Home Forums Ganymede & Titan Forum The Doctor Who Spoilers Thread – Part III

Viewing 100 posts - 201 through 300 (of 320 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #82120
    pfm
    Participant

    > The more I think about it, the more the resolution of Donna?s arc feels the most successful – and genuinely moving – part of the episode.

    Definitely. I thought they were gonna shortchange her character due to Rose coming back and overshadowing everything, but in the end she got the best resolution we could possibly have hoped for. As for Rose and the semi-Doctor, I didn’t think it worked that well. Though I sort of predicted it right months ago saying RTD would probably find a way of the Doctor and Rose living happily ever after. But will they be happy?? It could be cool if they did a Bizarro Doctor situation.

    #82122
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant

    I understand that we got to see how much Donna had changed due to her travels with the Doctor through comparison with her mind-wiped pre-doctor persona…

    But is having her character arc reset really the most satisfying outcome? Doesn’t it just nullify her entire journey and everything we’ve seen?

    #82123
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant

    Also, where’s Cappsy? I wish to know whether or not the finale did in fact make him puke now that we know know that the spoilers wern’t entirely “rancid ?shipper? crap”.

    ;)

    #82124
    Pete Part Three
    Participant

    >But is having her character arc reset really the most satisfying outcome? Doesn?t it just nullify her entire journey and everything we?ve seen?

    Yes, and yes.

    I thought it was wonderfully melancholy. And who is to say which is the better Donna? Self-involved Gobshite vs Saviour of the Universe?

    It’s kind of a parallel to the clone-Doctor thing. The potential is there but needs someone to bring it out. For clone-Doctor that will, invariably, be Rose. For Donna…who knows?

    #82125
    Jonathan Capps
    Keymaster

    Hello! I echo what has already been said about so many wrong things happening, but all done really, really well. I loved pretty much all of it. It felt like a big ol’ celebration of Who and RTD’s era.

    #82126
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant

    I thought the ulitmate downer was that for Donna, the Doctor was the only person who could bring it out. Tate mused on Confidential that Donna will probably now just be a gobby temp for the rest of her life..and I’m inclined to agree.

    The whole thing left me cold. The show takes an irritating, seemingly shallow character and takes us on a journey with her – seeing her develop above and beyond all her (and our) expectations…

    And then it’s all snatched away and we’re back to square one…with no good reason other than to leave us depressed. I do enjoy the melancholy moments…but this one just seemed to shit over an entire character arc.

    I know the themes of the episode revolved around the way we are changed through experiences and interaction with those around us…but that was made very clear through the fate of the human-timelord Doctor and very clear from the evolution of Donna. You didn’t need to reset her to make the point.

    Darn it, I guess I just didn’t want to see Donna disappear like that. And that’s something I never thought I’d say!

    #82127
    Tarka Dal
    Participant

    Yep that was something else I thought yesterday, but come on he’s got 900 years of Timelord memories and in the RTD universe that alone is surely enough to mean that he’ll have his own Tardis knocked-up out of sticky back plastic and a toilet roll by oooh Thursday?

    I think the main difference between RTD’s finale and Empire’s point on sequels is that in every case except Donna’s we’ve had a gap sinceeach of the ‘Who players’ were last around.

    Plus I think they did all have something to do*. Sure we’ve seen Rose, Martha, Sarah-Jane & co before, but we’ve never seen them altogether in one story, one location. That’s where the scale ramps up and their combined appearance serves a purpose. That and the tieing up of character arcs and the establishing of new ones.

    Re: The Empire blog, it isn’t generally writers who bring back characters for sequels. Writers themselves are often the first casualty when it comes to sequels as there value rises, with producers spending the dollars on bringing back the on-screen candy. As the article points out they appear to work on the logic that if they include the same cast, they’ll get an equally successful movie.

    To me the point being made was more about characters outstaying their welcomes – sticking around and yet having nothing more to contribute. It’s easy to justify Marion coming back in Indy IV even if it’s just for a cheap nostalgic high, because we’ve seen Indy’s life without her. Compare that to say Mackenzie Crook in Pirates who essentially does the same thing in three different films, so if he turns up in number four it has no real worth.

    Of course leaving characters behind doesn’t always work. David Fincher will always be a **** for killing off Newt and Hicks before the titles even rolled in Alien3.

    * – Apart from Jackie.

    #82128
    Pete Part Three
    Participant

    >I thought the ulitmate downer was that for Donna, the Doctor was the only person who could bring it out. Tate mused on Confidential that Donna will probably now just be a gobby temp for the rest of her life..and I?m inclined to agree.

    Possible. But her dreamworld in FotD hinted that she has other aspirations.

    And if not, to repeat myself: who’s judging what’s the better life?

    (Disclaimer : I should point out that I’m not a temp. Neither am I the most important woman in the universe)

    #82129
    Tarka Dal
    Participant

    > And then it?s all snatched away and we?re back to square one?with no good reason other than to leave us depressed. I do enjoy the melancholy moments?but this one just seemed to shit over an entire character arc.

