Dr Who News (4)
1 April 2017 at 01:38 #55929
@janetteb there were plenty of hints that Clara was bi
Indeed. Little wisps of stuff — and for the Doctor’s tastes being varied as well (that lightning exchange in HoRS — “Stephen Fry!” “Cleopatra!” “Same thing.” As I recall; plus “I snogged a Zygon, once. You titillate the fritillaries like this — ” more or less). Exactly the kind of thing that fetches sneers and rage from the impatient, bit like the French Revolution of 1789: a few steps forward are posited, and the mob boils over and chops your head off for it because it’s not ENOUGH!1 April 2017 at 03:17 #55930Anonymous @
That was the only problem I had with the way they announced that Bill is gay. They said that she is the first LGBT companion, but even without Clara saying the words “I’m bisexual”, she clearly was if paying attention. I wish that it had been better acknowledged.
I’m still very happy to have found out more about the new companion. It’s sparked some excitement for Season 10.1 April 2017 at 05:28 #55931
@janetteb Yes, that’s a good point — they say Bill is the first “openly” gay character, which strictly speaking is different from “first openly bisexual character” (Captain Jack), or first “openly pan-sexual-but-often-ace character” (the Doctor himself; those Zygon fronds); and Clara could hardly be more “open” about her own sexuality than telling a roomful of school kids that she has reason to know that Jane Austen was great kisser. I guess BBC doesn’t want anybody getting too specific about any of this . . . kids are watching, and many parents get nervous when kids ask uncomfortable questions about sexuality.1 April 2017 at 05:38 #55932
Yes. I think it is just a case of making news out of minor details, to gather interest in the run up to the new series. Bill’s sexuality is not central to the story and more than Clara’s was, and I agree it will be nice to live in a time where a persons choices regarding who they sleep with are not subject to sensationalism which is essentially what this story is. It also smacks a little of the BBC saying, “see how open minded we are”, rather than simply showing it.
Still it is nice to have a reminder that Dr Who is almost here at long, long last and I am really looking forward to seeing how Bill does shape up as a companion. I think she will be refreshingly different to Clara and Amy.
I have been checking the Supermarket shelves for Jammy Dodgers. They stocked them for the last two series. (I am certain it was deliberate. Otherwise it was a hell of a coincidence. Regardless I will probably still make some.)
Janette1 April 2017 at 06:27 #55935
I doubt that you are the only one of us on a count down Janette.
Thank you @ichabod. this could the series to end all series – and THIS time, I shall watch every episode, instead of waiting until I get the DVD. It almost killed me last year.
Missy1 April 2017 at 11:41 #55939Whisht @whisht
Just wanted to say “hi” to the new members, as well as echo Craig’s call that its the PR dept. who made a news item of Bill’s sexuality.
A bit poor from them (bit of a stretch for it to be ‘news’ in this day and age), but clicks and all that.
Also (wrong thread but) great to hear our friends in Aus not too affected by the storm, but still – water is a massive pain so here’s hoping the damage isn’t too bad.1 April 2017 at 12:16 #55940
Moffat has said more than once that no Dr Who material goes out without his say-so (which is why he does not consider trailers to be spoilers), so I very much doubt that the Pearl Mackie interview was done without his approval.1 April 2017 at 21:19 #559442 April 2017 at 02:58 #55948
Ah, you doubt, but you don’t know. it would be a change of tactics if he agreed to this, but then who knows.
There is a column in our Saturday paper which would interest you. @pedant
People email the columnist with complaints about bad English grammar and the misuse of words – such as Issue instead of problem. You would enjoy it I’m sure. I do, because he only says what I’ve been saying for a few years, English is going to pot.
Missy2 April 2017 at 03:29 #55950Anonymous @
I think @pedant writes the article in the first place. 🙂
But in the case of Moffat, from what I know, I also think the interview went with his approval. There’s an article about that somewhere too -I’d link to it but I can’t recall whether it was in the Fin Review or The Melbourne Age.
Puro says the Adelaide papers were good -but not so much now. The Advertiser has a long history of non-conservatism which has been taken over – by the Right unfortunately.
