just driving by again *waves at fellow Whoonies from inside Cyber car window* NOT READING ANY POSTS!!
HOPEFULLY!! we will be able to watch it tonight *pleeeeeeze!!*
Mr W has just nipped out for a quick pint with an old work mate so I could just watch it without him knowing, but he would really hate it if I did that.
so - because I am always true to my word, I will just carry on and keep calm.....
accidentally saw a trailer for part II this morning, did an involuntary "NOOOOOOO!!!!"
and scrabbled around for the TV remote, with my eyes shut saying "lalalalalala" to myself so I could turn the tellybox to another channel
saw a bit though - meh!
anyhooooo
my SQUEEEEE of the day, happened on Christmas Eve
I served a customer that day, and when he opened his wallet to pay for his goods, it had a Dalek printed on the inside of it! but he quickly folded back again.
and of course, I had to comment on it and say "oooh was that a Dalek on your wallet?"
the guy looked at me as if I was a bit *woohwooohwooh*
and said "yes......" and guessing that I would like a closer look, held the wallet up ala the Doctor and ......
just popping in to say Loved Dr who, and all this stuff on other threads about how it was silly and unbelievable, what on earth, any of us who have been watching the old stuff know that that is Dr who, which then means that all the people who says that new dr who is so different etc all obviously need to re think their opinions it just shows its exactly the same show, utterly brilliant
and the cafe scene omg
I really can't wait and really don't want to see the next episode, Merry xmas and a happy new yearto you all
It is part of the hero : instantly recognizable by his clothes. If you look at Belgian comics, the two most iconic heroes are Tintin and Spirou and both have very distinctive costumes, which for Spirou hardly varied between the 1960's and nowadays. Same goes for American comics, look at Clark Kent's suit !
The Doctor has to be instantly recognizable, and has also to be instantly recognizable as different from the others, just like a comics hero. Furtherore, I think it contributes to sense of identity to individual Doctors.
But Doctor Who is not a comic book hero. And a look at comic books and strips of all sorts would indicate the costumes at least as much for simplicity in drawing as anything else as it's used for all kinds of characters in all kinds of strips. Doonesbury is hardly an action hero, nor are Charlie Brown and Archie.
Doctor Who is a TV show and the Doctor is an individual hero, not part of any organisation where a uniform is required. The convention in these circumstances is for a character to have a disctinct individual style, but not a costume - and certainly not a ludicrous one as worn by 1 through 7 (I exempt 8 since we don't know he would have remained in his fancy dress costume).
any of us who have been watching the old stuff know that that is Dr who, which then means that all the people who says that new dr who is so different etc all obviously need to re think their opinions it just shows its exactly the same show
A lot of their complaints are matters of style. They don't like the fact that it's a modern TV show, using modern production methods like a musical score, quality effects and character development and backstories. Some also dislike that it acknowledges a more open and diverse world. Many of them cling to the hope that this will all change under Moffat, but there's nothing in his scripts for Who and other shows to indicate that.
and as much as i love RTD his fixation in the first 3 serises of making the companions Love the Doctor and stuff it was fantastic to get donna (not only because of that but because it freed him to return to more taditional storys where his relationship didnt compromise his judgement as it did with rose and martha !
I know people talk about it all the time, but I just don't see this whole "love fixation". I don't know how to explain it without looking like I'm favoring some companions though... Which isn't true, I like Rose Martha and Donna equally. Well, Donna is my favorite character, as a person, but that's just an added bonus. As companions, I think all three were equally great.
But I'll try to argue with the "compromise his judgement" part. Did it really? I honestly don't see how "the Donna series" was more traditional than previous ones when it comes to the Doctor's judgements... No, really, give me an example, because I can't think of any. Not the small talk or "lingering looks", but where exactly did he behave differently, plots-wise, character-wise, because of the "love" thingie?
Would he cry less if it was Donna sucked into the void in Doomsday? Would it stop him from fighting monster of the week if it was Donna's face stolen instead of Rose's? Or from saying something in the style of "if I believe in one thing, I believe in Donna!"? (I'm sorry, I'm so sorry )
It's not easy to switch companions freely between the stories, but that's because of their characters and story arcs and everything else, not the "love" stuff. It's hard to imagine Rose or Donna in Human Nature, but would the Doctor's or John Smith's decisions really changed if he had a different companion/servant at that moment?
If it was Rose or Donna kidnapped in Gridlock, or drifting away into the sun in 42, would it stop him from trying to get them back exactly the same way he's done with Martha?
