|
E: Actually, you know what? I'm 99% sure that this post won't contribute meaningfully to anything. Sorry.
Republican Vampire fucked around with this message at 06:01 on Aug 15, 2014 |
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 12:12 |
|
|
See I dunno. The Davies stories are really eager to be ridiculously campy. I don't think it was meant as a pointed jab at reality TV or game shows or anything like that. He, more than Moffat, appreciates that Doctor Who is super kitschy and I think he's just more competent at creating that than most because he has special gay powers.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
Roach Warehouse posted:Shout-out to ubiquitous British actor Paterson Joseph as 'Weakest Link rear end in a top hat' in this episode. I think the dude usually does good work with what he's given, and I remember hearing a rumour he was being considered as David Tennant's replacement back in the day. Joseph was near the top of the betting odds until the very end when Smith appeared out of nowhere. Moffat's since said that the role's been offered to a black actor who refused, and a lot of people reckon it was him and that's why he ranked so high.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2014 07:38
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Wow I think that would probably piss me off if I saw that. I don't remember a show ever getting so big in the U.S. that casting rumors actually made the front page, keep that poo poo to the entertainment section. There's also a notable cultural difference. Entertainment news, sports news, and soft focus lifestyle stuff tend to wind up on the front of UK tabloids as a support story or flash pretty regularly.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2014 18:39
|
|
|
The illness isn't mysterious, dude. Something like that happens whenever he regenerates. He'll have a coma or suffer amnesia or become temporarily psychotic. It's a great opportunity to introduce comedy or remove him from most of the action while the writers figure him out more or just have him choke someone.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
Regy Rusty posted:I totally agree with you about this episode. It's stupid and hilarious and I didn't really understand why people were implying it was bad. It's a Christmas Special. Almost all UK Christmas Specials are like this. They're bigger, louder, dumber and more fun because it's a light-hearted festive romp for people who have a pound of turkey and half a bottle of port down them. The ridiculous dumb fun aspect puts a lot of people off.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2014 03:47
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:I strongly beg to differ. There's at least one that made me angry with how lazy it was. The writer actually confirmed it was just a first draft that somehow got filmed. Is it the one with Bill Bailey? It's the one with Bill Bailey, isn't it?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2014 03:55
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:That really, really annoyed me. She was right. And I never understood how the Doctor had supposedly ruined her career. He says "Don't you think she looks tired?" to... someone? And that makes everyone think she's not fit to be PM any more? What? Well, uh, you know her fall leads to the rise of Saxon, who kinda happens to be the Master, and she ultimately proves heroic even when facing her death. So the show pretty consistently reinforces the idea that he's wrong to do that to her
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2014 06:30
|
|
|
armoredgorilla posted:Dumb nerd poo poo, got it. Even dumber than that. I might be misremembering, but I'm pretty sure Platt's book was actually based on aborted plans he drew up with Andrew Cartmel. Basically that poo poo would actually have been on TV if the BBC hadn't killed it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2014 03:48
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:uh, Rose, you're in very real danger of dying. You should really take that threat a little more seriously. Toxxupation posted:I feel bad for not giving an episode of Doctor Who an A. I loving despise all of you for what you've done to me. Republican Vampire fucked around with this message at 05:22 on Aug 23, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
Android Blues posted:Mickey is just such a bad character, and yet these early seasons can't seem to leave him alone. Rusty was really invested in the idea of showing the domestic/kitchen sink poo poo, and talking about the people who were left behind. Rose was a big dramatic shift away from the old norm in that sense, even though there's sort of a precedent in the Seventh doctor revisiting Ace's childhood and past. Considering Rusty's roots in soapy drama? It's sort of understandable that it wouldn't quite work. Jackie's a lot better handled and more interesting than Mickey though. Even in bad episodes or when she's being terrible, she's immediately recognizable.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2014 05:14
|
|
|
Spatula City posted:I like the idea that various enemy races in Doctor Who represent different threats to the UK from the present or past. The Slitheen are pretty clearly meant to represent New Labour at the dawn of the War on Terror.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:To think of what would've happened if the "gay agenda" crowd had gotten whiff of Who back in the day. Actually they kinda did! See, Big Gay Rusty actually had a Big Gay Agenda that permeated his work on Who. Basically he figured that Doctor Who is a family series enjoyed by families. Which means kids. Which means prime targets for his INSIDIOUS GAY AGENDA. Said Gay Agenda basically consisted of making a conspicuous effort to include queer secondary characters. This sounds innocuous, and it would've been if not for the fact that they were often very clumsily introduced. This arguably peaked with a Christmas Special which was weirdly influenced by Angels in America: A Gay Fantasia on National Themes. That episode made no sense and was terrible. This gay association goes back to Queer as Folk, where Stuart remembering the actors who played the Doctor (and the fact that Paul McGann doesn't count) was essential to proving that Stuart and Vince were meant for each other. While what he did was admirable from an ideological angle, it kinda hosed up the story. A lot. And pointing that out was enough to get you branded a homophobe way back when even if you were so gay that your cock sucks dicks.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2014 05:13
