Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
1 January 2014 at 19:11 #23785
@scaryb – all slightly fragile here too. We spent the afternoon watching Transamerica, and then for contrast Goodbye Mr Chips…. then found ourselves watching one of those collections of YouTube clips which seemed to mainly comprise people vacuuming their cats. And then three Big Bang Theory episodes in succession. Have now recovered sufficiently to put some Miles Davis on the CD player and even pour some wine. This could end badly…
1 January 2014 at 17:45 #23779@idiotsavon – (a), thanks! and (b) no such thing as coincidence…
@Monochrome Dimension – welcome!
31 December 2013 at 13:59 #23708Splendid! Keep bonkering on! My motto for 2014.
31 December 2013 at 12:08 #23689Indeed, happy birthday to this forum. So glad I found this place, where all the things I enjoyed about the Guardian blog were present and correct (all you lot, basically), and the things I hated and found depressing and tedious are banished. Here’s to 2014 – looking forward to speculation about the Capaldi doc, to keep us all going till he actually arrives. Thanks especially to those who set it up, and who keep it developing and running smoothly, and to all who contribute to it. It’s a remarkable space, this, in its good humour and generosity, as well as the exceptionally high calibre of bonkers theorising that goes on here. Long may it flourish.
30 December 2013 at 17:34 #23667I’d love a musical one. It absolutely has to have a narrative justification though – as the Buffy ep does – not just randomly have an episode obeying conventions from an entirely different genre. It also has to have great songs – as the Buffy ep does. And yes, it would cause mass apoplexy in certain quarters, but is that necessarily a bad thing?? Just asking…
But aside from that, in terms of episodes that could connect with Who, I’d certainly go for Hush. It’s reasonably self-contained, and as others have noted, the Gentlemen almost certainly influenced some recent Who big bads. It’s one of the scariest as well, proper behind the sofa stuff.
As for Angel, in some ways the whole Pylea arc is unusual in transplanting the action to another dimension/alien planet, so might be interesting to look at from a Who perspective. Epiphany – I’ll have to re-watch it to see how well it stands alone. I had forgotten though that Lorne references Zuzu’s petals in this one!
I’m still musing on this, so may come up with other ideas in due course…
29 December 2013 at 20:46 #23624@wolfweed ah, but this is still all within Who world, did Eric Ritchie Jr (don’t know where I got the D from) have a reality outside Who?
29 December 2013 at 20:24 #23620@wolfweed has reminded me – anyone got any thoughts on Eric D Ritchie – Thoughts on a Clock? I’d assume it’s just random except that there was no need to identify the author/source for a poem in a cracker, unless it was in some way significant.
29 December 2013 at 12:19 #23593Thanks @scaryb and @Phase Shift, I’ve sent it over. Hope it passes muster… The DEM blog has set the bar pretty damn high!
28 December 2013 at 19:13 #23541when her nan was talking bout her grandad to me it sounded like she was describing the doctor…
You don’t think… noooooo. Surely not. But …
In all the genealogical speculation when Clara first appeared, were we looking at the wrong generation?
28 December 2013 at 17:11 #23531OK, I have a bloggy thing about Frank Capra and Who. I can get it to you by some means or other if you think you could use it (obviously you can read it before you decide anything – I won’t claim my Jammy Dodgers unless you feel it’s worth posting!).
Cheers
27 December 2013 at 18:22 #23492@Phase Shift Jammy dodgers, eh? How can I resist. Just starting to jot a few thoughts down now. Don’t tell my PhD supervisors – unless I can think of a way to weave some reference to W G Sebald’s oeuvre into this, I don’t think I can pass it off as part of my ‘real’ research…
27 December 2013 at 18:20 #23491Just a thought – the poem that was in the cracker, Eric D Ritchie’s Thoughts on a Clock. My googling has only brought up quotes from and references to this episode – does anyone know if it was a real poem?
