|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Sept 19, 2016 12:47:56 GMT
I disagree in regards the crack. I thought the crack in time was pretty subtle. Up until the point he {Spoiler}
put his hand through the crack and came back with a piece of the Tardis  Cheers Tony Good point. Most of the arc was 'spot the crack in the latest episode' though. |
|
|
|
Post by acousticwolf on Sept 19, 2016 12:59:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Sept 19, 2016 13:02:00 GMT
Not Where or when? But what? |
|
|
|
Post by acousticwolf on Sept 19, 2016 13:05:01 GMT
Not Where or when? But what? You'll have to be more specific about what? I'm afraid . What do you mean when you say "What was that all about?" - unless you mean "What on earth was that all about ..." Cheers Tony |
|
Tony Jones
Chancellery Guard
Professor Chronotis
Still rockin' along!
Likes: 2,132
|
Post by Tony Jones on Sept 19, 2016 13:21:05 GMT
Have edited the title out of all caps as this conventionally means shouting. This is meant to be a friendly forum
|
|
|
|
Post by icecreamdf on Sept 19, 2016 13:45:30 GMT
Up until the point he {Spoiler}put his hand through the crack and came back with a piece of the Tardis Cheers Tony What was that about? The cracks were a result of the TARDIS explosion, so there was debris from the TARDIS in the crack. |
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Sept 19, 2016 15:17:18 GMT
The cracks were a result of the TARDIS explosion, so there was debris from the TARDIS in the crack. But that contradicts Time of the Doctor, as its a means of Gallifrey contacting the Doctor. |
|
|
|
Post by eldersensorite on Sept 19, 2016 16:01:59 GMT
Up until the point he {Spoiler}
put his hand through the crack and came back with a piece of the Tardis Cheers Tony Good point. Most of the arc was 'spot the crack in the latest episode' though. Well, more HERE'S A CRACK LOOK AT IT WHAT COULD IT POSSIBLY MEAN !!! Not particularly subtle if you ask me. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2016 17:08:24 GMT
Ditto. I think Delgado edges it for me over Ainley, but I really don't like the over-the-top insanity of Simms or Gomez. Anyway back on topic, I think Arcs work well when they are subtle - Bad Wolf worked as did Saxon because they weren't in-your-face. By the time we get to the Cracks and the Impossible Girl the arc seems to be main story, rather than the other way around. Cheers Tony I disagree in regards the crack. I thought the crack in time was pretty subtle. I don't mean to be rude, Dalekbuster, and this may come across the wrong way, but do you like to debate with people and state unfounded things that you don't believe so it looks like you have an edge over them? It's just that for a Moffat fan I find it odd that you didn't like Heaven Sent and the cracks in time stuff is now subtle. I'm sorry if I sound a bit rude, but it's just a bit - how should I put it - different. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2016 17:15:07 GMT
The cracks were a result of the TARDIS explosion, so there was debris from the TARDIS in the crack. But that contradicts Time of the Doctor, as its a means of Gallifrey contacting the Doctor. Not a contradiction as such, just needs some gap filling. The crack was caused by the TARDIS exploding, but the Time Lords were able to later exploit it as a way of getting their signal from their pocket dimension back to the main universe. |
|
|
|
Post by icecreamdf on Sept 19, 2016 18:14:36 GMT
The cracks were a result of the TARDIS explosion, so there was debris from the TARDIS in the crack. But that contradicts Time of the Doctor, as its a means of Gallifrey contacting the Doctor. The Time Lords didn't create the cracks. They just took advantage of them. They were a weak point in the universe, so they were able to send a signal through one. |
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Sept 19, 2016 18:23:25 GMT
But that contradicts Time of the Doctor, as its a means of Gallifrey contacting the Doctor. The Time Lords didn't create the cracks. They just took advantage of them. They were a weak point in the universe, so they were able to send a signal through one. And, people wonder why others think he makes it up as he goes along! |
|
|
|
Post by icecreamdf on Sept 19, 2016 18:55:40 GMT
The Time Lords didn't create the cracks. They just took advantage of them. They were a weak point in the universe, so they were able to send a signal through one. And, people wonder why others think he makes it up as he goes along! Well, he does, but there's nothing wrong with that. |
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Sept 19, 2016 19:27:07 GMT
I disagree in regards the crack. I thought the crack in time was pretty subtle. I don't mean to be rude, Dalekbuster, and this may come across the wrong way, but do you like to debate with people and state unfounded things that you don't believe so it looks like you have an edge over them? It's just that for a Moffat fan I find it odd that you didn't like Heaven Sent and the cracks in time stuff is now subtle. I'm sorry if I sound a bit rude, but it's just a bit - how should I put it - different. I love Steven Moffat's era but I'm not afraid to admit he isn't perfect. Also: it's not that I didn't like Heaven Sent, I just don't think the one-hander concept quite worked. In some places it was successful, in others less so. |
|
|
|
Post by constonks on Sept 19, 2016 22:22:38 GMT
I like my Who with arcs.