    True, but consider that the Doctor Donna scenes only work because they are like a firework. Burning bright and over fast. Imagine we were stuck with the Half-Tate, half-Doctor creations for a whole series?

    #82130
    Andrew
    Participant

    I LOVED the Donna outcome. Loved it. Dramatically spot-on, and a great way to conclude a companion’s journey.

    But it DID make me dislike Turn Left even more than I already did…

    Donna’s status as Most Important once again falls to being in the right place at the right time. Admittedly this is down to Caan’s manipulation (hmm, doesn’t that make Caan Most Important?), but it’s the Doctor’s brain that saves the day. Its fusion with a human’s gives inspiration, but there’s no suggestion that Donna’s humanity is somehow more appropriate than anyone else’s. (Which is ironic, because Tate’s performance is absolutely vital to the success of this fusion – there can’t be five actresses who could have played those ‘DoctorDonna’ scenes so spot-on.)

    So, as before, her importance isn’t intrinsic to her, but rather down to capricious fate. As part of the whirlwind of a season climax, I have no problem at all. Adored it, in fact. As a conclusion to Turn Left’s dodgy promises, it fails. That episode demonstrated that her life would maintain the same old direction without outside influences – which makes Journey’s End’s conclusion all the more poignant, and Turn Left’s claims all the more redundant.

    > who?s judging what?s the better life?

    I think Donna is. She’s not happy. She lacks a sense of self-worth (a great bit of pop-psyche in the last ep discussed how this was redirected into her shouty attitude), and absolutely hunted the Doctor down so he could take her away.

    Were Donna happy being ‘just a temp’ – as plenty of people are – that would be fine. But by her own criteria, she doesn’t rate her life…and yet without the Doctor, she’s unable to escape it. (You’re right about her aspirations on FotD, but again that existence is the product of outside intervention – Doctor Moon setting her up with her husband.)

    BTW, anyone ever work out how Rose managed to make the Bad Wolf stuff appear?!

    #82131
    Tarka Dal
    Participant

    The same way she made the rest. She could see the whole of time and space back at the end of series one, so that must have included series four right ;-)

    #82132
    Pete Part Three
    Participant

    Translation: A wizard did it.

    >(You?re right about her aspirations on FotD, but again that existence is the product of outside intervention – Doctor Moon setting her up with her husband.)

    That was kind of my point though. Donna needs some sort of guidance to unlock her potential (whether that’s a role as a mother or a time lady) and that seems to be an ongoing theme of RTD’s Doctor Who. Consider all of his “family” members and how different their lives would be without the Doctor.

    But it’s not necessarily the Doctor she needs. She may still find contentment in another avenue. I don’t see it as an unhappy ending as such as an “open” ending. You could read it that Donna will spend the rest of her life, secretly unhappy and wishing for something more. Or you could read it that, eventually, her potential will be unlocked by another influence.

    Either way, I still think its extremely effective. Her disinterested farewell to the Doctor being particularly good.

    As a sidenote to this, I didn’t find her character development being particularly gradual across the season so just a simple opportunity of escaping her life is perhaps all she needs.

    My justification of this is that whenever Tate’s performance annoyed me, I thought she was just Runaway Bride Donna (i.e irritating to the core)…rather than something more. But, these performances were dotted across the season and seemed to coincide with the below-par episodes that this season served up.

    I had no problems with the character in the better episodes (Pompeii, SITL, FOTD…even her small contribution in Midnight), while she still verged on aggravating in the dross elsewhere.

    #82135
    Somebody
    Participant

    I think part of the problem is that it’s not shown (especially since Doctor-blue is apparently fine) why the Doctor needed to do such a catastrophic search-and-destroy on Donna’s memory. He needed to remove the imprint of himself, fine. Perhaps the events of TL, TSE & JE as well since they all tie into that. But why EVERYTHING since TRB? If anything, by blocking stuff he doesn’t need to, he heightens the risk of it all bursting out one day surely.

    #82137
    Seb Patrick
    Keymaster

    >anyone ever work out how Rose managed to make the Bad Wolf stuff appear?!

    Oooh, oooh, I’ve got this one – she made it appear when she absorbed the time vortex and scattered the message throughout history.

    Because, y’see, she scattered it throughout her own personal timeline. When she went to the parallel universe, however, that timeline wasn’t in “our” universe any more – so the messages would all have disappeared. However, when she returned… it came back. Where it falls down, I guess, is that she wasn’t actually WITH the Doctor and Donna, so there was no real reason for it to show up there/then, but she did have a link to Donna, and had made a physical connection to the TARDIS with the attempted messages.

    I’m not sure if that was the intended explanation, but it’s the one I inferred. It’s not perfect, by any means, but as a concise visual shorthand for the Doctor to immediately discover, without meeting her, that Rose was back in “his” universe, it worked pretty well.

    #82143
    Tarka Dal
    Participant

    So what I said above then, only in far more detail ;-)

    #82151
    Andrew
    Participant

    Seb and Karl being right, there. (Or, at least, it’ll do.) Shame – as with the companion ‘death’ – that it wasn’t articulated.

    I love the moment, regardless.

