Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
24 August 2014 at 08:01 #30028
American media does not recall or recognize the villain from “The Girl in the Fireplace,” and, given the lack of Capaldi quotations in a dozen articles, they also do not understand his accent well enough.
I had no expectations for American media on it, though, because… well. Need I say more? This made the “instant reviews” (more like knee-jerk reviews) middling to negative to somewhat positive.
Every member of our dinner party thoroughly enjoyed the “Deep Breath.” My band of Whovians live in the Blue Ridge Mountains of NC on the eastern coast of the states, so we bizarrely have a deep connection and immediate understanding of the Scottish accent. It’s innate to the lingual culture here.
More thoughts later, 3:00 just turned here. Cheers to the new series and a new series’ discussion! Crazy theories fomenting.
12 October 2013 at 10:00 #18322@craig –
Thanks for adding it, and I understand both minds to which you referred. I’m slightly trepidatious adding the first post, but there’s such a wealth to discuss about it that it will be spoiler free (after breakfast and tea).
11 October 2013 at 13:04 #18248@phaseshift – But because the BBC has certain clever rights to this footage, they stand to make a more than substantial amount of money by slowly releasing the lost eps on DVD and digital downloads. This will create a relatively huge influx of money for them (which sadly won’t be in part funneled to some degree back into the nudget for new Who over the coming years, from what I understand of the profit redistribution system in place.
11 October 2013 at 12:55 #18247@IAmNotAFishIAmAFreeMan – They needed to be remastered (and what a fine job), but I imagine that SM et al got to see them these past several months if not years in some cases. And the influence from them on the direction of writing and casting has been quite palpable.
@bluesqueakpip – Given what Gatiss said, and the journalistic work done by certian sites like Bleeding Cool over the last several months, compounded by the fact that all implications point to the Beeb having known this for possibly at least one or more years while they could collect the eps, hence allowed Moffatt and Gatiss and select others to view the lost eps before the remastering process even began, only allowing those at the highest levels of Who creators via NDAs in a most clandestine manner, to take secret advantage of the wealth of the Lost Classics in their writing processes. Occam’s Razor. It’s the simplest explanation to so, so many choices in the direction that these showrunners and writers have taken over the whole last season. Not to mention the casting of Capaldi.
11 October 2013 at 10:17 #18234@craig – Loving the redesign. Worlds better. Gray is the new grey. Could you please add “Web of Fear” to the BG episodes section now that it is released? I imagine I’m not the only old goat giddy to discuss it. Thanks.
11 October 2013 at 10:09 #18233@scaryb –
The same thought passed throuh my mind as I watched the first two episodes tonight. Which thought then transmuted: How long has SM known about and been watching these lost episodes? And how much have they informed his choices on many levels, from the inclusion of The Great Intelligence in his writing to the casting of Peter Capaldi (after seeing just how well the older actors with their wiser, more age worn visages work when you get down to basics of telly-making).
What a night! “Web of Fear” is an absolute revelation! I am such a giddy goat.
5 August 2013 at 19:57 #154945 August 2013 at 19:24 #15492@scaryb – Let’s be honest about the fan”girls”, especially some of the American ones, who made some rather “ugly” social media responses to Capaldi’s selection: if they think that not having late 20-something to 30-something sexy Doctor eye candy is a problem, by the time 2014-? comes around when Capaldi’s episodes finally begin to air and once they end, and the female fans are that much older too, it won’t be a problem. Right? Any die-hard fangirls/fanwomen agree? As our Captain Jack might say, I’d say there’s something about a distinguished gentleman that calls up one’s attention. There won’t be a problem.
That said, what is the popular consensus on if there should be/will be a general move in the direction of removing the Doctor from all romantic possibility with any Companions with the new incarnation?
