The Dr Who thread

fro · Post by **fro** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 6:51 pm 0

DutchLlama wrote:
Harlequin wrote:I have encountered them. Indeed, both of my mothers are of that gender.
You have two mothers?

You mean you don't?

Bog · Post by **Bog** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 8:45 pm 0

Firefox wrote:The bit outside the pub near the end made me cringe. I immediately thought "Argh, they've spliced a bit of Eastenders in by mistake!"

That was one of the downsides. The other downside was when they were blatantly dying to pull the racks in the corridors down, but you knew the hospital administrator said "no".

Funny thing - just before watching the ep, Sue and I were looking down on St. Thomas' Hospital (the one that really went to the moon) from the London Eye just before sprinting back to our hotel and seeing it get nicked. So funny.

It's promising. Tennant has finally stopped trying to play up to Ecclestone, and he's just making The Doctor his own role. I have a good feeling about this.

It's also nice to see the Doctor having a companion who's a scientist, not a muggle. Regarding the pointless family crap? It'd be nice to focus on what about them is special - not about what is mundane. Almost everyone has a dysfunctional family. Either there's infidelity, or impropriety, or incompatability. Or, if you're really lucky, they die before you learn to hate them. If you're really unlucky, you find out later on that they just faked their death. There's nothing special there - nothing at all. It's not a part of sci-fi, it really isn't.

We've all got a shit sandwich for family. *shrugs* If I stepped foot in the Tardis... I'd never look back.

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 9:35 pm 0

Yes, it is nice to see an assistant who's smart and who isn't pursuing the race-to-the-bottom lifestyle.

Mayhem · Post by **Mayhem** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 9:52 pm 0

Okay possibly daft question here but...

if the Doctor technically died as a result of the plasmavore sucking on him, why didn't he regenerate?

HGFB · Post by **HGFB** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:51 am 0

Mayhem wrote:Okay possibly daft question here but...

if the Doctor technically died as a result of the plasmavore sucking on him, why didn't he regenerate?

I guess he wasn't dead enough. Especially since Martha could do a bit of cpr and bring him back. Maybe massive blood loss just put him in a state of deep suspension (He's done that before) and he just needed a kick start to bring him back.

Dungeon-Dave · Post by **Dungeon-Dave** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 1:52 pm 0

DutchLlama wrote:Why can't Dr. Who for once be mainly about exploring the galaxy instead exploring troubled family relations?

Dr Who isn't Star Trek; the success of the classic series came from variations in storylines becoming story arcs, such as the role of UNIT, repeating characters like the Master, earlier events having unforseen consequences that are revisited in later stories, etc.

If the doctor's companion comes from a troubled background then it will feature in the stories in some way - it rounds the characters more and makes them feel less "red jersey status". I generally don't like disposible characters; I probably don't give them enough attention since I know they won't feature later on - they're just another face.

I found the conclusion of the Rose/Doctor arc quite good, especially when Mickey etc were revisited. This is less about the Doctor and more about the effect he has on those around him.

HGFB · Post by **HGFB** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 2:28 pm 0

AI scores are out. Here's the news from Outpost Gallifrey

Not only was the launch of the new series one of the most watched programmes of the week, it was also one of the most loved, with an Appreciation Index of 88.

This is the highest figure for a Doctor Who series debut, and has only been beaten by previous season finales "The Parting of the Ways" and "Doomsday", both of which which scored 89.

The programme was 4 clear index points higher than anything else shown on Saturday night.

The Appreciation Index, or AI, is a measure of how much the audience liked the programme. It is a score out of 100, based on responses from a carefully selected panel. The average score for drama on BBC1 and ITV1 is 77. A score in excess of 85 is regarded as excellent while a score below 60 is poor.

Darkflame · Post by **Darkflame** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 2:44 pm 0

Dungeon-Dave wrote:
DutchLlama wrote:Why can't Dr. Who for once be mainly about exploring the galaxy instead exploring troubled family relations?
Dr Who isn't Star Trek; the success of the classic series came from variations in story lines becoming story arcs, such as the role of UNIT, repeating characters like the Master, earlier events having unforseen consequences that are revisited in later stories, etc.

If the doctor's companion comes from a troubled background then it will feature in the stories in some way - it rounds the characters more and makes them feel less "red jersey status". I generally don't like disposible characters; I probably don't give them enough attention since I know they won't feature later on - they're just another face.

