Andrew

[Andrew]

> He thought the first ?Hulk? movie was better than the reboot,

It is.

> and he really liked ?The Golden Compass?.

Yeah, okay, for that one he’s pretty much damned to hell…

[Andrew]

Haven’t seen it yet. Dreading it now.

> I?m also puzzled as to why this was a comedy drama.

There seems to be a real perception problem in commissioning now. If you’re planning to do dramatic elements among the punchlines, you’re a drama. End of. I can’t imagine turning up with an OFAH script from the ’50 minute episodes’ era and the channel (ANY channel) understanding that it’s still intended for a live audience. “But…but he’s talking about a miscarriage!”

More and more only things like My Family and The Persuasionists- big lights, unexceptional sets, loud delivery and a heavy-handed audio mix – are apparently entitled to shoot as audience sitcoms. It’s a ghastly narrowing of the genre.

[Andrew]

> I just got my new job based on the volunteer work that I do for the fan club :o)

*applauds loudly*

[Andrew]

In the Loop is pretty much entirely separate. With the exception of Tucker, the characters are different…despite the fact they’re often played by Thick of It actors. (The movie was what got me into the TV series, in fact.)

[Andrew]

Yeah, I’d assumed somone said it to him – that the line in the show is a sort-of direct response. And yeah, I think the Spike/Dru thing is coincidence – the dynamic’s pretty typical vampire stuff, easy to stumble into. Whedon did!

[Andrew]

> I mean, it clearly works, I just don?t understand how.

It’s worth saying, I guess, that Psychoville was written without knowing who their antagonist was. And there’s that Queeg ending, too.

I can see, as a writer, why you’d avoid the hardest, dullest part of the process if you could – the planning can lack the fire and energy of either ‘having the ideas’ or ‘writing the scenes’ – but I find the method…sorta terrifying. Especally for story-heavy shows. I couldn’t work that way. But I guess plenty of novellists do…

[Andrew]

Hmm, that adds a layer to the ‘there’s a werewolf in Buffy called Nina’ line from episode one…

[Andrew]

And the hint…well, it’s not a hint.

Wow, look at all the bold!

[Andrew]

Is this the game with the big round ball and the massive nets, or the hard little ball and the sticks?

[Andrew]

> Because viewers = quality.

You didn’t say good, you said ‘properly successful’. Hi, welcome to the real world where ‘what you like’ isn’t the same thing as ‘successful’. Didn’t like Joking Apart, Jekyll and Coupling? Okay. You’re an idiot, but okay. But don’t bleat about ‘success’ like industry awards, audience appreciation stats and ratings matter less than that opinion.

> And Rose as ?Bad Wolf? wasn?t meant to be like end-of-season-6-black-hair-power-crazed-Willow either.

Who made that comparison? Who said it was meant to be? Seriously, do you even know what you’re talking about when spout like this?

[Andrew]

> I only mean this in a fun way, as well.

Ah, I see what you’ve done there, you’ve confused ‘speaking in fun’ with ‘talking like a prick’.

> But Oh Em Gee Willow cheated on Oz with Xander and then turned into a lesbian, now THAT?s the work of a godlike genius showrunner!!

It’s almost as if all you’ve done there is taken two separate dramatic aspects of a show, reduced them to a single line of description and said them in a sarcastic tone. Gosh, if only this technique couple be used about ANYTHING in place of useful or intelligent criticism.

“But Oh Em Gee The Doctor sent Rose home and she came back anyway and then he left her in another dimension, now THAT?s the work of a godlike genius showrunner!!”

It’s the execution, characterisation and emotional truth of any writing that makes the difference, after which the rest is taste. You must know this, so why act otherwise?

> The true test is post-Who. Then you?ve got the Grand Moff, who?s last properly successful series was Press Gang.

Oh yeah, cos picking up Bronze and Silver Roses for your sitcoms is something everyone has done, and Coupling and Jekyll weren’t watched by anyone…

[Andrew]

> New variations of the Snowflake, I mean.

