Bio not provided
I'm pretty sure that sequence does indeed say "Eleventh". I've just re-watched it on YouTube for my own peace of mind, and it sounds pretty clear to me.
1 hour, 25 minutes ago on Moffat Questions “Twelfth Doctor” Title
It's true that he doesn't include his incarnation number as part of his name when he introduces himself, but what would be the point given that most species know nothing of regeneration? There are instances where he does refer to himself by number under other contexts, though - such as when he headbutts Craig in the Lodger to transfer knowledge to him secretly, and specifically states "Eleventh" while pointing to his own face to clarify that he's the Eleventh incarnation. So it can't be the case that The Doctor simply doesn't differentiate between his own incarnations, he clearly does. He just doesn't treat it as a de facto part of his name, the way us IRL fans do for the convenience of discussion.
1 hour, 28 minutes ago on Moffat Questions “Twelfth Doctor” Title
I imagine that given his prestige, if he does ever direct an episode of Doctor Who it'll be one of the bigger budget episodes of its series - and I'd stake money on it being either the series opener or the finale.
20 hours, 7 minutes ago on Moffat: Peter Jackson Episode Will Probably Happen
Yeah that's perfectly fair - the difference in lighting really does alter the mood. But ultimately the set itself didn't change, which is the only reason I tend to think of it as Eccleston's TARDIS even despite Tennant's longer stint in it. Both are valid though, I don't intend to criticise.
1 day, 12 hours ago on How does the TARDIS reflect the Doctor?
You know, you actually might be. I've seen practically every element of the show slagged off by somebody, at some point, but I can't recall seeing anyone ever speak ill of the TV movie console room. I thought it was one of those things that everyone automatically loved, like finding a fiver in your pocket or watching David Tennant shake his fist and say "Barrrrowmaaaaan!"
1 day, 22 hours ago on How does the TARDIS reflect the Doctor?
It makes me sad when people call it "the Tennant one". :( I know he used it too, but... poor Eccleston. He finds a brilliant new desktop theme, and his successor gets all the credit.
I'd all but forgotten about the Tom Baker era secondary control room - looking back, I really quite like it. When compared to all the other Classic control rooms, which each have their characteristic nuances whilst broadly trying to imitate one another's core design, it almost feels as if it was the precursor to the post-revival approach toward the TARDIS design: making each one visually/aesthetically unique. It wasn't a total fresh start, like we've had during the NuWho makeovers (you still had the "round things" adorning the walls, the same shape of console, etc), but the wood and stained glass was in such contrast to the sterility of the other console rooms of its time that really does ooze personality. By and large though, I don't think the TARDIS interiors, for the most part, were a great reflection of their current inhabitant until at least the movie. That seems to be the point when they really started trying to give the room some real personality and to try and match it to the current inhabitant - the grand, gothic library was was the perfect match for a lonesome, aging 7th Doctor, and a good fit for the 8th considering his style of dress. Then we got much more alien again with Eccleston, which the Coral look couldn't have been more ideal for, and Smith gets his weird, asymmetrical labyrinth, which suited him to a T. Really makes me wish that hadn't redesigned the TARDIS again so late into Smith's era, as it means that like Tennant, Capaldi will have to make do with a TARDIS that, to me, was clearly designed with the previous Doctor in mind. I want to see what they'd be able to come up with if they were starting afresh to design a purely-Capaldi TARDIS control room.
"The Doctor's Wife" was great and that season had the usual mix of both good and bad episodes.
3 days, 22 hours ago on Cybermen Invade London (Again!)
Precisely. The Cybermen were never intended to be robots. They're near-humans who have cybernetically enhanced themselves to the point of being unrecognisable, but there's a living, organic core supporting it all. That, for me, was always their appeal and their fright factor - they're what we might become, once we realise we can out-engineer our own bodies and make ourselves, stronger, faster, smarter and near-immortal. They're a metaphor for the slippery slope of technological dependence. Turn them into your run-of-the-mill robots (as, to a certain extent, they have been over the years) and they lose their very essence.
There are very few Classic-era companions that I'd be interested in seeing return, but Ace would definitely be one of those few. I'm still mildly content with the passing reference to her in that SJA serial with Jo Grant ("Death of the Doctor"?); fingers crossed we get a Moffat-era "School Reunion" to elaborate on that. More so than almost any other companion, I'm curious to know what Ace is up to now (and what alien-battling initiative "A Charitable Earth" is a front for :D).
5 days, 17 hours ago on Barrowman on Jack’s Future, Capaldi Critics
I wouldn't be so sure that the only reason we haven't seen more Torchwood is because RTD doesn't want to write it yet; fact of the matter is, it's an expensive show to produce and I'm not sure anybody wants to pick up the costs. The reason Miracle Day was a co-production with U.S. network Starz was because the BBC weren't prepared to fund another series of Torchwood until someone else was willing to split costs. So we're lucky we even got Miracle Day really, regardless of what you may think of it. Since it didn't get the best reception - either in terms of viewing figures, or critical reviews - I'm not sure anyone sees it as financially worthwhile. And sadly, the longer we wait, the less culturally relevant the show is, and thus the case for making Series 5 grows weaker and weaker still.
Nope. He was commissioned to write the episodes that introduced Jack, whom had already been 'created' (or conceived) by Russell T. Davies as part of the overall plan for Series One. By virtue of writing Jack's first appearance(s), Moffat shaped the character somewhat, but he doesn't take credit for creating him.
People were saying it the night he was unveiled in that live special, all those many moons ago. But loads of people were quick to say Matt Smith would be terrible before he made his full debut. A fair few said the same of Tennant before his tenure got underway properly. I can't really recall much furore around Eccleston's casting, but I'll bet a pound to a penny that there were plenty saying he wouldn't be right for the part too. It's funny how a show that's only survived through constant change still gets so many in a panic whenever anything changes.
Really, though, will he ever be "required"? No character, bar the Doctor of course, is ever truly "required". It's entirely up to the writer. If there's something that the Doctor can't achieve without the help of an unexpected re-appearance from Jack, it's because that's how the writer has chosen to write the story: theoretically, there's nothing that Jack could do that the Doctor couldn't achieve without him. Sure, Jack's a swell, 51st Century Guy, but the Doctor is an ancient genius from the most powerful race ever to rule the Universe. There's never going to be a story where Jack is absolutely, inarguably needed - he's only a requirement if the writer decides that he should be. So honestly, I'd say bring him back whenever so long as it isn't done purely in fan service. If there's a decent role that he could fill in a story, and Moffat feels so inclined, I'd gladly see Jack again.
