|
Escobarbarian posted:From a "criticising the review" standpoint I gotta say there's far too much discussion of Grant and superheroes in general and too little about the actual episode. Which I guess presents a point, while obviously the recaps are long gone, should the review still generally make sense to someone who hasn't seen the episode? I dunno what the answer is (obviously this thread is mainly for fans of the show, which is an argument against it) but I know as someone who hasn't seen the episode all this review tells me about it is "there's a guy called Grant who is a superhero and also parts of the episode revolve around the Doctor". Is there a villain? Were they good or bad? What was the Doctor doing in his half? Was it good or bad? Who is this guy Capaldi apparently leaves to die? etc You'll get used to the tangents. I forget the episode (latter-era Davies, I'm pretty sure), but I remember once he spent the first like 1,500 words of a 3,000-word review going on and on and on and on about the television writing and production process and how it works, explaining it to us like it was TV 101 ... except he was talking about a process that was literally not at all the way Doctor Who (or most other British TV) works.
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 24, 2024 13:37 |
|
|
And More posted:Just a little reminder that you're talking to Bown. Y'know, the guy who got "banned" from the initial thread.    how did i not know about the nameswitch
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
Lick! The! Whisk! posted:Like, if you honestly argue that Series Five is anything but one of if not the best seasons of Doctor Who, ever, I would say you are either arguing in fundamentally bad faith or aren't actually a fan. You're arguing in bad faith, or at least setting up a ridiculous strawman, because very, very, very few of Moffat's critics have anything bad to say about the fifth season.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2017 17:29
|
|