It is currently Wed Apr 08, 2020 4:15 pm


Post a new topicPost a reply Page 3 of 4   [ 95 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

What did you think
Great 61%  61%  [ 20 ]
Good 24%  24%  [ 8 ]
Fair 9%  9%  [ 3 ]
Not so good 3%  3%  [ 1 ]
Bad 3%  3%  [ 1 ]
Total votes : 33
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 6:47 pm 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 8:30 pm
Posts: 595
Gender: Male
Ok Fourth Planet I am confused

Capaldi is inconsistent due to a narrow characterisation? How does that work?

What's a good example of an active Doctor?

Erm yes standalone episodes that seen together make a larger story is a classic arc

Finally you seriously think Capaldi and Smith don't have some artistic freedom in their performances?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 6:51 pm 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2014 10:19 pm
Posts: 517
Location: Devils Ball, spacemate...
Gender: Male
Basileus wrote:
Technically 10 is now an odd numbered incarnation.

Notice I didn't say Doctor.


Shhhh, don't mention the War! I did once but I think I got away with it...

runalong wrote:
Finally you seriously think Capaldi and Smith don't have some artistic freedom in their performances?


I'm sure Of Mars will be back and answer this question himself. But as I'd had this conversation with him before on the dead SFX place I'll just chip in.

First off, I'm pretty sure Capaldi does have loads of influence, first off there's the often quoted "no Papa, Nicole moments" thing. An actor with his status in the industry can make such demands, not so sure Smith would have got away with that if he'd put his foot down as soon as he'd been cast. But that's up for debate, if you can be bothered with it (it'll only ever be speculation either way now).

In regards to characterisation, I'm pretty sure in his first series Matt did in fact want to put his stamp on the Doctor, and in deed, did. He often talked of the "mad professor" type of character, and I think in S5 he did achieve that (a few misfires script wise IMO but never mind).

Where we get to quibbles is that once Matt had established his character the writers obviously we're keen to incorporate mannerisms etc into scripts, so in effect Matts contributions were hard coded in, leaving him little room for more improvisation. Not none at all but little room. I.e. Lots of people commenting on his waving his hands about, so therefore that's what Matt has to do, otherwise the lines don't make sense. It's one of the reasons both Mars and I have said in the past that by the end Matt seemed to be doing an impersonation of Matt playing the Doctor, rather than being the Doctor. I'm sure you won't agree but still, Matts interpretation is fresh in S5 but by the "**many things** of the Doctor" episodes, it's all become a bit predictable and stale.

So it's a classic case of writers writing for the actor, rather than writing and having the actor (with director) interpret the script.

What Mars is getting at is, will the writers see the PC-Tom and have him doing similar impersonations throughout next series (for example)? Which will ultimately limit what he can do with those scenes. Because he has to do an impersonation of Pertwee, then Eccleston etc. because that's his "thing" now.

_________________
"How can you convert something so 1D into 3D" - Knappos (SFX Forum) on Star Wars: The Phantom Menace 3D.

Everyone expects The Fannish Inquisition!

Now on http://www.offtopica2.com!! Woo!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:22 pm 
Member
Member

Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 12:36 am
Posts: 334
But that is all speculation isn't it? And is that a reason to base your judgements of a show on? Your own assumptions about things that occur behind the scenes? Or should we stop now?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:36 pm 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2014 10:19 pm
Posts: 517
Location: Devils Ball, spacemate...
Gender: Male
Saul Iscariot wrote:
But that is all speculation isn't it? And is that a reason to base your judgements of a show on? Your own assumptions about things that occur behind the scenes? Or should we stop now?


So are a lot of things written on forums. Just answering Runalong's question, no need to get uppity about it. Some people like discussing this stuff, some don't.

