Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2024 10:38:22 GMT
I'm gonna get a lot of hate for this, but Doctor Who was a joke in the 80s and Michael Grade was completely justified in axing it. That's not to say I'm glad it happened, I would've loved to see 90s Who, but Grade had every right to do as he did. I adore some of the late McCoy stuff but it was too little, too late. I also think the TV movie was a complete misstep when what they should've done was pitch a reboot of the show to the BBC or another British network.
God I hate that stuff so much. Nothing gets on my tits more than the Doctor being painted as this waxing moraliser. He is cruel, and petty, and often quite cowardly, but what keeps it together is that he is fundamentally good-hearted. His role changes quite a bit as the series progresses. Hartnell is more of a mischievous sidekick if anything, a character plucked right from a Verne or Wells novel, and he is very often dismissive of those around him, not treating situations as seriously as he should, which lands the team in all sorts of trouble; Troughton is a stone-cold coward, a chattering imp who pulls it out of the bag at the last minute or leaves it up to others to solve; Pertwee is a classical hero who can be quite curt and arrogant (the "I usually am" remark would under normal circumstances be evidence for a diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder); Baker is a mad eccentric who can also be vicious, mean and cowardly, avoiding his responsibilities and not taking anything seriously. But they are all decent, good men. None of these portrayals even approach the "Jesus" archetype that Tennant, Smith, Capaldi and Whittaker would be laden with.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cherry Pepsi Maxil on Apr 27, 2024 10:52:03 GMT
Grade and those higher up had the power to give the show the money it needed or make the decision as to who was producing the show. He axed it because he didn't like it. To be honest, even if Hinchcliffe was on board and pumping out classic after classic Grade would have still thought it was shit (he loathed science fiction in general). I don't think it was a joke in the 80s and there's a lot of good stuff from that period that is more like Doctor Who than the majority of the rubbish that's been churned out since 2005.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2024 10:56:04 GMT
It didn't need money, it needed someone who could actually write their way out of a paper bag.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cherry Pepsi Maxil on Apr 27, 2024 11:03:43 GMT
It didn't need money, it needed someone who could actually write their way out of a paper bag. It's very easy to spin things that way. I could say 00s Who was a joke and mention crap like Partners in Crime, Love and Monsters, Fear Her, The End of the World, burping wheelie bins etc. While there were certainly duff periods in the 80s, I don't think it deserved to be taken up off the air. There was always a classic or two that would get made when things looked desperate. How many belters has the show produced since 2017? That's nearly a decade ago. That's more worthy of cancellation. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2024 11:11:55 GMT
It's just hard to sell when literally every Doctor Who story from 1977 to 1988 was utter bilge with the exception of an odd couple here and there.
I hold the same opinion of the story quality from 2013 to 2024; but the fact of the matter is the ratings don't lie. It took until Capaldi's last season for the live ratings to even come close to the pits of the McCoy era, and that was back when more people watched live television.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ludders II on Apr 27, 2024 11:16:44 GMT
It's very disappointing. I had always respected Louise more than many others actors, and turned a blind eye to this on the basis she always seems as though she's trying to be a nice person to everyone. I'd like the chance to hear her elaborate on exactly why she thinks this. I like her a lot as a person, but it wouldn't stand up in my court. I think it's a bit much to lose respect for someone based on their shit taste in tv. I don't have a problem people's tastes, but I do have a problem with hyperbole. Perhaps the word 'genius' have become so overused that it now means something different, like successful. That's the only way to apply the word to RTD. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Apr 27, 2024 12:12:08 GMT
I'm gonna get a lot of hate for this, but Doctor Who was a joke in the 80s and Michael Grade was completely justified in axing it. That's not to say I'm glad it happened, I would've loved to see 90s Who, but Grade had every right to do as he did. I adore some of the late McCoy stuff but it was too little, too late. I also think the TV movie was a complete misstep when what they should've done was pitch a reboot of the show to the BBC or another British network. God I hate that stuff so much. Nothing gets on my tits more than the Doctor being painted as this waxing moraliser. He is cruel, and petty, and often quite cowardly, but what keeps it together is that he is fundamentally good-hearted. His role changes quite a bit as the series progresses. Hartnell is more of a mischievous sidekick if anything, a character plucked right from a Verne or Wells novel, and he is very often dismissive of those around him, not treating situations as seriously as he should, which lands the team