... with a nice dollop of ooey-gooey luuuuuuv on top.
and a "cherry" subplot.
aw.
ooh! and time paradoxes! "history" -- changing! yeah, uh, explain that to me again ...
and look, it just keeps on going -- next ep looks like a doozy huh??
that whole "time streams" thing is such a load of fucking wack. if something's happened, it's happened. you can't go back to the past and change it. obviously what we saw in this ep happened, and the doctor "remembered" it wrong.
like i said, time travel is such a load of wack, the more in the background it's left, the better.
oh, and did i mention the great ooey gooey ...
let's all hold hands gang! time hug!!
and a "cherry" subplot.
aw.
ooh! and time paradoxes! "history" -- changing! yeah, uh, explain that to me again ...
and look, it just keeps on going -- next ep looks like a doozy huh??
that whole "time streams" thing is such a load of fucking wack. if something's happened, it's happened. you can't go back to the past and change it. obviously what we saw in this ep happened, and the doctor "remembered" it wrong.
like i said, time travel is such a load of wack, the more in the background it's left, the better.
oh, and did i mention the great ooey gooey ...
let's all hold hands gang! time hug!!
posted by:
|
Pittsburgh
|
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Sun, May 8, 2005 - 8:37 PMsnap your fingers and make it go away. ;) -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Sun, May 8, 2005 - 9:55 PMIan, you're telling me DW is not a soap opera?!?
it did not use to be -- at least not as much as it is now, what with all these histrionics -- oh ET, phone home across time and space! oh i miss me mum! oh hold my hand! -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Sun, May 8, 2005 - 10:01 PMI dunno if soap opera is quite what comes to mind....
I think we have the Buffy thing again. Take a season, and it will have three or four stories that carry through most episodes.
I was pondering on another thread the Bad Wolf thing, and someone suggested it portended a larger story arc. Checked out the dr who website, and viola, Bad Wolf is episode 12.
My guess: that's the episode where the Doctor comes to terms with the big bang that took out the Time Lords.
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Mon, May 9, 2005 - 4:11 AMKeep in mind that I am only at episode 3 at the moment-- having just viewed Unquiet Dead.
> Ian, you're telling me DW is
> not a soap opera?!?
The soap opera genre is all about the melodrama-- that is the focus of the story: "when are they going to admit they are in love?" "when is A going to discover B is having an affair with C?" "How will D gain revenge on E?" Everything else is window dressing.
The elements of DW you've cited as soap opera so far (at least the ones I have seen) are appropriate to the story.
> ET, phone home across time
> and space! oh i miss me mum!
Rose's call home over 5 billion years was to illustrate just how far away from home Rose was-- it was to underline the culture shock that a companion to the Doctor should feel, but previously hadn't been shown in the original run, because extended character arcs were simply not part of the SF genre at that point in time. DW never really had character arcs until Turlough (and that was handled poorly by the writing team) and was only handled well with regards to Ace during the last two seasons. Companions had perviously only had an initial "it's bigger on the inside than on the outside!" "are we really on another planer?" in their first adventure traveling with the Doctor after which they settled into things and took it all for granted. The call home actually made for more psychologically realistic science fiction in my view (my only probem is the issue of how is it the Doctor just happened to have the appropriate antenna and battery combination for Rose's phone.)
> oh hold my hand!
The hand holding I have seen (again, I have only seen up to Unquiet Dead) is perfectly appropriate to the situation and the characters... it's certainly not like the kissing in the TVM. -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Mon, May 9, 2005 - 5:32 AM<ecause extended character arcs were simply not part of the SF genre at that point in time>
hogwash -- star trek. lost in space. etc etc.
<"when are they going to admit they are in love?" "when is A going to discover B is having an affair with C?" "How will D gain revenge on E?" Everything else is window dressing.>
this is a **perfect** encapsulation of how the show is now.
<W never really had character arcs until Turlough (and that was handled poorly by the writing team)>
the guardian trilogy is one of the high point of the series -- and that's in no small part due to the writers' conception and handling of turlough.
<it was to underline the culture shock that a companion to the Doctor should feel>
should feel according to what? hey guys! have you been like Ian here and found the first 26 years of Doctor Who sorely lacking because the characters didn't display the kind of "culture shock" they **should** feel, with the "story arc" they **should** have ...? -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Mon, May 9, 2005 - 5:51 AM>>should feel according to what? hey guys! have you been like Ian here and >>found the first 26 years of Doctor Who sorely lacking because the characters >>didn't display the kind of "culture shock" they **should** feel, with the "story >>arc" they **should** have ...?
