Doctor Who Season 6 on BBC America - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 237 Old 07-26-2011, 04:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
HDMe2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Kittrell, NC
Posts: 5,203
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by vfxproducer View Post

But can you blame her? I mean, who wants to meet Wesley Crusher?

Ashley Judd did

(I recently rewatched "The Game"... and that's the episode where I finally decided to hate Wesley Crusher)

Yeah baby!  It's Halloween!
HDMe2 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 237 Old 08-17-2011, 09:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Savageone79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Carbondale IL
Posts: 2,454
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
When does it come back? I can't wait!
Savageone79 is offline  
post #93 of 237 Old 08-17-2011, 10:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
HDTVChallenged's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,403
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Savageone79 View Post

When does it come back? I can't wait!

Apparently running clip/self-promo "specials" for the next 2-3 weeks, then it starts up again.
HDTVChallenged is offline  
post #94 of 237 Old 08-18-2011, 07:09 AM
Member
 
diditagain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Episode 6-8 ("Let's Kill Hitler" -- I guess you could call this the "mid-season premiere") airs on Saturday, August 27 at 9pm EDT on BBC America, a few hours after the BBC One airing at 7:10pm London time.

And according to the BBC America schedule, there will be a new episode on Labor Day weekend, since episode 6-9 is on their schedule for Saturday, September 3 at 9pm EDT (remember that BBC America waited a week to air episode 6-6 because of Memorial Day weekend). After that, new episodes will continue until Saturday, October 1.
diditagain is offline  
post #95 of 237 Old 08-25-2011, 08:45 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
dad1153's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 35,749
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 156 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Q&A
'Doctor Who' showrunner Steven Moffat on Amy, River, Rory and more
By Alan Sepinwall, HitFix.com - August 24th, 2011

The sixth (modern) season of "Doctor Who" returns to BBC America on Saturday night at 9 with an episode cheekily-titled "Let's Kill Hitler." I haven't seen the episode yet, but will presumably have a post-air review of it up that night.

When I was at press tour earlier this month, I got a chance to sit down with Steven Moffat, the man in charge of the "Who"-niverse these days, to talk about the intertwined lives of Amy Pond and River Song, about the famous audition that made Matt Smith the youngest Doctor ever, about the recurring themes of Moffat's time on the show, the workload of writing for the Doctor and Sherlock Holmes simultaneously, and more.


I want to start out by asking about the timeline. When you were doing the "Silence in the Library" two-parter, had you and Russell (Davies) already talked about the idea of you taking over the show the following year?
It's really hard to get all that fixed in my head. Talked about it just after this, TCAs, in 2007 when I was here for "Jekyll." So, yes, we would have talked about it when I wrote it.

So you knew going in that you would have this story to tell with River and you'd be in charge to tell it?
That wasn't especially my plan. It came about for the most practical of reasons, River: it was because the Doctor had to be found in a library that had been sealed off for 100 years, and a team of archaeologists had to walk through that door, and some things the psychic paper won't cover. So I didn't want to have a long section where he was arrested, like the show used to have. That would be boring. And it was really hard, actually, to get around that. I thought that the lamest idea in the world is that one of them knows him, and I felt that was too much of a coincidence. But you can disguise the coincidence, hide it out of sight, if it's someone he hasn't met yet. And then it's just click-click-click: What if it's a woman? What if it's a woman who flirts with him? And then you think, "That's going to upstage the rest of the story, but let's do it anyway." But even at that point, I was thinking that this would be a one-off character. She was designed to be, and maybe she could be canoodling the 45th Doctor, and we wouldn't have to see her again until I'm no longer materially involved in either making or watching it. But because Alex (Kingston) was so good, and the character was so popular, why not?

At what point did you realize the relationship that River and Amy would have?
Remember, all plans have to be susceptible to change. What if Karen had left early? You can't make final decisions. In the process of writing that two-parter and rewriting the two-parter, I came up with one version of who she could be. So I left the option open when I came up with Amy Pond, knowing I was probably but not definitely going to bring River back. I made sure there was some link - the Pond/River thing - that I could return to later.

