|
DoctorWhat posted:there exists even now a poster on THESE VERY FORUMS who once likened David Tennant to a Nazi who was "just following orders" because Tennant was "complicit" in RTD's scripts Don't be shittalking Nefud. Nefud is the last hope against the nazi hordes.
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 04:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 01:40 |
|
|
Regy Rusty posted:Ok I remember this episode now and it wasn't very good but the Harry Potter bit is great, get lost. No sorry it was a decently funny joke when it happened but it's aged ludicrously poorly and it, along with all the lol shakspare gay stuff leaves this looking like dumb fandom bait.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
Zaggitz posted:Don't be shittalking Nefud. Nefud is the last hope against the nazi hordes. Nefud is/was an insane sleazebag and exactly the kind of person I always had in mind when poo poo-talking the Doctor Who spoiler threads. Truth bomb dropped, back to work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 04:34
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:Uh, dude, Doctor Who was for all intents and purposes dead. It was comatose and had been hooked up to life support for nearly a decade before RTD got a hold of it. Sure it had the Big Finish stuff and books going on, but that's like saying lung function and circulation make a person truly alive and kicking. Hey now, I think we're all perfectly willing to grant RTD exactly two things he's done well. He brought the series back and he handed it off to the amazingly wonderful Steven Moffat. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
Doctor Who "The Shakespeare Code" Series 3, Episode 2 I liked this episode better before this thread happened. "The Shakespeare Code" is, in fact, the episode I was thinking of waaaay back during my "Unquiet Dead" writeup, when I said that, on the whole, I preferred the "past" episodes to the "future" ones. The scene-setting here is superb; the sets are convincing, cramped and choked with gloom, and the costume work is the best I've seen since "The Girl in the Fireplace." Shakespeare is a lively, entertaining character, his personality a valid extrapolation of what little biography we have of him and the character his body of work suggests - a peppy, vulgar womanizer with a razor-sharp mind that he's generally too relaxed to even show off. The villains are alien witches who use literal science-magic and are banished with the power of Harry Potter. The final scene consists of a mysterious grudge held by Queen Elizabeth that the Doctor is too surprised/creeped out to even bother investigating. It's all a great spirit of adventure. And the reason I thought all of this was because, in a very considerate gesture, my mind had surgically removed that atrocious bedroom scene from my memory. Which says a lot about the scene's relevance to the episode as a whole, really - it has no impact on events past or future, it says nothing that we don't learn in more detail later, it has absolutely no purpose except to get the Doctor within kissing distance of Martha only for him to wistfully reminisce about this rather thick blonde girl he liked. And then there's Martha, ready to do the Gallifreyan bop with this guy within literally two days of knowing him (because unlike the iffy timeline of Rose's adventures, we know for a fact that this is Martha's first trip in the TARDIS). It's just sleaze coming from both ends and we, the audience, are trapped in the middle. The Rose fixation didn't taint the whole episode for me as it did for Occ, mostly because I know how much worse things will get from here, but it does further set up Season 3 as a sort of dark mirror for Season 1. We have the initial meeting of the Companion followed by a jolly trip into the not-too-distant (comparatively) past and, as the preview for "The Shakespeare Code" implies, the far future. Not a damning similarity by any means, except that the Doctor himself keeps pointing this out, as though the writers are wearily aware of how they're treading the same ground and writing their frustration right into the dialogue. The Doctor moans that he "hates starting from scratch," and that's exactly what he does, re-treading the fluid nature of time, the TARDIS, and the psychic paper with Martha the same way he did for Rose. The plot beats, too, are identical, with us meeting a famous old author and banishing an alien threat that bears an uncanny resemblance to a magical mythical creature. And over it all, the spectre of Rose hangs, clad in slightly trashy denim. Doctor Who's saving grace is its madcap unpredictability, and it looks more and more like one of Season 3's biggest failings is that it's essentially a holding pattern for Davies, slapping us on the same amusement-park rides again while he figures out what to do with his Rose-less self. But the rides are breaking down, the lights are burning out, and the seats all smell faintly of vomit. Despite being trapped in the role of Rose redux here, Martha still handles herself commendably. She takes most of the time-travel