|
|
|
Frankly, it's kinda homophobic and hosed up to pretend that that Rusty didn't have a conspicuous gay agenda. When you try to paint it as some imaginary straw-human being, you insult the work he was trying to do. It's a preemptive apology for the wrong thing. The gay agenda is not the problem. The problem is that he was often clumsy about how it turned out on screen, and I think it's entirely fair to argue that that's a result of trying to shoe-horn characters and themes in for ideological reasons. Then again, when he tried to do a properly queer episode, he turned out Voyage of the Damned, which is bizarrely influenced by Angels in America. So maybe doing a straight-on queer story is a bad idea.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
First off, Rusty's decision to include more minorities was part of of his queer agenda. He talks about it in The Writer's Tale, and it's been discussed by academics. Don't get me wrong. I'm gay. I like seeing gay people in media. I understand that the phrase "Gay Agenda" has baggage, but gently caress that. Rusty had a political agenda. It was a gay agenda. It was a progressive agenda when it came to gender and race. It was a very positive thing in science fiction. It was totally on point and he was a courageous and righteous person to pursue that. I'm gay and I like seeing representation of queer people on TV. I like to think that someday it'll be normalized enough that I can do all the things straight people do with their partners in public. But there are episodes where it seems like the gay characters are just there to check the box. I think that Rusty maybe should've been more careful about some of the times he inserted queer characters or about how lines that referenced queer characters were shot. I'd talk about when it worked and when it didn't in more depth, but we are kind of trying to avoid spoilers in this thread. Also I think it's really hosed up that people try to erase the fact that he had that agenda. Seriously, progressives. We should just own it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
See, here's my thing, and I'm spoilering the whole thing because I can't meaningfully talk about it without spoilers. There's a very real difference between doing a queer story or including queer characters on the periphery and shoe-horning queer characters into an existing story for ideological reasons. I can think of examples of when Who has done all of the above under Davies. A good queer story? Look at Tommy in The Idiot's Lantern. The boy's a fag struggling with his family. Even his gran thinks he's too soft and needs a beating. But after his family's torn asunder by his father's anger problems and petty dictator bullshit, he sets out to build a new relationship with his family based on honesty and his own strength. That's a good gay story. As for when gay side characters work? gently caress. All of the companions under Rusty have gay friends who are just mentioned in passing. Sky from Midnight is getting over her wife. But there are also stories where it seems weirdly and awkwardly kludged in. A lot of people feel that way for the extended discussion of the Cassini 'Sisters' in Gridlock, and frankly I Think that the way that Davies processes Angels in America and shits out Voyage of the damned is hosed up and lazy. IT's all minor stuff, but that's part of why it's jarring. It doesn't correspond with what's around it. But yeah Davies is poo poo about Trans people. I mean Cassandra? What the gently caress? e: Also. Seriously. We should own Gay Agenda. Gay Agenda Now, Gay Agenda Tomorrow, Gay Agenda Forever. e2: Also I am seriously so mad about that episode I keep mentioning in spoilers. God drat it, it's a brilliant play and he fucks it all up so bad. Republican Vampire fucked around with this message at 06:13 on Aug 29, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2014 06:08
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:I have serious issues with that first story you mention under the spoiler bars, but we'll get to that when Occ does. It's next, isn't it? Either way, I just wanna make sure y'all understand where I'm coming from and that I'm not some homophobic weirdo that's mad about those drat dirty gays getting all up in my Doctor Who. It's very hard to criticize Davies about sexuality without coming off that way. e: Also buy plat so I can PM you instead of making GBS threads up this thread!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2014 06:17
|
|
|
The only good Doctor Who novel is Coming of the Terraphiles.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:But yeah, I like this show (well, when it's not absolutely terrible). I guess I should be more accurate: I like this show's message. It doesn't come across as smug, easy moralizing trying to spread an insipid, reductionary message, it comes across as more hopeful and hope-filled instead. Most Doctor Who fans, at least, most of the dorkier, crustier ones, have reached a point like this. You have an idealized version of the show, what it's about, and that it's capable of in your brain. It bothers you when it doesn't do that, but you develop an affection for that ideal that causes you to tune in even when you know the show won't live up to it more often than not. 'cuz sometimes there's a miracle and the right story had the right director and writer and cast. Other old genre shows like The Twilight Zone or the original Star Trek work the same way. Also, the talk show host Craig Ferguson described the show as being thematically about the triumph of intellect and romance over brute force and cynicism. Which is about as well as that idea of what the show's about has been distilled.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2014 07:19