I totally get what you mean though. But, I don’t know the difference between issue and problem? Boy oh boy, better get cracking!! 😀 Seriously. I thought they meant the same thing?
Thane152 April 2017 at 03:35 #55951Anonymous @
good to have you back! I hope you are also looking forward to the end of the month -Who time!
It’s good to see new members swimming back…..
from Thane and Puro2 April 2017 at 04:36 #55953
@Thane15 (made sure I got it right this time.:-) )Don’t mention that filthy rag in my hearing. grrr. I think Murdoch bought it at about the time I moved to S.A. so I have never known it to be a reliable, honest, newspaper.
Words do change meaning through changed usage. Something my S/O and I often argue about. Language is an ever evolving thing and that makes for a fascinating study. At times however the meaning of a word is deliberately corrupted, a favourite tactic of the right. And Thane, I have a honours degree in English and I didn’t know there was a difference in meaning either between issue and problem so don’t feel bad about it. I will have to look it up to.
As @thane15 said, good to see members coming back.
Janette2 April 2017 at 06:16 #55954Anonymous @
Yes I agree, This time last year I would not have known about these papers -Murdoch and Packer and so on. Mum made me watch the 4 Corners on Crown and Packer in China. In all honesty I didn’t know where Macau WAS! Also, even though I didn’t like the Media Studies unit and I KNOW the paper was an A (she gave me a B+ citing “too much detail ” as the reason why I didn’t get an ‘A’) -anyway, I learned about Murdoch. Not from the teacher because they read the Murdoch papers which is awfully sad and sorry but from Mum and others who are Mum’s friends. One is from Adelaide and were school friends together. This lady was also saying how bad the paper now is.
We have the Courier Mail which is basically to wrap fish and chips in according to Mum. I didn’t even know that fish used to be wrapped in old pieces of newspaper. They don’t do that now. It comes on a paper plate and costs like $30 for two people. We never buy it -so expensive. Mum uses the word ‘dear’ except I don’t really understand that. Totally off topic now but I was SO embarrassed as I didn’t know that these two words: Lightening and lightning weren’t the same!! OMG.
Not really Dr Who News now….
I’ll hide quickly 😀2 April 2017 at 12:50 #55956
Let me rephrase: It beggars belief that the interview went out without Moffat’s approval, most likely because he wanted the debate to happen now rather than when the show is on the air. My sceptical tendencies lead me to avoid absolute language, except for ironic effect.
English is not going to pot, and it is beyond silly to claim it is. It is a living language and is in constant flux. There are horrible interjections for PR-speak, but that is just a cost of doing business and to resist this is to be Cnut (except, of course, he knew he couldn’t turn the tide back and was demonstrating this to sycophantic courtiers).
My pet hates are:
- “reached out” as a synonym for “tried to contact”. You only reach out if you are Diana Ross or The Four Tops.
- “begging the question” used to mean “raising the question”. You can look that one up, but the phrase comes from a similar root to “beggars belief”.
Well, that and readers being too lazy to learn the correct pronunciation or Machynlleth.
Not that change is a new thing:2 April 2017 at 14:21 #55958
@pedant the phrase I object to most at the moment is “l like to believe” but not because it is bad English but because it implies that truth is a matter of choice. It is whatever we want it to be.
Until roughly the end of the nineteenth century newspapers weren’t too fussy about spelling. I have found a surname spent three different ways within the same article. Going further back another hundred years or so and the name changed noticeably within a generation. Australia was using U.S. spelling as well which explains why the Labor Party is spelt that way.
However all this is very off topic. I am too tired right now to think of a sneaky way of pulling to conversation back to Who news. I will go and fill in another square on the calendar instead.
