• 12th Doctor is Peter Capaldi
    253 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Mors Quaedam;41713810]So that's why it got millions of viewers on the unveiling of the 12th doctor? Okay.[/QUOTE] views =/= quality it's a bad show grow up [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Let's go in a Doctor Who thread and argue about how it's bad, great idea" - MaxOfS2D))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=zerosix;41713833]views =/= quality it's a bad show grow up[/QUOTE] Clearly it's not if millions of people watch it. Opinion =/= fact. [quote]grow up[/quote]
[QUOTE=Mors Quaedam;41713860]Clearly it's not if millions of people watch it. Opinion =/= fact.[/QUOTE] Millions of people watch Big Brother, Geordie Shore, The Only Way Is Essex, right? Would you call those quality programs? Millions of people watch Ray William Johnson on YouTube, would you call those quality videos?
[QUOTE=zerosix;41713870]Millions of people watch Big Brother, Geordie Shore, The Only Way Is Essex, right? Would you call those quality programs? Millions of people watch Ray William Johnson on YouTube, would you call those quality videos?[/QUOTE] No, but none of those have been going as long as Doctor Who.
[QUOTE=Mors Quaedam;41713860]Clearly it's not if millions of people watch it. Opinion =/= fact.[/QUOTE] sorry but the sentiment views =/= quality is very true not to say that all popular things are shit but just because something's popular doesn't mean it's good
[QUOTE=Mors Quaedam;41713878]No, but none of those have been going as long as Doctor Who.[/QUOTE] your argumentative skills are fantastic
[QUOTE=Generic Monk;41713883]sorry but the sentiment views =/= quality is very true not to say that all popular things are shit but just because something's popular doesn't mean it's good[/QUOTE] Why would people watch something if they thought it was bad? [editline]5th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=zerosix;41713895]your argumentative skills are fantastic[/QUOTE] So are yours.
[QUOTE=Mors Quaedam;41713900]So are yours.[/QUOTE] I understand why you like Doctor Who now
[QUOTE=zerosix;41713922]I understand why you like Doctor Who now[/QUOTE] I don't even watch it :v: I just know it's a good show because I used to watch it. Anyway, what has liking it got to do with this argument?
[QUOTE=zerosix;41713895]your argumentative skills are fantastic[/QUOTE] 50 years in the run and a stable, growing number of viewers doesn't tell you that perhaps it's a good show and people watch it for a reason? It's family-oriented, but it still has some really goddamn grim elements to it. I usually hate this argument, but have you watched it yourself? Or are you just basing your arguments off of short bits and pieces? Bad acting based on what? Define "cheesy effects". Bad writing and production based on what, and more importantly COMPARED to what?
[QUOTE=Mors Quaedam;41713900]Why would people watch something if they thought it was bad? [/QUOTE] sometimes the popular opinion differs from the critical or personal opinion aka there's no such thing as 'good' or 'bad'
Some episodes of Doctor Who are pretty awful tbh (at least in my opinion), but others are genuinely brilliant. It's patchy, but it's still a generally good show provided you don't expect anything mindblowing. Although I haven't watched it since the end of Matt Smith's first series, so it could have changed since then, IDK.
[QUOTE=Tweevle;41713503]He'd better keep his Scottish accent, unlike Tennant.[/QUOTE] One of my favorite Ecclestone moments. "how can you be an alien? you've got a Northern accent" "every planet's got a North"
If they didn't replace Moffat as the primary script-writer, they fucked up. His overarching storylines are absolute shite. He's absolutely fantastic at individual episodes, but man his storyline writing is absolute trash. Excited to see a badass old guy as Doctor. Tired of Smith.
[QUOTE=zerosix;41713922]I understand why you like Doctor Who now[/QUOTE] Grow up.
[QUOTE=zerosix;41713833]views =/= quality it's a bad show grow up [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Let's go in a Doctor Who thread and argue about how it's bad, great idea" - MaxOfS2D))[/highlight][/QUOTE] your right, views is not quality, but that only happens some of the time but it's a good show because its got actual GOOD VIEWS and its STABLE and you're dumb grow up [QUOTE=Derp Y. Mail;41713987]50 years in the run and a stable, growing number of viewers doesn't tell you that perhaps it's a good show and people watch it for a reason? It's family-oriented, but it still has some really goddamn grim elements to it. I usually hate this argument, but have you watched it yourself? Or are you just basing your arguments off of short bits and pieces? Bad acting based on what? Define "cheesy effects". Bad writing and production based on what, and more importantly COMPARED to what?[/QUOTE] effects can be kinda shit but shit effects doesn't = shit show just look at the original Star Trek.