Would Rose or Martha changed the outcome of the Pompeii story? I don't think so. Different details ("she is returning" could sound a bit out of place if it was still Rose... ), but swap companions, or even Doctors (I can easily imagine Nine instead of Ten there), and the story would probably still have the same ending.
The Doctor always does what he does best (well...), helps and stuff. I never thought "Oh, he's only doing it because he loves her" or "oh, shame he doesn't love her, he would do this instead of that". Maybe that's just me.
Am I the only person in the world who doesn't want the Doctor to have a costume at all?
And before anyone gets too excited, no, I don't mean he should be naked. I just think he should vary what he wears as much as anyone else does. And I'd rather see him dressed in contemporary clothing for the era in which the programme is being produced.
I thought what 9 and 10 wore was OK, they just didn't vary it enough (especially 9). I hated the other Doctors' costumes.
No! The doctor's old, quintessential, endearing British eccentricity, the thing that makes him and the show different and the thing that makes him and the show great should, like in classic who, be reflected by what he wears.
It's not the time and space traveling that attracts who it's fans, there are plenty of other shows centred around that and with significantly better CGI, but the quirky character who does that time and space traveling and his funny mode of transport, and a big part of his quirkiness is his odd choice of clothes.
Perhaps you have to be British to get and appreciate that side of the show.
As a nation, we love the fact that he isn't some rippling, gun wielding, heroic hollywood hero but a weedy, celery wearing, mad-hat middle englander saving civilisations in a shed.
Am I the only person in the world who doesn't want the Doctor to have a costume at all?
And before anyone gets too excited, no, I don't mean he should be naked. I just think he should vary what he wears as much as anyone else does. And I'd rather see him dressed in contemporary clothing for the era in which the programme is being produced.
But why would he wear 2010 clothing when he's, say, in Victorian London? As it is, Smith's costume is contemporary clothing.
By the way, I forgot to say that Colin Baker's little vest in the Two Doctors had me laughing because he changed into something just as ugly
And this is where people unfairly criticise Baker's costume. Yes, it is bright and garish, but it was the mid-80s. It really wasn't much more bright and garish than a lot of contemporary clothes. The waistcoat was shop-bought, rather than custom-made, and so was his umbrella.
Isn't he, though? The programme is very comic book-like.
The convention in these circumstances is for a character to have a disctinct individual style, but not a costume - and certainly not a ludicrous one as worn by 1 through 7 (I exempt 8 since we don't know he would have remained in his fancy dress costume).
3 definitely had a unique style rather than a costume.
And I think you're overselling the idea that they're ridiculous, for the most part. They're simply anachronous.
1 is simply dressed in an Edwardian suit. 2 is dressed in a scruffy Edwardian suit. Jon Pertwee's costume in his first series was actually a suit of his grandfather's clothes. 4's clothes (scarf excepted) were academic's clothes from a decade or two previously. 5's was an Edwardian cricket costume. 6's was an Edwardian suit again, although one made of patchwork cloth. 7's was just a suit, both in the series and in the movie.
The only one that isn't directly from Earth's history is 6's, and even then it's not off except for the colour. Isn't it actually more unlikely that he'd wear human clothes all the time, rather than alien fashions? Certainly, a time traveller to wear anachronistic clothing is perfectly believable.
Me too... I have no problem with cooking meat, handling meat, I even like the smell of some meats cooked (roasted chicken smell, I love it). But during that scene, I was like "Eurgh" !
Strange, I love that scene and I'm probably less tolerant than you are, I still struggle with most smells...
Oh well, good thing we don't have smell-o-vision yet! I don't wanna slag some classic S-F stories, but I'm really glad they were wrong with their predictions for the future sometimes.
Btw, I watched Hamlet. I'l keep comments for later (if we're ever gonna discuss it), just two points for now.
It was visually stunning, the editing, the costumes... easily my favorite classic play with "updated" look. Very simple, but looked and felt much better than any big screen movie version, or (blasphemy alert) any actual theatrical production (to be fair I've never seen one I liked, not that I saw that many anyway...)
But I didn't like the ending.
Maybe RTD is the Shakespeare of today, but even he (known for his "unsatisfying conclusions") wouldn't end a story that way. It's like we had the best bits of T&C, Doomsday, S&J and Midnight rolled together but then someone slapped the ending of Caves of Androzani on top of it! And what's worse, forgot to follow with the regeneration!
Btw, I watched Hamlet. I'l keep comments for later (if we're ever gonna discuss it), just two points for now.
