Discussion:
Doctor Who overkill
(too old to reply)
b***@topmail.co.nz
2017-04-24 08:17:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
the ABC is repeating it on ABC1 Monday afternoon then ABC2 Monday evening.
Why do they have iView then?
I presume Rove must be watching a direct link at 5AM Sunday, so he can
choose the clips to put in Whovians straight after the regular screening.
Fred Smith
2017-04-25 01:41:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@topmail.co.nz
the ABC is repeating it on ABC1 Monday afternoon then ABC2 Monday evening.
Why do they have iView then?
I presume Rove must be watching a direct link at 5AM Sunday, so he can
choose the clips to put in Whovians straight after the regular screening.
They've run out of Stephen Fry repeats to use as filler?
Trevor
2017-04-25 10:42:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Does anybody else think the current doctor and companion are two of the
worst for many years?
Rove and his guests seem to think they are great though. But then I only
watched it once, won't be doing that again!
Computer Nerd Kev
2017-04-26 23:05:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Trevor
Does anybody else think the current doctor and companion are two of the
worst for many years?
It's the plots with more holes than Swiss Cheese that kill it in my
opinion. That and the poor pacing where everything important happens
in the last five minutes, the skeptic in me is tempted to put that
down to a concious effort to speed over the plot holes so fast that
nobody notices.

The last episode was a prime example.
--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#
BruceS
2017-04-27 13:45:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Computer Nerd Kev
Post by Trevor
Does anybody else think the current doctor and companion are two of the
worst for many years?
It's the plots with more holes than Swiss Cheese that kill it in my
opinion. That and the poor pacing where everything important happens
in the last five minutes, the skeptic in me is tempted to put that
down to a concious effort to speed over the plot holes so fast that
nobody notices.
The last episode was a prime example.
Yeah, the classic Tom Baker episodes had such solid, hole-free plots,
consistent with the deep character development and completely believable
special effects.
Computer Nerd Kev
2017-04-27 23:08:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BruceS
Post by Computer Nerd Kev
Post by Trevor
Does anybody else think the current doctor and companion are two of the
worst for many years?
It's the plots with more holes than Swiss Cheese that kill it in my
opinion. That and the poor pacing where everything important happens
in the last five minutes, the skeptic in me is tempted to put that
down to a concious effort to speed over the plot holes so fast that
nobody notices.
The last episode was a prime example.
Yeah, the classic Tom Baker episodes had such solid, hole-free plots,
consistent with the deep character development and completely believable
special effects.
At least those stories went long enough that they could get away
with showing people wandering around casually talking to each other
for half an hour and not, as a result, have the ending as a frenzy
of jumps around the universe, cut together faster than most music
videos.

Still, I think they had the mix right back when they relaunched
the show. There will be a new producer for the next season, so
that might swing things around.
--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#
Trevor
2017-04-28 03:23:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Computer Nerd Kev
Post by BruceS
Post by Computer Nerd Kev
Post by Trevor
Does anybody else think the current doctor and companion are two of the
worst for many years?
It's the plots with more holes than Swiss Cheese that kill it in my
opinion. That and the poor pacing where everything important happens
in the last five minutes, the skeptic in me is tempted to put that
down to a concious effort to speed over the plot holes so fast that
nobody notices.
The last episode was a prime example.
Yeah, the classic Tom Baker episodes had such solid, hole-free plots,
consistent with the deep character development and completely believable
special effects.
At least those stories went long enough that they could get away
with showing people wandering around casually talking to each other
for half an hour and not, as a result, have the ending as a frenzy
of jumps around the universe, cut together faster than most music
videos.
Still, I think they had the mix right back when they relaunched
the show.
Agreed.
Post by Computer Nerd Kev
There will be a new producer for the next season, so
that might swing things around.
Certainly hope so, and a new Doctor and companion I hope. I always
wondered why the hell the didn't get the girl who was in the original
weeping angels "Don't Blink" episode as a regular companion. She was FAR
better than most of the ones they've had since Billie Piper. They could
easily bring her in with a flashback to that episode too.

