Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2021 14:25:04 GMT
I do. I have a particular fondness for it mainly because it has all the hallmarks of a Season 21 actioner and also for Tara Ward who plays Preston. I also enjoy the music by Johnathan Gibbs and the overwhelming sense of urgency in the final few episodes. I like the defence of the base and Turlough's expanded role in the proceedings. Pennant Roberts does a fairly decent job with the direction despite a few wonky moments and the story itself is intriguing. I like watching it back to back with Resurrection of the Daleks because they're both fast paced and full of action and interesting characters.
|
|
|
|
Post by RobFilth on Apr 3, 2021 15:03:31 GMT
It's a falling down production disaster and poorly directed, but I prefer "Warriors" to the outright snooze'o'thons of the Davison era such as "Bore To Doomsday", "Time-Shite", "Terminus Boredom", etc.
It's literally no worse than "Arc Of Infinity" or "Planet of Fire" and it's still head and shoulders above most of what came post-hiatus.
I actually quite like the script of Johnny Byrnes, although giving away the plot resolution in episode 1 was a bit dumb.
Just a damn shame they couldn't have got a decent director, dimmed the lights a bit(power drain after the Doctor sabotages the nuclear reactor perhaps?) and given the Eocene's a bit more synchronicity in the fight sequences which are appalling.
Some decent weapon effects wouldn't have gone amiss either.
The Myrka would have been alright as it was if shot in semidarkness and dripping a bit of slime and directed a bit better.
It reminds me a lot of "Paradise Towers" in that it's a half-decent script executed VERY badly.
|
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Apr 3, 2021 15:47:35 GMT
Not getting into the Sadako feud here LOL, but I do think that it is a stinker.
I agree that the Doctor comes off as sanctimonious and racist when he says the Silurians deserve to exist more than us, simply because they are more advanced?
I find that it also does nothing new with the Silurians. Just the same old boring shit rehashed again. I also think that the direction, effects and sets are among the absolute worst the show ever had and the ending does feel too contrived to be tragic.
Really not a good story by any means and a turgid end to the Silurian saga.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2021 16:11:38 GMT
I prefer it to Caves honestly.
|
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Apr 3, 2021 16:14:26 GMT
I prefer it to Caves honestly. Come on Maxil. Come on! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2021 16:19:39 GMT
I prefer it to Caves honestly. Come on Maxil. Come on! One has Tara Ward and the other one doesn't. I know which one I'd rather watch  |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Apr 3, 2021 17:56:33 GMT
One has Tara Ward and the other one doesn't. I know which one I'd rather watch Ingrid is in Death in Heaven. Doesn't mean it isn't utter dreck. Warriors isn't as bad as DIH, but that is very, very faint praise. It's hard to believe either could be in the same show as Androzani meanwhile. Hell it's hard to believe both were made by the same species as Androzani. |
|
|
|
Post by RobFilth on Apr 3, 2021 17:58:46 GMT
One has Tara Ward and the other one doesn't. I know which one I'd rather watch Ingrid is in Death in Heaven. Doesn't mean it isn't utter dreck. Warriors isn't as bad as DIH, but that is very, very faint praise. It's hard to believe either could be in the same show as Androzani meanwhile. Hell it's hard to believe both were made by the same species as Androzani. Imagine if you swopped the directors and production turn around limits to both stories though. "Warriors" would have been incredible and "Caves" another overly waffley Davison snoozathon. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Apr 3, 2021 18:07:05 GMT
Ingrid is in Death in Heaven. Doesn't mean it isn't utter dreck. Warriors isn't as bad as DIH, but that is very, very faint praise. It's hard to believe either could be in the same show as Androzani meanwhile. Hell it's hard to believe both were made by the same species as Androzani. Imagine if you swopped the directors and production turn around limits to both stories though. "Warriors" would have been incredible and "Caves" another overly waffley Davison snoozathon. I don't think so. Caves has some atrocious production values. The monster in Caves is almost as laughable as the Myrka. Also there are some sloppy moments of direction in Caves too, like the villain looking at the camera. I might like to point