[QUOTE=Acezorz;40745606]hope not, split series is just wank.[/QUOTE]
this
we need a return to the 13 episodes, with two parters. series 7 suffered because of the lack of any two parters.
Series 6 & 7 suffered with the split.
[QUOTE=Dan2593;40746240]Series 6 & 7 suffered with the split.[/QUOTE]
Series 6 part 1 felt so much better than part 2 because of the two parters.
Yep.
Whole thing would've felt much better if it just ran continuously.
guys i just wrote a new story
the doctor faces off against a monster that feeds on rumor and gossip
and his main feeding site is gallifrey base
am i meta enough
Nope. No spoilers come from Gallifrey Base anymore and hasn't in a while.
People who post spoilers have their posts deleted and disappear. I usually grab stuff from Twitter and Youtube. I have some contact with some sources too.
[QUOTE=Dan2593;40746397]Nope. No spoilers come from Gallifrey Base anymore and hasn't in a while.
[I]People who post spoilers have their posts deleted and disappear. [/I]I usually grab stuff from Twitter and Youtube. I have some contact with some sources too.[/QUOTE]
[B]EXACTLY[/B]
it's the rumor monster eating it
trouble at t'rumour mill
Who were the people who used to write Who episodes? First time I came to this thread I was like "Wut is this" when I read that. Then I came back six months later and it was totes cool.
TNOTD up to 1.6m timeshift.
[img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/gen.gif[/img]
Episode 1 of Genesis of the Daleks, in handy-dandy Gif mode.
[QUOTE=CoolCorky;40750931]
Episode 1 of Genesis of the Daleks, in handy-dandy Gif mode.[/QUOTE]
what is this? a .gif for ants?
[QUOTE=krakadict;40750941]what is this? a .gif for ants?[/QUOTE]
I don't think the gif would load properly if it was too big.
In LMAO pics, someone posted a gif which contained the whole of Terminator 2. I guess you could zoom in a little, don't know if that helps though.
[url]http://www.reddit.com/r/gallifrey/comments/1eulsf/the_doctor_and_the_devil_xpost_from_rdoctorwho/[/url] Jesus Christ, I love this.
[QUOTE=Kendra;40751085][url]http://www.reddit.com/r/gallifrey/comments/1eulsf/the_doctor_and_the_devil_xpost_from_rdoctorwho/[/url] Jesus Christ, I love this.[/QUOTE]
It's interesting until they start mouthing off going "JOHN HURT DOCTOR IS THE ORIGINAL INCARNATION AND HE'S ACTUALLY THE DEVIL" [sp](something which has all but been confirmed as being categorically wrong)[/sp].
Most of the god/satan references are most likely there because ingrained in our culture as the beings of purest good and evil, so it's incredibly easy to make references to them.
I don't think he literally means he's [I]the Devil[/I] as we know it, but he has developed into a persona where it's practically a simile.
The God/Devil references are simply there for a development of character fifty years old. He's done some terrible things in the name of the good, that's always been the case. It's just still being applied with relevancy now.
Found it interesting one of the names for The Doctor according to GI is "The Beast"
[img]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_SRebQG7JBU4/TSu2iKIIu6I/AAAAAAAAAK4/PiFw9smpII8/s1600/the_beast.jpg[/img]
Doctor...?!
[editline]23rd May 2013[/editline]
New Strax video out tomorrow regarding "The Doctors greatest secret".
Keep an eye out for it.
Are Strax videos a constant thing now?
They're a nice way to disperse info. No idea if there will be more after this. Probably.
[QUOTE=ojcoolj;40754132]Are Strax videos a constant thing now?[/QUOTE]
They probably just got Dan Starkey for a few hours during S7P2 filming and recorded a bunch of them at once, so videos regarding anything undecided on at the time of filming probably won't show up.
It's like how in the episode 'making of' videos that have been going out, in the interviews with Matt and Jenna they've been wearing the same outfits in all of them, because they'll have done them all on the same day.
I have to admit, a lot of stuff in this makes sense.
[url]http://theidiotboxx.wordpress.com/2013/05/03/what-is-wrong-with-doctor-who/[/url]
[QUOTE=evlbzltyr;40755509]I have to admit, a lot of stuff in this makes sense.
[url]http://theidiotboxx.wordpress.com/2013/05/03/what-is-wrong-with-doctor-who/[/url][/QUOTE]
I can't disagree more.
It seems we get one "eh" half series and suddenly everybody is slamming the entirety of Moffat Who and Moffat personally for things he didn't write.
It's rose tinted fanboyism. People are comparing Who to the likes of self contained dramas like Broadchurch. When in reality it's more similar in tone to something like Warehouse 13. It's supposed to be a fun romp week-in week-out. Not mind blowing edge-of-your-seat TV. The show has never taken itself that seriously and never should. The tongue is firmly placed in cheek and if it wasn't it never would've got pass Series 1.
This time 6 months ago none of these complaints were around and nobody would've thought of making them. You've had a few average episodes and suddenly people are making demands and disappointed the show isn't measuring up to their impossible expectations. It's a knee-jerk reaction.
[editline]23rd May 2013[/editline]
Also I can't believe the arrogant self-entitlement of that article/blog. Same on Gallifrey Base.
They don't like Matt Smith. They don't like Tom Baker. They decide the show needs help and is having some sort of catastrophe when ratings and AI scores say otherwise.
[QUOTE=Dan2593;40755631]I can't disagree more.
