Home Forums Ganymede & Titan Forum Thoughts on the Series XII Flipside Cover?

Viewing 72 posts - 301 through 372 (of 372 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #226133

    International Debris – You can read a Target novel in an hour!? And a PDA novel in a single evening!?

    My brain and eyes just couldn’t do that.

    I am reminded of that moment in “Rose” when the Doctor reads The Lovely Bones.

    (“sad ending…”)

    #226134

    Well, maybe about 80 minutes for your average Target. My Kindle app normally has my PDA time at around just over four hours. I’ve never compared reading times before, but I’ve always read a lot pretty much since I learned to read, so maybe I’m quite fast. I’ve read 97 Who books so far this year!

    Thankfully my list includes a fair few of the new series ‘quick reads’ books, which I reckon are probably 45 minuters for me.

    #226135
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    >Earthshock is my favourite colour era classic Cybermen story

    Talk about damning with faint praise.

    The Capaldi two-parter was much more about the Masters and Bill, but I thought they used the Cybermen very well, and particularly enjoyed the body horror of the scarecrows and the transformation. Taking them back to their roots, there. The original Mondas costumes did look really, really bad though, I have to say. I liked the idea of using the original design, but… maybe they should have gone back to 576i black and white, as well.

    There were supposed to be other Cyberman designs in that episode too (Tomb, Invasion, Earthshock) but, of course, there was no money for that, as usual. They would have been shown off as the Cybermen evolved more and more, rather than going straight from Tenth Planet to Nightmare in Silver.

    #226136

    Forgive me everyone but, International Debris – news of your quest has thrown up all sorts of questions in my mind. So…

    1. Where did you start? Time and Relative?

    2. Are you doing Engines of War? If so, presumably it’s between The Gallifrey Chronicles and the forthcoming Rose novelisation? (That’ll be a very weird 3 book sequence!)

    3. Where are you placing the 7th Doctor PDAs? Prior to the Virgin NAs, due to the ending of Loving the Alien? Confusingly I seem to recall there is a viewpoint that one of PDAs (Algebra of Ice?) takes place somewhere DURING the early NAs…

    4. Have you been stumped as to where any of them belong? The Infinity Doctors for example?

    5. What will you do if they release further novels (like The Drosten’s Curse for example) which are set at a point you’ve already overtaken? Just ignore them?

    6. Where on Earth is the Dying Days going?

    7. It’s weird that (in your marathon) Resurrection and Revelation of the Daleks just won’t happen, due to never having been novelised, isn’t it?

    8. Finally – 97 Who books in a year? And it hasn’t sent you insane?

    #226139
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    There’s someone on /tv/ lovingly known as “chronological anon” who is making it his mission to experience every single piece of official Doctor Who content, in in-universe chronological order. He’s up to Paul McGann, I think.

    He, is insane.

    3355 Doctor Who stories are listed on this website: http://eyespider.org.uk/drwho/compleat.html

    Just thinking about the sheer number of television stories and audios alone gives me anxiety.

    #226140
    bloodteller
    Participant

    where does Dimensions In Time fit in?

    #226141

    Well, between the DWM comic strip “Three Steps to the Left” and the Shorty Trip “Storm in a Tikka.”

    Obviously.

    Ahem.

    (This is simultaneously terrifying and impressive, like those Lance Parkin History books)

    #226142
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    They also list A Fix With Sontarans, which features a first appearance by good old Jimmy Saville and lacks a fourth wall, which is… questionable at best.

    #226143
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    Guest appearance*

    #226166

    > 1. Where did you start? Time and Relative?

    Frayed. Time and Relative second.

    > 2. Are you doing Engines of War? If so, presumably it’s between The Gallifrey Chronicles and the forthcoming Rose novelisation? (That’ll be a very weird 3 book sequence!)

    Yes, and yes!