Janette2 April 2017 at 22:55 #55959
@thane15 Thank you, that’s very kind of you
@pedant and All
What would Moffat like to debate now? I thought you Britons are open-minded with civil partnerships and gay marriages and you don’t need to discuss such matters beforehand (preparing/warning people (of what?!!!)?. Maybe I’m wrong about that but I listen to the Archers and there’s a lovely gay marriage and last year a new character was introduce, a lesbian lawyer who saved the day and I had the impression that everyone was 100% positive about her. So the fact that they would like to debate Bill’s sexuality now is a bit incomprehensible at least for me. Maybe they want unusual buzz but Power Rangers was first.3 April 2017 at 00:38 #55960
You underestimate the ability and willingness of the tabloid press to stir up trouble, on any pretext, for the BBC. Moffat has spiked their guns.5 April 2017 at 17:12 #55974Daniella Robin @daniero
Really excited about this!5 April 2017 at 22:09 #55980Mudlark @mudlark
Steven Moffat’s response to the fuss about Bill’s sexuality, with applause from me.6 April 2017 at 03:32 #55982
@mudlark A good response from Moffat. I forgot Vastra and Jenny in my post earlier. How could I! Two of my favourite characters. I do wish there was a Paternoster Gang spin off in the works.
Janette6 April 2017 at 11:13 #55983
re: Bill, I suppose the difference was that Clara’s sexuality was more of a nudge when it came to women- we only saw her romantically/sexually interested in men. Jack was, well, Pansexual, but again it was mostly nudging before Tourchwood, the most serious it got was, I think, in Ten’s goodbye tour where Ten seemed to set him up with Russel Tovey’s character. (I might be misremembering, I was swiftly becoming thoroughly resigned to Ten leaving simply by the length of time he took to say goodbye).
And Vastra and Jenny was arguably (well, I’ve seen it argued) more controversial for involving difference species than for involving the same sex (though as I always say, a sentient humanoid doesn’t make it bestiality). But a lot of people piled on the relationship, calling it bestiality (I was never sure if it was the Lizard or the Ape descendent being called a beast. Jenny didn’t see live dinosaurs growing up). Or calling it abusive. or calling it contemporary political because they were married. Anyway, it contained two newish-unusual things: gay marriage and crossing species (I did say ish).
So I suppose a full time gay companion is a little different, and maybe a little more representative? And built up a little too much, I keep seeing posts on facebook about how it shouldn’t be a big deal, with streams of comments stating irritatingly ‘it isn’t, so why are you still banging on about it’. But that might be about the kinds of pages I follow. I’m sure people are offended.6 April 2017 at 11:41 #559856 April 2017 at 11:41 #55986
You and pedant are probably right, about Moffat and his permission.
@pedant: I repeat, the English language is going to pot. Of course it must change, of course it will evolve, but not into another country’s language.
” Stomped” instead of ‘stamped,’ ‘yard” instead of ‘garden,’ ‘get go’ instead of ‘from now on.’ As for pronunciation,
I’m sick of hearing the word ‘harassed’ pronounced ‘HArassed’ when it should be ‘harassed’ without any emphasis.
The word ‘issue’ could also be subject, topic or affair – not problem except in rare cases. The word ‘problem’ is exactly as it says, a problem not an issue. This was brought up in the column I spoke of.
One more and I’ll shut up. ‘Addressed /address. “This problem will be addressed.” it could actually be ‘dealt with!’
Perhaps these words make the speaker feel clever.
End of rant.
Missy6 April 2017 at 11:48 #55987
P.s As for Bill’s sexuality, who really cares?
There is far too much emphasis put on Gay and Straight nowadays.
Live and let live say I.
Missy6 April 2017 at 12:19 #55989
All. A correction and my apologies. What I should have said was: “from the get go” instead of “from the start/beginning,” and “from here on in” instead of “from now on.”
Missy6 April 2017 at 12:29 #55990
@Missy- for the English language to evolve not into another countries language… isn’t that how English has always evolved? I see the English language as a kind of carnivorous blob, absorbing words and structures from everything it touches.
I don’t know if it’s just me, but to me a ‘garden’ is the space attached to the house with some kind of lawn, and a yard is short for courtyard, enclosed with walls and paved.
