Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2017 17:33:43 GMT
Serious question if there are going to be more historical stories from periods farther back then 40 years should the Doctor always start them in a position of authority and respect? Regards mark687 I quite like the idea of the Doctor not being in a position of authority and respect. I think it would be more interesting to watch her struggling as a complete outsider to a society than for her to just walk in and have everyone respect her. The Doctor has to be subtler, working in the shadows, avoiding the authorities who'd probably have her locked up as a madwoman, protecting a world she can never be part of. Right, but you can tell that story for any time period, anywhere. ANY story can have the Doctor struggle, be disrespected and have to work in the shadows. Mark's query specifically relates to if they should have that struggle specifically for Earth gender attitudes of the past that this incarnation could face uniquely among Doctors. While I think there'll be a nod to those attitudes, maybe even a whole story ,I sincerely doubt that Chibnall would have her consistently face challenges specifically down to her gender. The struggles you're talking about could be gender neutral - they're good ideas, but not really unique to the query Mark posed. I mean you essentially just described Genesis Of The Daleks, or any number of Who stories that didn't rely on the gender of the character.
|
|
|
Post by J.A. Prentice on Oct 16, 2017 18:50:07 GMT
I quite like the idea of the Doctor not being in a position of authority and respect. I think it would be more interesting to watch her struggling as a complete outsider to a society than for her to just walk in and have everyone respect her. The Doctor has to be subtler, working in the shadows, avoiding the authorities who'd probably have her locked up as a madwoman, protecting a world she can never be part of. Right, but you can tell that story for any time period, anywhere. ANY story can have the Doctor struggle, be disrespected and have to work in the shadows. Mark's query specifically relates to if they should have that struggle specifically for Earth gender attitudes of the past that this incarnation could face uniquely among Doctors. While I think there'll be a nod to those attitudes, maybe even a whole story ,I sincerely doubt that Chibnall would have her consistently face challenges specifically down to her gender. The struggles you're talking about could be gender neutral - they're good ideas, but not really unique to the query Mark posed. I mean you essentially just described Genesis Of The Daleks, or any number of Who stories that didn't rely on the gender of the character. I was trying to be more general to show how the Doctor not being listened to can work, so the gender "issue" is actually a blessing, but I think my point got lost somewhere in there. I don't want whole episodes devoted to discussing gender, but I'd like it to always be a background factor for this Doctor in historical periods. People don't automatically respect her anymore, people think she's dangerous or out of line, and everything becomes more of a struggle. But it should be more of a shift in how scenes are written than constant sexism from other characters. Have it be more implicit than explicit, as racism and sexism often are. More "Are you trying to have it all?" or "She doesn't project authority." than "Get back in the kitchen." The worst case scenario for me would be writers continuing to write the show exactly as they have but with small throwaway scenes where someone's sexist and the Doctor out argues them and suddenly everything is fine because it was just one obviously bad person and not an insidious societal system.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Oct 21, 2017 0:17:16 GMT
Normally I do not link to videos, but there was a discussion about the PR surrounding 13: www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqOdg_lUf7gI get what the guy's saying (if more extreme than I would put it), but as I've said before, I think Chris made the smart choice in just not engaging with the internet. It was a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario and I'd rather there be this nebulous quality to what he's doing over the Paul Feig school of overreaction and blame games. Honestly, Chris getting involved would only make things worse, no matter what he actually said.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Oct 21, 2017 21:07:44 GMT
Serious question if there are going to be more historical stories from periods farther back then 40 years should the Doctor always start them in a position of authority and respect? Regards mark687 Nope, because that would require correcting history - which is pointless as all it does is give a false lie that we as the human race have always been perfect.
