|
Post by Paul McDermott on Nov 27, 2013 7:33:54 GMT
...in this timey wimey era (shudder)... He must have adored the '90-'95 and '97-'04 seasons... Yes, I'm surprised they don't say that The Doctor flies around in his Tardis Wardis! 1990-96 was still 7th doctor because he regenerates at the start of the movie. (we just don't see his later adventures). 1997-04-well that was the War Doctor and I expect that in his mind SM has filled in the void. (or at least I would have). Perhaps he is intending to fill it in retrospectively. Or at least TWARDISW, the Timey Wimey And Relative Dimension In Spacey Wacey machine? Hell, even almost looks cod-Welsh! In the years I indicated, I was really meaning the TV-less gaps which were large, unnecessary but sadly inevitable. Of course the books, audios, comics etc filled a gap for many of us. But a TV show should be on TV, really - and for the general audience Who disappeared between Survival and the telemovie, and again from the latter to the premiere of Rose.
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Nov 27, 2013 9:40:30 GMT
Of course the books, audios, comics etc filled a gap for many of us. But a TV show should be on TV, really - and for the general audience Who disappeared between Survival and the telemovie, and again from the latter to the premiere of Rose. Books and comics etc just doesn't take the place of the telly though for me. Those empty years will always be 'lost' in a sense. Maybe Phil Morris can find them! It's hard to concentate on Audios, even missing episodes if there is no visualization to hold attention-so I get involved in something else eventually ignoring the audio altogether. And the Doctors keep getting younger too-soon we shall tune in to find an embryo clutching a sonic screwdriver! The War Doctor helped offset this somewhat but hopefully Capaldi will set a trend back to older wiser Doctors! (or should I say Doctor Woctor?) I took a little while to get used to audios, but here's how I got the taste for them - and now I'll never go back to not having them! First, Genesis Of The Daleks - the LP and tape version, from way back when. How many times did I listen to that as a lad, before and after VHS arrived?! Second, Slipback. Far less satisfactory - but very like Season 23 in that every ep seemed to end with a shouty bit and a closeup on Colin! Was that down to Saward's contributions?! Third, and best, the Missing Episodes on CD! (2.5 would be a couple of reconstructions I saw before then, Marco Polo and The Savages - both incredible, given the options then.) Hartnell and Troughton for me are as much TV Doctors as Audio Doctors, due to the missing episodes. So, having heard the ones I can't see that way, with narration to assist, has been terrific. And once I got done with those, I wanted more Hartnell and Troughton!! So, I sought out the Companion Chronicles of these eras, and the First and Second Doctor box sets. The Missing Stories range, adapting the likes of Farewell Great Macedon, Masters Of Luxor, even Prison In Space, has been a real thrill - much better than just reading unused scripts! And I guess I wasn't alone - next year sees the start of an apparently ongoing new audio adventures set with Doctors 1 and 2, using original actors as companions. Frazer does a pretty decent Pat, and William's Billy is a very nice thing. You feel the respect and the love these opportunities to revive their friends offer, in every scene. So with all that in mind, I can't say I've had much trouble getting into the audio viewer (heh) experience. The Fourth Doctor Adventures rock my world, as he was my Doctor and the chemistry between Tom and Louise is a joy forever. Next year I'll get to enjoy Mary Tamm's final outing as Romana - then after that, Hell freezes over when Lalla Ward and Tom Baker join John Leeson for more new stuff!! I snapped up the McGann audios due to the recent minisode tie-in sale. I've only heard a few to date, but have liked them and can easily fit in one a day. Why not read some reviews, pick an era and actor you like, try a few on the cheap as a download as an experiment? Headphones on, phone off, eyes closed, and imagine the pictures! Of course, you may find it difficult to stop if you like them as I do - they even do Blake's 7 ones now, with all the old cast (save the dearly departed Peter Tuddenham)!! As for the prospect of a toddler-aimed Spoonerist new era for the show, remade over as Woctor Dho - WD - I don't I want to go there!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2013 10:22:37 GMT
I don't think Moffat has ever heard the expression "less is more" (let alone understand the concept)! He'd do well to learn though. I expect it derives from Old High Dicksian, Laurence - the ancient language of the Script Lords. Not many people understand it these days... But fortunately we do! Ha ha! I do expect more than we get from so-called professional writers though. Moffat and others don't seem to have learned their craft properly. Terrance Dicks was on the right track when he alluded to a lack of narrative structure in modern Who. It's like they haven't learned the basics before going on to tackle complexity (a typical symptom of fan fiction, in fact), with the result being that a story doesn't hang together coherently and make proper sense. Discipline and understatement are two of the basic requirements of solid writing but they're both completely missing from DW these days.