I can't say I'm part of his cult-like following, but I do rate both Harkness and Barrowman. The man himself because of his sheer passion for the franchise (you can tell that he's as big of a fan as any of us here), and the character because at the time, he introduced something different. Although much of what made him special was later assimilated into River Song, rendering him less notable with hindsight, when he first hit our screens he was a blaze of charm, wit, pansexuality and square-guns, from a far future in which everyone communicates exclusively through flirting and innuendo. That was pretty cool; immediately, the character stood out and without needing any time to 'gel' into the TARDIS dynamic, immediately felt like worthy contrast to Nine and Rose. He melded into that dynamic perfectly and added whole new elements to it (imho, Nine/Rose/Jack is the best character dynamic of the revived show). It helps that he was introduced in such a strong story, and was given plenty of screen-time and a good script to help him flesh out the character. From there, while his popularity may have waned a little, he was pretty much permanently established as a talking point within the fandom for at least the next few decades.
If there's one thing that Moffat does excel it, it's making changes to the show to keep it fresh. Whereas all of the Tennant era feels as-one, every series of Moffat's tenure so far feels like a re-envisioning. We started with the light and fairytale-esque Series 5, onto the more sci-fi heavy and arc-centric Series 6, and then the blockbuster film vibe of Series 7. They all felt fresh and all had a different tone and dimension to them. So I wouldn't worry too much about Series 8 feeling too similar to what we've had before; if that's what Moffat has been able to do whilst working with the same lead actor, imagine how much more a step he can take into left-field with a brand new leading man ready for a whole new set of directions? I'm confident that we'll get something that feels new and exciting, and I'll be thoroughly disappointed if we don't - because I see no reason why we shouldn't, based on both common sense and past form.
1 week, 1 day ago on Conversation @ http://www.doctorwhotv.co.uk/discusswho/062014/
Even as someone who's flicked through the first couple of scripts and had a sneaky-peaky-week at the Deep Breath rough cut (no regrets - please, form an orderly line if you're queuing to beat me with a wet fish), this annoys me. I just don't understand why people can't wrap their heads around the idea that not everyone wants things spoiled for them ahead of time. There are plenty of us out there who have indulged in the leaks for personal gratification without desiring to pour it all over your doorstep, so I do apologise for my far less intellectually-extant cousins; they're from the side of the family tree that we don't talk about. #keepeverybodyelsespoilerfree #imtooimpulsivethoughdon'tworryaboutme
I understand that having the companion struggle to come to terms with the Doctor's regeneration and new persona goes against all previous form, but surely that's the point? Up until 2009, every previous Doctor had been (for the most part - some mouthed off a bit, like Troughton) quite accepting of their demise and reincarnation; they didn't see regeneration as that big of a deal. Yet they completely flipped that around during Tennant's final run, and it spawned one of the most compelling and emotive narrative threads of the revived show thus far (if not of all Who history). It took something we're used to accepting passively and made us think about it - just as we passively accept that all companions are ready and willing to effectively ignore the fact that the man they've been running around time and space with has just exploded into fire and been replaced by someone new. But why not step back, look at things anew, and question whether everybody would be so quick to accept that? If I was chatting with my mate down at the pub one day, and he suddenly combusted and became an old Scottish guy, I'd probably need at least a week or two to come to terms with that. I think it's wonderful when the show looks at its own formula and finds ways to portray the same old conventions in an interesting and original way, and couldn't be happier that they've obviously decided to spin a story out of this.
1 week, 1 day ago on How Far Into Darkness will the 12th Doctor Take Us?
That's some interesting stuff - I feel compelled to do a bit of research now. Thanks for sharing, Caleb.
1 week, 1 day ago on Series 8 Launch Trailer Breakdown
At the same time though, some very inexperienced male writers have written for the show. Take Gareth Roberts, for example. He'd written a few Who novels back in the 1990s, but beyond that he had very little experience writing in any medium at all: but RTD brought him into the show without hesitation, and Moffat kept him there. He's now one of the show's most established recurring writers. Or Matt Jones, who wrote The Impossible Planet/The Satan Pit. He'd had a fair bit of experienced in TV, mostly in producing, but few notable writing credits. He was given a shot too. Granted they're both RTD's doing, but Moffat has had similarly inexperienced writers - Steven Thompson, despite some stellar work on Sherlock the year before his first Who script, was practically unknown previously. Ultimately, if the show is willing to gamble on bringing in male writers who are as yet unproven at Who's level, they should be equally willing to gamble on female writers without subjecting them to a proving grounds first - which is why I say it should be for all or none. Though, as I said, I don't think it's a bad idea to try and use alternative mediums to help an unproven writer establish themselves and hone their skills before giving them full writing credits: it just needs to be done fairly and justly, hence why I wanted to take gender out of the equation.
1 week, 1 day ago on First 12th Doctor Novels Detailed
Have you read any of the older Doctor Who books, like the Virgin New Adventures/Missing Adventures ranges, or the Eighth Doctor Adventures? There's some really good stuff in some of those, too. If you're only just getting into the Who novels, then I'd definitely say that the current NSAs are the place to start, but I heartily recommend looking into some of the older material once you've had your fill of the current stuff. They're a bit different, but still fascinating.
If Doctor Who isn't already required reading, you're on the wrong course. You should consider switching to Transcendental Engineering
Haha - it's not at criticism at all if that's what you're asking, more a reference to your omnipotence and omniscience.
Audio scripts tend to be a little different to televisual scripts, but they're much more closely related than either are to novels. It'd certainly be a more effective way of testing whether a writer can tell a good story in the right sort of format before risking a big-budget TV episode on them, even if there are still differences that a writer transitioning from one to the other would have to overcome. But whilst I certainly wouldn't be opposed to using the NSAs or Big Finish as a testing ground, purely to make sure the overall standard of the show is maintained whilst allowing less experienced writers to prove their worth (an opportunity they otherwise might not get), it shouldn't simply be for prospective female writers. It should be for all unproven writers across the board, or for none at all. Getting segregationist and holding double standards isn't going to make the sexism debate go away.
Excellent, thanks. And howdy - it's been a while haha.
I was sold as soon as you said 'Zombiote'. That's going straight into my mind-canon.
I'm curious. The shot of the TARDIS flying through space, which DWTV calls a re-used scene - does anyone know where it's actually from? I'm not doubting DWTV's knowledge (I'm pretty sure the whole website is run by a bored TARDIS), I'm just wondering where exactly it's been lifted from. Obviously, the other re-used shot from The Doctor's Wife is quite easily identifiable - the former, not quite so much. Anyone know?
It's sort of like a Kindle, but it's written in ink on sheets of mashed-up plant fibre and can only hold one story. Non-rewritable too, unless you've got enough time and crayons. It's quite antiquated, but it has a certain charm.
I'm pretty sure that's how things worked for the early 10th and 11th Doctor New Series Adventures; they had script access (so they knew how the character would be written), and got to see some of the filming footage (so they knew what sort of edge the actor would put on their incarnation). Obviously it's still tremendously hard to capture a Doctor's personality when the actor and writers are still finding it for themselves, but they don't have a blank slate to start from.