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Oct 21, 2017 21:17:05 GMT
Serious question if there are going to be more historical stories from periods farther back then 40 years should the Doctor always start them in a position of authority and respect? Regards mark687 The Doctor seldom starts any story in such a position though. In a large number of them he starts off as a murder suspect, and there's been two stories where the entire plot revolves around him having no authority or respect (The Caves of Androzani and Midnight). So lacking authority or respect isn't a new problem for the Doctor. The new Doctor should absolutely face difficulties in certain periods of history, there's no point avoiding it, drama should come from her overcoming them. That said it shouldn't dominate the stories either.
|
|
|
Post by barnabaslives on Nov 1, 2017 7:31:40 GMT
D'ya know what? I sorta think the first pic we saw of the New Doctor should have been standing in front of a great pile of flaming Dalek bits. Nothing in my book says you're The Doctor like heaps of flaming Dalek bits. All I have to do is picture that and I am totally sold on the idea and totally on board.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2017 4:42:07 GMT
Serious question if there are going to be more historical stories from periods farther back then 40 years should the Doctor always start them in a position of authority and respect? Regards mark687 The Doctor seldom starts any story in such a position though. In a large number of them he starts off as a murder suspect, and there's been two stories where the entire plot revolves around him having no authority or respect (The Caves of Androzani and Midnight). So lacking authority or respect isn't a new problem for the Doctor. The new Doctor should absolutely face difficulties in certain periods of history, there's no point avoiding it, drama should come from her overcoming them. That said it shouldn't dominate the stories either. And it's very easy to overcome if you don't want it to get in the way too often:
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Nov 2, 2017 14:23:39 GMT
Another video from mr bowles on Youtube, this time about Chibnall himself: www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XoKt8ba6JoOkay, so anyone can make of this what they will (I'm split, myself), but there is a comment he made in the comments section that has me... perplexed to say the least when someone discussed fan disatifaction: ''Well said, Paul (no related to ours, of course). I think we now have more than enough evidence to conclude that this will definitely be the case. I think the show has already reached the point of no return. I think Chibnall's continued silence, after months, has validated everyone's concerns. '' What evidence? The 250 comments on your video? Your videos on 13 get less than 10,000 views, the Wimbledon reveal itself on the BBC's YT channel has only 9k dislikes (to my memory, there was a previous one that ran higher to maybe 60/70k), and even the assorted Facebook threads only run maybe a few hundred thousand comments in total, which include positive and negative. By comparison, even Capaldi's worst episode pulled in upwards of 4-5 million domestically, nevermind global figures, of people watching. So, where's the overwhelming tsunami of dislike that the BBC are foolish to ignore, bowl? You and those who are hardcore, deadset against this (not people who's already left, mind you, but people who still hang around and complain) are a subset of a subset of fandom in number terms. Heck, Big Finish's overall fandom size (every range included) is probably bigger than the quantifiable number of people dead against 13.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Nov 2, 2017 14:35:04 GMT
Plus, to address something else in that same comment thread on bowl's video: do these people not understand that demographics change? Noticing a lot of terms like 'real fans' or 'hardcore fans' getting thrown around. What does that actually mean, though? Do they think that every person who watched Who in 63 was still watching in 73, let alone 83? Did every person who watched Hartnell hang around until McCoy, never mind Eccleston and Tennant?
Audiences change and new ones can fill in gaps if and when they come up. Every major franchise has had to do this at some point. I guarantee that less than a fraction of the 8 million plus who tuned in to 'Rose' in 05 were veterans, for example. Otherwise, why would we have all kinds of sequels, spinoffs and reboots? Why would there be multiple Star Treks if it was just all about the TOS crowd, for example, or the Star Wars EU, or the different Stargates?