So in the scene in the stone angels two-parter where Amy meets River, you're writing it with the idea that, "If I go through with this, people are going to go back and watch this episode and see how River reacts to it"?
Yes. Plan A held, but anything could have happened. We could have decided that we didn't like River with Matt. Or it would interfere with Amy.

In both the library two-parter and the angels two-parter, we got the sense that River and the Doctor's encounters have been extremely out of order. But when she appears at the start of this current season, she says, basically, that they've been traveling in exactly opposite directions.
No, she's talking poetically.

Okay.
It's the broad sweep of it. Even within the series, it doesn't happen that way. She's saying that while there will be individual moments that are out of sequence, in the broad sweep of things, she tends to deal with a younger Doctor each time.

Because one of the things that's interesting in that same episode is that she tells Rory to imagine meeting the Doctor when you're very young, and how much that would influence you. And that's basically Amy's story, and it was Madame de Pompadour's story (in the Moffat-written "The Girl in the Fireplace"). What is it about this idea of the Doctor influencing someone throughout their life that's so interesting to you?
I think it's the story of the whole series, not just those characters. Ex-companions must have to deal with that for the rest of their lives, but we hardly ever see them again. Realistically, that would be the highlight of your life, the most extraordinary thing. You'd never be able to watch a science program without laughing at it. Everyone would speculate about life on other planets, and you'd know. It would change your life forever. The series has always been the story of how the companion changes, not how the Doctor changes. The Doctor doesn't change very much. That's always the story.

So the childhood meeting is just an easy way to illustrate that, rather than revisiting a former companion years later?
I like things that force the Doctor to address that he's aging much more slowly than everyone else. I think that's interesting, whether you do it in the simple, cartoony way of him missing an entire growing up, or just seeing Amy and Rory. They're getting married, getting a house, while the Doctor is remaining fundamentally the same, while they grow up around him. Which is why he tries to get out of their lives. It's too hard.

There do seem to be certain other recurring themes from your episodes in the Davies era that keep coming up now that you're in charge. Is it just the case of, because you're responsible in some way for every episode, the things that you enjoy doing with the character come up more often? Or is it just, "Hey, this works, I'd like to do it as much as I can"?
I don't think it's even authorship. I've talked with Russell about this. There are certain ideas that become prevalent in the series, because everyone thinks of them at once. When Russell was doing it, he said that one year, everybody was talking about breeding planets. Frequently, you find a bunch of people who, with no confab at all, are going on about the same thing. And maybe just because we're all living in the same world, absorbing the same news stories, we all tend to think of the same things. It's just a bunch of ideas being informed by the same preoccupations.

Obviously, you're writing for a different Doctor, but beyond that, how has the experience of writing for this character changed now that you're in charge versus being the guy who parachutes in once a year?
The actual experience of writing a "Doctor Who" story is pretty much the same, because it's still a "Doctor Who" story. The difference is the obvious one: I have to worry about all the episodes, where before I was just worrying about my episode and trying to know as little as possible about the others. I would just drive on, do my one script, and go off. It's not a unique experience to me. I've done this before with other shows; I'm just doing it with "Doctor Who."

There's the famous story: you were not expecting to cast a Doctor as young as Matt, Matt comes in, wows you, he's the guy. When I interviewed Matt a while back and asked him what it was he did that impressed you, he couldn't quite put it into words. What did you see? What was he doing?
The same performance you see on the show now. I still have it on my laptop. It's the same performance he gives now. He was just brilliant. He was by far the best.

What scene was it? Was it something new, or an older scene for Tennant or Eccleston?
I worked up three scenes. A couple were from "The Eleventh Hour," like the one where he's tied up by Amy, and the one where he runs into the town center and sees the Atraxi. And then the one where Amy's hand is turning into stone. It's really dead-simple. His acting was outstanding, his grasp of the character. He's exactly what you see on the screen right now. It was actually alarming. It was literally the first time he'd done it, and he had the hair, the manner, all of it.

