i had the pleasure of seeing a star reporter at work interviewing beth ditto at the height of her tabloid popularity. he told her about some bullshit rachel stephens had said about pop stars being role models and extrapolated that she was saying fat people shouldn't be pop stars, to which ditto just replied something innocuous & diplomatic. i checked the paper the next day, and it'd been turned into a massive 'beef' in the article... they're true artists.
New Series of Dr Who
- Thread starter strung out
- Start date
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
Ok the sister thing was wrong. I admit that. I can't really justify that. I was just getting a bit sick of your over-reactionary bile towards me. I really don't see where this is all coming from.
Also, you seem to have plenty of time for me. You are spending much more time on saying what you think of me than anyone else who thought Mr Whos writing was below par, or Mr who himself for that matter.
Why on earth am I a hypocrite?
What the heck did I post on this subject that makes me so arrogant?
Do I really deserve the C word because I think the last episode of Doctor Who could have been better?
Gromit
International Man of Misery
The pandorica light touched him and resurected it.
Boycey
juvenile rave slut
not at all, i find it particularly odd when people take criticism of something they love but had no part in creating personally.
as for me, i fucking almost every minute of it- roll on the next series!
Shippou-Sensei
4:1:2.5
yes
resistance is futile join us become one with family entertainment... you have no need of logic for we have ... heart
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
I think it is for the same reason I have always hated lord of the rings.
"Oh no we are trapped and doomed"
"Don't worry master Frodo, magic water horses that have never been mentioned before in the plot are here to save us, phew"
"Ok rings in the fire but how are we going to get out of this shit now"
"It's ok master Frodo some giant magic birds that have never been mentioned in the plot before this moment have come to save us"
"What the. . . Why didn't we just fly on them and save all these good people nine hours of bum rot?"
"Something about eagles not interfering in the wotsit of men or something?"
"Eh?"
"Stop complaining, you are safe now. If you are going to complain about anything complain about the fact that despite the film being over, you still have 2 and a half hours and three more over emotional endings dripping with honey flavored strawberry screen sentimentality to sit though."
"Can't I just leave?"
"No. You are here with your wife remember and she loves this bullshit"
"Rats"
Stigmata
sexual tyrannosaurus
Why the fuck does everyone bring this up like it's some sort of brilliant solution to the plot?
A fuck off big eagle trying to cross the Plain of Gorgoroth would have been shot down in like 15 seconds. Sauron gets the ring off the bird corpse, end of the world ensues.
It would of course also be the end of the film, so maybe that's what you were hoping for.
fogbat
The Talibum
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
There is bad writing and then there is bad readers.
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
Stop it stop it stop it.
I have heard it all before, I was only kidding. It doesn't take two and a half hours to end after that either.
(Not about it being shit and giving me bum ache though).
And maybe he wouldn't have been shot down.
http://www.sean-crist.com/personal/pages/eagles/index.html
Read that (I haven't) and discuss it amongst yourselves.
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
And you too.
Take it easy. I was stupidly fishing with a massive net and got what I deserved.
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
I think most people get upset when this happens:
'I enjoyed that! It was really good.'
'No, it wasn't good, because of reasons a, b and c.'
People are rarely interested to find that there are formal reasons why they are incorrect to enjoy something. Partly perhaps because there are no unbreakable rules in art. As soon as someone says 'a story that does x or y is Bad', someone can come up with a counter-example when a story does exactly that and is nevertheless satisfying.
'I enjoyed that! It was really good.'
'No, it wasn't good, because of reasons a, b and c.'
People are rarely interested to find that there are formal reasons why they are incorrect to enjoy something. Partly perhaps because there are no unbreakable rules in art. As soon as someone says 'a story that does x or y is Bad', someone can come up with a counter-example when a story does exactly that and is nevertheless satisfying.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
the old 'all art is subjective' rule.
It is true to a certain extent but questioning the internal logic in a manner that is wrong means you have been wrong about a fantasy story. On the internet. The internets bit compounds your epic fail.
It is true to a certain extent but questioning the internal logic in a manner that is wrong means you have been wrong about a fantasy story. On the internet. The internets bit compounds your epic fail.
It's not that it's subjective, it's that there are no absolute principles. Like playing chess - you cannot formulate a rule for making a good move that applies in all situations. You have to be sensitive to context. There are only good moves within the context of a particular game.
Or take language - you can't decree that 'saying x always means y', because it can nearly always mean something else in the right context. That's how sarcasm and understatement work, and you can never legislate that sort of thing out of a language.
There is internal logic, and there is good and bad reading, but the most important thing is whether something is convincing or not.
Someone used the words 'deus ex machina' a couple of pages back on this thread and they were good words to use.
It doesn't matter whether or not something is "correct" or "logically possible" or "congruent with the story" or whatever –*when you have a fiendish difficult, cliffhanger situation in which somebody is placed, it's always a bit of a let-down when they get out of it too easily, in a way that feels like a bit of a cop-out.
The thing about the deus ex machina in Greek theatre, or Shakespeare, or Joe Orton, is that it is employed either semi- or entirely self-consciously: it is something that draws attention to it's artificial status in order to highlight the theatricality, the "there but for the grace of God go I", the "it may be formally a happy ending, but we all know it's not really". It leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
The Dr Who endings don't recognise that. They just have a tendency to laziness: it's just a bit too easy.