|
|
|
Post by rran on Nov 2, 2017 15:18:14 GMT
D'ya know what? I sorta think the first pic we saw of the New Doctor should have been standing in front of a great pile of flaming Dalek bits. Nothing in my book says you're The Doctor like heaps of flaming Dalek bits. All I have to do is picture that and I am totally sold on the idea and totally on board. Oh don’t say that Poor daleks . I really like them
|
|
|
Post by mark687 on Nov 2, 2017 15:32:19 GMT
D'ya know what? I sorta think the first pic we saw of the New Doctor should have been standing in front of a great pile of flaming Dalek bits. Nothing in my book says you're The Doctor like heaps of flaming Dalek bits. All I have to do is picture that and I am totally sold on the idea and totally on board. Oh don’t say that Poor daleks . I really like them
Regards
mark687
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Nov 2, 2017 17:27:36 GMT
Another video from mr bowlestrek on Youtube, this time about Chibnall himself: www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XoKt8ba6JoOkay, so anyone can make of this what they will (I'm split, myself), but there is a comment he made in the comments section that has me... perplexed to say the least when someone discussed fan disatifaction: ''Well said, Paul (no related to ours, of course). I think we now have more than enough evidence to conclude that this will definitely be the case. I think the show has already reached the point of no return. I think Chibnall's continued silence, after months, has validated everyone's concerns. '' What evidence? The 250 comments on your video? Your videos on 13 get less than 10,000 views, the Wimbledon reveal itself on the BBC's YT channel has only 9k dislikes (to my memory, there was a previous one that ran higher to maybe 60/70k), and even the assorted Facebook threads only run maybe a few hundred thousand comments in total, which include positive and negative. By comparison, even Capaldi's worst episode pulled in upwards of 4-5 million domestically, nevermind global figures, of people watching. So, where's the overwhelming tsunami of dislike that the BBC are foolish to ignore, bowl? You and those who are hardcore, deadset against this (not people who's already left, mind you, but people who still hang around and complain) are a subset of a subset of fandom in number terms. Heck, Big Finish's overall fandom size (every range included) is probably bigger than the quantifiable number of people dead against 13. Really don't get what he expects Chibnall to do. Why should Chibnall say anything? There's no criticism for him to respond to because nothing showrunned by him has actually aired yet. As for the toxic fandom, it's not Chibnall's job to mediate the fandom. Also what the hell is he talking about in regards to Broadchurch? Every character is flawed in that series-that's basically the point. There is no 'good guy'. It's not just the men.
|
|
shutupbanks
Castellan
There’s a horror movie called Alien? That’s really offensive. No wonder everyone keeps invading you.
Likes: 5,677
|
Post by shutupbanks on Nov 2, 2017 22:21:09 GMT
Another video from mr bowlestrek on Youtube, this time about Chibnall himself: www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XoKt8ba6JoOkay, so anyone can make of this what they will (I'm split, myself), but there is a comment he made in the comments section that that because thas me... perplexed to say the least when someone discussed fan disatifaction: ''Well said, Paul (no related to ours, of course). I think we now have more than enough evidence to conclude that this will definitely be the case. I think the show has already reached the point of no return. I think Chibnall's continued silence, after months, has validated everyone's concerns. '' What evidence? The 250 comments on your video? Your videos on 13 get less than 10,000 views, the Wimbledon reveal itself on the BBC's YT channel has only 9k dislikes (to my memory, there was a previous one that ran higher to maybe 60/70k), and even the assorted Facebook threads only run maybe a few hundred thousand comments in total, which include positive and negative. By comparison, even Capaldi's worst episode pulled in upwards of 4-5 million domestically, nevermind global figures, of people watching. So, where's the overwhelming tsunami of dislike that the BBC are foolish to ignore, bowl? You and those who are hardcore, deadset against this (not people who's already left, mind you, but people who still hang around and complain) are a subset of a subset of fandom in number terms. Heck, Big Finish's overall fandom size (every range included) is probably bigger than the quantifiable number of people dead against 13. The only contribution I can make is that many fans believe that devoting a few hours a week to watching a show and commenting on it gives them a perspective that "mundanes" don't have. They also make the mistake of thinking that knowing about the behind-the-scenes gossip of a couple of shows makes them an expert on television/film production. They also believe that because they have a forum for discussion they can be movers and shakers. You can compare hardcore fans of anything to political and religious extremists: they have the same ideas about heresy and apostasy, the same levels of schisms and factions, but about a tv show. Then when they reach a point where a regular person would think, "Nah, this isn't fun anymore: I'll stop watching" they take it personally and begin to slander the production because, like everything over time, it has begun to evolve and change. </rant>