[QUOTE=J!NX;41714236]effects can be kinda shit but shit effects doesn't = shit show just look at the original Star Trek.[/QUOTE] I will even argue that the classic Who FX had its own little charm to it. It was funny watching people in rubber suits try to talk.
[QUOTE=Generic Monk;41711790]ok I know i rag on matt smith a lot; he's not that bad but he's so, so inferior to the other two[/QUOTE] Well... in [B]your opinion.[/B] You cannot say he is objectively worse than the other two, because it's a subjective point. It's up to me to decide who was better for me, and for you for you. Just don't pass it off as fact because you'll get nowhere. As for "loads of people watch it so it's good", trying getting your own opinions, stop watching stuff because other people do.
People who say the effects in the revived series are bad seriously need to get out of 2005 and 2006.
is it just me or would that guy make a really really good g-man in any half-life movie
[QUOTE=Matriax;41714274]Well... in [B]your opinion.[/B] You cannot say he is objectively worse than the other two, because it's a subjective point. It's up to me to decide who was better for me, and for you for you. Just don't pass it off as fact because you'll get nowhere. As for "loads of people watch it so it's good", trying getting your own opinions, stop watching stuff because other people do.[/QUOTE] Though, I do think acting skill is an objective thing and he had his moments where he acted really well. It's just the writing didn't give us enough of those moments or just used the same ones over and over.
[QUOTE=Derp Y. Mail;41714258]I will even argue that the classic Who FX had its own little charm to it. It was funny watching people in rubber suits try to talk.[/QUOTE] I loved Zatoichi and when I say Zatoichi I watched almost everything that had him in it and liked all of it, its pretty damn old. fuck special effects. I watch star trek for the story and drama, though, the new movies are more about that, and effects these days, but that they're all on equal ground.
[t]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/10/14/1255534407037/peter-capaldi-thick-of-it-001.jpg[/t] [t]https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRMclC8JWu9QF4DCLCNuWiO_4lFR3nQtjkgRzPWrudx1beIc4N5[/t] am i just seeing things?
[QUOTE=zerosix;41713762]why would a lack of swearing bother me? it's a terrible show, cheesy effects, terrible writing, bad production, boring acting, I just don't see the hype over it originally it was primarily a kids show and as far as I'm concerned the only people that could possibly find this show entertaining are children that don't know any better[/QUOTE] I thought the effects were decent... [MEDIA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVEY5AL5zzk[/MEDIA] ...even better so now.
[QUOTE=Generic Monk;41713750]it is primarily for kids tbh[/QUOTE] I'd say it's aimed more at a general audience than any one, specific demographic. Also, since when was being aimed at kids a bad thing? There's plenty of great stuff aimed at kids.
[QUOTE=Tweevle;41714086]Some episodes of Doctor Who are pretty awful tbh (at least in my opinion), but others are genuinely brilliant. It's patchy, but it's still a generally good show provided you don't expect anything mindblowing. Although I haven't watched it since the end of Matt Smith's first series, so it could have changed since then, IDK.[/QUOTE] It's so cheesy in parts but that's part of the charm, and it does have some serious episodes that are genuinely great television. The worst episodes imo are the ones where it tries to be serious but just ends up falling flat on its face.
[QUOTE=Sableye;41714329][t]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/10/14/1255534407037/peter-capaldi-thick-of-it-001.jpg[/t] [t]https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRMclC8JWu9QF4DCLCNuWiO_4lFR3nQtjkgRzPWrudx1beIc4N5[/t] am i just seeing things?[/QUOTE] yes you are gman has a much squarer jaw, much more noticeable cheekbones, less pointed nose shape, less tilted ears, more squared-off brows, a squarer chin, and bigger bags under his eyes capaldi has an overall pointy face, gman has a very rectangular one.
[QUOTE=Mors Quaedam;41713725]It's not a kids TV show. Just because it doesn't have swearing in it doesn't mean it's just for kids.[/QUOTE] To be honest ever since Matt Smith became the doctor I lost interest because it seemed like a kids show and was also drawing attention to a younger, more childish audience. The show isn't a kids show, otherwise it'd be on children's TV (Like the Sarah Jane adventures).
[QUOTE=Yin;41714433]I'd say it's aimed more at a general audience than any one, specific demographic. Also, since when was being aimed at kids a bad thing? There's plenty of great stuff aimed at kids.[/QUOTE] I never said being aimed at kids was a bad thing. It's primarily for kids but it can be enjoyed by adults too if the episode's a good one.
[QUOTE=Generic Monk;41714462]I never said being aimed at kids was a bad thing. It's primarily for kids but it can be enjoyed by adults too if the episode's a good one.[/QUOTE] Oh, sorry, I meant that as a more general question than being aimed specifically at you.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.