Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2021 23:38:28 GMT
It's been a lot to process. Personally, I was planning on delaying my purchase of Ravagers anyway for budgetary reasons. Too much to buy with too few funds at the moment (Age of Chaos's reissue won out). I'd made that decision long before everything that happened over the past couple weeks. We got the highest highs and the lowest lows, all at once. It's a lot to think about and I don't blame anyone who feels as though the wind's been taken out of their sails. I'll still be getting Ravagers at some point, when money permits, but holy hell...
Kinda glad we're talking about this here, in the context of Ravagers. I didn't mention it in my initial comment of Sphere of Freedom because I figured my hot take on Rose was spicy enough. But to be completely honest? Listening to that first new story with Eccleston kinda pissed me off--at Russel Davies. What we have here, in this inaugural audio adventure, is a really fun story with a phenomenal actor whose take on the Doctor is totally (radically?) different than everything before or since. Eccleston has never been terribly specific about his reasons for leaving the show, but given the recent revelations it's hard not to suspect that RTD was fostering (or at the very least tolerating, which is a distinction without a difference) a pretty goddamned toxic work environment. Obviously there's an enormous debt we all, collectively as a fandom, owe Davies for the revival series. I've alluded to, a couple of times I think, an essay idea I've had percolating in the back of my mind for the past few months on the (honestly kinda profound) genius of interposing the Time War in-between the Classic and New series. But even so--I can't help but think he's a big part of the reason why Eccleston left the show. I honestly don't know, sadly. I can't speak to the state of the production as I wasn't there. I can only comment from what I've seen elsewhere. There was a bit of correspondence back in 2018, which addressed how Eccleston's relationship with his superiors (the producer, co-producer and showrunner) broke down during filming. If you follow the trail back through the articles, Eccleston partially puts it down to a dissolution of trust between both parties and partially because of his own insecurity with the role of the Doctor. He was, in his own words, out of his comfort zone playing the part. Given everything else he was struggling with at the time, his life-long fight against anorexia and body dysmorphia... Yeah. Yeah, I can empathise with the man. Russell T. Davies addressed the article later in an interview he did for SFX Magazine, where he said, more or less, if he was going to respond, it would be in private. Not as a public tit-for-tat for the presses: "What has to be remembered when the show’s being discussed in the present tense, now, is that I was his employer – I was his producer. I have a duty of care towards any lead actor I work with, so I have a duty of care towards Chris in that moment. He’s free to say and explore whatever he wants – that’s fine. This duty of care [that I have] involves respecting him and listening to him at all times. That’s my job. And that duty of care towards him will extend for the rest of our lives. He will always be my Doctor, and I will always be his producer."
And further from Davies: "The thing I’ve got to say is that Chris is a magnificent actor and a magnificent man – he’s truly a leader of men – and he was a magnificent Doctor Who as well. You forget what a brave move it was to take the part on when the press were quoting people like Paul Daniels as the next Doctor. It was a huge leap for Chris to make, and I love what he did. I think his comedy is funny – he plays it brilliantly. I think the darkness is off the scale with him – when the Doctor’s angry, it’s spectacular. It’s a magnificent, never-to-be forgotten Doctor, and it was an honour to work with an actor delivering a performance like that."
