I understand entirely that is the point that is being made. But I would suggest if you looked at other episodes you would see it is not unusual for straight characters to state and state again that they are heterosexual or in a heterosexual marriage/relationship.
Jackie Tyler did it. Rose did it. Martha did. Amy and Rory did little else. For goodness sake, Donna's first episode was all about her marriage to a man! And yet, did we have thread after thread dedicated to discussing how they were 'over emphasising' their heterosexuality? Funnily enough, no we didn't.
You're (deliberately?) missing the point completely. Think you are making some lousy comparisons to unsuccessfully support your agenda but there you go.
I voted average. It seemed like a 45 minute episode stretched out to over an hour.
The villains were a bit of a damp squib, I didn't really sense any threat from them, though I did like the reference to the girl in the fireplace (a much better episode).
Capaldi was pretty good, not great but then the episode wasn't. I think he has great potential and I'm probably going to like him (Matt Smith started to grate on me towards the end of his tenure so Capaldi is a welcome change).
Also, the show could lose Vastra and co as far as I'm concerned. They are such one dimensional characters and don't really seem to add much.
Dr Who might be victim of its own advertising.
To put in perspective,overnight ratings were low (6.8 million/32% share), less than an average night for "Call the Midwife".
There was too much anxious "messaging" going on in the writing,polemics about age-ism and same sex marriage. It almost became a social tract at times,instead of drama.That tone suggested a lack of confidence in itself as itself, emphasized by the need to bring Matt in as a reinforcement cameo.
It didnt appeal to the younger members of my family who were watching.It was too "wordy" for them and they lost interest.
The acting of capaldi was superb, but sometimes the episode felt like a demonstration tape for "good acting". Clara also became a role to demonstrate "acting skills".
The episode focused on trying to "prove itself" instead of telling a good tale. I didnt feel close to it in anyway and it didnt mean anything to me.I didnt feel personally engaged.It was trying too hard to be something when in fact it already is something and doesnt have to prove anything....so,all in all,for me it fell apart. It just didnt hold my attention,which i would expect for a first episode after such a long absence.
It was important to the storyline. Vastra was explaining why she had to pretend Jenny was her maid, as homosexuality would have been "a big issue" in Victorian times and it still is in many countries today. Brilliant work by Moffat. Besides, their banter could have just as easily been done with a straight couple, if there was a straight married couple in Doctor Who.
Again, most of us got the bit about the maid without it having to be spelt out yet again. And absolutely nothing to do with the plot (not that there was much of a plot anyway).
Now I remember why I stopped coming on here - so much constant negativity!
Anyway, I really enjoyed the episode on the whole. There were some really good moments - the scenes in the restaurant were fantastic. And when the Doctor abandoned Clara! The phone call from 11 was a really lovely touch, convincing Clara to stay and give 12 a chance. To the people wondering why Clara had trouble accepting 12 when she had seen all his other regenerations already - surely this is because 11 was *her* Doctor, the man she travelled with. She didn't travel with all the other Doctors, hence why it was hard for her to accept this much older and different guy as her new travelling partner. ^_^
Not more "palatable" but more natural. Also, I don't get why you are supporting a gay inter species relationship. Whatever way you look at it, inter species relationships are not generally acceptable (as I mentioned before the crime of bestiality) and are considered abnormal. So by promoting a lesbian relationship between two different species what Moffat is effectively doing is linking being gay to being abnormal. So I don't see how that is a good depiction of gay people in anyway whatsoever.
The 'interspecies' element seems something of a red herring for me.
It seems to me that the forum members complaining about Vastra and Jenny are the same people who complained about RTD's 'Gay agenda' for five whole years, and who picked holes in the 'Gay references' in episodes like The Unicorn and the Wasp or Gridlock.
They are the same forum members who went on to complain when Moffat included Gay characters in episodes like A Good Man Goes to War. They are the same forum member who spoke out on the thread about Sarah Jane's son, Luke, returning as a Gay character if The Sarah Jane Adventures had continued.
So I don't agree with your concerns about the 'interspecies' issue or agree that is the reason people on this forum are in such a tizzy about the Vastra and Jenny.
You're (deliberately?) missing the point completely. Think you are making some lousy comparisons to unsuccessfully support your agenda but there you go.
No I'm not missing the point at all. I'm just waiting for someone who is attacking Vastra and Jenny to make a valid point not backed by a homophobic agenda.