in all sorts of trouble; Troughton is a stone-cold coward, a chattering imp who pulls it out of the bag at the last minute or leaves it up to others to solve; Pertwee is a classical hero who can be quite curt and arrogant (the "I usually am" remark would under normal circumstances be evidence for a diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder); Baker is a mad eccentric who can also be vicious, mean and cowardly, avoiding his responsibilities and not taking anything seriously. But they are all decent, good men. None of these portrayals even approach the "Jesus" archetype that Tennant, Smith, Capaldi and Whittaker would be laden with. Sorry but the show wasn't a joke in the 80s. I mean yes there was stigma around it being a sci fi show, but ultimately it was a mainstream hit in the UK and more popular than it ever would be abroad again during that time, until Grade actively sabotaged it. These are hard facts. Grade took it off in 1985 when its viewers were nowhere near low enough. He and Powell openly admitted they didn't like it and when the backlash was huge, they were forced to recant their decision to 18 months. Both men also undermined it by giving it no publicity. Both men also fired Colin and went against the terms of his contract to do so. Both men also gave JNT bad advice on how to run it and put stipulations on the programme that harmed it. These included not allowing the Daleks to return for seasons 23 and 24, demanding that JNT make it lighter and sillier in season 24, and convincing JNT not to respond to Saward's damning article which Powell openly said "I hoped it would be another nail in his coffin." They also both took it out of its timeslot and put it up against the A-Team after an 18 month hiatus and then opposite Coronation Street which was getting 30 million viewers and in one instance a world cup qualifier for England on the other side. (That's what led to the lowest ranking episode of the McCoy era btw.) They also raised the prices of stories to the point where nobody could afford to buy them in America (where prior to that it was being seen by over 9 million people.) Which killed its overseas following overnight. Ultimately these all played the key roles in killing DW in the 80s. I'm not saying that there weren't creative problems with the show, like Colin's coat, Saward being a lazy script editor who didn't like the character LOL, JNT not knowing how to use the shows budget, overuse of the Master, poorly thought out companions, apart from Ace, some of whom were just JNT's vendetta against feminists etc, but ultimately those pale in comparison to the ways in which it was sabotaged. For the record I actually didn't mind that it came to an end in the late 80s. It had a good run of 26 years, it ended on a high, what more can you want from a show. Yes like I said I would have loved a 90s Who with Rik Mayall or Tim Curry in the role, but hey I already had 7 great leading men. However it's the way it was f*cked over and obviously the way guys like Grade and their chums in the media would then try and undermine it in the 90s and kick it when it was down that was utterly unforgivable and why nobody involved in Who should be trying to reassess Grade as anything other than a c*nt. Meanwhile glad someone agrees with me on the awful the Doctor is kind crap that new who fans spew out. It always makes me laugh when gits like Mr Tardis go on about how Caves of Androzani show how kind the Doctor is the way he goes out of his way to rescue a young woman he hardly knows. Leaving aside the fact that he has been travelling with her for a while, the only reason Peri is in that situation where she has been poisoned, shot at, groped etc, is because the Doctor was such an arrogant, reckless shit who insisted they stay behind when she wanted to wisely get the f*ck out of there. That story is about his reckless behavior biting him in the arse not about how kind he is. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Apr 27, 2024 12:15:25 GMT
I think it's a bit much to lose respect for someone based on their shit taste in tv. I don't have a problem people's tastes, but I do have a problem with hyperbole. Perhaps the word 'genius' have become so overused that it now means something different, like successful. That's the only way to apply the word to RTD. Even then it doesn't as his latest shows, DW or otherwise have been flops. PS I've not seen it, but I hear his show about aids in the 80s wasn't very good either as apparently it completely left out the role lesbians played in helping gay men during that time RTD has got some problems with women I think. Leaving aside this which has to have been deliberate, he also did turn the role of the companion into a shallow, petty jealous girlfriend and insisted the only way he could ever get a woman watching the show was if they wanted to f*ck the Doctor. Then there is the rampant misogyny in Queer As Folk and the Al Bundyesque lines the likes of Jacki and Donna are subject too for being middle aged women in New Who, and the way they are portrayed as oversexed characters chasing young men who run away in terror from them like Jack and Elton. His reputation as a progressive is as hollow if not more so than his reputation as a great writer is. |
|
|
|
Post by Ludders II on Apr 27, 2024 12:26:22 GMT