    > 3. Where are you placing the 7th Doctor PDAs? Prior to the Virgin NAs, due to the ending of Loving the Alien? Confusingly I seem to recall there is a viewpoint that one of PDAs (Algebra of Ice?) takes place somewhere DURING the early NAs…

    I can’t for the life of me remember which website I was using, but one actually has them all ordered into ‘seasons’. There are a few sites which have chronologies, and I’ve tried to piece them all together in an order that works. I’m trusting these to be right, but if they’re not then I’ll just have to deal.

    > 4. Have you been stumped as to where any of them belong? The Infinity Doctors for example?

    I’ve got a short section for other/unknown Doctor at the end of it, featuring that, Scream of the Shalka and The Dalek Factor.

    > 5. What will you do if they release further novels (like The Drosten’s Curse for example) which are set at a point you’ve already overtaken? Just ignore them?

    The Krikkitmen will be the first of these, and I’ll just go back to it once I’ve finished. Not the most satisfying way of doing it (I’m terrified they’ll start novelisation ALL the new stories, which will be bloody annoying – I’ll probably end up doing a whole new-era marathon one day in the future if that happens).

    > 6. Where on Earth is the Dying Days going?

    I have it between The Eight Doctors and Rip Tide. I don’t know if that’ll work but we’ll see!

    > 7. It’s weird that (in your marathon) Resurrection and Revelation of the Daleks just won’t happen, due to never having been novelised, isn’t it?

    I have a couple of unofficial novelisations downloaded.

    > 8. Finally – 97 Who books in a year? And it hasn’t sent you insane?

    Nope, I’m really bloody enjoying it!

    #226167

    I kind of wish I’d started a blog about it actually, but now I’m about 160 books in it seems a bit late to start one. The closest I’ve come is making remarks on each book in the Old Doctor Who thread on cookdandbombd.

    #226183
    Katydid
    Participant

    I’m a bit late to the bit about Douglas Adams, but my two cents on that as talented he is as a comedy writer, it’s kind of obvious that all his best work is carried by the strength of the humor and never by the storytelling. From a plot perspective, the entire Hitch-Hiker’s series is really just a series of absurdly improbable coincidences happening in succession. The plot device specifically written in to cause improbable coincidences to happen isn’t even responsible for the majority of them past the first series / book. The absurdist storytelling really hurts the drama of the later books that go for a darker tone.

    Would I be correct in assuming Adams’ work on Dr. Who suffers from that as well?

    #226184

    From a plot perspective, the entire Hitch-Hiker’s series is really just a series of absurdly improbable coincidences happening in succession.

    Yes.

    I am a big fan of Douglas Adams. I love his work. Yet strangely, I would say 90% of my enjoyment derives from a peculiar and unplaceable quality which imbues his work. A “Douglas Adams-ness” which I greatly enjoy. It almost feels like being in the company of a friend, whose presence I especially enjoy. He really makes me laugh, and I enjoy the way he fizzes with ideas.

    If I set this aside and analyse his work dispassionately, I would say his storytelling is undisciplined, it is chaotically structured and unpolished; his characters are 2-Dimensional; and he hurtles through ideas, veering from one to the next, often without developing them or connecting them in a dramatically satisfying way.

    In other words, most of the criticisms I hear of Douglas Adams are, I would say, fair. And yet that doesn’t diminish my enjoyment.

    Further up the thread, Ben mentioned that “Destiny of the Daleks” feels a lot like a Douglas Adams script, despite having Terry Nation’s name on it. I completely agree. It has a big dose of Douglas thanks to him being the script editor, and it is somehow imbued with “Douglas Adams-ness” in a way that a similar Terry Nation story like “Death to the Daleks” just isn’t.

    When Douglas Adams wrote his first solo Doctor Who script (The Pirate Planet) there is evidence that he actually put a hell of a lot of thought into building its world, and exploring all of its concepts, and writing and rewriting it to hone its structure. There is a very interesting appendix to James Goss’s recent novelisation of the Pirate Planet which details Douglas’s intensive early drafts and revisions.