out that I am not the biggest fan of Caves. I think it is horrendously overrated by the fandom incrowd. That said however it is a much better script. It does at least try to do something new, the villains have proper motivation and feel like real characters, the dialogue is tight and the Doctor is well written. He is flawed. (It's his own arrogance and curiosity that gets he and Peri into the bad situation in the first place. Like the first Dalek story, yet his is also shown to be brave and noble in helping his friend.) Warriors however is slow, plodding, sloppily written. "FACE IT TEGAN HES DROWNED" after being under for all of 3 seconds LOL. The plot is formulaic, it doesn't do anything interesting or new with the Silurians, and the Doctor does come over as inept and a bit racist and judgemental in the story. Now if Warriors had Death in Heaven's production values, then I dare say it would be more watchable and better thought of. Death in Heaven meanwhile my god if it had Warriors effects in addition to that script and the performances of Danny Pink, Chris Addison and Missy it would be possibly the biggest car crash of all time LOL. |
|
|
|
Post by RobFilth on Apr 3, 2021 18:13:04 GMT
I don't think so. Caves has some atrocious production values. The monster in Caves is almost as laughable as the Myrka. Also there are some sloppy moments of direction in Caves too, like the villain looking at the camera. I might like to point out that I am not the biggest fan of Caves. I think it is horrendously overrated by the fandom incrowd. That said however it is a much better script. It does at least try to do something new, the villains have proper motivation and feel like real characters, the dialogue is tight and the Doctor is well written. He is flawed. (It's his own arrogance and curiosity that gets he and Peri into the bad situation in the first place. Like the first Dalek story, yet his is also shown to be brave and noble in helping his friend.) Warriors however is slow, plodding, sloppily written. "FACE IT TEGAN HES DROWNED" after being under for all of 3 seconds LOL. The plot is formulaic, it doesn't do anything interesting or new with the Silurians, and the Doctor does come over as inept and a bit racist and judgemental in the story. Now if Warriors had Death in Heaven's production values, then I dare say it would be more watchable and better thought of. Death in Heaven meanwhile my god if it had Warriors effects in addition to that script and the performances of Danny Pink, Chris Addison and Missy it would be possibly the biggest car crash of all time LOL. Oh I dunno, I reckon DIH might have been part way entertaining if it had the fall down production values and shit budget of "Warriors" myself. Imagine those ludicrous Ironman rocket propelled Cybermen done on an 80's shoestring budget pulled slowly upwards by an obvious kirby wire with sparklers tied to their feet!  |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Apr 3, 2021 18:18:43 GMT
I don't think so. Caves has some atrocious production values. The monster in Caves is almost as laughable as the Myrka. Also there are some sloppy moments of direction in Caves too, like the villain looking at the camera. I might like to point out that I am not the biggest fan of Caves. I think it is horrendously overrated by the fandom incrowd. That said however it is a much better script. It does at least try to do something new, the villains have proper motivation and feel like real characters, the dialogue is tight and the Doctor is well written. He is flawed. (It's his own arrogance and curiosity that gets he and Peri into the bad situation in the first place. Like the first Dalek story, yet his is also shown to be brave and noble in helping his friend.) Warriors however is slow, plodding, sloppily written. "FACE IT TEGAN HES DROWNED" after being under for all of 3 seconds LOL. The plot is formulaic, it doesn't do anything interesting or new with the Silurians, and the Doctor does come over as inept and a bit racist and judgemental in the story. Now if Warriors had Death in Heaven's production values, then I dare say it would be more watchable and better thought of. Death in Heaven meanwhile my god if it had Warriors effects in addition to that script and the performances of Danny Pink, Chris Addison and Missy it would be possibly the biggest car crash of all time LOL. Oh I dunno, I reckon DIH might have been part way entertaining if it had the fall down production values and shit budget of "Warriors" myself. Imagine those ludicrous Ironman rocket propelled Cybermen done on an 80's shoestring budget pulled slowly upwards by an obvious kirby wire with sparklers tied to their feet! LOL I also wonder what Osgood going pop would have looked like? Some bad CSO effect. Having said that though actually a lower budget might have made that scene effective. You wouldn't have the budget to just vaporize someone like a Looney Tunes cartoon (with her glasses remaining whilst flesh, bone and metal all went poof.) They'd have had to have had the Master stab her like Kara in Survival. I reckon Chris Addison would still be outacted by the Cybermen on strings. He gets away with how awful his performance was in that imo. It's up there with Cotton from The Mutants. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2021 18:18:57 GMT
One has Tara Ward and the other one doesn't. I know which one I'd rather watch Ingrid is in Death in Heaven. Doesn't mean it isn't utter dreck. Warriors isn't as bad as DIH, but that is very, very faint praise. It's hard to believe either could be in the same show as Androzani meanwhile. Hell it's hard to believe both were made by the same species as Androzani. To be fair there are other reasons why I like Warriors which I've mentioned here. Androzani is good, but incredibly overrated. Not a patch on Earthshock or Resurrection. Nicola's acting is cringe and I find Part 2 to be very slow. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2021 18:23:06 GMT
Fans in 1984 had the right idea, rating Resurrection above Caves in the poll.
|
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Apr 3, 2021 18:26:17 GMT
Ingrid is in Death in Heaven. Doesn't mean it isn't utter dreck. Warriors isn't as bad as DIH, but that is very, very faint praise. It's hard to believe either could be in the same show as Androzani meanwhile. Hell it's hard to believe both were made by the same species as Androzani. To be fair there are other reasons why I like Warriors which I've mentioned here. Androzani is good, but incredibly overrated. Not a patch on Earthshock or Resurrection. Nicola's acting is cringe and I find Part 2 to be very slow. Sorry I fail to see anything of value in Warriors. Resurrection is a underrated gem. Earthshock is a bit straight forward, but superbly directed and even by today's standards extremely bold for the show. Warriors however is almost like a poster child for what's wrong with the 80s. Every era probably has a story like that that condenses everything shit about a decade or era LOL. The Time Monster for instance is everything wrong with Pertwee era Who. Overuse of the Master, far too long, Barry Letts being too self indulgent and injecting his own beliefs into it, UNIT just being there for the sake of it, the Brig being useless etc. Warriors is pretty much that. Crap effects, and worse JNT not knowing what the limits of the BBC budget would give him and doing something that even a show like Buffy, Star Trek, or Xena would struggle to do (IE a giant monster), it trying to be angsty for the sake of it, the Doctor being made weak to make it more dramatic, pointless return of old enemies for nostalgia sake, I suppose that could be another thread. The quintessential shit story of each era LOL. Pretty much every era will have one story that has all the faults of that time in the programe but none of the redeeming qualities. In Jodie's case though that would be every episode. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Apr 3, 2021 18:28:45 GMT
It's a falling down production disaster and poorly directed, but I prefer "Warriors" to the outright snooze'o'thons of the Davison era such as "Bore To Doomsday", "Time-Shite", "Terminus Boredom", etc. It's literally no worse than "Arc Of Infinity" or "Planet of Fire" and it's still head and shoulders above most of what came post-hiatus. I actually quite like the script of Johnny Byrnes, although giving away the plot resolution in episode 1 was a bit dumb. Just a damn shame they couldn't have got a decent director, dimmed the lights a bit(power drain after the Doctor sabotages the nuclear reactor perhaps?) and given the Eocene's a bit more synchronicity in the fight sequences which are appalling. Some decent weapon effects wouldn't have gone amiss either. The Myrka would have been alright as it was if shot in semidarkness and dripping a bit of slime and directed a bit better. It reminds me a lot of "Paradise Towers" in that it's a half-decent script executed VERY badly. I actually got Paradise Towers recently. It was the only McCoy I didn't have. I'm keen for a rewatch to see if it is as bad as I remember. I can remember even as a child rolling along the floor laughing at Richard Briers "performance". |
|