I believe you're referring to the wonderful David Morrissey, and he did indeed play The Governor as well as Jackson Lake. Quite a sharp contrast of roles right there.
(The same applies to all writers irrespective of gender, I should make clear - I'm making the point that books aren't the best testing grounds for potential TV writers, rather than addressing the 'there's not enough female writers' argument).
There's a big difference between writing prose and writing for television/film - trust me, I've experienced both first-hand, and skills in one don't always translate into skills in the other. Some writers are perfectly capable of both. Some writers are better suited to one than the other. I'm sure they would be able to find plenty of talented female authors to pen some terrific Doctor Who books, but those same authors may not be suited to writing scripts, so it doesn't really work as a testing ground for potential show-writers. Torchwood, being a TV show, worked much better for that reason - you knew they were good at writing specifically for television before they ever penned a Who script.
I'm liking the sounds of the second one: reminds me a little of that old Tenth Doctor animated "special", The Infinite Quest. He found himself locked up on a prison world during part of that mini-serial too, after being recognised as a wanted criminal and faced with serving a 2 billion year sentence. I always thought, back at the time, that it would have made a fantastic live-action episode in itself (I don't think that section of The Infinite Quest lasted more than about 10 minutes so it wouldn't exactly be rehashing as much as giving some substance to the same concept). Sadly I can't see an episode along those lines happening any time soon if the same plot has been adapted into one of the official novels, but I'll happily settle for a book. I haven't added to my Who novel collection in quite some time; I think it's about time I gave them some company. The Clockwise Man has been sitting solemnly on my shelf for nearly a decade, and I can't even imagine how lonely Warmonger must be getting.
That's why it irks me to see fans of one Sci-Fi franchise chiding those of another! All this in-fighting just ain't right, we should be uniting to form an alliance of geeks powerful enough to bring our favourite genre to reality. Now fantasy fans, on the other hand, fantasy fans can go to hell. Vote GeeKIP. (I jest, of course - we should unite with the fantasy fans just long enough to take power).
1 week, 2 days ago on Weird and Wonderful
And it's just about the best thing that was ever made.
Well, I think Malcolm Tucker walked away with it personally, haha.
Outside of Britain, at least, I'd say that Star Trek is at least as culturally iconic as Doctor Who. I'd hazard a guess that there are probably as many Trekkies out there as Whovians, too. And as for technological advantage, I'm not entirely sure what aspect(s) you're referring to - as the video itself references, Star Trek was being broadcast in colours years before Doctor Who ever was, and the budgets that the modern Star Trek films have had exceed anything Doctor Who will ever have in a series. So, past and present, there's a fair claim that Star Trek has had certain technological advantages over Who. Plus, although Star Trek has had some really naff-looking aliens over the years, early Doctor Who probably had worse by-and-large. Don't get me wrong, I've never been a particularly huge fan of Star Trek and I'd take Doctor Who any day of the eternity: but you're being pretty harsh on Star Trek (and Americans for that matter) IMO. Out of interest, have you ever watched much Star Trek?
Far from impossible (from what we know, it doesn't seem too unlikely at all), but I'm hesitant on the grounds that it's very un-Doctor-ly. By all accounts, Twelve might not abide by the same rules as his predecessors, but one of the few things The Doctor will never do is to interfere with his own history. See "Father's Day" for an explanation of why. Crossing back across your own timestream is a big no-no even to a renegade Time Lord like the Doctor, which is why he occasionally has to rebuff suggestions from (often fairly new) companions that he should just simply hop back in time and change things in the past. Once you're part of events, you simply can't do that, lest you destroy the whole Universe or accidentally un-write yourself from time. It's one of the fundamental "rules" of both the show and the titular character. Not that there are never exceptions, but if he does start travelling back along his timeline to undo everything that ever went wrong, he might as well start carrying an AK-47 on his back (for occasionally killing innocent civilians). It'd be a huge departure from the man he's always been and the rules he's always tried to follow.
1 week, 2 days ago on Doctor Who Series 8 TV Launch Trailer
He was a shade over 1200 at the beginning of The Time of the Doctor, and then spent roughly 900 more years defending the town of Christmas. So actually, he's more like 2100 (at least). At this point, he's most definitely rounding down.
Fine, but I insist no live-action: we go anime all the way.
1 week, 3 days ago on Weird and Wonderful
Ha, I was expecting the Rap Battles of Sci-Fi video to be terrible as soon as I hit play and heard the sound quality, but I guess it's a reminder not to judge a book by its cover; the quality may be lower, and the guys' impersonations may not be as good, but the lyrical quality of that "battle" far out-shined the Doctor Who vs. Doc Brown predecessor from the Epic Rap Battles of History crew.
Yeah, Russell went a bit OTT in translating classical, archetypal villainy into "oh, him? yeah, he's just a bit insane" during his era - worked well with Simm's Master, for my money, but seemed like more of the same when it came to Davros (even though he always had been a little crazy). If he does come back, I'd like to see him a little more reserved and conniving (and preferably not a pet).
1 week, 3 days ago on Doctor Who Series 8 TV Launch Trailer
Perfectly reasonable argument. But to me, without going into the depths of my individual gripes with that particular redesign, I don't think the Daleks should ever be "fantasy orientated", even if that's the general direction the show may be going - they're high-tech biomechanical war machines hellbent on ethnic cleansing on a Universal scale. I just don't think it was ever the greatest idea to paint them bright colours and make them so unnecessarily large and cumbersome; you're never going to reconcile "intergalactic holocaust" with "cozy fairy tale", and the attempt to do so did, in my view, degrade the Daleks quite considerably at first. But whilst the Officer Class idea may have been thrown together after-the-fact, I do think that it provides an internally-sound logic for having the occasional giant, colour-coded Dalek amidst the hordes of little bronze blighters. All armies need commanders, right? So in my view, this is all one, big, happy accident - the Moff accidentally commissioned some terrible new Daleks, and in the process of trying to find a way to retcon himself, found the perfect niche for them to fit in after all.
Personally, although I agree completely that promoting/demoting them to Officer rank was an blatant damage-limitation move after the awful reception they got, I thought the dynamic it created for the newly re-established Dalek Empire in AotD was terrific, and whilst I was one of the fans who publically bemoaned the now-infamous "Skittle Daleks" after Victory of the Daleks, I became immediately sold on them as an elite sub-class of Dalek and I'm actually now quite anxious to see them stick around. I'm just eager to see this new Dalek Empire expanded upon full-stop, really. It feels to me that Steven Moffat hasn't had a clear idea of exactly where he wants to take the Daleks under his stewardship, but Asylum - wittingly or unwittingly - has paved the groundwork for what could be their first serious "character development" ("race development"? I can't find the words) since 2005. I hope he realises that and runs with it, because as much as I prefer the bronze Daleks aesthetically, it'll be a real waste if he phases out the Paradigm models entirely. It'll be interesting to see exactly what direction Episode 2 goes in (I won't lie, I did start reading the script at one stage, but I cut my losses early).
