Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2020 18:53:06 GMT 1
The 1996 Doctor Who TV Movie. It's a deeply flawed but immensively enjoyable little standalone film. On one hand, Paul McGann, who plays the 8th Doctor, deserved so much better than he's gotten since then. On the other hand, this film also tried to do some very questionable things with the "Doctor Who" canon and I can see why BBC and the various showrunners in charge since then have wanted to distance themselves from it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2020 20:01:35 GMT 1
The 1996 Doctor Who TV Movie. It's a deeply flawed but immensively enjoyable little standalone film. On one hand, Paul McGann, who plays the 8th Doctor, deserved so much better than he's gotten since then. On the other hand, this film also tried to do some very questionable things with the "Doctor Who" canon and I can see why BBC and the various showrunners in charge since then have wanted to distance themselves from it. And yet it still influenced much of what was to come in New Who.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2020 21:58:35 GMT 1
The 1996 Doctor Who TV Movie. It's a deeply flawed but immensively enjoyable little standalone film. On one hand, Paul McGann, who plays the 8th Doctor, deserved so much better than he's gotten since then. On the other hand, this film also tried to do some very questionable things with the "Doctor Who" canon and I can see why BBC and the various showrunners in charge since then have wanted to distance themselves from it. And yet it still influenced much of what was to come in New Who. Yes, but usually not overtly. Thank goodness they dumped that "half-human" part altogether, though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2020 23:53:14 GMT 1
And yet it still influenced much of what was to come in New Who. Yes, but usually not overtly. Thank goodness they dumped that "half-human" part altogether, though. As a Whovian - or at least a former one - I thought that was rather a shame. I liked the concept because it finally gave a reasonably logical reason for the Doctor's unusually high interest in Earth, when there are so many other worlds to choose from.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 0:44:20 GMT 1
Yes, but usually not overtly. Thank goodness they dumped that "half-human" part altogether, though. As a Whovian - or at least a former one - I thought that was rather a shame. I liked the concept because it finally gave a reasonably logical reason for the Doctor's unusually high interest in Earth, when there are so many other worlds to choose from. Unneeded, unnecessary. We saw The Doctor's reasons for becoming interested in Earth and falling in love with humanity, first-hand. In the first three years of the Classic Series, his experiences with Ian and Barbara, then Vicky, Steven, Ben, Polly, and his other human companions are what made him fall in love with humanity. Those experiences are what changed him from being an arrogant and impartial Time-Lord not unlike the rest of his species into The Doctor we know and love. Just making him half-human is a copout and lazy, because the answers already exist, starting in the pilot episode, "An Unearthly Child". I would never have touched New Who with a ten foot pole if they'd kept that insipid explanation about his mother being human canon. I'm able to tolerate the 1996 film because I know it's only present there. The Doctor's loyalty to Earth is touching not because he's half-one of us, but because he is this otherworldly being that spent time with some of us and saw something very worthwhile. That is so much more meaningful than "My mum was human." I'm sorry if this comes on very strong, but I am very, very opposed to The Doctor being half-human.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 1:51:02 GMT 1
As a Whovian - or at least a former one - I thought that was rather a shame. I liked the concept because it finally gave a reasonably logical reason for the Doctor's unusually high interest in Earth, when there are so many other worlds to choose from. Unneeded, unnecessary. We saw The Doctor's reasons for becoming interested in Earth and falling in love with humanity, first-hand. In the first three years of the Classic Series, his experiences with Ian and Barbara, then Vicky, Steven, Ben, Polly, and his other human companions are what made him fall in love with humanity. Those experiences are what changed him from being an arrogant and impartial Time-Lord not unlike the rest of his species into The Doctor we know and love. Just making him half-human is a copout and lazy, because the answers already exist, starting in the pilot episode, "An Unearthly Child". I would never have touched New Who with a ten foot pole if they'd kept that insipid explanation about his mother being human canon. I'm able to tolerate the 1996 film because I know it's only present there. The Doctor's loyalty to Earth is touching not because he's half-one of us, but because he is this otherworldly being that spent time with some of us and saw something very worthwhile. That is so much more meaningful than "My mum was human." I'm sorry if this comes on very strong, but I am very, very opposed to The Doctor being half-human. Very needed. Very necessary. No, we saw a lazy, Earth-centric view of the Universe presented by people who lacked vision and imagination. There are billions of other civilizations in existence, but this wanderer in space and time just happened to keep showing up on one single world again and again...? Bullshit. If you want a lazy cop-out, let's consider a TV series where all of space and time is the background, yet the majority of it is set on one planet within the lifetime of an average member of its dominant species... Bullshit. I've never cared for New Who myself... and personally, I always felt it should've ended after the Doctor's thirteenth life. Every good story needs a beginning, a middle and an end. And as for you not liking the Doctor being half-Human, how do you feel about him, her, it not even being a Gallifreyan or a Time Lord? Or capable of being male, female and even various other species... including lower order animals? And no, your opinion wasn't very strong, or strong, or anything of the sort. I've been reading this sort of thing for nearly 20 years... there's nothing new here. I realize I'm on the outer with my opinions, but after everything that New Who has done to damage the legacy and reputation of DOCTOR WHO, I no longer care.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 2:28:15 GMT 1