On the one hand, fans and fangirls seem very split that Rose’s and/or Amy’s attraction was either not cool or was understandable. (The attraction element to both Smith and Tennant, I think we all must admit, expanded global popularity among fangirls.) On the other hand, fans mostly love River Song’s marriage with the Doctor, and newer fangirls couldn’t care less.
Pre-boot, the Doctor was literally alien to all romance, and I loved that. Things have changed though, post-boot, and I also love that. I love that the Doctor can love a human. “Intellect and romance over the brute forces of violence and cynicism” to quote Craig Ferguson’s homage theme cover. I do like purely platonic relationships with the Doctor. I also celebrate if the Doctor could possibly alienate his own loneliness and find solace in finding love, even if it can only be with a lowly human.
5 August 2013 at 19:16 #15490@shazzbot et. al. – After the deflating celebrity hype of the live special and a day to consider the new Doctor, I have come to realize this:
Celebrity is being incredibly overblown. Not just on the special. Whether the Doctor is a celebrity, say, a “famous” actor, or a stage actor (not mutually exclusive by any means), or is an “unknown” seriously does not matter at all. I fully believe that they can jump from celebrity to unknown to celebrity to unknown (if the regenerations continue, of course). The calibre of talent that makes the casting process has for the past three (?) have all done stage work as well as multiple video/film media. The younger an actor is, however, the more unlikely he/she has received enough exposure to be considered of celebrity status. The older the actor is, he/she would have garnered sufficient celebrity and fame from an opus of theatre and tv/film. That’s all a matter of time and age. Also, while I consider Capaldi to be famous, that’s only because I’m a British TV freak in America. The BBC is casting the Doctor for a global Anglo audience now, and in that larger arena, Capaldi is not exactly a celebrity.
So, I have no worries about that particular issue, just because I think the very concept of celebrity is very distinct from the views of the public and the inside views of the industry players. The latter tends to think that most celebrities are right arseholes and would prefer to avoid them at all costs.
@osakahatter – Good to know about Hannibal. If it’s the first 15 min, then I could watch it streaming some couple of days when my disability strikes me down to bed. Honestly, it was that unforgettable, truly horrifying final grotesque scene from the “Hannibal” film by Ridley Scott that made me avoid the series. The image and my instant recall of it is something I really wish I could forget but never will. And I didn’t want to deal with another of those.
4 August 2013 at 23:57 #15319@juniperfish – I’m a huge fan of Bryan Fuller (“Wonderfalls” and “Pushing Daisies”), but I couldn’t gather enough interest to slog through the gore at 10 p.m. on a week night.
4 August 2013 at 23:54 #15318Of interest in one of the articles covering this is that Moff nearly cast PC instead of Smith as Eleven. From the writing angle, I think that has some serious implications. Initially Moff decided to start with the youngest Doctor instead of, at that time, a 51 year old Doctor. Now Smith is out and PC is cast the second time round. I have to wonder if there are stories Moff wanted to tell that he believed would simply not work unless an older Doctor were playing the role.
4 August 2013 at 22:15 #15276So excited about the the choice here. PC has a thundrously wide range and will be able to dress down hostile aliens in a singular manner.
That was an incredibly painful live show. It’s basically a drawn-out press release, but global interest made the BBC appear to think it was necessary. Too bad they faffed it. As an American, I had no idea who any of the British celebrities were (or why they were on there in the first place). But I watched, so make of that what you will.
I have to say I’m incredibly relieved that they cast an older Doctor. I think it allows for a different direction in the way the character is written and is acted.
12 July 2013 at 05:14 #13664Final thought: Walter Bishop is a direct homage to William Hartnell as the originator.
12 July 2013 at 05:04 #13663Some have said the name John Noble, of “Fringe” fame, as a new Doctor suggestion. (In the States, the Venn Diagram of modern science television watchers consists in the circles of those who for the last five years watched “Fringe” and “Doctor Who”, and the circles in this diagram overlap to the point of being nearly concentric.)