I don't have a problem people's tastes, but I do have a problem with hyperbole. Perhaps the word 'genius' have become so overused that it now means something different, like successful. That's the only way to apply the word to RTD. Even then it doesn't as his latest shows, DW or otherwise have been flops. PS I've not seen it, but I hear his show about aids in the 80s wasn't very good either as apparently it completely left out the role lesbians played in helping gay men during that time RTD has got some problems with women I think. Leaving aside this which has to have been deliberate, he also did turn the role of the companion into a shallow, petty jealous girlfriend and insisted the only way he could ever get a woman watching the show was if they wanted to f*ck the Doctor. Then there is the rampant misogyny in Queer As Folk and the Al Bundyesque lines the likes of Jacki and Donna are subject too for being middle aged women in New Who, and the way they are portrayed as oversexed characters chasing young men who run away in terror from them like Jack and Elton. His reputation as a progressive is as hollow if not more so than his reputation as a great writer is. Yes, I'd would never rate him as artistically successful. To me, he's a hack. But you could probably say that he's been a commercial or mainstream success. Which of course is no barometer for quality. All sorts of shit is commercially successful. That's where personal taste comes in. We can like it, but flinging around words like 'genius' is very often nothing more than hyberbole most commonly employed by the press or media. |
|
|
|
Post by Cherry Pepsi Maxil on Apr 27, 2024 13:01:17 GMT
I don't have a problem people's tastes, but I do have a problem with hyperbole. Perhaps the word 'genius' have become so overused that it now means something different, like successful. That's the only way to apply the word to RTD. Even then it doesn't as his latest shows, DW or otherwise have been flops. PS I've not seen it, but I hear his show about aids in the 80s wasn't very good either as apparently it completely left out the role lesbians played in helping gay men during that time RTD has got some problems with women I think. Leaving aside this which has to have been deliberate, he also did turn the role of the companion into a shallow, petty jealous girlfriend and insisted the only way he could ever get a woman watching the show was if they wanted to f*ck the Doctor. Then there is the rampant misogyny in Queer As Folk and the Al Bundyesque lines the likes of Jacki and Donna are subject too for being middle aged women in New Who, and the way they are portrayed as oversexed characters chasing young men who run away in terror from them like Jack and Elton. His reputation as a progressive is as hollow if not more so than his reputation as a great writer is. I've said this before, but he seems to neglect lesbians for the most part. Series 1-4 included one prominent lesbian character (who later got possessed and sucked out of an air lock in Midnight) and a pair of old women in Gridlock which seemed to me to be for humour more than anything. He's obsessed with gay men because he is a gay man. lesbians barely register for him. His female characters are always talking about men and how hot and great they are. |
|
|
|
Post by Cherry Pepsi Maxil on Apr 27, 2024 22:04:33 GMT
Christ, the man is a barely literate babbling buffoon, and that's ignoring his even less flattering character attributes. Talk about the Emperor's New Clothes. I'm positive all his scripts are actually written in crayon. I hate everyone associated with this f*cking embarassment now. You're not wrong:  |
|
|
|
Post by Cherry Pepsi Maxil on Apr 27, 2024 22:07:11 GMT
Even then it doesn't as his latest shows, DW or otherwise have been flops. PS I've not seen it, but I hear his show about aids in the 80s wasn't very good either as apparently it completely left out the role lesbians played in helping gay men during that time RTD has got some problems with women I think. Leaving aside this which has to have been deliberate, he also did turn the role of the companion into a shallow, petty jealous girlfriend and insisted the only way he could ever get a woman watching the show was if they wanted to f*ck the Doctor. Then there is the rampant misogyny in Queer As Folk and the Al Bundyesque lines the likes of Jacki and Donna are subject too for being middle aged women in New Who, and the way they are portrayed as oversexed characters chasing young men who run away in terror from them like Jack and Elton. His reputation as a progressive is as hollow if not more so than his reputation as a great writer is. Yes, I'd would never rate him as artistically successful. To me, he's a hack. But you could probably say that he's been a commercial or mainstream success. Which of course is no barometer for quality. All sorts of shit is commercially successful. That's where personal taste comes in. We can like it, but flinging around words like 'genius' is very often nothing more than hyberbole most commonly employed by the press or media. Yes. I'm sure you remember a time when high praise words like "excellent" and "masterpiece" actually meant something. Now they're used to describe Modern Who turds like The Star Beast. |
|
|
|
Post by zarius on Apr 28, 2024 7:42:17 GMT
I'm gonna get a lot of hate for this, but Doctor Who was a joke in the 80s and Michael Grade was completely justified in axing it. You were the Cyberman on Wogan and I collect my £50. |
|
|
|
Post by Cherry Pepsi Maxil on May 5, 2024 12:35:16 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by zarius on May 6, 2024 6:24:30 GMT
|
|