Some people love behind the scenes stuff as much as in front of camera, at this point we don't have any concrete data either way. As to what has and hasn't happened. Thankfully for DWM they have a wealth on old Who, someday new Who's behind the scenes stuff will come out, at which point we'll be able to say either way. Unless someone's got scripts from either of Matts last two series, in which case we can see for ourselves if it was written in or not (I mean actual scripts, not edited for publication ones). Given people mention things like the waving hands on screen, I'm guessing, they are, otherwise you'd have something like that classic comedy moment where some actor says, "is that the phone I hear?" Then the phone rings. :smallsmile:

I'm quite happy to stop as though as this isn't the thread for it.

But then again, I wasn't planning of go any further on it anyway, until you commented.

_________________
"How can you convert something so 1D into 3D" - Knappos (SFX Forum) on Star Wars: The Phantom Menace 3D.

Everyone expects The Fannish Inquisition!

Now on http://www.offtopica2.com!! Woo!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 8:10 pm 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 8:30 pm
Posts: 595
Gender: Male
Can you give Me an example of a show where the actor plays a role for years and his tics/mannerisms are not incorporated? I would argue that happens for all the Doctors.

I can understand you enjoying a debut year it's fresh and new but by year two both writers and actors get a grip on their interpretation of a character. It's harder to experiment if you've started to fill the shape in


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 8:19 pm 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2014 10:19 pm
Posts: 517
Location: Devils Ball, spacemate...
Gender: Male
runalong wrote:
Can you give Me an example of a show where the actor plays a role for years and his tics/mannerisms are not incorporated? I would argue that happens for all the Doctors.

I can understand you enjoying a debut year it's fresh and new but by year two both writers and actors get a grip on their interpretation of a character. It's harder to experiment if you've started to fill the shape in


Which is why I said it was a classic case of writers writing for the actors. Take Dad's Army for example. The question wasn't with the method but the implementation.

I'm sure they did write "Tom Baker" but that would include taking into consideration metre of speech etc, rather than too much toothy grin talk by other characters. I can think of a couple of examples of that though.

Some would argue the "shape" should evolve, though, over time.

_________________
"How can you convert something so 1D into 3D" - Knappos (SFX Forum) on Star Wars: The Phantom Menace 3D.

Everyone expects The Fannish Inquisition!

Now on http://www.offtopica2.com!! Woo!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 8:50 pm 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 8:30 pm
Posts: 595
Gender: Male
I would argue that as you smooth the tougher edges of a performance you do evolve the character. This year for me the edginess of Capaldi is allowing a lot more jagged performance but my hope is like Colin wanted he will slowly find some more humane aspects. For me though he allows a lot more flexibility in the performance


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 9:32 pm 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2014 10:19 pm
Posts: 517
Location: Devils Ball, spacemate...
Gender: Male
I'm wondering if they're trying to deliberately do the Sixth Doctor again, just properly this time.

EDIT: You're back to the Womble again!

_________________
"How can you convert something so 1D into 3D" - Knappos (SFX Forum) on Star Wars: The Phantom Menace 3D.

Everyone expects The Fannish Inquisition!

Now on http://www.offtopica2.com!! Woo!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 9:44 pm 
Atomic Member
Atomic Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2014 11:41 pm
Posts: 2270
Location: Norn Iron
Gender: Male
I don't think we will be in any position to reach a conclusion until the end of the season.

They are "Doing a Colin" - I think that expression should stick. As they are taking a season to play out the storyline they are taking the opportunity to play with the Doctor's character.

And to do such a thing Capaldi has to be fully involved and participating. The good thing is it's giving him time to find his performance.

However what that will be is obscurred with the season arc. And I am sure whatever the reveal will be once the Missy thing is triggered will have the path back to the character Capaldi wants.

However writers in Doctor Who, once they get the hang of a new Doctor do write for that character. They do put those ticks in. The thing is I think they will be mostly none the wiser next year with a few character ticks from this year which may or may not be relevant after this year.

Of course if this is the case Capaldi will have something new to mould next year allowing for further character growth.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 14, 2014 4:22 am 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2013 11:06 am
Posts: 990
Location: Home of the Carronade
Gender: Male
I enjoyed it. Kind of liked clara's justification of hate is something caused by someone you like doing something you don't like. Effectively she wanted to keep her friend but couldn't be with him on adventures any more.