Wouldn’t John Noble as an actor be a promising companion, though? More than capable of running from back to front a fully conceived and executed character arc as a new companion?
Not that I wouldn’t mind seeing a harkening of the OD (Origina’ Doctah’) WH hisself in the form of a Pater Familias once again in the professorial yet emotional authority of an actor such as John Noble.
Apologies for the broken grammar. I broke it in all the right places, though. (You can get a degree in that.) More than anything, I recommend the entire series of that program “Fringe,” front to back, and ask if seeing Walter Bishop plucked from the “Fringe” time stream does not tickle your cerebrum.
20 June 2013 at 01:48 #12658Has anyone else been following the reports/rumors about “the special surprise present” the BBC has planned for the anniversary?
20 June 2013 at 01:22 #12657The impression that I received when Clara read the book and said “that’s who” was that the experience got erased due to temporal paradox. In the finale she remembered, and the Doctor remarked with some fear that her remembering was “impossible” (of course, but she’s the Impossible Girl, right?). My impression is still such that she remembers, but only in a cliffhangar manner. What she learned from the Book is still quite important and holds future portent that I suspect will be learned in the next two episodes (So by Dec 25).
As far as your wonderful theorizing and DT: purely from an acting standpoint, like no other actor, David Tennant in his performance embodied the guilt and the pathos carried by The Doctor for his “crimes against the living universe” (two genocides and a series of universe-devouring reality rifts are the minimum of the charges levied by himself alone). Because we all tend to agree the Anniversary will likely address Time War-era Doctor, more or less, it makes the purest of casting sense to include Tennant. Tennant alongside Smith create a dream team cast. With their acting chops, audiences around the planet will cry, millions in unison, sheerly by the force of performance craft and story fused. Tennant and Smith as the post-war Doctors, facing the anguish of their collective sins against life and the universe itself.
On that note, does anyone know if other countries are also playing this in the theatres on airing. I know people who run a movie theater here with a 3D projector but have no clue who at the BBC to contact to male the screening happen. Please PM me if you do. There are hundreds in this city alone who want to see it on the big screen in 3D in a crowd.
20 June 2013 at 00:53 #12655@htbpdet
Thanks! Perfectemundo
20 June 2013 at 00:42 #12653I am happy to concede. My only question is what makes the people who control the content on the BBC different from other “suits”? Could you send me a link that explicates the difference in how the BBC top dogs are required to follow governmental rule to follow a different production system? I would love to learn more.
Always love to learn. “Intellect and romance over the brute force and cynicism.”
20 June 2013 at 00:26 #12649I remember the existential threat of “the permanent record” since kindergarten. It was my first big word: “But I gave Russell his toy back, why do I have to go on my ‘purr-muh-mint reck-ord?'” Who knew it had been real starting in 2006 (as the news shows that these programs have been running unchecked since 2006 in the US and spread to England in that time)?
20 June 2013 at 00:22 #12648I understand what you mean; however: How is it protected? What crucial difference? From everything I’ve read, the TV tax you have to pay in Britain is just that: a tax for a bureaucratic government that does not afford any intellectual promise as to the quality of the programming. The business, regardless of it being about a show or film, in a socialist capitalistic or democratic capitalistic country that produces these productions, is still simply at its core a business. I’ve not worked in England, but in the countries where I have worked on productions, at the top the ultimate decisions are made in those board rooms (or the people from those boardrooms fly out to the location and crack the whip if it’s that kind of gig).
I understand the ideal of hoping it’s not that way, but if there is a significant amount of money involved, the people controlling that money make unilateral calls all that indelibly shapes the creative production process. I truly wish it were not that way. Unless the BBC signs some sort of structural contract that frees the process from the interests of money, it’s the same in the US, Britain, AU, and even South American countries. No implicit promise exists not to do that.
I’ve followed new Who since its inception and from an industry perspective on issues such as this. I am happy to agree to disagree. I am often wrong but not usually about production matters and the social machine that drives them.