I’d fight to the death with someone over the insistence on pronouncing ‘memo’ ‘mee-moe’ rather than the first syllable of ‘Memorandum’, but as a rule I find it best to stay out of pronunciation wars, I’ve lived in South East London, Bath, Manchester and North Wales, and generally, I’ve been the one who speaks oddly.6 April 2017 at 13:50 #55991
The fuss is not about Bill’s sexuality but about announcing it now. I can accept that it’s a PR move althoug I don’t like it. Sexuality shouldn’t be discuss as something sensational. And as the announcent has become a kind of sensation I feel it took some power of the fact that Bill is gay. I think it shouldn’t be announced but showed when it’s time as completely natural. That would be a real statement. But it’s only my view. And I will never believe that Moffat is afraid of the Sun or Daily Mirror or people who share their views.6 April 2017 at 14:21 #55992
@missy one that annoys me most at the moment is Math. The word is short for Mathematics. there is supposed to be an s on the end. (At least P.C. got it right) It really annoys me when my boys use Americanisms but that is not about the degrading of language but cultural imperialism. Yard is an Australian term or at least a term used in Australia for a long time probably because back before the goat house trend, (houses built so close together a goat could jump from roof to roof, something my sons thought up) people did have yards with a bit of garden and lawn and space. Pronunciations vary so much though. My sons and other often correct me because I grew up in Victoria and though I have lived in S.A. for many years I still often revert to Victorian pronunciations. Not incorrect, just different.
But I am of topic again. Back to topic. Only a week to go. (plus a day or two depending.) Still no sign of Jammy Dodgers in our supermarket so looks like I have no choice but to try and make them this year, so, what with Easter and birthdays “an’ all” it looks like a busy time ahead cooking. (not my favourite occupation)
Janette6 April 2017 at 14:23 #55993
Nobody here would dispute this statement:
Sexuality shouldn’t be discuss as something sensational.
In fact that is exactly what Moffat said.
But he knows the British tabloids and their willingness to use any stick to beat the BBC with. It is not just The Sun or The Mirror, but the Daily Mail, one of the most hateful publications around. Its willingness to use any pretext to stir it up is long established, and forcing he issue now makes it harder for them to wield effectively it when the show is on the air (one thing tabs hate is stale news).6 April 2017 at 15:03 #55995
@pedant I have your point and I agree with Moffat although the announcement itself contradicts his words but if it’s because the press is so vile so be it.7 April 2017 at 03:21 #56006Anonymous @
I’m sick of hearing the word ‘harassed’ pronounced ‘HArassed’ when it should be ‘harassed’ without any emphasis.
Puro here. Yeah, drug free @pedant but not for bloody long.
Missy: I’ve known a lot of Americans in my time. Not many are dumb and most are articulate. Your “HArassed” is pronunciation -not a case where the devil’s in the detail but where the devil’s distracting you from something important. This isn’t misuse or “abuse” of language. Examples such as “less than” and “fewer” would fit in that category. The highly educated members (in linguistics) might point to the nuance of a quiet ‘h’ rather than the g’stop of “HArassed.”
@janetteb “math” compared to “maths” ? A problem? I suspect not 🙂 -in my opinion, but I get where you’re “coming from” -thing is, now, every single colloquialism I’ve typed could be ransacked for “really totally bad grammar” or “just annoying misrepresentations” 🙂
@missy perhaps we can be “sick” about something else! Let’s be happy instead 🙂 -head outside and check out Brian Cox and the stars: those are the details…. I do, however, share your concern about the misuse of language and yet I must conclude language -just like music -evolves. I found this out recording language and music 25 years ago in Indonesia. Listening to those (almost) alien sounds now it’s wonderful to hear linguistic variation and trends- historically; peripatetically.
More things bind us than separate. I think there’s a perfect example of that right here where Canadians, Ozzies, Americans, and the “entire” UK congregate. On balance, we’re doing good. 😉
Puro.9 April 2017 at 04:38 #56031
Janette: Thank you for that. I get so angry and should not take it out on you good people. I agree about Math -s.
All. Just these few lines, and then I shall shut up and concentrate on the Doctor.
A yard is not covered in grass, and paddocks are for livestock not wheat or corn.
Puro. The peace keeper *big smile coming your way.* Being keen to a fault, I always look up pronunciations of words in The Oxford Concise Dictionary, and the word harassed is constantly mispronounced. My question is, why can’t people simply get it right? It isn’t hard.
I didn’t want to offend our American friends. They have their own way of speaking, but we don’t have to copy it. Was that offensive?