The actual episode was really good fun. Liked the use of the on-screen clock. Perkins was a great character and glad the Doctor at least offered him a chance to go with him in the TARDIS Tennant was particularly bad for "Pretty lady, yes come and travel with me, bloke, umm bye"

Liked the Heartless turnaround, from making Clara lie to get the next victim to the lab to then (Admittedly using a plot device) making himself the target. It was a suddenly heroic moment. All the other things people ahve said, conversation with himself, jelly babies were good too and I liked the guard captain character. Expected to see him show up with Missy.

Of course, Clara never asks how many he saved. Was it just the car they were in? The whole train? Just Clara and Perkins? we may never know.

The space train was all 7.5 colours of dumb though.

_________________
"There is no conspiracy. Nobody is in charge. It's a headless blunder operating under the illusion of a master plan." - Worth, Cube


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 14, 2014 4:23 pm 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 3:12 pm
Posts: 629
Location: Originally SFX, now on Offtopica-2
Gender: Male
Basileus wrote:
Technically 10 is now an odd numbered incarnation.

Don't get technical with me...

_________________
Self Proclaimed, "Moffat Critic - Extraordinaire"

------------------------------
It won't be Star Wars if it doesn't have the 20th C Fox fanfare at the begining - Of Mars: Oct 2012
It was Star Wars even though it didn't have the 20th C Fox fanfare at the begining - Of Mars: Dec 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 14, 2014 6:08 pm 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 3:12 pm
Posts: 629
Location: Originally SFX, now on Offtopica-2
Gender: Male
Ooh it's just like the old days!! Hooray for the Womble...

runalong wrote:
Ok Fourth Planet I am confused
1 - Capaldi is inconsistent due to a narrow characterisation? How does that work?
2 - What's a good example of an active Doctor?
3 - Erm yes standalone episodes that seen together make a larger story is a classic arc
4 - Finally you seriously think Capaldi and Smith don't have some artistic freedom in their performances?

Perdide wrote:
First off, I'm pretty sure Capaldi does have loads of influence... An actor with his status in the industry can make such demands, not so sure Smith would have got away with that if he'd put his foot down as soon as he'd been cast.... In regards to characterisation, I'm pretty sure in his first series Matt did in fact want to put his stamp on the Doctor, and in deed, did. He often talked of the "mad professor" type of character... once Matt had established his character the writers obviously we're keen to incorporate mannerisms etc into scripts, so in effect Matts contributions were hard coded in, leaving him little room for more improvisation. Not none at all but little room. I.e. Lots of people commenting on his waving his hands about, so therefore that's what Matt has to do, otherwise the lines don't make sense. It's one of the reasons both Mars and I have said in the past that by the end Matt seemed to be doing an impersonation of Matt playing the Doctor, rather than being the Doctor.
So it's a classic case of writers writing for the actor, rather than writing and having the actor (with director) interpret the script.
What Mars is getting at is, will the writers see the PC-Tom and have him doing similar impersonations throughout next series (for example)? Which will ultimately limit what he can do with those scenes. Because he has to do an impersonation of Pertwee, then Eccleston etc. because that's his "thing" now.

Great answer Perdide, I am not sure I need to answer!! However, I will anyway just to reiterate the points by referring back to Runny's post, just for the sake of Auld Lang Syne.

2 - I thought it was self-evident, but forgive me. What I mean is basically the Doctor actually doing something himself to "save the day", rather than waving his Sonic (SEE: 'Power of 3') or superpower (SEE: 'Time of...'). Then I said that even this daft ending makes a nicer change than Clara and her leaf.