When it comes to the original (OP) question, I only want to say this: I doubt that anyone but a white and properly accented male will be cast as the next Doctor because the way the industrial side of the show is designed, TPTB will want to keep the status quo. That being said, the following Doctor could be female or not white because the same people who profit from the status quo know when the status quo is lagging behind the times. However, at that point, they will get a new showrunner, a new Doctor, and new writers. They house clean, and from the first day in preproduction, they get everyone o. The same page: “It’s not the same Who now that it’s 2016. The fans have been voicing for a change in tone since 2013. We gave you the tools, money, and responsibility. Now you creatives go make the best series in the 53 year history of this show!”
19 June 2013 at 23:59 #12643To dip out of politics and the Orwellian nation-state that I am now forced as “a reader” (as Bill Hick put it) to spend two hours a day reading news purely to keep up with prism and the dozen other acronyms that are surveilling essentially all Yanks (and Brits). Rather time-consuming and paranoia-affirming.
So, there was much mention of wine during the airing of the last grouping of episodes. And as this is the pub, I am quite curious to see what people imbibe while watching the show based on country (as well as based on the seasons: seasons of the year and of the show).
During the last series, I tended to have a bit of beer while throwing watching parties/family gatherings. When spring arrived, some pinot gris or pinot grigio with the windows open at night and Who on the little big screen. And as a general apertif, gin and tonic. (Hats off to the good Brits who manufacture these juniper-infused spirits.)
What kind of wine were you all drinking to enhance the episodal experience? White? Red?
It’s the pub folks, and the next episode is months away. Sound off! I want to have the perfect drink and meal prepared ahead of time, so give us your favorites. Just like when I invented the Wootini for Star Wars events (kiwi, vodka and raspberry lemonade et. al.), I want to have the perfect Autumn beverage pre-prepared for 50th.
Please give your suggestions in the pub over the months, as pubs are the only places people ever talk about alcohol. Ever. Anywhere. (Sorry, folks, prism may be listening, and I don’t want them thinking me a lush. It could go in my permanent record.)
19 June 2013 at 23:09 #12637I have a good decade of working in the American film (and increasingly) video world, and the way the hierarchy and bureaucracy work, yes, unfortunately the people who call the shots, dole out the money to the creatives and the crews, do stay in the process from beginning to end, and they shape it. When there is a hit show or movie, like with Who, the people above those people ensure from preproduction to postproduction the vested interests of keeping that franchise going on what has been working (as opposed to what the creatives know will work.
They are essentially “helicopter parents” or “Tiger moms” or whatever you phrase your Anglo-culture uses. They hover and make sure things “run smoothly”, or, in better words, make sure that the status quo remains recognizable from a business perspective.
This, of course, hampers change and creativity. While that is unfortunate, these people (“producers” et. al. which is code for the people attached whose interest are mainly financial) have a serious stake in their careers and reputations with how they handle their work on tv and film projects.
There’s good and there’s bad there. If they thought SM was not returning their financial investment properly according to their bottom lines, they would fire him. Because he is doing so well, and helping to spread the show to a global market, they intend to keep him happy, as well as many key crew positions (such as writers) so that the quality does stay high.
However if some idea for the next series were truly brilliant, these business-side people very well will stifle, insist on re-writes, or worse abort the concept if they cannot sell the story idea to a boardroom full of curmudgeonly old men and woman who do not watch the show and have no understanding of story and probably have only seen the show at Christmas with their grandchildren.
This is my experience working within, and fighting within, the film and television system.
17 June 2013 at 07:31 #12394Depending on the poster’s age, or not, we do have to presume that when people say an older Doctor, they’re referring to the more recent casting trends of Smith and Tennant in the revived era.