    But when, the following year, he wrote the much-celebrated City of Death, he was forced to do so at breakneck speed (as we discussed further up the thread, he had a delirious coffee and alcohol-fuelled weekend in which to write 4 scripts) and what you end up with is a story with a really lovely Douglas Adamsy feel, but which is technically something of an artistic explosion.

    It’s his most celebrated Doctor Who work, beloved of many fans like International Debris. And it is very good, but…

    I’ve always had difficulty, for example, with the concept of how a character can be splintered through time (an idea reused by Moffat to similarly perplexing effect with Clara Oswald). And quite what the hell is going on with that guy doing a portrait of Romana with a cracked clock face I’m not sure.

    These are just a couple of examples of arresting, vivid ideas, which I would argue haven’t been entirely satisfyingly engineered into the storytelling. At least from my subjective perspective.

    So, to answer your question (kind of) I’d say that Douglas Adams’s Doctor Who BENEFITS from having that mysterious quality of Douglas Adams-ness, but that this necessarily brings with it some of the (entirely legitimate) criticisms to which you have alluded.

    For example, I gather Douglas Adams wrote the final scenes of The Armageddon Factor, and that is a catastrophic let-down because so much hinges on it providing narrative satisfaction for the Key to Time story arc. And yet here Douglas doesn’t seem to bother with narrative satisfaction. Instead of giving us a good crescendo, he instead writes the Doctor making the philosophical argument that his epic quest (which we’ve been following all season) was fundamentally flawed from the beginning, and thus he resets the status quo, by scattering the Key to Time back through the cosmos, undoing a season-long quest, rendering the whole exercise pointless!

    That’s my attempt to summarise things anyway.

    As a post-script I would say that paradoxically Douglas Adams didn’t always manage to harness his own Douglas Adams-ness. I found Mostly Harmless to be almost completely devoid of his charm (as was, incidentally, that regrettable posthumous Hitch-hiker movie).

    #226185

    International Debris – I’m in awe of your quest, and your supernatural speed-reading powers. Although maybe if you had been blogging along the way you wouldn’t have made it to 97 books this year!

    #226187
    Warbodog
    Member

    The first Dirk Gently book is probably the story most randomly clogged with whatever was on Douglas Adams’ mind at the time. It probably doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, but he mashes it all together so masterfully in the end that it feels like it does. You just need the patience to wait half a book while all the seemingly incompatible playing pieces are moved into place, and before the main character even shows up.

    Clearly feeling frustrated and stifled by Hitchhiker’s (I still like the painfully-squeezed fourth book a lot), Dirk Gently reads like the author’s having a massively indulgent, messy and explosive wank. I re-read Adams’ books this year for the first time since my teens, and Dirk Gently 1 came out as my surprise favourite. Second one was just okay. Not watched (either of) the series.

    (DGHDA > THHGttG > TRatEotU > SLaTfatF > LCtS > LtUaE > TLDTTotS > TSoD > TMoL > MH).

    ((CoD > TPP > S)).

    #226188
    Warbodog
    Member

    (((Don’t really have an opinion on the series XII flipside cover))).

    #226190
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    It’s best just to pretend Series Seven of New Who just didn’t happen, honestly.

    Yes, there is fun Adams-ness to a lot of his work, but honestly it does not work for Doctor Who. Doctor Who needs to be taken seriously, as any of the best actors who have been in it will tell you. Because it’s so out there, so silly and unbelievable by default, you have to play it with the utmost sincerity so that the audience will believe in the story. Adams seems incapable of taking anything seriously for any extended period of time, although he does have his good moments of seriousness, like when the Doctor confronts the pirate Captain about his plans.

    But then you have the gratuitous walking the plank jokes, the parrot, all that silly shite. City of Death is good because you get to look at Paris a lot, Tom Baker and Lalla Ward have incredibly chemistry, and there is loads of brilliant dialogue – not because of the plot.

    It is worth pointing out that Tom and Lalla did a lot of uncredited rewriting on the dialogue of City of Death, and so not only are you getting Adams personality shining through, but Baker’s too.

