|
Post by rebeltimelord on Sept 16, 2017 0:54:11 GMT
There are fans of Doctor Who and our stuff generally who, sadly, will push through the darkest things through fandom , and there are people who aren't even fans (Nazis, White Supremicists, homophobes and good old fashioned misgonists) who will intersect themselves into fandoms to use it as a platform to spread their beliefs and taint the younger generation and others. You see it in comic book fandom, sadly - where people push a narrative that Marvel is focusing too much on the younger diverse heroes kids (who are a great jumping on point for new readers), despite the younger kids existing in their own bubble away from the adult heroes and Marvel even had to address it in a video for promoting a upcommiong event. Or with shakeups with like Amadeus Cho taking over the mantle of Hulk and with Bruce being dead (despite everyone knowing how comic book death works and Bruce's return inevitable due to the MCU) or Riri Williams and Tony Stark (where she isn't Iron Man and her story is all about how her actions as a hero will affect Tony when he returns) or Thor. I'm not saying these changes weren't going to cause a stir - they were - and people have every right NOT to like them - but there are people for nefarious agendas who will use that stir to lure the young to re-enforce some very dark agendas or use it to tear down these characters because their people of colour. They'll focus on why these new characters are attached to existing legacies, rather then being new characters in their own right, when they know that the comic book industry isn't in the best of shape right now and can't push these characters that way. Sometimes this is out of ignorance, but a lot of it is designed to re-enforce their agenda. I don't know why, but I still like to think personally that comics can come up with new and successful characters rather than turning existing characters into flagships of diversity. I also suspect it might provide the ne'er-do-wells with less ammunition if they would do that, rather than risking someone's new-found distaste for Group Y because their favorite hero Captain X was just "ruined" by being made into a member of Group Y. I'm still tempted to think it's just sort of lazy to refurbish established characters, or that it's disrespectful to established audiences (who might have helped put some of the same franchises where they were in the first place) as well as to characters, to just re-write character history. Not in the current comic book market, sadly. Sales are lower then they've ever been and for Marvel, it's the event stuff that sells. We're looking at a different time, sadly where we can't see that experimintion. Kid Kajji (despite being an Inhuman) seems to be a test case for Marvel to see if a new character without existing ties can do well. Runaways, despite being a beloved series, was only brought back because of the upcoming TV series. So, a new character sadly does need a platform to spring off from. And you can't blame Marvel for not expecting hate-filled f**** to f*** with them to the extent that they have. And Marvel needs to engage with a younger audience, because their heavyweights just aren't working, even with the MCU. Miles, Amadeus, Kamela and Riri are just young enough for that audience, especially kids to connect with. It's why I don't give a damn about renumbering, to be honest. It just makes everything more accessible to new readers. Amadeus is young enough to get a young reader to connect to the Hulk and lead him to the Avenger titles. And from discussion from African-American and Middle Eastern existing fans or potential readers talk about their concerns about how such characters might be portrayed, even with the best of intentions. Attaching that character to existing characters and their stories, like Spider-Man or a well-established ones such Captain Marvel is a good way to dispel those concerns. And I think Kamela,Miles and Riri are distinct enough characters in their own right and we know that eventually, they'll go and create their own legacy, so in the end, it's pretty much the same thing
|
|
|
Post by number13 on Sept 16, 2017 14:30:21 GMT
I am prepared to fight anyone who says anything sexist or misogynistic. By that, I don't mean anyone who simply says they don't like the idea. Just those who spout sexist rubbish like 'They should rename it Nurse Who'. But that's Hex surely?! (Which reminds me I must relisten to 'Shadow Planet' and the fabulous 'World Apart'. And that I would like a full trilogy return for Hex.)
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Sept 16, 2017 16:20:43 GMT
I am prepared to fight anyone who says anything sexist or misogynistic. By that, I don't mean anyone who simply says they don't like the idea. Just those who spout sexist rubbish like 'They should rename it Nurse Who'. But that's Hex surely?! (Which reminds me I must relisten to 'Shadow Planet' and the fabulous 'World Apart'. And that I would like a full trilogy return for Hex.) Or Rory.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2017 20:38:53 GMT
I am prepared to fight anyone who says anything sexist or misogynistic. By that, I don't mean anyone who simply says they don't like the idea. Just those who spout sexist rubbish like 'They should rename it Nurse Who'. But that's Hex surely?! (Which reminds me I must relisten to 'Shadow Planet' and the fabulous 'World Apart'. And that I would like a full trilogy return for Hex.) Absolutely, but please BF, no more revivals from the dead. Please? He has enough gaps in his own timeline already to do a perfectly good Solitaire and us still love it to pieces.
|
|
|
Post by number13 on Sept 16, 2017 21:42:35 GMT
But that's Hex surely?! (Which reminds me I must relisten to 'Shadow Planet' and the fabulous 'World Apart'. And that I would like a full trilogy return for Hex.) Absolutely, but please BF, no more revivals from the dead. Please? He has enough gaps in his own timeline already to do a perfectly good Solitaire and us still love it to pieces. Definitely agree. The way they did the double-bills suited me fine. I don't remember any of the three releases worrying about where exactly they fitted in which timeline. I'll take any quality release, single or trilogy with any known Doctor / Companion combination and not worry about exactly when it was. I enjoyed the way they treated the continuity as a joke in 'Time in Office' {Spoiler} There we were constructing theories about what Turlough might have done on Frontios while the Doctor and Tegan were away... when in fact he was in his bedroom in the TARDIS the whole time! (Oh yes, serious continuity!)