It was visually stunning, the editing, the costumes... easily my favorite classic play with "updated" look. Very simple, but looked and felt much better than any big screen movie version, or (blasphemy alert) any actual theatrical production (to be fair I've never seen one I liked, not that I saw that many anyway...)
But I didn't like the ending.
Maybe RTD is the Shakespeare of today, but even he (known for his "unsatisfying conclusions") wouldn't end a story that way. It's like we had the best bits of T&C, Doomsday, S&J and Midnight rolled together but then someone slapped the ending of Caves of Androzani on top of it! And what's worse, forgot to follow with the regeneration!
There, I said it.
Is it the ending of 'Hamlet' in general which you don't like or specifically the way it was filmed in this production?
I love the ending of 'Hamlet' - for me, it is the only outcome possible after all the procrastinating and indecision.
I watched Confidential this morning and I remembered something else I meant to say about the beat the Master hears (I keep remembering little things I meant to mention!)
The four beats being a timelord's heartbeat reminded me of Donna hearing the heartbeat at the Shadow Proclamation last year, which was supposed to be a foreeshadowing of the DoctorDonna. I wonder why the Master has always heard that heartbeat - is it related to all the Masters he has now created, or is the explanation to do with the Time Lords..?
Mr E was out with his brother and sister this week and he found out something which I would have squeed about ages ago if I had known. His sister is a bit obsessed with John Barrowman - she is not really a DW or TW fan, just a JB fan. Anyway, she had been out with her boyfriend to the concert which was filmed for the DVD release which was out recently and they went for a drink in the Concert Hall bar afterwards. Her boyfriend is one of these types who will talk away to anyone and dragged her over to some folk who were standing by themselves in a corner. Turns out that it was JB's mum and dad, who were waiting for JB to finish up. JB's husband Scott also came to chat and they ended up all having a drink together. They didn't meet JB himself, but said that his parents and Scott were absolutely lovely!
Hi y'all. Had to skip loads (I'm still only on page 40 something). However, very much enjoyed the comments I've read so far.
I've managed to rewatch tEoT and again with the commentary. Some very interesting discussions between RTD and JG there, especially the one about Donna. Not many clues to the finale, but one or two small ones.
Watching again I found the episode to be even more spectacular that the first time. I didn't think it was possible, but it it really is a great episode. I'm still counting down the minutes until we get the resolution and it's killilng me. So many unanswered questions and I definitely get the impression that this is only the beginning. There's so much we can't make sense of and I'll bet some things that we think we've made sense of that lead somewhere else entirely.
I didn't like the re-incarnation of the Master the first time round, but it seemed much better on second viewing. I doubt somehow we'll learn about the origins of the 'Book of Saxon', it's obviously something related to the Master only because he is the only Saxon. It must be something he left behind relating how he could be brought back to life.
I too was disappointed we didn't see more of Lucy though.
The acting was just superb. The cafe scene will become / is already a classic moment. It says and means so much.
Ooooh Squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! Sorry, just slipped out.
I also watched Hamlet last night and enjoyed it very much. What I enjoyed was the acting. I thought the performances were spot on. I wasn't quite so keen on the setting and staging, but I still loved it.
And I finally got around to watching CT's own show, which was very funny. These three shows just show how marvelous and versatile DT is at his craft.
I started to listen to the latter last night, but fell asleep towards the end. I'm hoping this doesn't mean I'll fall asleep when listening to the audios as I intend to do after all the Christmas madness is over and the family have left (which may not be until the beginning of Feb, I discovered yesterday).
Which audio did you start with Solamenn? I must go back and find all tf's advice about them. And Eowyn? I want to do this right - so what order should I do it in?
I also watched Hamlet last night and enjoyed it very much. What I enjoyed was the acting. I thought the performances were spot on. I wasn't quite so keen on the setting and staging, but I still loved it.
And I finally got around to watching CT's own show, which was very funny. These three shows just show how marvelous and versatile DT is at his craft.
Hey SheMoore - good point - three appearances within 24 hours and so very different each time.
I started to listen to the latter last night, but fell asleep towards the end. I'm hoping this doesn't mean I'll fall asleep when listening to the audios as I intend to do after all the Christmas madness is over and the family have left (which may not be until the beginning of Feb, I discovered yesterday).
Which audio did you start with Solamenn? I must go back and find all tf's advice about them. And Eowyn? I want to do this right - so what order should I do it in?
You know me - I can't do things out of order, so started at number 1!
