Yeah, but they all also lived super forever awesome in the milliseconds before dying and/or got to live out rich fulfilling lives anyway!
WELL, THAT'S ALRIGHT THEN!
Doctor Who
Re: Doctor Who
Welp, watching that on my adopted baby's first Christmas sure made me feel ways about stuff.
Gatwa's off to a great start. I don't think we have any more of a feel for who his Doctor is yet than we did for Tennant's after Christmas Invasion, but he's beginning to take shape and I love him in the role.
AFAIK the UNIT spinoff hasn't been officially confirmed, but Giggle teased it so hard I don't think "teased" is even the right word anymore.
Also Davies has said in several interviews that a side effect of the bigeneration is that every previous Doctor has been resurrected. Which...doesn't really mean anything, in the scheme of things, except "if we decide to have Colin Baker show up, we've got a needlessly complicated in-universe explanation for his baldness locked and loaded."
Gatwa's off to a great start. I don't think we have any more of a feel for who his Doctor is yet than we did for Tennant's after Christmas Invasion, but he's beginning to take shape and I love him in the role.
AFAIK the UNIT spinoff hasn't been officially confirmed, but Giggle teased it so hard I don't think "teased" is even the right word anymore.
Also Davies has said in several interviews that a side effect of the bigeneration is that every previous Doctor has been resurrected. Which...doesn't really mean anything, in the scheme of things, except "if we decide to have Colin Baker show up, we've got a needlessly complicated in-universe explanation for his baldness locked and loaded."
Re: Doctor Who
Also I'm enjoying the commitment to the "mavity" gag. Like that Futurama where Leela says "You must be using an archaic pronunciation. Like when you say 'ask' instead of 'axe'." and then for the rest of the series various characters keep pronouncing it "axe".
Re: Doctor Who
I think we get another shot of Mel and Rose in the "upcoming season" trailer stuff so at least we're not leaving everything from the specials behind whether or not the spin-off ends up happening (which it definitely will.)
Personally loving the entire concept that Wild Blue Yonder introduced with the supernatural and myth being let into the universe and it manifesting in ways that are basically no different from any other alien bullshit conceit except they're Goblins instead of Gorlockians or whatever.
I did also see someone already use the interview bigeneration musings to headcanon The Curator from the 50th anniversary in exactly that way, which works for me.
Personally loving the entire concept that Wild Blue Yonder introduced with the supernatural and myth being let into the universe and it manifesting in ways that are basically no different from any other alien bullshit conceit except they're Goblins instead of Gorlockians or whatever.
I did also see someone already use the interview bigeneration musings to headcanon The Curator from the 50th anniversary in exactly that way, which works for me.
Re: Doctor Who
Davies has always been good at balancing that kind of nod to complicated continuity the longtime fans (such as himself) enjoy with straightforward storytelling that doesn't alienate new viewers. (Moffat too, and I'd even say Chibnall did a pretty good job of it despite all that Timeless Child stuff at the end.) On back to his very first episode, where he chose the Autons as the monster, and it's not a regeneration episode but it's briefly implied in dialogue that the Doctor regenerated recently.
The Tennant specials were a look back, by design, but Gatwa's first episode, like a standard New Doctor episode, was a jumping-on point; there's not even really any continuity to speak of except the bit where he acknowledges he's a foundling -- and that's there because it connects him to Ruby, not because we're gonna get into all that stuff right now (though Tennant called attention to it in "Wild Blue Yonder", too, so I expect we'll be circling back to it again at some point).
I like the sense that RTD is changing things up this time and it's going to be different than his last run, because if you're just going to do the same thing again, why even do it?
Again, it's too early to have a complete picture of Gatwa's Doctor, but that discussion with Tennant about how 15 is okay now because 14 took the time to process his trauma suggests a desire to turn the page on the haunted-survivor characterization that's defined the Doctor since 2005. His line about how he doesn't have anybody, and his mention that he doesn't know where he came from, suggest he's still got a certain loneliness and feeling that he doesn't belong, but still and all maybe we'll see a Doctor who's more like 2-5 (pre-Adric) who's lighthearted and fun and not just as a mask he wears to hide his guilt and pain.