    I will say again that Tom Baker and Douglas Adams works incredibly well, but not for Doctor who

    #226191
    Katydid
    Participant

    The first Dirk Gently book is probably the story most randomly clogged with whatever was on Douglas Adams’ mind at the time.

    That sounds like my writing ten years ago.

    You just need the patience to wait half a book while all the seemingly incompatible playing pieces are moved into place

    THAT sounds like my writing ten years ago.

    reads like the author’s having a massively indulgent, messy and explosive wank

    Have you been going through my archives?!

    #226195
    flanl3
    Participant

    Personally, I was so annoyed by both the main cover and the lack of a flipside on the US release that I just still haven’t bothered to get a DVD.

    #226201

    Of particular interest about the first Dirk Gently novel is it’s one of the many versions of the Who story Shada that you can now enjoy. At least 50% of the plot is the same, what with Shada being unfinished at the time (later released on video with Tom Baker’s narration and Keff McCulloch’s Casio Corner providing distraction, then released as an Eighth Doctor audio and animated webcast, then released as novelisation completed by Gareth Roberts, then released as a part-animated DVD). For the classic lost Who story, it has more adaptations and versions than any other.

    #226202

    Still baffles me why they didn’t give Capaldi a two-parter Valeyard story with him playing both parts. It would’ve bloody glorious.

    #226203
    Ben Paddon
    Participant

    Personally, I was so annoyed by both the main cover and the lack of a flipside on the US release that I just still haven’t bothered to get a DVD.

    My Red Dwarf DVD collection started while I was still living in the UK so I tend to import anyway, but the lack of a reversible cover on the Blurays leaves me feeling mildly irked.

    #226207

    Still baffles me why they didn’t give Capaldi a two-parter Valeyard story with him playing both parts. It would’ve bloody glorious.

    Two problems:

    1. If you cast Peter Capaldi as “the dark side” of the Doctor, where his morality is brought into question, and he’s a bit of a cold bastard… it would basically be Series 8.

    2. The Valeyard was described as deriving from between the Doctor’s 12th and final incarnation. And Moffat ballsed up the numbering of the Doctors. From what I remember of the trainwreck that was Time of the Doctor, it was stated that Matt Smith was playing the 13th and final Doctor.

    Apparently David Tennant counts as two Doctors, because at the end of Series 4 he bled regenerative energy into a hand and essentially made a human clone of himself, thereby using up an incarnation. I absolutely hate this reading of that scene, and think it unnecessarily complicates things.

    Combined with the fact John Hurt played an extra Doctor in between McGann and Eccleston, that means the Valeyard would hail from between Tennant (the Eleventh/Twelfth Doctor) and Matt Smith (the 13th Doctor).

    I know what you’re thinking: “between the 12th and final” doesn’t necessarily mean “between the 12th and 13th”… alas, Time of the Doctor makes a great show of the fact that Matt Smith is the final Doctor. His life is only sustained because the Time Lords magically zap him a whole new cycle of regenerations, essentially re-starting his life.

    Peter Capaldi is playing the first Doctor of a new cycle. (The 14th Doctor in-Universe; but only the 12th Doctor if you are counting actors who have played the lead on BBC TV).

    Thus Jodie will be the 13th (in real life) and the 15th (in-Universe) Doctor.

    Urgh, I despise how complicated Moffat has made things.

    #226216
    Dave
    Participant

    The Doctor’s final regeneration clearly hasn’t happened yet, though. So it’s not complicated at all, and the original description offers a perfectly reasonable get-out.

    #226217

    I don’t have a problem with the hand using up a regeneration (it did make an entirely new Doctor, after all), and I do love Hurt’s War Doctor. But I agree that the numbering became a pain in the arse.

    That said, with the media being down on the show recently, with exaggerated stories of low viewing figures and ratings, I’d actually be quite worried if Capaldi was intended to be the ‘final’ Doctor of his first lot of regenerations. It’d be an easy way to kill the show off.

