Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
25 January 2014 at 10:27 #24625
No, not badly directed, but, in my opinion, rather poorly directed by an otherwise good director, who had done some exceptional work. You only have to compare the way he directed “A Night to Remember”, which is a film of tremendous emotional impact, or “The October Man”, shot on a small budget, but which captures a sense of paranoia extremely effectively. By comparison, his “Quatermass” film is strangely “flat” in my opinion, with too many exposition shots of characters walking, of vehicles arriving, yet many scenes that called for a quiet, dramatic tension are rushed. Personally, I found the style of filming more expressive of late 60s TV than of cinema.
But, as I say, that is simply my opinion. Why did you feel it worked better than the 50s TV production?
24 January 2014 at 23:55 #24615Fantastic. Please do it.
24 January 2014 at 21:59 #24610Damn! I meant, of course, Andre Morell.
How embarrassing.
And @bluesqueakpip, I do encourage you to write about Quatermass. I can guarantee you would have a dedicated readership of one (and I am sure many more).
24 January 2014 at 21:37 #24608I only just caught up with your reference to Quatermass and the Pit. Please, please, do go through the episodes. That is one of my very favourite shows. It managed to capture a real sense of…evil. And through its references to the race riots of 1950s London, it made a powerful social statement as well. Andrew Morell was perfect as Quatermass…possessing a civilised gravitas that was essential to Quatermass, with a world-weary contempt for military and political gamesmanship. Anthony Bushell as the slightly unhinged Colonel Breen was excellent, as was Christine Finn as Barbara Judd, working as a scientific equal (which was, in itself, fairly advanced for 1950s TV). Perhaps only Cec Linder as Matthew Roney did not quite capture the right note, but even then, the company of actors worked together tremendously well.
It was truly haunting and powerful at an emotional level that allowed (and still allows) you to look beyond the small budget. By comparison, I have never really taken to the 1967 movie directed (I think rather poorly) by an otherwise good director (Roy Ward Baker). Yes, it had a bigger budget, better effects and colour, but it lost the sense of emotional dread and the social commentary on race, that the TV version had. In a funny sort of way, I would compare the TV version and the movie version with the Hartnell TV version of Doctor Who’s “The Dalek Invasion of Earth” (lacking colour and effects but full of a haunting power) and the Cushing movie version (with colour, a budget and effects, but with none of haunting power of the original TV story).
22 January 2014 at 14:21 #24546Ooo…Sontaran Battle Pod…must have!
19 January 2014 at 21:38 #24449For a long time I was attracted to the idea of Clara as the daughter of River and the Doctor. Does this mean I am attracted to soaps? I don’t think I am. However, given my fond memory of “A Family at War” (what a great show) I probably am! Anyway, given everything that has happened on the show since Clara first apppeared, I am reluctantly abandoning that idea of her being their daughter. (Of course, given my track record of unsuccessful predictions, by abandoning the idea, it probably means she IS their daughter after all!)
Nonetheless, until I am convinced otherwise, that scene by the cot still implies to me that the Doctor and River did have a child. And that the story of River is not over yet.
18 January 2014 at 16:15 #24378What perfect timing! You have provided the coherent thoughts (to the same end I was hinting at) that I was lacking. I can now concentrate on the mulled wine front and centre!
18 January 2014 at 16:07 #24375As other others have commented, that is some theory!
While I am attracted to the way it hangs together, I have a lingering hesitiation, based on one thing–the way Moffat writes. I tend to think Moffat references himself first and foremost. While he may draw on the ideas of other writers, he tends, I think to use those ideas to his own ends first, and is less concenred with respecting the original intentions of previous writers. This is what I think he does with The Moment, Bad Wolf and even with the Time War itself. As for the crack in the universe, well, this is Moffat’s own and I tend to think everything else is subservient to that.
As I read your theory, it involves incorporating the ideas of other, pre-Moffat, writers into an explanation of how the crack in the universe operates. I just do not get the sense that this is the way Moffat thinks.
Yes, I need to be more specific, and I have inchoate thoughts on how the Weeping Angels and Rory (on different occasions) are sucked into the crack and cease to exist, and on how the representation of the Papal Mainframe and the clerics changes over time, but the cold means my brain is not firing on all cylinders yet. Perhaps after some mulled wine in front of the fire I will be back with more coherent thoughts.
But most of all, @barnable, it is brilliant to see some hard-core bonkers theorising back on the board!
14 January 2014 at 17:23 #24301Viewing it from a storytelling perspective, Clara asks the time lords to help and then they do. So this implies that they helped because she asked.