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2017 2:36:03 GMT
Another video from mr bowlestrek on Youtube, this time about Chibnall himself: www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XoKt8ba6JoOkay, so anyone can make of this what they will (I'm split, myself), but there is a comment he made in the comments section that has me... perplexed to say the least when someone discussed fan disatifaction: ''Well said, Paul (no related to ours, of course). I think we now have more than enough evidence to conclude that this will definitely be the case. I think the show has already reached the point of no return. I think Chibnall's continued silence, after months, has validated everyone's concerns. '' What evidence? The 250 comments on your video? Your videos on 13 get less than 10,000 views, the Wimbledon reveal itself on the BBC's YT channel has only 9k dislikes (to my memory, there was a previous one that ran higher to maybe 60/70k), and even the assorted Facebook threads only run maybe a few hundred thousand comments in total, which include positive and negative. By comparison, even Capaldi's worst episode pulled in upwards of 4-5 million domestically, nevermind global figures, of people watching. So, where's the overwhelming tsunami of dislike that the BBC are foolish to ignore, bowl? You and those who are hardcore, deadset against this (not people who's already left, mind you, but people who still hang around and complain) are a subset of a subset of fandom in number terms. Heck, Big Finish's overall fandom size (every range included) is probably bigger than the quantifiable number of people dead against 13. Really don't get what he expects Chibnall to do. Why should Chibnall say anything? There's no criticism for him to respond to because nothing showrunned by him has actually aired yet. As for the toxic fandom, it's not Chibnall's job to mediate the fandom. Also what the hell is he talking about in regards to Broadchurch? Every character is flawed in that series-that's basically the point. There is no 'good guy'. It's not just the men. Well, a fire needs oxygen to survive... You can't have a flame war if the other side doesn't provide the atmosphere (or even just the opportunity). Logically, a creator responds to their supporters, not their detractors, that's likely to be Rule One with any property. It's certainly one that makes sense, nothing would be done otherwise. Any conversation pertaining to fandom's always a difficult conversation to have because there's what people think fandoms are (*seeth, hiss, writhe*) vs. what a fandom can actually be ("Hi."). It's not just Broadchurch either. Doctor Who has a fair amount of flawed characters as well, you only have to look at the Doctor himself. No incarnation really gets out of it unscathed, not the Second Doctor (who used Jamie to attempt genocide), not the Fifth (who plotted an assassination), not the Eleventh (who used fear to get a man to shame himself)... That's part of what makes them so interesting, their occasional capacity to be put in situations where they cannot be as brave, strong or noble as they themselves (or the audience) expect to be. At the end of the day, they are still people and people can do everything right and still not succeed. That's not a weakness, it's just part of chaotic nature of the world. I think that part of the characters' perfection lies in their imperfections. Even Mary Poppins had a few weaknesses: it took a while for her to adjust to the Banks children and by the end of it, had to move on elsewhere. If they really were perfect, we wouldn't have a story.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Nov 3, 2017 9:51:59 GMT
Another video from mr bowlestrek on Youtube, this time about Chibnall himself: www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XoKt8ba6JoOkay, so anyone can make of this what they will (I'm split, myself), but there is a comment he made in the comments section that has me... perplexed to say the least when someone discussed fan disatifaction: ''Well said, Paul (no related to ours, of course). I think we now have more than enough evidence to conclude that this will definitely be the case. I think the show has already reached the point of no return. I think Chibnall's continued silence, after months, has validated everyone's concerns. '' What evidence? The 250 comments on your video? Your videos on 13 get less than 10,000 views, the Wimbledon reveal itself on the BBC's YT channel has only 9k dislikes (to my memory, there was a previous one that ran higher to maybe 60/70k), and even the assorted Facebook threads only run maybe a few hundred thousand comments in total, which include positive and negative. By comparison, even Capaldi's worst episode pulled in upwards of 4-5 million domestically, nevermind global figures, of people watching. So, where's the overwhelming tsunami of dislike that the BBC are foolish to ignore, bowl? You and those who are hardcore, deadset against this (not people who's already left, mind you, but people who still hang around and complain) are a subset of a subset of fandom in number terms. Heck, Big Finish's overall fandom size (every range included) is probably bigger than the quantifiable number of people dead against 13. Really don't get what he expects Chibnall to do. Why should Chibnall say anything? There's no criticism for him to respond to because nothing showrunned by him has actually aired yet. As for the toxic fandom, it's not Chibnall's job to mediate the fandom. Also what the hell is he talking about in regards to Broadchurch? Every character is flawed in that series-that's basically the point. There is no 'good guy'. It's not just the men. There is criticism that can be levelled at Chibnall actually. Why haven't we seen 13's costume yet? That's my only complaint about him so far. As the showrunner he should be pushing for the BBC to reveal Jodie's costume now, not next week or the week after.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Nov 3, 2017 9:56:38 GMT