27 December 2013 at 16:19 #23485@Phase Shift – don’t tempt me! I’m supposed to be writing a whole other thesis which sadly has no connections whatsoever to either Who or Capra. But if I have the odd moment …
27 December 2013 at 14:45 #23478Oh, and I can second the recommendation as well. That book scared me half to death. And whilst the film is great, it loses a lot of the tragedy in the novel, because Jack Nicholson makes Jack Torrance a raving psychopathic axe murderer from the start, who just hasn’t happened to actually axe murder anyone yet. In the book, you see a personality disintegrate and that’s both chilling and terribly sad. But I could go on about Stephen King for ages and that belongs on another forum so will shut up now.
27 December 2013 at 14:42 #23477Excellent call @phaseshift, I hadn’t made the Shining connection, but I would be v v surprised if that wasn’t lurking somewhere in the background when the Angels were dreamed up.
26 December 2013 at 20:45 #23417I agree with @blenkinsopthebrave. Not for the first time in NuWho, the themes of ageing, of loss, of choices made, and chances missed were so powerful here, and very moving. I thought (as I often do) of the best film in the world, It’s a Wonderful Life, which I have always argued is not a film that the young will really appreciate (I read a comment from a 20-something just today, who was underwhelmed by it, and I’d argue with her except that she’s a 20-something who will never be a 40-something and that’s a whole other order of godawful sadness ). But, if you’re old enough to have lost people, to have had to make hard choices, to have got some of them wrong, and to have missed chances that will not come round again – then you can feel for George Bailey, and you can feel for the Doctor too. Actually there are loads of links and echoes – will go away now and write a thesis on the influence of Frank Capra’s film on the RTD/Moffatt era Who…
25 December 2013 at 21:16 #23376Still a bit too emotional to analyse anything TBH but I’ll echo @magnetite‘s ‘rather splendid’.
The Grauniad seems to assume that the Time Lords restarted the clock on the regenerations, making Capaldi no. 1 in a new sequence but was that explicit? It makes sense, I hope that is it. God, I’ll miss Matt though.
Apparently, ‘Caves of Androzani this was not’. Good.
24 November 2013 at 19:50 #21420Sorry if I’ve missed a thorough fettling of this particular issue, but the Osgood/Oswald thingie – it’s got to be more than coincidence, hasn’t it? The Wiki entry for the episode refers to UNIT technician Osgood from The Dæmons, so she could have a link to Who history anyway, but the sister comment must be significant, or else it’s just rather gratuitous.
I loved every damn minute of the episode anyway, and will be rewatching it soon.
5 August 2013 at 10:34 #15440@scaryb et al. Yes, very happy. Hadn’t thought of Capaldi till the last few days when he seemed to suddenly be the One, but he’s a fan, he’s a fine actor, he has range, gravitas, humour. If he gets even halfway decent scripts he’ll be fantastic. REALLY looking forward to seeing how the regen etc is played out.
3 August 2013 at 19:08 #14998I was always going to watch it, with it being (a) French and (b) about zombies. Except only the first was really accurate – we’re not in Walking Dead territory here. I thought it was incredible – subtle and ambiguous and creepy (very, very creepy). I’m getting it on DVD when I can, as it will most def repay rewatching – lots of little details that I’m sure I missed (one downside of the subtitles – my French is no way good enough to follow the dialogue without looking at them). You’ll have got a flavour from the series blog but do watch it when you can. Top TV of this year for me.
3 August 2013 at 15:54 #14989Any other Whovians recently unsettled/fascinated/intrigued/hooked by The Returned?
2 August 2013 at 07:16 #1480710 June 2013 at 19:08 #12125@craig @scaryb I found the news hit me harder than I was expecting it to, as well, given that I didn’t know the guy, just his books (have to say, I loved Iain Banks and struggled with Iain M Banks…) . I do know why though – as I lost a friend earlier this year who also died far too soon, also from cancer, and also thought he had more time than he did have, and left his family and lots of others who loved him stunned and devastated. So it woke up all of that emotion for me – and reminded me how much I hate evil bastard cancer. Anyway, am about to read The Crow Road which I’d unaccountably missed so far. Which has the added benefit of allowing me to abandon both Alan Hollingshurst and Marcel Proust for the time being…
7 June 2013 at 20:45 #12015@juniperfish – excellent, excellent stuff x
7 June 2013 at 09:22 #11962@miapatrick A – it would be a challenge to the writers, certainly. But in a good way. B – a reason why it would be a good idea. C – fancyability not crucial, charisma a deal-breaker. The first without the second would be disastrous. The second without the first, absolutely fine. Both together could be perhaps too much of a good thing (see my comments earlier about Tennant). D – exactly the place. It’s well enough established, even (dread word) iconic. It can take risks that a pilot can’t. There are advantages to being in one’s 50s (honest) – it’s a time for reinventing and reinspiring and all that stuff.
