|
Post by iainmclaughlin on Jan 15, 2018 21:14:24 GMT
I thought that, too - but I'm Scottish and I think everybody should have a Scottish accent. It would be nice if in a future adventure the Doctor visits an obscure Scottish historical event. It would suit this Doctor perfectly me thinks; makes a nice change to have people stories as sometimes DW is far too reliant on alien monster baddies. Well, he comes to Scotland next month... not to an obscure place or time though... and I ain't sayin' another word about it.
|
|
|
Post by steveothen on Jan 16, 2018 10:18:27 GMT
Has anyone received there actual CD's of this yet ?.
|
|
|
Post by Whovitt on Jan 16, 2018 14:26:06 GMT
Though I liked James Dreyfus as The Master in the first story, he doesn't bring anything new to the part at all. In fact, following on so soon from Jacobi there's little about him that stands out that you can say is distinct to his incarnation. A fine but uninspired performance and characterisation. Kinda frsutrates that The Doctor is so different from body to body and incarnation to incarnation but in 2017 BF still give us a massively Delgado-informed Master. Every Doctor does their own thing - why are so many Masters written the same way and played likewise? The thing I find most interesting about the 'new' incarnations (particularly Dreyfus and Macqueen) is that they claim to having no previous experience with the character and are taking the part as written and are running with it. Perhaps the way in which the part is written should be shaken up a little so that the different actors find something different for their performances, do you think? I certainly agree that, while I enjoyed his performance, there were no real standout moments for Dreyfus in this story (but there are a least two or three other stories that he's recorded already, so maybe there's already material waiting to shows us what he's made of )
|
|
|
Post by elkawho on Jan 16, 2018 14:31:17 GMT
Though I liked James Dreyfus as The Master in the first story, he doesn't bring anything new to the part at all. In fact, following on so soon from Jacobi there's little about him that stands out that you can say is distinct to his incarnation. A fine but uninspired performance and characterisation. Kinda frsutrates that The Doctor is so different from body to body and incarnation to incarnation but in 2017 BF still give us a massively Delgado-informed Master. Every Doctor does their own thing - why are so many Masters written the same way and played likewise? The thing I find most interesting about the 'new' incarnations (particularly Dreyfus and Macqueen) is that they claim to having no previous experience with the character and are taking the part as written and are running with it. Perhaps the way in which the part is written should be shaken up a little so that the different actors find something different for their performances, do you think? I certainly agree that, while I enjoyed his performance, there were no real standout moments for Dreyfus in this story (but there are a least two or three other stories that he's recorded already, so maybe there's already material waiting to shows us what he's made of ) I wouldn't call out the writing. I mean, McQueen certainly put his own take on the character. It was so his own that {Spoiler} you knew there was something out of place when he switched bodies with the Beevers Master in The Two Masters. Those two are completely different.
It may be that Dreyfus was told to deliver it in a certain way due to his placement in regards to the others. As an old friend who has since had a change of heart(s)?
|
|
|
Post by Whovitt on Jan 16, 2018 14:33:53 GMT
The thing I find most interesting about the 'new' incarnations (particularly Dreyfus and Macqueen) is that they claim to having no previous experience with the character and are taking the part as written and are running with it. Perhaps the way in which the part is written should be shaken up a little so that the different actors find something different for their performances, do you think? I certainly agree that, while I enjoyed his performance, there were no real standout moments for Dreyfus in this story (but there are a least two or three other stories that he's recorded already, so maybe there's already material waiting to shows us what he's made of ) I wouldn't call out the writing. I mean, McQueen certainly put his own take on the character. It was so his own that {Spoiler} you knew there was something out of place when he switched bodies with the Beevers Master in The Two Masters. Those two are completely different.
It may be that Dreyfus was told to deliver it in a certain way due to his placement in regards to the others. As an old friend who has since had a change of heart(s)?