nonsense in stride, doesn't wander off, and comes up with the Harry Potter coup de grace (which technically means that she wins at Doctor Who, forever). I especially liked her reaction to the conditions of the bedlam house - her disgust doesn't just come out of a sense of generalized compassion, but out of professionalism, speaking from her experience as a medical student as well as just a decent person. It's one more thing that gives her a leg up over Rose, especially early-series Rose, who practically got a round of applause and a medal every time she displayed an ounce of sympathy towards another character. On the other hand, Shakespeare's defense of bedlam comes off as reasonable, in its way, which is impressive given that it's a place where you opened up holes in people's heads and waited for the crazy to drain out. Their exchange was one more lovely background detail that helped ground the episode in its time period, alien witches notwithstanding. Honestly, if you just carved out the Rose nonsense then "The Shakespeare Code" would probably be considered remarkably, sometimes insufferably clever. Beyond the character of Shakespeare in general, there are nods to some details of his career which, if not exactly obscure, would at least take a bit of a Wiki-walk to riddle out - there's the famous "57 academics" line, and also the allusion to the Sycorax, who's also the name of a character in The Tempest whose etymology has even modern Shakespeare scholars a bit stumped. The running gag of Shakespeare ganking his famous lines from the Doctor's quotes of his own work is a little Forrest Gump for my liking, but their interactions are otherwise energetic enough for me to overlook it. And that last verse he used to shout the space-witches back to space-hell wasn't that bad! Well, I say not bad, it's not terrible. Well, I say not terrible...anyway. So there you have it, a middling to above-average episode kneecapped by the Rose fixation, right down to the repetition of her earlier plotlines. I can't bang on Davies too hard for this one, because he didn't actually write it (this was Gareth Robers, who actually has some of my favorite episodes of the series under his belt), but I do wonder at just how much he contributed to the slightly creepy nostalgic ennui that permeates much of Season 3. Why is Rose still haunting us even when the script isn't written by the man who kisses her picture goodnight before bed? Did she keep popping up by author fiat, or were the other writers simply going with the flow? If anyone who watches that Confidential nonsense can shed some light on this, by all means, go ahead. But if not, I doubt answers will come, for these episodes are long since past and these questions but fragile echoes of ones asked before. The rest is silence.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:So there you have it, a middling to above-average episode kneecapped by the Rose fixation, right down to the repetition of her earlier plotlines. I can't bang on Davies too hard for this one, because he didn't actually write it (this was Gareth Robers, who actually has some of my favorite episodes of the series under his belt), but I do wonder at just how much he contributed to the slightly creepy nostalgic ennui that permeates much of Season 3. Why is Rose still haunting us even when the script isn't written by the man who kisses her picture goodnight before bed? Did she keep popping up by author fiat, or were the other writers simply going with the flow? If anyone who watches that Confidential nonsense can shed some light on this, by all means, go ahead. But if not, I doubt answers will come, for these episodes are long since past and these questions but fragile echoes of ones asked before. The rest is silence. Davies moderately-to-heavily rewrote every non-Moffat episode during his era.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 05:14
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:Davies moderately-to-heavily rewrote every non-Moffat episode during his era. Wonder what Moffat did to make him stay his pen. I'm guessing it involved a shillelagh and a pan of hot cooking fat.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 05:15
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:Wonder what Moffat did to make him stay his pen. I'm guessing it involved a shillelagh and a pan of hot cooking fat. It's because Moffat was an established and competent writer for TV and had run entire shows on his own before, while all the other writers hadn't had that level of experience.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:It's because Moffat was an established and competent writer for TV and had run entire shows on his own before, while all the other writers hadn't had that level of experience. Why are you killing my dreams.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 05:19
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:Wonder what Moffat did to make him stay his pen. I'm guessing it involved a shillelagh and a pan of hot cooking fat. He just looked at RTD and said "Touch this and you are erased from Doctor Who."
