|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on Jun 30, 2020 10:31:58 GMT
Here's the question I'd like answered - will it EVER be released or will it end up as BF's very own Shada? Will it going from "short delay", to "coming soon but we're all very busy and no one has the time", to "don't know, must email Sue Cowley about that", to "no date set" and end up "Sorry, MR has ended so nowhere in our schedule we can fit it in". If that is the case, I just hope it wasn't a "book-end" story - Flip or Constance's departure tying up loose ends before the MR ends - or something with a significance in their ongoing arc. Place your bets now, which will be released first Jekyll & Hyde or The Lovecraft Invasion! I've been surprised (in a good way) that no one is really taking issue with the delay itself. Just with BF's usual utter inability to deal with bad news in any sort of competent manner. Good for us. Yes this is the issue isn't it. Time & time again BF have shown they cannot deal with any negative issues in a constructive or clear way. Unless there are legal reasons why they cannot give the real reason they need to be more transparent. This would obviously stop the crazy speculation.
|
|
|
Post by antartiks on Jun 30, 2020 10:52:22 GMT
I'm also more frustraded with BF's handling of the bad news than with the delay, although I was really eager to listen to this episode in particular.
I'm constantly amazed by how BF is seemingly afraid of disappointing us and making things worse in the process by pretending nothing happened. I'd have been satisfied with a more transparent explanation even if I can also understand they can't get into too much details. A "we can't release it right now and we're sorry about that" would have been better than what we got.
|
|
|
Post by BHTvsTFC on Jun 30, 2020 11:21:48 GMT
I'm also more frustraded with BF's handling of the bad news than with the delay, although I was really eager to listen to this episode in particular. I'm constantly amazed by how BF is seemingly afraid of disappointing us and making things worse by pretending nothing happened. I'd have been satisfied with a more transparent explanation even if I can also understand they can't get into too much details. A "we can't release it right now and we're sorry about that" would have been better than what we got. We're currently in a climate where 'shades of grey' no longer exist. I wanted to hear this release to hear how the writer handled Lovecraft. We've had controversial figures before in Doctor Who including Churchill, Mary Queen of Scots, Cromwell, Nixon, Thatcher, etc. All people who have controversial places in history. Understanding them is part of what makes us who we are. Understanding is not the same as liking/disliking them or approving/disapproving of them. In terms of the show I don't always agree with the Doctor, which is what makes it interesting! It actually offends me that the possibility of this story being postponed because Big Finish might be accused of being racist, or the story showing a racist individual in a positive light might in someway make people believe that racism is okay. It's just one aspect of anyone's personality. I'm sure there are many people all 'over the world' who have prejudices yet have done good things too. I recently read a book called The Brother whose most sympathetic character was the young jihadi soldier. Like I say I like stuff that throws different light onto someone or a piece of history. It doesn't mean I approve, it just means I understand a little bit more. I think the arguments against some shows and the fact that some actors are getting forced out of parts they've played for years is getting uglier by the day. I don't have a problem with white people voicing black roles or black people voicing white roles, women voicing male roles (often done if a boy is one of the characters), men voicing female roles - Sacha Dhawan played Matthew in a radio adaptation of Chocky and he was wonderful. It's called acting, it's made up, it's supposed to be fun, engaging and thought provoking. As an aside would you expect Rebecca Root to only play transwomen? Would she be allowed to cis-females or would that be wrong because she'd be taking a role from a cis-female? Equally so would she be allowed to play a male role without any controversy. My answer is a wholehearted yes to both of those questions. Of course, in any case, it would depend on the performance. You wouldn't cast anyone to play any role if they couldn't do it justice or play it from the heart. Going back to the original point, playing someone like Lovecraft could be an actors dream, to get under the skin of someone who they may not like, to have try and think the way they thought, to understand.
|
|
lidar2
Castellan
You know, now that you mention it, I actually do rather like Attack of the Cybermen ...