3 - Not really a question but I get your point. However, you have missed the point I was making. Aside from the Clara storyline, there is no "MISSY" scene crashing the middle of the episode, or tagged on at the end (which I expected when watching). All the talk on here about Perkins is speculation, and so this episode at this point in time is free to be watched on its own unlike 'Dalek 2' & 'Caretaker' but there is just a hint here and there that something else is going on, but that is does not imposse on the actual episode itself.
Blimey Runalong, whadyawantfromme - I was originally trying to say something a little positive about it, and you pick me up on that as well!!

1 - Maybe narrow was the wrong word. Substitute it for vague or slight instead. Meaning that at this point [in response to the post by Basileus about 12th: "We have had flashes but nothing consistent. Whether the problem is they don't know how to get the balance or they are setting things up...I fully expect another interpretation of his character next week."], whilst Peter Capaldi is responsible for his acting choices, that inconsistancy in the character are because the writers (plural) are not certain of what to do with this interpretation that will have come from Moffat.

4 - Perdide tackled this stupendously, and I see the conversation continued. However, let me clear the waters by throwing in some more mud.
Tom Baker was unknown in series 12 and it shows, but he does his thing. He then continues in collaboration with the production team, untill about series 17 where he thinks he is more important and that anything he did would be wonderful (SEE: "Ooh my arms" in 'Nightmare of Eden'), but he was quashed drastically by JNT for series 18, when the new producer put his own mark on it all.
I am not saying that Matt had no freedom whatsoever, but more that Moffat did not write the Eleventh as freely after series 5. I think he constricted himself with his convoluted plots and had to force the Doctor bits, instead of writing it naturally.

_________________
Self Proclaimed, "Moffat Critic - Extraordinaire"

------------------------------
It won't be Star Wars if it doesn't have the 20th C Fox fanfare at the begining - Of Mars: Oct 2012
It was Star Wars even though it didn't have the 20th C Fox fanfare at the begining - Of Mars: Dec 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 14, 2014 8:11 pm 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 8:30 pm
Posts: 595
Gender: Male
2 - still not an example of what you think an active solution is

3 - I understand now

1 and 4 contradict yourself - I'm not surprised a first year Doctor is a bit up and down. The writers haven't seen him on screen and the shadow of the last guy is always around. The actor too is playing around. As discussed earlier I think in year two we get a synthesis as both sides find. A balance - I still think that is pretty much any TV show so am intrigued which one shows your preference


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 14, 2014 8:15 pm 
Member
Member

Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 12:36 am
Posts: 334
I still want to know where you get all this behind the scenes information from? Because if it is a criticism of the show then you must be able to corroborate it? Or are you going to take the avenue of that was all you had to say on the subject?

I can understand people saying they didn't enjoy the show, or series. Nothing is so perfect that it must appeal to everyone. But over the last two episodes I've been told I wasn't listening to the point being made. Which as far as I understood it was that Marlowe was only taking what was said on screen to support his point, despite what was seen contradicting that evidence. And here, Runalong asks a question, Perdide answers, then when I point out it is speculation, his answer was everything is speculation and he didn't want to carry on talking about it.

You've then backed up he said everything so well that there is little point in adding to it, then do. But some, and not all, of your criticisms are based on how you thing the show is made without anything to support it. We are supposed to accept that the writers are adapting things to Capaldi's take on the Doctor, and at the same time throwing them in? We have to accept that Clara's annoyance with the Doctor at the end of episode seven was just glossed over as we didn't see five weeks of her being annoyed with him, her trying to win her over, eventually settling for one last adventure that eventually convinces her to carry on the ride, yet you often complain about Moffat being a soap opera operative?