(Producers) Piers (Wenger) and Beth (Willis) talked in the panel about how the character has even become a bit more like Matt over time. When you were writing "Eleventh Hour," what ways did you see that Eleven was different from Ten or Nine?
I really, honestly, never think of it like that. The important thing to me is that it's the same man. Literally the same man, in every single respect. What changes is, you'd be behaving differently if you were wearing a suit today, or something else. So he's got a different body, and certain things alter. But how it changes in terms of how you write it, is - just unconsciously, without thinking about it - to start maximizing what the new actor brings to it. You're not even working out what those things are. Initially, and quite fearlessly, I just wrote David. And when David started, I just wrote Chris. Russell said the same thing: "Just write the Doctor, and see what he does with it." With Matt, it's a return to the more mad Doctor like the old show, but in a younger, cooler form than he's ever been before.

In "Eleventh Hour," he seems much too old for that face, and as that series went along, he becomes younger and almost like a petulant kid, which I quite enjoyed.
He can do both, really. He can do the grand old man when he needs to. Everyone was talking about how young Matt is, but who says the Doctor's old? The Doctor's young. He just has a very long lifespan.

One of the things you talked about in the press conference is that each set of writers can change the mythology and do whatever they want. One of the major changes you made was to get rid of the paradox rule. The Doctor can cross his own timeline and change things a little bit.
I didn't get rid of it. It's changed throughout the history of the series. He's always changing time.

Well, in Russell's era, there was always a specific point about how, "I can't go back to this place I've just been and do it differently."
That's not quite it. He says there are fixed points, like Pompeii is fixed. But otherwise, he's changing time all the time. Can he go over his own timestream? He does it in "Smith and Jones," he does it every time he meets himself. Are we really saying there's a rule the Doctor isn't going to break? The fact that he says it's a rule doesn't mean he's going to stick to it.

When Toby (Whithouse) was at Comic-Con, he says he loves that "wibbly-wobbly-timey-wimey" phrase because it gives him license to not even worry about that sort of thing.
It's a joke line, but the truth is it's just as useful as saying, "It's the inter-fantastical nature of the sub-space continuum." It's all gobble-dy gook.

I watched the two-parter that opened this season, and I thought to myself, "Wow, this is a show for children, and they're not dumbing it down at all." That was a very structurally-complicated two scripts there.
When did we decide that children - who learn to read in a very short space of time, who learn to speak the English language within a year and a half, who can learn anything faster than you or I - are stupid? They're bored by different things, and there are some complicated emotions that can be confusing to them. But I always get gobsmacked when people say that. Have you seen what they're reading? Harry Potter? These great big doorstops of books! And children who watch television, watch it like this (he folds his hands under his chin and stares intently at an imaginary screen). And if there's something that maybe makes them say, "I didn't quite understand that, Dad, what happened?" and they have a conversation about it, can someone tell me what's wrong with that?

I think it's fantastic. I admire it. I'm just used to this notion of, like I said, dumbing it down when it's maybe not necessary.
If you ever, ever, ever dumb anything down, you are assuming other people aren't as clever as you. And you will not survive long. Always assume people are smarter than you.

I want to get back to another recurring theme of yours, which is people traveling through time the long way. That comes up in the first episode with the Weeping Angels, Rory does it as the centurion. What is it about that that interests you?
It's more the other thing. It's more that the Doctor cannons around life in a short way. He skips ahead to the interesting bits, and that gives him an odd relationship with the universe. He doesn't own a time machine, he actually lives in one. He lives his life in the wrong sequence. I just think that that colliding with ordinary lives is tragic and odd, and gives him a very strange and very inhuman perspective on things like death.