Still don’t get it…

[Andrew]

It’s not about censors, it’s about advertisers. You can legally show stuff, it’s that the networks fear losing revenue. The channels bow to the sponsors, the sponsors bow to the majority in middle America. Sadly it seems to be the case that an all-equal, liberal perspective is ghettoised to smaller channels. A narrower world view is more commercially viable…and so it looms largest.

[Andrew]

> why the fucking fuck would ANY sci-fi writer/producer go anywhere near Fox?

Because they’ll give a two-series run to a SF show even when it doesn’t really work…? (And, ahem, doesn’t that sound like the perfect home for Torchwood?)

It’s only development, anyway. A pilot hasn’t even been ordered. I’m only disappointed that THIS is what RTD and his peeps have elected to do in America.

I’d be more concerned by the very real possibility that, if made, it it might be BETTER than the UK version. Torchwood only works when Davies is at the helm, and one key issue – that the bombastic storytelling was ill-fitting to the Cardiff setting – would likely be solved. (Though Christ knows how Jack’s sexuality will make it through the process. That aspect of Davies’ writing is bound to be a sticking point when it comes to selling to the heartland.)

How would they exist together? Who cares. If Barrowman’s in, Jack continues. If he’s not, it’s just another brand of Torchwood. I’m kinda pleased that it puts some further distance between RTD Torchwood and Moffat Who – as you say, they don’t feel like they’d cohabit well.

[Andrew]

Now hang on, this is only the fourth time this conversation has come up. Or is it a continuation, since it’s in the same thread as the second conversation happened? Just how ARE we going to number our discussions about series numbering?

[Andrew]

> Which interview is that? Could you post a link to it, please?

http://www.supermanhomepage.com/movies/movies.php?topic=interview-selutron

> Where the hell did this come from, Ellard? No doubt you devise new variations in your spare time?

Um…huh?

[Andrew]

I’m not impressed with “Selutron” – just read an interview and his attitude…not great. It’s possible to do this kind of job without being contemptuous of – and rude about – those who went before. (Not least by acknowledging the production issues that don’t encumber fan projects.) The tinkering’s interesting, but it’s not a ground-up overhaul; I don’t see ‘phenomenal’ at all.

Mind you, I’m not convinced all this tinkering could provide anything remotely definitive, either. The definitive version of the two-part saga was never shot, never even fully written, so how can it be cobbled together? We’ve not been denied something. Putting Zod in front of the White House is interesting, but it doesn’t suddenly make the whole thing work. What ending do you put on film one to get a ‘definitive’ version?

It’s becoming Koch’s Snowflake at this point – infinite variations trapped within a finite, flawed total area.

[Andrew]

> The Selutron Cut. Sadly, the account later closed, but while it was there, the work was just phenomenal.

A few clips here:

http://www.capedwonder.com/newwebsite/pages/selutron.html

[Andrew]

Titbits from the update book, please!

One assumes the ‘Doctor’s mother’ reference wraps up the identity of Wilf’s imaginary friend…?

[Andrew]

> There?s far too much hate about Ghostbusters II.

Indeed. Just going by the ‘good joke’ ratio, it deserves a better rep.

I also prefer Superman II to The Movie, though it’s close. And the Donner cut complicates matters significantly…

[Andrew]

> but does how many hits a website gets affect it?s maintenance?

There’s more pressure on you to create more content if you feel it’s been promised, that you’d be letting down the readership. If you start delaying, interest lessens, which in turn means you allow yourself to delay even longer next time because you’re disappointing fewer people. Eventually you realise you haven’t written anything for six months because you’ve been off doing other stuff…and somewhere along the line nobody’s too disappointed any more.

> Anything longer than a tweet or a forum post is too much for people to handle these days. We don?t want to read ?articles? whatever they may be.

Thing is, we were still getting a lot of interest in pieces when we did manage to get them up. People were still reading and engaging. (Ironically, in some cases they would read the pieces on NTS and then have the forum discussion elsewhere, on their own regular forums.) Substantial articles still have a valid place on the web.