There are legitimate complaints about Who, but there are times when it feels like a one sided discussion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 14, 2014 8:22 pm 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 8:30 pm
Posts: 595
Gender: Male
It's a bit frustrating as it is either Moffat is a total control freak or he cannot spot inaccuracies between stories. Hard to argue he can do both at the same time


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 14, 2014 11:49 pm 
Junior Member
Junior Member

Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 10:31 pm
Posts: 32
Gender: Male
Surely we should know by now that every wrong thing in the universe and beyond is down to Moffat. :p


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 15, 2014 12:15 am 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2014 10:19 pm
Posts: 517
Location: Devils Ball, spacemate...
Gender: Male
Saul Iscariot wrote:
I can understand people saying they didn't enjoy the show, or series. Nothing is so perfect that it must appeal to everyone. But over the last two episodes I've been told I wasn't listening to the point being made. Which as far as I understood it was that Marlowe was only taking what was said on screen to support his point, despite what was seen contradicting that evidence. And here, Runalong asks a question, Perdide answers, then when I point out it is speculation, his answer was everything is speculation and he didn't want to carry on talking about it.


I guess you're talking to Of Mars here but as you mentioned me I'll chip back in. Hmm, I did actually say more than that though, if you look. It wasn't just "everything's speculation, so that's it, I'm done." What about all that bit where I said people like discussing this stuff and that unless we have an original script we'll never genuinely find out - which is of course the only evidence on what is in the scripts, are the actual scripts or at least until such time as DWM do an archive or interview with staff from this era. You can extrapolate from the lines and the course of the story on screen what may be in there but as I said, it's always going to be speculation.

Saul Iscariot wrote:
But that is all speculation isn't it? And is that a reason to base your judgements of a show on? Your own assumptions about things that occur behind the scenes? Or should we stop now?


That bit is why I said I was quite happy to stop - you asked! Clearly you don't want to though. I'll still suggest that we move to a dedicated thread rather than fill up this one with OT material though.

People make judgements on their favourite shows all the time, this can be influenced by many things including behind the scenes documentaries, interviews, scandal, tabloid fluff etc. as well as the actual content. Sorry to say it but if you're after hard evidence either way then I can't provide any as my answer to runalong was based on what I remembered being discussed in some thread on the SFX forum. As that's no longer there I can't reference it at all. "How convenient" you may say but honestly I can't remember how or why or if any "evidence" was produced for the statement "Do the writers write the Doctor's mannerisms in and restrict the actors choices in some scenes."

runalong wrote:
It's a bit frustrating as it is either Moffat is a total control freak or he cannot spot inaccuracies between stories. Hard to argue he can do both at the same time


Hasn't this been discussed before? The conclusion was that Moffat is a control freak, though I'm not fond of that phrase, in the sense that he likes to have his hand in everything but inaccuracies creep in because he writes in his usual sitcom style which means he either forgets or deliberately ignores elements from previous stories in favour of telling the current one. So yes, he is capable of both.

Hornetxt wrote:
Surely we should know by now that every wrong thing in the current rebooted DW universe ... is down to Moffat.


Fixed for you. :p

_________________
"How can you convert something so 1D into 3D" - Knappos (SFX Forum) on Star Wars: The Phantom Menace 3D.

Everyone expects The Fannish Inquisition!

Now on http://www.offtopica2.com!! Woo!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 15, 2014 7:36 am 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2014 1:01 pm
Posts: 602
Location: Neath, Wales
Gender: Male
you know I thought I was going to miss the SFX forum but it really is alive and well on here :smallsmile:




OK im lying I still miss the Forum .......... but I am making a home here and that's nice. :bigsmile:

_________________
People keep making apocalypse jokes like there's no tomorrow


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 15, 2014 7:40 am 
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:16 pm
Posts: 76
Location: I...wha... that's a good question...
Gender: Female
A couple of people have mentioned the SFX Review so I thought I'd link to it: http://www.sfx.co.uk/2014/10/11/doctor-who-8-08-mummy-on-the-orient-express-review/

3 Stars and I mostly disagree with it though for once there are actually clear reasons for the rating.

And I do agree with what some have said about the sheer uselessness of the other scientists. It's actually distracting how little they contribute, the Extras aren't even doing a good job at pretending to do...well, anything.