I think that Eight has the most common thread running through his stories, so would definitely be sure to do his in order. The others, maybe not so big a deal, but I would listen to 'The Marian Conspiracy' before any other Six audios as it introduces a new companion.
You know me - I can't do things out of order, so started at number 1!
I think that Eight has the most common thread running through his stories, so would definitely be sure to do his in order. The others, maybe not so big a deal, but I would listen to 'The Marian Conspiracy' before any other Six audios as it introduces a new companion.
I'm really looking forward to this actually. I've always steered away from the audios before because I thought they might confuse me re timelines etc, but I've got a timeline with all the stories in order from all media. I think trollface posted it. And I've got all of you now to keep me on track. :cool:
Which reminds me, I've been meaning to say HAPPY ANNIVERSARY to the thread and its posters / readers. I can't believe its a whole year! What a journey, it is hard to imagine Tigger now as a new viewer. What a year it's been and here's to many more years of Whoonie happiness.
To be honest though, while harsh, I don't think it's that unjustified. It was never going to totally live up to the immense hype, but that was naff. It was overly rushed and didn't feel very epic - when you think about it, little actually happened. I'm usually one of the first to defend an episode and roll my eyes at the haters, but yesterday I found myself nearly agreeing with them. I really hope part 2 is better for the sake of Ten and Russell's send-off .
Sorry it didn't do it for you Sid. Hopefully part 2 will make up for it for you.
Bye the way, I've finished A2A the second series. And I am confused beyond belief. So when you are next on please drop me a bell.
In stained glass windows, isn't traditionnally the one holding the book supposed to be Luke or Matthew or one of the Evangelists ?
I am not necessarily up to scratch with stained glass windows art.
But I like your theory about the book. If there was one little thing in this stained glass window such as the TARDIS, why not put another one ?
I don't know anything about stained glass either. And have no idea if one of them would hold a book. But even if they did, this book was very bookish and not in keeping with the era, well in my opinion anyway...which isn't much to go on, lol.
I agree with you. There is no necessity to bring that forward now.
Sorry
I've watched the Confidential. Still very frustrating, I can feel that there is a lot they are not telling.
About the TL, they are all wearing the same dress colour. But as it was explained in the Deadly Assassin there are different colours which corresponds to different chapters or convent or groups or whatever. But here they were all in crimson. Is it because there is just one faction resurrected ? Or is it just one faction taking up power and going bad ?
Anyway, to me the TL are baddies since they killed my beloved Two. If now they are going to be responsible for the death of my beloved Ten... Oooh, I'm going to hate them with a passion !
I wondered if they may be a renegade band too. Being all the same colour and that. Unless we haven't seen the other colours yet.
And during the Confidential, I noticed behind Timothy Dalton's TL there are two holding their head in their hand : is it remorse ? Are they condemned or burden by grief ? Or, thinking back about what Tiggs said of the stained glass window, they remind me of the pose in which there is often one the twelve apostles often is... except I just can't remember which one !
Ooh don't remember that. Might have to watch it again.
About the woman in white appearing to Wilf only... (this is not a spoiler Weedle, it happens in the first two minutes of the episode)
I am beginning to be quite partial to the idea that she is the White Guardian. But then, and here it's wild speculation, couldn't we say that the Trickster (who was very ominous at the ending of the Wedding of SJS) is the Black Guardian ? Then if the White Guardian shows up, shouldn't he too ?
I'd still like her to be Susan or another Time Lady, but the White Guardian theory seems somehow grander, putting this battle to the dimensions of the universe.
Unless she is the Doctor's mother. The one person who would do anything to protect their child. He may have run away, stolen a Tardis, done things against the rules of the institution, but a mother will always protect her son.
I've posted something in the RTD thread that will get some backs up, no doubt, but must be off now so won't get to see the reaction to it..:p
Oh dear, why can't people just be nice. The theory, if you haven't anything nice to say don't say it at all would work very well on these forums occasionaly.
Welcome Amos come and join the whoonies in this wonderful thread/s hehe ahem....
yes the main forum has become a hateful wild west kinda place in the past 24 hours, i cant believe how some "fans" are behaving so you and anyone else with constructive or inane to say can join us here and you are most welcome to !!!
Kenneth
Yes welcome welcome all those joining us for the finale. Here we respect all opinions even if we don't agree with them.