    As for ’12th and final’, if the Valeyard existed after the 12th Doctor, he wouldn’t have known another regeneration cycle was coming, so he would really think he was about to enter his final incarnation. So, given the new numbering, he could very easily be something that came about due to the ‘meta-crisis’ that happened in Journey’s End. That’s my head-canon, anyway.

    #226218
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    For the common man, Capaldi is still the 12th Doctor, Whittaker is still the 13th, and they are referenced as such in the show, none of it really matters unless you are actually, currently watching Time of the Doctor.

    Any episode that addressed the regen limit was going to have some amount of asspulling in it, so I’m glad he did away with it in a Christmas special honestly. TotD has some really nice moments in it (the cracker scene later mirrored in Last Christmas) but overall it’s silly fluff like every Christmas special that isn’t A Christmas Carol.

    The real deal with the Valeyard is this – the Doctor forgot, the audience forgot, everybody forgot apart from some sweaty nerds on the internet who think bringing him back would be a good idea for some reason

    #226219

    Yeah, if even Moffat can’t find some absurdly convoluted way to fit The Valeyard in (other than a brief reference in Name of the Doctor), then it’s not coming back as a concept (especially given that Chibnall was outspoken about his opinions on Trial… back in the ’80s).

    There’s definitely a whole series there for Big Finish, though. He’s an offshoot of the meta-crisis regeneration, thinks he’s trying to reclaim a bunch of new regenerations for his future, then Clara or someone comes along in the last story and points out that he’s got a whole new cycle of regenerations left.

    everybody forgot apart from some sweaty nerds on the internet

    And that’s why we’re discussing him here.

    #226220

    Anyway, all this talk of the Valeyard and general fanwankery reminds me of another question I have regarding your novel marathon, International Debris…

    If you’re doing unofficial novels like Resurrection/Revelation of the Daleks, does that mean you’re also doing Time’s Champion by Hinton and McKeon?

    If so, before or after Spiral Scratch?

    #226221
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    Big Finish did bring The Valeyard back the The Last Adventure, which is apparently good.

    There’s an interview with the Moff where he’s asked about the Rani and the Valeyard, and he pretty much says only sweaty nerds even know who they are so there’s no point in bringing them back because 80% of your audience will be like “who, sorry?”

    It’s like making Snoke Darth Plageuis and trying to pass it off as a huge twist – everybody who hasn’t seen or who has forgotten about the prequels won’t care.

    The valeyard is best left in that era of the show, and there’s no real need to bring the Rani back, but they probably could if they really, really wanted to

    #226222
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    “It would be like making Snoke…” *

    So you don’t think I’ve just spoiled something, I haven’t

    #226232

    If you’re doing unofficial novels like Resurrection/Revelation of the Daleks, does that mean you’re also doing Time’s Champion by Hinton and McKeon?

    I’m only doing those two unofficial ones because they’re based on official stories. If I started doing actual fanfiction then I’d never know where to draw the line.

    I wouldn’t mind if they brought the Rani back, although I’m not sure quite why some people are so into the idea, given that she only had two canonical stories, one of which is largely considered the worst story of the classic era.

    #226233

    Makes total sense, International Debris.

    Apparently Gareth Roberts did start writing an official Revelation novelisation, but then Eric Saward got cold feet unfortunately.

    I think Revelation could make a magnificent novel. Imagine a good writer harnessing all that macabre black comedy in pitch-black prose; expanding the gruesome goings on at Tranquil Repose; giving new tragicomic inner monologues to the mourners or grief-stricken relatives.

    Instead of a straight-forward Target retelling, Revelation has the potential to have been something poetic – something morbidly philosophical, witty, poignant… And then a saucer full of Daleks blast their way in at the end!

    What a shame it never came to pass.

    #226234

    Presumably the strange clamouring in certain quarters for the Rani to reappear has quietened down now that Michelle Gomez was so outstandingly good as the Master..?

    #226235

    I wonder if a novelisation of Revelation would end up with The Doctor actually being involved in the plot on some level, rather than simply wandering around.

    Did Saward ever explain why he didn’t want his Dalek stories novelised? Especially given that Earthshock was adapted.

    #226236
    cwickham
    Participant

    Terry Nation was asking for too much money, basically (which for whatever reason wasn’t a problem with Kit Pedler and Gerry Davis).

    They could *probably* be done today, but they don’t have the sales advantage of Shada, City of Death and The Pirate Planet – namely that you can stick Douglas Adams’ name on the cover.

    #226238

    Ha! D’you know what, I’m sure Gareth Roberts would have addressed the Doctor’s non-involvement in the plot. It seems like the kind of thing he would want to fix. The polish he gave to Shada definitely made it work better. I’ve no clue how he would have done it for Revelation, but I imagine it would have been via the fine tradition of Doctor Who novelisers deviating from what was seen on screen.

    I have never heard anything officially said about the abandoned Revelation novelisation. I just saw a couple of tweets where Roberts confirmed that he had started work on it, and that the project had been shelved at Saward’s behest.

    If I had to guess, this would be my theory: Saward was happy for Earthshock to be novelised by someone else way back in 1983 because he himself was busy as script editor on the show, and Target paid peanuts. I imagine nowadays the publisher pays a proper fee, plus he’s no long up to his eyeballs with script editing. But I bet the publisher wanted an author with a good recent track record to do the writing, and chose Roberts due to the quality of Shada. So maybe Saward initially said yes to the idea, but when they were hammering out the deal he realised he actually wanted to be the one to write it. Especially considering the money would otherwise be split between Saward, Roberts and the Terry Nation estate. Meaning less money for Saward as well as him being deprived of the satisfaction of novelising his own script. This is a complete and total guess though, don’t take my word for it; I might be miles off.

    #226239

    Terry Nation was asking for too much money, basically (which for whatever reason wasn’t a problem with Kit Pedler and Gerry Davis).

    This would have been the reason Target didn’t do those books back in the 1980s, but Gareth Roberts has said it was Saward who halted the recent attempt to novelise Revelation.

    Nowadays the Terry Nation estate are quite happy for novelisations to feature daleks. We know for a fact that a novelisation of Day of the Doctor is forthcoming, written by Steven Moffat.

    Certainly nobody has a name that will help shift units to the extent that DOUGLAS ADAMS must improve sales. But I’m willing to bet a cover design with daleks on it (plus having “Daleks” in the title) would have a positive impact on sales. Especially as a load of old fans would buy it on the basis that it completes their Target library. I reckon you’d sell more copies of Revelation of the Daleks than you would, say, The Wheel of Ice or The Drosten’s Curse or any of those other original novels they’ve printed recently.

    #226240
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    Maybe Saward doesn’t want Resurrection of the Daleks novelised because it’s shit.

    #226241
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    He did say he tried to put too much into it on the dvd – the subplot about the daleks wanting to make a clone of the doctor so as to invade gallifrey, or something, for one.

    #226242

    I bet Resurrection wasn’t even mooted (except by Target in the 80s).

    #226243

    What’s Resurrection without Rodney Bewes, anyway?

    #226247
    Lily
    Participant

    >Apparently David Tennant counts as two Doctors, because at the end of Series 4 he bled regenerative energy into a hand and essentially made a human clone of himself, thereby using up an incarnation. I absolutely hate this reading of that scene, and think it unnecessarily complicates things.

    I thought that was a full regeneration, just that he kept the same face. 11 said he was having ‘vanity issues at the time’.

    #226248
    cwickham
    Participant

    I like the decision to make The Stolen Earth count as a regeneration, because it really bugged me at the time that the Doctor could use the regenerative energy then stop before it actually counted as a regeneration.

    Plus, Moffat wanted to deal with the regeneration limit, and once he’d retroactively added John Hurt he realised he was up to 12… so it was either not have The Stolen Earth count and deal with it when Capaldi regenerated, or have TSE count and deal with it now, when the Time Lords have just returned and there’s a perfect opportunity to give him a new regenerative cycle.