This may be something that's addressed in the remaining six episodes, and if so you don't need to answer, but Amy has been attracted to the Doctor, the Doctor has some sort of relationship with what turns out to be Amy's daughter - what is the meaning of that, from a Freudian perspective, or whatever?
(Laughs) Well, he didn't know! And first of all, he does comprehensively reject Amy's advances. He absolutely says "No." And that has nothing to do with whatever relationship he has with River. It has to do that for the Doctor, Amy will always be 7. And that's just appalling to him. Not that he isn't aware that she's pretty. And it's fan-generated nonsense to say that the Doctor doesn't like pretty women. The entire run of the show tells you the true story about that. But he absolutely says no. I'm not sure, if Rose had flung herself at him in that way, that he wouldn't have just gone with it. Probably would if River did.

So I'm not sure there's that kind of complexity. There's a temporal problem there. River seems to him like an older person, someone more like him, and Amy seems like a child, and oddly enough Amy is the mother of River.

And for however long baby River, or Melody, is gone, how do you keep Amy as the carefree, headstrong character we like, while her baby has been abducted?
You'll have to wait and watch, won't you? It's dealt with.

Have you given any thought at this stage to how many more stories you have about this character?
Not really. I think I would run out of energy and stamina and all that before I'd run out of stories. Because doing this and "Sherlock" as well, this is savage.

I've seen you on Twitter talk about how one of the shows is in production and you're in a corner writing for the other one, going back and forth. Has that been manageable for you?
"Manageable" is the wrong word. It's "survivable." You can do it. You have no choice. That said, I think it's, "I have no choice, therefore I will do it," rather than, "This is a sane way to live your life." This is not f--king sane what I'm doing right now.

But it's brilliant.
And that's the thing. This will never come again. I'm not sure anyone's ever had this: the two great dramas in the country. I can't think of anyone who's done it.

But it's not just the two great dramas. It's two of the most iconic characters in the country, ever.
I know. I'm very, very fortunate, so I can't spend my time bellyaching about the fact that my work schedule is truly tragic. It's truly shocking.

http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/whats-al...-rory-and-more


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
dad1153 is online now  
post #96 of 237 Old 08-27-2011, 09:09 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Keenan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 28,336
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 367 Post(s)
Liked: 414
Ah, it's nice to see The Doctor back after having to watch that mess that is Torchwood. Great episode tonight, nice tight storyline with all the characters having a reason to be there, unlike the Starz presentation of Torchwood.
Keenan is online now  
post #97 of 237 Old 08-28-2011, 10:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
vfxproducer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 86
Clearly I missed something. Why was The Doctor's regereration 'disabled'?
vfxproducer is online now  
post #98 of 237 Old 08-29-2011, 04:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ss9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: metro Atlanta
Posts: 8,649
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 327
^^
I did too. Maybe it just made for better drama. Or Matt Smith not ready to leave the show
Didn't make much sense, tho.

Steve
ss9001 is online now  
post #99 of 237 Old 08-29-2011, 09:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
HDTVChallenged's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,403
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by vfxproducer View Post

Clearly I missed something. Why was The Doctor's regereration 'disabled'?

1) The wardrobe change (into Tophat/Tails from Amy's Wedding) was probably significant.

2) How else would one kill a time lord? The only choices seem to be to use up all allotted regenerations, double-tap in mid-regen, or somehow suppress the ability (presumably with a poison.)

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Spoiler  
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

3) I have a feeling that we still have at least two doctors running around ... the real one, and a "flesh-clone/ganger" version. We don't know if a ganger version would have regen capability.
HDTVChallenged is offline  
post #100 of 237 Old 08-29-2011, 09:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
vfxproducer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDTVChallenged View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Spoiler  
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

3) I have a feeling that we still have at least two doctors running around ... the real one, and a "flesh-clone/ganger" version. We don't know if a ganger version would have regen capability.

Oh yes, this last point makes the most sense to me.
vfxproducer is online now  
post #101 of 237 Old 08-29-2011, 10:23 AM
Advanced Member
 
ltownsend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Coral Springs, FL
Posts: 648
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Anyone figure out River Pond?