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Nov 27, 2013 13:54:26 GMT
I expect it derives from Old High Dicksian, Laurence - the ancient language of the Script Lords. Not many people understand it these days... But fortunately we do! Ha ha! I do expect more than we get from so-called professional writers though. Moffat and others don't seem to have learned their craft properly. Terrance Dicks was on the right track when he alluded to a lack of narrative structure in modern Who. It's like they haven't learned the basics before going on to tackle complexity (a typical symptom of fan fiction, in fact), with the result being that a story doesn't hang together coherently and make proper sense. Discipline and understatement are two of the basic requirements of solid writing but they're both completely missing from DW these days. I agree with you about this, Laurence - which leaves me wondering, why this is so. If it's not a conscious strategy at the heart of the '05+ era to grow the brand by making it easier to mentally digest for the widest possible audience - and TDOTD would perhaps have been quite painless for a newbie in that they'd have lost nothing of the last 8 years by having the retcon etc - then how do you explain it? Moreover, is there a quarantine policy for Doctor Who nowadays, where the usual rules of drama production are waived for it? One might think it lowers the tone of the Beeb as a whole to exempt certain series from quality control, and I doubt that would have been tolerated in the only recent past. Perhaps there is a perception filter in the relevant quarters responsible for oversight? People who have been sold a false notion that the rules don't apply to what they're told is a hip way-out scifi show, that brings high visibility and profits so should be left alone? I remember Douglas Adams complaining that his vision of how Pirate Planet should have been done was different as the humour in the script was disproportionately overweighted in production. Maybe in the case of Who these days, the KPI isn't the demonstrable application of mundane but fundamental underpinnings of good scripts. If that's so - and it might be, for all I know - the commercial and marketing returns for the BBC could be the focus now, whilst only keeping alive the appearance of cultural heritage. As I mentioned earlier, the theme pub approach. The quality of food sold at a burger chain isn't the most important thing, by contrast to a real restaurant. Both have different goals and clientele, but McDonalds does very nicely on volume. Perhaps in this instance, it has been mistakenly decided that Doctor Who is most useful to be least like what used to differentiate the Beeb from the commercials, because of the sweet ROI. Of course, creative stagnation is no springboard for sustainable growth of a worldwide brand - nor a hallmark of excellence or quality. And the risk is having the rot spread to other productions, with the concomitant impact on the reputation of and support for the Corporation as a whole. It'd be nice if the new year finally sees enough of the right people at the right time all deciding that this is not the best way to invest the license fee or keep a valuable property in the pink. Were there significant changes at the Who production office, they would only bear fruit if the intent for doing so was sound and the means of following through stood a high chance of success. This is far from impossible and would require time, planning and new blood but at present it's probably less likely than the return of more lost stories back to the Archive. I'd like Capaldi to get his best possible chance in the role by having him usher in a truly revitalized series, rather than just being the newest label on a 9 year old tin of Who-O's spaghetti. Dropping the production team's signature amateurish disinterest in the nuts and bolts you (and the others we've mentioned) refer to, is the only prospect I can see for pulling that off.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2013 14:17:59 GMT
If the special was a tidying up of loose ends and jettisoning of clutter built up since 2005 and earlier (hard to tell really as it made little sense to me), it potentially leaves the way clear for the show to start again from basics with self-contained stories at the point of Capaldi's debut. I say potentially as I doubt there is any will on the part of the production team to rid the programme of the curse of modern story-telling (i.e. story arcs and other detritus).