    #226249
    Ben Paddon
    Participant

    We know for a fact that a novelisation of Day of the Doctor is forthcoming, written by Steven Moffat.

    Do we? I can’t find anything about it online.

    #226250
    Ben Paddon
    Participant

    Huh, you’re right.

    Though it’s interesting to note that Penguin AU have taken the page down listing the books.

    #226251

    As far as I’m concerned, the telltale sign of a regeneration is that the Doctor suddenly looks physically completely different and has a traumatic mental episode where he’s confused/amnesiac. I would say if these 2 criteria are not met then it’s not a regeneration, it’s just the Doctor getting injured and bleeding some gold CGI.

    I like to think that a few seconds after Night of the Doctor, a young John Hurt climbs into the TARDIS and says “erm, who am I again..?”

    In 2008, my interpretation of the Stolen Earth cliffhanger was that the Doctor was badly injured, but managed to stave off regeneration. Result: he still looked like David Tennant and he wasn’t mentally confused. He did however bleed Artron energy. I don’t see why bleeding Artron energy means you use up a regeneration, any more than a human being losing vast quantities of blood should be considered medically dead if they later recover.

    I didn’t even consider that David Tennant might have regenerated into David Tennant. I have to say I *really* don’t like that idea. Instead, I interpreted the “vanity” line as meaning the Doctor was too vain to submit to regeneration in the Stolen Earth (which tallies with the “I don’t want to go” business in End of Time) but that he essentially “lost” an incarnation by syphoning it into the hand and creating a mortal human copy of himself.

    I didn’t have a problem with the Doctor almost regenerating (but recovering) in the Stolen Earth. I know it pissed other people off.

    But if the Doctor loses an incarnation every time he bleeds gold CGI doesn’t that mean Capaldi has played about 17 Doctors by now..?

    #226253

    Ben Paddon: yeah, the new Target novelisations are mentioned in the latest DWM.

    Steven Moffat said in an interview somewhere that he wanted to be the person to novelise the 50th anniversary story because he had such a rotten time doing the script that he didn’t want some other bugger doing the victory lap.

    #226255
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    My gripe with the two Tennant regenerations lies squarely with RTD, honestly, because bringing Rose back just to give her another gushy ending where she gets her own Doctor Clone to go off and shag for the rest of her life is just about one of the worst things that ever happened on the show, and the fakeout regeneration was cheap drama that happened at a time when we already knew Tennant was bowing out later. It also directly contributed to the magification of regeneration energy which is not something I view as appropriate or sensical.

    Also yes there were a couple Moff novelisations listed then taken down recently – and a couple Moff episodes being novelised by other people, interestingly.

    #226256
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    Also No Name, he generated an entire other living being out of his “bleeding CGI”, that’s got to at least make a dent in his reserves. Also he was mortally wounded etc.

    It was stupid, can we just pretend it never happened, as we do with large swathes of the show’s canon already?

    #226261

    Also No Name, he generated an entire other living being out of his “bleeding CGI”, that’s got to at least make a dent in his reserves.

    Yeah, it wasn’t the most satisfying of plot points. In fact, it was a cheap trick, dramatically speaking. I would also level that accusation (possibly more so actually) at the pseudo-regeneration in The Lie of the Land.

    But I see it as being like losing a dangerous amount of blood, nearly dying, but then donating that blood so somebody else might live.

    It was stupid, can we just pretend it never happened, as we do with large swathes of the show’s canon already?

    I have to admit, I was happily doing this until Moffat raked it up and complicated the regeneration limit by imposing his specific interpretation onto the Stolen Earth cliffhanger.

    I personally found this as unwelcome as if the Doctor had suddenly started harping on about the Morbius Doctors, like some boring fan.

    I say this as a self-evident boring fan.

    #226273
    Ben Paddon
    Participant

    Russell T Davies said at the time that Ten’s metacrisis regeneration would probably have consequences. He just wasn’t the one to write them.