But I like it a lot more when those arcs make sense. TV Who has done that at times. (Even if the payoff is pretty crap, Season 3 did a good job of that. It doesn't bog down the episode and the resolution of who Mr. Saxon is makes sense.) But others, a lack of foresight really shows.
My personal favourite arcs in Doctor Who have always been BF's. In particular, Charley's arc until Zagreus and then her whole time with Colin. You get these masterful stand-alone episodes with a couple questions buried in the text and that's it, until we hit the grand finales.
The Sixth Doc ones shine especially bright for me, as I found myself listening to the next audio to hear what happened to Charley and being sucked into the main story of the piece instead. The arc keeps the listener coming back, the story makes it worth their while.
|
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Sept 19, 2016 22:46:22 GMT
My personal favourite arcs in Doctor Who have always been BF's. In particular, Charley's arc until Zagreus and then her whole time with Colin. You get these masterful stand-alone episodes with a couple questions buried in the text and that's it, until we hit the grand finales. The Sixth Doc ones shine especially bright for me, as I found myself listening to the next audio to hear what happened to Charley and being sucked into the main story of the piece instead. The arc keeps the listener coming back, the story makes it worth their while. I only have some story arcs on BF. 1 - 51 and the 1963. Very little else. I still can't listen to McCoys 1963, though! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2016 1:24:26 GMT
The Sixth Doc ones shine especially bright for me, as I found myself listening to the next audio to hear what happened to Charley and being sucked into the main story of the piece instead. The arc keeps the listener coming back, the story makes it worth their while. And that is exactly what an arc should do. An arc is a promise to your audience and your story is the delivery of that commitment. "Where do we go from here, Charley?" |
|
|
|
Post by constonks on Sept 20, 2016 1:55:33 GMT
My personal favourite arcs in Doctor Who have always been BF's. In particular, Charley's arc until Zagreus and then her whole time with Colin. You get these masterful stand-alone episodes with a couple questions buried in the text and that's it, until we hit the grand finales. The Sixth Doc ones shine especially bright for me, as I found myself listening to the next audio to hear what happened to Charley and being sucked into the main story of the piece instead. The arc keeps the listener coming back, the story makes it worth their while. I only have some story arcs on BF. 1 - 51 and the 1963. Very little else. I still can't listen to McCoys 1963, though! Most of those are standalone. The 1963s in particular have nothing to do with each other. The only real arcs in BF's 1999-2003 output are Charley/anti-time, Dalek Empire and the Forge/Evelyn stuff. There are also a couple links between audios here and there, but it's more akin to the linking scenes in, say, Season 19, than an actual arc. |
|
|
|
Post by icecreamdf on Sept 20, 2016 4:12:34 GMT
I only have some story arcs on BF. 1 - 51 and the 1963. Very little else. I still can't listen to McCoys 1963, though! Most of those are standalone. The 1963s in particular have nothing to do with each other. The only real arcs in BF's 1999-2003 output are Charley/anti-time, Dalek Empire and the Forge/Evelyn stuff. There are also a couple links between audios here and there, but it's more akin to the linking scenes in, say, Season 19, than an actual arc. Well, you can probably consider most of the box sets to be arcs, even if they are just one release. Then, of course, there's Dark Eyes and Doom Coalition which are across multiple releases. |
|
|
|
Post by Timelord007 on Sept 20, 2016 8:33:30 GMT
I think Big,Finish do arcs far better than the new series, one of my favourite arcs is the Burning Prince trilogy which covers three incarnations of the Doctor's over a period of time from beginning to end.
As for nuWho Moffat hasn't a clue how to resolve a arc with his twist on a twist timey wimey bafflegab.
To tell a good arc, keep it simple, give your arc a good beginning, a intriguing middle & a nail biting conclusion.
|
|