Unneeded, unnecessary. We saw The Doctor's reasons for becoming interested in Earth and falling in love with humanity, first-hand. In the first three years of the Classic Series, his experiences with Ian and Barbara, then Vicky, Steven, Ben, Polly, and his other human companions are what made him fall in love with humanity. Those experiences are what changed him from being an arrogant and impartial Time-Lord not unlike the rest of his species into The Doctor we know and love. Just making him half-human is a copout and lazy, because the answers already exist, starting in the pilot episode, "An Unearthly Child". I would never have touched New Who with a ten foot pole if they'd kept that insipid explanation about his mother being human canon. I'm able to tolerate the 1996 film because I know it's only present there. The Doctor's loyalty to Earth is touching not because he's half-one of us, but because he is this otherworldly being that spent time with some of us and saw something very worthwhile. That is so much more meaningful than "My mum was human." I'm sorry if this comes on very strong, but I am very, very opposed to The Doctor being half-human. Very needed. Very necessary. No, we saw a lazy, Earth-centric view of the Universe presented by people who lacked vision and imagination. There are billions of other civilizations in existence, but this wanderer in space and time just happened to keep showing up on one single world again and again...? Bullshit. If you want a lazy cop-out, let's consider a TV series where all of space and time is the background, yet the majority of it is set on one planet within the lifetime of an average member of its dominant species... Bullshit. I've never cared for New Who myself... and personally, I always felt it should've ended after the Doctor's thirteenth life. Every good story needs a beginning, a middle and an end. And as for you not liking the Doctor being half-Human, how do you feel about him, her, it not even being a Gallifreyan or a Time Lord? Or capable of being male, female and even various other species... including lower order animals? And no, your opinion wasn't very strong, or strong, or anything of the sort. I've been reading this sort of thing for nearly 20 years... there's nothing new here. I realize I'm on the outer with my opinions, but after everything that New Who has done to damage the legacy and reputation of DOCTOR WHO, I no longer care. Very unneeded. Very unnecessary. We're just gonna have to agree to disagree on this every regard, then. "Doctor Who" coming back time and again to visit various points in Earth's history never bothered me, because that's part of the show's identity. Since you're asking about the Jodie Whitaker years, no, I'm not a fan of them or what they've done to the character or canon of Doctor Who. The Doctor: full-blooded Gallifreyan, male. Period. My opinion is strong, I don't care what you've read for 20 years. Breathing isn't new, either, but I don't see you dismissing that rudely. My opinion is my opinion and I am very firm about it. Don't you dare undermine me or my opinions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 2:51:35 GMT 1
Very needed. Very necessary. No, we saw a lazy, Earth-centric view of the Universe presented by people who lacked vision and imagination. There are billions of other civilizations in existence, but this wanderer in space and time just happened to keep showing up on one single world again and again...? Bullshit. If you want a lazy cop-out, let's consider a TV series where all of space and time is the background, yet the majority of it is set on one planet within the lifetime of an average member of its dominant species... Bullshit. I've never cared for New Who myself... and personally, I always felt it should've ended after the Doctor's thirteenth life. Every good story needs a beginning, a middle and an end. And as for you not liking the Doctor being half-Human, how do you feel about him, her, it not even being a Gallifreyan or a Time Lord? Or capable of being male, female and even various other species... including lower order animals? And no, your opinion wasn't very strong, or strong, or anything of the sort. I've been reading this sort of thing for nearly 20 years... there's nothing new here. I realize I'm on the outer with my opinions, but after everything that New Who has done to damage the legacy and reputation of DOCTOR WHO, I no longer care. Very unneeded. Very unnecessary. We're just gonna have to agree to disagree on this every regard, then. "Doctor Who" coming back time and again to visit various points in Earth's history never bothered me, because that's part of the show's identity. Since you're asking about the Jodie Whitaker years, no, I'm not a fan of them or what they've done to the character or canon of Doctor Who. The Doctor: full-blooded Gallifreyan, male. Period. My opinion is strong, I don't care what you've read for 20 years. Breathing isn't new, either, but I don't see you dismissing that rudely. My opinion is my opinion and I am very firm about it. Don't you dare undermine me or my opinions. Very needed. Very necessary. An excellent suggestion, which I was considering making myself. At least we agree on something. Actually, I wasn't... but I have some "similar" views... I was originally planning to quit at the end of Matt Smith's run, but Capaldi just looked so... appealing. What a shame his run was as disappointing as the rest of New Who. You're opinion is your opinion... strong, weak or indifferent. It's probably no better or worse than anyone else's... depending upon the topic. Breathing is an irrelevant comparison... I wasn't being rude... simply to the point. No offence was meant and if you took any, that's on you. As for what you do or don't choose to get firm about... that's your prerogative. If you can't take it, you shouldn't give it... that's what you were doing to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 3:02:54 GMT 1