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Nov 27, 2013 14:57:53 GMT
If the special was a tidying up of loose ends and jettisoning of clutter built up since 2005 and earlier (hard to tell really as it made little sense to me), it potentially leaves the way clear for the show to start again from basics with self-contained stories at the point of Capaldi's debut. I say potentially as I doubt there is any will on the part of the production team to rid the programme of the curse of modern story-telling (i.e. story arcs and other detritus). I guess there's several questions here, Laurence. Do the production team want to do this? Do the production team know how to do this? Do the production team even understand what such a difference would mean? For mine, I have to say I think pessimism about change is the realistic likelihood, barring a ruling from above their internal fiefdom that cannot be refused. Time and again we've seen an inability or incapacity to appreciate the importance of sweating the details and internal logic in scripts. Another quote from Terrance, from the commentary track on Planet Of The Daleks ep 2: "These days, in my view, they don't worry about that, they go for the moments." That being the case, it's highly dubious that they want to make such a break from the safe doctrine laid down in '05. Moreover, one could well wonder whether these same folk really do understand how their show would be different, were they able to effect such a change. My guess is that they know very well, and feel that this static approach is the best way to go, lest the wider and less demanding audience feel it's no longer for them. It's funny, I routinely have heard the nonsense idea put to me that Who was only really truly itself when the sets and visuals were crap. It's crazy making for a bunch of reasons, and I think we all know them so I shan't elucidate. But now the show has plenty of cash, the cheap weak scripts are where I'm sure, if the show someday soon mercifully moves beyond this phase, we'll hear the same thing again. No no - the story is too busy. Explain this, explain that, motivation, clarity blah blah blah - how dull, how pretentious, how dreary, how pedestrian - where's the magic and the mystery?!
|
|
|
Post by garysrothwellx on Nov 27, 2013 15:11:06 GMT
In a parallel vein i equate this with Francis Rossi's insistance that the current Status Quo line up is superior to the 1970's line up which recently reformed. He is quite adamant on this point and cant understand why people want the 70's line up with their harder sound, better songs (OK, if you hate Quo, leave that aside and let me make my analagy - am talking about Quo fans at this point)
The point being (unfortunately), like Quo, the current softer / poppier line up is probably far more of a going concern and popular that the reformed 70's line up. Anyone becoming a fan after the end of the 70's would have recognised only a few of the shows songs played back in March.
My point, is that even though i prefer the 70's line-up hands down, i guess the wider market is not there for it (i am being pragmatic here), and therefore the band has to decide "mass market vs niche" depending how much money can be made.
I suspect it is the same for Who, as has been speculated. Massive appeal, massive amounts of money and poularity, however with the result we get the equivalent of Marguerita Time.... (For non-Quo fans.... this was not good) and I suspect there is no desire to move back to Niche appeal.
If only someone could get the balance between the two just right....
|
|
|
Post by Jaspal Cheema on Nov 27, 2013 15:18:35 GMT
In a parallel vein i equate this with Francis Rossi's insistance that the current Status Quo line up is superior to the 1970's line up which recently reformed. He is quite adamant on this point and cant understand why people want the 70's line up with their harder sound, better songs (OK, if you hate Quo, leave that aside and let me make my analagy - am talking about Quo fans at this point) The point being (unfortunately), like Quo, the current softer / poppier line up is probably far more of a going concern and popular that the reformed 70's line up. Anyone becoming a fan after the end of the 70's would have recognised only a few of the shows songs played back in March. My point, is that even though i prefer the 70's line-up hands down, i guess the wider market is not there for it (i am being pragmatic here), and therefore the band has to decide "mass market vs niche" depending how much money can be made. I suspect it is the same for Who, as has been speculated. Massive appeal, massive amounts of money and poularity, however with the result we get the equivalent of Marguerita Time.... (For non-Quo fans.... this was not good) and I suspect there is no desire to move back to Niche appeal. If only someone could get the balance between the two just right.... So,do you equate 'Pictures of Matchstick Men' with the Pilot episode...?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2013 15:26:55 GMT
If only someone could get the balance between the two just right.... Yep, I agree with the point you're making with the Quo analogy, Gary. Just that it doesn't have to be either / or. The mid '70s era proved you could have popular appeal AND intelligent storytelling. If they took that view now, it might increase the audience even further. Mass popularity does not have to equal dumbed down - it's selling the audiences short.