Again, I don't know. It just doesn't seem to fit Davies's behaviour. Without him, we likely wouldn't still have Big Finish. The BBC would've come down on them in the mid-2000s as they'd intended and that would've been that. Instead, he went "No, I'll take care of it," and they've been chuffing along ever since (with a few tips of the hat in his writing to things like The Apocalpyse Element, Spare Parts, etc.). And given how self-contained and accessible he wanted (and the BBC charter required, apparently) to make that initial first series -- enough that he turned down Nine's original regeneration from Eight in the DWM comics he often took inspiration from (time locks? look no further than The Dogs of Doom) -- that strikes me as having respect for content creators beyond his own wants or even needs. I get the impression the working conditions may have been down to a mix of some awful choices by co-stars, BBC politicking, personal strife, and producers whose focus had to be on every aspect all the time (although that said, Julie Gardner did issue the reprimand). On a show where the pressure was so high to succeed with so small a margin for success 1. We take it for granted now, but Doctor Who as a television series had been dead for 16 years. Efforts had been made to return it 1993, 1996, 2003... 2005/6 could've easily been the same. It could've perished after Parting of the Ways and that would've been that. There was even more riding on it for Eccleston, personally, as he contacted Davies for an audition. Not the other way around. He'd worked with him before on Second Coming and had a good working relationship there (good enough to be sought out). I think it's a testament to Eccleston's performance and his commitment that after one series, the Ninth Doctor feels extremely well-explored. In thirteen episodes, it felt like we got to see every aspect of him. All the highs and lows of the character. Enough that he feels as richly developed as his successor, David Tennant, who had five years after him. The change from 2018 to 2019 to now, makes me think that maybe life got a bit better for him as a person, too. It's why I mention how he lights up, happily, when getting to talk about revisiting the role. From all that grief, strife, and pressure over the proceeding years... He made the right decision. He's vindicated. And, hopefully, like Colin Baker before him, Ravagers is the start of something good. ( 1 - Speaking after Series 1's production, the wider BBC also badly mishandled his reasons for departure by issuing a press statement that wasn't verified with him. They since issued an apology and Eccleston felt comfortable dropping it.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2021 4:03:42 GMT
Of course, it's up to the individual as to whether these things matter, but there's a crushing review on Facebook's Big Finish Audio Greoup, in which words and phrases like 'rejected first draft of an unsolicited fanboy script', 'no character, no story, no heart', and 'Doctor Who written-by-numbers'and 'Anyone can do it' are bandied about. The comments pretty much agree too. I mention this because, well, I'm wondering if Nick will have something to say ... ?
|
|
|
Post by theillusiveman on May 16, 2021 4:23:12 GMT
Of course, it's up to the individual as to whether these things matter, but there's a crushing review on Facebook's Big Finish Audio Greoup, in which words and phrases like 'rejected first draft of an unsolicited fanboy script', 'no character, no story, no heart', and 'Doctor Who written-by-numbers' are used. Anyone can do it' are bandied about. The comments pretty much agree too. I mention this because, well, I'm wondering if Nick will have something to say ... ? Oof that’s harsh I mean the story is generic and forgettable but not the worst thing ever Then agian I can’t even remember most of the story and Ecclestons performance was noteworthy
|
|
|
Post by timegirl on May 16, 2021 4:24:19 GMT
Of course, it's up to the individual as to whether these things matter, but there's a crushing review on Facebook's Big Finish Audio Greoup, in which words and phrases like 'rejected first draft of an unsolicited fanboy script', 'no character, no story, no heart', and 'Doctor Who written-by-numbers' are used. Anyone can do it' are bandied about. The comments pretty much agree too. I mention this because, well, I'm wondering if Nick will have something to say ... ? I hope Nick Briggs doesn’t see that review! I definitely see where the reviewer is coming from, the story did have lots of problems, but there is a far kinder way to word those criticisms if it is a platform where Nick, the author might see it. As someone who is very rejection sensitive I do emphasize slightly with Nick Briggs negative reactions to criticism of his work. If I ever am lucky enough to write for BF one day, I don’t think I could look at any reviews of my work at all. Any even mildly negative review would likely make me extremely upset and I would probably have difficulty controlling my emotional response. Perhaps Nick Briggs is also very rejection sensitive? Maybe he should just avoid looking at reviews all together?
|
|
|
Post by shallacatop on May 16, 2021 9:32:00 GMT
Nick made a Facebook post thanking everyone who made the launch of the Ninth Doctor at Big Finish happen and so successful and warmly received. Someone commented to say it was “quite a solid release, characterisation feels a bit odd for 9 being so upbeat in contrast to how he was in Rose”, to which Nick replied “He had many upbeat moments. And who wants a return of the Ninth Doctor where he's depressed all the time? That said, I did write something like that to start with, but no one liked it.”. I think the exchange is a bit from one extreme to the other really. For me he shouldn’t be quite as upbeat as he is in the set, nor as depressed as Nick seems to think. Anyway, I thought it was interesting that there was consideration for something different, and, dare I say, something perhaps a bit more faithful. /?d=n
|
|
|
Post by project37 on May 16, 2021 9:40:22 GMT
The more I reflect on it, the less I like it. Things like the shy gay prison guard and the Doctor's half-baked speech about being kind (even Audrey told him to knock it off) didn't resonate as much as they wanted to. Those moments felt oddly forced. It's disappointing, because I know people worked hard on the project and are excited about it. It just wasn't for me, despite my going in with enthusiasm. Unless my memory is cheating (and it very well could be), I seem to remember a number of the highly anticipated "event stories" (the Fourth Doctor's debut in Destination: Nerva, the Sixth Doctor's Last Adventure, the 50th anniversary everybody's-in-it Light at the End, the Eighth Doctor box set debut Dark Eyes) all being initially greeted with general glowing praise before slowly giving way to middle-of-the-road reactions. I'd expected to see something similar with Eccleston's debut over time. It's surprising and disappointing to see how briefly this release was able to coast on good will before people started being more vocal about disappointment in the end product.