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Sept 24, 2017 0:48:40 GMT
I get the sentiment, but I do think it's a tad hyperbolic: the controversy has died down pretty fast in internet time, and most have either flat out said no more or are willing to give Jodie a go. Any fears over a Whogate are just that: mere phantoms of something that likely won't happen, given given how little airtime the BBC gave this affair (someone in PR clearly learnt from what Sony and Marvel had done so catastrophically wrong before in courting internet controversy).
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Sept 24, 2017 3:33:22 GMT
I get the sentiment, but I do think it's a tad hyperbolic: the controversy has died down pretty fast in internet time, and most have either flat out said no more or are willing to give Jodie a go. Any fears over a Whogate are just that: mere phantoms of something that likely won't happen, given given how little airtime the BBC gave this affair (someone in PR clearly learnt from what Sony and Marvel had done so catastrophically wrong before in courting internet controversy). I think Sony and Marvel have taken too literally the old mantra of 'any publicity is good publicity'. With Whittaker's announcement it was not bigger than any other Who announcement, she had her clip and a few short interviews and that's it. It's really quite quiet in how the BBC went about this. As to the original subject of this thread, can't we just watch the series? Sure there will probably be a small contingent of 'fans' who genuinely hold sexist views but that's true of almost anything. Think it's important to emphasis that people who are uneasy about a female Doctor are not necessarily sexist because of that. It is a big change. Me personally I don't see it as too big a deal but understand for others it isn't. The best way to combat those who hold genuinely sexist views (which I don't believe anyone on this forum does) is just to watch the series and thus support Whittaker's Doctor, surely? Also I spend half my life discussing politics and dealing with such issues, I'd really rather I didn't when discussing Who too (maybe from time to time, but I need some escapism).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2017 4:06:51 GMT
Also I spend half my life discussing politics and dealing with such issues, I'd really rather I didn't when discussing Who too (maybe from time to time, but I need some escapism). In that vein, what do people think the tone of the show is going to be like? More science fantasy or closer to the tropes of science fiction? Doctor Who tends to swing back and forth on a pendulum much like the silly/serious crests and valleys of the Bond films, so I'm more inclined to believe the latter (barring interference from far above).
|
|
shutupbanks
Castellan
There’s a horror movie called Alien? That’s really offensive. No wonder everyone keeps invading you.
Likes: 5,721
Member is Online
|
Post by shutupbanks on Sept 24, 2017 5:31:17 GMT
Also I spend half my life discussing politics and dealing with such issues, I'd really rather I didn't when discussing Who too (maybe from time to time, but I need some escapism). In that vein, what do people think the tone of the show is going to be like? More science fantasy or closer to the tropes of science fiction? Doctor Who tends to swing back and forth on a pendulum much like the silly/serious crests and valleys of the Bond films, so I'm more inclined to believe the latter (barring interference from far above). I'm hoping the tonal shift won't be as jarring as it was between Seasons 17 and 18 (Horns of Nimon and Leisure Hive (I know there was Shada, but that's such a patchwork story in all incarnations that it's hard to really count it)) and that we get led gently into Mr Chibnall's house style over the course of a few episodes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2017 7:28:10 GMT
In that vein, what do people think the tone of the show is going to be like? More science fantasy or closer to the tropes of science fiction? Doctor Who tends to swing back and forth on a pendulum much like the silly/serious crests and valleys of the Bond films, so I'm more inclined to believe the latter (barring interference from far above). I'm hoping the tonal shift won't be as jarring as it was between Seasons 17 and 18 (Horns of Nimon and Leisure Hive (I know there was Shada, but that's such a patchwork story in all incarnations that it's hard to really count it)) and that we get led gently into Mr Chibnall's house style over the course of a few episodes. That'd be rather nice, a gentle ease into the changes until everything settles in. It'll be tricky with the entirely new production team though, I think we'll likely be in for an aesthetic change like between Seasons 17/18 or 7/8, if nothing else. The Leisure Hive's always been a bit of an oddity in its way, even within the context of its own season. Its cinematic production values don't really fit anywhere else in Season 18 and its immediate successor, Meglos, feels much closer to something that could have been taken chapter and verse from the previous year of Williams/Adams stories. The narrative and aesthetic style of the era doesn't really settle down until Full Circle.
|
|