|
Post by david on Nov 1, 2015 16:23:42 GMT
But Peter Harness gets a free pass? Nice to see you've started the way I'm sure you mean to go on...negative, Moffat-bashing, NuWho-hating, exclamation-point-abusing... You just don't get it, do you? Steven Moffat is the Show Runner and he oversees EVERY script, and EVERY piece of dialogue. No, laddie. YOU don't get it. And never have. Never will. You didn't even bother mentioning the writer of the story, just Moffat and have been constantly lambasting him since he took over. It's the most tedious and prolonged trolling I've ever seen. You've got a nasty agenda and will do anything to fulfill it.
|
|
|
Post by icecreamdf on Nov 1, 2015 16:25:45 GMT
Harry Sullivan is an imbecile. I wouldn't be surprised if he developed the nerve gas without fully thinking through what the consequences would be. Besides, in Terror of the Zygons, the Zygons were depicted as monsters with no redeming qualities. Harry probably never really saw them as people.
|
|
|
Post by david on Nov 1, 2015 16:28:58 GMT
The books - System Shock, Millenium Shock and Damaged Goods to name but three - have had Harry being a top man at MI-5 - an oragnisation not averse to torture, political assassination, conspiracy and murder. I don't see that someone working at the head of the UK secret service would have any qualms about developing and indeed using a gas like that. In any of those books does it say that Harry inflicted pain on anyone? No - Harry was the first "nice" MI-5 chief that eliminated the torture and the state-sponsored murders, instead using all the secret agents to deliver puppies to orphanages.
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Nov 1, 2015 16:41:12 GMT
In any of those books does it say that Harry inflicted pain on anyone? No - Harry was the first "nice" MI-5 chief that eliminated the torture and the state-sponsored murders, instead using all the secret agents to deliver puppies to orphanages. Then, going by those books, its completely out of character for Harry to do anything nasty!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2015 16:48:26 GMT
Nope. No way in hell Harry Sullivan designed a nerve toxin. 0/10 for character assassination. Well, he did. It said so on last night's episode.
|
|
|
Post by TinDogPodcast on Nov 1, 2015 17:18:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by seeley on Nov 1, 2015 18:28:56 GMT
Steven Moffat is the Show Runner and he oversees EVERY script, and EVERY piece of dialogue. And don't you think that an overseer of that capacity might miss a few minutiae? I imagine that Moffat has bigger concerns with a script than "does this piece of throwaway dialogue ruin a character that hasn't been on the telly for nearly forty years?" If you don't like the idea of Harry Sullivan developing nerve-gas, just ignore the line, because that's all it is. If you had no idea who Harry was, you'd not be bothered, would you? If I write a story in which a character mentions, in passing, "Melanie Bush, the Carrot Juice-killer who slaughtered an entire orphanage in a fit of pique," have I actually portrayed the character as a serial killer? I've simply had someone say so, which is by no means the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Nov 1, 2015 19:10:35 GMT
Steven Moffat is the Show Runner and he oversees EVERY script, and EVERY piece of dialogue. And don't you think that an overseer of that capacity might miss a few minutiae? I imagine that Moffat has bigger concerns with a script than "does this piece of throwaway dialogue ruin a character that hasn't been on the telly for nearly forty years?" If you don't like the idea of Harry Sullivan developing nerve-gas, just ignore the line, because that's all it is. If you had no idea who Harry was, you'd not be bothered, would you? If I write a story in which a character mentions, in passing, "Melanie Bush, the Carrot Juice-killer who slaughtered an entire orphanage in a fit of pique," have I actually portrayed the character as a serial killer? I've simply had someone say so, which is by no means the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Nov 1, 2015 19:13:20 GMT
And don't you think that an overseer of that capacity might miss a few minutiae? I imagine that Moffat has bigger concerns with a script than "does this piece of throwaway dialogue ruin a character that hasn't been on the telly for nearly forty years?" If you don't like the idea of Harry Sullivan developing nerve-gas, just ignore the line, because that's all it is. If you had no idea who Harry was, you'd not be bothered, would you? If I write a story in which a character mentions, in passing, "Melanie Bush, the Carrot Juice-killer who slaughtered an entire orphanage in a fit of pique," have I actually portrayed the character as a serial killer? I've simply had someone say so, which is by no means the same thing. So, I and fans are allowed to pick and choose what is, and isn't canon? I can put my hands over my ears, and scream "LA LA LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU"! Well, I choose to ignore Doctor Who from 2005 onwards!