When Douglas Adams was doing the script editing, the lack of story arc and character developments were glossed over with humor. After that, the stories were mostly re-hashes of Doctor Who stories which were already made (without the Douglas Adams humor). So, i don't really see it ass a bad thing if they work in some character and plot arc's to keep the show from stagnating again.
My biggest complaint so far is that although the story writing is generally not bad, and the direction (especially for BBC) is pretty good, the script puts a layer of cheese on it. The dialogue needs to be less flashy and trite. -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Mon, May 9, 2005 - 11:22 AMWhen I was a kid, I used to ponder some of those questions: Shouldn't he or she be shocked? doesn't anyone miss him/her? Where's the loo?
I don't mind RTD exploring the topics. Well, maybe the last one is best left alone. -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Mon, May 9, 2005 - 4:04 PMfolks -- sex is obvious. everything is about sex. some of you already were commenting re: dalek what a porn portal the internet is.
that is one reason DW has always been so refreshing.
oh well ... -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Mon, May 9, 2005 - 4:06 PMand drogulus, really, i disagree -- there was no "arc" with sarah and the baker doctor -- unless you count the obvious evolving chemistry between them -- and no! not boring sexual chemistry!
it was no different than with the doctor and romana #2, or with the davison doctor and adric, or tegan. there was evolution in all cases but not the **telegraphed** and yes! soap operatic!!! "arc" in space that RTD is shoving down our throats. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Mon, May 9, 2005 - 4:45 PMNo, actually you agree...
There wasn't much of an plot or developmental arch in the older series. I think the scripts were generally more clever (especially during the Tom Baker/Douglas Adams years) which kept the series from stagnating. After that, the show stagnated pretty fast as they were just re-using old plots with different doctors and crappier scripts.
The script writing for the new series isn't all too terrific. However some of the character and plot arcs could give a 50 year old series a hand out of the mud. So long as it's less convoluted than Babylon 5, and less of a soap opera than sliders it should work well. Farscape (for the most part) had a decent balance of keeping sci fi bits, humorous bits, interpersonal bits, and long running plot arcs without becoming too overwhelmingly ridiculous at any point (not counting peace keeper wars).
I think this Doctor Who series is shooting for something similar, and while the direction, and writing are there, the production isn't quite jim henson studios, and the scripts have too many moments that make me wince.
I can see that an interpersonal development angle might be a big difference from the old series, but then again the characters didn't seem to give a shit about one another in a believable way. Here today, gone tomorrow relationships are great if you're a television producer, but it doesn't make for the most compelling writing in the world. I agree that the play between Rose and the Doctor is way too sappy and to fast to be realistic, I think the idea that the characters have emotional investments in one another was badly needed and could improve the series greatly. -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Mon, May 9, 2005 - 4:55 PMno we do not agree -- the series stagnated after the davison era, not before.
and ... re-using old plots? what is the title of this thread?
i don't think any of the plots of the mccoy era were re-treads, or barely any.
and, really ... <the characters didn't seem to give a shit about one another in a believable way>
please. like i argued in my last post, it was obvious all the people i mentioned cared about each other. the parting of sarah from the doctor was genuinely touching, as was romana's parting. and um ... adric? they all seemed really broken up by his death.
it's the sappy emotionalism that was thankfully lacking. when turlough leaves, with his wry observation about the doctor to peri -- that is the kind of understated british thing that blows away anything they are doing now.
understated -- like the not so special effects -- it left more to your imagination!
-
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Mon, May 9, 2005 - 5:05 PMHey GORdon, if you are so disenchanted and obviously frusterated with the new show,
WHY DO YOU WATCH IT???
I quite like it. All of it. I really like the Davison era too. I dont really like Colin Baker or Sylvester Mckoy era yet i appreciate the gems they have and dont make a big deal out of the rest. Lighten up, it's only the longest running sci fi show ever. -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Mon, May 9, 2005 - 5:38 PMIm with sparkle. At least start a "the New Doctor Who Show Sucks" tribe and spout your complaints there. Its one thing to share your opinion, its quite another to repeatedly tell others that there opinion about a TV show is wrong. It is a TV show. You do know that don’t you? -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Mon, May 9, 2005 - 6:05 PMthen why do guys take my comments so seriously?
i'm laughing over here.
:o
-
-
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Mon, May 9, 2005 - 10:26 PM>>please. like i argued in my last post, it was obvious all the people i mentioned cared about each other.
The character relationships were flat as pancakes with little to no depth. Barely more complicated than people who share a bus stop every morning. they may have said goodbye, but they really didn't get to know one another. The relationships were intentionally set to be temporary and passing as a producers convenience.
The title of this thread is appropriate... but as I said before, character depth and longer plot arcs can bring new life out of the cellar of stories.
I didn't care for the davison era, not because of the writing, but because davison had the flattest character and was probably the worst actor out of all of the doctors.
Mystery is all about manipulating the imagination, and so far the new series is much more ambitious than the old series. -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Tue, May 10, 2005 - 10:06 AM<he character relationships were flat as pancakes>
<davison had the flattest character and was probably the worst actor out of all of the doctors>
wow, i could not agree less. there was genuine warmth between some of those people -- doc and susan, doc and jamie, ben and polly, jamie and victoria, doc and victoria, doc and jo!!!!! for god's sake!!! doc4 and sarah, doc and romana, doc5 and adric, doc and tegan, doc and ace!!!! for god sake's!!!!
how you can deny that i don't know. i think you just want the over the top, telegraphed, american variety of "relationship" -- i prefer the understated, subtle, nuanced british variety and that's one reason why i love Doctor Who and years ago became passionate about it because i am passionate about things i love so get off my case "sparkle" and "aminata" if you don't like i don't read or post here like it was just said to me and like i realized was right. -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Tue, May 10, 2005 - 10:34 AM>>wow, i could not agree less. there was genuine warmth between some of >>those people -- doc and susan, doc and jamie, ben and polly, jamie and >>victoria, doc and victoria, doc and jo!!!!! for god's sake!!! doc4 and sarah, >>doc and romana, doc5 and adric, doc and tegan, doc and ace!!!! for god >>sake's!!!!
The funny thing is that there wasn't much difference in any of the relationships. They were all prefunctory role-playing. It was a good formula, and they certainly got mileage out of it, but we're not looking at much more depth than "Different Strokes". While formulas are good to give an audience what they expect, they tend to get predictable and boring. Adding extra dynamics put the potential for breaking the mold...the downside is that when it's done poorly the whole thing explodes in a big shitty mess. I think the new series is still on the fence here. -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Tue, May 10, 2005 - 11:03 AMHaven't joined this thread so far because there's not much I have to add that isn't already being said...but I'm agreeing with GORdon about 75 to 80% here.
The relationship between McCoy's Doctor and Ace was as nuanced and complicated as could be; nothing formulaic about it. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Tue, May 10, 2005 - 8:37 PMI note GORdon's appreciation for the more subdued, understated nature of British drama, but I disagree that every instance was exactly that.
Turlough's departure for example. Turlough was shifty from start to finish and it never made any sense to me that the Doctor would just shrug his shoulders and blithely accept him on board the TARDIS. Now AFTER Turlough finally pulls through in Enlightenment, I can see it, but I would also think the Doctor would have a renewed and greater interest in Turlough, but no, he's just another companion to get into trouble with. So I found his departure to be about as dry and uninteresting as could be. He might as well have said, "Right, I'm being written out of the show now. Bye."
One of the reasons I really like Caves of Androzani so much is because, despite what an annoying twit Peri is, it is the only episode where the Doctor really shows genuine concern and affection for one of his companions, right on up to carrying her to the TARDIS. So GORdon, what YOU might call the understated, British style in some cases, I might call just hodgepodge, crappy scripting, executed with little enthusiasm.
My gripe about the companions though, is not so much about character depth, as just the fact that I'd like to see them more useful and intelligent. With JNT's regime, there's a lot more of the companions just being stupid and helpless and herded around through the story, always needing to be rescued.
I think about when Sarah shot the gelignite in Pyramids of Mars, or locked Morbius in his own lab, when she was blind...Leela never afraid to scrap...Romana could be relied upon for second opinions and any rigging up that required two people. I really do NOT like it when the companions just stand around asking "What is it Doctor?", "Where are we, Doctor?" "Can we go back to the TARDIS now, Doctor?" and then blundering into something and needing to be rescued. I want to see the companions having an intelligence, not being in a constant state of "OMG! I'm in outer space somewhere and I dont' know what to do now!"
I keep thinking of Tegan and Peri as among the worst of the worst companions...oh, and Mel...UGH!! Please, no more stupid, helpless, whining women.
-
-
-
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Tue, May 10, 2005 - 7:35 PM> I didn't care for the davison era,
> not because of the writing, but
> because davison had the flattest
> character and was probably the
> worst actor out of all of the doctors.