_________________
Commander 'Splody of FlammableShrub, Head of 'Splosions and Gadgets
"Where am I? Can I burn things?"
Follower of the Mightly Rolled Fig


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 15, 2014 6:07 pm 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 3:12 pm
Posts: 629
Location: Originally SFX, now on Offtopica-2
Gender: Male
runalong wrote:
2 - still not an example of what you think an active solution is

3 - I understand now

1 and 4 contradict yourself - I'm not surprised a first year Doctor is a bit up and down. The writers haven't seen him on screen and the shadow of the last guy is always around. The actor too is playing around. As discussed earlier I think in year two we get a synthesis as both sides find. A balance - I still think that is pretty much any TV show so am intrigued which one shows your preference


2 - Not an "active solution" as you say it; but I mean the Dr defeating whoever, or solving whatever with wit & wisdom, and not being rendered useless by a scenerio in which any jackanapes or ham-fisted-bun-vendor can do it instead.
This problem was not born of Moffat, as it was plentiful in the RTD era as well. They spend so much time TELLING us the Doctor is GREAT, but seldom do we actually see it, other than by sonic or magic power. I don't understand how anyone can disagree with me about this, I mean if you don't want to see the Doctor doing what the Doctor does then why watch it?

3 - Groovy.

4 - Please by all means (well click a few buttons and type a few words) show me my contradiction and I will answer again.

0 - This is fun!

Z - That wasn't irony!


Saul Iscariot wrote:
I still want to know where you get all this behind the scenes information from? Because if it is a criticism of the show then you must be able to corroborate it? Or are you going to take the avenue of that was all you had to say on the subject?

Nope I have lots to say... but I throw the question back to you. Where and what, in my post did I say is "behind the scenes information"? If you find it, I will answer your point or question.

Saul Iscariot wrote:
But over the last two episodes I've been told I wasn't listening to the point being made. Which as far as I understood it was that Marlowe was only taking what was said on screen to support his point, despite what was seen contradicting that evidence. And here, Runalong asks a question, Perdide answers, then when I point out it is speculation, his answer was everything is speculation and he didn't want to carry on talking about it.

You will have to speak to them about it to be honest.

Saul Iscariot wrote:
You've then backed up he said everything so well that there is little point in adding to it, then do.
I said "Great answer Perdide, I am not sure I need to answer!! However, I will anyway just to reiterate the points by referring back to Runny's post, just for the sake of Auld Lang Syne.", what's wrong with that? Why can't I continue the debate, that's waht we are here for is it not? Anyway, I was answering Runalong who asked me questions, and I thought it would be nice to continue our "strange duet *", as previously sung on SFX.

Saul Iscariot wrote:
But some, and not all, of your criticisms are based on how you thing the show is made without anything to support it. We are supposed to accept that the writers are adapting things to Capaldi's take on the Doctor, and at the same time throwing them in?

Did I say that? Though this is the same basic thing Runny said, so I will await both to see waht needs answering.

Saul Iscariot wrote:
We have to accept that Clara's annoyance with the Doctor at the end of episode seven was just glossed over as we didn't see five weeks of her being annoyed with him, her trying to win her over, eventually settling for one last adventure that eventually convinces her to carry on the ride, yet you often complain about Moffat being a soap opera operative?

I think I know what you are saying here but it is not that simple. It isn't one or the other.


* Points for anyone who knows where that comes from.

_________________
Self Proclaimed, "Moffat Critic - Extraordinaire"

------------------------------
It won't be Star Wars if it doesn't have the 20th C Fox fanfare at the begining - Of Mars: Oct 2012
It was Star Wars even though it didn't have the 20th C Fox fanfare at the begining - Of Mars: Dec 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 15, 2014 6:30 pm 
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 7:00 pm
Posts: 217
Location: Batley, West Yorkshire
Gender: Female
Of Mars wrote:
runalong wrote:
and I thought it would be nice to continue our "strange duet *", as previously sung on SFX.


* Points for anyone who knows where that comes from.