    Still, can’t help wonder why Rose never mentioned it. And there is that slightly odd thing that, in fact, Caan IS Time Vortex Rose in this story – knowing the threat that is to come he adjusts the past to manipulate the Doctor’s involvement.

    #82153
    John Hoare
    Participant

    Shame – as with the companion ?death? – that it wasn?t articulated.

    I actually quite like the fact that which ‘death’ was fortold wasn’t explained, and you’re supposed to come to your own conclusions as to what Caan was banging on about. I find that more interesting.

    (For me, it’s Donna – it fits best as a quite literal death of a *companion*.)

    #82155
    Dave
    Participant

    Is Caan a Mary-Sue?

    #82157
    Jonathan Capps
    Keymaster

    Christ, Arlene’s going to go nuclear when she sees this episode.

    #82160
    Somebody
    Participant

    2. I don?t think she can remember most of the stuff that she did when she absorbed the heart of the tardis. I.e. she might not remember having sent the BAD WOlFs to that time period.

    Rose: If you… escaped the Time War, don?t you want to know what happened? What happened to the Emperor?
    Dalek Sec: The Emperor survived!?!
    Rose: ‘Til he met me. ‘Cause if these are going to be my last words, then you?re gonna listen. I met the Emperor. And I took the Time Vortex, and poured it into his head, and turned him into dust. D?you get that? The God of all Daleks. And I destroyed him. (laughs)

    #82159
    ChrisM
    Participant

    .And if timelord / human hybrids created in these circumstances cannot exist for long (i.e. Donna), how come he can?

    Donna said “I got the best bit, your mind.” I think this means that she is physically entirely human, she just has the Doctor’s knowledge and personality. Her human mind just couldn’t cope with all that information, hence her little ‘short circuit’ “binary-binary-binary” moment.

    As for the hybrid Doctor, I think he was still physically part timelord/galifreyan, and I think that gave him that extra something to cope with his memories. Probably best to think of him as essentially the same Doctor with some human DNA and memory influx.

    As to how Rose left the message, yeah I agree with those who have spoken before, except for the BAD WOLF vanishing when she went to the other universe. I don’t think moving to another universe would change the events established in the universe one originates. She just sent the words to that particular time period from back then, signifying I’ll be back/I’m back. (Asta La Vista blondie. ;) )

    >Still, can?t help wonder why Rose never mentioned it.

    2 possible reasons.

    1 she was so caught up in events it didn’t occur to her. (I.e. the moment she meets the Doctor again he gets shot, and then then everything got rather dramatic after that.)

    2. I don’t think she can remember most of the stuff that she did when she absorbed the heart of the tardis. I.e. she might not remember having sent the BAD WOlFs to that time period.

    Yeah I’m not sure I entirely buy that last one either, I think she would remember that much.

    I was also curious how Dalek Caan influenced events. Did seeing the time vortex mean he also gained the same godlike power as Rose had?

    #82161
    ChrisM
    Participant

    Rose: If you? escaped the Time War, don?t you want to know what happened? What happened to the Emperor?
    Dalek Sec: The Emperor survived!?!
    Rose: ?Til he met me. ?Cause if these are going to be my last words, then you?re gonna listen. I met the Emperor. And I took the Time Vortex, and poured it into his head, and turned him into dust. D?you get that? The God of all Daleks. And I destroyed him. (laughs)

    Fair enough. I still think she forgot some of what happened in that time period though. Big things like killing the Dalek emperor she’d remember. Smaller stuff like leaving a message to the Doctor… when she’d bump into him regardless, maybe not, (Although I loved that scene.)

    The whole point of the Doctor absorbing it from her was that she couldn’t cope. True that was as much the destructive effect of the Tardis energy as the knowledge I’d imagine but the knowledge itself would likely have killed her, parallel with what happened to Donna. I was just listing her forgetting as a possibility anyway (one which I’m not convinced of myself, as I stated. ;) I think the main reason is that events caught up with them.

    #82164
    Seb Patrick
    Keymaster

    Donna said ?I got the best bit, your mind.? I think this means that she is physically entirely human, she just has the Doctor?s knowledge and personality. Her human mind just couldn?t cope with all that information, hence her little ?short circuit? ?binary-binary-binary? moment.

    As for the hybrid Doctor, I think he was still physically part timelord/galifreyan, and I think that gave him that extra something to cope with his memories. Probably best to think of him as essentially the same Doctor with some human DNA and memory influx.

    That was certainly my assumption. I’m not quite sure why people have such a problem with it. Donna is human with the mind of a Time Lord. Doctor II is a Time Lord with one heart and no regenerations.

    #82165

    >Christ, Arlene?s going to go nuclear when she sees this episode.

    Meh. I’ve already seen the relevant spoilers.

    #82166
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant

    I still don’t really get the whole Bad Wolf thing. Why those words? Why scattered through time? To leave a message to herself? What was the message?

    I remember it all being so very vague.

    #82168
    Dave
    Participant

    Wibbly Wobbly Timey Wimey

    #82170
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant

    Oh I seeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

    #82173
    pfm
    Participant

    The way I see it, when she saw ‘Bad Wolf’ back home she then realised she must have left herself that message, so it means she must be able to get back to the Satellite 5 (the Game Station) in order for her to be able to leave it in the first place.