Its ironic that a large part of the debate on sites is about "sexuality" in the episode, since it spent so much time trying desperately hard to emphasise there is no sexuality between doctor and companion, that its now platonic.
To me the discrimination is the programme making such a big issue of it by the constant need to mention it. The programme doesn't do the same for hetrosexual relationships, so, in my view, it is giving the impression that homosexual ones are out of the ordinary by highlighting it so much.
It is NECESSARY for contemporary mainstream flagship entertainment to get people used to the simple fact that women can have a wife and men can have a husband.
And all the uncomfortable forum members here clearly underline just how necessary it is.
It's about amending the balance after decades of false invisibility.
Not more "palatable" but more natural. Also, I don't get why you are supporting a gay inter species relationship. Whatever way you look at it, inter species relationships are not generally acceptable (as I mentioned before the crime of bestiality) and are considered abnormal. So by promoting a lesbian relationship between two different species what Moffat is effectively doing is linking being gay to being abnormal. So I don't see how that is a good depiction of gay people in anyway whatsoever.
You make some very good points. However, 'inter-species' relationships are a staple of sci-fi in general (Star Trek alone abounds with examples) and the alien partner is never regarded as an animal (which is the definition of bestiality). So while I can accept that linking the show's sole gay relationship to a real-life abnormality is a bad thing, in the wider fictional world of sci-fi where aliens exist and such multi-species relationships abound, it's not nearly so abnormal - even commonplace.
Didn't Jack Harkness say the human race went out into the galaxy and 'danced' with plenty of other races? That implies it's not such an odd notion in the Doctor Who future, and we know that Vastra and Jenny have travelled to the future on at least one occasion (and may well have been married there).
I think the point is, in a fictional setting, it's two adult, sentient people in love, regardless of gender or race. That's not a bad message to put across, even if it did seem very heavy-handed last night.
Thought Capaldi had a strong start, will take a while to get used to the less eccentric nature of his Doctor, but it took a while to get used to Matt Smith after Tennant left. From what I saw last night, I think a couple of episodes in and I'll have adjusted. I like what I saw and I think potentially he's going to be a very good Doctor.
As for the episode itself, it was okay, did enjoy it but didn't think it was a strong episode to start off with. The pacing was better but it was still a bit slow at times. However, it was far better than some of the episodes from previous Series. Really pleased Jenna Coleman had a bigger role in this episode as feel she had been overshadowed in the 50th anniversary story and Matt Smith naturally took centre stage in Time And The Doctor.
I really don't get why Matt Smith's appearance was such a 'shock' as it was in the papers months ago he was going to appear. It was weird seeing him back, a very bold step by Moffat I thought to have the previous Doctor back in his successor's first episode. Just hope it doesn't become a trend with future Doctors though!
I think the point is, in a fictional setting, it's two adult, sentient people in love, regardless of gender or race. That's not a bad message to put across, even if it did seem very heavy-handed last night.
Its ironic that a large part of the debate on sites is about "sexuality" in the episode, since it spent so much time trying desperately hard to emphasise there is no sexuality between doctor and companion, that its now platonic.
Well lesbian reptile sex is one thing, but an old(ish) man hitting on a much younger woman is just gross...
Let's be honest, this episode was better than the 50th special.
Errrrrr no. But it was better then the Christmas special mind. Imho of course! ;-)
As many have said, a 45 minute story stretched out to over an hour, which affected the pace.
Capaldi was of course excellent, plus Jenna put in a fine performance...
It was an ok story. Not a disaster, and not a triumph.... 3/5.
Next weeks story is much better, and the Robin Hood story is the best story Gatiss has written for 'Nu-Who' [imho] So i'm happy with the way the show is going atm.
Well lesbian reptile sex is one thing, but an old(ish) man hitting on a much younger woman is just gross...
Can you really call it "lesbian" anyway ? If my dog jumps up and licks my face is he being homosexual ? It's more inter-species than same gender, which I suppose should be more shocking.
I thought it was pretty good after a shaky start. With the hyperactive Capaldi I couldn't shake off Malcolm Tucker. And I thought it was maybe going to be one of those phoned in episodes where nothing much happened other than faffing around with the dinosaur and getting it home again.
People have commented negatively about the polemic with the ageism - but I think Capaldi is so noticeably older than recent Doctors, that I think it needed some addressing or it would have been the elephant in the room. So in the end I think they did a pretty good job, and the call from Smith at the end was a nice touch.