5 June 2013 at 11:31 #11875@janetteb Is it permitted to have two ‘My Doctors’? I certainly hope so. 4 was my Doctor – I saw DW before 4 and obviously after 4 but he was mine. 9 didn’t have long enough to really establish himself for me. 10 I adored but to my surprise my second My Doctor turns out to be 11. It possibly is relevant here that I don’t actually, you know, fancy him to bits. Not that fancying the Doctor is wrong, but it was occasionally a distraction with 10. 11 won me over with fish fingers and custard and that funny old/young face with the chin & all, and managing to be dark and daft at the same time. So, I will miss him.
However, who knows, 12 may turn out to be my third ‘My Doctor’, if they get it right.
If there’s just the one (and I’m liking the multidoctor hypothesis), I’m really rooting for a woman. Not sure which woman, mind. Anybody suggested Geraldine Somerville yet?
3 June 2013 at 16:46 #11761@phileasf – ooh, Lawrence Fox! I love him as Hathaway – so much not said, not shown, but glimpses of intellect and passion and sadness… I’ll be very happy if it’s him.
2 June 2013 at 15:28 #11666Speculation is no doubt entirely futile, but it’s such fun. More fun, more interesting, and without the risk of libel action that the other current ‘who?’ question involves.
I’d be delighted with a woman doctor. Olivia Colman is not quite right, however much I love her. Suranne Jones is the Tardis so ruled out (presumably) on those grounds. However, if we can’t have Bailey, what about Scott? Or what about Vicky McClure? Or Miranda Richardson?
Other tempting possibilities I’ve not seen listed elsewhere – Tom Hiddleston, Stephen Moyer,
And cheers to @phaseshift for Damien Moloney
Not going to put any actual money on any of these. That would just be silly.
14 April 2013 at 18:38 #5561Back to Duran Duran – yes Clara would know it from radio, clubs, etc, pop is constantly looking back at its own past and being nostalgic for the sounds of previous decades. Can’t recall which bits of lyric we heard from the Prof or from Clara, but this line seems pertinent: Scent and a sound. I’m lost and I’m found / And I’m hungry like the wolf….
7 April 2013 at 18:50 #4489Having just decided to unlurk and composed a lengthy if not massively enlightening post, I then lost it all due to some technical shenanigans. I will try to recap.
Random thoughts:
Oh my stars – goes back to the 16thc, there’s a quote from Christopher Marlowe in Edward II, where it is not just an all-purpose exclamation but an address to the stars, as the force that determines one’s destiny. So, quite pertinent in light of the chap’s speech about the leaf and so on.
Also, the mother . I haven’t come up with a coherent theory about who she is yet, but her speech about how she will always come to find Clara wherever she is, is either just poignant in light of her death and thus failure to keep that promise, or suggests that she is something more timey-wimey. I’d be inclined to the latter – those words were given an awful lot of weight, and I don’t think it was just to trigger the tears (though they did, mine anyway).
And another thing – did people here read the monster thingie as the sun of that planet? If it was, then as some posters have said, if the Doc and Clara destroyed it, they presumably threatened the future of the planet’s inhabitants. But the second question is, did they destroy it or just send it to sleep?
That’s it for now. Nice to be able to post without worrying about being savaged by sheep or whatever…
Cheers all!
1 January 2013 at 17:36 #143Greetings Whovians, the NYD fog permits no insights into your many inventive (and occasional bonkers) theories, but it will clear and with luck I may be able to contribute the occasional apercu. Whether or not, I will enjoy yours, and am glad this has been set up so fill the long gaps between Guardian blogs.
-
AuthorPosts