Likes: 5,813
|
Post by lidar2 on Jun 30, 2020 11:45:02 GMT
I'm also more frustraded with BF's handling of the bad news than with the delay, although I was really eager to listen to this episode in particular. I'm constantly amazed by how BF is seemingly afraid of disappointing us and making things worse by pretending nothing happened. I'd have been satisfied with a more transparent explanation even if I can also understand they can't get into too much details. A "we can't release it right now and we're sorry about that" would have been better than what we got. I think the arguments against some shows and the fact that some actors are getting forced out of parts they've played for years is getting uglier by the day. I don't have a problem with white people voicing black roles or black people voicing white roles, women voicing male roles (often done if a boy is one of the characters), men voicing female roles - Sacha Dhawan played Matthew in a radio adaptation of Chocky and he was wonderful. It's called acting, it's made up, it's supposed to be fun, engaging and thought provoking. As an aside would you expect Rebecca Root to only play transwomen? Would she be allowed to cis-females or would that be wrong because she'd be taking a role from a cis-female? Equally so would she be allowed to play a male role without any controversy. My answer is a wholehearted yes to both of those questions. I agree that it is ok in a non-visual medium to have white actors playing non-white parts. Actors "doubling up" to play more than one character is part of the business model for audio drama, a way to manage costs
I listened to the Talons of Greel recently and the part of Li'Hsen Chang was played by a Chinese actor - BF were obviously aware the original part had been played by a white actor and didn't want a repeat. Fair enough, but in the same play we had a French lady played by a British actress putting on an accent. Hello? Anyone else notice the inconsistency?
Likewise, completely random example, I can think of Terry Molloy doing a Scottish accent in Rat Trap but the arguments about lack of authenticity and depriving Scottish actors of opportunities were not raised. Nick Briggs gave us a cod French accent in The Silurian Candidate and Louise Jameson gave us a Belfast accent in The Time Vampire along with John Leeson's Dutch accent. I understand and accept the arguments against "blackface" in a visual medium, but I really don't see why or how they apply in a non-visual medium. Nor do I see why in a non-visual medium it is deemed ok for actors to put on an accent if the accent is for a character with the same skin colour as the actor, but deemed not ok for them to put on an accent for a character with a different skin colour.
|
|
|
Post by TinDogPodcast on Jun 30, 2020 12:01:48 GMT
1 I'm gutted this wont be out today. I wanted to listen on the treadmill.
2. I've been putting of walking for says so I could listen.
3. My money is on a backlog of physical media available to actually produce the physical versions.
4. I trust the writers not to shy away from how problematic h p l is in real life. But also to provide a cracking tale.
I'm sure we will get it one day.
|
|
|
Post by cwm on Jun 30, 2020 12:06:11 GMT
3. My money is on a backlog of physical media available to actually produce the physical versions. That doesn't make any sense, though. BF have been unable to send out CDs for months and downloads have still been coming out. There is still a delay whilst they clear the backlog, none of May or June's physical releases have been dispatched yet. Stranded and the Steed & Peel set were released in the last fortnight, so what could have changed since then? Whenever there has been a delay to the CD release before the download has still come out. It is hard to escape the conclusion that real-world events are what prompted the delay, and BF really need to be more transparent about it rather than trying to do it as quietly as possible.
|
|
|
Post by aussiedoctorwhofan on Jun 30, 2020 12:23:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by TinDogPodcast on Jun 30, 2020 13:14:49 GMT
3. My money is on a backlog of physical media available to actually produce the physical versions. That doesn't make any sense, though. BF have been unable to send out CDs for months and downloads have still been coming out. There is still a delay whilst they clear the backlog, none of May or June's physical releases have been dispatched yet. Stranded and the Steed & Peel set were released in the last fortnight, so what could have changed since then? Whenever there has been a delay to the CD release before the download has still come out. It is hard to escape the conclusion that real-world events are what prompted the delay, and BF really need to be more transparent about it rather than trying to do it as quietly as possible. Why? We are just customers. We are not their friends. Transparency could cause newspaper attraction and all sorts of nastiness. If they are hiding. I font blame them for a second
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 14:01:09 GMT
Why? We are just customers. We are not their friends. Transparency could cause newspaper attraction and all sorts of nastiness. If they are hiding. I font blame them for a second But paying customers should be kept informed about the product they have bought, as soon as possible. Not just left hanging around until a vague excuse is quietly slipped out. The delay doesn’t bother me, the brushing it under the carpet approach does.
|
|
|
Post by number13 on Jun 30, 2020 14:19:49 GMT
I've been surprised (in a good way) that no one is really taking issue with the delay itself. Just with BF's usual utter inability to deal with bad news in any sort of competent manner. Good for us. That doesn't mean we don't have issues with the delay. I do, most definitely.
Assuming this isn't simply a technical delay, I have lost a lot of respect for whoever is responsible and I hope it wasn't BF.
But it's a fait accompli so what's the point of me getting all 'outraged' about it? I'm several decades too old to enjoy the fashion for online 'outrage'.
|
|
|
Post by elkawho on Jun 30, 2020 14:30:34 GMT
I'm also more frustraded with BF's handling of the bad news than with the delay, although I was really eager to listen to this episode in particular. I'm constantly amazed by how BF is seemingly afraid of disappointing us and making things worse by pretending nothing happened. I'd have been satisfied with a more transparent explanation even if I can also understand they can't get into too much details. A "we can't release it right now and we're sorry about that" would have been better than what we got. We're currently in a climate where 'shades of grey' no longer exist. I wanted to hear this release to hear how the writer handled Lovecraft. We've had controversial figures before in Doctor Who including Churchill, Mary Queen of Scots, Cromwell, Nixon, Thatcher, etc. All people who have controversial places in history. Understanding them is part of what makes us who we are. Understanding is not the same as liking/disliking them or approving/disapproving of them. In terms of the show I don't always agree with the Doctor, which is what makes it interesting! It actually offends me that the possibility of this story being postponed because Big Finish might be accused of being racist, or the story showing a racist individual in a positive light might in someway make people believe that racism is okay. It's just one aspect of anyone's personality. I'm sure there are many people all 'over the world' who have prejudices yet have done good things too. I recently read a book called The Brother whose most sympathetic character was the young jihadi soldier. Like I say I like stuff that throws different light onto someone or a piece of history. It doesn't mean I approve, it just means I understand a little bit more. I think the arguments against some shows and the fact that some actors are getting forced out of parts they've played for years is getting uglier by the day. I don't have a problem with white people voicing black roles or black people voicing white roles, women voicing male roles (often done if a boy is one of the characters), men voicing female roles - Sacha Dhawan played Matthew in a radio adaptation of Chocky and he was wonderful. It's called acting, it's made up, it's supposed to be fun, engaging and thought provoking. As an aside would you expect Rebecca Root to only play transwomen? Would she be allowed to cis-females or would that be wrong because she'd be taking a role from a cis-female? Equally so would she be allowed to play a male role without any controversy. My answer is a wholehearted yes to both of those questions. Of course, in any case, it would depend on the performance. You wouldn't cast anyone to play any role if they couldn't do it justice or play it from the heart. Going back to the original point, playing someone like Lovecraft could be an actors dream, to get under the skin of someone who they may not like, to have try and think the way they thought, to understand. This! So much this! I agree with every word. And yes, I was also really looking forward to this one. Valentine is one of the new BF writers that has really been superb.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 14:53:32 GMT
We're currently in a climate where 'shades of grey' no longer exist. I wanted to hear this release to hear how the writer handled Lovecraft. We've had controversial figures before in Doctor Who including Churchill, Mary Queen of Scots, Cromwell, Nixon, Thatcher, etc. All people who have controversial places in history. Understanding them is part of what makes us who we are. Understanding is not the same as liking/disliking them or approving/disapproving of them. In terms of the show I don't always agree with the Doctor, which is what makes it interesting! It actually offends me that the possibility of this story being postponed because Big Finish might be accused of being racist, or the story showing a racist individual in a positive light might in someway make people believe that racism is okay. It's just one aspect of anyone's personality. I'm sure there are many people all 'over the world' who have prejudices yet have done good things too. I recently read a book called The Brother whose most sympathetic character was the young jihadi soldier. Like I say I like stuff that throws different light onto someone or a piece of history. It doesn't mean I approve, it just means I understand a little bit more. I think the arguments against some shows and the fact that some actors are getting forced out of parts they've played for years is getting uglier by the day. I don't have a problem with white people voicing black roles or black people voicing white roles, women voicing male roles (often done if a boy is one of the characters), men voicing female roles - Sacha Dhawan played Matthew in a radio adaptation of Chocky and he was wonderful. It's called acting, it's made up, it's supposed to be fun, engaging and thought provoking. As an aside would you expect Rebecca Root to only play transwomen? Would she be allowed to cis-females or would that be wrong because she'd be taking a role from a cis-female? Equally so would she be allowed to play a male role without any controversy. My answer is a wholehearted yes to both of those questions. Of course, in any case, it would depend on the performance. You wouldn't cast anyone to play any role if they couldn't do it justice or play it from the heart. Going back to the original point, playing someone like Lovecraft could be an actors dream, to get under the skin of someone who they may not like, to have try and think the way they thought, to understand. This! So much this! I agree with every word. And yes, I was also really looking forward to this one. Valentine is one of the new BF writers that has really been superb. Agree with both of these posts. It's a real shame that this story, which promised/promises great things (Old Sixie meeting one of the greatest and most influential horror writers of our time, whilst acknowledging controversial sides to his personality) has been delayed or possibly put on hiatus forever. A real shame. Of course, it is entirely possible there are production problems that have caused the delay, especially during the current pandemic - but it's a big coincidence if that is the case.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 14:56:02 GMT
Why? We are just customers. We are not their friends. Transparency could cause newspaper attraction and all sorts of nastiness. If they are hiding. I font blame them for a second But paying customers should be kept informed about the product they have bought, as soon as possible. Not just left hanging around until a vague excuse is quietly slipped out. The delay doesn’t bother me, the brushing it under the carpet approach does. While I agree with you in principle, things are delayed often, without as much explanation as Big Finish have given. It doesn't stop such things being generally disappointing, but BF are not unique in this and I do feel the slating they are getting for this is unfair.
|
|
|
Post by newt5996 on Jun 30, 2020 15:25:28 GMT
Yeah there’s got to be something more than a simple production delay: there was a tease for this in the podcast weeks ago, why tease it if it hasn’t been recorded?
|
|
|
Post by newt5996 on Jun 30, 2020 15:27:47 GMT
We're currently in a climate where 'shades of grey' no longer exist. I wanted to hear this release to hear how the writer handled Lovecraft. We've had controversial figures before in Doctor Who including Churchill, Mary Queen of Scots, Cromwell, Nixon, Thatcher, etc. All people who have controversial places in history. Understanding them is part of what makes us who we are. Understanding is not the same as liking/disliking them or approving/disapproving of them. In terms of the show I don't always agree with the Doctor, which is what makes it interesting! It actually offends me that the possibility of this story being postponed because Big Finish might be accused of being racist, or the story showing a racist individual in a positive light might in someway make people believe that racism is okay. It's just one aspect of anyone's personality. I'm sure there are many people all 'over the world' who have prejudices yet have done good things too. I recently read a book called The Brother whose most sympathetic character was the young jihadi soldier. Like I say I like stuff that throws different light onto someone or a piece of history. It doesn't mean I approve, it just means I understand a little bit more. I think the arguments against some shows and the fact that some actors are getting forced out of parts they've played for years is getting uglier by the day. I don't have a problem with white people voicing black roles or black people voicing white roles, women voicing male roles (often done if a boy is one of the characters), men voicing female roles - Sacha Dhawan played Matthew in a radio adaptation of Chocky and he was wonderful. It's called acting, it's made up, it's supposed to be fun, engaging and thought provoking. As an aside would you expect Rebecca Root to only play transwomen? Would she be allowed to cis-females or would that be wrong because she'd be taking a role from a cis-female? Equally so would she be allowed to play a male role without any controversy. My answer is a wholehearted yes to both of those questions. Of course, in any case, it would depend on the performance. You wouldn't cast anyone to play any role if they couldn't do it justice or play it from the heart. Going back to the original point, playing someone like Lovecraft could be an actors dream, to get under the skin of someone who they may not like, to have try and think the way they thought, to understand. This! So much this! I agree with every word. And yes, I was also really looking forward to this one. Valentine is one of the new BF writers that has really been superb. And Valentine’s a massive Lovecraft fan, he only followed me on Twitter once I mentioned liking the author. He clearly understands that Lovecraft wasn’t a good person, but a brilliant writer and I expect the script to reflect that.
|
|
|
Post by grinch on Jun 30, 2020 15:28:56 GMT
Rather seems unlikely, but maybe Lovecraft uses some very blatant racial slurs which they’re having to edit out? Again, I doubt this very, very much considering Doctor Who’s target audience but it’s the only thing I can think of at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by mark687 on Jun 30, 2020 15:40:26 GMT
This! So much this! I agree with every word. And yes, I was also really looking forward to this one. Valentine is one of the new BF writers that has really been superb. And Valentine’s a massive Lovecraft fan, he only followed me on Twitter once I mentioned liking the author. He clearly understands that Lovecraft wasn’t a good person, but a brilliant writer and I expect the script to reflect that. See that's what I don't get this delay may very likely alter or curtail this stated intent, which has to have been approved at the time. Regards mark687
|
|
|
Post by fitzoliverj on Jun 30, 2020 16:41:38 GMT
I suspect there's no production problem whatsoever, and that somebody (probably the BBC) is uncomfortable with releasing it in the current political climate.
|
|
|
Post by ollychops on Jun 30, 2020 16:59:22 GMT
But paying customers should be kept informed about the product they have bought, as soon as possible. Not just left hanging around until a vague excuse is quietly slipped out. The delay doesn’t bother me, the brushing it under the carpet approach does. While I agree with you in principle, things are delayed often, without as much explanation as Big Finish have given. It doesn't stop such things being generally disappointing, but BF are not unique in this and I do feel the slating they are getting for this is unfair. This. At the end of the day, we’re customers and BF is a business. When DVDs/books/CDs/whatever get delayed you don’t typically get a reason, you simply get a new release date, so I’m not sure why it should be different with BF. Yes, they’re a small company and the creatives tend to interact with us, but that does not mean we’re entitled to know all the ins-and-outs of the business side of things. At the end of the day, BF has told us it’s delayed and it’ll be released after summer. That’s all we really need to know.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jun 30, 2020 17:07:23 GMT
Oh now we are floating into entitlement territory. The release isn’t canceled, it is delayed. If it is canceled I have no doubt BF will record something new to takes its place. The vast majority of us sub out the range without knowing what any of the releases are about, which Doctors they feature in which serials and no real knowledge of creative teams. IF the serial is canceled and a person only bought this one, I’m sure a refund will be on the table. It not coming out in June for whatever the reason is at worst a minor inconvenience for all of us. Do I wish BF were more transparent and forthcoming about the reasons for the delay? Yes of course but given the climate of protest and upheaval, I understand their trepidation. Moving this release off a couple of months out of respect for the movement Is not a dumb or unreasonable move on their part but this level of anger or aggravation over us not getting a Doctor Who audio really isn’t a good look. Perspective folks.
|
|