|
Hewlett posted:Never in my wildest dreams would I imagine I'd be so close to the top with the guessing game - if he ends up loving the finale as much as I did, I can at least maintain my position there. I was keeping track between me you and Noxville and we were SO CLOSE but I hosed myself with the last few episodes.
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 21:20 |
|
|
Bicyclops posted:I watch both pretty extensively, surc, and I feel like the characterization is pretty sitcom-y, and Rory's is not. I don't think this guy is a Nice Guy in the full Ross and Rachel way, it just has the will-they/won't-they of every one-off sitcom couple. I think my B indicates it doesn't ruin the episode for me, but it's there. howe_sam posted:I think it's fair to say the way the Doctor comes in and lives Craig's life "better" than Craig does comes off as very sitcom'ish. The football and then the later scene at the call center are both incredibly broad. Regarding the Rory comparison, obviously they're written very differently, but people were throwing out the "nice guy with romantic drama" as a reason why craig was a bad character, and my point is that it's not having a nice guy with romantic drama be a main focus of the episode that's the problem. My previous point still stands on the sitcom thing though. That's a wide net being thrown, and a lot of the time, Doctor who IS a sitcom, it just happens to be a scifi sitcom with more out-there situations for the moral and light-hearted banter to be set against. surc fucked around with this message at 19:09 on Feb 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
surc posted:
I actually disagree a lot. I would love an actual sitcom riff episode of Doctor Who, maybe called Four Cameras or something, which could be done hundreds of different ways, but nothing in New Who has ever felt like a situation comedy to me, minus some characterization of some of the minor or one-off players in episodes that are set in the near-present. It's possible we're quibbling on the definition of the genre here, but I can't see what you're talking about at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
I think part of the point of The Lodger is that even though Matt Smith/Eleven is freakishly adorable, he is an alien, and he's only good at long-term interactions with a very specific sort of person. Any time the Eleventh Doctor interacts with domestic life (see his carelessness with Amy in Ep 1 of this season), he's not just clueless but careless. It's not that he has any intention of being unkind, it's that human domestic life isn't in him. Basically, not your cuddly best friend, even though he often pretends to be.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
The Lodger is just great. Matt Smith is great.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2015 21:46
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:Dude it's breaking bad! Anyone who wouldn't consider this a legitimate excuse doesn't know what they're talking about.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:I actually disagree a lot. I would love an actual sitcom riff episode of Doctor Who, maybe called Four Cameras or something, which could be done hundreds of different ways, but nothing in New Who has ever felt like a situation comedy to me, minus some characterization of some of the minor or one-off players in episodes that are set in the near-present. It's possible we're quibbling on the definition of the genre here, but I can't see what you're talking about at all. We are definitely quibbling on the definition of the genre, because my point is basically entirely about the definition of the genre.  In my experience, people are way too strict about genre-lines and make snap judgements based on what genre this thing is. Especially with something as nebulous as sitcom, where do you draw the line? It seems like in everybody's "no no no, doctor who isn't a sitcom!" what they're really trying to say is "no no no, doctor who isn't written in an insanely familiar and predictable pattern!" which is just  to me, because that reads the same as saying that it is impossible to have a good sitcom, because it's written well, not written like a sitcom. (Also, Doctor who does have soooooome patterns and tropes it loves to follow)
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
thexerox123 posted:Anyone who wouldn't consider this a legitimate excuse doesn't know what they're talking about. Because spin offs of popular shows always turn out great. Not that I'm disparaging BCS- I haven't seen it. But when I first heard about it, I thought "crappy knock off to wring every last dollar out of the franchise." I'll be happy to be proven wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
Jurgan posted:Because spin offs of popular shows always turn out great. Not that I'm disparaging BCS- I haven't seen it. But when I first heard about it, I thought "crappy knock off to wring every last dollar out of the franchise." I'll be happy to be proven wrong. Watch it, you'll be happy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
Jurgan posted:Because spin offs of popular shows always turn out great. Not that I'm disparaging BCS- I haven't seen it. But when I first heard about it, I thought "crappy knock off to wring every last dollar out of the franchise." I'll be happy to be proven wrong. Watch the first ten minutes of the pilot
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
Jurgan posted:But when I first heard about it, I thought "crappy knock off to wring every last dollar out of the franchise." I'll be happy to be proven wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
first episode of BCS is okay. enjoyable. I don't think anyone is expecting it to be as good as BB.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2015 23:31
|
|
|
GonSmithe posted:I was keeping track between me you and Noxville and we were SO CLOSE but I hosed myself with the last few episodes. I am so close to taking the CineD General Chat crown in this contest. drat it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
Noxville posted:I am so close to taking the CineD General Chat crown in this contest. drat it. Right behind you, bud. Although at this point even a perfect performance from here on out won't get me the crown so, whatever.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
surc posted:We are definitely quibbling on the definition of the genre, because my point is basically entirely about the definition of the genre. No. Doctor Who isn't a sitcom because the climax of each episode is not a punchline. Just because a show has jokes does not make it a sitcom, just like Scrubs having people dying doesn't make it a hospital drama.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
Attitude Indicator posted:first episode of BCS is okay. enjoyable. I don't think anyone is expecting it to be as good as BB. I am
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
surc posted:We are definitely quibbling on the definition of the genre, because my point is basically entirely about the definition of the genre. Ah, okay, I understand. Yeah, it's definitely possible to have a good sitcom. I guess the way that I should have put it is that while I feel like the dude in this story is at least not the typical gross Nice Guy, and just kind of a guy who enjoys his quiet life, the woman doesn't have a lot of characterization, and the emotion we're supposed to feel about their relationship suffers a little because of it. On the whole, I think this episode is carried by Matt Smith (and the portion of the writing that deals with the Doctor), and that the episode is good in spite of (and not because of), the man he's lodging with, although I think he is well acted.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
Attitude Indicator posted:first episode of BCS is okay. enjoyable. I don't think anyone is expecting it to be as good as BB. You should definitely watch the second episode then, because holy poo poo 
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
Spin-offs are usually crap, but every once in a while you get a Frasier.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:Breaking Bad's creator voluntarily ended the show while it was still hugely popular because the time was right for the story to end. Well yeah, he didn't want it to become Doctor Who.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
Complaining about genre on Who is dumb because one of the strengths of Who is its genre flexibility. They have a magic box that can put them in any place, time, situation, genre.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
after watchin better call saul i'm all like, "doctor who?"      