Phantom of the Opera


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 15, 2014 6:53 pm 
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2014 9:38 pm
Posts: 326
Gender: Male
Finally got round to watching it last night and even though I agree with a lot of what Ian said in his review about the Foretold and it's motive not making much sense I still enjoyed it a lot. Not sure if I would watching it again in the future but it kept me gripped more than Kill The Moon did towards the end and while the Doctor was still a bit of an arse at times, at least it felt like there was a good reason for it this time.

I did initially groan as soon as we realised Clara's storming out didn't last very long but 5 minutes after her explanation for coming back I honestly didn't mind. Plus she looked amazing as a flapper.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 15, 2014 7:28 pm 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 8:30 pm
Posts: 595
Gender: Male
Obviously I am the phantom ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 1:26 pm 
Flaming Member Level 2
Flaming Member Level 2
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 11:26 pm
Posts: 1093
Location: Finland
Gender: Male
Rated this one as "good" as I rather enjoyed that a lot.

Love how wonderfully realised the mummy was. It looked fantastic and I LOVE the foot drag - it's such a small thing and is probably a little daft to get so hooked on, but it just sold it for me beautifully. Bang up job all round.

I had a wee flailing geek out when Capaldi did his Tom Baker impression, which I've taken to be this incarnation of the Doctor sort of asking his older selves for advice and allowing the one with mummy-experience to bleed through a little more.

I was surprised to find that I enjoyed Frank Skinner's Perkins much more than I expected to, and in fact I think he's my favourite supporting character of the season so far. It's a bit of a shame that he turned down the invitation, but it may well be a good thing as perhaps less is more. At least with him not tagging along for a while, there is no chance of Frank Skinner singing. That said, I wouldn't be too surprised if we saw him again later on, either in conjunction with Missy this season or perhaps in a Christmas special. Perkins and the Doctor got on too well for it to properly be the end, I reckon.

I do wish we could have had an episode without Danny Pink, but hey ho. Regarding that last phone call though, did he really say that he doesn't mind Clara and the Doctor going on adventures, or did Clara lie? I did a double take when she said it, so either my dislike of the Clanny caused me to zone out for a few seconds and I missed it or she is doing what she's accused the Doctor of doing, only to the Doctor and Danny.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 1:51 pm 
Junior Member
Junior Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:16 am
Posts: 39
Location: Australia
Gender: Male
Basileus wrote:
Technically 10 is now an odd numbered incarnation.

Notice I didn't say Doctor.



Ahem: 10 was also 11 cos of him cheating the regeneration sequence (now canon due to the Christmas special spelling out that it used up a regen). Therefore if you are shifting him up one due to the War Doctor then he is now 11 and 12. So does that make him both good and bad? I dunno cos I don't make the rules!

_________________
Fabricati Diem, Pvnc!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 3:41 pm 
Forum God!
Forum God!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 11:57 pm
Posts: 5188
Location: All around you, like a mist or fog or halibut.
Gender: Male
PSN ID: TaoJude
Nintendo Network ID: TaoJude
Robin the Ripper wrote:
I had a wee flailing geek out when Capaldi did his Tom Baker impression, which I've taken to be this incarnation of the Doctor sort of asking his older selves for advice and allowing the one with mummy-experience to bleed through a little more.



I like this idea. That's what I'm going to believe from now on.

_________________
White collar conservative flashin' down the street
Pointin their plastic finger at me. Ha!
They're hopin' soon my kind will drop and die but, uh,
I'm gonna wave my freak flag high. HIGH!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 8:08 pm 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 3:12 pm
Posts: 629
Location: Originally SFX, now on Offtopica-2
Gender: Male
fainiel wrote:
Of Mars wrote:
and I thought it would be nice to continue our "strange duet *", as previously sung on SFX.
* Points for anyone who knows where that comes from.

Phantom of the Opera

Points for you!

runalong wrote:
Obviously I am the phantom ;)

Does that mean I am Sarah Brightman then?