    It’s similar to Dalek Caan manipulating things so that Doctor Donna would happen. Vortex-Rose brought herself back to the Game Station. Er…oh just fucking accept it. You just can’t think about it. Look at Back To The Future, the time travel aspect is so full of holes it would be unwatchable if you consider it too much.

    #82176

    You aren’t thinking 4th dimensionally.

    #82177
    Tarka Dal
    Participant

    Can we have Dalek Caan as the new companion?

    #82179
    ChrisM
    Participant

    >Can we have Dalek Caan as the new companion?

    That would certainly be amusing wouldn’t it?

    I hope that they perhaps try for something different with the new companion(s). Ok, they already did with Donna, but even further than that. I.e. maybe someone from a different time period or and alien, or male even. Or maybe even more than one.

    Ok he’s had 2-3 companions already if we include Micky, Captain Jack and that guy with the window in his forehead. But perhaps 2-3 companions that last for a longer period of time rather than the 1 semi permanent (as in at least 1 series) and the others that are more transitory (2-3 episodes). Actually it might be interesting to have the Doctor just traveling alone for the first 2-3 episodes, rather than finding a new companion straight away… (Although I’d imagine that could well happen in the specials.)

    #82181
    Pete Part Three
    Participant

    >I.e. maybe someone from a different time period or and alien, or male even. Or maybe even more than one.

    The whole point of the companions are to act for the audience. Ie, asking the same questions that we would ask and reacting in a similar way to how we would react. An alien wouldn’t really provide the same service. They’d have to be careful with people from different time periods too, but they’ve done it before.

    #82183
    Dave
    Participant

    >The whole point of the companions are to act for the audience. Ie, asking the same questions that we would ask and reacting in a similar way to how we would react. An alien wouldn?t really provide the same service.

    One of the things I really liked about Death Comes To Time was the companion Antimony, he was asking all those fish out of water questions but about early 21st century London, and lead to exchanges like this:

    Campion: ‘What do I look like?’
    Antimony: ‘Well, you look like a human, but with a bigger stomach’

    But it’s probably not sustainable for 13 weeks or more.

    What do we reckon Jenny or River?

    #82185
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant

    Sally Sparrow!

    I think the Doctor travelling alone can work. Deadly Assassin was great.

    #82186
    Pete Part Three
    Participant

    Sally and Jenny.

    (Doctor and TARDIS optional)

    #82187
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant

    (and clothing)

    #82196
    ChrisM
    Participant

    >The whole point of the companions are to act for the audience

    True, but if we had more than 1 companion, we’d only need one to do that.

    Besides, a lot of people have seen the previous series by now so they’ve already gone down that route. Asking questions from another perspective could be interesting.

    #82198
    Pete Part Three
    Participant

    But we get the other perspectives from the Doctor. Why are humans in every episode, despite being a fairly small percentage of the Doctor’s universe?; because they give the audience something to relate to.

    To me, it’s the same kind of request as saying that the Doctor should visit more alien worlds and give Earth a rest for a season. It kind of misses the point of the programme (and sci-fi in general).

    #82200
    ChrisM
    Participant

    Hardly sci-fi in general. There are entire universes where Earth doesn’t even appear.

    I didn’t say there shouldn’t be humans in new series anyway. Or even that there shouldn’t be a human companion with him. Point is, there can be more than one companion. And the human companion needn’t be from the present day. That doesn’t mean they couldn’t be related to, (humans really aren’t that different), and the new slant could add something new.

    Oh and I’m happy for there to be more actual time travel episodes ON EARTH, along with the usual space-travelling fun.

    #82201
    Pete Part Three
    Participant

    >Hardly sci-fi in general. There are entire universes where Earth doesn?t even appear.

    I didn’t specifically mean Earth-set stories; I meant that stories without humans or humanoids were against the idea of sci-fi. Of course there are dozens of shows, films and books set nowhere near Earth, but the vast majority all explore their situations using human sensibilities, emotions and perspectives.

    There’s nothing inherently wrong with an alien companion, but they just need to offer this dynamic. And if they are going to offer this dynamic, what’s the point in them being aliens? Daft make-up and a funny costume?

    #82202
    Andrew
    Participant

    > To me, it?s the same kind of request as saying that the Doctor should visit more alien worlds and give Earth a rest for a season.

    But when people ask for those – at least in the context of Old Who – they generally still mean ‘some planets with aliens who look like people’, don’t they? I don’t think there are many asking for all-alien, all the time, and NEVER humanoid. Nobody’s asking for the aforementioned human sensibilities, emotions and perspectives to be left behind.

    Not that I entirely disagree. It’s a fool’s errand to be unfamiliar for the sake of it. I’d love to see stories set during the ancient history of a now-modern alien world, but causing/preventing a disaster IN that history has a tenth of the impact of doing the same with, say, Pompeii.