I think it all just helps the audience understand a bit about what Clara accepts the new Doctor, and creates a new dynamic between them, rather than us just seeing her carry on as if nothing had changed.
By any standards, that is a poor comparison. Left handed people were never attacked in the streets, put in prison, locked up in mental asylums or executed simple for being left handed.
Marriage equality is a massive step forward for this country and having that reflected positively in a modern, family TV show like Doctor Who is wonderful (even if one half of that couple is a lizard lady from the dawn of time).
But my response was to how we expect people to be treated, not how they were in the past. Equality will have arrived when sexual orientation is no more an issue to be treated in drama than handedness is today.
And as for inter-species relationships, hardly an episode of Star Trek went by without James T Kirk becoming embroiled in something similar.
No, no, no, no, no. You wouldn't get a straight couple referring to their marriage in every single scene they were in, especially if the scene actually had nothing whatsoever to do with their marriage. The inclusion of gay relationships in mainstream TV should really be done in a way directly comparable with straight relationships. It really is risible stuff, almost as bad as Moffat's 'hoots un toots och aye ahoy!' drivel about being Scottish. Yeah, we know Moffat. Get over it.
You just don't see that in Dr Who though do you?
I find the shoe-horned in sexuality bizarre in a show that's supposed to be a family show. Although clearly it isn't any more.
This series is going to crash and burn, I can feel it.
I agree. I have no issue whatsoever with having gay themes in any mainstream show that would also include heterosexual theme. But if they feel 'shoe-horned in', as they do so often with 'Doctor Who', then it just tends to stand out like a sore thumb.
Thanks guys this x 1000.
Maybe I'm not good at explaining my point of view, I have NO problem with gay themes in tv progs my point is this is aimed at young children upwards, to me it is fine in a show like torchwood aimed at more mature viewers.
And the fact they kept repeating 'we're married' na-nana-na-na like they were banging us over the head with the thick book of PC acceptence pissed me off.
Hopefully they will tone it down in the future otherwise I will switch off.
Best bit for me was the concept of "veiling", that we look at people through a veil of our own making. That was good writing and really caught my attention because it made me question my own behaviour. It made me want to know more about the writers thinking behind it.
Why do people have such an issue with a Lizzard woman from the dawn of time being married to a hot human female, personally if I were in her shoes I would do the same.:D
Comments
You're (deliberately?) missing the point completely. Think you are making some lousy comparisons to unsuccessfully support your agenda but there you go.
The villains were a bit of a damp squib, I didn't really sense any threat from them, though I did like the reference to the girl in the fireplace (a much better episode).
Capaldi was pretty good, not great but then the episode wasn't. I think he has great potential and I'm probably going to like him (Matt Smith started to grate on me towards the end of his tenure so Capaldi is a welcome change).
Also, the show could lose Vastra and co as far as I'm concerned. They are such one dimensional characters and don't really seem to add much.
To put in perspective,overnight ratings were low (6.8 million/32% share), less than an average night for "Call the Midwife".
There was too much anxious "messaging" going on in the writing,polemics about age-ism and same sex marriage. It almost became a social tract at times,instead of drama.That tone suggested a lack of confidence in itself as itself, emphasized by the need to bring Matt in as a reinforcement cameo.
It didnt appeal to the younger members of my family who were watching.It was too "wordy" for them and they lost interest.
The acting of capaldi was superb, but sometimes the episode felt like a demonstration tape for "good acting". Clara also became a role to demonstrate "acting skills".
The episode focused on trying to "prove itself" instead of telling a good tale. I didnt feel close to it in anyway and it didnt mean anything to me.I didnt feel personally engaged.It was trying too hard to be something when in fact it already is something and doesnt have to prove anything....so,all in all,for me it fell apart. It just didnt hold my attention,which i would expect for a first episode after such a long absence.
Again, most of us got the bit about the maid without it having to be spelt out yet again. And absolutely nothing to do with the plot (not that there was much of a plot anyway).
Anyway, I really enjoyed the episode on the whole. There were some really good moments - the scenes in the restaurant were fantastic.
The 'interspecies' element seems something of a red herring for me.
It seems to me that the forum members complaining about Vastra and Jenny are the same people who complained about RTD's 'Gay agenda' for five whole years, and who picked holes in the 'Gay references' in episodes like The Unicorn and the Wasp or Gridlock.