_________________
Self Proclaimed, "Moffat Critic - Extraordinaire"

------------------------------
It won't be Star Wars if it doesn't have the 20th C Fox fanfare at the begining - Of Mars: Oct 2012
It was Star Wars even though it didn't have the 20th C Fox fanfare at the begining - Of Mars: Dec 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 9:47 pm 
Flaming Member Level 1
Flaming Member Level 1
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2014 10:19 pm
Posts: 517
Location: Devils Ball, spacemate...
Gender: Male
Tao wrote:
Robin the Ripper wrote:
I had a wee flailing geek out when Capaldi did his Tom Baker impression, which I've taken to be this incarnation of the Doctor sort of asking his older selves for advice and allowing the one with mummy-experience to bleed through a little more.



I like this idea. That's what I'm going to believe from now on.


I like that too, but it does mean we've missed his opportunity to do an impersonation of Pertwee on the moon. With spiders and all that.

_________________
"How can you convert something so 1D into 3D" - Knappos (SFX Forum) on Star Wars: The Phantom Menace 3D.

Everyone expects The Fannish Inquisition!

Now on http://www.offtopica2.com!! Woo!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2014 10:12 pm 
Atomic Member
Atomic Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2014 11:41 pm
Posts: 2270
Location: Norn Iron
Gender: Male
Fabricatus wrote:
Basileus wrote:
Technically 10 is now an odd numbered incarnation.

Notice I didn't say Doctor.



Ahem: 10 was also 11 cos of him cheating the regeneration sequence (now canon due to the Christmas special spelling out that it used up a regen). Therefore if you are shifting him up one due to the War Doctor then he is now 11 and 12. So does that make him both good and bad? I dunno cos I don't make the rules!


How did I know that would come up. :bigsmile:

The Red One's theory was even numbered liking sweets.

I would say Tennent being 11, didn't actually change when he became 12 so likes and dislikes were carried over. And Capaldi would now be 14, so even and thus no change from being 12. :thumbs:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:02 am 
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2013 12:43 pm
Posts: 83
Gender: Male
I enjoyed this one. It had some good moments that made up for the relentless Clara/Doctor soap-opera tripe.

The mummy plot was well done, although it drifted into pointlessness a bit before the end. The whole lab/train/space thing was bobbins. Hokey but fun.

Frank Skinner was great.

On the other hand, it was yet another creature outside of normal perception, and also another entity cobbled together from bits and trying to fulfill old orders/programming.

(and that's before we get to Flatline, apparently featuring an enemy from beyond human perception...)

_________________
There's more to life than stainless steel and looking cool.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:11 am 
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2013 12:43 pm
Posts: 83
Gender: Male
Saul Iscariot wrote:
But over the last two episodes I've been told I wasn't listening to the point being made. Which as far as I understood it was that Marlowe was only taking what was said on screen to support his point, despite what was seen contradicting that evidence. And here, Runalong asks a question, Perdide answers, then when I point out it is speculation, his answer was everything is speculation and he didn't want to carry on talking about it.


What I was saying was this:

In the episode we are presented with information that the Moon has gained a specific amount of mass and told that this has had a specific impact on Earth. That information is scientifically incorrect. Thus it is a plot hole. It's not a sign that something else is going on that the characters don't know about. There's no indication in the episode that the Doctor or anyone else doesn't understand what is happening. At no point does the Doctor announce "the amount of mass you mention would scarcely be noticed". The premise of the episode is that the creature has added the mass and that this is a Bad Thing. The fact the writer didn't think it through and just chucked in some numbers to make it sound 'sciency' is what renders it ludicrously wrong.

If they'd gone down the 'science fantasy' route and just handwaved 'bad things happening on Earth, Moon's mass increasing' and not tried to be specific, it would have avoided the hilarious wrongness.

On the other hand, you appear to think if something stated in the show is balls, it just means there's some secret thing happening that the writer is keeping from you. Whatever floats your boat, I guess.

_________________
There's more to life than stainless steel and looking cool.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post a new topicPost a reply Page 3 of 4   [ 95 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Help keep this forum ad-free - please Donate


This free, ad-free forum is hosted by ForumLaunch
cron


Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
twilightBB Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net