Good, solid trailer. Provokes plenty of intrigue without giving too much away (besides the Daleks - notably not the Paradigm - although who wouldn't expect them to feature this year?), and even if it's pretty standard for a Who trailer, it all looks pretty good and gives me high hopes for the series ahead. Has anyone else picked up on the TARDIS interior tweaks yet though? Unless I'm being remiss and something changed between The Snowmen and The Time of the Doctor which passed me by completely, those are some brand new bookcases (and other miscellania - I can't really tell) on the walls. Which is interesting, because the set as a whole is obviously the same, they've clearly not rebuilt from scratch with a new design - just made some modifications. I like it; was never a fan of the new overly metallic interior (give me Coral any day), but at least some bookcases and such give it a touch of homeliness. Interesting how the set is lit very differently now too - it tended to be shown in cold, blue hues during Smith's stint in it, whereas it's all warm and ominously red/orange here, which presumably is a stylistic choice they'll be sticking with (I think it's brilliant, it brings out a whole new side to the console room and, in quite literal terms, shows the Doctor himself in a very different light too - makes him seem more fierce, as Capaldi's incarnation seems to be).
It always baffles me when people equate Doctor Who being 'dark' (a term the fandom has incidentally grown far too attached to, but I digress) with the Tennant era. For the most part, I think it tended to be at its lightest and fluffiest back then (with exceptions, obviously). Sure, he had a fiery or even cruel side that he showed now and then - Family of Blood, Waters of Mars, etc - but I'd say Smith's Doctor had more of those sorts of moments than Tennant ever did. When I think of the Tennant days, it's the romance, warmth and charm that he exuded that sets that era apart - almost the opposite of 'dark'.
To me, he looks like a hybrid of the War Doctor and Sir Digby Chicken Caesar from The Mitchell & Webb Look. Which is a Science Fiction novel that demands to be written right away.
1 week, 6 days ago on Series 8: Deep Breath First Look
As far as I'm aware, he didn't know when it was being written. I don't even think the decision had been made at that point. IIRC, he found out he'd got the job round about the time the episode went to air. However, he knew he was in the running back when he wrote it (and presumably that he had RTD's backing too), and River Song was part of his "pitch", a sort of backdoor pilot wrapped up into a character if you like. But you're right in that The End of Time most likely wouldn't have been written, or at least turned out the way that it did - I wouldn't have been surprised if RTD still wanted to use the Time Lords as part of his personal finale, but the whole four knocks thing would have been out, which would have had quite a knock-on effect.
1 month, 2 weeks ago on What if… Tennant had stayed for Series 5?
I'd completely agree with you - without taking anything away from Who, Breaking Bad is a different beast entirely and, on a myriad of levels, is probably one of the best television dramas in many years (if not, as many might say, all time). But it's just so simply unlike Who that it doesn't feel fair to stack them up against one another, so I try not to. I think I need to abstain from this vote, lest one of the voices in my head develop a grudge.
2 months ago on 2014 BAFTA Television Awards: Day Triumphs!
@DWTV I did stumble across that account too, but still retained my doubts. It all seemed fairly fishy. But confirmation is confirmation, and I'd be bloody delighted to have a 90 minute finale. No complaints I guess!
2 months ago on Two-Part Finale for Series 8
Twitter is already telling me that no such account exists, so I'm going to assume (as I already had done based on the absence of grammar) that it's a fraudulent imitation. I do still hope that we get a two-parter for the series finale - I honestly do feel that the show has suffered for their loss - but I'm not going to hold my breath. Moffat seems pretty enthused with these short finales, and since there's no other source (that I know of) to suggest he's going to buck that trend, I'd say another one-part finale is a safer bet at this stage. But we can hope, right?
@DWTV If so, done.
2 months, 1 week ago on Another New Companion for Series 8?
@DWTV Ah, hadn't scrolled that far back yet. My bad. And yeah - you just want me to send you an email from my current address?
@Oodkind Child actress, I believe. A quick google image search of her name brings up, alongside a bunch of old white men, a lone picture of a black child actress. Following that image to its original webpage "youngandtalented(dot)co(dot)uk" (seemingly a young person's acting and talent agency), it seems she was involved in "Sport Relief Does Glee Club" in 2012. Assuming that I'm not barking up the wrong tree, it appears she's around 13 and doesn't seem to have any other significant roes that I can find. But everyone starts somewhere - if she aced a Who audition, this could definitely be her.
Man, I remember when this was first on Weird & Wonderful many moons ago. I'm still in love with it.
2 months, 1 week ago on Could An Overseas Version of Doctor Who Ever Work?
No worries. It wasn't my greatest - I was neither sober nor drunk enough to achieve that particular gold standard. Which you were astute enough to notice. You scare me, sometimes.
Genie - glad I caught you actually. If you happen to speak with DWTV any time soon, would you be kind enough to ask if they wouldn't mind re-sending me a password thingy for Whoniverse Discussion? Ta.
It doesn't. My idiocy is immortalised. Allow me to retreat back into darkness for another six months.
Oh dear. Hadn't spotted that. Now to try and remember if Livefyre allows me to edit...
An overseas remake of Doctor Who is completely and utterly necessary - it's not like it fares badly in the international market in its current form. The 50th Anniversary was simul-cast around the world, and if I'm not mistaken it set various records in doing so. Some British shows simply wouldn't hold the same appeal in other markets. That's why the U.S. insists on making their own versions of shows like The Office, Skins, Shameless or Sherlock, so they can set the show in locations more familiar to U.S. viewers, with humour and references more attuned to the U.S. than the U.K. But for the most part, Doctor Who is about vivid, fanciful, often fictional places, where "familiarity" actually serves to defeat the point. So it's simply not necessary in my opinion. That said, if - IF - there was to be, say, an American Doctor Who, I'd actually prefer it not to feature the familiar Who icons like the Daleks or Cybermen, because that just makes it virtually the same as the UK version and defeats the point further. In the unlikely event a foreign Doctor Who ever happens, I'd say its best bet is to start afresh with its own continuity. That way, it has at least some chance of establishing itself in its own right. Otherwise, it's doomed to fail from the off.
@Ollie Walton Harrod I think you've misread/misinterpreted. AI figures aren't the same as viewing figures. AI figures are a measurement of how much a cross-section of viewers enjoyed a given show. It's essentially a poll measuring how much they liked what they saw, on a scale of 1-10. It's not got anything to do with how many people tuned in. How useful these figures actually are is still very much open to debate (as the author illustrates, many oft-derided episodes amongst the fandom score comparatively well in AI terms, and vice versa), but they're definitely more useful than viewing figures if you're attempting to analyse the show's quality. And when it comes down to it, these figures just go to show that to most people, the difference in quality between the two writer's eras is negligible at best.