It’s a shame, because we were still finding an audience when we put the effort in. Fans would link to articles, discussion ensured, and the hits would shoot up again – but without the fostered NTS community it once had. Good to know there was still a lot of interest – both from engaged viewers and, in several cases, from the creators of the content under discussion – but we just couldn’t match that interest with our own spare time.

[Andrew]

Aside from anything else, ‘as broadcast’ – technically – will usually mean ‘credits shrunk to unreadable side while Strictly Come Fucking is promoted’. Sure, go ahead, put that on the DVD, see what the purists make of that…

[Andrew]

Currently amused by the Amazon reviews for the specials box set. One condemning for not including Christmas Invasion, Runaway Bride and Voyage of the Damned (available separately, but okay, so if we give you that, what will we call the set that contains ‘all the stuff since the end of the last full series’?); and one giving one start for these not being the broadcast versions. The change? THE END CREDITS.

Now hey, I’m all for ‘original, as broadcast’ DVD content, but…Jeez, get some perspective.

[Andrew]

Would be good, wouldn’t it?

But I don’t think it’d happen. RTD’s a wide-open kind of personality, whereas Doug – like a lot of writers – is pretty private about his process.

[Andrew]

The specifics I’ll certainly assume as vague – but between comments in the commentary and the underlying nature of Moff’s writing I can’t see any reason for that assumption beyond “Well it’s vague, and I don’t know, so he must not either.”

[Andrew]

And the argument for his return is: http://twitter.com/abemchesca/statuses/7761661665

What a loss. We shall never see his like again.

[Andrew]

> We don?t need to know the truth about her.

Matter of opinion, but I’ve no doubt he knows.

[Andrew]

You can’t argue with the ratings – and, as has been said before, audience appreciation will play its part too. As much as anything, though, it’s an indication of just how big a deal getting a million-plus is for a digital channel. If you have a show that can do that, you want to keep hold of it.

[Andrew]

Does anyone know what hair colour we can expect from Doc 11s first companion?

[Andrew]

> We have been talking about Misfits elsewhere on the forum but not under it?s own thread.

Indeedy. Been recommending it repeatedly since episode two proved that it wasn’t just a single idea. A surprising, nuanced and sharply made piece of work. Loved it – possibly my (non-Dwarf) show of 2009.

[Andrew]

> I didn?t know you spoke Spanish.

WIN

[Andrew]

iPlayer!

[Andrew]

> The werewolf in that capsule being forced not to change was bloody horrific!

Yeah that was perfectly executed. I yelled – actually cried out – and had to cover my mouth with a cushion. You KNOW a scene is working when that happens.

[Andrew]

> Anyone else think that he?d changed into MS in the radiation booth until we saw his face?

Oh yes. I’m pretty sure that’s exactly what was intended. While most of your rational mind is aware that there’s no way RTD lets Tennant go without a Memorable Line and a huge fanfare – and quite right to – a part of me couldn’t help think it.

[Andrew]

Indeed. The good ones do what you always got asked to do in essays – compare and contrast.

It’s not just “Here’s eight ways a show has used invisibility” it’s “And here’s what’s interesting about the difference in the topic’s handling”. That certain DenofGeeks often neglect to do the latter doesn’t make the technique redundant.

*Sigh* Just realised I never did do that piece comparing the three I Am Legend film adaptations. Ho-hum…

[Andrew]

> Presumably in the month that had elapsed in between the two series, their relationship had deteriorated somewhat.

This is true, actually. I think the problem wasn’t that it wasn’t credible for the character – like most things, I tend to think anyone is capable of almost anything given the right, horrible circumstances – it’s that we hadn’t been witness to that journey. So we’re coming in at the end of the story, which is a shame because I think it needed more delicate staggering to feel ‘right’.