    Keep in mind also, Moffat would often email Davies when he plans to do something with roots in Davies’ tenure as showrunner, so I don’t doubt that he fired off an email to Davies at the time to either ask, “Hey, do you think that counts as a regeneration?” or “Hey, so I’m thinking that counts as a regeneration, and I’d like to do this…”

    For my money, the metacrisis regeneration has always counted. Frankly it’d be cheap if it didn’t. I was initially not super-keen on the idea of the War Doctor, but by the time “The Day of the Doctor” rolled around I was enjoying myself far too much to give a fig about Doctor numberings and whatnot. The numbers were always a little iffy anyway, what with “The Brain of Morbius” and all that.

    #226308
    Katydid
    Participant

    “Thoughts on the Series XII flipside cover…and Doctor Who…and Douglas Adams…and presumably a few other things as we go…”

    #226309
    bloodteller
    Participant

    so what’s the general consensus on Doctor Who: The Movie? i really quite liked it, but the last time i mentioned it to someone they just said “that’s not doctor who” and then they buggered off.

    #226312
    flanl3
    Participant

    So why did people hate The Last Jedi? I absolutely adored it.

    #226315

    The film has a decent story and a great performance by McGann, but The Master is bloody crap in it, the whole thing is too over the top and it takes far too long to get going. McCoy’s regeneration was a really important aspect, to keep the continuity of the original series, but it should have been a flashback for the moment where he finally gets his memory back.

    #226316
    bloodteller
    Participant

    Chang Lee was good too, probably the least annoying companion from all the Doctor Who shows i’ve seen (i ended up watching a few recently)

    #226317
    bloodteller
    Participant

    everyone always forgets about poor Chang Lee

    #226325
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    The Last Jedi was far too long and incredibly boring. All the stuff with Luke, Rey and Kylo was interesting, and could have made for a decent movie all on its own, but the B and C plots with the slow motion chase and the casino planet were just tedious.

    Also the shit jokes undermining the drama, as if they’re afraid of being too serious for too long, Mary Poppins made me want to die, weaponising that thing that shouldn’t be weaponised opens up a can of worms (although I thought it was fine) and oodles and oodles of plot convenience.

    The Doctor Who Movie is a lot of fun and McGann is great, but I totally get the whole “it’s not really Who” angle – it is incredibly cheesey, and quite different from the rest of the show. And the half human thing

    #226326
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    I don’t really like the flipside cover, by the way, Craig’s face in that photo just doesn’t look very good and it breaks the tradition of only having him and Chris on the cover x

    #226336
    GlenTokyo
    Participant

    I like the Who movie. Best theme tune too, McGann is great aswell. In fact it’s all great apart from Eric Roberts I’d say. Sets are good, McCoy is good, and looking back now after the Russell T Davies reboot, it doesn’t seem as out of character for the Doctor to be interested in relationships. I prefer it to a lot of new who to be honest.

    #226338
    flanl3
    Participant

    So what’s everyone’s opinion on shorts?

    #226339
    bloodteller
    Participant

    depends on what type of shorts they are

    #226340
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    I don’t like them

    #226343

    Depends who’s wearing them.

    #226345
    bloodteller
    Participant

    me.

    #226346
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    Oh, definitely not then

    #226347
    flanl3
    Participant

    I like them.

    #226348
    Hamish
    Participant

    Who likes short shorts?

    #226350
    flanl3
    Participant

    She wears short shorts, I wear t-shorts, she’s shorts captain and I’m on the bleached-shorts,

    #226359
    Ben Saunders
    Participant

    Now short shorts I can get into. Not literally, though

    #226368
    flanl3
    Participant

    What if your mind got your dick and the elastic on athletic shorts mixed up so instead of getting a boner your waistband got bigger and your shorts fell off instead of your waistband getting bigger but your shorts staying on?

    Please do not permit me to think when I should have

    #226374

    Please check my modelling profile for me wearing short shorts.

Viewing 72 posts - 301 through 372 (of 372 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.