Can we keep the slagging off of Sherlock in the Sherlock thread so I only have to avoid one? 
This thread is for slagging off Doctor Who! (Har.)
Doctor Who... Page 1,050
But they're the same show.
Quote: zooo @ 6th January 2014, 10:39 PM GMTThis thread is for slagging off Doctor Who! (Har.)
Too true! 
Quote: zooo @ 6th January 2014, 10:39 PM GMTCan we keep the slagging off of Sherlock in the Sherlock thread so I only have to avoid one?
This thread is for slagging off Doctor Who! (Har.)
Yeah, I can't be doing with arguing my opinion nowadays anyway, it's mine after all.
Just a quickie about the Crimbo Special that I made on Facebook -
How could the wooden Cyberman get past the shield but not the Weeping Angels who are essentially rocks?
I emailed Moffatt about that and various other concerns here's his response I think it applies to most questions, on SHerlock and Who.
Because....your mum.
Quote: sootyj @ 6th January 2014, 11:34 PM GMTI emailed Moffatt about that and various other concerns here's his response I think it applies to most questions, on SHerlock and Who.
Because....your mum.
Booyah!
stop watching Dr Who right now, its making you racist.
Quote: sootyj @ 7th January 2014, 3:52 AM GMThttp://doctorwhoandrace.com/
stop watching Dr Who right now, its making you racist.
I have that book. Numerous authors. Some is great. Much is just stating the blindingly obvious in dull academic terms and trying to send fans on a guilt-trip. What really galls me about Doctor Who over the years is its portrayal of squirrels - or lack thereof. Why, in 50 years (even though it hasn't really been 50 years) has the Doctor never been a squirrel? Why have squirrels been denied time in the TV series and relegated to fleeting appearances in Who novels and comics? Perhaps the greatest insult is that the squirrel in the Eighth Doctor novel Vampire Science was actually a hamster in a squirrel costume. Sure, society was different back in 1854, but unless the show wants to remain stuck in the past, it's time for the next Doctor to be a squirrel. Etc.
Because squirrels are an inferior species, obsessed with gathering all the nuts.
It's in the Bible.
Quote: sootyj @ 7th January 2014, 8:53 AM GMTBecause squirrels are an inferior species, obsessed with gathering all the nuts.
The nuts gather on this site.
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ 6th January 2014, 11:15 PM GMTJust a quickie about the Crimbo Special that I made on Facebook -
How could the wooden Cyberman get past the shield but not the Weeping Angels who are essentially rocks?
When nobody is looking at them, when they can actually move, they're not rock, they're living organisms.
Quote: Kenneth @ 7th January 2014, 6:55 AM GMTI have that book. Numerous authors. Some is great. Much is just stating the blindingly obvious in dull academic terms and trying to send fans on a guilt-trip. What really galls me about Doctor Who over the years is its portrayal of squirrels - or lack thereof. Why, in 50 years (even though it hasn't really been 50 years) has the Doctor never been a squirrel? Why have squirrels been denied time in the TV series and relegated to fleeting appearances in Who novels and comics? Perhaps the greatest insult is that the squirrel in the Eighth Doctor novel Vampire Science was actually a hamster in a squirrel costume. Sure, society was different back in 1854, but unless the show wants to remain stuck in the past, it's time for the next Doctor to be a squirrel. Etc.
Haven't read the book but the blurb is pseudo academic at best and poorly written so will not be buying it.
Quote: sootyj @ 7th January 2014, 3:52 AM GMThttp://doctorwhoandrace.com/
stop watching Dr Who right now, its making you racist.
Bloddy Daleks coming over here and taking our jobs, etc...