2 months, 1 week ago on Settling the Moffat vs. RTD Debate (Using AI Scores)
@TheNightmareChild @Ivegotkidneys @Liana21 Well thanks for that. I'll be contemplating this all night now. So much for sleeping soundly. O.O
2 months, 2 weeks ago on Settling the Moffat vs. RTD Debate (Using AI Scores)
@supermoff I'm glad you did too. It's one of the better articles I can recall seeing here in recent times, and it's not even like the bar had been set low for you. Excellent work.
Absolutely one of the best guest articles I've read on DWTV in quite some time. I was genuinely fearful when I first started reading the headline - "Settling the Moffat vs. RTD debate..." - but this was brilliant. Impartial, insightful and based upon tangible, meaningful data. That's not to knock the more common breed of guest submission, the "Why X is the best monster/story/series" sort of article (they can be genuinely fascinating reads at times), but it is refreshing to see the difficult problem of writing an original Who article tackled from new angles and with less of a "here's what I think" mentality. Puts me in mind of Caleb's Science of Doctor Who articles (haven't seen one of those in a while - you still here, Caleb?). More articles like this please, contributors - to even out the balance a little, if nothing else. Excellent conclusion as well - I had a lingering fear as I progressed that there'd be a sour ending where the author used the figures to champion one side over the other (no doubt starting a civil war in the process), but it ended on just the right note. Excellent idea for an article, and beautifully realised. I have no higher praise (the fact I'm even commenting, which I haven't done in months, is testament to how glad I am to have read this). Bravo, Mr. Yetman.
TV Ratings aren't a successful gauge of viewerships in the digital age. What with Netflix and similar services, illegal streaming and downloading (which is still rather prolific), DVD sales and whatnot, whatever obscure British channel chooses to show a popular American show, way past it's original broadcast date, at some awkward hour, is largely irrelevant. Besides, I acknowledged in the very post you replied to that British TV gets higher ratings in Britain. That's just, well, obvious. It doesn't mean that "nobody watches" anything non-British though.
4 months, 3 weeks ago on Moffat: Remaking Doctor Who would be Insane
As you say, Doctor Who is more the exception than the rule in this instance. I can't name any other show, from any other country, that's ever emulated the cultural impact and longevity that Doctor Who has. Even here in Britain, the only other dramas that can claim to lack the "transience" you talk about are soap operas like EastEnders or Coronation Street, but I wouldn't utter them in the same breath as Doctor Who. TV shows come and go at a surprising if not alarming rate wherever you are in the world; don't make the mistake of assuming Doctor Who is any small way representative of British television as a whole. Exactly what he was trying to express is anyone's guess, but from my perspective it seems very much as if he's trying to brush off what has been a marked revolution in TV viewing habits as if it never happened - American TV has become increasingly popular over recent years. People do watch it. And he's just come out and denied that outright, as if he'd announced to the world that the grass wasn't green and cows don't go moo.
Then in our increasingly media-savvy age, he's completely neglecting to consider what's actually a sizeable cross-section of the modern audience. I know more people that watched Breaking Bad than Doctor Who, I know more people who watch Game of Thrones than Sherlock, and I know more people who watch The Walking Dead than Torchwood - and this from people ranging from teenage to middle-age. I'm not disputing that British programming pulls higher figures here, one would expect as much, but the hugely condescending way he brushes off all imported programming as if it has zero impact is, to my mind, either ignorant, stupid or both.
Although I'm with him on this specific, highlighted quote, he also goes on to talk some absolute rubbish in that original article. He also states "There are no shows from America that are big hits in Britain. They're all minor hits. Your mates may talk about them but no-one's watching them.", which is both dumbfoundingly stupid and obtusely ignorant. At times, I can only assume he's permanently attached to some sort of shock collar that triggers whenever he speaks more than four sentences without saying or doing something that causes controversy, because nothing else explains how he can talk so much sense and then follow it up with such a bogus comment.
I think there's a certain charm about the Doctor's recurring use of this particular spacesuit. It's featured in at least three stories now, across two actor's eras (the episode currently filming will make it three actor's eras), so it's becoming rather iconic in it's own right. Who is wearing it in this instance (and why), I don't have a clue, but I'm glad its back.
4 months, 3 weeks ago on Series 8 Filming: A Night Out
Nooo, Peter! It'll be a much more meaningful moment if we have to wait for it! I'd hate for the Daleks to consume another series finale just yet, but at the same time their impact will be lessened tenfold if they appear early on in Peter's run, like with VotD. They could get away with it in Series One because the show had suffered a 16-year absence, but now we're all fully accustomed to the show again it requires something more special to keep the Daleks interesting and exciting. I'd much rather they be used sparingly, appearing no more than once every couple of series and then cropping up for the major landmark episodes. The less we see of them, the more exciting it'll be.
5 months ago on Daleks Series 8 Rumours
He isn't involved in the casting of anyone other than the main cast though, is he? Other than the Doctor or the companion, it's out of his hands.
5 months ago on Gillan on Moffat Female Character Criticisms
It was referenced in a comment further up this little thread of responses; I'm not aware of any myself, so I was wondering if anyone else has heard of this or whether the original poster simply mis-spoke.
Racism's a new one to me; has that argument really been levelled against him? I've heard criticism of sexism and of homophobia in Moffat's writing (which, in almost every "example", seems non-existent to me), but I'm not aware of him having been branded racist too. Once he gets accused of causing religious offence, I think he'll win Outrage Bingo.
Sadly, this episode defined the phrase "style over substance" for me. It was almost designed to overload the senses, offering up a plethora of eye candy and edge-of-the-seat moments but failing to back that up with any sort of compelling story-telling. It didn't seem woven together as a real story, more of a sequence of flashy, whizz-bang events and the Doctor scowling a lot. If you were to cut every scene that didn't really advance the plot, the entire episode could have been condensed into just a couple of minutes.
That's not to say that there was nothing to like about this episode - just like junk food, it's occasionally nice to gorge the senses on a piece of television like this. It's full of madcap ideas, there's never really a lull in the pacing of it, and once you start watching it can be difficult to pull your eyes from the screen. It's constantly throwing the unexpected in your face, and that's one of Who's most enamouring traits as a show. But if you're looking for a deep, moving story with layers of meaning to it, or a solid piece of thought-provoking science fiction, this really isn't the episode to watch.