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:there exists even now a poster on THESE VERY FORUMS who once likened David Tennant to a Nazi who was "just following orders" because Tennant was "complicit" in RTD's scripts
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:We will praise his LGBT-pandering When the gently caress has it ever been pandering? I can think of one event in a Doctor Who episode from 2014 that felt like pandering. And even then it was pandering through a straight man's lens. I'm trying to think of the time when I, a gay man, was being pandered to by this show and can't remember it. Yes, some of the morals given are questionable (particularly in The Idiot's Lantern) but they weren't pandering.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 06:25
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:When the gently caress has it ever been pandering? I can think of one event in a Doctor Who episode from 2014 that felt like pandering. And even then it was pandering through a straight man's lens. I'm trying to think of the time when I, a gay man, was being pandered to by this show and can't remember it. Yes, some of the morals given are questionable (particularly in The Idiot's Lantern) but they weren't pandering. It's not pandering to LGBT people, but it's trying to make the point that 'gay people are normal' with all the painful un-subtlety of getting punched in the face by a heavyweight boxer using roast hams as gloves. I can think of exactly one time in which I felt that it worked well, but Oxx hasn't gotten there yet, so I won't say. It's a valid point, but RTD makes it poorly enough that it almost undermines any good that he's done.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
I think The Shakespeare Code is an okay but mostly forgettable episode, but Toxx is spot on when he talks about the massive disservice done to Martha in this episode, especially in that the extent of her characterization (positive AND negative) is reduced to solely being "Not-Rose". That isn't enough to define a character, to say that she is NOT like a pre-existing one, and RTD seems so adamant on stressing the notion and the Doctor's own "mourning" that Martha continues to be an enigma - who is she? She's "Not Rose", and to RTD's mind that alone seems to be enough.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 07:00
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:He just looked at RTD and said "Touch this and you are erased from Doctor Who." Well that sort of happened anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 07:23
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:When the gently caress has it ever been pandering? I can think of one event in a Doctor Who episode from 2014 that felt like pandering. And even then it was pandering through a straight man's lens. I'm trying to think of the time when I, a gay man, was being pandered to by this show and can't remember it. Yes, some of the morals given are questionable (particularly in The Idiot's Lantern) but they weren't pandering. It's not so much pandering as the world's most heavy-handed attempts at normalizing gay behavior. It doesn't really count as normalizing it when half the time it sticks out really obnoxiously, where you can practically hear RTD screaming  LOOK EVERYONE DOCTOR WHO IS SHOWING A FUTURE WHERE BEING GAY ISN'T WEIRD, LOOK AT HOW PROGRESSIVE THIS IS!!!!
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 08:31
|
|
|
I have never gotten that sense from the revival at all, the (laudable) attempts to normalize being gay never felt forced or jammed in at all, they were just there. The only time I can recall a character being upset by learning somebody was gay (or omnisexual in Jack's case) was in the Empty Child 2-parter, and that seemed to just be another example of Rose having to recognize that her early 21st Century moral views weren't the most enlightened thing in the universe (similar to the debate about the use of corpses in The Unquiet Dead). Given that this happened in a Moffat story, I don't think the "blame" could be put onto RTD anyway, especially since he was on record as never feeling the need to rewrite Moffat's stuff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 08:58
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:I have never gotten that sense from the revival at all, the (laudable) attempts to normalize being gay never felt forced or jammed in at all, they were just there. The only time I've felt it awkwardly out of place was in a yet-to-be-seen episode where RTD explicitly makes clear in The Writer's Tale that he only put it in because he fancied the actor.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 09:02
|
|
|
I don't feel that RTD was particularly heavy-handed with the gay stuff. No, wait, let me amend that. I don't feel that RTD was particularly heavy-handed with the gay stuff compared to RTD's normal level of heavy-handedness. I mean, for all the things RTD is, bar one or two exceptions subtle is not one of them. RTD is bombastic, loud, campy, and heavy-handed. His best episodes tend to unapologetically play to these strengths. At his worst, he produces things like Torchwood, which loudly scream to the universe the niche it's trying to fill and fall apart because of it. The somewhat heavy-handed homosexuality was a symptom of that, but only really more noticeable because it's both somewhat unusual to see on mainstream TV and a bit of a pet issue for him (being gay himself) so it simply showed up more often. I mean, his gay stuff is unsubtle compared to what, exactly? The subdued, nuanced parody present in Bad Wolf? That's not to say RTD is a terrible writer, but he has a clear style, and that style generally does not involve intricate subtlety or nuance. Linear Zoetrope fucked around with this message at 09:12 on Sep 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 09:09