    I do think you could do an alien companion perfectly well, though. The Doc’s so full of humanity, and an understanding of Earth-ish-ness, that a Leela-style outsider written in the more emotional New Who style has real dramatic possibilities. Questioning our values from the outside, while still needing info on other stuff that the Doctor traditionally explains. (Like…I dunno, Anya in Buffy.)

    #82208
    pfm
    Participant

    Billie worked brilliantly as the first companion for new Who because the public didn’t then see her as the posh girl she really is, mainly due to her pop days and being in the tabloids, they could easily buy her as this ‘chav’ character because as far as they were concerned that was what she was like anyway. SO she was perfect for the plebs of this country to ‘relate’ to.

    Nothing else will do. Fully expect the first new companion of Moffat’s rein to be similar. No companions from other worlds (unless that planet is called ‘Chav-ron 3’ or something (the Doctor lands in the city of ‘Elizabeth Duke’…) and everyone is basically a gobby Londoner who wears pink and massive hoop earrings). OK, Donna wasn’t entirely like that, but that was overcome by the fact that everyone knew her as characters from the Catherine Tate Show

    #82239
    Pete Part Three
    Participant

    >didn?t then see her as the posh girl she really is

    She is? She married Chris Evans!

    >Fully expect the first new companion of Moffat?s rein to be similar.

    Moffat’s ladies seem to be slightly different though; Sally, Reinette and River for example.

    #82242
    Andrew
    Participant

    > Moffat?s ladies seem to be slightly different though; Sally, Reinette and River for example.

    And somewhere a Who fanboy is whining that those are sexually confident women and Doctor Who “simply isn’t the place for such things”.

    #82243
    pfm
    Participant

    But they were one-off characters. None of them would have worked as permanent companions, regardless of the copious masturbation that took place over Sally Sparrow.

    #82244
    Jo
    Participant

    I still think Sally Sparrow would make an awesome companion.

    #82245
    Jonathan Capps
    Keymaster

    > None of them would have worked as permanent companions

    Why? Surely Donna has proved that even the shittest, most obnoxious one off characters can be revived and made slightly ok. There is absolutely no reason why Jenny or Sally (both good actresses) couldn’t be ace.

    #82246
    ChrisM
    Participant

    If utilized the right way I think they could work ok.

    Having a strong confident character with the Doctor I mean, not the masturbation.

    We’ve had a different dynamic already with Donna. No reason why a whole different character couldn’t work again. And being strong characters should not mean they have no weaknesses whatsoever, or no place to grow. Even as the Doctor himself shows weakness from time to time and needs the supposed ‘weak’ character to sort him out.

    #82247
    Seb Patrick
    Keymaster

    >Moffat?s ladies seem to be slightly different though; Sally, Reinette and River for example.

    And somewhere a Who fanboy is whining that those are sexually confident women and Doctor Who ?simply isn?t the place for such things?.

    … and somewhere else, someone (probably Lawrence Miles) is pointing out that Moffat can’t write good women characters, as if Coupling (in which, admittedly, his writing of women was bloody awful) is the only thing he’s ever written.

    #82248
    Andrew
    Participant

    > None of them would have worked as permanent companions

    Well, sure they could, but the point is that Moffat has, let’s face it, some pretty solid recurring facets when it comes to his female leads. You don’t have to bring those characters back to see some of their traits in the new companions.

    The Coupling three (who I don’t think ARE badly written – at all), Becky in Joking Apart, Suzie in Chalk, Lynda in Press Gang, Sally, Reinette and River..they all have much in common. Not the least of which is a blend of (often sexualised) sass and mystique, coupled with endearing doses of personal paranoia.

    That said, he also does this with his male characters as well (The Doctor and Jack in The Doctor Dances being a case in point). So it’s as much about his general style as anything. Where Davies, you feel, writes with a big silly grin, and Gatiss writes with a kind of stern need to be true to his subject matter, Moffat writes while horny but self-doubting. :-)

    #82258
    #82442
    #82453
    Dave
    Participant

    http://www.ganymede.tv/forum/2008/06/the-doctor-who-spoilers-thread-part-iii#comment-129194

    To finish off pedantically:

    The Stolen Earth>Parting of the Ways>Sound of Drums>Journey’s End>Doomsday

    #82459
    John Hoare
    Participant

    Bad Wolf > The Sound of Drums > The Stolen Earth > Army of Ghosts
    The Parting of the Ways > Journey’s End = Doomsday > Last of the Time Lords

    Really can’t decide between Journey’s End and DoomsdayDoomsday is far more coherent, but Journey’s End has so many punch-the=air moments that it’s impossible for me to decide.

    I also fully admit that part of the reason Psrting of the Wolf comes top is the sheer joy at having Who back that first year.

    #82462
    pfm
    Participant

    “David?s real-life love Georgia Moffett, 23, returns as his daughter Jenny for one of the Who specials.”