11 June 2013 at 22:04 #12146I’d certainly be fine with a female Doctor… but not by Moffatt. I’d rather for that sort of change, see a new showrunner and new Doctor simultaneously. It’s not any sort of jab at SM, but for something that isn’t broken… don’t start fixing it with a new set of tools. When things change hands, a new runner and new set of writers with a new Doctor, that would be an ideal time for what many would view as a ground-up shift on an element that has been consistent for half a century.
11 June 2013 at 21:59 #12145It has died down to a large degree.
Although I have written part one on my treatise concerning the forum’s theories inre “red” and “blue” Doctor and Clara, because that theory is right on the spot (pun nonwithstanding), and will post during the dog days of summer as there is little rush for the BT (bonkers theorizing) until the Special.
11 June 2013 at 21:55 #12144Nothing has changed. The book makers are still closed. The name that shut down bookies from Britain to the US and Australia is Rory Kinnear. However, it’s been two days, so I’d imagine it’d be otherwise reported. My hunch is that they got word that someone is cast or soon to be so don’t want to take a hit, whether it’s Kinnear or not. I imagine, however, that the BBC has gotten wise enough to start using both the internet and the book makers as a way of testing out the fan reaction to the various names being bandied.
9 June 2013 at 17:32 #12088Casting spoiler potentially:
The bookies on the next Doctor have stopped taking bets in the last few hours, seeming to give credence to the casting rumor today. I won’t say who it is, but you can do a quick search. If I find more sources beyond that they have heard that the offer was accepted or if it’s all bunkum, I’ll check back here.
If no one wants to know, I’ll gladly refrain, which is why I placed this in spoilers.
4 June 2013 at 02:44 #11814@craig – So his new uber villain: “The Post Men.” Future ep entitled: “The Post Men Always Ring Twice.”
2 June 2013 at 01:51 #11571I’m looking forward to the video, which I can only imagine must be a difficult task to make as it is really a direct message to fans by Matt Smith who has only just announced his departure. That’s integrity.
Now that I’ve had some time to decompress, I’m left fantasizing about, say, ten years from now, that a “lost season of Smith as the Eleventh Doctor” is found in some cupboard or another at the BBC. Even if all the other current production elements were stripped (budget, actors, writers, prop and wardrobe, etc.), I still would love to see Smith have some further videographic adventures as the Doctor. That I only wish to see him more, regardless of any other production circumstances is a testament to his success in the role and the longevity of his contribution. (And who knows, maybe some cheeky future showrunner will produce some “lost Eleventh Doctor episodes” come the time of the 60th anniversary! And perhaps it’s about time the TARDIS had some pre-recorded holograms of one of the Doctors to play for future companions in case of emergency, and wouldn’t it be fun if they were all dated from one specific era, like Smith’s?)
2 June 2013 at 01:21 #115671 June 2013 at 22:41 #11526Given the ending of the finale, I wish the news broke a little sooner.
1 June 2013 at 22:35 #11524Very surprising the way they’re handling it: two weeks after the season finale, months before the special, and half a year from Christmas. Who knew but Smith and Moff that those sad scenes from two weeks ago would resonate even more greatly today?
26 May 2013 at 18:42 #11052Hello, all.
I haven’t found such a lively and intellectually stimulating on a television program since the days of Lostpedia, and hence haven’t joined in on such a conversation. You have compelled me to do so now, sadly only after the hiatus begins.
After a re-watch last night, I noticed a bit of dialogue that I predict will be illustrated onscreen during the Special. When Clara asks the Doctor who Jenny, Vastra and Strax are to him, he responds that they were his friends through the “dark times.” The dialogue is more in depth that that, but the gist was that during his “dark times” they took care of him when he needed it.
On first watch, I thought this was the period (100-200 years?) after he lost Amy and Rory. Now, I predict that this was foreshadowing instead that the trio of companions originated instead with the “Dark Doctor,” and that we will see a scene with Doctor Hurt and those three, perhaps just after regeneration or after he acted but “not in the name of the Doctor.”
-
AuthorPosts