I agree with timegirl that it's possible to be critical without being cruel. That's something I've come to appreciate more over the years, which is why I now always make the effort to phrase my responses as "this didn't work for *me*" as opposed to stating "this didn't work" as if it were a universal fact. That would be needlessly harsh to the creative team. And I do my best to keep the focus on the work and never the individual.
I'm glad this has its fans and I'm glad there are more on the way. But if this series is wrapping up with another single-author box set "epic finale", then I'll wait to see how it's received first.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2021 10:33:01 GMT
I get where people are coming from with Ravagers as the only problem I have with it is the same one I have with a lot of Big Finish box-sets. These 'event' releases often feel to me like a story stretched to fit the discs and generally I feel the actual story could have been more concise and produced as a 2 x CD release with nothing lost content wise. Dragging things out to fill a box set seems to be the way BF do things now. I think that leads to weak sets that are good but not special. In a few years time we will look back at all those average enough box sets and the only thing that Ravagers will have going for it is that it's Christopher Eccleston's return to the role.
Hearing Christopher Eccleston back was very enjoyable though and Ravagers was a nice return for the Ninth Doctor. I did like Ravagers so I've given it 4/5 in the poll here. It's probably not gonna go down as a Big Finish classic as it's not that outstanding a story but hearing Christopher Eccleston back in action gets it an extra mark...
|
|
|
Post by Chakoteya on May 16, 2021 15:00:58 GMT
Oh dear, I don't like being a Negative Nanny when I'm commenting on a story, but... I'm nearly half way through Cataclysm and I'm already rolling my eyes and going 'Oh, for Zarqon's sake, not another end of the universe dilemma story.' Yes, the acting is good, and some of the dialogue, but it is very NuWho in that a lot is pretty much instantly forgettable. So kudos to Nick for getting the feel of the era just right - meh - and I'll carry on to see how it gets resolved. I just hope it's a better answer than oh, the Tardis/screwdriver picked up your DNA and tracked it through the infinity of time and space to right here, right now. Not any other point in your existence, obviously, because that wouldn't be helpful to the story. Duh.
NOVA: Oh, argh, no. I haven’t got words for what this is. DOCTOR: Sometimes there just aren’t any words.
|
|
|
Post by Andymac on May 16, 2021 16:07:03 GMT
Oh dear, I don't like being a Negative Nanny when I'm commenting on a story, but... I'm nearly half way through Cataclysm and I'm already rolling my eyes and going 'Oh, for Zarqon's sake, not another end of the universe dilemma story.' Yes, the acting is good, and some of the dialogue, but it is very NuWho in that a lot is pretty much instantly forgettable. So kudos to Nick for getting the feel of the era just right - meh - and I'll carry on to see how it gets resolved. I just hope it's a better answer than oh, the Tardis/screwdriver picked up your DNA and tracked it through the infinity of time and space to right here, right now. Not any other point in your existence, obviously, because that wouldn't be helpful to the story. Duh.
NOVA: Oh, argh, no. I haven’t got words for what this is. DOCTOR: Sometimes there just aren’t any words.
The only problem with that spinet of dislodge was that it gave me flashbacks to writing my dissertation. Sometimes there aren't words, sometimes you just can't find more ways of saying the same thing over and over.
|
|
|
Post by Kestrel on May 17, 2021 8:40:34 GMT
I agree with timegirl that it's possible to be critical without being cruel. That's something I've come to appreciate more over the years, which is why I now always make the effort to phrase my responses as "this didn't work for *me*" as opposed to stating "this didn't work" as if it were a universal fact. That would be needlessly harsh to the creative team. And I do my best to keep the focus on the work and never the individual.