    Whatever… Moffat saved her, she’ll return in a Moffat-written episode IMO. Let’s say, for instance, that she was the one who picked up the Master’s ring. His daughter returns but she’s really the Master, or at least has the Master inside her. She somehow becomes pregnant and the Master is the father (the Master as the Doctor’s son-in-law…priceless). Because of the way she was ‘born’ her pregnancy doesn’t last long and the kid quickly becomes a fully grown, strangely John Simm-looking adult. The Master’s consciousness passes into this new child and thus he is properly back. However, the accelerated growth continues and he only has a matter of hours to put his dastardly plan into action before he looks like John Simm in the same age makeup used for the old Tennant and Davros. The episode ends with him unexpectedly regenerating and fleeing before we see his new guise.

    #82505
    pfm
    Participant
    #82541
    Seb Patrick
    Keymaster

    >Some experts estimate his pay packet for Doctor Who could be ‘not more than ?150,000’ a year.

    I can confidently state that this is absolute bollocks. To say much more would break confidentiality agreements, but… while Moff probably won’t earn as much as Russell, he’ll earn a fuckload more than ?150,000 a year if he plays his cards right.

    #82543
    Jonathan Capps
    Keymaster

    I think it’s pretty safe to say that almost all of that article is made up. The quotes are so obviously fake, it’s painful.

    #82544
    John Hoare
    Participant

    One Hollywood insider said: ‘No one walks away from Spielberg and all that money for a show no one has heard of. I mean, what is this doctor show about? It sounds a little silly.’

    #82545
    Jonathan Capps
    Keymaster

    The Moffat quote about wanting the job since he was seven, too. That’s clearly just been constructed by the joke he made when it was announced he had the job.

    Fuck the Daily Mail.

    #82798
    pfm
    Participant

    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=KwI-V4AdGYc

    Reverse the polarity of the WHAT?

    #82813
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant

    God almighty that was pantomime awful.

    I know it was a kiddies thing but bloody hell…even as a wee ‘un I would’ve found that patronising.

    #82867
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant

    Interview with Moffat….

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7531310.stm

    I love everything he says.

    #82869
    Andrew
    Participant

    “It’s impossible for Doctor Who to get it wrong because we can just say ‘he changed time, it’s a time warp, it happens’.”

    What pisses me off is that when Davies says stuff like this, a hundred fan-wankers kick up a fuss about how he SO doesn’t get the genre. Yet when Moffat says it, it’s somehow rendered divine.

    Fandom is so often rubbish.

    #82871
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant

    Oh, actually I didn’t like that bit too much. Though he has a point. He was after all the one who invented the “wibbley wobbly timey wimey” stuff, which explains pretty much anything.

    I think he’s making the point that with a show like Doctor Who, there’s no corner that you can’t write yourself out of. As long as the way out is written well! I have more faith in Moffat saying it cos I think his writing for the show has proved that he has the ability to do so.

    If Davies said it, I get the idea that it’d be as a means of justifying another implausible plot device.

    #82874
    John Hoare
    Participant

    God almighty that was pantomime awful.

    I know it was a kiddies thing but bloody hell?even as a wee ?un I would?ve found that patronising.

    I liked it, but bear in mind that it was designed to be *seen* at the Prom. With a Graske running around on stage, and the Doctor’s manuscript flying across the stage, according to reports. And later on, DAVROS APPEARED THROUGH THE FLOOR.

    It’ll come across a lot better on the televised version.

    #82882
    Dave
    Participant

    >God almighty that was pantomime awful

    It’s no Time Crash, but it could’ve been worse

    #82883
    Andrew
    Participant

    > If Davies said it, I get the idea that it?d be as a means of justifying another implausible plot device.

    And thus was my point made.

    #82884
    Jonathan Capps
    Keymaster

    > What pisses me off is that when Davies says stuff like this, a hundred fan-wankers kick up a fuss about how he SO doesn?t get the genre. Yet when Moffat says it, it?s somehow rendered divine.

    I’ve not seen *any* evidence of the latter, incidentally. It’s still a bit of a crappy attitude no matter who says it.

    #82885
    Andrew
    Participant

    > I?ve not seen *any* evidence of the latter, incidentally.

    To be fair I was coming directly off a post that said “I love everything he says.” But outside of the bughouse craziness of the heavy hardcore – I’m thinking the causal postings as you get on, say, AICN or Chud – there’s a lot of “Moffat knows what he’s doing, see – now Davies should bugger off” stuff.

    > It?s still a bit of a crappy attitude no matter who says it.

    But it’s not, is it? It’s just…y’know, true.

    If it’s better for the show long-term to, say, revive a dead character, you have the means to do it. While I agree that you don’t break rules that you’ve set in stone (at least not easily), the genre is insanely flexible outside of a few of your own pre-set basics. You do, kinda, have a magic wand to wave.

    In fact the breaks can be the best part. “Don’t cross the streams” is my favourite example of a ‘rule’ that was set-up early and then broken for the climax…

    #82886
    Jonathan Capps
    Keymaster

    I dunno, I just get the impression it’s being said as an excuse for lazy writing. Like you say, arbitrary rules are there for a reason and basically saying “Our show is special because we can ignore all rules” really limits some of the storytelling potential.

    #82887
    Andrew
    Participant

    > I just get the impression it?s being said as an excuse for lazy writing.

