|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Blandiver Date: 26 Apr 13 - 08:29 AM Just come across the term Nu-Hu (New-Who) for more recent regenerations. The other day I was so ill it was all I could do to sit and watch all 4 episodes of Attack of the Cybermen on YouTube - featuring a sterling performance from Brian Glover - and a LOL moment when the Tardis materialises in a London scrapyard and the Radiophonic Workshop respond with a twisted approximation of The Steptoe & Son theme. Naturally I loved every minute of it even though I never watched any of the Colin Baker stuff at the time. |
|
Subject: Lyr Add: Christmas Invasion From: Nigel Parsons Date: 26 Apr 13 - 08:05 AM Going back to the first David Tennant story: (preferably sung a la Eartha Kitt) CHRISTMAS INVASION Nigel Parsons (1 Feb 2006) I'm just an old fashioned girl with an old fashioned mind Not sophisticated, I'm the sweet and "simple" kind I want an old doctor who will make house calls at night And a doctor who I know will care. I want an old fashioned car, a cerise Cadillac Not a blue Police-Box that has been to Hell and back I want an old doctor who will make house calls at night And a doctor who I know will care. My new doctor looks a hoot In his shirt and tie and suit No more leather jacket or pullover. No more cricket flannels too But between both me and you. Believe me, he's still quite the Casanova! I've got a new Doctor Who looks different from before. Changed his whole appearance But for why? I'm not quite sure. I want my old doctor who will make house calls at night And a doctor who I know will care. There are several sounds that please, Like those spinning Christmas trees And plastic Santas playing Christmas carols. But the sound that beats both them Is the sound of our PM As she gives it to the aliens with all barrels. I want an old doctor who will make house calls at night And a doctor who I know will care. My new doctor came along when the TARDIS went quite wrong, And aliens invaded in December. And though he supports the right. His hearts weren't in the fight Until he grew a brand new member. I've got a new Doctor, Who can share my room at night Spend the day in PeeJays. But then still put up a fight I've got a new Doctor Who now, for better or for worse Will take me round the Universe. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Dave the Gnome Date: 11 Jun 11 - 09:15 AM I think you get Righteous Radicals from drinking Green tea. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 10 Jun 11 - 06:15 PM Thanks, 'Uncle Rumpo'! As a result of your zeal and forethought my pearl of wisdom is available for perusal again! Perhaps I'm being overly anal about this but the soap opera form (and the soap opera 'pollution' of other forms of mass entertainment) has really, really annoyed me for years! Sorry about the omission of my nom-de-plume from this morning's post, Joe. I'll try not to let it happen again! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Sugarfoot Jack en route to the pub for a tun Date: 10 Jun 11 - 03:09 PM Shim was right about soap operas though, but I don't think Dr. Who is one personally. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Joe Offer Date: 10 Jun 11 - 02:46 PM No personal offense intended. We review all guest posts on a list of guest posts, not within context. If a post has no name, it's likely to be deleted, whenever it's first seen by a moderator. We've been trying to identify no-name posts when we can, but this one we weren't able to identify. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Uncle Rumpo Date: 10 Jun 11 - 02:14 PM What this over-zealously deleted guest post... [Luckily I'm a bit OCD about gathering web pages to read offline... and no, it wasn't me] "From: GUEST Date: 10 Jun 11 - 05:46 AM "- why be baffled?" Because I find soap operas booorrring! They seem to be about the tedious emotional traumas of tedious pillocks who I wouldn't particularly want to know in 'real life'. I don't consider myself to be a "Righteous Radical" (whatever one of those is?) by the way." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 10 Jun 11 - 01:50 PM I suppose that the deleted 'Guest' post was probably one of mine. I contributed a witty and incisive opinion upon the subject of soap operas this morning, before I left the house - and probably forgot to include my nom-de-plume in the 'From:' box. So one of my immaculate pearls of wisdom is now lost forever. Oh, woe is me - and oh, relieved are the rest of you! "Without it, my last post makes no absolutely sense (no smart remarks from you, Shimrod)." As if I would be so unkind, Suibhne!