It seems we get one "eh" half series and suddenly everybody is slamming the entirety of Moffat Who and Moffat personally for things he didn't write.
It's rose tinted fanboyism. People are comparing Who to the likes of self contained dramas like Broadchurch. When in reality it's more similar in tone to something like Warehouse 13. It's supposed to be a fun romp week-in week-out. Not mind blowing edge-of-your-seat TV. The show has never taken itself that seriously and never should. The tongue is firmly placed in cheek and if it wasn't it never would've got pass Series 1.
This time 6 months ago none of these complaints were around and nobody would've thought of making them. You've had a few average episodes and suddenly people are making demands and disappointed the show isn't measuring up to their impossible expectations. It's a knee-jerk reaction.
[editline]23rd May 2013[/editline]
Also I can't believe the arrogant self-entitlement of that article/blog. Same on Gallifrey Base.
They don't like Matt Smith. They don't like Tom Baker. They decide the show needs help and is having some sort of catastrophe when ratings and AI scores say otherwise.[/QUOTE]
did you actually read it
[editline]23rd May 2013[/editline]
it's about the companion's relationships with the doctor and how moffat doesn't understand how his portrayals of the doctor / companion interactions are even more sexist than old who. the complaints about new episodes being not as good as older ones aren't groundless or jumping at rating fluctuations, they're grounded in specific reasons that I think are pretty justified. I wasn't able to pin down exactly why I didn't like Clara aside from a vague feeling of blandness, and this article has helped to provide a context for it. I don't agree with everything it says but it's very thought-provoking
Yeah, it was mostly about complaining about Clara as a companion not the stuff you listed.
and some feminism.
EDIT: Mostly feminism, actually. But it's spot on. Moffat can't write humans.
Admittedly I read the first couple of lines or so and just gave up and guessed what the rest would be. And skimmed it and saw the writter suggest Steven Moffat should be locked in a room without bread and water. Then take it back and say he shouldn't be allowed to write Who. So sorry about that.
I've been reading the same shit all day all over the place so just guessed the ending. But my point still stands regarding the negatives posts all over the shop.
So I read the article through and through, and whilst I agreed with some points the writer was trying to make, but some things I completely disagree with.
'Doctor Who is structurally sexist. It is about a male hero and his female sidekick.' - The show was established in the 1960s, back when sexism and racism were pretty much at their prime. Having a male hero was a tried and tested method, and back at that time, they had no idea the show was going to become what it currently is today. The modern assistants/companions etc haven't just been female, look at Mickey and Rory for example, some of the best loved companions.
'Three have obvious romantic feelings for the Doctor.' - The show has to be tainted for a modern audience. There was romance (hints at that) in the original show too, between the 4th Doctor and Romana. People like romances. It's just a fact.
'He wrote the bizarre, unfunny, sub-Friends festival of gender stereotyping that is Coupling' - What. Coupling was one of the best 90s/00s shows out there. It's clever writing and hilarious, yet believable characters earned it. Furthermore, Moffat based it around his then relationship with Sue Vertue; it wasn't just something he made up on the spot entirely.
'The “mystical pregnancy” makes women in fantasy and sci-fi suffer, exploiting their reproductive capacity as a weakness' - I don't fully understand how Moffat exploited it as a weakness in the show? Amy wasn't weakened at all as a ganger, and the whole "eye patch lady" mystery was a great addition to the show.
"It’s also interesting that Amy and Clara have no family." - PHAHAHAHAHAHA. Are you shitting me here? Amy had her Mum, her Dad, her Aunt, and her husband. Clara's Mum and Dad (particularly how they meet!) was a serious focal point for s7p2.
'The Doctor dehumanises Clara by calling her “salvage”' - I sort of half agree with this one. On one hand, The Doctor thinks of Clara as inferior; but on the other, he may just be using 'salvage' in this sense as he is her saviour, or a way to convince those three salvage guys to come with him.
'Moffat has gotten rid of some of the naffer, more kid-friendly aliens like the Ood' - Ood on the loo. That is all.
Sigh.
[QUOTE=Abbers100;40757179]"It’s also interesting that Amy and Clara have no family." - PHAHAHAHAHAHA. Are you shitting me here? Amy had her Mum, her Dad, her Aunt, and her husband. Clara's Mum and Dad (particularly how they meet!) was a serious focal point for s7p2.[/quote]
are you shitting me, we saw amy's parents for like 3 scenes in one episode and they were never heard from again, and they were flat, cardboard characters that were used solely as plot devices. they didn't have any personality.
ditto for clara's parents.
the exception is rory's dad of course, I dunno why the same treatment wasn't given to amy's parents.
I mean, I don't even remember the names of clara's and amy's parents, I dunno if they're even ever said onscreen.
whereas the families of rose, martha and donna are all well-written, interesting characters, jackie and wilf in particular.
I hope Claras dad has an episode with us next year. Whenever we hear about him I think he sounds interesting. Would be nice.
It's the one thing I miss from the RTD era. The exploration of the family. It makes the companion seem real and grounded. We've done the story where a companion goes back to see their dead relative (in this case Claras mum) but what if they accidentally brought Claras dad with them for that. Maybe we find out how she died?
[editline]23rd May 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Abbers100;40757179]'Moffat has gotten rid of some of the naffer, more kid-friendly aliens like the Ood' - Ood on the loo. That is all.[/QUOTE]
Perhaps because whenever a childish alien is introduced people complain a shit storm. Isn't Strax exactly one of those?
Ood is hardly gone either.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