Its also very easy to be cruel without meaning to, or for criticism to be read as condemnation. I've had some trouble with this, especially when I was younger, as I tend not to pick up on subtext well (I'm told this is an ASD thing) and have difficulty with communication in general--I once had the (frankly, horrifying) epiphany that people who read a text will inject just as much content into it as the person who wrote the text--conjuring their own implicit messages and implications and themes in-between the lines. Writers have no control over this and taking the time to more carefully and specifically lay out your points can often be counterproductive. Copy-editing can be especially rough, especially w/ hardopies, as they frequently degenerate into a mess of ink that can look very scary, even if most of it is minor punctuation fixes and questions scribbled in the margins. So, yeah. Some helpful tricks I've learned? Definitely focus on yourself. That's good advice. "This doesn't work for me," always lands better than, "this doesn't work." I find it's also generally better to frame responses as questions, than statements, as sometimes we read things incorrectly, and sometimes they're written incorrectly, or a bit of both. I always try to assume there's something wrong with me, before the text, before the writer. I've also found that people are kinda like dogs. Have y'all heard this? That dogs only remember the first and last thing that happens, so for example, if you take a dog to the vet and give them a treat immediately before and after, they'll only remember the treats. Well, we work the same way. Couch criticism in-between praise, and it lands a lot better. I try to always begin and end my comments with praise. (Granted this is all when I'm interacting directly with the writers; I may not necessarily be as careful in informal online contexts like this one, but I hope to do better.)It's also important to remember that writing is really hard--not necessarily the act of doing it, but the anxiety of other people reading--and making judgements on your personality from it. That's especially nerve-wracking with the knowledge that so much of what they read isn't present in the text (which is why I'm not at the other end of the table, for now at least). If I dislike something--and I've had to go over some awful stuff--the only way to know from my response is that I don't end my comments with something to the effect of, "Overall, I really enjoyed it, and with just a bit more work I think you'll have something special here." Also I work with editing and translation, which has some additional complexities--language barriers can make some people more or less likely to take offense, and there's no way to know which way they'll go, so ya' always gotta try and err on the side of caution. Which is all a very long-winded and meandering way of saying: yes, absolutely--taking care to be as kind as possible with criticism is absolutely essential, and kind of requires constant vigilance. It is very easy to forget and be unkind by accident, regardless of intent. And also (I know! I know! I'm sorry! This is the last bit, I promise) negative criticism doesn't really work. If someone thinks you're being mean to them, they're not going to listen to anything you say. Doesn't matter how valid the criticism is, they won't hear it--they'll get defensive and double down. If you want things to get better, be nice!
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on May 17, 2021 11:44:52 GMT
Well this gets a 5 from me, no it isn't the greatest story ever (it is Briggs after all) but Eccleston is "fantastic", this gives his Doctor something different to do than he had during his tv season. Great performances all round & a real enthusiasm shines through.
|
|
|
Post by thelonecenturion on May 17, 2021 12:14:19 GMT
1. Sphere of Freedom - A great first part. Sets up the story nicely, while leaving a suitable few mysteries to be answered in the following episodes. I think the non-linear structure worked really well here, and the character of Nova was great. Hearing Eccleston back after sixteen years was just amazing and he, along with the whole cast, delivers a stellar performance.
2. Cataclysm - Furthers the mystery set up in Sphere of Freedom, without just being a pointless 45 minutes. Once again, the cast were on top form.
3. Food Fight - While a little hard to follow, this ties up all the threads from the first two episodes really nicely. I'm so glad they went down the route they did with Nova's character.
Overall - For me, Ravagers was a complete success. Yes, the story was nothing special, but I don't think it needed to be. Briggs captured the Ninth Doctor excellently, getting his voice right from the beginning. The final episode was quite confusing thou, so a re-listen is definitely in order. Howard Carter's music and Iain Meadows's sound design were, as always, excellent, and the music suite Carter provides is really nice. The story isn't particularly special, but it didn't need to be - it was a re-introduction to the Ninth Doctor and it achieves that perfectly. 8/10.
|
|
|
Post by Who Review on May 17, 2021 12:58:21 GMT
|
|
|
Post by relativetime on May 17, 2021 13:01:17 GMT
This set really reminds me of the first War Doctor box set in a lot of ways. That set too felt like it was taking a more predictable route compared to what I was hoping to get out of a War Doctor range and it too was elevated by the lead actor’s immense talent. It’s certainly a set that’s softened with me as time’s moved on and I have a feeling that’ll be the same for this set.
