Quote: Marc P @ May 17 2010, 7:33 AM BSTI read a lot of Byron when I was at Uni please don't make me do it again
You are excused from class Marc - however, it would provide hours of diverting procrastination material 
Doctor Who... Page 478
Quote: sootyj @ May 17 2010, 4:09 PM BSTGodot I saw Edge of Destruction. It may well have been one of the worst bits of TV ever made. The only good bit was that the Tardis had a drinks dispenser that did milk or water.
Old Who was frequnetly dull, silly, cheap and tear inducingly pointless. Yes there were good episodes and even great ones.
You old bastard. Oh - you mean you saw the DVD. Sooty, I never said Edge of Destruction was good, merely that it was filler. It genuinely was filler, written quickly to bridge two vacant episodes slots. I doubt that 'Amy's Choice' (Groan) was produced on the hoof.
Quote: Nogget @ May 17 2010, 5:30 PM BSTOdd that whereas 'classic' Who is loved for things like the rubbish monsters, and the shaky sets, new Who is hated for its faults...often by the very same people.
I'm fairly willing to turn a blind eye to dodgy SFX (there are no posts in this thread by me complaining about the OAP alien cock eye, or the storm in the Vampire story) it's lame writing that troubles me and cheesy, derivative ideas. As I said Doctor Who is the best SF show there is, and I doubt that it's hard to find people who want to write for it. There should be no weak scripts.
Quote: jacparov @ May 17 2010, 6:10 PM BSTYou are excused from class Marc - however, it would provide hours of diverting procrastination material
Quote: Godot Taxis @ May 17 2010, 6:57 PM BSTY I doubt that it's hard to find people who want to write for it. There should be no weak scripts.
This.
Quote: Godot Taxis @ May 17 2010, 6:57 PM BSTYou old bastard. Oh - you mean you saw the DVD. Sooty, I never said Edge of Destruction was good, merely that it was filler. It genuinely was filler, written quickly to bridge two vacant episodes slots. I doubt that 'Amy's Choice' (Groan) was produced on the hoof.
Saw it on YouTube full series. Surely the hell for any TV series.
Sorry but it was up against classic Avengers and Twilight Zone. Which had it owned.
Amy's choice. Sorry but that's classic Who like a reduced Pertwee episode.
And Matt may have something else going on. I'm wandering if he may be the best Dr...?
Another good, if not great episode of Who.
Thought this one had more than a touch of the Star Trek's about it. The Dreamlord was very 'Q'.
Much as I love the Moff, I hope his tenure isn't going to be entirely dominated by him commissioning his writing mates.
Quote: john lucas 101 @ May 18 2010, 9:26 AM BSTMuch as I love the Moff, I hope his tenure isn't going to be entirely dominated by him commissioning his writing mates.
I just wish he was able to write even more episodes himself! We have to wait to the final story till we get another.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ May 18 2010, 9:27 AM BSTI just wish he was able to write even more episodes himself! We have to wait to the final story till we get another.
Mind you, six episodes in one season is pretty good going. And I guess he's writing/written the Xmas ep as well, is/has he?
Quote: john lucas 101 @ May 18 2010, 9:29 AM BSTMind you, six episodes in one season is pretty good going. And I guess he's writing/written the Xmas ep as well, is/has he?
Yeah. Maybe if he'd distrubuted them a bit better. The second half of the series is too Moffat-lite! Apart from the finale, none of the other upcoming episodes are really perking my interest too much either. Hopefully this means a couple will take me by surprise and be brilliant.
Quote: john lucas 101 @ May 18 2010, 9:26 AM BSTMuch as I love the Moff, I hope his tenure isn't going to be entirely dominated by him commissioning his writing mates.
I thought it was a damn good debut for Nye, and I hope he gets to write more.
Quote: Nogget @ May 18 2010, 9:32 AM BSTI thought it was a damn good debut for Nye, and I hope he gets to write more.
I did like it, a good debut (sorry Godot 
); if only the direction had been better. For an episode set in two dreamworlds, the direction was pretty uninspiring. A missed trick there surely.
Quote: Godot Taxis @ May 17 2010, 6:57 PM BSTAs I said Doctor Who is the best SF show there is
I think of it more as science-fantasy than science-fiction. The SF elements often strike me as quite ropey.
Quote: sootyj @ May 17 2010, 4:09 PM BSTGodot I saw Edge of Destruction. It may well have been one of the worst bits of TV ever made. The only good bit was that the Tardis had a drinks dispenser that did milk or water.
I enjoyed The Edge of Destruction. Fascinating to have an episode set entirely within the TARDIS. And it was this cost-saving two-parter that encouraged the BBC to keep making Doctor Who, according to the late Verity Lambert.
Quote: Nogget @ May 17 2010, 5:30 PM BSTOdd that whereas 'classic' Who is loved for things like the rubbish monsters, and the shaky sets, new Who is hated for its faults...often by the very same people.
I watched a lot of Doctor Who when I was a child - and the monsters, particularly the Zygons and the Daleks, were scary. I never noticed shaky sets. In recent years I have watched a lot of old Who on DVD and although some monsters/aliens are pretty ordinary by today's standards, I still don't notice the "shaky sets". I think that's a just a cliche that gets bandied about too much. Sometimes a set or prop looks crap, but there's not a whole lot of shaking going on. The only things I dislike about New Who are its overuse of maudlin ethereal music and soppy sentimentality. And the Doctor's sudden switches from manic glee to glib profundity.
Or as Griff once put it: the ersatz emotion.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ May 18 2010, 9:31 AM BSTApart from the finale, none of the other upcoming episodes are really perking my interest too much either. Hopefully this means a couple will take me by surprise and be brilliant.
I'm sure you'll think they're brilliant when I tell you how rubbish they are.
Quote: Godot Taxis @ May 18 2010, 2:41 PM BSTI'm sure you'll think they're brilliant when I tell you how rubbish they are.
I do tend to wait for your opinion before I'm able to form my own.
Quote: chipolata @ May 18 2010, 12:15 PM BSTI think of it more as science-fantasy than science-fiction. The SF elements often strike me as quite ropey.
That's true, but quite often there's a grounding, maybe quite tenuous, in real science.
Take these Weeping Angels, "quantum locked" when you look at them, clearly a reference to the importance of the observer in quantum mechanics.
Kids might look into it a bit more and find they like physics. (Or join a cult. Depends what part of the web they visit.)
Also, I've noticed Moffat sometimes puts in throwaway lines to cover his arse on the science, even if the dialogue jilts a bit a result.
Like when River Song dives out of that spaceship into the Tardis, through vacuum, no ill effect. There's a line buried in there about the Doc setting up a invisible protective tunnel or summingk.
It's clear Moffat thinks about the science when he's writing his scripts.