I am even more confused after the latest ep...

Here is my understanding:

River (Melody) is Amy & Rory Pond's daughter. (sidebar: Rory does not have a last name, he has taken Amy's ...

River (Melody) was named after Amy's BF

Amy was kidnapped when she was preggers by the Doctors enemies and kept until she gave birth to Melody

Her captors raised Melody and trained her for one thing - to kill the Doctor

She was renamed River Song (translated from Melody Pond)

River is the child in the astronaut suit who kills the Doctor (and watches the event with Amy, Rory and older Mark Sheppard)

(insert here any information I missed until she reappears as the Archaeologist from 215? we meet helping the Doctor) with the Van Gogh painting of the Tardis

Burning question - how did River become a time traveler like the Doctor???
I know the Tardis trained her on how to operate her, but she jumps in and out of time whenever she is needed (or not needed) at will.

Contributions gladly accepted. Any insight would be most helpful ...

"I shall not commit the fashionable stupidity of regarding everything I cannot explain as a fraud." - C.G.Jung

 

 

ltownsend is offline  
post #102 of 237 Old 08-29-2011, 11:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
vfxproducer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltownsend View Post

River is the child in the astronaut suit who kills the Doctor (and watches the event with Amy, Rory and older Mark Sheppard)...

One possible correction here...we assume it is River inside the astronaut suit, due to the Doctor's killing being one of those fixed points in time. But we don't know that she was a child in the suit.

I'm also assuming that the aliens who kidnapped River as a newborn somehow engineered the idea of River later regenerating as an infant, and being placed with a family near Amy Pond, so that they could grow up as childhood friends.

I'm wondering this...how did you guys feel about seeing the pre-vis animation of the missing scene that was too difficult/expensive to film? Did you feel that it was a good idea to show that, and did it add to the storytelling for you?
vfxproducer is online now  
post #103 of 237 Old 08-29-2011, 01:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
HDMe2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Kittrell, NC
Posts: 5,203
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 119
I liked it... I watched it twice... but I'm not sure it was a well-written episode.

I've said in other forums, that I think Matt Smith might be one of the most gifted actors to play the Doctor... and that he and the other actors often save the plot with their acting skill...

But, if I really try and pay attention to the episode and what is going on... it feels like there is too much going on, and that it is built around ideas that are executed before fleshed out.

Like... I watched the Confidentials and for the earlier Neil Gaiman episode... he described his own episode as starting about imagining "what if the Doctor and the Tardis could talk"... and Gaiman said he knew what each would say... and the rest of the episode sprang from that.

I feel like a lot of this series in particular is constructed that way.

"What if River is Amy's daughter"
"What if she can regenerate"
"What if she grew up with them and they didn't know it"
"What if the Doctor dies"
"What if he dies again"

and so forth...

And so we get some amount of "filler" just to get to a particular punchline or scene... such that the events don't necessarily build to the big event.

What was the point of Hitler? The Teselact (or however you spell it) seems like there should be a LOT of backstory to explore, and it wasn't.

Mels would have been better served IF we had seen her as a child last series... Given that Moffat says he planed these series together... I would have felt more satisfied if we had seen the Mels character introduced last season... and then you would have thought she was a throwaway extra character... then this episode would have been "oh, now I get it"...

But instead, she is introduced and dispatched in a matter of minutes... so no real emotional impact there.

It's funny... because had they not done the regeneration... I was going to make a joke that maybe Sylvester McCoy's "Mel" companion could be revealed as being her too That would have been funny.

I still enjoy Doctor Who... but it is starting to feel like a show that doesn't have a direction... but rather is going for flash and buzz without substance.

Yeah baby!  It's Halloween!
HDMe2 is offline  
post #104 of 237 Old 08-29-2011, 02:45 PM
Advanced Member
 
Oliver Deplace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Northern California
Posts: 749
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 24
The quote has been edited to include, in boldface, my attempts to answer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ltownsend View Post

Anyone figure out River Pond?