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
^^^^^^ Well great, I put all that effort into my angry post about genres, and it's trounced in quality even before I posted it.  ---- Gaz-L posted:No. Doctor Who isn't a sitcom because the climax of each episode is not a punchline. Just because a show has jokes does not make it a sitcom, just like Scrubs having people dying doesn't make it a hospital drama. Except for the huge numbers of sitcom episodes that end with either A) some moral to take away, or B) something sappy and sweet. Which of course, Doctor Who would never do. Would you say that Spaced isn't a sitcom? There's a bunch of comedy, but really the climax of the episode is usually something about relationships between two people so I guess it's a relationship drama right? This went a little off track though, My original point was, the distinctions people are using to call this episode a sitcom (and therefore lesser than other Doctor Who), are totally false distinctions because this show does sitcom stuff ALL THE TIME, just like it does pretty much all other tv genres at some point. E: Also please forgive any swapping of letters mid-word, I'm typing these on my lovely netbook keyboard in between things at work, and my ranting goes faster than it can process accurately. surc fucked around with this message at 01:36 on Feb 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
poo poo just got real in here. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:Complaining about genre on Who is dumb because one of the strengths of Who is its genre flexibility. They have a magic box that can put them in any place, time, situation, genre. I agree with this wholeheartedly, actually. In retrospect, I should have phrased my (minor) problems with the characterization in a completely different way, and my description was inadequate, which is why surc and I were mostly just arguing semantics. Apologies, surc!
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
surc posted:^^^^^^ Comedy can be meaningful. Nothing says that drama has a monopoly on commenting on the human condition. And sitcoms can bend genre and do touching moments. When they do it too much, we get the nebulous 'dramedy'. The bolding (mine) is, I think, where I'm most in disagreement with you, because I'd absolutely describe The Lodger as "Who-does-sitcom" but I in no way mean that as a disparagement, and maybe I missed the people who were using it as such in the thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
Gaz-L posted:Or Bill Bailey begging Tim to come and work for him again. BABYLON 5'S A BIG PILE OF poo poo!
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
Oxxidation: boy where have we seen those hand-guns before Occupation: shut up oxx gently caress THE GODDAMN NESTENE CONSCIOUSNESS Oxxidation: RETURN OF THE PLASTIC BOYFRIEND, MOTHERFUCKER Occupation: GODDAMN IT gently caress YOU gently caress YOU MOTHERFUCKER gently caress Oxxidation: PI PI PI PIZZAAAAA Occupation: GOD FUCKIN gently caress
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
this...this is the episode this thread was made for
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:48
|
|
|
I simulwatched the last twenty minutes or so of it when I saw you posting on twitter and holy poo poo I forgot how amazingly hosed everyone is at the end of this episode, it's amazing
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:49
|
|
|
We have arrived at last.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:50
|
|
|
quote:@SAOccupation 6m6 minutes ago You are not wrong, my friend.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:51
|
|
|
Yeah, the ending of this episode is astoundingly bleak (and that's great). I always say the most heartbreaking moment is that even up to the end the Doctor doesn't grasp that HE is the bad guy, that they haven't come to ask for his help, they've come to lock him away. He is not the wizard who defeats the bloodstained monster, he is the bloodstained monster.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:51
|
|
|
The last 10 or 15 minutes of this episode are just incredible. Occ's posting, as ever, is crazy ambiguous in regards to whether or not he liked it - but he should like it. It's just so well done and amazingly heartbreaking, and is probably the best Doctor Who cliffhanger ever. How the hell do you bounce back from that!?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:53
|
|
|
I cannot loving believe that the bad guy in rose is plot crucial to "The Pandorica Opens" I cannot loving believe this loving bullshit Hey Occ from 6 months ago, remember when you rightly said you hated nearly all of that poo poo? WELL GUESS WHAT MOTHER FUCKER IT'S GONNA BE INTEGRAL TO AN EPISODE YOU ADORE A HALF YEAR LATER
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:I cannot loving believe that the bad guy in rose is plot crucial to "The Pandorica Opens" the autons date back to 1970 fyi
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
quote:Occupation @SAOccupation 11m11 minutes ago 
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
god the fact that i have a paper trail of my reactions makes this so much better/worse what in the loving gently caress
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
I bet he was so happy when he saw Rory. And then...
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 21:20 |
|
|
Yeah, it didn't feel to me specifically WOAH REMEMBER THE FIRST EPISODE, it's more, hey, here's just another one of the numerous Doctor Who baddies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:56
|
|