Granted. But while Clara’s plea does have a rather Tinkerbell air about it that is designed to appeal to the Linda Lee in us all, it doesn’t really feel right in terms of what we already know about the Time Lords. Let’s face it, they are just not that nice!
I guess they’re just lucky he wasn’t instantly killed at some point in those 300 years, in some scrimmage against a Cyberman!
Well, that is one of the many benefits of being fictional!
Even more possible, it seems to me, is that the Master could sneak through somehow.
Yes, agree entirely. And agree about a slightly quieter, wittier relationship between the two. I never really embraced the manic screaming of John Simm. Or the “Snidely Whiplash” of Anthony Ainley. But I do have fond memories of the smoothly cultured evil of Roger Delgardo. Who could provide a good foil for Peter Capaldi? Perhaps Bill Nighy? or Charles Dance?
14 January 2014 at 14:40 #24294More thoughts on the crack in the universe.
It still exists, so it is highly likely it will feature in S8. If the Time Lords can see through the crack and send regenerations through the crack, what else might they be able to send through?
I think we can safely assume they cannot send all of Gallifrey through, but might it be possible to send one Time Lord through? If so, who? OK, now this is bonkers speculation, but, a steely, slightly fierce Doctor like the Capaldi Doctor might be up for an ongoing battle of wits with…the Master.
Yes, probably just wishful thinking on my part, but still…
13 January 2014 at 22:43 #24280@bluesqueakpip, @arbutus, @nick
I may be missing something quite obvious, but if Clara could communicate to the Time Lords through the crack, and if the Timelords could send the regenerations through the crack, then can we not also assume that the Time Lords have always been able to see through the crack? If so, then can we not assume that they are well aware of the Doctor’s approaching mortality, and decide to award him the regenerations when it suits them–that is, after he has spent 300 years defending the town of Christmas, and before he dies.
While Clara’s plea (“If you love him…”) might have a Tinkerbell ring to it, It might be because it now suits them to do so.
13 January 2014 at 15:19 #24266Like you, I am not sure if discussion of the Master should be here in Spoilers or not, but: who would make a good Master to Capaldi’s Doctor? Particularly since we are being primed to expect a Doctor with a bit of fire and ice. I suspect that Cumberbatch is too busy with Hollywood, but who knows?
If we go with another actor from the Moffat/Gattis troupe, what about Andrew Scott? He could certainly hold his own against Capaldi.
10 January 2014 at 20:50 #24193it takes a tragedy of mammoth proportions to get Canada into the American news
Oh, that one’s too easy!
(clue: I live in Toronto)
10 January 2014 at 20:30 #24190The flags are at half-mast across the country today.
Fortunately, the blenkinsop cellar is secure.
9 January 2014 at 20:03 #24125Have I missed much?
The real question should be: have we missed you? And the answer is a resounding YES! Welcome back from the fog of a pre-internet age.
Of course, there is stuff for you to catch up on: lots of interesting new blogs, lots of new lurkers-who-became-posters, and lots of Who stuff from around the web courtesy of @wolfweed
9 January 2014 at 13:50 #24114Would have responded earlier, but have been travelling throught the polar vortex that is eastern Canada (no Ice Warriors or Yeti spotted).
Yes, I do hope there is the possibility of a return for River. Admittedly, she was written by Moffat as part of 11’s story, and so there is a logic to the minisode of Night and the Doctor, but Moffat is always careful to never close a door entirely, so who knows?
But I do hope that the cot will make a return. It promised so much. And for it to return, surely River must return?
Of course, I have also been hoping for a return of Canton, to no avail!
3 January 2014 at 23:11 #23894I am sure you are right about the ways social media, and the media generally these days, encourages or exacerbates the type of bad behaviour that we are talking about, but to take this site as an example, it came about precisely because there was a core of us who contributed to the G talkback who craved civility and wit, and…friendly enthusiasm. The posting format did not turn us into trolls, we consciously resisted that. Why? Because of who were in the first place, I suspect. In terms of the old nature/nurture divide I wonder if media outlets like the G (and a host of others) really turn people into mean-spirited gits, or if mean-spirited gits, along with people who have always craved civility and tolerance, go to those sites because that is all there is for them? We set up an alternative–where civility was encouraged and ad hominem attacks were rigorously policed by our wonderful Time Lords. Now that there is an alternative, we are discovering lots of lurkers who realise that this site reflects the values they already admire–civility and tolerance, and humour (usually self-deprecating).
But it is way past time for the screw top to be removed from the bottle of shiraz here in Canada. It is probably bed-time in the UK. Sleep well, my friend and we shall continue to share our enthusiasm for all things Who (including the Colin Baker years!) on the morrow.