Oh, I wasn't blaming the writing I was just wondering whether davy thought changing the way the character was written might have made the performance more different from other incarnations of the Master
|
|
ljwilson
Chancellery Guard
It's tangerine....not orange
Likes: 5,061
|
Post by ljwilson on Jan 16, 2018 17:21:55 GMT
Has anyone received there actual CD's of this yet ?. Nope
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2018 18:29:54 GMT
CDs are going to be sent out from the end of this week, there was a delay getting them.
|
|
|
Post by mark687 on Jan 16, 2018 18:54:48 GMT
CDs are going to be sent out from the end of this week, there was a delay getting them. Official Update
Regards
mark687
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2018 19:04:47 GMT
Though I liked James Dreyfus as The Master in the first story, he doesn't bring anything new to the part at all. In fact, following on so soon from Jacobi there's little about him that stands out that you can say is distinct to his incarnation. A fine but uninspired performance and characterisation. Kinda frsutrates that The Doctor is so different from body to body and incarnation to incarnation but in 2017 BF still give us a massively Delgado-informed Master. Every Doctor does their own thing - why are so many Masters written the same way and played likewise? I think the problem with this is that the powers that be at BF either: A.) Don't want to go too extreme with the characterisation of the Master for fear of getting slapped down by BBC Worldwide for putting out a 'wrong' portrayal. Or B.) Wanted to essentially focus this release on feelings of nostalgia, or at least wanted to reconstruct some of the charm of Classic Who, and therefore there were limits as to how far they were willing to go with the Master's characterisation. But yeah, I get the frustration.
|
|
|
Post by nudge on Jan 16, 2018 20:56:23 GMT
Though I liked James Dreyfus as The Master in the first story, he doesn't bring anything new to the part at all. In fact, following on so soon from Jacobi there's little about him that stands out that you can say is distinct to his incarnation. A fine but uninspired performance and characterisation. Kinda frsutrates that The Doctor is so different from body to body and incarnation to incarnation but in 2017 BF still give us a massively Delgado-informed Master. Every Doctor does their own thing - why are so many Masters written the same way and played likewise? I think the problem with this is that the powers that be at BF either: A.) Don't want to go too extreme with the characterisation of the Master for fear of getting slapped down by BBC Worldwide for putting out a 'wrong' portrayal. Or B.) Wanted to essentially focus this release on feelings of nostalgia, or at least wanted to reconstruct some of the charm of Classic Who, and therefore there were limits as to how far they were willing to go with the Master's characterisation. But yeah, I get the frustration. I think Andrew Scott would make a splendid incarnation of the Master. Something similar to his Moriarty character in BBC's Sherlock. Though I assume they'd need to particularly careful not to make the character too vibrant otherwise he might outshine the Doctor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2018 21:49:59 GMT
I think the problem with this is that the powers that be at BF either: A.) Don't want to go too extreme with the characterisation of the Master for fear of getting slapped down by BBC Worldwide for putting out a 'wrong' portrayal. Or B.) Wanted to essentially focus this release on feelings of nostalgia, or at least wanted to reconstruct some of the charm of Classic Who, and therefore there were limits as to how far they were willing to go with the Master's characterisation. But yeah, I get the frustration. I think Andrew Scott would make a splendid incarnation of the Master. Something similar to his Moriarty character in BBC's Sherlock. Though I assume they'd need to particularly careful not to make the character too vibrant otherwise he might outshine the Doctor. I reckon Iwan Rheon would be a good choice too. Might give him a chance to play up the brutality he seemed to be holding back a bit with on Game of Thrones.
|
|
|
Post by xlozdob on Jan 16, 2018 22:09:24 GMT
I think Andrew Scott would make a splendid incarnation of the Master. Something similar to his Moriarty character in BBC's Sherlock. Though I assume they'd need to particularly careful not to make the character too vibrant otherwise he might outshine the Doctor. I reckon Iwan Rheon would be a good choice too. Might give him a chance to play up the brutality he seemed to be holding back a bit with on Game of Thrones. Personally, I would like to see Iain De Caestecker as the Master; after seeing his performance as the HYDRA Fitz in AoS season 4, I think he's perfect for the role and, actually, he'd be a great match for Jodie's Doctor when/if the time comes. That said, Rheon and Scott would make for great Masters too.
