Isn't it about time Doctor Who was an hour long now?

2»

Comments

  • tingramretrotingramretro Posts: 10,974
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Seemed like a 30 minute episode that was padded tonight

    Were you actually watching the right channel?
  • Ricky D GervaisRicky D Gervais Posts: 2,429
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I agree actually, a lot of fluff in the first half of the episode could have been trimmed with no consequence. Good second half though.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 953
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The episode this week was 50mins in total. It felt about right, pacing wise on this occasion.

    A couple of year ago The BBC filmed Jonathan Creek with a 15 minute sub-plot that could be removed in it's entirety for international scheduling. It was dire when shown in the UK - it padded out and spoiled what was otherwise a well written episode. So be careful what you wish for :D
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 916
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I agree actually, a lot of fluff in the first half of the episode could have been trimmed with no consequence. Good second half though.

    I disagree completely... I think perhaps you're too used to RTD's "I can cram a 2 hour story into 40 mins if I leave out most of it" attitude that left everything feeling too rushed.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,890
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I agree actually, a lot of fluff in the first half of the episode could have been trimmed with no consequence. Good second half though.

    Maybe you just didn't *get* some crucial points ;) so you didn't realise it was important.
  • Ricky D GervaisRicky D Gervais Posts: 2,429
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    No, stuff like Amy's prolonged misadventure with the Cyberman was dragged out far too long and held no real importance to the story.
  • nebogipfelnebogipfel Posts: 8,375
    Forum Member
    No, stuff like Amy's prolonged misadventure with the Cyberman was dragged out far too long and held no real importance to the story.

    It was more satisfying dramatically for Rory's reintroduction than having him just walk in the room during a calm, no-peril moment and say "yoohoo! Guess who?" So, I would say it did have importance to the dramatic presentation of the story.

    It gave The Doctor something to think about, increasing the number of things he was having to juggle in his mind, and The Doctor not quite intepreting the clues properly was crucial to the plot.

    Yes, they could have just had a dormant cyber arm on the floor and just have the Doctor speculating. But come on - where's the fun in that? It was scary and tense. If Who (or pretty much any drama with an action/thriller element) dropped these things they could all be done and dusted in about 15 minutes. But noone would watch.
  • nebogipfelnebogipfel Posts: 8,375
    Forum Member
    Forgot to put anything directly on topic in my post. Having all episodes 60 minutes would often be paddings-ville. Modern audiences seem unforgiving about meandering or slow down. If it was all explosions, chases and orchestra music I'd soon get bored and it stretches the budget.

    Sometimes it's good to hear they had to cut 10 mins of what they thought was good stuff - it challenges them to think really carefully about what they leave in. Apocalypse Now Redux was not, on the whole, an improvement despite the cut stuff being mostly good.

    I hanker after a slower, creepier, pace (I love, eg, lingering scenes of daleks gliding silently down darkened corridors, eye stalks sweeping left to right. No music.) but am resigned to the modern need for tightness. (If I made Who it would probably end up paced like Werner Herzog's Nosferatu and be cancelled after one episode.)

    On balance. Happy with the format.
  • Ricky D GervaisRicky D Gervais Posts: 2,429
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Also, regarding the Cybermen, since when did they have an entire human skull in their helmet? This whole development of the suits seeking out new flesh was a horrible idea IMO that isn't consistent with their previous appearances at all.
  • tingramretrotingramretro Posts: 10,974
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Also, regarding the Cybermen, since when did they have an entire human skull in their helmet? This whole development of the suits seeking out new flesh was a horrible idea IMO that isn't consistent with their previous appearances at all.

    Why? It's only contradictory if you assume the Cybermen haven't developed at all since their introduction, and in fact that's clearly not the case as these Cybermen have spaceships, which the Pete's World versions did not. I'm kind of assuming these are Cybermen from 'our' universe which have simply adopted some of the technology of the alternate Earth versions, and the original Cybermen always had more organic components. Much more effective, IMO.
  • Ricky D GervaisRicky D Gervais Posts: 2,429
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Well it's something of a role reversal for a start. Now we've got robots seeking out human flesh as opposed to humans turning to technology to survive.
  • tingramretrotingramretro Posts: 10,974
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Well it's something of a role reversal for a start. Now we've got robots seeking out human flesh as opposed to humans turning to technology to survive.

    The Cybermen's overriding motivation has always been simply to survive at all costs. This was simply a new slant on it. If you think about it, it just highlights how the lines between the machine part and the human part have become blurred, which fits in with the original concept pretty well.
Sign In or Register to comment.