Very unneeded. Very unnecessary. We're just gonna have to agree to disagree on this every regard, then. "Doctor Who" coming back time and again to visit various points in Earth's history never bothered me, because that's part of the show's identity. Since you're asking about the Jodie Whitaker years, no, I'm not a fan of them or what they've done to the character or canon of Doctor Who. The Doctor: full-blooded Gallifreyan, male. Period. My opinion is strong, I don't care what you've read for 20 years. Breathing isn't new, either, but I don't see you dismissing that rudely. My opinion is my opinion and I am very firm about it. Don't you dare undermine me or my opinions. Very needed. Very necessary. An excellent suggestion, which I was considering making myself. At least we agree on something. Actually, I wasn't... but I have some "similar" views... I was originally planning to quit at the end of Matt Smith's run, but Capaldi just looked so... appealing. What a shame his run was as disappointing as the rest of New Who. You're opinion is your opinion... strong, weak or indifferent. It's probably no better or worse than anyone else's... depending upon the topic. Breathing is an irrelevant comparison... I wasn't being rude... simply to the point. No offence was meant and if you took any, that's on you. As for what you do or don't choose to get firm about... that's your prerogative. If you can't take it, you shouldn't give it... that's what you were doing to me. The bit about the Doctor being able to be man, woman, animal, or vegetable led me towards Jodie Whittaker. I'm fine with New Who until we get to Capaldi. Can't say I share the same dislike for New Who as a whole with you, but I understand it. It has it's obvious shortcomings, especially in the lack of variety in modern companions. I have no idea why they can't give us another combo like Jamie and Zoe. Sorry I made you feel I was undermining you. That was not my intention. When I get going, I sometimes forgot myself.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 3:16:16 GMT 1
Very needed. Very necessary. An excellent suggestion, which I was considering making myself. At least we agree on something. Actually, I wasn't... but I have some "similar" views... I was originally planning to quit at the end of Matt Smith's run, but Capaldi just looked so... appealing. What a shame his run was as disappointing as the rest of New Who. You're opinion is your opinion... strong, weak or indifferent. It's probably no better or worse than anyone else's... depending upon the topic. Breathing is an irrelevant comparison... I wasn't being rude... simply to the point. No offence was meant and if you took any, that's on you. As for what you do or don't choose to get firm about... that's your prerogative. If you can't take it, you shouldn't give it... that's what you were doing to me. The bit about the Doctor being able to be man, woman, animal, or vegetable led me towards Jodie Whittaker. I'm fine with New Who until we get to Capaldi. Can't say I share the same dislike for New Who as a whole with you, but I understand it. It has it's obvious shortcomings, especially in the lack of variety in modern companions. I have no idea why they can't give us another combo like Jamie and Zoe. Sorry I made you feel I was undermining you. That was not my intention. When I get going, I sometimes forgot myself. New Who just seems to reduce everything down... to make everything less. Instead of the Rani, we get a female Master. Instead of the return of Romana... we get a female Doctor. Instead of expanding the DW multiverse, we get a contraction. I'd just like to have seen a different, slightly less obvious "humanoid" companion... an Ice Warrior, a Cyberman, a Zygon... anything other than a Human female in her early to mid twenties. Likewise... It seems we mistook each other's intentions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 3:30:11 GMT 1
The bit about the Doctor being able to be man, woman, animal, or vegetable led me towards Jodie Whittaker. I'm fine with New Who until we get to Capaldi. Can't say I share the same dislike for New Who as a whole with you, but I understand it. It has it's obvious shortcomings, especially in the lack of variety in modern companions. I have no idea why they can't give us another combo like Jamie and Zoe. Sorry I made you feel I was undermining you. That was not my intention. When I get going, I sometimes forgot myself. New Who just seems to reduce everything down... to make everything less. Instead of the Rani, we get a female Master. Instead of the return of Romana... we get a female Doctor. Instead of expanding the DW multiverse, we get a contraction. I'd just like to have seen a different, slightly less obvious "humanoid" companion... an Ice Warrior, a Cyberman, a Zygon... anything other than a Human female in her early to mid twenties. Likewise... It seems we mistook each other's intentions. Yeah, I have no idea what New Who has against bringing back the Time Ladies. Especially Romana. She's easily one of the most iconic companions of the whole Classic Series. They were quick enough to bring back Sarah Jane, and... no one else. For reasons that baffle me. I can pick out so many episodes where The Brigadier would have fit in perfectly. I always thought a DW spinoff about Gallifrey after the 50 Year Anniversary where they're trying to rebuild under the leadership of Romana II would have been interesting, and we'd see this contingent of good Time Lords trying to make the race what they're supposed to be again. And on the other side of the civil war is Rassilion and whatever other bad Time Lords are trying to make things exactly as they were (minus the Time War and Daleks). I always thought the Tree Lady from "End of the World" would have been a good companion. Now, a reformed Dalek would have been interesting. I'm glad we were able to clear that up so quickly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 3:51:06 GMT 1
New Who just seems to reduce everything down... to make everything less. Instead of the Rani, we get a female Master. Instead of the return of Romana... we get a female Doctor. Instead of expanding the DW multiverse, we get a contraction. I'd just like to have seen a different, slightly less obvious "humanoid" companion... an Ice Warrior, a Cyberman, a Zygon... anything other than a Human female in her early to mid twenties. Likewise... It seems we mistook each other's intentions. Yeah, I have no idea what New Who has against bringing back the Time Ladies. Especially Romana. She's easily one of the most iconic companions of the whole Classic Series. They were quick enough to bring back Sarah Jane, and... no one else. For reasons that baffle me. I can pick out so many episodes where The Brigadier would have fit in perfectly. I always thought a DW spinoff about Gallifrey after the 50 Year Anniversary where they're trying to rebuild under the leadership of Romana II would have been interesting, and we'd see this contingent of good Time Lords trying to make the race what they're supposed to be again. And on the other side of the civil war is Rassilion and whatever other bad Time Lords are trying to make things exactly as they were (minus the Time War and Daleks). I always thought the Tree Lady from "End of the World" would have been a good companion. Now, a reformed Dalek would have been interesting. I'm glad we were able to clear that up so quickly. Well, they did bring back K9... and at least "he" isn't humanoid. And the Brigadier is probably my single favourite character from the entire TV series and they did bring him back... as a fucking Cyberman. K9 AND COMPANY, K9 and THE SARAH JANE ADVENTURES was all a bit meh... CLASS was a load of crap and TORCHWOOD aimed at the wrong audience. I must admit, I always liked the idea of a UNIT spin-off... or a TV series that was neither Gallifreyan or Human centric. Ever heard of SECOND EMPIRE? I also liked Jabe and I would've been very happy to see Rose trip and fall out an airlock... just like Katarina... except that I actually like Katarina. As for a reformed Dalek... Rusty? No worries.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 4:49:01 GMT 1