This chap Zoltan Kovacs, writes for the Weekend West, calling himself Bill Stickler of the SOP. Society of Pedants.
Over the many months, he has written about readers who write to him complaining about our language being ruined, mostly by bad grammar. So far, every word, phrase or pronunciation tally with my complaints. it’s made our children sit up and take notice, realising that “it isn’t just mum!”
Missy9 April 2017 at 05:01 #56034
I do disagree with you re’ pronunciations though there are plenty of common mispronunciations which make me cringe too. If we all spoke in accordance with the recommendations of the Oxford Dictionary there would be no regional variation, no dialects. That is exactly the kind of cultural hegemony that concerns me. It isn’t “correctness” that in my opinion is the problem but the imposition of one way of speaking and thinking on others. So a scone rhyming with Don can be a scone rhyming with moan, if you please just as there is no rule as to whether the jam or cream goes on first. Oh damn. Now I feel the urge to go off and make a batch of scones or dig up that particular episode of Goodies.
And back to Dr Who News, of which there is not nearly enough at present. Only one week to go. I am so impatient. I can’t wait. Still now news about who will direct the Christmas Special I see. I am still hoping Peter Jackson will direct Moffat’s last story. If so I expect there will be an announcement soon to tie in with the series start so it is looking less and less likely by the day.
Janette9 April 2017 at 05:27 #56036
Janette: Did you have to mention scones? *begins dribbling*
As for our Doctor -and I must investigate further – a pilot is to be shown at the cinema on the 15th? Naturally (or perhaps not) I began to panic. Surely they aren’t going to do to us what they did with Sherlock and not show series 10 on TV?
Missy10 April 2017 at 10:29 #56060
Very odd. Last night we watched a programme I’d recorded on the ABC (channel two) and to my surprise they showed clips from series 10 I hadn’t seen before. The odd thing was that they ended with these words: ‘
Sunday 16th on ABC and iveiw at 7.40pm?
When I checked the ABC programme lists for that date, it wasn’t there?
Missy10 April 2017 at 19:10 #56064
@missy They should be airing “The Pilot” (the Series 10 premiere) on TV where you live if I’m not mistaken. Thing is, in the last few years it’s been common to also have special one or two-night movie theater screenings of “event” episodes of Who, usually a few days after the television broadcast premiere.
This goes back to the international theatrical screenings of a 3D version of “The Day of the Doctor” in 2013. Since then, here in the U.S. there have been screenings of “Deep Breath”, a 3D version of “Dark Water”/”Death in Heaven” that also included the public debut of the “Doctor’s Meditation” short, “The Husbands of River Song”, a movie edit of the “Power of the Daleks” reconstruction, and “The Return of Doctor Mysterio”. Apparently these screenings are rather popular, so they’re doing it again with this season premiere.10 April 2017 at 19:52 #56066
Just found out about this — at least in the U.S., the cinema screenings of “The Pilot” (April 17 and 19) are actually a double-bill with the first episode of Class!
Also, in related news — I don’t know if I’m the only Whovian here who also loves Mystery Science Theater 3000, but even as that show is about to get a revival on Netflix, the spiritual successor series Rifftrax (which features several performers from the original MST3K) has announced that they will be poking fun at “The Five Doctors” in a live show that will be streamed to U.S. movie theaters August 17.
Anyone interested in these shows (I have attended several of them and they are great fun) should check out http://www.fathomevents.com, which handles all of them.11 April 2017 at 05:25 #56081
@missrori Yup, we’ve got screenings next Saturday night and the following Wednesday evening, at a theater near me (and one on the other side of the river). Local Whovians make it a bit of a party, these occasions; and — very soon now — off we go!11 April 2017 at 16:43 #56100
@ichabod Lucky you! I know there are other people who enjoy Who in my neck of the woods, but we’re not organized, and not all of the Fathom Events screenings make it to my area. As I recall we got the 3D Series 8 finale and “The Power of the Daleks”, but not Twelve’s most recent Xmas specials. It does look like the Series 10 premiere/Class double feature is coming to a neighboring town next week, though, and they’ll definitely get the Rifftrax “Five Doctors” special in August.16 April 2017 at 05:30 #56243
With luck, the Pilot will be on the series 10 Box Set.