I've warmed to it a little more in the time since it first aired, and hindsight really allows one to judge the episode better on its own merits rather than as a function of the series arc, but I still can't afford this episode any higher than a meagre, middle-ground 5/10 - distinctly average. But that 5/10 is born not from a neutral indifference, but from the collision of the two separate scores I'd prefer to give it - 10/10 for style, 1/10 for substance. I consider it akin to a pack of Jelly Babies, compared to, say, The Girl in the Fireplace or Blink's three-course dinner. The former can be a tasty treat from time to time, but if I'm hungry I'd rather head straight for the latter. /badanecdote
5 months, 1 week ago on Best of Matt Smith: A Good Man Goes to War
If anyone remembers me rambling on about The Rebel Flesh/The Almost People in the past, they'll know exactly how much love I have for these episodes. They're amongst the most underrated stories since 2005, and serve as an example of what the show can achieve when it pushes the outdated 'monster of the week' story archetype aside and builds real, human stories - it was strong social science fiction, which is something I'd like to see a little more often in Doctor Who. It wasn't without flaw, and even falls limply to one side when compared to The Girl Who Waited (which was even more exemplary of solid, human-centric stories without villainy), but it built the most well-rounded supporting cast of characters to date, it opened up the proverbial Pandora's Box (or Pandorica..) of moral, ethical and philosophical questions, and was a superb reflection of society in the face of danger, demonstrating how quickly battle-lines can be drawn and how irrationally and aggressively we can act when under duress.
5 months, 1 week ago on Best of Matt Smith: The Rebel Flesh / The Almost People
I have the same problem, I have no idea why. I can't find anything about it online.
5 months, 1 week ago on 10 Most Heartbreaking New Who Moments
Seems a bit tenuous to me, not really sure where you got that idea from.
5 months, 1 week ago on Series 8: A Returning Character & Monster
Excuse me whilst I print this out and frame it.
5 months, 1 week ago on Doctor Who and Sexuality
I see potential for a new spin-off in the form of a sit-com...
The concept behind Jack Harkness is wholly accredited to Russell T. Davies, it's simply that he entrusted Steven Moffat to write the episode(s) that introduced him to the TARDIS since he wanted this to occur mid-series (but presumably had enough on his plate already - understandably). Were it not for Russell, there would have been no Captain Jack in Moffat's scripts whatsoever.
Well, I'll give it a shot. Allons-y!
Did it work? Let's hit submit and see. :P
Edit: It does! Excellent! Thanks so much for that, you're my saviour!
I've been aware of the rumours for a while, but I'd still prefer to bury my head in the sand if it's all the same to you. ;)
I agree that it's quite tenuous speculation (that I still don't buy into), but in lieu of any official news to help broadcast, these sorts of articles are about all we're likely to get on the Series 8 front right now. It's better than nothing (in my opinion, anyway). And no need to apologise - as I say, I didn't mean to target you, just felt I needed to get it off my chest since I've seen a few comments along similar lines already (and no doubt, more will inevitably come).
Ah don't worry, we all have them. Hope you're alright. :)
They didn't jump to conclusions though. "a monster that may be making an appearance", "There has been little evidence to support this", "It’s not concrete, but it’s food for thought". I don't mean to single you out, but it does irk me a little when people misinterpret what is obviously just speculation and conjecture as being a false statement of fact. DWTV never said that the Clockwork Droids are returning. They're merely reporting on the possibility and on the coincidence between the rumours and the change to this guy's CV.
Yep, I have all sorts of problems with it. For starters, I can't line break. Everything I post has to be in one huge paragraph, it's infuriating. It also tells me, quite often, "you are attempting to post malformed content", forcing me to F5 before posting the exact same words with the exact same formatting without a hitch. I was all on board with the Livefyre switch at first, but it seems to be a very buggy system.
Apologies, it wasn't intended as criticism, it was merely a correction. No offence meant.
In fairness, they never vouched for the validity of these claims - it was made clear that there has been no prior evidence to support a Clockwork Droid return, and that it's only posted as food for thought. But I do agree that 'Droid' is an extremely broad term in Doctor Who and SF in general, and I too doubt that it refers directly to the Clockwork variety.
Exactly. Monsters with unique gimmicks, like the Weeping Angels and Silence, make sense to bring back. They have their own special properties that make them stand out and give them a great deal of untapped potential. The Clockwork Droids lack that. As you say, they were a little generic - there's nothing about them that makes you think "Well, there was potential for X, Y and Z which went unused". They were an instance of a monster that was designed to fit a story, rather than a story designed to fit a monster - and so I just can't see what reason there could possibly be to bring back those specific monsters when, evidently, almost any "generic" monster could suffice. I'd take a brand new one-off creation over the unnecessary resurrection of an old one-off, story-contained monster any day of the century. Unless there's a very good and very specific reason to bring back a threat, I just don't see the point - it makes the Whoniverse feel so much smaller and more contrived.
And The Impossible Astronaut/Day of the Moon. And Let's Kill Hitler.
I'm still dubious of the notion that 'Restaurant Droid' refers to the Clockwork Droids from The Girl in the Fireplace. They were ideal as a standalone monster and I just don't see any reason whatsoever to bring them back to serve some other purpose. I'm going to hope that whatever these Series 8 Droids are, they're unrelated to the Clockwork crew of the SS Madame de Pompadour. If not, then for approximately the billionth time since 2010, I have to question what the hell Moffat was thinking.
It seemed he had some degree of influence over the switch to a fall broadcast; or at the very least, he championed the BBC's move. I would presume he gets his say, but the ultimate decision is very much out of his hands.
5 months, 1 week ago on Summer Broadcast for Doctor Who Series 8?
Hypothetically there are an infinite number of possibilities, but "they changed time" is the one that's most heavily inferred (if not outright stated) in the story, so I'm inclined to accept that as the canonical explanation (besides, as you posited, I also believe that narratively and dramatically speaking, it's the best solution).
5 months, 1 week ago on What if… the 8th Doctor was the War Doctor?
Well, that is what happened. They changed history by preventing the use of The Moment - although the change is now retroactively applied, erasing the timeline in which War, alone, activated the Moment, that prior timeline was still real at some stage. It was a self-fulfilling prophecy in a way. War had to commit the act in the first place for the time loop it creates to hold steady. If he hadn't activated the Moment, his future incarnations wouldn't have spent centuries dwelling on it, and wouldn't have eventually gone back in time and prevented him. It's paradoxical and completely impossible, but it's thoroughly Doctor Who.
As much as I'd like to see Capaldi's first series come as soon as physically possible, I'm a little suspicious. I thought Moffat had fought to move the show to Autumn for a reason, because he felt that it benefited from the long, dark and cold nights of that time of year. I'm hesitant to believe he'd change his mind so quickly (presuming he wasn't overruled by higher-ups who insisted on another scheduling switch). I'm either going to call misinterpretation or mistake on Wheatley's part here, but I'm more than happy to be proved wrong. I'm honestly neutral as to when the show airs - Spring, Summer, Autumn, Winter, it's all the same to me. I don't pay the slightest bit of attention to what's going on outside when Doctor Who's on the telly.
But if they choose to re-incorporate the Valeyard into the show and he targets Capaldi's Doctor, that's still 12 new potential regenerations for him to steal. Plus, him targeting the Sixth at the time still makes sense, as at that point Six still had plenty more regenerations ahead of him. I don't see why he can no longer exist.