Yeah, I have no idea what New Who has against bringing back the Time Ladies. Especially Romana. She's easily one of the most iconic companions of the whole Classic Series. They were quick enough to bring back Sarah Jane, and... no one else. For reasons that baffle me. I can pick out so many episodes where The Brigadier would have fit in perfectly. I always thought a DW spinoff about Gallifrey after the 50 Year Anniversary where they're trying to rebuild under the leadership of Romana II would have been interesting, and we'd see this contingent of good Time Lords trying to make the race what they're supposed to be again. And on the other side of the civil war is Rassilion and whatever other bad Time Lords are trying to make things exactly as they were (minus the Time War and Daleks). I always thought the Tree Lady from "End of the World" would have been a good companion. Now, a reformed Dalek would have been interesting. I'm glad we were able to clear that up so quickly. Well, they did bring back K9... and at least "he" isn't humanoid. And the Brigadier is probably my single favourite character from the entire TV series and they did bring him back... as a fucking Cyberman. K9 AND COMPANY, K9 and THE SARAH JANE ADVENTURES was all a bit meh... CLASS was a load of crap and TORCHWOOD aimed at the wrong audience. I must admit, I always liked the idea of a UNIT spin-off... or a TV series that was neither Gallifreyan or Human centric. Ever heard of SECOND EMPIRE? I also liked Jabe and I would've been very happy to see Rose trip and fall out an airlock... just like Katarina... except that I actually like Katarina. As for a reformed Dalek... Rusty? No worries. Yep, they brought back the robot dog Tom Baker LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVED so much. They could probably have done a UNIT spinoff that started the next week after the end of "Robot", which would follow the exploits of The Brig, Benton, Yates, and any other characters they had to add to give it a full cast. I supposed Liz Shaw would have still been off the table by then, unfortunately. K9 and Company, the one-off spinoff that manages to be the redheaded stepchild in a franchise full of redheaded stepchildren. I liked The Sarah Jane Adventures at the time it was being made, but hindsight was not been kind to it. I think I was just psyched Elizabeth Sladen was getting so much attention after so long. "Torchwood", ugh... I never understood the point of Torchwood existing when UNIT already did. They could have just as easily just had Captain Jack become the current Brigadier of UNIT and called it a day without having to invent a new agency or supersede the original one that'd been a part of "Who" lore for so long. I've read "Second Empire" a long, long time ago. My memories are fuzzy. And even if Jabe didn't stick around as a companion, they didn't need to kill her. Such a waste of a character they could have still done things with in the future. If we're talking about Rose during Tennant's era, I completely agree. I can't quite put my finger on it, but I thought Rose was enjoyable in Series 1. Must have been something between her and Eccleston that clicked for me. It did NOT carry over to her and Tennant, though. Holy crap, I can't stand her once Series 2 begins. Don't even get me started on 10 pining for Rose after she's gone. Not saying he should have forgotten her as quickly as he forgot about Adric, but Series 3 is definitely the low point for the 10th Doctor as a character. It definitely made Martha good look by comparison, though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 5:20:33 GMT 1
Well, they did bring back K9... and at least "he" isn't humanoid. And the Brigadier is probably my single favourite character from the entire TV series and they did bring him back... as a fucking Cyberman. K9 AND COMPANY, K9 and THE SARAH JANE ADVENTURES was all a bit meh... CLASS was a load of crap and TORCHWOOD aimed at the wrong audience. I must admit, I always liked the idea of a UNIT spin-off... or a TV series that was neither Gallifreyan or Human centric. Ever heard of SECOND EMPIRE? I also liked Jabe and I would've been very happy to see Rose trip and fall out an airlock... just like Katarina... except that I actually like Katarina. As for a reformed Dalek... Rusty? No worries. Yep, they brought back the robot dog Tom Baker LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVED so much. They could probably have done a UNIT spinoff that started the next week after the end of "Robot", which would follow the exploits of The Brig, Benton, Yates, and any other characters they had to add to give it a full cast. I supposed Liz Shaw would have still been off the table by then, unfortunately. K9 and Company, the one-off spinoff that manages to be the redheaded stepchild in a franchise full of redheaded stepchildren. I liked The Sarah Jane Adventures at the time it was being made, but hindsight was not been kind to it. I think I was just psyched Elizabeth Sladen was getting so much attention after so long. "Torchwood", ugh... I never understood the point of Torchwood existing when UNIT already did. They could have just as easily just had Captain Jack become the current Brigadier of UNIT and called it a day without having to invent a new agency or supersede the original one that'd been a part of "Who" lore for so long. I've read "Second Empire" a long, long time ago. My memories are fuzzy. And even if Jabe didn't stick around as a companion, they didn't need to kill her. Such a waste of a character they could have still done things with in the future. If we're talking about Rose during Tennant's era, I completely agree. I can't quite put my finger on it, but I thought Rose was enjoyable in Series 1. Must have been something between her and Eccleston that clicked for me. It did NOT carry over to her and Tennant, though. Holy crap, I can't stand her once Series 2 begins. Don't even get me started on 10 pining for Rose after she's gone. Not saying he should have forgotten her as quickly as he forgot about Adric, but Series 3 is definitely the low point for the 10th Doctor as a character. It definitely made Martha good look by comparison, though. Yeah, but to be fair, Tom Baker felt like that about most people... sooner or later. Apart from Liz Shaw, they could've brought back Corporal Bell too. SECOND EMPIRE is now an animated web series, part way through... There's also a MULTIVERSE WAR series too. The only companions I liked in New Who were Jack, River, Wilfred Mott and... Nardole. The rest of them left me underwhelmed. As for series 1, I'm not sure what the Doctor tried harder to open... Rose's mind or legs. To me, he just came across as a bit of a creepy paedo. I also liked Sarah, but they rewrote her backstory to make her into something she'd never been originally... after all, what about Susan, or Victoria, or Jo, or Romana, or Nyssa, or Ace? And I suppose from the Doctor's point-of-view, losing Rose is like losing a favourite pet... you miss them. Especially the ones who think they're people.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 6:12:50 GMT 1