The Tennant specials were a look back, by design, but Gatwa's first episode, like a standard New Doctor episode, was a jumping-on point; there's not even really any continuity to speak of except the bit where he acknowledges he's a foundling -- and that's there because it connects him to Ruby, not because we're gonna get into all that stuff right now (though Tennant called attention to it in "Wild Blue Yonder", too, so I expect we'll be circling back to it again at some point).
I like the sense that RTD is changing things up this time and it's going to be different than his last run, because if you're just going to do the same thing again, why even do it?
Again, it's too early to have a complete picture of Gatwa's Doctor, but that discussion with Tennant about how 15 is okay now because 14 took the time to process his trauma suggests a desire to turn the page on the haunted-survivor characterization that's defined the Doctor since 2005. His line about how he doesn't have anybody, and his mention that he doesn't know where he came from, suggest he's still got a certain loneliness and feeling that he doesn't belong, but still and all maybe we'll see a Doctor who's more like 2-5 (pre-Adric) who's lighthearted and fun and not just as a mask he wears to hide his guilt and pain.
Re: Doctor Who
Listened to the recent Our Opinions Are Correct episode about Who (made after the first special aired, so they're not up on what happened in the other 3) and aside from general analysis of Doctor Who and how it's changed with the times, they had a couple of specific examples I hadn't thought about.
The recent Dalek short doesn't just show Davros looking like a regular guy because it's pre-Genesis of the Daleks and he hasn't had his accident yet. Davies was deliberately moving away from the "evil disabled/disfigured person" trope.
And the Celestial Toymaker is just the Toymaker now because "celestial" is orientalist. (I'd figured it was just part of the trend to shorten characters' names to make them catchier.) Come to think of it, his alternately affecting different accents and nationalities could be a retcon to explain why his original incarnation was a white guy dressed like a Chinese stereotype. (Aside from being, y'know, NPH doing his Count Olaf shtick again.)
The recent Dalek short doesn't just show Davros looking like a regular guy because it's pre-Genesis of the Daleks and he hasn't had his accident yet. Davies was deliberately moving away from the "evil disabled/disfigured person" trope.
And the Celestial Toymaker is just the Toymaker now because "celestial" is orientalist. (I'd figured it was just part of the trend to shorten characters' names to make them catchier.) Come to think of it, his alternately affecting different accents and nationalities could be a retcon to explain why his original incarnation was a white guy dressed like a Chinese stereotype. (Aside from being, y'know, NPH doing his Count Olaf shtick again.)
Re: Doctor Who
A little bit more on this:
Okay I watched the first half of the video. I think most of it so far is bang-on but I'll note a couple of conclusions I disagree with (and also note that I haven't seen most of these episodes in awhile so there are things I could be misremembering):
I don't think the bit where Amy looks at all the beautiful women who've been companions in the past was intended to imply the Doctor brought them all along because he wants to fuck them. I do think it's meant to say you might guess that by looking at them. It's a meta-commentary on the sexism of the show, on how most of the companions over the years have been attractive women who appeal to "the dads" -- but Moffat's trying to have his cake and eat it too, because Amy is the most overtly sexualized companion in the history of the series. It's not just the outfits and the camera angles like with Peri or Liz or whoever; it's right there in the scripts, such as, y'know, when she tries to fuck the Doctor later in that episode. (And it is extremely weird and uncomfortable and does not need to be in there!)
But a nontrivial detail Verity doesn't circle back to until later in the video is that the Doctor refuses. They do acknowledge that later, talking about Moffat's fetish for sexually dominant women taking what they want from repressed or reluctant men, but I think the other thing is that ultimately the Doctor doesn't seem particularly interested in sex, even the Matt Smith version. Yeah, there's more flirting and uninvited kissing and dick jokes, and I don't mean to minimize Verity's observations about those things, but I don't remember ever really getting much of an impression that Smith's or Capaldi's Doctor were that interested in sex.