|
|
|
Post by aussiedoctorwhofan on Jan 20, 2018 8:53:50 GMT
|
|
mbt66
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 3,075
|
Post by mbt66 on Jan 20, 2018 11:32:13 GMT
That is a relief. I did wonder if they had got lost in the post. Now it a race between the Fourth Doctor and the First Doctor who will arrive first. I know that the Fourth has got a head start, but he does get distracted so easily. It’s the tortoise and the hare Doctor Who style!
|
|
|
Post by dastari on Jan 24, 2018 2:36:50 GMT
With this series coming out this month, I thought that it would be a good idea to post a link to a panel that I was on at Chicago TARDIS 2017. We were going to talk about what we thought of the announcement of The First Doctor Adventures and speculate about what it all meant, but then Nick showed up (he wasn't scheduled to be on the panel) and it became a different panel entirely, since the man with the answers was there. Even if you've listened to the stories already on download, there's some interesting stuff here such as Nick's thoughts on recasting in general, some behind-the-scenes info, and some hints about things that we may be seeing soon (including confirmation that they will be using Carole Ann Ford soon). You can find my podcast, The 42cast on stitcher radio and iTunes or here: Chicago TARDIS 2017 - The First Doctor Adventures
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 17:01:04 GMT
Since there was some wondering about the physical version of these: it's two double-disc cases (not a case for each disc like the Fifth Doctor Box Set), with a separate case for the extras disc. They also recreate this image (with David Richardson in place of Verity Lambert) on the extras disc's back cover, which is a nice touch: www.bbc.co.uk/staticarchive/4f22323cd3539e272e2db2654d870a049c1728b3.jpg
|
|
|
Post by mark687 on Feb 4, 2018 21:36:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Timelord007 on Feb 5, 2018 8:53:49 GMT
Loved James Dreyfus interpretation of the Master & the interplay between him & David Bradleys First Doctor was excellent.
|
|
lidar2
Castellan
You know, now that you mention it, I actually do rather like Attack of the Cybermen ...
Likes: 5,786
|
Post by lidar2 on Feb 6, 2018 13:17:37 GMT
Finally listened to this. Very good indeed. Glover and Powell were the most convincing for me, Bradley's northern accent came over a bit too much (nothing wrong with Northern accents, mind, just made his version of One feel a little less authentic to me). I am watching the Crown with my wife and every time I heard Claudia Grant as Susan it just made me think of Claire Foy as the Queen.
Stories themselves were very strong, very much of the period, and Dreyfus made a great Master.
|
|
|
Post by nudge on Feb 6, 2018 13:34:12 GMT
Listened to both stories and a bit of the ‘behind the scenes’ chat yesterday. Really enjoyed the stories and appreciated the mix of sci-fi and historical. Great sound design, very film-esque. Wasn’t particularly keen on either Barbara or Susan, wished the actors had gone with their interpretation of the characters rather than trying to mimic. In the ‘behind the scenes’ chat Claudia Grant said she was trying to copy Carole Ann Ford’s voice - which I’m not particularly keen on either - but think it would have been better to have gone with something more nearer her own natural voice. This would also have helped keep their voices more consistent as a couple of times one of them reminded me of Claire Foy in Netflix’s ‘The Crown’.Also anybody spot Rosalita’s Puerto Rican accent sway into Scottish twice, once quite noticeably, was surprised no one picked it up during recording? Finally listened to this. Very good indeed. Glover and Powell were the most convincing for me, Bradley's northern accent came over a bit too much (nothing wrong with Northern accents, mind, just made his version of One feel a little less authentic to me). I am watching the Crown with my wife and every time I heard Claudia Grant as Susan it just made me think of Claire Foy as the Queen.
Stories themselves were very strong, very much of the period, and Dreyfus made a great Master. Same here; that's what I thought too.
|
|