I am even more confused after the latest ep...

Here is my understanding:

River (Melody) is Amy & Rory Pond's daughter. -Seems to be. (sidebar: Rory does not have a last name, he has taken Amy's ... -Rory's sir name is Williams

River (Melody) was named after Amy's BF -Apparently, Melody and River are one and the same.

Amy was kidnapped when she was preggers by the Doctors enemies and kept until she gave birth to Melody -Seems to be.

Her captors raised Melody and trained her for one thing - to kill the Doctor -Dunno. But, I think is was the Silence who framed Melody/River for killing the doctor. The space-suit was autonomous and it was what killed the doctor. Melody/River was simply imprisoned within and it was she who took the blame. (But really, the writers can have the doctor go back and forth in time and change anything to suit whatever.)

She was renamed River Song (translated from Melody Pond) -Seems to be.

River is the child in the astronaut suit who kills the Doctor (and watches the event with Amy, Rory and older Mark Sheppard) -I'm assuming that it is she who is in the space-suit, but we don't get to see the face.

(insert here any information I missed until she reappears as the Archaeologist from 215? we meet helping the Doctor) with the Van Gogh painting of the Tardis -Sorry, but series six is my first exposure to this show.

Burning question - how did River become a time traveler like the Doctor???
I know the Tardis trained her on how to operate her, but she jumps in and out of time whenever she is needed (or not needed) at will. -A theory is that she was conceived aboard the TARDIS during a temporal whatchamacallit.

Contributions gladly accepted. Any insight would be most helpful ...

From what I've seen, the Doctor Who universe is an "anything goes" sort of place. What seems to be, may subsequently be revealed to be something different.

Two would seem to be two too many to me too.
Sarcasm is the sincerest form of flattery.
I bid you a fondue.
Oliver Deplace is offline  
post #105 of 237 Old 08-29-2011, 03:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Temple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose CA
Posts: 8,476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Wow, I was considering jumping into the Whoverse again (last time I watched was in the 70s), but from the last few posts, I doubt I'll get up to speed without going back to when RTD took over.

I don't lurk as much as I used to and I NEVER listen. Comes from being old and cynical.

Ron Temple is offline  
post #106 of 237 Old 08-29-2011, 09:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cocoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,220
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Temple View Post

Wow, I was considering jumping into the Whoverse again (last time I watched was in the 70s), but from the last few posts, I doubt I'll get up to speed without going back to when RTD took over.

It's only 6 seasons so far with 13 episodes each. Not counting the stand alone specials.
cocoon is offline  
post #107 of 237 Old 08-29-2011, 10:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
vfxproducer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by cocoon View Post

It's only 6 seasons so far with 13 episodes each. Not counting the stand alone specials.

Plus, you could easily jump in at season 5 and follow along pretty well from there.
vfxproducer is online now  
post #108 of 237 Old 08-30-2011, 07:15 AM
Advanced Member
 
xcrunner529's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 536
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by vfxproducer View Post

Plus, you could easily jump in at season 5 and follow along pretty well from there.

That's what I did after wanting to catch up (I watched the first couple episodes of season 1). I love the cast!
xcrunner529 is offline  
post #109 of 237 Old 08-30-2011, 01:55 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
To those who were actually around to have been following it then, remember - he left off in "the 70's". The difference between Who in the 70's and now is like a complete night and day difference, and pretty jarring if he were to go straight into the newer series, if he were expecting them to be anything at all alike. It's like two, completely different shows. The 70's period - especially the T. Baker/Sladen/Jameson era, is far too unique in comparison - even to any other period of the original series.