5 months, 1 week ago on A forecast on Capaldi’s Doctor: The Frustrated Optimist
Tremendous. Indulgence or not, thanks for taking the time to interact - unfortunately, it's not every day that our favourite writers grace the fan-sites we frequent (for better or worse!), so it's an honour that you've stopped by. I must admit, I suspected fraud or parody when I first saw your name appear in the comments (I still have my suspicions that you might secretly be Chris Chibnall playing mind-games with us...), but if you are who you purport to be, then happy (now slightly-belated) birthday and all the best! Dalek still remains one of the greatest episodes of the revived show, and I'll literally be oscillating with excitement if and when you ever write for Doctor Who again. Keep being awesome.
5 months, 1 week ago on Bring Back… Robert Shearman
Absolutely! As Galactic Yo Yo said, Dalek was loosely adapted from an audio, and of course Blink was adapted from a comic strip and Human Nature/Family of Blood on a novel. If the story is good enough and translates well on-screen, there's no barrier whatsoever to prevent adventures from alternative media being remade for television. "Desirable" is a much more subjective matter though (obviously).
Midnight and Turn Left are two of my favourite RTD scripts, so in that regard I understand where you're coming from. But on the flipside, I didn't think much of the series opener and I'd say the finale was, by some margin, his weakest ever. Plus, it was the year he ruined the best ending he ever wrote by having Rose master the multiverse. I'd say it was probably his best year for standalone adventures, but his worst for the major episodes.
Steven Moffat doesn't get to choose his successor. He might be allowed to voice his opinion if there's a candidate (like Gatiss) that he wishes to back, but the decision is completely out of his hands.
As much as it'd be nice as a fan to see him write another episode, he didn't enjoy the pressures of writing for television hence why he's yet to return. I don't think a Shearman revival is very likely sadly.
Personally, I'm inclined to agree that the downvote wasn't necessarily a bad thing. Unfortunately, downvotes weren't water off a duck's back to everybody - I found the constant instances of "Who downvoted me?", "Why did this get downvoted", "Oh the trolls are downvoting me again" to be even more tiresome and aggravating than actual disagreements, so I am at least glad that we've done away with all that pointless hassle.
5 months, 2 weeks ago on “I will always remember when the Doctor was me”
Both plans were occurring simultaneously. The War Council who represented Gallifrey during Day of the Doctor made reference to the High Council at one point I'm pretty sure, but it was made pretty clear that both "factions" were acting relatively independently at the time. Presumably, whilst the War Council were busy doing what they do best and trying to fight off the Dalek invasion, Rassilon was putting his crazy doomsday schemes into action, thus starting the events that led to The End of Time. (edit - turns out this has been said, but, yeah, still.)
Canonically, I think he only lived for round about three years - the ages 903 to 906. It's definitely much less than ten, and I'm near-certain that was below five as well. In that context, I actually found his "I could do so much more!" sentiments quite moving - he'd finally found happiness, of sorts, after two lifetimes of misery, and it was cut short by a cruel twist of fate after what would have been a pitiful lifespan even by dog years, let alone Time Lord. I wouldn't have wanted to go either.
The one where he's unravelling along his timeline, and sits by her while she sleeps? "We're all stories in the end"? If so, I agree - that one sits up there amongst the best of them.
The crew of the Tesselecta which had been "hired" to impersonate the Doctor during his death presumably weren't aware that he was in his final incarnation - if the War Doctor didn't throw a spanner in the works in that regard, Tennant's regeneration into Tennant surely must have. Short of being told personally, they'd have no way of knowing what number incarnation he was. Presumably, they thought he was killed mid-regeneration. That's how I justify it in my own personal fanon, anyway - but in real-world terms, I presume it's simply that Steven Moffat hadn't formalised The War Doctor in his 50th plans yet, and so Smith was still, at the time, effectively playing the 11th incarnation/regeneration.
Both Livefyre and Disqus have their flaws. I'm not really sure the changeover was necessary, but I don't think this one is too bad all in all - it's the small bits of functionality that I miss, rather than the appearance/layout.
5 months, 2 weeks ago on Your verdict on Capaldi’s Costume
In future, when the Smith's regeneration vs. Tennant's regeneration discussion inevitably resurfaces, I'm just going to provide a link to this comment. It perfectly summarises everything I feel about their respective send-offs.
Understandable, I'd be a rich man if I had a penny for every Whovian I've seen/heard say the same. The End of Time in itself wasn't particularly better than The Time of the Doctor (though I do prefer the former a little; there's no accounting for tastes), but I just much preferred the closing sequences - particularly the farewell tour, and his final encounter (first encounter? timelines..) with Rose. I thought the entire build to his swansong, and the theme of regeneration as an incarnation's death and another incarnation's genesis, rather than a fluid transition, was a master stroke, but I can see why it didn't sit well with everybody.
I'm not even sure it's that simple. All in all, I'd say I probably have more affection for Smith's Doctor now than Tennant's or Eccleston's (although I adore all three), but I still find Tennant's farewell more emotionally impacting than Smith's in the grand scheme of things.
I'm not sure it was his best. It was excellent, as most of his speeches have been, but I'm not convinced it quite matches up to the gravitas he exuded at Stonehenge, or his "execution" speech to the Silence in Day of the Moon, for instance. Obviously that's just a matter of opinion though.
This has probably seen said somewhere in the comments already, but Ten did not "regenerate into the same face" for vanity reasons - he doesn't have that much control over the process. What he did do was find a way to vent the regenerative energy into a matching biological container (his severed hand) thus averting the need to fully regenerate, which is what Eleven insinuated was an act of vanity. Otherwise, it's an interesting article. I buy into Theory #1 far more than Theory #2 though - I can't see why they'd go through such lengths to explain away such a minor long-term continuity slip. After all, we had Martha in the Series 2 finale and Amy Pond even turned up herself in Pompeii. Whatever RTD/Moffat had/have devised for explaining away the recurring faces, I'm sure it'll be handled in a subtler fashion, probably waved away with just a few lines of dialogue. But we'll see. It's interesting that they've decided to tackle it as an issue when, realistically, there isn't any pressing need. If you can't suspend your disbelief long enough to believe two people who look incredibly alike can exist in the same Universe, I don't know how you're going to cope with time travel, paradoxes and a host of bizarre and impossible aliens.
5 months, 2 weeks ago on Some Theories on Capaldi’s Familiar Face
I've never personally seen the need for a Dream Lord sequel, but should one ever materialise I want it to play out exactly as you just described. It sounds terrific.
