|
|
Post by iank on Aug 5, 2021 8:31:22 GMT
I only know her from Braithwaites, which was good and funny. It didn't particularly scream Doctor Who at me (apart from Davison lol) but just from that she's a better writer than little Chibbers could ever dream of being. I have no idea what she'd be like as a Who writer or showrunner, but at least it would be someone from outside the usual clique and isn't an immediately appalling choice. Perhaps a female showrunner would let them score woke points and save face when making the Doctor male again?  |
|
|
|
Post by zarius on Aug 5, 2021 14:27:03 GMT
at least it would be someone from outside the usual clique Actually, about that... ...Yeah, she and Russel are quite tight. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Aug 5, 2021 16:05:02 GMT
Oh god can't we get some f*cking outsiders for a change? Are we really going to have to pry it out of these c*nts cold dead hands?
|
|
|
|
Post by iank on Aug 5, 2021 21:07:54 GMT
Oh God. Forget I spoke.
Still, it could be worse. It could be Paul Marquess...
|
|
|
|
Post by henshin on Aug 5, 2021 21:14:24 GMT
Christopher Nolan would be my choice if he minimised the production to something akin to Momento.
|
|
|
|
Post by ClockworkOcean on Aug 17, 2021 17:43:33 GMT
Needless to say, I'm glad that this terrible era will soon be over. I'm also encouraged by how unpopular it's been with the fanbase and the general public at large; the silent majority around the world have voted with their wallets & TV remotes, and it would be the height of absurdity to argue that this has been anything but a failure of disastrous proportions.
I have practically zero interest in who or what comes next, as I've come to terms with thinking of Doctor Who as a dead franchise and a thing of the past, save for the occasional audio drama that piques my interest.
I'm still conflicted about where the story ends for me, headcanon-wise. Hartnell to McCoy are in the "definitely canon" group. Jodie and any of her successors are in the "fokk off" category. McGann to Capaldi are in the "maybe" group, partly due to how shit much of NuWho is, and my uncertainty about the extent to which art can or should be separated from its artist re: the conduct of the Fitzroy crowd.
|
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Aug 17, 2021 18:30:59 GMT
Christopher Nolan would be my choice if he minimised the production to something akin to Momento. I'm actually warming to the idea of Peter Jackson doing it. I've always been a fan of his, but I'm not sure if he would have worked before, but now I think he would. I'd love to see what he'd do visually with Skaro. When you see what he did to Skull Island in terms of making it a nightmarish, monstrous place, his Skaro really would be something. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Aug 17, 2021 18:35:15 GMT
Needless to say, I'm glad that this terrible era will soon be over. I'm also encouraged by how unpopular it's been with the fanbase and the general public at large; the silent majority around the world have voted with their wallets & TV remotes, and it would be the height of absurdity to argue that this has been anything but a failure of disastrous proportions. I have practically zero interest in who or what comes next, as I've come to terms with thinking of Doctor Who as a dead franchise and a thing of the past, save for the occasional audio drama that piques my interest. I'm still conflicted about where the story ends for me, headcanon-wise. Hartnell to McCoy are in the "definitely canon" group. Jodie and any of her successors are in the "fokk off" category. McGann to Capaldi are in the "maybe" group, partly due to how shit much of NuWho is, and my uncertainty about the extent to which art can or should be separated from its artist re: the conduct of the Fitzroy crowd. Great to see you back. In terms of head canon for me it should really just be Classic Who, followed by maybe the movie, and whichever audios and comics you like. Eccelston to Capaldi can be an alternate universe and enjoyed on its own merits (assuming you think there any LOL, I do, but that's another story.) Jodie meanwhile is so shit that she should just be disregarded overall. I'd take any previous bit of Who material, from Shalka, to Death Comes To Time to Cushing before her. As for separating the art from the artist, well in all fairness to the Fitzroy Crowd most people who work in the industry are dickheads. Look at what came out about Joss Whedon. Jesus Christ he seems to have been an absolute fokking nightmare, but that isn't going to spoil Buffy and Angel. |
|
|
|
Post by henshin on Aug 18, 2021 0:06:43 GMT
Christopher Nolan would be my choice if he minimised the production to something akin to Momento. I'm actually warming to the idea of Peter Jackson doing it. I've always been a fan of his, but I'm not sure if he would have worked before, but now I think he would. I'd love to see what he'd do visually with Skaro. When you see what he did to Skull Island in terms of making it a nightmarish, monstrous place, his Skaro really would be something. Not a bad choice but, Jackson always goes BIG. So big, that even film developers said "no way" to his pitch for a Halo film due to the sheer expense. That's why I was particular on the reference to Memento. Something small, haunting and close to the hairs on your neck. Frankly, I see Jackson taking the worst elements of the RTD and Moffat era by just magnifying them. |