3 January 2014 at 21:57 #23890@phaseshift, @thommck, @jimthefish, @cathannabel, @scaryb
I have really tried, when commenting while on the web, to make a point of avoiding making critical comments on those drongos who engage in ad hominen attacks (whoops, I have already broken the pledge!), but the current culture of incivility and “tall poppy” envy-fuelled hate (agree entirely on that point) on the web, is, I confess, starting to get to me in my weaker moments.
I am sure there are sound sociological reasons for it, to do with the nature of social media in a mass society, or…
perhaps we are just dealing with lots and lots of horrible mean-spirited gits who have “sh*t on the liver” as my old gran used to say. God, she had the gift of the gab!
ok, with that off my chest, back to being blenkinsop.
3 January 2014 at 17:23 #23861Not only have I given up commenting–any attempt to inject civility into the G blogs is hopeless, I now believe; but I have given up reading the comments–there is only so much bile one can stomach.
3 January 2014 at 14:47 #23848Welcome@PurpleCup!
What excellent points!
I recall that River said she had seen all of his faces (up to 11, or beyond?) and I keep remembering the line about him turning up with a new haircut and a new suit (or words to that effect). I think it is left open that River could have inhabited all of the Doctor’s timeline, for the whole 50 years of the show (and beyond). For me, the biggest challenge has always been to try and see River beyond a linear timeframe–ie, how can the actress age, but River not, or, alternatively, how can River appear older out of linear sequence? One of the many limitations of the blenkinsop brain.
As for the cot, I have long believed that River and the Doctor had a child, the only two questions are: which Doctor and which child.
The other point that needs to be explained is that River has some Time Lord attributes (ability to regenerate) but does not seem to be affected by the problem of crossing timelines. While that is always presented as a problem for the Doctor, it never seems to be an issue for River. Wiser minds (such as yours, @purplecup!) may have the answer to that, and much more.
2 January 2014 at 00:02 #23798Thanks for that. I read the explanation(s) on the Guardian (but avoided the comments). Sounds like a hoot. Will be waiting (im)patiently for the DVD.
1 January 2014 at 20:35 #23790Alas, iPlayer Global (which I now have) is not the same as what can be seen on the BBC site if you reside in the UK (international rights issues). So it is a matter of waiting for the DVD.
Needless to say, I will have to know and so will read all about it on the Guardian (cannot resist) and then will probably be confronted with the usual Guardian commentators telling us how Moffat has ruined another British cultural tradition, etc, etc.
1 January 2014 at 19:20 #23786I’m now rewatching the last episode of Sherlock Reichenbach Fall prior to tonights return. Anyone got any clever theories?
I thought you would never ask.
1. There were the obvious hints dropped (via stories in newspapers read in other episodes about renovation work being done on St Barts). Admittedly, Gattis stated in the DVD commentary to the last season that this was an early idea that was dropped, but I hold out hope, nonetheless, that it may link to:
2. there were TWO jumps. One was Sherlock jumping into prepared scaffolding out of Watson’s (and assassin’s) line of sight, and one was replacement body (courtesy of Molly) that was body which hit the ground, which connects to:
3. cyclist was designed to disorient Watson, so that he did not realise body was not Holmes.
Alternatively:
1. Holmes jumps into truck filled with padding, and replacement body (courtesy of Molly again) is dumped on street. Truck drives off. Everyone on street is in on it (courtesy of Mycroft, who has already demonstrated he can fill a jumbo jet with dead bodies).
Alternatively:
blenkinsop has cup of tea to calm down, only to realise that because of the “Canada problem” he will not get to see what happens, and goes into complete funk.
31 December 2013 at 13:23 #23703@craig and everybody
Happy birthday!
I wonder if the anniversay of our little home should be celebrated by a slight change to the language? I propose that “bonker” be reclassified as a verb; as in describing the act of coming up with theories more insane than what’s actually happening as…”to bonker”.
In that spirit, let’s all bonker on into 2014!
28 December 2013 at 16:58 #23530Love the photo! It certainly gets my vote for the image to celebrate for out first birthday.
Wow. A year…
I can think of someone who really deserves a birthday present for that date… @craig, without whom none of us would have had a year of bonkers theorising in this wonderfully warm bath.
28 December 2013 at 01:22 #23501@craig, @phaseshift, @jimthefish, @fatmaninabox
Dear Time Lords, I know you are out there, behind the crack in the universe.
I wonder if it would be possible to change the image of Matt Smith, now that he has gone?
Since it may be too early to feature Capaldi, and since the show (and our discussion) is about all the Doctors, would there be a great image out there of all the Doctors?
Just a thought (from this side of the crack in the universe).
