I re-read your blog Jim. It’s really interesting just how the blog, the comments e […]

However I think there is a difference between something that can be proven to be factually correct in an absolute sense (evolution) and something which is subjective and unproven (unproveable even).

Depends how you define ‘factually correct’ and ‘absolute’. Natural selection is definitely provable by observation and experiment, and the…[Read more]

@Nick is right that it’s been a kind of rolling, evolving thing. But where it’s at at the moment is a rough discussion of AI, automation and cultural production with me arguing that how we consume culture — meaning everything from TV to music to books — is ultimately…[Read more]

Everything that is except for the Spoilers thread that I don’t go on.

So thanks @jimthefish for shifting the discussion with @nick about future economy to a more open thread.
I’m intrigued by it but obviously missing how it began and how its…[Read more]

Couple of belated points.

@bluesqueakpip—

Well, there is a need. Because if you think you don’t need to explain and j…

[Read more]

I think, that the Doctor’s character, in its fullest sense, is broad enough to encompass gender change. My point is that if someone else doesn’t believe that to be true, who are we to criticise them for thinking something different, let alone call them misogynist.

But you’re happy to criticise those who don’t believe that the theory of…[Read more]

I really don’t think that there’s any group of Muslims who think that the Bible is the literal word of God. 🙂

One problem with talking about a particular group of people (such as Biblical literalists) within a much larger group of people is that you often end up implying that the particular group of people represent the larger group.…[Read more]

Shifted the general ‘economics of the future’ chat over hear for fear of boring everyone else on the Spoilers thread to death. Just a couple of things I’d like to say.

 I don’t think it ever be the case for films and much TV as a whole (as well as other cultural pursuits, which require significant training to become skilled).  You rea…

[Read more]

Using the same sort of language or argument back to will certainly achieve nothing, whereas the opposite at least has a chance. It also descalates the conflict.

In principle, I agree. But at the same time, there’s a danger here. Richard Dawkins said that he stopped debating with Creationists because by doing so he was on some level…[Read more]

Send your mum my best wishes. Hope she had a great day. She’s very much missed on the site.

@Nick—

No, not everyone opposed to JW’s casting could be dismissed as a misogynist. But many clearly were, or at the very least guilty of sexism and unexamined prejudice — including, sad to say, a few of the posts we got on here in the…[Read more]

There have been comments made on here, (let alone on twitter or other forums) that are unaddressed, which definitely show no respect towards the “traditionalists” who view the Doctor as a male character and don’t want to see that changed, by badging their opinion as misogynist.

That’s because the traditionalists have a very tricky line…[Read more]

I think it’s always worth bearing in mind that we’re pretty much all twits here. (What other word describes (mostly) grown adults spending a not insignificant part of their time discussing a 50-year-old British children’s TV show?)

I think, @Nick, that we’re probably going to have to agree to disagree on The Tenth Planet and the…[Read more]

To the best of my recollection, all I have ever seen of The Tenth Planet are one or two clips, so my knowledge is based almost entirely on the transcripts and the synopsis on the BBC official website, but the discussion above has prompted me to go back to these sources, and the first thing that strikes me now  in the transcripts i…[Read more]

I shouldn’t worry too much about the ratings – the problem with a ‘streaming’ model is that people are getting more and more used to the idea of binge watching. For example, I’ve watched every episode of Series 10, but wouldn’t be in either the overnights or the consolidated ratings, because I often watched the two and three parters as one…[Read more]

I must admit that this persistent meme that Capaldi has suffered from ‘poor’ writing really grinds my gears. He hasn’t. No more than Smith or Tennant did. In fact, I’d argue that he’s suffered from far fewer obviously rushed or ‘filler’ stories than any of his predecessors. There’s no Love and Monsters or Fear Her…[Read more]

In addition to the outstanding performance of Planet Earth II around the world and the continued success of Dancing with the Stars, the company saw a return to strength of Top Gear and a Doctor Who Christmas Special,…

[Read more]

But the First Doctor didn’t want to regenerate. Or, rather, the actor who played him didn’t. Nor did the producers really want to take that terrible risk of changing their leading man.

No Doctor has ever wanted to go; it’s always been a last-ditch effort to save their lives. Just as the very first regeneration was a last ditch attempt to…[Read more]

Here’s a brief taster…

With regards to writers and rights, I believe that it used to be more standard for writers to keep the rights to creatures or characters they created until Haisman and Lincoln created such a fuss with the Yeti and the Quarks that the contracts were changed to ensure the Beeb retained all rights unless,…[Read more]

None of these involved adding new scenes or changing the basis of the original TV story years later.

The various Star Treks have done it quite a lot.

Basically, I’d need to see the original contract, but if it’s anything like the modern contracts then Doctor Who was probably classed as a ‘long running series’ and the BBC has the right to make any alteration, add scenes etc. The needs of a weekly serial like 60’s Who meant producers might need to make rapid script changes and not be able…[Read more]

I’m possibly overstating that aspect and you’re probably right that it didn’t need to be done but something that SM perhaps felt the show would be better off doing by formalising the conflicts inherent in the show’s history. (cf RTD’s infamous ‘ming-mong’ comment a few years previously.) The other aspect of it is that as the 50th…[Read more]

Moff and RTD certainly haven’t with Who and Sherlock for example.

Uh, of course RTD has handed over artistic control of Who to someone else. He handed it over to Steven Moffat, just as Steven Moffat is about to hand over artistic control to Chris Chibnall. RTD also ignored any previous ‘canon’ that got in his way – witness Kit Pedlar a…[Read more]

@Nick—

The only thing I can easy see that this arc did, was give any show runner/writer free reign to rewrite any existing story the way they want to. Is that not fankwank at its simplest ?

No, I personally don’t think so. I think I’d call it streamlining the canon, getting the show in shape for the next 50 years. I agree that there would…[Read more]

The ’emotions’ scene is in episode 2, 16 minutes in… Ben indeed crashes into the room halfway through.

This could just be a short flashback of the 1st Dr’s to explain which story in his timestream he’s come from…

The Dr is taken to the cabin at the start of ep 3 (beca…[Read more]

However, nothing I’ve seen so far, suggests that Moff is doing anything like that.

I accept that you don’t think the Tenth Planet needs ‘fixing’; it’s just that I’d disagree.

Episode 4 of The Tenth Planet has a mysterious bit where the Doctor wanders off by himself muttering that he must get back to the TARDIS, leaving Ben and Polly b…[Read more]

Yes, eighteen of the less popular plays are only found in the First Folio and one (Pericles) only turned up in the Second Folio.

The rest have Quarto versions and Folio versions. Generally, the Folio version is considered the ‘best’, and most official. The Quarto (s) are often considered to be cobbled together by the actors, from memory,…[Read more]

That’s a bit harsh. Rather than a moment of Ego, I’d argue that the culmination of the Impossible Girl arc (I think I’d have to go with ‘girl’, ‘woman’ sounds a bit Theresa May for my liking) is the pinnacle of SM’s achievements on the show. And he did it for a very good reason, I think. To free future showrunners from the burden of 50…[Read more]

We frequently have two or three versions of Shakespeare’s plays, and we also know that scenes were reordered, omitted or added by Shakespeare at different times. Given that, shifting scenes around is considered perfectly okay – why get antsy when we’re often not sure whether the Folio or the Quarto order is the ‘right’ one? Or maybe they’re…[Read more]

It’s a story about regeneration & this story is when the 1st Dr regenerated. The scene dialogue will no doubt be the same and then we’ll be be whisked off to the adventure which we didn’t see in 1966. After that I expect we’ll be whisked off back to ‘The Tenth Planet’ for the (faithful-ish) regeneration…

It’s reverence to Dr…[Read more]

Refilming a small part of an old episode around the regeneration is one thing, but adding new scenes into someone else’s writing shows nothing but Moff’s hubris.

Don’t know about that. Both Branagh and Olivier took it upon themselves to insert scenes and modify others when they filmed Shakespeare. Not sure this would be much different. But…[Read more]

@JimTheFish

Yes. This scene:

#61420

&(More intro)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nv22tftlCWU

I’m not sure the existing regeneration footage is of good enough quality to do anything but a reshoot with. As far as I recall, it’s second generation stuff and only exists because of being incorporated into a Blue Peter episode.

As to the Polly clip, looking at the trailer (yet) again, it’s pretty clearly not inside the TARDIS but in…[Read more]

Moff could write and show that, but I rather hope he doesnt. If he wants to show the first Doctor regeneration then in my opinion he should use the original footage (adding some colour if he must).

Except that aside from the seconds of the regeneration itself, none of that footage exists any longer. I wouldn’t blame Moffat if he wanted to…[Read more]

So presumably the Xmas character cast will include (As well as Polly & Dr 1) Ben, General Cutler, Doctor Barclay & a (new) old Cyberman…

So we can expect to see this scene at Christmas…

And perhaps a variation on this one…

Oooh, you really have it in for the haters, Lisa!  You want their heads to *expLODE*…[Read more]

Always good to know what sh*t is being espoused. That way you can laugh/cry, whilst keeping your wits about you…

Rebuttal is valid, especially if you’re the showrunner…

We will all remember where we were when DavisonGate broke… (Fake News! Sad!)

I would hesitate from beating up a 78 year-old past presenter of Blue Peter on the street

(Other 78 year olds are fair game)

Purves said he would be ‘horrified’ by a female Doctor. But this was before the JW announcement. I wonder if anyone’s gone back to him since. And I’d imagine since…[Read more]

AG Who with Rose, Martha, River (and Amy/Clara to an extent) has broadened the relationship to include sexuality as describe. I think you can argue whether this change was necessary or not, I think that […]

@nick  I wouldn’t want it thought that I’m against the casting because I’m absolutely not.  I’m looking forward to what a new actor brings to the role, I just hope she’s allowed to be an actor first and a woman second.  I’m aware that the subtext will always be there, I acknowledge the po…[Read more]

Chibnall saying that he wanted his period as Head Writer to include a female Doctor is no less reasonable than Moffat wanting to play with the philosophical implications of time travel. […]

 To include a standard comedy character such as a goofy bumbling bloke could never work for me. It would be as sexist as having a female companion portraying a standard petite teenage blond

I agree and […]

Great blog, very well put and I wholeheartedly agree with all of it.

@nick raises an interesting question in that will we see the same kind of emotionally nuanced Doctor of the AG series or […]