Am I right or wrong in thinking that the old Dr Whos didn't really mess about with the paradoxes of time travel overmuch? I don't remember characters often going back over their own timelives at all, let alone the Dr. It was generally the Dr just using the Tardis to get from A-B, whatever period of history that was.
Someone used the words 'deus ex machina' a couple of pages back on this thread and they were good words to use.
It doesn't matter whether or not something is "correct" or "logically possible" or "congruent with the story" or whatever –*when you have a fiendish difficult, cliffhanger situation in which somebody is placed, it's always a bit of a let-down when they get out of it too easily, in a way that feels like a bit of a cop-out.
The thing about the deus ex machina in Greek theatre, or Shakespeare, or Joe Orton, is that it is employed either semi- or entirely self-consciously: it is something that draws attention to it's artificial status in order to highlight the theatricality, the "there but for the grace of God go I", the "it may be formally a happy ending, but we all know it's not really". It leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
The Dr Who endings don't recognise that. They just have a tendency to laziness: it's just a bit too easy.
Am I right or wrong in thinking that the old Dr Whos didn't really mess about with the paradoxes of time travel overmuch? I don't remember characters often going back over their own timelives at all, let alone the Dr. It was generally the Dr just using the Tardis to get from A-B, whatever period of history that was.
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
I don't think anyone has been saying there are formal reasons for people to not enjoy the series. Point's A,B and C ruined it a bit for me (though it was still a fairly enjoyable jaunt), it didn't bother others. You can have a perfectly logical story that is still a boring and drama free as anything.
Tom and Jerry is good but that doesn't exactly follow the laws of physics or logical character motivation.
The problem for me is that it came close to being good and missed the mark by what seemed like lazy writing or a desire to push the series into a magical direction that I am not in the least bit interested in.
I always wanted Doctor Who to actually do time travel stuff.
Baker 1 had a sort of time travelly paradox when he had to decide whether to prevent the Daleks from ever existing.
krtek a houby
Merry Xmas!
Or, he wouldn't save Adric (don't blame him) because that would have messed with Earth's history but wasn't Perri saved and lived happily ever after with Brian Blessed?
Also, those ridiculous stories where the Doctor met earlier incarnations?
I always thought they were out of step with the time travel stuff.
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
You are right. He barely visited the same places twice. McCoy once visited the school his grandaugter went to in the 60s I think. I think they might have even been past the yard where he used to keep the TARDIS.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
yeah, but it won't wash (much like your mum etc), You aren't going to get 50 mins of story if the Doc can just go 'You know what, I'll pop back a bit and dtail to myself the epic cuntitude I am going to face and that way my future self will just pwn on everybody'
krtek a houby
Merry Xmas!
Baker (Colin) did that too, whilst the chameleon circuit was "working"...
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
I enjoyed it. A lot.
Yeah it didn't all make sense and there was doses of deus ex machina and there was a healthy dollop of sentimental cheese.
On the other hand there it was full of energy, invention, good performances, good writing, emotional engagment, suprises and tension. And it was mostly consistant with its own internal logic.
For me the latter significently eclipsed the former. Under RTD it was very much the opposite.
The opening sequence with Amy in the box was brilliant.
The crusty dalek was cool and scary.
The story of rory guarding the box for 2000 years was genuninely moving - shades of the lump-in-throat inducing story of the steadfast tin soldier.
The somehting old, new, borrowed, blue thing was win.
The deadpan young amy was great.
And Matt Smith I salute you.
Roll on next series!
Yeah it didn't all make sense and there was doses of deus ex machina and there was a healthy dollop of sentimental cheese.
On the other hand there it was full of energy, invention, good performances, good writing, emotional engagment, suprises and tension. And it was mostly consistant with its own internal logic.
For me the latter significently eclipsed the former. Under RTD it was very much the opposite.
The opening sequence with Amy in the box was brilliant.
The crusty dalek was cool and scary.
The story of rory guarding the box for 2000 years was genuninely moving - shades of the lump-in-throat inducing story of the steadfast tin soldier.
The somehting old, new, borrowed, blue thing was win.
The deadpan young amy was great.
And Matt Smith I salute you.
Roll on next series!
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
That was always key to the story. No TARDIS no quick escape. It's the same reason the writers hated K9 and the sonic screwdriver, it was always too easy to get out of a spot. Both were destroyed. K9 would have gone waaaay sooner if he wasn't so popular. That would have made me a very sad lad though, I seem to remember even being pretty upset when Davison dropped the sonic screwdriver.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
wasn't Silver Swordsman Pertwee's era about how he couldn't fix the TARDIS and this inability was punishment by the Time Lord massif?
I thought the Master had half-inched it.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
IIRC it had been spannered by the Time Lords because they basically considered the Doctor to be an inteferring cunt who had blates TWOCed a type 40. But they allowed him to carry on his bidness on earth (after fucking his TARDIS up). I swear he was forever tinkering with something or other when Lethbridge Stewart would intrude and Pertwee would be all acerbic at him.
Similar threads