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Dave the Gnome Date: 10 Jun 11 - 01:25 PM Dr Who used to be entertaining years ago when it was a kids' programme. Agreed. But is that because it was a kids programme or because we were kids? Going back to the point that I cannot treat light entertainment too seriously I think that you may have grown up more than me! I can still enjoy the Doc, plot flaws and all. I have a couple of DVDs with old episodes on and I cannot say, watching them now, that they are better than the new ones. In many ways they were very poor. Plotlines, scripts, acting and all. I cannot say I find the new series particularly pretentious either. But, as you so rightly pointed out - each to his or her own. On which note I think some may be well advised to remember that this is a discussion on personal taste concerning a fictional series on TV. Maybe a bit of light discussion goes better with light entertainment? :-) Cheers DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray Date: 10 Jun 11 - 09:13 AM I see some over-zealous jobsworth of a mean-spirited misanthropic Mud-Elf has seen fit to delete a GUEST post which was (in any case) absolutely essential to this discussion. Without it, my last post makes no absolutely sense (no smart remarks from you, Shimrod). Surely in the context of genuine discussion Mudcat's pathetic house rules can be suspended once in a while? So, Mudelf, please reinstate the lost post, and whilst you're about give life a try, you might get a surprise. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Stu Date: 10 Jun 11 - 07:26 AM "And, for me, that only serves to emphasise the thread-bare stupidity and ignorance of the plot-lines." Just out of interest Shim, do you fancy putting forward some candidates for those TV shows that could teach a thing or two to the writers of the current Dr. Who then? I watched the Neil Gaiman episode again yesterday on iPlayer - it was excellent. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray Date: 10 Jun 11 - 07:08 AM whatever one of those is? I'm not sure, but maybe Shimrod fits the bill? Which isn't to be too hard on the poor fellow; on the contrary, much respect etc. because in this day and age I might admire anyone who can still summon the indignation to believe in anything, just as long as it fits the bill, of course - fascists, homophobes, racists and sexists need not apply, likewise the religious who dream of their exclusive salvation which would have the rest of us condemned to an eternity of damnation; fecking pillocks the lot of them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Jack Blandiver Date: 10 Jun 11 - 04:21 AM but then soap opera is popular - which also baffles me! Storytelling has always been popular - why be baffled? Actually that's Popular in the sense of its genereal appeal too; it's a hearty catharthis which most people find entertaining on various levels, like when David Essex turns up as wife-murdering Eddie Moon in EastEnders. Most people I know watch at least one, apart from several Righteous Radicals who feel that it's somehow beneath their dignity to do so, much less admit to it. Each to their own. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: BTNG Date: 09 Jun 11 - 07:48 PM *it has become hideously pretentious and full of its own importance* this is getting more and more familiar |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray Date: 09 Jun 11 - 06:54 PM ...it has become hideously pretentious and full of its own importance. It thinks that its 'relevant' and its become sort of 'actorly' in a nauseating, trendy, metropolitan, 'meeja studies' sort of way. And, for me, that only serves to emphasise the thread-bare stupidity and ignorance of the plot-lines. Actually, the same could be said of the more earnest side of the folk song & ballad scene one (occasionally) runs into these days. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 09 Jun 11 - 06:45 PM But the thing is, DtheG, Dr Who used to be entertaining years ago when it was a kids' programme. I remember that my brothers and I loved the papier mache monsters ('grolly men' - as we used to call them). We looked forward to each episode and were delighted with the outlandish creations that the BBC props dept. came up with. My youngest brother even watched each episode from the traditional place behind the sofa. We knew that it was rubbish then but we delighted in the pantomime silliness of it. In its more recent incarnations, though, it has become hideously pretentious and full of its own importance. It thinks that its 'relevant' and its become sort of 'actorly' in a nauseating, trendy, metropolitan, 'meeja studies' sort of way. And, for me, that only serves to emphasise the thread-bare stupidity and ignorance of the plot-lines. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Stringsinger Date: 09 Jun 11 - 05:31 PM I have the same difficulty as does Penny. Sometimes I think that the episodes are out of a Robert Altman movie. Never had trouble understanding Tenant, Eccleston or Baker though. RiverSong is intelligible. Oh well, at least I can understand the Daleks. As to entertainment value, the Doctor is always good for a laugh. If you don't take it seriously, it makes perfectly good sense. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Dave the Gnome Date: 09 Jun 11 - 05:17 PM I find that forms of entertainment that I could 'drive a bus through' are not entertaining. Ahhhh - I guess that is where we must differ greatly then. I find Picadilly bus station very entertaining... Seriously though - I do understand what you mean. I know people who would kill the person who dressed a 47th Hussar in the wrong buttons or decided that the photon can opener was a good idea when last week the same thing was an atomic poop scoop. Personaly I find that treating light entertainment as documentary is too frustrating. So I don't! Cheers :D (tG) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: BTNG Date: 09 Jun 11 - 02:57 PM ... but then soap opera is popular - which also baffles me! so you're saying that the posts in Mudcat baffle you? It hardly surprises me |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 09 Jun 11 - 02:40 PM Keep on grinding that axe, Suibhne! Perhaps one day (soon ... please!!!!) you'll wear it away. So, don't be tardy, keep that wheel a-turning! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Penny S. Date: 09 Jun 11 - 12:24 PM Dave, sometimes I find the speech - usually Smith's - too fast, and indistinct. I thought it was me, until I found a number of comments on the BBC's own Radio Times pages which said the same, with people having to repeat passages several times, or run with the subtitles on. So I don't think it is me. It may be background noises off during speech, but it does seem a genuine problem. Penny |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray Date: 09 Jun 11 - 07:20 AM Actually in the context this thread that Tardus joke is pretty neat. Those entirely unfamiliar with Latin and its derivations will have to look up to get the laugh though. Folk, I fear, was ever thus! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray Date: 09 Jun 11 - 06:35 AM who assume that because folk music is old it must have something to do with troubadors Hold on there a mo, Shimster - you mean it doesn't? Shit, man - this is where I've been going wrong all these years, assuming that at the heart of Folk there lingered a very real Human Creativity, whereas, in actual fact, Folk is Viral Thang that uses collective humanity as a Passive Medium... Hmmmm; sounds all a bit sci-fi to me; maybe this is why so many Folkies are also Graduate sci-fi nerds and why True Folk no longer apeals to True Folks, who have their own thing going on which the True Folkies invariably despise from their High Towers of Cultural Righteousness. No indeed, Dr Who is part of the free-styling Zeitgeist, too heavy on Bathos and GCI maybe, but part of a storytelling tradition going back - oh - to the time of the Troubadours at least I'd say. In fact, the first ever documented sci-fi is a now-lost poem by Bertran de Born in which he encounters visitors from the future who step forth to greet him from a gleaming silver chalice bigger on the inside than it is on the out. According to Dante he called this device the Tardus by way of temporal irony... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 09 Jun 11 - 05:59 AM "I suppose we can still enjoy the mundane though. Can we?" You can enjoy whatever you like, DtheG! How could I stop you? Speaking personally, though, I find that forms of entertainment that I could 'drive a bus through' are not entertaining. I regard them as insults to my intelligence. I suppose that I want my entertainment to be provided by people who know more than me and can give me fresh insights into the way the world works or, at least, to allow me to suspend my disbelief. I know that's a tough call - but there you go! At a deeper level, though, Dr Who suffers from, what I call, the 'make it up as you go along' syndrome. The writers assume that they know everything that there is to know about Science Fiction (whilst actually they know very little). They then assume that because SF often contains fantastical elements they can just make it up without bothering about consistency or credibilty - whereas real SF authors often care deeply about such things. It's a bit like so-called folk singers who assume that because folk music is old it must have something to do with troubadors etc. - and hence proceed on that basis without actually doing any research. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Sian H Date: 08 Jun 11 - 06:01 PM On a technical note, has anyone noticed a glitch every week about 15 mins in on the Sat night showing here in UK? The screen freezes for a fraction of a second, and then it happens again a minute later. This doesn't happen on the repeats on Sunday. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Dave the Gnome Date: 08 Jun 11 - 05:48 PM Ah well, Shims, guess we can't all be intelectuals:-) I suppose we can still enjoy the mundane though. Can we? DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Dave MacKenzie Date: 08 Jun 11 - 04:13 PM The Doctor always was a bit crotchety - I've just been watching quite a bit of William Hartnell. All that regeneration can't be doing his personality any good either. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Stringsinger Date: 08 Jun 11 - 03:27 PM I guess I'm going to have to watch the last few episodes over again to decipher the naturalistic conversation. I like the idea of brains rather than brawn as a model for heroism. Dr. Who eschews the use of guns, which I think is an excellent message. He also has a sense of humor regarding the lockstep of military enterprises. I like the sense of compassion that he exhibits toward humanity. The character retains the sense of adventure and objective humor about the predicaments he enters. I don't think I like his temper tantrums that have been added recently. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker Date: 08 Jun 11 - 01:14 PM The most significant problem with this new series is the over-complex far too rushed pace of the storytelling. Each new episode is now an exasperating strain to keep up with; like watching a 3 hour narrative condensed into a 45 mins abridgment of edited highlights, and not necessarily edited in the correct order... A bit reminiscent of watching confusingly dubbed & heavily censored imported Kung Fu and Italian Horror movies and Spaghetti Westerns back in the 1970's... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 08 Jun 11 - 11:35 AM As a Brit I'm having difficulty in understanding how this stupid, silly, lazy, sci-fi soap opera ever became popular ... but then soap opera is popular - which also baffles me! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Dave the Gnome Date: 07 Jun 11 - 05:37 PM I'm English and therefore come under the general category 'Brit', although I dislike that term, yet have no problem understanding any of the dialogue. Not doubting you Penny but what, in particular, are you having difficulty with? And I also wish to point out that not all of us 'Brits' have the problem. Maybe a regional thing - although I am not at all sure what Smith's accent is! Cheers DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Penny S. Date: 07 Jun 11 - 02:24 AM Us Brits are finding the speech a bit hard to pick up, as well. Too fast and too indistinct. It isn't just me, it's on a number of review sites. People having to watch several (and not just twice) times to hear what is said. People having to put the subtitles on. I hope Moffat picks up on that. Penny |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: DMcG Date: 06 Jun 11 - 02:33 PM Interesting you picked up on that one, Dave. It struck me as one of the best lines in the current series as they said it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Dave the Gnome Date: 06 Jun 11 - 02:11 PM I think this incarnation of the Doctor is becoming realy interesting - Showing how he has his vindictive side in particular. The bit where he told the general or whatver he was to surrender was positively frightening! Looking forward to the next bit. We had already figured out (read no more if you haven't seen it)... The Pond/River connection. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Stringsinger Date: 05 Jun 11 - 05:21 PM It's funny but I find myself not caring for the new series because the dialogue is often muffled and the plots are confusing. The one about the "gangers" was not too interesting, I thought. I appreciate the Matt Smith is a good actor but I miss the swashbuckling sense of adventure that Tom Baker and Chris Eccleston brought to the character. They seemed like more fun than Tenant, who I liked, or Smith, who I haven't really gotten used to. I like the character of Riversong, a kind of Dragon Lady but Karen Gillam seems too bland for my tastes. I liked the incoherence of Katherine Tate's character. I guess it's just a matter of opinion. I wish they would sharpen up the dialogue on the new series so that it isn't reminiscent of a parody of "Actor's Studio" where the naturalized speech patterns are sometimes, at least for me, unintelligible. I know the Brits know how to speak well when they want to. The monsters are beginning to look alike, as well, an elongated giant insect with the face of a human used in the last episode and on the one where the man tries to create his fountain of youth but takes a wrong turn with his DNA. Maybe it's just me but I think the earlier episodes were a little more intelligent and less formulaic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Stu Date: 05 Jun 11 - 07:13 AM Loved it. Great series so far. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray Date: 05 Jun 11 - 03:21 AM The series finale was back to the absurd excesses of the Tenant Tenure, which was a shame after the lumbering sit-com sci-fi of the preceding two episodes. Too much budget & CGI as I say; and having a Sontaran offering to wet-nurse a human (for all intents and purposes) baby is maybe a joke too far. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Dave MacKenzie Date: 04 Jun 11 - 06:42 PM So now we know who River Song is, or at least partly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: akenaton Date: 01 Jun 11 - 07:12 PM Well, I was a classmate and pal of one of the Doctors. I usually get asked "What planet was that on?" :0) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Stringsinger Date: 01 Jun 11 - 04:45 PM Entertainment is something that entertains someone. Everything doesn't have to be great art. It can be pretty good and make you laugh. That's what Dr. Who does for me. I don't take it seriously but as good fun. The "willing suspension of disbelief" is immediately broken when space creatures start speaking in North Country English or Brit slang. I find that in itself hilarious. As the Dr. says, "Every planet has a North". (Only true of Earth, I think). In the meantime, it's a merry romp with the special effects and interesting characters, not the ponderous ones you see on cop and crime shows or "shoot-em-ups". The show has a good humor about it which belies the conspiracy theory that it has subterranean messages (Christian or otherwise). Again, lighten up. It's supposed to be fun. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Naemanson Date: 01 Jun 11 - 02:59 AM This last couple of seasons have The Doctor doing more things in which he manipulates time more than the old Doctors. I enjoyed the Christmas Carol special episode though I had not expected to. I liked the way he kept going back to visit the boy in order to change the old man. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: DMcG Date: 31 May 11 - 10:45 AM Ok, we'll agree to differ on Narnia! Please translate the comment into the equivalent for, say, Cinderella if you feel more comfortable with it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray Date: 31 May 11 - 10:24 AM now's the time to read the book! No way - such thinly veiled Christian propagandising has no place on a Dr Who thread. Kids get Traditional Stories on a level no adult ever could - adults areway too sophisticated to get the immediacy of it, Dr Who likewise. I think Robert Cormier had it about right - when they made the film of The Chocolate War he was forced to rewrite the ending to make it apealing to adults - or at least what adults thought was more suitable to a kids film - but kids faithful to to the novel were justifiably outraged by the untypical up-ending (in every sense). The most disturbing book I ever read (Cormier's stuff notwithstanding) was Diana Wynne-Jones Fire and Hemlock which pitches True Thomas and Tam Lin into a twisted tale of evident evil and imminent adulthood; a kids book, but as an adult I doubt I got the half! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: DMcG Date: 31 May 11 - 08:37 AM I think Doctor Who is a children's show in the same sense that the Narnia stories are for children, or the Alice books, or the majority of the traditional story tales. Namely, it is possible to thoroughly enjoy them at that level, but the (better) stories simultaneously deal with much deeper material that is truly adult. To take Narnia as an example, for a change, in "The Last Battle" there is a paragraph explaining the difference between Aslan and Tash which is so simply written a child can understand it, but is also conceptually very sophisticated. And if you don't know the reference: now's the time to read the book! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Nigel Parsons Date: 31 May 11 - 08:19 AM As for being a children's show. This week's cliffhanger might revise that notion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Naemanson Date: 30 May 11 - 08:04 PM As for the show being a children's show that is a topic of conversation between me and my wife. Her first exposure to The Doctor was Christopher Eccleston. She really enjoys what she's seen so far. One of these days I'm going to buy a few episodes of Tom Baker and see what she thinks of those. Anyway, she doesn't see it as a children's show but as a show for adults and children. I'm not so sure. As for an opinion of Matt Smith as The Doctor I guess I'd have to say I'm disappointed but then I've been disappointed before by actors in that role. Colin Baker and Sylvester McCoy were disappointing. Hell, it was tough making the transition from William Hartnell to Patrick Trughton and Jon Pertwee to Tom Baker. So I'm willing to ride this horse for a while longer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray Date: 30 May 11 - 03:34 PM The new Doctor seems to getting back to basics - all it's needs is a 95% reduction in the budget and replacing the CGI with latex. Still, at least they had the wit not to show the shuttle in last night's episode - nice touch! As was the reference to Tom Baker ('...would you like a jellybaby?') - all this and Marshall Lancaster too, so it's well on track & cracking TV to boot. Good times for TV these days - Nighshift, Shameless, Ideal, Vic Reeves' Rogues Gallery - almost worth the license fee. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: Amergin Date: 30 May 11 - 04:37 AM I have a hard time liking this current Doctor...he's too cartoonish, and wimpy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: DMcG Date: 30 May 11 - 03:07 AM Doctor Who isn't Shakespeare ... Hey people, it's TV entertainment. Lighten up. I believe Shakespeare wrote his plays as entertainment, not as material for school examinations. I don't buy the argument that because something is entertainment it is sufficient to look good and pass the time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Doctor Who From: DrugCrazed Date: 29 May 11 - 07:27 PM I've been less than impressed with this current series. Not as good as the last series, but there were some very enjoyable things. |