Yeah, but to be fair, Tom Baker felt like that about most people... sooner or later. Apart from Liz Shaw, they could've brought back Corporal Bell too. SECOND EMPIRE is now an animated web series, part way through... There's also a MULTIVERSE WAR series too. The only companions I liked in New Who were Jack, River, Wilfred Mott and... Nardole. The rest of them left me underwhelmed. As for series 1, I'm not sure what the Doctor tried harder to open... Rose's mind or legs. To me, he just came across as a bit of a creepy paedo. I also liked Sarah, but they rewrote her backstory to make her into something she'd never been originally... after all, what about Susan, or Victoria, or Jo, or Romana, or Nyssa, or Ace? And I suppose from the Doctor's point-of-view, losing Rose is like losing a favourite pet... you miss them. Especially the ones who think they're people. Yeah, that guy was infamously hard to work with. Especially if you were poor Lalla Ward. Or Jonathan Nathan Turner. Oh, that is an interesting development for "Second Empire". I've mostly been delving into Big Finnish to get my fix of more "out there" stories, so SE kind of fell to the wayside. I think I'll check this out. Generally speaking, I like the New Who companions. Like you, I do wise we got some non-Earthlings in there, but overall, I'm not displeased with what we do usually get. Up until Amy and Rory left. After that, it'd be Nardole before I liked another one. I haven't even bothered giving the newest bunch a decent look. LOL
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 11:07:52 GMT 1
Yeah, but to be fair, Tom Baker felt like that about most people... sooner or later. Apart from Liz Shaw, they could've brought back Corporal Bell too. SECOND EMPIRE is now an animated web series, part way through... There's also a MULTIVERSE WAR series too. The only companions I liked in New Who were Jack, River, Wilfred Mott and... Nardole. The rest of them left me underwhelmed. As for series 1, I'm not sure what the Doctor tried harder to open... Rose's mind or legs. To me, he just came across as a bit of a creepy paedo. I also liked Sarah, but they rewrote her backstory to make her into something she'd never been originally... after all, what about Susan, or Victoria, or Jo, or Romana, or Nyssa, or Ace? And I suppose from the Doctor's point-of-view, losing Rose is like losing a favourite pet... you miss them. Especially the ones who think they're people. Yeah, that guy was infamously hard to work with. Especially if you were poor Lalla Ward. Or Jonathan Nathan Turner. Oh, that is an interesting development for "Second Empire". I've mostly been delving into Big Finnish to get my fix of more "out there" stories, so SE kind of fell to the wayside. I think I'll check this out. Generally speaking, I like the New Who companions. Like you, I do wise we got some non-Earthlings in there, but overall, I'm not displeased with what we do usually get. Up until Amy and Rory left. After that, it'd be Nardole before I liked another one. I haven't even bothered giving the newest bunch a decent look. LOL Oh, Lalla Ward - AKA the daughter of Edward Ward, 7th Viscount Bangor - appears to have been a bit of a snotty, stuck up bitch, who thought she was a bit too good for those around her. She once tore into a hired photographer, who was on set to take pictures for some sort of official record... You know, just doing the job he was paid to do. She calld him a "nasty little man" or variations thereof. I also learned she was less than pleasant towards certain colleagues and co-stars... so fuck that piece of shit. As for JNT, if he'd left DOCTOR WHO at the same time Peter Davison did, I think he'd be viewed much more favourably by posterity... Although I'd still take his entire era over New Who any day. I've thoroughly enjoy SE so far, although there was a bit of a delay while those responsible for it had to replace their computer system, due to a breakdown... however, everything now seems in order and ready to proceed. I'm also particularly intrigued by the multiverse story... I have high hopes for that one. I stepped away at the end of TWICE UPON A TIME and will not be returning, regardless of what occurs. As I previously mentioned, my initial plan was to leave at the end of - what was then considered - the Doctor's natural life cycle, but I became intrigued by Peter Capaldi... an interesting incarnation with yet more disappointing serials.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 22:08:22 GMT 1
Oh, Lalla Ward - AKA the daughter of Edward Ward, 7th Viscount Bangor - appears to have been a bit of a snotty, stuck up bitch, who thought she was a bit too good for those around her. She once tore into a hired photographer, who was on set to take pictures for some sort of official record... You know, just doing the job he was paid to do. She calld him a "nasty little man" or variations thereof. I also learned she was less than pleasant towards certain colleagues and co-stars... so fuck that piece of shit. As for JNT, if he'd left DOCTOR WHO at the same time Peter Davison did, I think he'd be viewed much more favourably by posterity... Although I'd still take his entire era over New Who any day. I've thoroughly enjoy SE so far, although there was a bit of a delay while those responsible for it had to replace their computer system, due to a breakdown... however, everything now seems in order and ready to proceed. I'm also particularly intrigued by the multiverse story... I have high hopes for that one. I stepped away at the end of TWICE UPON A TIME and will not be returning, regardless of what occurs. As I previously mentioned, my initial plan was to leave at the end of - what was then considered - the Doctor's natural life cycle, but I became intrigued by Peter Capaldi... an interesting incarnation with yet more disappointing serials. I'm not overly familiar with what actors are like behind the scenes, but that is unfortunate to hear. Wow, she sounds worse than Patrick Stewart in his younger days. True, but whoever took over for Turner would probably not have had a much better time of it, considering how it seems things were just destined to go wrong behind the scenes for "Who" by 1984. Well, you've gotten me excited. That was almost my jumping off point, too (Twice Upon a Time), but I held on just a bit longer to see how things would turn out past that. Wasn't pleased with how it was shaping up, so then I jumped ship.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2020 1:16:17 GMT 1