5 months, 2 weeks ago on Best of Matt Smith: Amy’s Choice
You're right in that by DW's standards, neither scenario is too out-there to be completely unbelievable as a "genuine" plot. But each of those plot threads had outlying elements which raised my suspicions. The Cold Star itself, without any other scrap of information tied to it, seemed innately suspicious and immediately raised my doubts. Amy's pregnancy did likewise - and my feelings were confirmed the moment Rory died. From then on (if not beforehand), I had it in my head that it was all a ruse and there was no correct reality. So that ruined the "fun" of the episode for me. And then, as a separate albeit slightly-related gripe, I'd put the Eknodine about on par with the Slitheen as monsters - so I can't even award any bonus points for likeable monster design. Ultimately neither was too far-fetched to be able to properly discount it, but both were a little too suspicious for me to buy into either (which worked well at first, but ultimately came to spoil it for me).
To me, Amy's Choice represents a phenomenal idea that was just a little too lacking in execution. The core concept of the TARDIS trio living two realities and having to ascertain which is real (lest they die in the wrong one) is utterly ingenious - I have no higher praise. Unfortunately, those two realities in question were each a bit too dull and inane for me to take it as seriously as I'd have liked to. The army of possessed eyestalk pensioners was a particularly silly threat, and the "burning cold Sun" (or however it was described) was equally ludicrous. This wouldn't have been such a huge problem for me were it not for one unfortunate caveat - it meant that I'd suspected both "realities" were fakes before the actual reveal, which took a whole load of punch out of the ending. If at least one of the two realities felt as though it could have genuinely been the real one, I'd probably have been duped long enough for the ending to catch me completely off-guard. That said, I did like the extra reveal that the Dream Lord was (presumably) an aspect of the Doctor himself. So in the end, it's a 7/10 from me. If it had taken itself a bit more seriously, I'd probably have been able to give it an 8 or a 9.
That's how I like to rationalise it. It would seem strange that he carries around his childhood cot. Besides, when did he take it? He obviously didn't have it when he first stole the TARDIS, and his trips to Gallifrey since then have been few and far between (and I don't see what purpose he'd have, on such occasions, to seek it out and take it). It must have had some other purpose within his time and travels.
5 months, 2 weeks ago on Who is the Doctor?
Honestly, if I'd have been posed this question a year or two ago, I'd probably have given it no better than a 6 and ranted about how Moffat ruined his greatest creation in just their second outing. But as time goes by, I'm becoming increasingly accepting of, and even keen on, the changes he's made to the Angels. The Statue of Liberty still took it a step too far, and I can't say I'm completely enamoured with the idea of the Angels assuming stone form, and moving around in it, whilst not quantum-locked, but some of the other concepts he introduced in these episodes are fascinating.
You've got "the image of an Angel (becomes itself an Angel)", which is in itself an ability even more creepy and interesting than their original sole gimmick of throwing you back in time (which was phenomenal in Blink, don't get me wrong, but that alone couldn't have sustained the Angels for as many outings as they've had). You've got a new smattering of advanced psychic powers (Angels that can invade your brain and grow inside your mind? What could be worse?). You've got Angels that are capable, despite their biology, of functioning as a whole army, not just the few scavengers seen in Blink. You've got Angels capable of reanimating deceased consciousnesses to use as vessels to communicate through. It's all incredibly eerie stuff, and really expands and fleshes them out as a species. They're no longer summed up by one odd ability - they're ancient and impossible entities with an array of unique and interesting powers with which to terrorise. That gives them staying power.
And then the episode had plenty of other merits as well - it was a decent reintroduction to River Song, it had that wonderful anomaly-Doctor moment (where he appeared to Amy while her eyes were closed) which ignited so much speculation and debate within the fandom, and it really utilised the crack in time well as a plot device. I loved the idea of the oxygen factory as well - utterly brilliant.
5 months, 2 weeks ago on Best of Matt Smith: The Time of Angels / Flesh & Stone
This is one of those instances where the theory fails to apply to the practice. Downvotes tend to follow controversial opinions no matter how pleasantly or intelligently put, so it doesn't tend to reflect the quality of the content, only whether it's in line with community consensus. I see inane, pointless or unintelligible comments all the time, and few ever attract downvotes. Yet the incredibly well-thought out and convincing comment explaining why somebody loved Victory of the Daleks, or hated The Doctor's Wife, gets an unhealthy smattering of them. It's just the way it is; regardless of it's intended use, it's actually nothing more than a rudimentary popularity gauge.
5 months, 2 weeks ago on Site Update: 3 February 2014
I've used a magical ring and a previously-unmentioned cult to preserve the essence of mine. You never know what the future might hold.
@The Eternal True. I have often wondered why a Dalek such as yourself spends so much time discussing Doctor Who. It doesn't exactly portray your species in the best light, I didn't think you'd be a fan.
@The Eternal I think that's the best I've read so far. I want to try and beat it now. You're such a bad influence! xP
You weren't there. In the final days of Disqus. You never saw what was born. And if the comment-lock is broken, then everything's coming through! Not just the downvotes, but the Avatar Degradations, the Nightmare Thread, the Could've-Been-Troll with his Army of Logical Fallacies and Personal Insults. Disqus turned into hell. And that's what you've opened, right above Livefyre! Hell is descending!
Apologies, I'll stop with the quote edits now. :P
@Baker Street You forgot the Flame War DWTV. He might not have called himself DWTV at the time, but it was still a regeneration.
Hello, Livefyre High Command? This is TheDoctor Speaking!
Hello, also The_Doctor! Can you hear me?
@TardisBoy And so began TardisBoy and The Idle Idol's most excellent adventure through time, space and the internet...
@TardisBoy Hmmm, you're right - we appear to have shorted out the time differential. If we're going to fix it, we need to find an artefact from the original Disqus.
I dread to say this, TardisBoy, but... we need to track down Mr. Fun. O.O
@Handles @TheIdleIdol @Lewis94. To tell you the truth, I actually enjoyed that. It meant that some moron was spending his time senselessly clicking downvote buttons instead of bothering us with his misspelt and inane opinions.
@Lewis94. It's the fact that some people take them way too seriously that's the problem. Personally, if I ever got downvoted, I simply took it as an "I disagree" and moved on. But a lot of people would start demanding to know who downvoted them and aggressively defend themselves and start crying "troll" all the time, which was just unnecessary aggro that nobody has time for. At least by removing it, people can stop taking it as a death threat button and just have normal conversation again.
@Djornad @TheIdleIdol Funnily enough, I'd just realised this and was about to amend my post again. But thanks all the same! :)
@Lewis94. Oh wow. That sucks a little bit. Oh well.
@Lewis94. Yeah, I'll be interested to see how it fares right after episode 8.01 has aired and everyone runs screaming to their computer. Time will tell.
@drjakeyoung Go to your profile, go to email notifications, and set them all to "never".
It all just disappears, doesn't it? Everything you are, gone in moment. Like breath on a mirror. Any moment now, he's-a coming.
It'll probably take a little while to get used to, and I'll miss my Disqus posting history, but I'm all on board with the change. Good job, DWTV. Here's to the future!
Edit: Seems I can't <b>bold</b>, <i>italic</i>, etc. Sad face.