Yes and no. Davidson is a strong actor in every other role I have seen him in, be it comedic or dramatic. The problem was that JNT had a certain conception of the Davidson Doctor as being something of an anti-Tom Baker: The Doctor stripped of eccentricity: bland. By most reports I have read, Davidson wished to play the Doctor darker, but was not permitted to do so by JNT.
There were few character arcs over the course of the original series of Doctor Who. This does not mean that the original series was no good. This is simply to state that the conventions of television at that time were either to have miniseries with clear beginings, middles, and ends or to have extended series in which most episodes end with the basic elements restored to what they were at the begining of the story.
There was wonderful chemistry between many of the Doctors and their Companions-- but this was not because the writing staff had planned some character arc to develop over the course of the season-- but because of the actors and how their relationships developed
The point is that television audiences these days expect to see relationships develop and characters to be affected by their adventures in a way that audiences of the 1970s simply did not. -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Tue, May 10, 2005 - 9:24 PMoh dear.
<One of the reasons I really like Caves of Androzani so much is because>
the reasons you cite are reasons i don't like it. caves of androzani -- Ian, there's some melodrama for you! say cheese!
tegan as a dud? uh, what other companion shot a cyberman with his own weapon? tegan a dud. uh huh. next ...
Ian -- i won't touch davison being bland because i am tired of defending him. BLAND IS WHAT PERTWEE AND TROUGHTON WERE, not davison. troughton: ooh! i'm curious. ooh! i'm righteous! pertwee: little different, just add a pumped up chest arrogance.
contrast that with davison's genuine fallibility, his weakness and confusion worn on his sleeve. his thoughtful musing at the end of kinda. what seems like bad writing in his taking on of turlough i see as subtlety and complexity -- i see the doctor, much like baker before him, acting as an innocent when in fact he is very wise and cunning -- keeping your ememies closer than your friends -- but it goes beyond what with mccoy would be one dimensional machieveleanism; davison's doc obviously saw the potential in turlough to evolve, so he also took him on for that reason.
oops! i commented anyway. really i find these condemnations of davison to be ridiculous. if we were sitting in front of the episodes i reference, i could point out evidence for every claim i have made.
Ian, satisfy the audience huh? that's what makers of soap operas want to do. they deliver up in spades what the audience wants, without regard for subtlety or nuance. next ...
-
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Tue, May 10, 2005 - 11:01 PMoy, it's getting hot in here....
i wouldn't mind if there were less hand-holding -- both between the characters and of the audience.
ingoring lack of subtlety... depth of relationships require time. force it, and it seems shallow. this series moves a little quickly for my taste.
i can't help but wonder how much of a role the 13-episode commission had do with the pacing, though. after all, rtd had no assurances from the bbc that there would be another season.
if he'd known that there'd be a season 2 (or 28, or 43... whatever), would he have played it differently?
(i suppose one could counter with the argument that during the 80's, every season was threatened with cancellation)
still, for a show targeting the pre-pubescent male, it's pretty damn good. better than the other schlock out there. and it's the only one i've found where the wife, the 4-year-old, the 12-year old and i can all sit down and enjoy -- whatever its faults. -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Wed, May 11, 2005 - 7:04 PMWhat i want to know is why the hell they didnt explore Chameleon more?! He could have been an awesome asset to the Dr and his travels. Ah well. -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Wed, May 11, 2005 - 7:20 PM<still, for a show targeting the pre-pubescent male, it's pretty damn good. better than the other schlock out there>
we agree!
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Thu, May 12, 2005 - 4:17 AMChameleon was played real robot; hard to move around and hard to use on the set. In addition, it had a unique programing language only understood by its builder. That one programmer died unexpectedly and so there was no way to use Chameleon. -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Thu, May 12, 2005 - 12:29 PMBrian: <it's getting hot in here.... >
RTD: <so let's take off all our clothes!> -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Sat, May 14, 2005 - 4:43 PMI liked this episode.
It's always a hoot to discover that the Bad Guy (or alien or whatever) can be killed with a simple thing like, oh, turning up the heat. Yay!
Electronic manacles? How convenient!
I'm not sure what was up with the woman trying to put the moves on the man-boy about the hole in his head, though.
But I DO know he better not go to any Beatnik poetry readings.