|
|
|
Post by garysrothwellx on Nov 27, 2013 15:34:54 GMT
quote]So,do you equate 'Pictures of Matchstick Men' with the Pilot episode...? [/quote] To be fair, the first pilot episode should be when Quo were still called Traffic Jam and released Almost But Not Quite there. It wasnt quite enough, so then Pictures becomes the re-mounted Episode 1 Or am i going too far now?
|
|
|
Post by garysrothwellx on Nov 27, 2013 15:39:17 GMT
If only someone could get the balance between the two just right.... Yep, I agree with the point you're making with the Quo analogy, Gary. Just that it doesn't have to be either / or. The mid '70s era proved you could have popular appeal AND intelligent storytelling. If they took that view now, it might increase the audience even further. Mass popularity does not have to equal dumbed down - it's selling the audiences short. Agreed on that - and as was said recently on this forum, Moffat has managed it with Sherlock, so why not with Who!
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Nov 28, 2013 2:49:34 GMT
If only someone could get the balance between the two just right.... Yep, I agree with the point you're making with the Quo analogy, Gary. Just that it doesn't have to be either / or. The mid '70s era proved you could have popular appeal AND intelligent storytelling. If they took that view now, it might increase the audience even further. Mass popularity does not have to equal dumbed down - it's selling the audiences short. Good points all round, chaps! Fear of losing all that we currently have is not a good reason to relinquish all that we are. So too it is with Doctor Who. As much as I'd wish it were otherwise, I think the show nowadays is hemmed in by success and worry that it'll be lost by changing the form in which it was brought back to the screen. I agree with you Laurence, it need not be this way at all. If they need someone in at Cardiff to remind them, to give them some pointers, I'll cover your bus fare! Authentic Who is just a bit different to what's been on the Welsh menu nearly a decade now. Why not try being risky again and let it both breathe and be more like itself? We didn't see that happen in the 80s, and the consequences were regrettable. Perhaps it's not too late to expect the biggest change of all - true creative renewal of the show. After all, if Doctor Who can get in a self-inflicted rut more than once, why can't it do exactly what Laurence and many of us here would like to see - recapture its vigor, be its best? As a certain crusty old salt would have it: REUBEN: I'm saying it's happened before, it'll happen again. Just don't ask me when, okay? I'm a thread poster - not a lighthouse keeper!
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Dec 4, 2013 0:17:02 GMT
Just in case any here were so unlucky as to miss out on AAISAT, good news! www.radiotimes.com/news/2013-12-03/mark-gatiss-lands-christmas-day-treble-on-bbc2It's back for Christmas day! Who Who Who, merry Christmas!! If that's not an encouraging sign of recognition for Who's 60s heritage and the recent support shown to it (and the Troughton returns) by an extraordinary number of people all over the world, on the day of Matt's swansong no less, I don't know what is! As for Gatiss? Soon Christmas, next year - the series?
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Dec 6, 2013 6:28:38 GMT
For anyone considering watching AAISAT's Christmas matinee repeat, it might be interesting to see if there's a little extra spice thrown into the mix. Although I agree with the sentiment that Jessica Carney was the right person to have in the final console room shot instead of the incumbent Doctor, maybe they'll mix that up a bit? It'd be a nice bit of sneaky cross-promotion to build anticipation for 2014 - let alone the Christmas special on later that evening - if we get our first glimpse at Capaldi's Doctor in costume. Maybe it's not possible or not something the production team desires, but I think it'd probably raise the viewing figures even higher if they did!
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Dec 13, 2013 2:59:29 GMT
Although Mark Gatiss has no clue as to the prospects of this wondrous show getting released on Blu-Ray, he has indicated via Twitter that the soundtrack will soon be available! Hooray!
|
|