Quiara
Grade School
Posts: 775
|
Post by Quiara on Apr 23, 2017 9:08:56 GMT -8
Enough people watch that a thread is a good idea, so let's talk Doctor Who.
"Smile" was kind of disjointed (emoji robots! soylent greenhouse! buildings made out of bees!) and contradicts its internal logic (if the building is made of Vardy, why do the emojidroids try to awkwardly chase the protagonists around other than a half-assed attempt at dramatic tension?) which I would forgive if the episode had a strong thematic core to it, but it really does seem like a kitchen sink, only touching on a potentially salient thematic vein in the last three minutes and blissfully booping away rather than address the only interesting point raised in the episode.
So it's amiably aimless in the vein of "The Power of Three" but superior because Capaldi and Mackie are so fun together.
~~~
Real world spoilers: how are we feeling about the speculative thirteenth Doctor? I'm really not familiar with any of the names being floated around sans Ayoade.
|
|
|
Post by Incandescence 112 on Apr 23, 2017 9:38:15 GMT -8
Enough people watch that a thread is a good idea, so let's talk Doctor Who. "Smile" was kind of disjointed (emoji robots! soylent greenhouse! buildings made out of bees!) and contradicts its internal logic (if the building is made of Vardy, why do the emojidroids try to awkwardly chase the protagonists around other than a half-assed attempt at dramatic tension?) which I would forgive if the episode had a strong thematic core to it, but it really does seem like a kitchen sink, only touching on a potentially salient thematic vein in the last three minutes and blissfully booping away rather than address the only interesting point raised in the episode. So it's amiably aimless in the vein of "The Power of Three" but superior because Capaldi and Mackie are so fun together. ~~~ Real world spoilers: how are we feeling about the speculative thirteenth Doctor? I'm really not familiar with any of the names being floated around sans Ayoade. The Doctor/Bill stuff was fantastic. Bill already feels like clearly drawn. Unlike previous Moffat companions, she's there to be a character, not a mystery. The actual story was underdeveloped and rushed, but thankfully the character interactions comprised the majority of the episode, so I really enjoyed it overall. I will give them credit though; any robot that kills you when you don't smile would never have worked with the previous New Who Doctors, considering they grinned like lunatics 95% of the time. Oh, and it was light years better than Frank Cotrell Boyce's previous em.....episode?, "In the Forest of the Night".
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Apr 25, 2017 22:11:12 GMT -8
I have only been watching the series for a few years and have caught some of the repeats of the previous seasons before that. As far as this new season goes I think it has started pretty good. 'Pilot' was a good introductory episode for both the new companion and The Doctor. I enjoyed Bill making pointed comments about the TARDIS and asking 'fan' questions about why and how. The second episode with the robots was a little off. The intro with the two women talking seemed so forced and illogical. Sure it wasn't the best, but seeing Capaldi fake-smile was worth it.
|
|
Quiara
Grade School
Posts: 775
|
Post by Quiara on Jun 3, 2017 15:03:23 GMT -8
So I was just going to comment after seeing "Extremis" that it was giving me some "Power of Three" vibes with its being 45 minutes of likable set-up marred by not having any... endpoints, or role beyond being setup. So I waltzed into this month-old thread and what does the first comment say, but So it's amiably aimless in the vein of "The Power of Three" but superior because Capaldi and Mackie are so fun together. Ok, so as far as episodes to emulate with your final season go, "The Power of Three" is a pretty bad choice. But you know what? I can watch Pearl Mackie in anything. She's fantastic.
|
|
|
Post by Incandescence 112 on Jun 3, 2017 15:14:11 GMT -8
So I was just going to comment after seeing "Extremis" that it was giving me some "Power of Three" vibes with its being 45 minutes of likable set-up marred by not having any... endpoints, or role beyond being setup. So I waltzed into this month-old thread and what does the first comment say, but So it's amiably aimless in the vein of "The Power of Three" but superior because Capaldi and Mackie are so fun together. Ok, so as far as episodes to emulate with your final season go, "The Power of Three" is a pretty bad choice. But you know what? I can watch Pearl Mackie in anything. She's fantastic. Actually I enjoyed parts of "The Power of Three" too. Just not anything connected to the main plot. I see what you're saying though. Lots of the episodes have been carried by that dynamic, with shrug-worthy plot resolutions. The two exceptions are "Thin Ice" and "Oxygen". Luckily the two leads have make a fantastic duo, so all the episodes are at least watchable. The three parter has been interesting so far but I think my opinion of it will be determined by "The Lie of the Land".
|
|
Quiara
Grade School
Posts: 775
|
Post by Quiara on Jun 9, 2017 20:00:50 GMT -8
Oh, that hilarious Toby Whithouse! You see, back in December the media was talking about "fake news," so the Doctor says "fake news!" Such insight on politics. Very topical. What is this, Supergirl?|
But I suppose it confirms something odd about Series 10, which is that despite being Moffat's last season it seems curiously interested in replicating... RTD-era Doctor Who? Lots of little easter eggs ("Knock Knock" namechecks Harriet Jones, "The Lie of the Land" gives a shout-out to Magpie Electronics) but also entire episodes that hearken back to Davies's pet tropes and ground axes. Flippant one-off where the Doctor is introduced to the companion? Crude political satire based around the Doctor's attempts to prevent world war three? (And heck, Extreme-Pyramid-Land owes a far more obvious debt to Series 3's ending triptych...)