I still think it'd be best for him to pick up and go chronlogically from the point he left off. The final, McCoy period into the new series would be a much a smoother, more tolerable transition, IMO. By that time (actually, it started with T. Baker/Tamm, when they consciously decided to start making the show "less dark", and continued on progressing in that vein), they were making the show for a "wider audience" again.
Rammitinski is offline  
post #110 of 237 Old 08-30-2011, 03:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,044
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammitinski View Post

The final, McCoy period into the new series would be a much a smoother, more tolerable transition, IMO. By that time (actually, it started with T. Baker/Tamm, when they consciously decided to start making the show "less dark", and continued on progressing in that vein), they were making the show for a "wider audience" again.

Hmm - whilst I can understand your drift - I'm not sure McCoy era is a good advert for Classic Who. Colour Pertwee onwards? Or start with Peter Davidson if the Baker stuff is a bit too dark?

Some of the McCoy stuff really doesn't stand up to repeated viewing IMHO - and I'm pretty die hard (and worked on Silver Nemesis...)
sneals2000 is offline  
post #111 of 237 Old 08-30-2011, 03:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Temple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose CA
Posts: 8,476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 32
We're talking the 70s guys...though in my 20s and because of it, I remember nothing much other than cheesey scifi with a few laughs.

I jumped into Eccelston S1 D3 for the first Harkness eps last night and did watch a stand alone ep without him. Easy peasey to follow, but I have no idea what's going on...just the Doctor being entertaining, hanging with the blonde chick (Rose?). Empty Child and the followup ep were pretty entertaining.

I don't lurk as much as I used to and I NEVER listen. Comes from being old and cynical.

Ron Temple is offline  
post #112 of 237 Old 08-30-2011, 04:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Church AV Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: High Desert, California
Posts: 4,607
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post

Hmm - whilst I can understand your drift - I'm not sure McCoy era is a good advert for Classic Who. Colour Pertwee onwards? Or start with Peter Davidson if the Baker stuff is a bit too dark?

Some of the McCoy stuff really doesn't stand up to repeated viewing IMHO - and I'm pretty die hard (and worked on Silver Nemesis...)

First, not to be too nitpicky, BUT, the Fifth Doctor was Peter Davison (1981-1984) not Davidson.

Second, I fully agree with your opinion. McCoy would not be the best intoduction to Who. I did like both Bakers though. My introduction was Tom Baker, and that worked well. Eventually I saw all of Pertwee, so I have seen every episode of Who since his first, Spearhead from Space. I think, if it's possible, Pertwee or Tom Baker would be recommended.

Luke

Evil is charming and beautiful. It makes you doubt yourself. It asks for one small compromise after another until it whittles you down, and it functions best when no one believes in it.-JOA
Church AV Guy is offline  
post #113 of 237 Old 08-31-2011, 12:37 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post

Hmm - whilst I can understand your drift - I'm not sure McCoy era is a good advert for Classic Who.

Then it'll just make the new series seem that much better.

Yeah, I suppose skipping McCoy entirely would be no great loss for anyone, and a time-saver. To heck with "repeated viewings" - I was barely able to sit through those episodes the first time around, because I found McCoy to be so pathetically ineffectual in the role of The Doctor (so no offense to you, personally - unless you're the one who actually cast him).
Rammitinski is offline  
post #114 of 237 Old 08-31-2011, 12:43 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
By the way, I wasn't suggesting that Ron start with McCoy. Heavens, no. Just to pick up from wherever he left off in the 70's, and then chronologically follow through.
Rammitinski is offline  
post #115 of 237 Old 08-31-2011, 09:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
HDTVChallenged's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,403
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltownsend View Post
Burning question - how did River become a time traveler like the Doctor???
I know the Tardis trained her on how to operate her, but she jumps in and out of time whenever she is needed (or not needed) at will.
1) At one point, I thought she had a vortex manipulator ala. Capt. Jack.

2) It's been revealed that she is (or was) part TARDIS, part Human.
HDTVChallenged is offline  
post #116 of 237 Old 08-31-2011, 10:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,044
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Church AV Guy View Post
First, not to be too nitpicky, BUT, the Fifth Doctor was Peter Davison (1981-1984) not Davidson.