Oh, Lalla Ward - AKA the daughter of Edward Ward, 7th Viscount Bangor - appears to have been a bit of a snotty, stuck up bitch, who thought she was a bit too good for those around her. She once tore into a hired photographer, who was on set to take pictures for some sort of official record... You know, just doing the job he was paid to do. She calld him a "nasty little man" or variations thereof. I also learned she was less than pleasant towards certain colleagues and co-stars... so fuck that piece of shit. As for JNT, if he'd left DOCTOR WHO at the same time Peter Davison did, I think he'd be viewed much more favourably by posterity... Although I'd still take his entire era over New Who any day. I've thoroughly enjoy SE so far, although there was a bit of a delay while those responsible for it had to replace their computer system, due to a breakdown... however, everything now seems in order and ready to proceed. I'm also particularly intrigued by the multiverse story... I have high hopes for that one. I stepped away at the end of TWICE UPON A TIME and will not be returning, regardless of what occurs. As I previously mentioned, my initial plan was to leave at the end of - what was then considered - the Doctor's natural life cycle, but I became intrigued by Peter Capaldi... an interesting incarnation with yet more disappointing serials. I'm not overly familiar with what actors are like behind the scenes, but that is unfortunate to hear. Wow, she sounds worse than Patrick Stewart in his younger days. True, but whoever took over for Turner would probably not have had a much better time of it, considering how it seems things were just destined to go wrong behind the scenes for "Who" by 1984. Well, you've gotten me excited. That was almost my jumping off point, too (Twice Upon a Time), but I held on just a bit longer to see how things would turn out past that. Wasn't pleased with how it was shaping up, so then I jumped ship. I don't normally care what they're like in real life... but that sort of bitchy, high and mighty, stuck-up approach just gets my heckles up. True... By the mid to late 80s, DW was wearing out it's welcome with the higher-ups at the BBC. They never gave it the help and support that it needed to continue on and thrive. In fact, they were doing the very opposite in an obvious attempt to kill it off. However, I still wonder what might have happened with someone new in charge, with fresh ideas and enough will power to make his intentions clear to others... Pure speculation of course. Good. Let me know how you get on with it and your impressions. I saw what was coming from a long way off... and not just with DOCTOR WHO. STAR TREK, STAR WARS, THE TERMINATOR, GHOSTBUSTERS... so on and so forth. So I decided to save myself some unnecessary pain and suffering. PS - We now appear to be in our very own DOCTOR WHO spin-off thread... How very meta.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2020 2:00:13 GMT 1
I'm not overly familiar with what actors are like behind the scenes, but that is unfortunate to hear. Wow, she sounds worse than Patrick Stewart in his younger days. True, but whoever took over for Turner would probably not have had a much better time of it, considering how it seems things were just destined to go wrong behind the scenes for "Who" by 1984. Well, you've gotten me excited. That was almost my jumping off point, too (Twice Upon a Time), but I held on just a bit longer to see how things would turn out past that. Wasn't pleased with how it was shaping up, so then I jumped ship. I don't normally care what they're like in real life... but that sort of bitchy, high and mighty, stuck-up approach just gets my heckles up. True... By the mid to late 80s, DW was wearing out it's welcome with the higher-ups at the BBC. They never gave it the help and support that it needed to continue on and thrive. In fact, they were doing the very opposite in an obvious attempt to kill it off. However, I still wonder what might have happened with someone new in charge, with fresh ideas and enough will power to make his intentions clear to others... Pure speculation of course. Good. Let me know how you get on with it and your impressions. I saw what was coming from a long way off... and not just with DOCTOR WHO. STAR TREK, STAR WARS, THE TERMINATOR, GHOSTBUSTERS... so on and so forth. So I decided to save myself some unnecessary pain and suffering. PS - We now appear to be in our very own DOCTOR WHO spin-off thread... How very meta. Good thing she wasn't on at the same time as Janet Fielding. In one of the "Doctor Who" DVDs I have, she talks about an encounter with Patrick Stewart who criticized her for "lowering herself" to being on DW while working on some play with him and how it deeply upset her. Something tells me she wouldn't have put up with Ward's attitude. And there was Eric Saward, who opposed to the casting of Colin Baker and "coincidently," all the scripts that had this guy's name on it whether as the writer or editor made The Doctor look bad. There's nothing to prove he was trying to undermine Baker and Turner, but damn, it's easy to believe just sitting through one of the 6th Doctor episodes. Of course, even if it's true, that's small potatoes compared to all the higher ups who were intentionally trying to kill what was an institution in their company at that point. Yeah, the PC girl power trip that never works out well for anyone.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 10, 2020 3:06:30 GMT 1
I ask about Doctor Who probably ad nauseam, because I always feel it should be the kind of thing I like (Sidney Newman’s other famous creation, The Avengers, is perhaps my favorite TV show ever)—but I just haven’t been able to find a single episode I unreservedly love.
I’ve found a few that I liked, however, including the pilot, “An Unearthly Child.” The first segment has a sense of the bizarre and the mysterious that appeals to me, and Hartnell himself was excellent.