Is this a more organic way to bring Moffat's run on Who full circle?
|
|
|
Post by Incandescence 112 on Jun 10, 2017 12:43:04 GMT -8
Oh, that hilarious Toby Whithouse! You see, back in December the media was talking about "fake news," so the Doctor says "fake news!" Such insight on politics. Very topical. What is this, Supergirl?| But I suppose it confirms something odd about Series 10, which is that despite being Moffat's last season it seems curiously interested in replicating... RTD-era Doctor Who? Lots of little easter eggs ("Knock Knock" namechecks Harriet Jones, "The Lie of the Land" gives a shout-out to Magpie Electronics) but also entire episodes that hearken back to Davies's pet tropes and ground axes. Flippant one-off where the Doctor is introduced to the companion? Crude political satire based around the Doctor's attempts to prevent world war three? (And heck, Extreme-Pyramid-Land owes a far more obvious debt to Series 3's ending triptych...) Is this a more organic way to bring Moffat's run on Who full circle? Oh, you have no idea. Supergirl's worse. At some point in the season the female president tells the citizens of National City to stand up against people who want to "make the world great again". Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuubtletyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy! Who needs it?
|
|
|
Doctor Who
Jun 10, 2017 22:03:46 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by ThirdMan on Jun 10, 2017 22:03:46 GMT -8
Plenty of shows have played on that phrase. And quite frankly, it's such an idiotic slogan, that I don't mind them sledgehammering him with mockery again and again.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jun 11, 2017 7:07:35 GMT -8
You could probably make a laundry list of current political topics that Supergirl skewered this season. I don't think any other show does it quite so often.
(And yet Kara and Mon-El's dads both voted for Trump.)
|
|
|
Post by Zarnium on Jun 11, 2017 8:09:34 GMT -8
If you'll allow me to go on a bit of a tangent, one of Babylon 5's ongoing storylines is that back on Earth, there's an increasing amount of xenophobic anti-alien/anti-immigration sentiment which feeds into a gradual slide towards authoritarian rule. Given that the show was made in the nineties, this brings up two important points; one, that the issues we're dealing with now were with us long before Trump and will still be with us long after he's gone, and two, more practically speaking, since Babylon 5 never referenced or built its stories specifically around contemporary events, its themes and lessons are timeless and will still have staying power for many years to come.
I say this because current TV being blatantly referential and reactionary towards current events is not really addressing the broader problem, and the references will also feel very dated before too long.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jun 11, 2017 13:32:42 GMT -8
Nearly every time I rewatch a West Wing episode these days, I start to notice some (obviously unintentional) connections to current events. I think this is just a side effect of the way current events have been so all-encompassing in recent months.
I do wish Supergirl and other current shows were less facile in their political commentary. At a certain point, it just feels like writer catharsis.
|
|
Quiara
Grade School
Posts: 775
|
Post by Quiara on Jun 11, 2017 13:45:55 GMT -8
Nearly every time I rewatch a West Wing episode these days, I start to notice some (obviously unintentional) connections to current events. I think this is just a side effect of the way current events have been so all-encompassing in recent months. I do wish Supergirl and other current shows were less facile in their political commentary. At a certain point, it just feels like writer catharsis. I think maybe the worst thing about the Trump administration might be the depths to which satire has fallen. Joss Whedon used to do great political satire... have you looked at his Twitter recently? (Don't look at his Twitter recently.) Stephen Colbert's infamous cock-holster ""joke"" would have been merely gross if it wasn't coming from someone who a decade ago produced maybe the best satire of the 2000's.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Jun 11, 2017 14:18:22 GMT -8
I didn't realize Joss was back on Twitter. I know he signed off a while back when he was getting grief over the Black Widow stuff in Age of Ultron.
I just think there's so much anger and frustration that you have such an incompetent, immature, morally bankrupt idiot running things, that people almost can't be bothered to be clever about it anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jun 11, 2017 14:28:31 GMT -8
I stopped looking at Joss' Twitter feed months ago. Awful stuff. I also stopped watching Colbert a few months back - he no longer even tries to be funny. (And yet his show is currently the highest-rated in late night. Sigh.) There are still a few late-night comedians who remain funny and on-point (Oliver, Kimmel, and occasionally Fallon), but too many of them are mean-spirited and only feed into more conflict. Which, of course, the studio audiences love. I didn't realize Joss was back on Twitter. I know he signed off a while back when he was getting grief over the Black Widow stuff in Age of Ultron. He rejoined back in September to promote his "Save the Day" Super-PAC. He made about a dozen political ads explaining that it's very, very important for every American to get out and vote (as long as they vote for Clinton). He's been in a really awful mood since Election Day.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Jun 11, 2017 15:22:39 GMT -8
Hmmm...I thought Colbert wasn't doing very well in the ratings, and that Fallon was well ahead of the pack in that regard. Did Colbert's ratings spike after the controversy over the "c**k holster" comment?
|
|