And Doctor Who's always been like that. The Doctor's rarely had a confirmed romantic relationship; the two I can think of off the top of my head are Ten/Rose and Eleven/River. And as Verity notes, the Ten/Rose relationship never seems particularly sexual, and the Eleven/River one largely consists of River being sexually aggressive and Eleven looking like a deer in headlights.
(I'd add that Moffat seems to treat sex or sexuality of any kind as a funny joke. Which isn't entirely surprising from the Coupling guy.)
Also, when Verity criticizes Moffat's queer male representation and contrasts it with Davies', the first example they use is Captain Jack, who was...co-created by Moffat.
All in all, though, that's just a few details I don't agree with. By and large I think Verity's right and Moffat's depiction of women had some real issues. I still think he responded to criticism and course-corrected as he went on, but I'll agree that he was the weakest of the three modern Who showrunners on that front.
And I still have about half the video to watch; I'll let you know if I get around to it and find anything else to comment on.
Büge wrote:Can anyone who's actually watched the Moffat era Dr. Whos verify if the appraisal of it as being much more sexist is at all accurate?
Okay I watched the first half of the video. I think most of it so far is bang-on but I'll note a couple of conclusions I disagree with (and also note that I haven't seen most of these episodes in awhile so there are things I could be misremembering):
I don't think the bit where Amy looks at all the beautiful women who've been companions in the past was intended to imply the Doctor brought them all along because he wants to fuck them. I do think it's meant to say you might guess that by looking at them. It's a meta-commentary on the sexism of the show, on how most of the companions over the years have been attractive women who appeal to "the dads" -- but Moffat's trying to have his cake and eat it too, because Amy is the most overtly sexualized companion in the history of the series. It's not just the outfits and the camera angles like with Peri or Liz or whoever; it's right there in the scripts, such as, y'know, when she tries to fuck the Doctor later in that episode. (And it is extremely weird and uncomfortable and does not need to be in there!)
But a nontrivial detail Verity doesn't circle back to until later in the video is that the Doctor refuses. They do acknowledge that later, talking about Moffat's fetish for sexually dominant women taking what they want from repressed or reluctant men, but I think the other thing is that ultimately the Doctor doesn't seem particularly interested in sex, even the Matt Smith version. Yeah, there's more flirting and uninvited kissing and dick jokes, and I don't mean to minimize Verity's observations about those things, but I don't remember ever really getting much of an impression that Smith's or Capaldi's Doctor were that interested in sex.
And Doctor Who's always been like that. The Doctor's rarely had a confirmed romantic relationship; the two I can think of off the top of my head are Ten/Rose and Eleven/River. And as Verity notes, the Ten/Rose relationship never seems particularly sexual, and the Eleven/River one largely consists of River being sexually aggressive and Eleven looking like a deer in headlights.
(I'd add that Moffat seems to treat sex or sexuality of any kind as a funny joke. Which isn't entirely surprising from the Coupling guy.)
Also, when Verity criticizes Moffat's queer male representation and contrasts it with Davies', the first example they use is Captain Jack, who was...co-created by Moffat.
All in all, though, that's just a few details I don't agree with. By and large I think Verity's right and Moffat's depiction of women had some real issues. I still think he responded to criticism and course-corrected as he went on, but I'll agree that he was the weakest of the three modern Who showrunners on that front.
And I still have about half the video to watch; I'll let you know if I get around to it and find anything else to comment on.
Re: Doctor Who
Also apparently I've been saying "Davies" wrong this whole time.
The Commonwealth sure louves iets extrae vouwels.
The Commonwealth sure louves iets extrae vouwels.
Re: Doctor Who
Thad wrote:Also apparently I've been saying "Davies" wrong this whole time.
The Commonwealth sure louves iets extrae vouwels.
shit and i've been keeping my armies there for ages
Re: Doctor Who
Damn, I was trying to figure out whether to make a "sleevies" joke or a "rabies" one.
Re: Doctor Who
No, this is Art
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests