|
|
Post by RobFilth on Nov 26, 2023 22:57:51 GMT
It should have ended with the Series 10 finale. All Fathead is doing here is defecating on a corpse that's been rotting away since July 2017. Could it actually have ended 28 years before the s10 finale? Nothing of value would be lost (apart from maybe McGann's Byron-esque take on the role)! And maybe Children Of Earth... Even Children of the Earth has its bloody idiot bits in like Barrowman encased in a concrete block etc and is essentially a Quatermas:Conclusion rip off. |
|
|
|
Post by mott1 on Nov 26, 2023 23:04:36 GMT
You're probably right, Rob. To be honest I have this horrible feeling I gave it too much credit on transmission because of Capaldi's excellent, dignified performance (which they barely let him do as the Doctor) and the Quatermass-like plot, that's why I've never gone back to it since.
Nu Who is hideous enough without denying ourselves the brief illusions it could have been better!
|
|
|
|
Post by UncleDeadly on Nov 26, 2023 23:04:51 GMT
Even Children of the Earth has its bloody idiot bits in like Barrowman encased in a concrete block looking eminently sensible at this point... |
|
|
|
Post by RobFilth on Nov 26, 2023 23:07:16 GMT
You're probably right, Rob. To be honest I have this horrible feeling I gave it too much credit on transmission because of Capaldi's excellent, dignified performance (which they barely let him do as the Doctor) and the Quatermass-like plot, that's why I've never gone back to it since. Nu Who is hideous enough without denying ourselves the brief illusions it could have been better! Children of the Earth does have many good set pieces and is shockingly good in places considering it's bloody Torchwood, but it still has it's fair share of dumb bits too, it's just that its not a complete exercise in crass moronity like most Torchwood episodes are. |
|
|
|
Post by Bernard Marx on Nov 28, 2023 9:20:35 GMT
A place to discuss the special after it airs. By the way, IMDB is utterly f*cked. The episode already has a 10/10 on the site. It’ll likely drop into the 7s within the next three days. Some Chibnall episodes had a 10/10 shortly before broadcast too. Turns out I wasn't wrong. It's now at 7.5/10. Which is frankly far too high as it is. |
|
|
|
Post by Bernard Marx on Nov 28, 2023 10:04:06 GMT
Some extra observations from my Dad yesterday (who isn't a Who fan, although appreciated some of the classic episodes when I watched them as a kid, and who prefers Smith to Davies' Doctors):
“Sorry, but Catherine Tate is a shit actress. An amicable enough comedian but frankly not good enough for a dramatic role.”
“Why do Tennant and Tate suddenly need to unnaturally react intensely to innocuous situations? Why are they so melodramatic? It’s weird.”
|
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Nov 28, 2023 10:25:12 GMT
Some extra observations from my Dad yesterday (who isn't a Who fan, although appreciated some of the classic episodes when I watched them as a kid, and who prefers Smith to Davies' Doctors): “Sorry, but Catherine Tate is a shit actress. An amicable enough comedian but frankly not good enough for a dramatic role.”
“Why do Tennant and Tate suddenly need to unnaturally react intensely to innocuous situations? Why are they so melodramatic? It’s weird.” I completely agree with that. Sorry but when you see her opposite Freema Agyeman and Billie Piper in series 4 it's painfully obvious. Look at the bit where Rose tells her about the Darkness, it's not like Billie Piper is giving the performance of a lifetime there, but she's at least natural whilst Catherine Tate is SHOOOOOUUUUUUTTTTIIIIIINNNNNNNNNGGGGGG. Also I think that Tate brings out the worst in Tennant as an actor. He often has to overact to keep up with her. "OIIII WATCH IT SPACEMAN" "OIII WATCH IT EARTH GIRL" that bit is absolutely painful to watch. I mean to be fair to them the dialogue is awful, but still. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2023 15:25:39 GMT
More than anything this feels dated, which is funny considering their "all about change" mantra. The visual effects have had an update, sure, but it's still got one foot rooted in 2005; like you said Burr, RTD is the kinda guy who wishes Heat magazine were still a thing and that the zeitgeist of celebrity gossip were still as pervasive.
|
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Nov 28, 2023 15:38:38 GMT
More than anything this feels dated, which is funny considering their "all about change" mantra. The visual effects have had an update, sure, but it's still got one foot rooted in 2005; like you said Burr, RTD is the kinda guy who wishes Heat magazine were still a thing and that the zeitgeist of celebrity gossip were still as pervasive. Haha that wasn't my quote actually. Uncle came up with it here, and someone used it on a forum and another person used it on twitter and I shared both of those here because I thought they were good. I think it's because it sums up just how tedious RTD can be at chasing the zeitgeist. As you say it is even more so now that he is a 60 year old man whose moment of mainstream glory ended in 2010. This would be like if Andrew Cartmell were handed the reigns in 2005. It is in fact almost the exact same distance of time between the end of the RTD era and now and the end of the McCoy era and the beginning of the RTD era. PS Cartmell I don't think would have been as out of touch as RTD is now as he wasn't as desperate to chase fads, other than some bits of Ace being a trendy teenager. Booooooom. |
|
|
|
Post by Monster X on Nov 28, 2023 18:49:58 GMT
Some extra observations from my Dad yesterday (who isn't a Who fan, although appreciated some of the classic episodes when I watched them as a kid, and who prefers Smith to Davies' Doctors): “Sorry, but Catherine Tate is a shit actress. An amicable enough comedian but frankly not good enough for a dramatic role.” “Why do Tennant and Tate suddenly need to unnaturally react intensely to innocuous situations? Why are they so melodramatic? It’s weird.” Well said, your Dad! Tate's an awful actress and I don't find her funny, either. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2023 21:35:11 GMT
7.4 now which is actually lower than my prediction. It was an 8.1 on Sunday morning as well!
|
|
|
|
Post by iank on Nov 28, 2023 21:38:47 GMT
Fiddled figures are just spin for the media. The real figure was 5.08.
And it's only gonna get worse.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2023 21:40:23 GMT
Fiddled figures are just spin for the media. The real figure was 5.08. And it's only gonna get worse. I was talking about the IMDB rating which is now lower than Jodie's last episode. lolz A 7.4 is a bit too low for an episode that's apparently the greatest thing since sliced bread. |
|
|
|
Post by iank on Nov 28, 2023 21:45:14 GMT
Oh right, fair enough lol
IMDB's a joke anyway. Its users all appear to be about 12 (or perhaps that's just their IQ).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2023 21:48:05 GMT
Oh right, fair enough lol IMDB's a joke anyway. Its users all appear to be about 12 (or perhaps that's just their IQ). No, you're right. The site as become more and more unreliable. The 2016 Ghostbusters magically went up from a 5.3 to a 6.9 over a single evening. Are we supposed to believe that sack of shit is better than the second movie? |
|