|
|
|
Post by iank on Aug 18, 2021 0:57:51 GMT
I hear Jackson is much more a classic guy than New Poo though. |
|
|
|
Post by Bernard Marx on Aug 18, 2021 6:46:16 GMT
I'm actually warming to the idea of Peter Jackson doing it. I've always been a fan of his, but I'm not sure if he would have worked before, but now I think he would. I'd love to see what he'd do visually with Skaro. When you see what he did to Skull Island in terms of making it a nightmarish, monstrous place, his Skaro really would be something. Not a bad choice but, Jackson always goes BIG. So big, that even film developers said "no way" to his pitch for a Halo film due to the sheer expense. That's why I was particular on the reference to Memento. Something small, haunting and close to the hairs on your neck. Frankly, I see Jackson taking the worst elements of the RTD and Moffat era by just magnifying them. True, but as Iank says, to be fair to Jackson, he does have loads more respect for the classic series than the previous NuWho showrunners, and he's at least capable of producing quality cinema. He isn't necessarily my first choice, but I'm unsure if he'd do what RTD and Moffat did. I think there were even talks of him making a Doctor Who film back in the 2000s starring Paul McGann in a classic series style continuation, unless I've misheard that from somewhere. I do find a Doctor Who influenced by the likes of Following and Memento interesting too though. Something more akin to a psychological noir thriller with experimental yet calculated structural choices would definitely restore an essence of mystery back to the series again, which is really what it needs. The staidness and lack of creativity is one of the primary factors contributing to NuWho's vacuity and lack of longevity. |
|
|
|
Post by RobFilth on Aug 18, 2021 8:59:48 GMT
I think there were even talks of him making a Doctor Who film back in the 2000s starring Paul McGann in a classic series style continuation, unless I've misheard that from somewhere. There's not many things I can think of which might lure me back to the franchise, but one like that would certainly pique my curiosity. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Aug 18, 2021 9:28:53 GMT
I'm actually warming to the idea of Peter Jackson doing it. I've always been a fan of his, but I'm not sure if he would have worked before, but now I think he would. I'd love to see what he'd do visually with Skaro. When you see what he did to Skull Island in terms of making it a nightmarish, monstrous place, his Skaro really would be something. Not a bad choice but, Jackson always goes BIG. So big, that even film developers said "no way" to his pitch for a Halo film due to the sheer expense. That's why I was particular on the reference to Memento. Something small, haunting and close to the hairs on your neck. Frankly, I see Jackson taking the worst elements of the RTD and Moffat era by just magnifying them. Oh no I definitely don't think Jackson would be like Davies and Moffat at all. He loves sci fi and fantasy, and he is a big classic era fanboy. In fact he even said he doesn't watch New Who that much. He only knows and respects it, but he is a huge fan of the original. Also Jackson has proven with LOTR and King Kong that when adapting other people's characters he is very faithful and respectful. His work on Kong is what makes me think he would do an amazing job in particular. Whilst LOTR is probably his best work, with Kong the world building he and his team put into Skull Island was unbelievable. Look at this docu about Skull Island. It's not long, under 20 mins, and it's done as though Skull Island were a real place. It's brilliant and really fleshes out Skull Island far more than any version of Kong either before or after it. Again one can only wonder what type of nightmarish planets he and his team would create for the Doctor, or how terrifying and fleshed out they'd make existing worlds. For instance what would Jackson's Skaro look like? Imagine the fun he'd have with the lake of mutations by the city, and how horrible, twisted and brutal he'd make the jungle look. His Skaro could match his Skull Island to be honest. Also on top of that Jackson I think can get the balance between horror and adventure down just right. It's a hard balance to find. On the one hand you want DW to be a bit edgy. A bit scary like in the Hinchcliff and McCoy eras, but you also don't want it to be so horrible that it isn't appropriate for family audiences. Jackson I think again has shown in Kong and LOTR that he can do this. The creatures from the Pit are a perfect example. They are nightmare inducing, but they aren't inappropriate for kids. IE we don't see them rip people's flesh off, or tons and tons of gore. The way they kill people is scary, but actually there's not a drop of blood shown. Similarly I could imagine Jackson doing the same thing with whatever monsters he dreams up for the Doctor. Also Jackson doesn't seem particularly woke either. I'm sure he probably is because hey you have to be to get anywhere, but the point is that he isn't a tosser like Neil Gaiman or J J Abrams who constantly boast every time they cast a black person or a woman, as though that makes them f*cking Martin Luther King or Sylvia Pankhurst. |