Trevor.
Computer Nerd Kev
2017-04-29 00:25:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Trevor
Post by Computer Nerd Kev
Post by BruceS
Yeah, the classic Tom Baker episodes had such solid, hole-free plots,
consistent with the deep character development and completely believable
special effects.
At least those stories went long enough that they could get away
with showing people wandering around casually talking to each other
for half an hour and not, as a result, have the ending as a frenzy
of jumps around the universe, cut together faster than most music
videos.
Still, I think they had the mix right back when they relaunched
the show.
Agreed.
Post by Computer Nerd Kev
There will be a new producer for the next season, so
that might swing things around.
Certainly hope so, and a new Doctor and companion I hope.
You'll apparently have your wish with the Doctor at least.
Post by Trevor
I always
wondered why the hell the didn't get the girl who was in the original
weeping angels "Don't Blink" episode as a regular companion. She was FAR
better than most of the ones they've had since Billie Piper. They could
easily bring her in with a flashback to that episode too.
They could just bring the same actor in from afresh anyway, Capaldi had
been in the show before he got the big job.
--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#
Silico
2017-05-08 06:29:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Computer Nerd Kev
They could just bring the same actor in from afresh anyway, Capaldi had
been in the show before he got the big job.
And they're going to use his Roman character again this season, probably something like regenerating by shattering
across time and space.
BruceS
2017-04-28 18:39:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Computer Nerd Kev
Post by BruceS
Post by Computer Nerd Kev
Post by Trevor
Does anybody else think the current doctor and companion are two of the
worst for many years?
It's the plots with more holes than Swiss Cheese that kill it in my
opinion. That and the poor pacing where everything important happens
in the last five minutes, the skeptic in me is tempted to put that
down to a concious effort to speed over the plot holes so fast that
nobody notices.
The last episode was a prime example.
Yeah, the classic Tom Baker episodes had such solid, hole-free plots,
consistent with the deep character development and completely believable
special effects.
At least those stories went long enough that they could get away
with showing people wandering around casually talking to each other
for half an hour and not, as a result, have the ending as a frenzy
of jumps around the universe, cut together faster than most music
videos.
Still, I think they had the mix right back when they relaunched
the show. There will be a new producer for the next season, so
that might swing things around.
I have to admit I haven't seen the latest episodes, I just found it
funny that anyone would imply Dr. Who should be expected to not have
plot holes.
Computer Nerd Kev
2017-04-29 00:35:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BruceS
Post by Computer Nerd Kev
Post by BruceS
Post by Computer Nerd Kev
Post by Trevor
Does anybody else think the current doctor and companion are two of the
worst for many years?
It's the plots with more holes than Swiss Cheese that kill it in my
opinion. That and the poor pacing where everything important happens
in the last five minutes, the skeptic in me is tempted to put that
down to a concious effort to speed over the plot holes so fast that
nobody notices.
The last episode was a prime example.
Yeah, the classic Tom Baker episodes had such solid, hole-free plots,
consistent with the deep character development and completely believable
special effects.
At least those stories went long enough that they could get away
with showing people wandering around casually talking to each other
for half an hour and not, as a result, have the ending as a frenzy
of jumps around the universe, cut together faster than most music
videos.
Still, I think they had the mix right back when they relaunched
the show. There will be a new producer for the next season, so
that might swing things around.
I have to admit I haven't seen the latest episodes, I just found it
funny that anyone would imply Dr. Who should be expected to not have
plot holes.
Well these days they're getting chased around the universe by robotic
puddles that are defeated by asking them to go away, and running though
cities built of flying robots that want to kill them, without being
caught.

True, most of the stories were never water-tight, but I think they've
got worse.
--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#
Peter Jason
2017-05-08 21:45:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Trevor
Does anybody else think the current doctor and companion are two of the
worst for many years?
Rove and his guests seem to think they are great though. But then I only
watched it once, won't be doing that again!
I never watch it anymore because the change in doctors confuse me, and
nowdays they leave out the jail bait.

Sylvia Else
2017-05-01 09:21:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@topmail.co.nz
the ABC is repeating it on ABC1 Monday afternoon then ABC2 Monday evening.
Why do they have iView then?
I presume Rove must be watching a direct link at 5AM Sunday, so he can
choose the clips to put in Whovians straight after the regular screening.
What amuses me is the caption on the broadcast suggesting that one can
"watch it now" on iView.

Given the significant lower quality of the latter, why would anyone want to?

Sylvia.
Loading...