I agree that this doesn’t really feel like a pre-Rose Ninth Doctor, but honestly that doesn’t really matter to me. If Eccleston is having a great time making these audios, then I could care less how he plays the Doctor so long as it’s still recognizably Nine and still a good performance. I can imagine this is a diverging timeline or something where he never meets Rose or a timeline where he lived on after The Parting of the Ways and that’ll be good enough for me. I mean, the Seventh Doctor’s timeline basically diverges into three branches with Ace, so why not with the other Doctors?
|
|
|
Post by timegirl on May 17, 2021 13:22:19 GMT
This set really reminds me of the first War Doctor box set in a lot of ways. That set too felt like it was taking a more predictable route compared to what I was hoping to get out of a War Doctor range and it too was elevated by the lead actor’s immense talent. It’s certainly a set that’s softened with me as time’s moved on and I have a feeling that’ll be the same for this set. I agree that this doesn’t really feel like a pre-Rose Ninth Doctor, but honestly that doesn’t really matter to me. If Eccleston is having a great time making these audios, then I could care less how he plays the Doctor so long as it’s still recognizably Nine and still a good performance. I can imagine this is a diverging timeline or something where he never meets Rose or a timeline where he lived on after The Parting of the Ways and that’ll be good enough for me. I mean, the Seventh Doctor’s timeline basically diverges into three branches with Ace, so why not with the other Doctors? Ooo I really like your interpretation of this version of 9 being from an alternate timeline from 9 who we see on tv! Head cannon accepted! If we truly don’t get any Rose or mention of Time War with 9 on BF, I wonder where they will take 9’s character development? He was pretty well defined on tv by his trauma from the Time War and his relationship with Rose, so if those aren’t present here BF will need to find something else to ground his character. If Nova is being carried on past this boxset, I hope they do something interesting with the dynamic between 9 and Nova that makes their Doctor/Companion relationship less surface level.
|
|
|
Post by masterdoctor on May 17, 2021 13:36:39 GMT
I tweeted this, but thought I might share it here. This feels like it Nine and Eccelston were apart of Moffat’s era as opposed to RTD. Very much high concept plots and twists, lots of wit and The Doctor is characterized much more like The Doctor Dances than Rose, to me at least. I loved fyi and think the tone is one of those reasons, as it truly feels like something Eccelston and Big Finish thought about and made a conscious difference.
|
|
|
Post by timegirl on May 17, 2021 13:49:47 GMT
I tweeted this, but thought I might share it here. This feels like it Nine and Eccelston were apart of Moffat’s era as opposed to RTD. Very much high concept plots and twists, lots of wit and The Doctor is characterized much more like The Doctor Dances than Rose, to me at least. I loved fyi and think the tone is one of those reasons, as it truly feels like something Eccelston and Big Finish thought about and made a conscious difference. That is an interesting interpretation of this boxset that I had not thought of! Although I do oddly remember thinking that the flirty bit with the psychic paper felt much more like something Moffat would write.
|
|
|
Post by Andymac on May 17, 2021 15:14:14 GMT
I'm not sure the upbeat 9 doesn't fit with pre-Rose, there are stages of grief. We've seen the Doctor at the end of that journey, not the start. He may just be at the denial stage if we use good old Kubler-Ross's model of grief. Denial · Anger · Bargaining · Depression · Acceptance, plenty of that could look upbeat from the outside.
|
|
|
Post by timegirl on May 17, 2021 15:26:08 GMT
I'm not sure the upbeat 9 doesn't fit with pre-Rose, there are stages of grief. We've seen the Doctor at the end of that journey, not the start. He may just be at the denial stage if we use good old Kubler-Ross's model of grief. Denial · Anger · Bargaining · Depression · Acceptance, plenty of that could look upbeat from the outside. That is very true! I wonder if they will build up to 9 grieving over the time War?
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on May 17, 2021 16:01:25 GMT
The Behind the Scenes extra is great, it comes across so strongly how great an actor Eccleston is, how committed to his craft he is & how well thought of he is by his fellow actors. &, in the short moments he does talk about the tv show he is quite candid about some of the personal issues happening during the making of the tv show.
|
|