They are the same forum members who went on to complain when Moffat included Gay characters in episodes like A Good Man Goes to War. They are the same forum member who spoke out on the thread about Sarah Jane's son, Luke, returning as a Gay character if The Sarah Jane Adventures had continued.
So I don't agree with your concerns about the 'interspecies' issue or agree that is the reason people on this forum are in such a tizzy about the Vastra and Jenny.
No I'm not missing the point at all. I'm just waiting for someone who is attacking Vastra and Jenny to make a valid point not backed by a homophobic agenda.
It is NECESSARY for contemporary mainstream flagship entertainment to get people used to the simple fact that women can have a wife and men can have a husband.
And all the uncomfortable forum members here clearly underline just how necessary it is.
It's about amending the balance after decades of false invisibility.
You make some very good points. However, 'inter-species' relationships are a staple of sci-fi in general (Star Trek alone abounds with examples) and the alien partner is never regarded as an animal (which is the definition of bestiality). So while I can accept that linking the show's sole gay relationship to a real-life abnormality is a bad thing, in the wider fictional world of sci-fi where aliens exist and such multi-species relationships abound, it's not nearly so abnormal - even commonplace.
Didn't Jack Harkness say the human race went out into the galaxy and 'danced' with plenty of other races? That implies it's not such an odd notion in the Doctor Who future, and we know that Vastra and Jenny have travelled to the future on at least one occasion (and may well have been married there).
I think the point is, in a fictional setting, it's two adult, sentient people in love, regardless of gender or race. That's not a bad message to put across, even if it did seem very heavy-handed last night.
As for the episode itself, it was okay, did enjoy it but didn't think it was a strong episode to start off with. The pacing was better but it was still a bit slow at times. However, it was far better than some of the episodes from previous Series. Really pleased Jenna Coleman had a bigger role in this episode as feel she had been overshadowed in the 50th anniversary story and Matt Smith naturally took centre stage in Time And The Doctor.
I really don't get why Matt Smith's appearance was such a 'shock' as it was in the papers months ago he was going to appear. It was weird seeing him back, a very bold step by Moffat I thought to have the previous Doctor back in his successor's first episode. Just hope it doesn't become a trend with future Doctors though!
Very eloquently put. Thank you.
Well lesbian reptile sex is one thing, but an old(ish) man hitting on a much younger woman is just gross...
Errrrrr no. But it was better then the Christmas special mind. Imho of course! ;-)
As many have said, a 45 minute story stretched out to over an hour, which affected the pace.
Capaldi was of course excellent, plus Jenna put in a fine performance...
It was an ok story. Not a disaster, and not a triumph.... 3/5.
Next weeks story is much better, and the Robin Hood story is the best story Gatiss has written for 'Nu-Who' [imho] So i'm happy with the way the show is going atm.
Oh, Clara will be fine. She's a lovely hot boyfriend on the way very soon.
Can you really call it "lesbian" anyway ? If my dog jumps up and licks my face is he being homosexual ? It's more inter-species than same gender, which I suppose should be more shocking.
People have commented negatively about the polemic with the ageism - but I think Capaldi is so noticeably older than recent Doctors, that I think it needed some addressing or it would have been the elephant in the room. So in the end I think they did a pretty good job, and the call from Smith at the end was a nice touch.
I think it all just helps the audience understand a bit about what Clara accepts the new Doctor, and creates a new dynamic between them, rather than us just seeing her carry on as if nothing had changed.
Yes and the bbc are keeping the pc brigade happy again.
But my response was to how we expect people to be treated, not how they were in the past. Equality will have arrived when sexual orientation is no more an issue to be treated in drama than handedness is today.
And as for inter-species relationships, hardly an episode of Star Trek went by without James T Kirk becoming embroiled in something similar.
I read a lot about this "brigade".
Who are they exactly?
Thanks guys this x 1000.
Maybe I'm not good at explaining my point of view, I have NO problem with gay themes in tv progs my point is this is aimed at young children upwards, to me it is fine in a show like torchwood aimed at more mature viewers.
And the fact they kept repeating 'we're married' na-nana-na-na like they were banging us over the head with the thick book of PC acceptence pissed me off.
Hopefully they will tone it down in the future otherwise I will switch off.
At last! You accept that it was heavy handed. Which is all that most of us have been saying, only to be accused of being homophobic.
Oh you.... shush!:cool:
Wow you'd think this forum was an echo chamber - all dissenting voices vill be shott