|
|
|
Post by seeley on Nov 1, 2015 19:38:37 GMT
So, I and fans are allowed to pick and choose what is, and isn't canon? I can put my hands over my ears, and scream "LA LA LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU"! Well, I choose to ignore Doctor Who from 2005 onwards! It is fiction, after all. If you prefer Ace going to Paradise Towers, instead of Mel, then the worst that happens is that you can't see that version on video. There isn't so much a Doctor Who canon, as a Doctor Who continuity.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Nov 1, 2015 20:09:54 GMT
Shocking. Paul Morris arrives and all six of his posts are either Moffat bashing or defending his Moffat bashing....in the same thread. It's like the BF forum never left.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Nov 1, 2015 20:13:36 GMT
So, I and fans are allowed to pick and choose what is, and isn't canon? I can put my hands over my ears, and scream "LA LA LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU"! Well, I choose to ignore Doctor Who from 2005 onwards! Great. Then do us all, and yourself, a favor and actually do that. Ignore Doctor Who. Because bashing something and defending that bashing isn't ignoring something. It is the opposite of ignoring. Ignoring would be not paying attention to it and finding something else to whine about.
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on Nov 1, 2015 21:18:27 GMT
Well, it was good all around but I felt like the Allegory was holding a sign saying "HEY! Look at me! I'm ALLEGORY!"
UNIT in jackboots going after Zygon-ISIS....
...in America.
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Nov 1, 2015 21:20:31 GMT
All I said was that Harry Sullivan would not be involved in experiments that would harm anyone!
|
|
|
Post by icecreamdf on Nov 1, 2015 21:23:06 GMT
And don't you think that an overseer of that capacity might miss a few minutiae? I imagine that Moffat has bigger concerns with a script than "does this piece of throwaway dialogue ruin a character that hasn't been on the telly for nearly forty years?" If you don't like the idea of Harry Sullivan developing nerve-gas, just ignore the line, because that's all it is. If you had no idea who Harry was, you'd not be bothered, would you? If I write a story in which a character mentions, in passing, "Melanie Bush, the Carrot Juice-killer who slaughtered an entire orphanage in a fit of pique," have I actually portrayed the character as a serial killer? I've simply had someone say so, which is by no means the same thing. Now I really want to see that story. Anyway, I might be wrong, but I don't think they mentioned Harry by name. If you want, you can just assume that two naval Doctors worked for UNIT.
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on Nov 1, 2015 21:27:52 GMT
I will also add: come on...
...let's not get angry about the fictional tarnishing, derived from one route of deduction from the episode, of fictional (and skin-deep on TV) character Harry Sullivan.
Let's get mad at the fact that they could have but didn't quite make the Doctor's guitar solo the lead-in to this theme. This time it kind of petered out, then the normal theme launched. I don't want him wandering around most episodes strumming, but if they do the thing where "the Doctor is fooling around, then the intro to the episode happens" thing, I'd like whatever he's strumming to launch into the theme.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Nov 1, 2015 21:28:58 GMT
We are at 34, 35 with this post, and Paul you have 7 of the 35 posts. All about what a fictional character would and would not do. And connected with your first Harry post was a Moffat is a disgrace as well. Give it a rest. Follow your own advice and ignore the show. Please. Follow your own advice.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2015 22:35:11 GMT
A lot of the imagery left a bad taste in my mouth (particularly at the end), in all honesty and felt tasteless and exploitative and the overall mesage of the episode was incredibly muddled by it.
WHAT THE HELL WERE MOFFATT AND HARKNESS THINKING?
|
|
|
Post by chrism on Nov 2, 2015 1:30:16 GMT
Thoroughly enjoyed this one, it was a real return to form. I was a little concerned after the Maisie Williams two-parter that this series peaked too early as the opening two stories were marvellous, but the Williams episodes got a bit lost and for the first time in years I really didn't like the story.
This was so strong, an edge of your seat adventure. Loved how Osgood was handled and the other Zygon story references. A near perfect 'part 1' in my opinion. If next week is half as strong then we're in for a proper treat.
|
|
|
Post by icecreamdf on Nov 2, 2015 1:42:03 GMT
The only thing that I think would have improved this episode would have been if we saw a bit more of the average, non-radical Zygons. The only good-guy Zygons we saw were those little girls who were killed off at the beginning, and maybe Osgood.
|
|