26 December 2013 at 19:12 #23416Both the scene with Clara coping with her relatives at Christmas dinner, and your story of watching it with the mother-in-law are both perfect examples of why, if given the choice between spending Christmas Day with the family or Christmas Day with the Doctor, one should always choose the Doctor!
26 December 2013 at 19:00 #23415A day late, but just finished watching it on the iPad. Watery eyes from both Mrs Blenkinsop and me.
It was lovely.
I think a big reason why it wasn’t as appreciated by some, is that, unlike so much that had gone before with Matt’s Doctor, this was a very adult and mature reflection on aging, death and dying, and what it means to lose a loved one.
Moffat also managed to tie up so much from the start of Matt’s tenure, and the granting of the new regenerations was done brilliantly, precisely because it was done so economically. You did not need to see the Time Lords. It was enough to know they were there.
Loved it.
23 December 2013 at 14:22 #23285The holiday season preparations at the Blenkinsop household proceed. Suitable viewing material for the coming days has been arranged, and the Blenkinsop cellar will be replenished later today. My principal concern is not whether Matt Smith is Doctor 11, 12, or 13, but whether the Tardis-themed Christmas present for Mrs Blenkinsop arrives in the mail in time.
Merry Christmas, all my fellow Enthusiasts (including those absent, but still missed).
23 December 2013 at 03:09 #23257I don’t see how the Time Lords can grant the Doctor a new cycle of regenerations when they are still trapped in the cup-o-soup. Wouldn’t he have to rescue them first?
Well, I didn’t say it would be easy!
However, let us suppose that the actions of the three Doctors in the 50th caused…the crack in the universe, that has been felt since the 11th Hour (in a timey-wimey way) and that the Time Lords are (have been) on the other side of that crack ever since the 11th Hour. They may well be in a cup-o-soup waiting to be discovered, but they may also be able to communicate through the crack.
Also, remember back to The Doctor’s Wife when the Tardis left the universe, and the Doctor sensed Time Lords…lots of Time Lords?
I think there might be ways. Moffat is, after all, the master of timey-wimey.
22 December 2013 at 23:17 #23250Does this mean I cannot include Peter Cushing, Rowan Atkinson, Richard E. Grant, Hugh Grant, Jim Broadbent, and Joanna Lumley?
And let’s not forget the guy who was the robot version of the Doctor built by the Daleks in “The Chase”!
Yes, I confess…now I am being silly.
22 December 2013 at 19:29 #23238Gallifrey is now a fairy-tale kingdom frozen in time, waiting for the Doctor/’prince’ to fight his way through and reawaken it.
That is a lovely way of expressing it. And yes, I think that is precisely what season 8, 9, 10, etc, will be.
I also agree with @phaseshift that the Time Lords won’t grant The Doctor a new set of regenerations because of their generosity. Rather, (and here I think the theories of @phaseshift and @bluesqueakpip can be reconciled) they might well grant him a new set of regenerations because of their self-interest. They need The Doctor, as he is the only one who can re-awaken their fairy-tale kingdom.
I am reminded of that other fabulous show from 1963, Jason and the Argonauts, where the gods on Olympus grant Jason powers, so that he can achieve their ends. They are ultimately selfish and capricious, allowing some to live and some to die, but, as Zeus says at one point, they, as gods, will only live as long as there are those out there who believe in them, So they intervene occasionally in order to keep the beliefs of mortals alive. But the motive is self-interest.
Similarly, the Time Lords might well grant the Doctor (and I agree with @phaseshift …the 13th Doctor) more regenerations in order that he can live to ensure that they might live.
Hmm. Might well be time to stick Jason and the Argonauts into the DVD player on this cold Sunday afternoon. A star turn by Patrick Troughton as the sinner condemned by the gods to be harassed by harpies, and some really excellent duelling skeletons!
22 December 2013 at 13:12 #23230Well, on the one hand, to me, at least, River just feels right as the mystery ghost.
But, as I have said before, I have an unbroken record of getting my predictions wrong!
If it was a previous Doctor, it would have to have real meaning (and, at the same time, the appearance should not upstage Matt Smith’s farewell, but complement it in some way. So…while David Bradley as the Hartnell Doctor is a nice idea, it is still another actor portraying an iconic figure. But…it might (with the aid of CGI) be William Hartnell himself who appears. That would be kind of cool.
21 December 2013 at 22:21 #23222I wouldn’t have thought it would be Bradley. Not sure it would have the same resonance as it did in AAiSaT.
I think the word “legend” is just journalist hyperbole, and would go by “fan favourite”. And it has to be a character that means something to Matt Smith’s Doctor alone. And who makes a “ghostly” appearance.