Except, of course, what it really is is the writer manoeuvring everyone into position for the Grand Drama of series two. No question this is going to pay off (unlike Torchwood which just kinda gave up Gwen and Owen when it was proven ridiculous). And with so few eps in a Brit season (not that I bemoan this), if your main story is going to be one thing, you only have limited time to wind up to it.

Still, usual, Buffy example – because that show seems to provide great examples of almost every type of writing: When Willow cheats on Oz with Xander, it’s heartbreaking all around…and at the same time all achingly credible. We see it every step of the way, so you don’t ‘blame’ anyone.

Here, I was kinda left blaming George for a woeful lack of restraint. Which isn’t what was intended.

EDIT: (In fact this whole problem goes back to the patchy opening, where we see George embark on his extra-relationship activity…without ever having seen him and Nina together since the close of season one. You don’t see what’s at risk before it’s already being thrown away.)

By the end of the ep, though, the layers of guilt and betrayal between the two of them were rich and wonderful and heartbreaking.

[Andrew]

It’s worth catching up on – and they’ve certainly started the new series with a stronger interest in continuing story – but you should be okay. Everything you need to know, which isn’t a great deal, is restated.

[Andrew]

I thought it was a slightly stumbly start to the new series.

The chasing around the car park at the start wasn’t especially great in itself (you could see the mechanics at work as they got split up to have one-one-one conversations, then rejoined), and wasn’t the best way in for newcomers. But then I’m a great believer in series – rather than serials – kicking off a new series with a ‘the gang’s all here, and this is what we do’ scene. Something a bit more ‘mission statement-y’

But after that it kinda got into gear. Not sure George would be so easily lured into cheating – as the character I most closely identified with, I was disappointed rather than engaged – but Russell Tovey was on top form. And he and Sinead Keenan, who was already the show’s secret weapon, were knockout.

Still a little slow in the pacing – it’s the rare BBC one-hour at the moment that wouldn’t easily whittle down to 50 minutes, and a lot of the same points were being made over and over – but it’s great to have it back.

[Andrew]

That she had to be reassured that she wasn’t being evicted when she was told about the magic trick was a lovely moment. She might have been sold as this ballsy, mouthy character, but what people think of her clearly does matter to her.

Also, Sisqo has a wonderful bottom. Good for him.

[Andrew]

Stephen’s hypothetical story which ended with his daughter happily being machine-gunned in the face is likely to be on my Top Ten TV moments of 2010. For dark, scary reasons.

[Andrew]

> it?s just something he wrote in so they could use it later if they wanted to.

RTD said (in the DVD commentary, I think) that Moffat put the memory loss in. It wasn’t on the showrunner’s request.

If Davies had asked for it, I’d assume that a) he didn’t know what the cause was at the time, and b) he’d pick it up somewhere along the line, because he’s a big one for retro-fitting things into the continuity of new stories. (The sound of drums, the Wilf coincidences, ‘hey, I bet I can use that fork-lift’, etc.)

But I don’t believe Moffat works that way. Just as he knows exactly who River Song is, I think he has a strong idea – not 100% locked, but clear enough – what caused Jack’s memory loss. What may be true is that all the subsequent Jack stories by other writers have either contradicted original ideas about the character’s history, or simply rendered it dramatically useless next to all the other stuff he’s been through.

[Andrew]

> I don?t think we?ll see CJ in Who any more though.

I dunno – after The West Wing I think she’s available…

[Andrew]

Bah – connection drop-out led to a double post.

[Andrew]

Actually, yeah – Jack’s origin in a Moffat story and Sarah Jane’s in old Who might make them exceptions. (Am I right in thinking Moff’s the only one who knows the truth about Jack’s missing memory?)

[Andrew]

> (The fact they married her off does seem rather final, but I wouldn?t be surprised if she is brought back at some point.)

I would. I don’t anticipate any of RTD’s extended family of characters showing up in the Moffat era.

Being married off is only as final going home to your family, though. If Davies were still writing, as I say, ‘Life goes on’ is part of his thesis – an adventure that saw glimpses of the married-and-wealthy Donna wouldn’t be massively unlikely.