    Maybe I’ve been listening to too many writers, but I genuinely don’t think this is why they say it. (Davies said one of ’em on Richard and Judy, who probably weren’t interrogating him on his genre techniques.)

    I think it’s an expression of joy of liberation from traditionally Earth-bound writers, and an explanation of what isn’t, actually, worrying them right now. (“Do you worry that you won’t be able to change X?” “Bah there’s always a way to change X.”) It’s a quickie answer, but I don’t think it’s a dismissive or defensive one.

    #82890
    Jonathan Capps
    Keymaster

    > (?Do you worry that you won?t be able to change X?? ?Bah there?s always a way to change X.?) It?s a quickie answer, but I don?t think it?s a dismissive or defensive one.

    I think the idea that a show can let you do anything naturally extends further than just being able to change things that could be problematic as a quickie solution. It could be used for absolutely anything the writer wants and that’s exciting, yes, but also potentially hugely problematic as it could easily be used to justify extreme laziness that could damage the quality of the show. Internal consistency in any universe (especially a fantastical one) is obviously really important, and any attitude that’s flaunting the opinion that “it’s ok, we can do ANYTHING and explain ANYTHING in this show, wheeeeeeee!” is a dangerous one, as it’s a breeding ground for last minute, one line explanations for everything.

    I’m not saying that Moffat will do this, but I *do* thing RTD has been guilty of being reckless with this ‘rule’ in the past and it would be nice to see that reigned in a bit, so it’s a bit worrying to see Moffat say what he has. After all, who knows what sort of a showrunner he’s going to be…

    #82892
    pfm
    Participant

    One question to ponder – is a one-line bullshit explanation for something better than no explanation at all?

    #82898
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant

    >> If Davies said it, I get the idea that it?d be as a means of justifying another implausible plot device.

    >And thus was my point made.

    How does this confirm your point? You were suggesting that I was displaying fanwankery – i.e. a blind and unjustified faith in Moffat and instant dismissal of Davies for making the same point. I was qualifying my position by saying that judging from what we’ve seen of Davies and Moffat’s respective writing talents thus far, I think Moffat would be more able to satisfactorily write his way out of a corner whilst Davies would create an illogical plot contrivance.

    Just judging the horses from the races they’ve run.

    #82897
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant

    Also, the “I love everything he says” was relating to that specific article, not Moffat in general.

    I’m one of the few who wasn’t convinced about his talents until Girl in the Fireplace.

    #82904
    pfm
    Participant

    I still think that RTD is the best person out there to run this ship. Moffat’s seriously got his work cut out. Has anyone ever considered that it’s unlikely he’ll be able to produce anything as fantastic as his previous Who scripts when he becomes the boss? He’s not revealing how many episodes he’s writing for series 5 but we can guess at 5 or 6 (inc the Christmas ep), at least 3 of those going to places he’s never been before – series opener and 2-parter finale.

    Look at Jekyll. I remember two of the middle episodes being pretty painful to watch at times due to how cringeworthy they were. The first one was all over the place too IMO. The parts I liked were the brilliant tie-in with the novel and, bizarrely, those scenes in the fucking zoo(!) along with all the other times ‘Hyde’ went mental. Michelle Ryan’s character turned out to be pointless. I hated all the cheesy American-accented characters, and what was with the two lesbian investigators?? OK they were played by great people. But to cap it all off, and I know this isn’t Moffat’s fault but still, the acting of Gina Bellman, playing Jackman’s wife, was utterly terrible. Bet she still crops up in Who though due to Moffat obviously loving her.

    #82955
    Dave
    Participant

    >I?m one of the few who wasn?t convinced about his talents until Girl in the Fireplace

    I almost agree, I loved The Curse Of The Fatal Death, but The Empty Child didn’t wow me like it seemed to with other people. I liked it, but I didn’t nearly drown in my own semen. Girl in the Fireplace & Blink nearly had me treading water.

    #82972
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant

    My sentiments exactly. It has some nice moments…but there’s a lot of cringe-worthy smug comedy dialogue in his first two-parter…and I don’t really like anything that he’s written outside of Who.

    We shall see.

    #82973
    Ian Symes
    Keymaster

    but there?s a lot of cringe-worthy smug comedy dialogue in his first two-parter

    When an episode contains lines like:

    “Before this war, I was a father and a grandfather. Now I’m neither, but I’m still a doctor.”

    “Excellent bottom!”

    “There is a war on, is it possible you’ve miscounted?”

    “Well, I’ve got a banana, and at a pinch you can put up some shelves.”

    “Bananas are good. Good source of potassium.”

    …and all the “everyone lives” stuff, you can’t really complain about the dialogue.

    #82974
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant

    ?Excellent bottom!?

    ?Well, I?ve got a banana, and at a pinch you can put up some shelves.?

    ?Bananas are good. Good source of potassium.?

    and

    “It’s….er….A SCREWDRIVER, OK? A SCREWDRIVER!”

    “Oooh…a sonic screwdriver…who looks at a screwdriver and thinks ‘that could do with being a bit more sonic”

    “Red only means emergency on earth. Everywhere else it’s camp”

    – those were the bits I meant. Didn’t do it for me. Made my anus pucker and my brow furrow. To my ears they’re Clunky and smug. Clug and smunky.