Really don't get what he expects Chibnall to do. Why should Chibnall say anything? There's no criticism for him to respond to because nothing showrunned by him has actually aired yet. As for the toxic fandom, it's not Chibnall's job to mediate the fandom. Also what the hell is he talking about in regards to Broadchurch? Every character is flawed in that series-that's basically the point. There is no 'good guy'. It's not just the men. Well, a fire needs oxygen to survive... You can't have a flame war if the other side doesn't provide the atmosphere (or even just the opportunity). Logically, a creator responds to their supporters, not their detractors, that's likely to be Rule One with any property. It's certainly one that makes sense, nothing would be done otherwise. Any conversation pertaining to fandom's always a difficult conversation to have because there's what people think fandoms are (*seeth, hiss, writhe*) vs. what a fandom can actually be ("Hi."). As I had remarked above, nothing Chibnall could say would mean anything. People like bowl and his fans have basically equated silence=guilt, so any sort of statement afterwards would only be open to any number of unfavourable interpretations. Chibnall could say 'There is no feminisit agenda at work' and bowl would accuse of it of being hollow, while the other side would accuse Chibnall of caving in to misogynsts, sexists yadda yadda rice pudding. Just the fact that bowl's viewcount is low in the realms of pop-culture videos is testament to how Chibnall's disengagement has denied him that attention, that validation that, say, Paul Feig or the STD staff didn't. It may also be reflective of, honestly, how many people genuinely feel that lady Doc is actually that major of an issue on principle, rather than dislike of Jodie's abilities.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Nov 4, 2017 0:12:35 GMT
Really don't get what he expects Chibnall to do. Why should Chibnall say anything? There's no criticism for him to respond to because nothing showrunned by him has actually aired yet. As for the toxic fandom, it's not Chibnall's job to mediate the fandom. Also what the hell is he talking about in regards to Broadchurch? Every character is flawed in that series-that's basically the point. There is no 'good guy'. It's not just the men. There is criticism that can be levelled at Chibnall actually. Why haven't we seen 13's costume yet? That's my only complaint about him so far. As the showrunner he should be pushing for the BBC to reveal Jodie's costume now, not next week or the week after. I imagine we'll get it sometime around Twice Upon's broadcast, or as a teaser at the end of the special. Anyone remember when we got Capaldi's costume reveal?
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Nov 4, 2017 0:19:21 GMT
There is criticism that can be levelled at Chibnall actually. Why haven't we seen 13's costume yet? That's my only complaint about him so far. As the showrunner he should be pushing for the BBC to reveal Jodie's costume now, not next week or the week after. I imagine we'll get it sometime around Twice Upon's broadcast, or as a teaser at the end of the special. Anyone remember when we got Capaldi's costume reveal? It was during location filming, wasn't It? Aren't they supposed to already be filming Series 11 Episode One?
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Nov 4, 2017 0:44:22 GMT
There is criticism that can be levelled at Chibnall actually. Why haven't we seen 13's costume yet? That's my only complaint about him so far. As the showrunner he should be pushing for the BBC to reveal Jodie's costume now, not next week or the week after. I imagine we'll get it sometime around Twice Upon's broadcast, or as a teaser at the end of the special. Anyone remember when we got Capaldi's costume reveal? Capaldi's costume was announced in late January 2014, so some time after the regeneration episode,
|
|
|
Post by barnabaslives on Nov 4, 2017 5:36:58 GMT
Really don't get what he expects Chibnall to do. Why should Chibnall say anything? There's no criticism for him to respond to because nothing showrunned by him has actually aired yet. As for the toxic fandom, it's not Chibnall's job to mediate the fandom. Indeed... I seem to keep wishing Chibnall would offer more insights in advance to help reasonable people avoid catastrophizing, but that may still not be much help for anyone simply determined to catastrophize. Anything he might have to say is likely to be taken the wrong way by someone, I presume. If he's taken the stance of mainly wanting to just have the show speak for itself when the episodes air, I can't say as I blame him - that might be wise of him, actually.
|
|