|
|
|
I liked the Jackie/Elton scenes because she gave him SO MUCH poo poo for trying to use her like that. Like... so much poo poo. She was angry and betrayed. Her hitting on Elton made sense because, well, she's a lonely woman and here's this solid 7 that's totally getting all up in her business for seemingly no reason. It is, to my mind, a more interesting and considered arc than anything that happens with Rose. That said, I only watched it the once because of how bad it is. The show's last great laughable turdbasket of a story about what the show "means" and its "fans" was The Greatest Show in the Galaxy. And that had a cringeworthy rap. And it's still more watchable. jng2058 posted:What shocks me is how quickly it happened to RTD. At the point of Love & Monsters he's only in his second season as showrunner. And already he's gotten to the point that either no one told him the end of the episode was poo poo or they did and he blew right past their objections anyway. The showrunner is a relative novelty in UK TV. Previously head writers would get P or EP vanity credits, but the actual work and authority would be with other people. Davies (and Moffat, who came after) became television writers in a world where showrunners were few and far between. Even on the shows that made their names (Queer as Folk for Davies, Coupling for Moffat) there were other people running the business end of things. With that in mind, it's really not surprising that it went to Rusty's head so fast. It was relatively unique and, in fact, the success of Rusty's Who is credited with popularizing the showrunner model in the UK. Republican Vampire fucked around with this message at 06:43 on Sep 4, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2014 06:40
|
|
|
I think a big part of the reason why Fear Her got slammed was that the dude who wrote it was known, at the time, for his work on a really excellent British cop show. that a lot of people thought of as being science fiction even though it was pretty clearly not. People were expecting a Life on Mars-ish thing, and Graham gave them something he thought his kid would like.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2014 05:29
|
|
|
Rusty, bless him, is great at some things. I'd seriously watch a Real Housewives style mockumentary where he just writes different Who villains throwing really campy shade. Also the Cybermen have exactly one good idea going for them and it's been forgotten by people who write for the show for like... forty years. gently caress the Cybermen. gently caress them in the ear. This is basically the hyperdork fan consensus. They are poo poo outside of maybe five stories total. Counting the audio plays and other assorted anorak bullshit.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:Also the Daleks have had good episodes as recently as this month, whereas the cybermen have sucked since the 60s. Spare Parts and The Flood beg to differ. Also decent? Are you snorting special K? That episode was a turd from script to workprint to airing. Republican Vampire fucked around with this message at 06:56 on Sep 7, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2014 06:44
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:Spare Parts and The Silver Turk both own, true. And [that episode] was more than decent. Was it a masterpiece? Maybe, maybe not, but that's for a different thread than this True 'nuff, but the point stands: the Cybermen can work in an environment where they can be more thematically interesting than they apparently can be on TV. It's just that TV, for some reason, insists on doing them very, very badly. Seriously. Didn't they try to say that the Cybermen in Series two were loosely based on Spare Parts? How the poo poo does that work?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2014 06:55
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:After one "episode", I'm okay with this just because of the weird dystopian elements that sounds like something a BNP supporter posted to DeviantArt. A lot of it's in the form of Podcasts. Thrilling Adventure Hour for instance does comedy shows. There's a push in some countries, Canada for instance, to produce more radio drama. Personally I'm totally onboard because radio drama/comedy is way more fun to listen to than talk radio or top 40.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
Yeah. Gonna go post in the other thread.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2014 04:14
|
|
|
Oh Wow. Look at you citing Abbot and Costello instead of the much stronger tradition of British double acts, which dates back just as long but essentially continued until the eighties (or nineties, depending on how you count it). Seriously the name's even a reference to what is arguably the last of the traditional double-acts, Mel Smith and Griff Jones, whose show had its last series in '98.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:We're not British. One of us is Californian and the other's from New Jersey. We're about as far from Britain as Americans can get without tossing tea into the Boston Harbor. I'm not British either. I'm from Alberta. I just think that context is important and one of the things that Rusty often does is situate the Doctor and his companions in situations out of vintage comedy. Especially since a lot of his style as a showrunner leans on the contrast between farce and melodrama. Also a lot of the British double acts are kind of a big deal? Fry & Laurie and Mitchell and Webb in particular stand out as old fashioned acts that've seen some success on this side of the sea. e: I kinda studied TV in school. So maybe I'm too focused on rigor-- but it just seems weird not to acknowledge the line that this episode (and the fourth series premiere, when it happens) draw to vintage comedy. I mean it's conspicuous and it's part of the broader conversation. If you're going to bring in the context of a US double act and make it the seeming focal point of your review, why not spend ten minutes or less looking at the IMDB or Wikipedia page for said episode? It just points to a lack of rigor or attention. Republican Vampire fucked around with this message at 05:14 on Sep 11, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:A thousand apologies for not justifying your wasted credit hours, nerd. That doesn't even make ironic sense when you're part of a comic double act posting overlong recaps of Doctor Who.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2014 05:23