Ergo…River.
21 December 2013 at 21:43 #23220I think it is all part of the BBC marketing division’s brief, actually.
But assuming it is accurate, my guess would be River.
21 December 2013 at 21:09 #23215If true, there are all sorts of possibilities.
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/showbiz-tv/hot-tv/356783/Dr-Who-Mystery-favourite-in-Xmas-plot
but to me, one seems more obvious than the rest.
If this is true…
21 December 2013 at 17:26 #23211Now that I think about, perhaps the perfect entry point for the show was the TV movie, Babylon 5: In the Beginning made near the end of the run. I haven’t seen it in years, though, and am not sure how hard it is to get. In fact, I may have had a long-lost VHS copy. If so, I must rectify this omission immediately!
21 December 2013 at 15:56 #23208In @janetteb‘s absence, a couple of suggestions for Babylon 5 (a real guilty pleasure!) would be the arc episodes “The Coming of Shadows” from season 2, and (among many from the excellent season 3) “Point of No Return”, “Severed Dreams” (both about the conflict with an increasingly fascist government on Earth), and “Shadow Dancing” and “Z’hadum” (which brought the season 3 to a spectacular season end). As I said, a real guilty pleasure.
But for a wonderfully whimsical experience, nothing (as pointed out by @jimthefish and @wolfweed) can compare to The Flipside of Dominic Hyde
21 December 2013 at 12:12 #23197Many thanks @craig. (and for the heads up on iPlayer Global!)
20 December 2013 at 20:03 #2317820 December 2013 at 18:55 #23166Unfortunately, the Strax video does not seem to be able to screen outside of the UK….
<shakes fist> The British Empire is screwed over once again!!
18 December 2013 at 15:54 #23064Christmas viewing (aside from Doctor Who):
Over in Doctor Who News the wonderful @wolfweed posted a link to Mark Gatiss’s directorial debut at 9.30pm. It is an adaptation of the ghost story “The Tractate Middoth” by M.R. James. It is followed by a documentary on James, hosted by Gatiss.
As many of you know, the is something of a Christmas tradition of screening adaptations of James’s ghost stories. Indeed, the 2010 adaptation of “Whistle and I’ll Come to You”, staring John Hurt, was one of the creepiest ghost stories I have ever seen.
For those of you who don’t know the work of M.R. James, he was an English scholar whose ghost stories are brilliant and should be required reading.
I know you will all be online after the screening of Matt Smith’s farewell performance, but I strongly encourage everyone to tune in to “The Tractate Middoth” at 9.30. But be sure to put the kiddies to bed and turn the lights down low when you watch it. You may very well end up watching it from behind the sofa.
Typically, I, on the other hand (lost in the wilds of Canada) will have to wait for the DVD of everything you get to see that night!
18 December 2013 at 10:59 #23044@MartyB
There are always rumours out there, which may, or may not, be true.
I think it best to be cruel to be kind and not say anything!
Only 7 days left. Be of stout heart.
And don’t take it out on the cat!
18 December 2013 at 03:11 #23018Somehow or other, there has to be a reference to the sonic in the skeleton’s hand. @pedant said something about that. Damned if I can remember.
18 December 2013 at 01:48 #23015I knew that my Kennedy assassination theory was correct…deny it as you may…
16 December 2013 at 17:46 #22907Just watched “The Five(ish) Doctors Reboot” again.
Astoundingly excellent.
Perhaps my favourite gag (among so many) was:
“Hold on, why are we doing this?”
Peter: “For the fans.”
Colin: “Of course. For the fans.”
Sylvester: “Right. For the fan.”
16 December 2013 at 14:19 #2289416 December 2013 at 13:29 #22891@wolfweed (or anyone else who might know)
The Five(ish) Doctors (which I have not been able to see yet).
Is this publically accessible yet? I am suffering the same “Canadian” problem again.
15 December 2013 at 21:55 #22862I agree that there are hints that the Doctor is more important to Time Lord society than we know. In “Remembrance of the Daleks” he lets slip that he, along with Rassilon and Omega, created the Hand of Omega. That alone makes him rather special.
How this relates to the regeneration limit, though, I am not sure. Moffat has said (if we believe him!) that the limit is canon and must be respected. So that does imply that Moffat will have to address the regeneration limit in a rather special way.
As to what they way might be, however, I have no idea!
15 December 2013 at 20:17 #22855Thanks! (and loved you recap of Silence will Fall)
As for the picture above, besides indicating that the Daleks seem to be behind everything, it made me wonder if the Daleks are now aware of the “new” fate of the Time War.
-
AuthorPosts