    #82975
    Ian Symes
    Keymaster

    This is an entirely subjective matter, but for me those exact same lines are some of the best dialogue ever in the show! Different strokes, and all that.

    #82980
    Danny Stephenson
    Keymaster

    What you talkin’ about, Symes?

    (I’m sorry I couldn’t resist)

    #84122
    Pete Part Three
    Participant

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/tv/article1659508.ece

    Probably best to take this with a cellar of salt.

    #84125
    ChrisM
    Participant

    So Tate,40, might be back with Tenant,37.

    Sorry, I find the age dropping thing amusing for some reason. Just looks a bit strange…

    #84383
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant
    #84894
    Pete Part Three
    Participant

    ***Spoilers (Apparently) from Den of Geek regarding the Xmas spesh***

    >The story is believed to centre around a future version of the Doctor, who is being played by David Morrissey. He is also believed to be married to River Song, which would explain much of the interplay between the Doctor and River Song in Silence In The Library/Forest Of The Dead earlier this year.

    Huh? Married to River Song? Was it made explicit that she only knew the Tennant Doctor? Either way, the whole idea sounds a bit fan-wanky for a Christmas special.,

    I’d read previously that Morrissey’s character was actually a phoney pretending to be the Doctor, which seemed like a great idea. (Jonathan Creek did a similar idea, but never mind).

    #84901
    Zombie Jim Undead
    Participant

    Awww…I don’t want the mystery of River Song to be revealed so soon!

    Don’t know if it was made explicit that she just knew Tennant’s doctor…was it?

    #84905
    ChrisM
    Participant

    >Don?t know if it was made explicit that she just knew Tennant?s doctor?was it?

    No. She recognized him, I think, and said “You’re really young” or words to that effect, but then she might have known that face before he regenerated again. Also you got the impression she was looking at the… inner him.. if that makes sense. (That sound rubbish I know. I mean she recognized him from beyond his outer form. Just an impression I got.)

    #84912
    Seb Patrick
    Keymaster

    I’ll eat my shoes if Morrissey is any kind of “future” Doctor. This is clearly inspired by The One Doctor, and he is clearly (spoilers) an imposter.

    #84914
    Andrew
    Participant

    It all strikes me as a very loaded reading of the deliberately non-committal book extracts by RTD, while handily ignoring the “I think she’s she’s his wife, I’m not sure; I dunno, it’s Steven’s thing” implications elsewhere in the same piece.

    Anyone else notice how DoG have missed the new Dwarf news? :-)

    #84918
    Ian Symes
    Keymaster

    Perhaps if there was a way of summarising the news in list form, they might carry it.

    #84931
    Tanya Jones
    Participant

    Top 10 of Things We’d Like to See in the New Dwarf Specials?

    #84932
    Pete Part Three
    Participant

    I think they must have heard you, Andrew.

    http://www.denofgeek.com/television/119658/red_dwarf_returns.html

    #84933
    Andrew
    Participant

    Anyone else notice how BBC One haven’t shown a late-night all-nude oily trampoline special featuring the female cast of Buffy?

    (Worth a try.)

    #84934
    ChrisM
    Participant

    All four will be shown in 2009, with the hope that if they achieve the kind of ratings Dave is after ? and if they don?t, they?ll just repeat them on loop anyway ? there may yet be further adventures on the horizon. Here?s hoping?

    Actually the latter bits a good point… their tendency to repeat didn’t occur to me. I usually find the repetitiveness of, er, repeats (of whatever show) a bit annoying, but in this case, and in this case (considering the prospect of future Dwarf) all to the good.

    #84935
    Danny Stephenson
    Keymaster

    Anyone else notice how BBC One haven?t shown a late-night all-nude oily trampoline special featuring the female cast of Buffy?

    That reminded me of ‘Dogma’.

    #84981
    John Hoare
    Participant

    The repeats on Dave would matter less if they pulled out some more obscure stuff at the same time, like UK Gold used to do. As it is, it’s understandable if it gets the ratings – which it *is* – but it sure makes for a more boring channel.

    The move into original programming is great, though.

    #85000
    pfm
    Participant

    Judging by how far into the ‘spoilers’ book Tennant’s Doctor featured, we’re talking at least another thousand years of the Doctor’s life before he even meets River Song. It won’t ever be dealt with and IMO it shouldn’t be. It’s Jenny who SHOULD be dealt with, by me, with my penis, and my tongue.

    #86033
    ChrisM
    Participant

    This could be complete rubbish but take a look.

    Of course if it does happen it could be pretty awful, I’m curious. I’d be interesting seeing Tom Baker back anyway. He looks a lot different now to his original incarnation (age’ll do that ;) ) but no doubt they’ll get round it with the usual timey-wimey excuse. Which is ok with me.

    EDIT- Oh, ok. Just noticed already covered in your Noise to Signal website. (I came to it via Den of Geek.) Never mind. :)

Viewing 100 posts - 201 through 300 (of 320 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.