Did any of you remember that Peter Capaldi turned 59 on the 14th? Shame on us! I didn’t remember until this morning.
HAPPY BELATED BIRTHDAY PETER.
Also – and thank the gods – Kris Marshall is taking on the role of the Eleventh Doctor, all is confirmed. Somewhere on this forum, I mentioned that this actor would be great as the Doctor – him or Ben Miller. My gawd, I can pick them. *big, big grin*
Looking forward to tonight.
Missy16 April 2017 at 05:39 #56245
ALL: Whoops! That should read the THIRTEENTH Doctor. *rolls eyes and tells self to calm down*
Missy16 April 2017 at 06:25 #56246Conchobarre @conchobarre
Big news! And I heard it first from you Missy.
I don’t know how I feel about it… If it has to be another white man, at least they could have given me a pretty boy. A Doctor Who Youtube clip had me convinced it was going to be Tom Ellis. Now that would have put a smile on my dial.
I’m also a bit sad to not have Capaldi in the next Christmas special.
Happy belated birthday Peter for the 14th.16 April 2017 at 07:01 #56247Anonymous @16 April 2017 at 07:19 #56249Conchobarre @conchobarre
Yes yes. I’ve been manically trying to find an authoritative version of this news but it’s only the British tabloids from what I can tell and they didn’t say it was confirmed.
Phew. Deep breaths. It’s ok. The more I thought about it the more I disliked the idea. The actor needs to be able to portray great age and having looked upon the untempered schism and existed with the time vortex inside him. Know what I’m saying?
Still, the odds of it being Kris Marshall have just risen dramatically.16 April 2017 at 09:36 #56255Anonymous @
Ach, no worries! I actually like him -he has old eyes! But still, who nose, hey? 🙂16 April 2017 at 10:37 #56257
I really, really want it to be Stephen Mangan, if we’re sticking with white male.
But then again, I might not want a Doctor I have a weird crush on.
I’ve only seen Kris in My Family, which is an awful sitcom. If we’re having a sitcom actor, why not Richard Coyle? Did anyone here watch Strange?
Doesn’t matter, not happened yet. I loved Smith, I’m loving Capaldi. Actors can surprise us (Jenna was from Emmerdale after all) and if I don’t like the next incarnation, I’ve had a really good run!So whatever happens, I’ll try not to see my ARSE…16 April 2017 at 10:53 #56259JimTheFish @jimthefishTime Lord
The Marshall stories seem to originate from The Mirror who seem to adding up 2 and 2 to make 5, not for the first time. It could well be right but I’m really hoping it’s not. I’m sure he’d be fine but it strikes me as an extremely pedestrian choice, for the first time in the reboot’s history. I would have liked to have seen a bit more risk-taking.
Coupled with the fact that Broadchurch 3 hasn’t inspired me with any more confidence in Chibnall’s show-running, I’m increasingly expecting an approaching age of extremely vanilla Who. Perfectly willing to be proved wrong though.16 April 2017 at 14:37 #56264
Had a thought re’ speculation that PC is regenerating before the Christmas Special. It is possible he might regenerate but still appear in the Christmas Special as I believe I have read that he will remain until the end of the year but plans of course might change. However my thought was that by some Timey Wimey, Moffaty trickery he might regenerate before the Christmas Special but still be the Doctor for the Christmas special. (no small degree of wishful thinking involved there at all..)
Janette16 April 2017 at 14:45 #56265nikmlnkr @nikmlnkr
Here’s an interesting post I came up recently where Peter Capaldi explains why he’s leaving Doctor Who: http://tellmenothing.com/2017/04/15/peter-capaldi-explains-leaving-doctor/16 April 2017 at 16:32 #56269Mudlark @mudlark
by some Timey Wimey, Moffaty trickery he might regenerate before the Christmas Special but still be the Doctor for the Christmas special
That possibility had crossed my mind, also, but as you say it may be wishful thinking.
Now I’m off to for a second viewing of The Pilot, in order to savour the details and all the little Easter eggs at leisure(whilst possibly munching a few pieces of chocolate from mine).
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.