I also liked “The Girl in the Fireplace,” set in Ancien Régime France (an era that’s always intrigued me). But so many episodes just seem like cheap sci-fi to me. Now, I want to repent of that blasphemy and say I like it as much as the rest of the world does—but I keep watching recommended episodes that I just don’t like. Please advise?
|
|
|
Post by AQUA JAR!™ on Sept 10, 2020 3:09:40 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 10, 2020 3:36:50 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2020 16:35:54 GMT 1
I ask about Doctor Who probably ad nauseam, because I always feel it should be the kind of thing I like (Sidney Newman’s other famous creation, The Avengers, is perhaps my favorite TV show ever)—but I just haven’t been able to find a single episode I unreservedly love. I’ve found a few that I liked, however, including the pilot, “An Unearthly Child.” The first segment has a sense of the bizarre and the mysterious that appeals to me, and Hartnell himself was excellent. I also liked “The Girl in the Fireplace,” set in Ancien Régime France (an era that’s always intrigued me). But so many episodes just seem like cheap sci-fi to me. Now, I want to repent of that blasphemy and say I like it as much as the rest of the world does—but I keep watching recommended episodes that I just don’t like. Please advise? Please advise...? Skip New Who and stick with Classic Who. And the reason it may seem like cheap sci-fi to you is because it was a science fiction TV show that was made on a shoestring budget. At its best, it relied upon interesting characters, intriguing plots and a healthy dose of imagination... not expensive special effects, sets or even props. PS - Have you considered that it just might not be for you...? I also enjoy THE AVENGERS TV series... so much more engrossing and interesting than the similarly named film franchise.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2020 16:41:42 GMT 1
I don't normally care what they're like in real life... but that sort of bitchy, high and mighty, stuck-up approach just gets my heckles up. True... By the mid to late 80s, DW was wearing out it's welcome with the higher-ups at the BBC. They never gave it the help and support that it needed to continue on and thrive. In fact, they were doing the very opposite in an obvious attempt to kill it off. However, I still wonder what might have happened with someone new in charge, with fresh ideas and enough will power to make his intentions clear to others... Pure speculation of course. Good. Let me know how you get on with it and your impressions. I saw what was coming from a long way off... and not just with DOCTOR WHO. STAR TREK, STAR WARS, THE TERMINATOR, GHOSTBUSTERS... so on and so forth. So I decided to save myself some unnecessary pain and suffering. PS - We now appear to be in our very own DOCTOR WHO spin-off thread... How very meta. Good thing she wasn't on at the same time as Janet Fielding. In one of the "Doctor Who" DVDs I have, she talks about an encounter with Patrick Stewart who criticized her for "lowering herself" to being on DW while working on some play with him and how it deeply upset her. Something tells me she wouldn't have put up with Ward's attitude. And there was Eric Saward, who opposed to the casting of Colin Baker and "coincidently," all the scripts that had this guy's name on it whether as the writer or editor made The Doctor look bad. There's nothing to prove he was trying to undermine Baker and Turner, but damn, it's easy to believe just sitting through one of the 6th Doctor episodes. Of course, even if it's true, that's small potatoes compared to all the higher ups who were intentionally trying to kill what was an institution in their company at that point. Yeah, the PC girl power trip that never works out well for anyone. I'd back Janet Fielding in a bitch fight with Lalla Ward every time. I liked most of Eric Saward's work, but I'm not sure he was necessarily the best choice to be the script editor. It worked fine in film and TV for decades... until the SJW brigade got involved and fucked everything up for everyone. Oh well...
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 10, 2020 17:15:40 GMT 1
Please advise...? Skip New Who and stick with Classic Who. And the reason it may seem like cheap sci-fi to you is because it was a science fiction TV show that was made on a shoestring budget. At its best, it relied upon interesting characters, intriguing plots and a healthy dose of imagination... not expensive special effects, sets or even props. PS - Have you considered that it just might not be for you...? I also enjoy THE AVENGERS TV series... so much more engrossing and interesting than the similarly named film franchise. My “cheap sci-fi” crack probably gave the wrong impression… I don’t have anything against a program or a movie filmed on a shoestring budget—in fact, many Hollywood b-and-lower-movies have more inventiveness and better scripting than a-pictures, exactly because they were shot cheaply (and away from the prying eyes of self-important studio execs). At the same time, I think “interesting characters, intriguing plots and a healthy dose of imagination” are some of the most important things in any kind of entertainment. My real problem with “cheap” is that, for me, the episodes haven’t yet seemed to transcend that cheapness. Edgar G. Ulmer filmed Detour on a shoestring budget, yet he makes it visually and directorially intriguing on his talent alone. So far, though, the color Dr. Who I’ve seen genuinely looks cheap, as if directors-producers-writers weren’t at all trying to disguise that fact. Maybe I’m being unfair to it; I haven’t seen, say, the Douglas Adams episodes. But so far I’ve found The Avengers (and the bigger-budgeted Prisoner) to have more of the “interesting characters, intriguing plots” and “healthy dose of imagination” that you and I both admire.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2020 17:42:53 GMT 1