[Andrew]

> Speaking of Donna, I wasn?t keen on her conclusion at all

What she got in End of Time wasn’t her conclusion for me – just a coda. A small grace note to suggest she’s still around and still Donna – plus a way of putting a loved character in jeopardy as Earth goes to hell. Of all the issues I have with the final story, Donna’s appearance wasn’t one.

When Rose came back – to get her free Doctor Double love-clone-with-added-Donna-personality – I thought it cack-handedly undermined the lovely conclusion the character had previously been given. Both Rose and Donna’s reappearances this time around impressed me for the simple reason that RTD didn’t fuck it up.

So yes, absolutely, she’s there for Wilf – and the Doctor, and the audience – to worry about. Jeopardy being a key part of the show, that makes sense. The story wasn’t designed as a particular farewell to her, she’s had that already, but a lot of the Davies mission statement has been about the ways in which lives continue after the Doctor has visited them. Putting the two together, especially in a story in which Wilf is ‘the companion’, is economical, sensible story-building.

[Andrew]

With those two characters it’s really about screen time. The relationship was quickly and clearly drawn…but they were thrown away so swiftly once they had served their purpose that a potentially-intetesting pair of characters got reduced to plot-device.

The same happened with the the two green aliens (anyone notice that their faces were pink in Confidential, but not in the main show? Looks like a costly post-produtcion fix to me). RTD wrote loads more for them, fleshing out the characters and having fun with them. But it got dropped. This last two-parter’s biggest crime, arguably, was having twice as many ideas as it needed. The Nainsmiths would, in a regular ep, have been an interesting pair to cause, and suffer the consequences of, something ghastly. The Time Lords could have been a seasons-worth of Big Bad.

Too many ideas here, too few in Planet of the Dead. If it weren’t for the oomph it would have stolen from Donna’s conclusion, I’d say Ten’s swansong would have been more satisfying if it happened with Journey’s End…

[Andrew]

There’s no denying that RTD’s writing is a high-wire act. He doesn’t plan ahead, and that’s both a flaw…and a huge gift.

A lot of the vibrant, interesting and wonderful Who we’ve had over the last few years – not to mention amazing stuff like Second Coming and Queer as Folk – comes from that process. It’s fair to criticise when it doesn’t work, but we have to accept it’s also why the great stuff is great.

He plants himself stuff to use later, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. What I will say is that there’s a basic genre/thematic argument for The Doctor not using the machine – artificially prolonging his life is a Master thing, not a Doctor thing. There’s the world of difference between using your regeneration to heal and finding a machine to keep you going. If he HAD done it, it would have been reasonable, legitimate…and yet felt utterly wrong.

I’d argue that genre alone gives you a pass on some such things. The Enterprise sometimes investigates planets ‘just because’, the casts of musicals burst into song and hard-bioled detectives fall in love with prime suspects. And The Doctor doesn’t drag out a generation by hooking it up to life support.

[Andrew]

Pete’s spot on about SOTD.

But also, finding an example – which I’m sure you could – of it happening it one point in one decent movie doesn’t somehow prove it’s dramatically satisfying in general.

And no, in that instance I wouldn’t prefer the characters to die – what kind of sense is that? I’d prefer they be written out of their situation through their own ingenuity not sheer good fortune.

Seriously, fixing scripts is what I do for a living. I’m pretty sure I know my own mind on the subject of whether or not I’d have accepted the fridge scene in a previous Indy movie.

[Andrew]

> I don?t think anyone would?ve had a problem with the fridge-nuking if it had occurred in ?The Last Crusade?

Well you’re wrong. I certainly would have, and I’m pretty sure I’m someone. It’s fine to have Indy fluke it a little, but for the climax of a sequence to rely on the hero making it by luck rather than nous is moronic screenwriting of the first order. You can jump the cart tracks with luck, but you have to stop the cart with IQ. You can have a lucky landing, but you have to take the last plane out with an umbrella and seagulls deliberately.

[Author]

Replies