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:I have never gotten that sense from the revival at all, the (laudable) attempts to normalize being gay never felt forced or jammed in at all, they were just there. I dunno, back when I was watching seasons one and two it often felt awkward; not the cases like in The Empty Child, where it was natural in the story, but a lot of the others where it'd get brought up in a way that was a bit unnatural to the flow of the conversation and irrelevant to anything, just enough that it stood out that it was there mainly for the purpose of going 'Look! Gay!' to the audience. Which would've been fine once or twice but when it happened practically every week it started to feel obvious. Bordering on things I shouldn't say, but I'll have more to say about this after the next episode. MikeJF fucked around with this message at 09:15 on Sep 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 09:11
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:but when it happened practically every week Did it? I'm honestly struggling to think of examples in season 1 and 2 and all I can think of is Jack flirting with everybody (male or female) in the back half of season one, and the implication of the son being potentially gay in The Idiot's Lantern. Other than that I can't really think of anything at all, and even those I didn't find particularly obnoxious, forced or "in your face". I think there was even supposed to be a gay relationship in the Cybermen 2-parter between Ricky and Jake that got cut out because there was no particular point where it would have fit into the story to mention it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 09:22
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:It's because Moffat was an established and competent writer for TV and had run entire shows on his own before, while all the other writers hadn't had that level of experience. Hadn't Matt Graham done Life on Mars at this point? Not excusing a terrible episode mind you, but he was an experienced show runner if he had. My family knows him and I'm pretty sure he's said the Olympics bit was allll RTD.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 09:43
|
|
|
An actual gay agenda debate. It's like 2007 all over again.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 09:53
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Did it? I'm honestly struggling to think of examples in season 1 and 2 and all I can think of is Jack flirting with everybody (male or female) in the back half of season one, and the implication of the son being potentially gay in The Idiot's Lantern. Other than that I can't really think of anything at all, and even those I didn't find particularly obnoxious, forced or "in your face". I think there was even supposed to be a gay relationship in the Cybermen 2-parter between Ricky and Jake that got cut out because there was no particular point where it would have fit into the story to mention it. Actually, glancing over it, a fair bit of what I'm thinking of might be seasons three and four. It's been a while, RTD's a bit of a blender in my brain.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 10:11
|
|
|
I remember Nefud. He was pretty cool.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 11:13
|
|
|
John Charity Spring posted:An actual gay agenda debate. It's like 2007 all over again. "I'm not a homophobe, that's what's so insane about this!"
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 12:22
|
|
|
What was wrong with Nefud? He had Strong Opinions About The Revival but that's about itRepublican Vampire posted:No sorry it was a decently funny joke when it happened Nope
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 12:53
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:What was wrong with Nefud? Nothing at all. It's sad he stopped talking about the show... unless he's still about in the spoiler thread?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 13:00
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Nothing at all. It's sad he stopped talking about the show... unless he's still about in the spoiler thread? Nope
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 13:02
|
|
|
He didn't like Moffat and Oxx can't handle that opinion existing in the world.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 13:58
|
|
|
John Charity Spring posted:An actual gay agenda debate. It's like 2007 all over again. Yeah, seriously, what the hell?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 16:31
|
|
|
gently caress
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 16:39
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:gently caress 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
So is someone going to buy Oxx an Elton av or
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:So is someone going to buy Oxx an Elton av or I'll just buy my old one right back, don't waste your money. No one touches my Paranatural pic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:gently caress 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:I'll just buy my old one right back, don't waste your money. No one touches my Paranatural pic. Problem with a Paranatural av is that the expressions just keep getting better.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
You will have to pry my anime avatar out of my cold dead hands. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
Republican Vampire posted:No sorry it was a decently funny joke when it happened but it's aged ludicrously poorly and it, along with all the lol shakspare gay stuff leaves this looking like dumb fandom bait. Mo0 posted:It's not so much pandering as the world's most heavy-handed attempts at normalizing gay behavior. It doesn't really count as normalizing it when half the time it sticks out really obnoxiously, where you can practically hear RTD screaming
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 17:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 01:40 |
|
|
Republican Vampire posted:along with all the lol shakspare gay stuff leaves this looking like dumb fandom bait. I do have to say that the Shakespeare bisexuality bit was great. It was an academia joke, not a lol gay gag.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 17:03
|
|