Second, I fully agree with your opinion. McCoy would not be the best intoduction to Who. I did like both Bakers though. My introduction was Tom Baker, and that worked well. Eventually I saw all of Pertwee, so I have seen every episode of Who since his first, Spearhead from Space. I think, if it's possible, Pertwee or Tom Baker would be recommended.
Apologies for the typo - I am enough of a fan to know better. (But I also have a friend called "Peter DaviDson" so motor memory probably kicked in!)
sneals2000 is offline  
post #117 of 237 Old 08-31-2011, 10:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,044
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammitinski View Post
Then it'll just make the new series seem that much better.

Yeah, I suppose skipping McCoy entirely would be no great loss for anyone, and a time-saver. To heck with "repeated viewings" - I was barely able to sit through those episodes the first time around, because I found McCoy to be so pathetically ineffectual in the role of The Doctor (so no offense to you, personally - unless you're the one who actually cast him).
No offence taken. I worked on one recording day of one episode... Personally I quite liked a few of the McCoy stories, but not many. I think Sylvester McCoy is a pretty gifted actor, just not sure the scripts, companions and supporting cast were that great (stunt casting didn't help - though this dates back before McCoy and may be less obvious to a non-Brit).

I grew up with Tom Baker and Peter Davison, discovered Pertwee through DVDs, and some of the Colin Baker episodes were OK. Rewatched "The Five Doctors" again recently, and it has its faults, but is still a very good watch for a fan.

Love the reboot - though it is a different show with some of the same history.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #118 of 237 Old 08-31-2011, 11:58 AM
Member
 
Polydorus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 84
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDMe2 View Post
What was the point of Hitler? The Teselact (or however you spell it) seems like there should be a LOT of backstory to explore, and it wasn't.
I thought the same thing. The IMDB list this episode:
Prequel to Let's Kill Hitler
Original Air Date15 August 2011
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0436992/episodes

Has anyone seen it?
Polydorus is offline  
post #119 of 237 Old 08-31-2011, 12:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
HDMe2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Kittrell, NC
Posts: 5,203
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polydorus View Post
The IMDB list this episode:
Prequel to Let's Kill Hitler
Original Air Date15 August 2011
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0436992/episodes

Has anyone seen it?
It is available free on iTunes... is is an ~2 min prequel scene. It's a good scene, but you don't really know you missed anything if you don't watch. It is referred to, though, in the opening minutes of the new episode.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post
Personally I quite liked a few of the McCoy stories, but not many. I think Sylvester McCoy is a pretty gifted actor, just not sure the scripts, companions and supporting cast were that great (stunt casting didn't help - though this dates back before McCoy and may be less obvious to a non-Brit).
Non-Brit here... and I completely agree. I thought it was common knowledge that the BBC had been cutting the budget and showing less and less interest in the show in its waning years back in the day... and that had to manifest somewhere.

I actually like all of the actors that played the Doctor... but the episodes? Not so much.

I also refer people to the 2-part David Tennant story where he becomes human to hide from some aliens... "Human Nature" was originally a novel written about McCoy's Doctor... and I think had he been given a story of that quality and a better budget, McCoy would be remembered more fondly.

The scripts just weren't as good in those final years... and the budget was slashed... and everyone just remembers those horrible final Doctors... who weren't given a chance really.

Yeah baby!  It's Halloween!
HDMe2 is offline  
post #120 of 237 Old 09-01-2011, 10:20 AM
Member
 
Polydorus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 84
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDMe2 View Post

It is available free on iTunes... is is an ~2 min prequel scene. It's a good scene, but you don't really know you missed anything if you don't watch. It is referred to, though, in the opening minutes of the new episode.

Thanks. I guess I didn't miss much by not seeing the Prequel to Let's Kill Hitler.
Polydorus is offline  
Reply HDTV Programming

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off