And I would be soooooo tempted to poke a pencil in there. -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Sat, May 14, 2005 - 6:03 PMAnd Simon Pegg! Yay! -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Sun, May 15, 2005 - 3:14 AM--- from gordon ---
Brian: <it's getting hot in here.... >
RTD: <so let's take off all our clothes!>
--- end ----
I think they use that song in Episode 2, The Director's Cut.
-
-
Re: Episode 7: The Long Game
Tue, June 7, 2005 - 12:38 PMI finally saw this episode weeks after everyone else, and I must say that I enjoyed it greatly.
I appreciated the manner in which Max and the Editor kept humanity enslaved without them knowing they were enslaved. I liked how tightly the different plot threads were wound around one another-- and I was amazed that so much could happen in a 45 minute episode.
Production design and monster design were very good.
It was also about time we saw the Doctor quickly find out that a companion is simply isn't going to work out on their very first trip through the vortex.
> I would be soooooo tempted to poke a pencil in there.
Ever see the film, "eXistenZ"? -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Long Game
Tue, June 7, 2005 - 2:29 PM<I appreciated the manner in which Max and the Editor kept humanity enslaved without them knowing they were enslaved. I liked how tightly the different plot threads were wound around one another>
like i said -- the sunmakers. -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Long Game
Tue, June 7, 2005 - 8:00 PM> like i said -- the sunmakers.
Always a favorite story of mine: The Fourth Doctor as an anarchist.
The story is made relevent to our era by proposing a different means of enslavement.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Episode 7: The Long Game
Tue, May 17, 2005 - 1:09 AMI liked Suki. She was cuter than Rose.
-
Re: Episode 7: The Sunmakers
Tue, June 28, 2005 - 1:54 PMsee, this is what i was talking about, re: foreshadowing.
now that we know what was really going on, i feel a bit cheated that there was no foreshadowing in the episode.
all it needed was just one scene, or a couple shots, to indicate that there was something going on at a level above the perpetrators we saw. something that would make no sense, basically, but would make sense after the whole denouement.
and the title doesn't count.
-
Re: Episode 7: The Long Game
Mon, April 28, 2008 - 1:41 PMJust saw this episode rerun on SciFi today as I got home from work and decided to bump the discussion back to the top. There are lots of tangents here, and plenty of examples of GORdon and I disagreeing more vehemently than it typical at this point.
1.) "The Long Game" is good science-fiction television and strikes me as proof that RTD can write a good, tightly plotted, and politically relevant Doctor Who script (unfortunatly he too often chooses not to.)
2.) It's a good nod the the classic series with plenty of new twists.
3.) I miss the gravitas and intensity Christopher Eccleston brought to the role.
4.) Reminded me that (despite what GORdon thinks) that Season 1 was consistantly strongly written-- as opposed the the uneven writing we saw in Seasons 2 and 3 (a strange mixture of powerfully written episodes and ones that were largely failures.) -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Long Game
Mon, April 28, 2008 - 2:40 PMlisten ian, i'd unravel my scarf to return to the good old days of eccelston and season 1.
as i've recently acknowledged, that season was way more solid overall than what has come since.
partly that season is helped along by RTD's cliches still being new -- the deus ex macchina ending (however that is spelled) being one of the most egregious staples.
i still haven't been following this season since i went over to a friend's house and watched that absolutely execrable season opener. i'm sure i'll check in at some point and survey the carnage.
admittedly, i have recently been reminded that there is quite a bit of carnage in the old Who. been catching up on the DVD releases and i netflixed "keeper of traken" and "logopolis" and can't stand to watch them, they are so bad. baker is just an irritable sot, and the production values are, well, rubbish. for traken in particular, both the lighting and set design are awful. after the hinchliffe era, with its great "planet of evil" jungle and such, the grove in traken just looks so bad.
and then of course there is the master. if davison wasn't so good, and castrovalva such a great story, i'd consign that one to the rubbish bin too, with its mustache twirling baddie.
lots of doctor dreck out there. like, say, the whole troughton and pertwee eras, for instance. -
-
Re: Episode 7: The Long Game
Tue, April 29, 2008 - 2:17 PM> listen ian, i'd unravel my scarf to return to the good old days of eccelston and season 1.
I have no reason to doubt you on that count. I was only highlighting our disagreement because somebody (presumingly joking) suggested that you were my alt, since I was defending your curmudgeonly ways.
Season 1 was rather strong-- the only missteps being raising the stakes so high in the season finale that only a deus ex machina could resolve the dilema (something that has become an RTD cliché) and so, the "Bad Wolf Arc" was just a plotting cop-out.
-
-
