The Doctor Who thread

Rabs

axisus said:

Tough crowd you lot. I'm enjoying the series and I like the new feel. 

I have a good pal who is a massive fan of Classic Dr Who (as in the biggest fan ever!) and he hates it all since it came back with Russel T Davies. I would see him in tea breaks at work and he would always have a massive rant about everything that was wrong with the latest episode. I've basically stopped talking about Dr Who to him as all the negativity was spoiling it for me. I could easily rant about any given episode and how it could be better, but generally these days I prefer to just 'go with the flow' and enjoy it for what it is, not what it isn't. 

Yes I agree... I just tend to go with whatever and take it for what it is.. I either like it or I don't.

I hate all the over analysing....  Like everything has to have a deeper meaning..

I see it the same as lyrics..  Some of them do mean things, some of it is just there cos it rhymes and they couldn't think of anything else better at the time. 

Heartfeltdawn

Fretwired said:

Doctor Who didn't used to preach. The Doctor was always anti-war and didn't have/like weapons - have a good story and you can get a point across without preaching. This isn't a Doctor Who issue .. it's all over the BBC's output.

Have a good story and you can preach, entertain, and develop. Who as an anti-war series is most obviously represented in history by The War Games. Being anti-establishment is at the heart of the series. The titular character rebelled against his own society. Critiques weren't simply anti-Conservative. Malcolm Hulke wrote some excellent stuff in the Pertwee era that offereed anti-military views and critiqued Communism as well. Then you go into Tom Baker's reign and you have criticism of all types of regimes right down to the pisstake of the Inland Revenue in the Sunmakers. 

It's all about writing and how you want to convey your message. The reason Who managed to work across the age ranges is because it wasn't consistently written '4 kidz'. You could have ridiculous episodes that were comedic and then something like Warrior's Gate which was totally the other direction. 

Heartfeltdawn

Rabs said:

Yes I agree... I just tend to go with whatever and take it for what it is.. I either like it or I don't.

I hate all the over analysing....  Like everything has to have a deeper meaning..

I see it the same as lyrics..  Some of them do mean things, some of it is just there cos it rhymes and they couldn't think of anything else better at the time. 

"What it is" isn't absolute and fixed. "What it is" is subjective and depends on the individual watching it. It's not different to sport. I don't get how some people end up so fanatical about football. I don't then go and tell them that they're oversupporting and putting in a far deeper meaning to a silly game than it deserves. Whether it's a telly programme, a sports team, or a band, everyone has their own personal relationship with that thing, be it deep contextual analysis (eg. McCoy era Who being so anti-establishment in the era of Thatcher) or simply taking it for what it is.  

Fretwired

Rabs said:

Yes I agree... I just tend to go with whatever and take it for what it is.. I either like it or I don't.

I hate all the over analysing....  Like everything has to have a deeper meaning..

:-)

This is a guitar forum .. go and look at the various Helix v Kemper v Axe FX threads or why Gibson guitars are crap .. over analysing and obsessing with trivia is what we do best ... don't take away our fun .... ;-)

Musicman20

I just found this recent episode very dull. Unfortunately. 

axisus

Musicman20 said:

I just found this recent episode very dull. Unfortunately. 

You can turn the brightness up on your TV

Rabs

Heartfeltdawn said:

Rabs said:

Yes I agree... I just tend to go with whatever and take it for what it is.. I either like it or I don't.

I hate all the over analysing....  Like everything has to have a deeper meaning..

I see it the same as lyrics..  Some of them do mean things, some of it is just there cos it rhymes and they couldn't think of anything else better at the time. 

"What it is" isn't absolute and fixed. "What it is" is subjective and depends on the individual watching it. It's not different to sport. I don't get how some people end up so fanatical about football. I don't then go and tell them that they're oversupporting and putting in a far deeper meaning to a silly game than it deserves. Whether it's a telly programme, a sports team, or a band, everyone has their own personal relationship with that thing, be it deep contextual analysis (eg. McCoy era Who being so anti-establishment in the era of Thatcher) or simply taking it for what it is.  

Yes this is of course true...  I just tend not to over analyse TV cos its just TV too me in he end, its not really that important that it needs any analysis its just meant to be entertainment

I have just seen too much of it on Youtube and of life in general these days..  Everything has to be labelled explained. The thing for me with all art is while I know some of it does have an intended message I also know that some of it is just nothing but ideas from a creative mind and has no real meaning (I used to be a game designer so have first hand experience with this).

The problem with it for me is that people tend to assume too much with these things..  Like the anti gun stance.. Some people will say how political it is without mentioning or remembering the fact that the Doctor has always hated guns. Because of the whole gender change thing  people are purposely looking for things to say about it so every tiny mention of women being strong or whatever gets totally taken out of context and becomes something it isn't  (if you see what im saying, im not always good at explaining myself).. And that's what gets me... People will then argue over something that was never intended to mean anything in the first place.

But I guess that is art.

Rabs

Fretwired said:

Rabs said:

Yes I agree... I just tend to go with whatever and take it for what it is.. I either like it or I don't.

I hate all the over analysing....  Like everything has to have a deeper meaning..

:-)

This is a guitar forum .. go and look at the various Helix v Kemper v Axe FX threads or why Gibson guitars are crap .. over analysing and obsessing with trivia is what we do best ... don't take away our fun .... ;-)

Yes..  It gets me on here sometimes too.. 

The big difference is what we talk about on here is about peoples personal experience.. What we think of the guitars we own and have played.  Id say its more relevant. if you spoke to someone about LPs and they said how much they hate them cos of the design faults they all have and then you found out they hadn't actually played one, you wouldn't listen to them just based on third party facts would you? You would want to talk to people who actually own one and know what they are talking about.

To try and gain real meaning out of a script we see on TV, you would really have to be one of the show writers and understand why those lines are there and be in the meetings where these discussions happen. Which we will never know. Which is why I just take it for what it is. Im sure none of those writes have ever been to an alien planet before 

slacker

I'm pleased that the first two episodes arnt awful and Jodie is a good actor and general reviews are positive.

However if this series goes downhill through poor writing people are probably going to centre on the wrong thing. 

TimmyO

My (fairly uninformed) opinion is that the manic-Dr-monologues are awfully written and delivered but the rest of her performance is really good. 

I've watched a handful Of episodes in each of the last few series and this seems to be as I recall - awkward lurching from Making a point to an action sequence a 9yo rolls His eyes at. 

Someone above was lauding the franchise for being both super serious and silly. To me that just makes it all over the place. 

digitalscream

TimmyO said:

My (fairly uninformed) opinion is that the manic-Dr-monologues are awfully written and delivered but the rest of her performance is really good. 

No, you're pretty much spot-on. I originally thought her performance would be awful (on the basis of previous roles), but actually she and Bradley Walsh are by the best things about it so far. The writing, however, is the worst part - Chibnall appears to go to great lengths to avoid taking the actors' strengths into account, and appears to concentrate purely on age and gender...on top of being generally crap.

equalsql

Gotta say, I enjoyed the first episode but halfway through the latest and Whittaker's doctor is starting to grate. It's like she's on speed with added caffeine and the new sonic screwdriver might as well be Harry Potter's wand as it seems to be the complete one stop problem solver. The writer's need to tone her character down and give her room to breath. 

Heartfeltdawn

Rabs said:

Yes this is of course true...  I just tend not to over analyse TV cos its just TV too me in he end, its not really that important that it needs any analysis its just meant to be entertainment

I have just seen too much of it on Youtube and of life in general these days..  Everything has to be labelled explained. The thing for me with all art is while I know some of it does have an intended message I also know that some of it is just nothing but ideas from a creative mind and has no real meaning (I used to be a game designer so have first hand experience with this).

The problem with it for me is that people tend to assume too much with these things..  Like the anti gun stance.. Some people will say how political it is without mentioning or remembering the fact that the Doctor has always hated guns. Because of the whole gender change thing  people are purposely looking for things to say about it so every tiny mention of women being strong or whatever gets totally taken out of context and becomes something it isn't  (if you see what im saying, im not always good at explaining myself).. And that's what gets me... People will then argue over something that was never intended to mean anything in the first place.

But I guess that is art.

Several hundred years ago Shakespeare was just entertainment. Look at the level of analysis now

I get what you mean with Youtube but I rather like that. A Who clip can become a thread all of its own and it's people who really are into the programme. That's the big difference to 25 years ago. A journalist writing in Doctor Who Magazine could write an article, get people's ganders up, and then the mailbag the next month would feature some pissy Whovians. Now they can do it instantly.  

I agree also that the gender change means people look too hard for every little thing. This is where old Who did it so much better. Go back to e 70s and Pertwee in The Silurians. There's a cracking scene involving the Brigadier and Liz Shaw. She tells him that she's not a desk girl, she's a scientist. It's not overblown, just a great little moment of a woman asserting herself. Now that same scene done now would be signposted. It'd be lauded for days as a positive scene. 

ICBM

equalsql said:

the new sonic screwdriver might as well be Harry Potter's wand as it seems to be the complete one stop problem solver.

This has been the case on and off for a long time. It needs to get binned.

axisus

ICBM said:

equalsql said:

the new sonic screwdriver might as well be Harry Potter's wand as it seems to be the complete one stop problem solver.

This has been the case on and off for a long time. It needs to get binned.

I have complained about the sonic screwdrivers for years! Ridiculously overused gadget that solves every problem. It basically allows them to make the writing very lazy.

Did anyone else find it rather daft that she made it in a car workshop? surely it would have had to be somewhere with advanced electronics, not the odd car radio! Oh damn, now I'm getting picky! As I mentioned before, my philosophy is to 'try' to just go with the flow and enjoy it

Dave_Vader

I wrote this about it a month or two ago

(warning, I think I was rude about musician's forums in the middle somewhere, sorry.)

https://davedoesntwriteanythingever.blogspot.com/2018/06/im-terrified-new-doctor-who-is-going-to.html

I'm enjoying it, to be fair. Bradley Walsh is surprisingly enjoyable.

It's no better or worse than any other Who, some good, some bad. They'll grow into it.

EricTheWeary

This thread has been going since August 2013.  Who would have predicted then what the Dr is up to now. 

Well, that was odd. I know people say they hide behind the settee/ sofa ( depending on your level of Northerness) during episodes of Dr Who but I presume that was in case of frightening monsters and not for fear of embarrassment. 

It seemed reasonably well paced, well made and the ending was quite touching. [ edits out bunch of spoilers] Could have been a lot worse but I’d rather they hadn’t. 

digitalscream

EricTheWeary said:

1 - It seemed reasonably well paced, well made and the ending was quite touching. [ edits out bunch of spoilers]

2 - Could have been a lot worse but I’d rather they hadn’t. 

1 - Seemed like a lot of unnecessary bits to me, and the Bad Guy seemed completely one-dimensional (just like the previous Bad Guy in ep 1). Given that he was the primary motivation behind the events of the episode, I was really hoping for more.

2 - Yeah, a pretty good summary.

thumpingrug

Great episode, but spoilt but the intrusive song struck that was played at the end.  No need for it at all.

Fretwired

Not going down well in the USA ... they can't understand the northern accents .. :-)