|
|
|
thexerox123 posted:I'd rather hear Occ's reactions to it as an episode of television, not as a research project. If he personally draws connections to a double act that he is familiar with, that's more interesting to hear then him talking about whatever rote background information is already out there for the episode. I don't want a research project either. I want what passes for a basic level of reflection in space year 2014. What makes "This is what I saw" more desirable than "This is what I saw, This is what people said, Here's what I think" ? E: To be clear, I think that this thread's more about the latter than the former. I think it's never been just "Here's what I think". A lot of it's been about reacting to what the fandom says or to other stuff in pop culture. So it bugs me when there's an obvious blind spot like that. I dunno. I'm dumb. Republican Vampire fucked around with this message at 05:31 on Sep 11, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
thexerox123 posted:If he starts going to IMDB and wiki pages for episodes, he's going to get spoilers. That's true, and that does spoil the nature of the thread. I'm probably just getting my hackles up because I'm dumb.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:He's got a point, the lack of rigor in this thread is very disappointing. I'm not even sure this publication is peer reviewed For context... Whether it's a panel star like Richard Ayoade or a national 'treasure' like Stephen Fry, pretty much every major english comic has come up as part of a double act. The irish, welsh and scottish might not claim the same, but it's been the standard operating procedure for decades: You get a 2-3 person act and you go to Edinburgh Fringe until someone notices you. Sometimes what you do will be branded according to your double act (think Mitchell & Webb Look) and sometimes it won't be (think Darkplace). This model only started to die out in the late nineties. So to see such a retro and foreign example like Abbott and Costello-- it's kinda jarring, is all. And I overreacted because I'm dumb.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
thexerox123 posted:A friend of mine loves The Shakespeare Code, and I've never understood why. It's The most gratuitous example of rampant fandom fetishization to date, complete with equating Harry Potter to Shakespeare. It is a bad episode.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2014 01:59
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Not to be a crazy dick like last time I sperged out, but Gridlock is a huge homage to 2000AD. Specifically to Judge Dredd. The setting, the aesthetic, the slightly gonzo ideas like selling feelings... and of course, a cameo by Max Normal, the Pinstripe Freak, as one of the drivers:  It's interesting historically because Who of the eighties tried to reinvent itself along the lines of this specific constellation of ideas and aesthetics in comics during both the C. Baker and McCoy years. Key stories for this include Vengeance on Varos and Paradise Towers.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2014 07:23
|
|
|
Fucknag posted:My intro was... I dunno spoiler policy wrt episode titles so I'll just say Ten's last episode(s). Dude I got hooked on the show with an episode that featured this as part of an allegory about BBC internal politics, the history of Doctor Who (and its fandom) and also maybe Mary Whitehouse. I was seven and had no possible frame of reference for understanding any of the broad thematic stuff that makes the serial even remotely interesting. Doctor Who just has this weird power to be so unlike almost anything you've ever seen because it's got basically no shame.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:OH GOD I CAN'T STOP LAUGHING I DUNNO IF I CAN GO ON THAT'S THE MOST INCREDIBLE loving THING I'VE EVER SEEN Rusty understands that The Master is basically a Pantomime character at this point and that concept of his character is probably the best part of this two parter.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
Holy poo poo. Martha's apartment is so loving mid-2000's. That paint, those shelves... and can you believe that we all used to have gigantic bombs strapped to the back of our CRT televisions? Jeez. What a world.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
It's theoretically possible for someone other than the leader of the largest party to form a government under the Westminster system. Just de facto impossible outside of maybe a really tortured coalition. But when you throw space alien mind control into the mix...
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 12:12 |
|
|
Slowing down is cool. The writeups are worth the wait. Regarding the Toclafane... I've always liked them because they seem like a way better version of The Cybermen than, you know, the Cybermen have been for decades. Humans so desperate to survive that they cut everything human out. The childish voices even seem to recall the way early Cybermen spoke. For a monster dreamt up on the off-chance that the BBC couldn't get the rights to the Daleks (they were sketched up on the quick as a replacement for the Dalek in Dalek and then re-used later) they're really a pretty cool creation.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2014 04:26
|
|