|
|
|
Post by RobFilth on Aug 18, 2021 10:16:22 GMT
Also Jackson doesn't seem particularly woke either. I'm sure he probably is because hey you have to be to get anywhere, but the point is that he isn't a tosser like Neil Gaiman or J J Abrams who constantly boast every time they cast a black person or a woman, as though that makes them fokking Martin Luther King or Sylvia Pankhurst.  That's funny! That's not "woke" burrunjor, it's a perfect example of liberal identitarianism gesture politics. It's like when Blair and his cronies all embraced the release of Nelson Mandela as the best result ever when absolutely none of them did a bloody thing to protest his incarceration at the time, unlike a certain Mister Corbyn... It's not "woke", it's fake and phony platitude politics. I must admit, I don't mind Jackson myself, his Kong was a brilliantly faithful update of the original and I've kind of liked his approach ever since Bad Taste and Braindead/Dead Alive. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Aug 19, 2021 9:08:51 GMT
Also Jackson doesn't seem particularly woke either. I'm sure he probably is because hey you have to be to get anywhere, but the point is that he isn't a tosser like Neil Gaiman or J J Abrams who constantly boast every time they cast a black person or a woman, as though that makes them fokking Martin Luther King or Sylvia Pankhurst. That's funny! That's not "woke" burrunjor, it's a perfect example of liberal identitarianism gesture politics. It's like when Blair and his cronies all embraced the release of Nelson Mandela as the best result ever when absolutely none of them did a bloody thing to protest his incarceration at the time, unlike a certain Mister Corbyn... It's not "woke", it's fake and phony platitude politics. I must admit, I don't mind Jackson myself, his Kong was a brilliantly faithful update of the original and I've kind of liked his approach ever since Bad Taste and Braindead/Dead Alive. Sorry but you're quibbling over terms here. To start with woke was a term these tossers used to refer themselves. (And I think it reflects their arrogant nature that they think they are "awake" to problems others are not.) I've always stressed exactly what you've said that identity politics is a tool used by the right to make themselves appear left, from Blair's babes, to the drone king ultimate deporter, war monger Barack Obama, to Hillary Clinton, a wall street, war mongering, crooked bitch being presented as a left wing candidate because she has a vagina. Whether you want to call them woke, phony left, or SJWs doesn't really matter to me as you need to call them something. These people have always been around. In the 60s they were the hippies who went to woodstock and chanted peace and love, only to then form new labour and vote for the Iraq war twenty years later. In the 80s they were the upper middle class punk poets who went on about hating Thatcher and capitalism to look edgy and get laid, but again later ended up owing companies their rich mummy and daddy bought for them, where they no doubt bully their staff and stiff them every way they can. Every generation has phony leftists. Lenin even referred to it as "left wing communism, an infantile disorder." Again though the difference today is the death of satire. It's like I'm always saying. Modern comedians are cowards who go with the flow. There are no Rik Mayall's or Frank Zappa's calling these people out as the ignorant poseurs they are, whilst still going after the right wingers. The media loves phony leftists. It can use them as a way to falsely claim its impartial or not as vile as it appears to be. "No, no we're not misogynist, we have an angry feminist writing an article about mansplaining." "No we aren't biased against Corbyn because he is left wing. We have an edgy comedian saying Trump is a prick and an upper middle class black woman who has never done a days work in her life writing an article about how oppressed she is." Sadly as a result as soon as comedians started cowtowing to the media then these SJWs, modern hippies, etc were able to march on unopposed, and take over left wing politics, which played into those at the tops hands. To start with we are all splintered. Women vs men, gay people vs straight people, white people vs black people. We are all fighting each other over trivial bullshit, who is more oppressed, whether or not one group are inherently evil, rather than being united to change the system. Furthermore your average person who isn't stupid, but maybe not as interested in politics is being put off the left because it does appear to be all this empty, at times quite prejudiced virtue signalling, and as genuine right wingers like Sargon and PJW are the only people criticising this shit, they are the ones more people are turning too, leading to a lack of support for the left. It's a shame, but sadly it shows you how important satire is and why when satirists work with the media, you really are f*cked. As for the original point LOL, Peter Jackson's style is a perfect match for DW in so many ways. Sadly I don't think they'd hire him as it would show up how embarrassing New Who really was. |
|
