Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 6279

PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 3:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dracko wrote:
This means I might actually start giving a fuck about this otherwise horrible, horrible series you should all feel bad about for liking.

You've crushed my soul ;_;
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932

"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Dracko
.
.


Joined: 10 Oct 2005
Posts: 2613

PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's okay: It was metastasising already.

I've done you a favour. ^_^

Wait, you haven't actually clicked the link, have you?
_________________
"This is the most fun I've ever had without being drenched in the blood of my enemies!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Harveyjames
the meteor kid
the meteor kid


Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 3636

PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 4:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stop trolling, Dracko. You'll have to forgive me if this is an unfashionably late entry on a subject that's been pulverized into memepulp by the Kotakusphere, but hey.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Dracko
.
.


Joined: 10 Oct 2005
Posts: 2613

PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Who the Hell reads Kotaku?

Doctor Who fans are to science-fiction what trainspotters are to fucntional human beings.
_________________
"This is the most fun I've ever had without being drenched in the blood of my enemies!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Shapermc
Hot Sake!
Hot Sake!


Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 6279

PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 9:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Doctor Who is so far away from hard sci-fi it's not even funny. I enjoy it much like I enjoy terrible action movies, or cheesy horror flicks.
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932

"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Wed May 21, 2008 1:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey ho. Let's all talk about Dracko's penis now.

Mum mum mum, look at that cock! Oh dear Bessie, it's like corn on the cob. Where's my butter?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Harveyjames
the meteor kid
the meteor kid


Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 3636

PostPosted: Wed May 21, 2008 2:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

aderack wrote:
Hey ho. Let's all talk about Dracko's penis now.


You'll have to forgive me if this is an unfashionably late entry on a subject that's been pulverized into memepulp by the Kotakusphere, but hey.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ashura
.
.


Joined: 02 Dec 2006
Posts: 109

PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 11:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

aderack wrote:
Oh dear Bessie, it's like corn on the cob. Where's my butter?




:O ?

While I disagree with the rest, I think Fear Her is one of the worst episodes, yeah. The great thing though about Doctor Who is, sort of like King of Fighters, there's so many of them, there's generally a game/episode for everyone.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 6:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And then there's the hair.




Mind, I don't know where this comes in.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Fri May 23, 2008 12:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steven Moffat wrote:
It's a discussion for people making the show. It's about a tone and taste - Doctor Who (whatever the composition of the audience) is absolutely a childrens show in terms of its strictures, limits and imperatives. All the talk at meetings is about what the eight-year-olds will think. Cos igniting the imaginations of eight-year-olds is pretty much - no, is EXACTLY - the mission statement.

A side benefit, of course, is that adults are in fact eight-year-olds with increased body-mass and frowning. So of course, THEY'LL watch! Of course they will. Get it right for the eight-year-olds and the adults will follow - nothing is more certain.

It's like - no really, it is - when you go into a restaurant, and you're looking at the menu, and you're being all adult, and you're thinking, ooh, maybe lettuce soup, or a carrot rissotto, or perhaps just a glass of water and slap from the Maitre D ... and your eye drifts (oh, how it drifts) to the children's menu!

Sausage and mash! Burger and fries!! Actual size chocolate pigs!!!

Doctor Who is the children's menu. Like you're ever gonna grow out of that.


Steven Moffat


PS. There will be people who argue the children's menu is actually the adults menu. Let them. They're not going to be around for long.

_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Patrick Alexander
.
.


Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 123
Location: various

PostPosted: Fri May 23, 2008 2:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Of course when he does make a children's show he makes Press Gang, so...
_________________
Raymondo Person | Eegra | Things
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Fri May 23, 2008 10:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't know what that means. Haven't seen it! I've heard it's pretty decent?

What, do all the kids give each other blowjobs in their free periods?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sat May 24, 2008 1:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Man, this HAS been seeded for a long time. In Torchwood, too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgFSq43ceiM

Again, no episode today. This is a consolation prize of sorts. Will resume next week.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
aderack
.
.


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1105
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sat May 24, 2008 6:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That trailer maker on the BBC's site is really limited. This is pretty much straining the limits of what is possible.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Gamer's Quarter Forum Index -> Quarterly Discussion All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19  Next
Page 15 of 19

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group