I found the conclusion of the Rose/Doctor arc quite good, especially when Mickey etc were revisited. This is less about the Doctor and more about the effect he has on those around him.

Don't try to justify it, we don't want any of this soap-crap in Dr Who.

Relationships and characters depth does not automatically mean family members screaming at each other in the middle of the street!

Personally, it seemed to me they only showed us that to show us what she wanted to get away from.
Much similar to they did with Rose, just turned up a notch.

Also, charecter depth and relationships and such dont have to come from outside the sci-fi realm. Look at Farscape; Some of the most complex charecters were the aliens.

HGFB · Post by **HGFB** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 2:47 pm 0

Darkflame wrote:Don't try to justify it, we don't want any of this soap-crap in Dr Who.

Speak for yourself.

Also, charecter depth and relationships and such dont have to come from outside the sci-fi realm. Look at Farscape; Some of the most complex charecters were the aliens.

I think they're aiming for a few more viewers than a niche sci-fi show (Good as it was). People seem to forget that.

Darkflame · Post by **Darkflame** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 3:05 pm 0

Doesn't help.
You cant get more viewers by bolting shows together.
Not for long anyway.

Adding Eastenders to Dr Who will just mean you piss off more scifi fans then you would gain by adding Soap fans.

Shows work like an AND more then an OR.
If one component of a show annoys someone, they are more likely to turn away then stay for the half they like.
While you could see a Venn-diagram of this, combining soaps with scifi will only leave a small overlapping portion of viewers that like both.

Also, Farscape got around 1.5-2.5 million viewers an eppisode, which while not being spectucular, wasnt really that niche for 6 o'clock BBC2 either. It knew it was a scifi, and probably sucked up most of the audience because there wasnt exactly much scifi's on a few years back.

Harlequin · Post by **Harlequin** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 3:08 pm 0

Darkflame wrote:Don't try to justify it, we don't want any of this soap-crap in Dr Who.

May I enquire as to how many of you there are?

Were you cloned or just duplicated via quantum-Tesla means?

HGFB · Post by **HGFB** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 3:11 pm 0

Darkflame wrote:Adding Eastenders to Dr Who will just mean you piss off more scifi fans then you would gain by adding Soap fans.

Shows work like an AND more then an OR.
If one component of a show annoys someone, they are more likely to turn away then stay for the half they like.
While you could see a Venn-diagram of this, combining soaps with scifi will only leave a small overlapping portion of viewers that like both.

Also, Farscape got around 1.5-2.5 million viewers an eppisode, which while not being spectucular, wasnt really that niche for 6 o'clock BBC2 either. It knew it was a scifi, and probably sucked up most of the audience because there wasnt exactly much scifi's on a few years back.

Damn. I guess that means Doctor Who has been doing crap in the ratings and is about to get cancelled since not being either a sci-fi show or a soap it could never get lots of viewers.

Oh wait. Darkflame in talking bollocks shocker.

HGFB · Post by **HGFB** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 3:13 pm 0

Martha has a blog

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fusea ... 763b3e31ML

Oh and I can't have been the only one who wanted to do dirty things to her really cute sister.

Harlequin · Post by **Harlequin** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 3:20 pm 0

Darkflame wrote:You cant get more viewers by bolting shows together.

What bolting? Combining Star Trek, Babylon 5, Blake's 7, The Wizard of Oz and The Muppet Show?

Darkflame wrote:While you could see a Venn-diagram of this, combining soaps with scifi will only leave a small overlapping portion of viewers that like both.

How is the use of family connections "combining soaps"? I recall long storylines involving father/son relationships and marriage troubles in some Australian Sci-Fi thing some years back but rarely encountered anyone referring to those elements as 'soap'.

The group of people who like New Who, complete with companions who have friends and family outside of the TARDIS, appears to be increasing.

Darkflame wrote:Also, Farscape got around 1.5-2.5 million viewers an eppisode, which while not being spectucular, wasnt really that niche for 6 o'clock BBC2 either. It knew it was a scifi, and probably sucked up most of the audience because there wasnt exactly much scifi's on a few years back.

Whereas now, with an explosion of new digital channels and far more Sci-Fi on telly, DW is pulling in many times more viewers.

HGFB · Post by **HGFB** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 3:22 pm 0

Torchwood got better ratings than Farscape and most of Torchwood was shite