Please advise...? Skip New Who and stick with Classic Who. And the reason it may seem like cheap sci-fi to you is because it was a science fiction TV show that was made on a shoestring budget. At its best, it relied upon interesting characters, intriguing plots and a healthy dose of imagination... not expensive special effects, sets or even props. PS - Have you considered that it just might not be for you...? I also enjoy THE AVENGERS TV series... so much more engrossing and interesting than the similarly named film franchise. My “cheap sci-fi” crack probably gave the wrong impression… I don’t have anything against a program or a movie filmed on a shoestring budget—in fact, many Hollywood b-and-lower-movies have more inventiveness and better scripting than a-pictures, exactly because they were shot cheaply (and away from the prying eyes of self-important studio execs). At the same time, I think “interesting characters, intriguing plots and a healthy dose of imagination” are some of the most important things in any kind of entertainment. My real problem with “cheap” is that, for me, the episodes haven’t yet seemed to transcend that cheapness. Edgar G. Ulmer filmed Detour on a shoestring budget, yet he makes it visually and directorially intriguing on his talent alone. So far, though, the color Dr. Who I’ve seen genuinely looks cheap, as if directors-producers-writers weren’t at all trying to disguise that fact. Maybe I’m being unfair to it; I haven’t seen, say, the Douglas Adams episodes. But so far I’ve found The Avengers (and the bigger-budgeted Prisoner) to have more of the “interesting characters, intriguing plots” and “healthy dose of imagination” that you and I both admire. I often find the "smaller" productions on film and TV to be far more entertaining and satisfying than the "major events". Even a "cheap" film has more scope, possibilities and freedom than a corresponding TV production. As for the sort of control and constraints a Hollywood studio might place upon a production next to what the laws and rules were in TV productions for most of the run of Classic Who... the two simply aren't comparable. Do yourself a favour and do some research. You'll be surprised that anything ever got made for BBC TV... especially something as ambitious as DOCTOR WHO. And the makers of DW in the 1960s, 70s and 80s could only dream of a budget like you mentioned for that film... I like Douglas Adams' work on Douglas Adams' projects. He should've been kept away from DW. And while I loved THE AVENGERS and DANGERMAN, I've always struggled with THE PRISONER. I want to like it, I like certain aspects of it, but overall... Perhaps THE PRISONER is to me what DOCTOR WHO is to you?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2020 21:16:18 GMT 1
Good thing she wasn't on at the same time as Janet Fielding. In one of the "Doctor Who" DVDs I have, she talks about an encounter with Patrick Stewart who criticized her for "lowering herself" to being on DW while working on some play with him and how it deeply upset her. Something tells me she wouldn't have put up with Ward's attitude. And there was Eric Saward, who opposed to the casting of Colin Baker and "coincidently," all the scripts that had this guy's name on it whether as the writer or editor made The Doctor look bad. There's nothing to prove he was trying to undermine Baker and Turner, but damn, it's easy to believe just sitting through one of the 6th Doctor episodes. Of course, even if it's true, that's small potatoes compared to all the higher ups who were intentionally trying to kill what was an institution in their company at that point. Yeah, the PC girl power trip that never works out well for anyone. I'd back Janet Fielding in a bitch fight with Lalla Ward every time. I liked most of Eric Saward's work, but I'm not sure he was necessarily the best choice to be the script editor. It worked fine in film and TV for decades... until the SJW brigade got involved and fucked everything up for everyone. Oh well... I might not like Tegan, but I can tell by Fielding's performance that she's a solid, vibrate actress. Saward: that, too. It seemed like a lot of people had jobs behind the scenes that had no business being there. I am so glad Baker got vindicated later on with audio productions. And they refuse to learn their lesson no matter how many times it flops.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2020 21:25:13 GMT 1
I might not like Tegan, but I can tell by Fielding's performance that she's a solid, vibrate actress. Saward: that, too. It seemed like a lot of people had jobs behind the scenes that had no business being there. I am so glad Baker got vindicated later on with audio productions. And they refuse to learn their lesson no matter how many times it flops. She later became an agent to Paul McGann... the eighth Doctor. When considering accepting the role, he asked her for guidance. Her description of the character of the Doctor was "two hearts, no dick." Well, perhaps Saward had to jump in to fill the gap left by the departure of Christopher Bidmead... who can tell? I'm sure there's a lot we don't know - or ever will - about what goes on "behind the scenes". Didn't you know? They don't have to learn any lessons, because they already know everything.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2020 22:35:37 GMT 1
I might not like Tegan, but I can tell by Fielding's performance that she's a solid, vibrate actress. Saward: that, too. It seemed like a lot of people had jobs behind the scenes that had no business being there. I am so glad Baker got vindicated later on with audio productions. And they refuse to learn their lesson no matter how many times it flops. She later became an agent to Paul McGann... the eighth Doctor. When considering accepting the role, he asked her for guidance. Her description of the character of the Doctor was "two hearts, no dick." Well, perhaps Saward had to jump in to fill the gap left by the departure of Christopher Bidmead... who can tell? I'm sure there's a lot we don't know - or ever will - about what goes on "behind the scenes". Didn't you know? They don't have to learn any lessons, because they already know everything. I can see why that'd be her description when she was on the show at the same time as Davison's 5th Doctor. All I know is BBC had a proverbial game of thrones going on at the same and "Doctor Who" was their Ned Stark. Their investors probably think otherwise.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2020 22:38:59 GMT 1
I ask about Doctor Who probably ad nauseam, because I always feel it should be the kind of thing I like (Sidney Newman’s other famous creation, The Avengers, is perhaps my favorite TV show ever)—but I just haven’t been able to find a single episode I unreservedly love. I’ve found a few that I liked, however, including the pilot, “An Unearthly Child.” The first segment has a sense of the bizarre and the mysterious that appeals to me, and Hartnell himself was excellent. I also liked “The Girl in the Fireplace,” set in Ancien Régime France (an era that’s always intrigued me). But so many episodes just seem like cheap sci-fi to me. Now, I want to repent of that blasphemy and say I like it as much as the rest of the world does—but I keep watching recommended episodes that I just don’t like. Please advise? The Classic Series always has something to offer, even at the worst of times. If you have the patience for long serials, starting from the beginning won't be a problem. If 12-episode stories are intimidating, though, the 3rd Doctor Era might be a good place to start. As for New Who: Just watch the Christopher Eccleston, David Tennant, and Matt Smith eras, and then stop. After that, it gets real, real stupid and self-contradictory. Oh, and skip "Love and Monsters", you'll thank me. But the first 8 years of New Who are pretty solid and enjoyable. More action-packed and sentimental than it's predecessor, but still pretty good.
|
|