Some of us loved EoT pt 1. Some of us didn't. Some of us haven't got a bloomin' clue what it was all about, like me.
well i didnt spoil it as you know, but is it even possible to spoil Hamlet ???? its like one of the best literary works of history and a large amount of ppl probably studied Shakespeare for English CSE'S or GCSE !!
but just in case i didn't give the plot away hehehe
Kenneth x
Good good. Because to my disgrace I have no idea what Hamlet is about. There is a skull in it somewhere because I've seen pics of DT holding it up. I'm hoping to get edumacated at some point though, as I have skyplused it.:D
Consider my prediction as my entry Still trying to avoid spoilers at the mo for some masochistic reason
Been tthinking about last night and have come up with a theory, which may well have been covered already, but as I am on limited access time, I havent read all the threads. My apologies if this has already been suggested
In previous years, RTD has scattered clues across the whole series. This year they are crammed in to three spcials, and particularly EOT pt 1. Any lack of sense will be resolved (mostly) next week when we can look back on go "of course, THAT is why he said/did that"
Eveyone is entitled to their opinion about the episode and personally I can understand why peopl.:)e might be disappointed. BUT where others see plagiarism I see homage and affection - even in the DragonBall Z lighting balls
Looking forward to next week and to rewatching two or 9 times before then
See I knew my number plate bus theory would have meaning in the end. We just don't know what it is yet.:D
Yes, me too - I have no problem handling or cooking meat for other folk, but that just turned my stomach!
I'm not vegetarian but it turned my stomach too.
I'm sure it has been mentioned in one or two commentaries that the Doctor should have an instantly recognisable silhouette and that is what a costume gives him - even Ten's variations (apart from the unlucky tux) give him the same outline.
Comments
HOPEFULLY!! we will be able to watch it tonight *pleeeeeeze!!*
Mr W has just nipped out for a quick pint with an old work mate so I could just watch it without him knowing, but he would really hate it if I did that.
so - because I am always true to my word, I will just carry on and keep calm.....
accidentally saw a trailer for part II this morning, did an involuntary "NOOOOOOO!!!!"
and scrabbled around for the TV remote, with my eyes shut saying "lalalalalala" to myself so I could turn the tellybox to another channel
saw a bit though - meh!
anyhooooo
my SQUEEEEE of the day, happened on Christmas Eve
I served a customer that day, and when he opened his wallet to pay for his goods, it had a Dalek printed on the inside of it!
and of course, I had to comment on it and say "oooh was that a Dalek on your wallet?"
the guy looked at me as if I was a bit *woohwooohwooh*
and said "yes......" and guessing that I would like a closer look, held the wallet up ala the Doctor and ......
IT.....WAS...THE.....PSYCHIC.....PAPER....WALLET.....THAT....THE.....DOCTOR.....HAS.....
he said that he got it for Christmas last year and was very proud of it.....
*wants....one.....*
right, off to do all the clearing up after our Faaaaamilleeeeee parteeeee last night :eek: :mad:
hopefully I will be able to get back on here later, once I have watched it, and be able to catch up with all the posts and comments etc....
*guesses how many pages to read? about 45??!!*
and the cafe scene omg
I really can't wait and really don't want to see the next episode, Merry xmas and a happy new yearto you all
But Doctor Who is not a comic book hero. And a look at comic books and strips of all sorts would indicate the costumes at least as much for simplicity in drawing as anything else as it's used for all kinds of characters in all kinds of strips. Doonesbury is hardly an action hero, nor are Charlie Brown and Archie.
Doctor Who is a TV show and the Doctor is an individual hero, not part of any organisation where a uniform is required. The convention in these circumstances is for a character to have a disctinct individual style, but not a costume - and certainly not a ludicrous one as worn by 1 through 7 (I exempt 8 since we don't know he would have remained in his fancy dress costume).
A lot of their complaints are matters of style. They don't like the fact that it's a modern TV show, using modern production methods like a musical score, quality effects and character development and backstories. Some also dislike that it acknowledges a more open and diverse world. Many of them cling to the hope that this will all change under Moffat, but there's nothing in his scripts for Who and other shows to indicate that.
I know people talk about it all the time, but I just don't see this whole "love fixation". I don't know how to explain it without looking like I'm favoring some companions though... Which isn't true, I like Rose Martha and Donna equally. Well, Donna is my favorite character, as a person, but that's just an added bonus. As companions, I think all three were equally great.
But I'll try to argue with the "compromise his judgement" part. Did it really? I honestly don't see how "the Donna series" was more traditional than previous ones when it comes to the Doctor's judgements... No, really, give me an example, because I can't think of any. Not the small talk or "lingering looks", but where exactly did he behave differently, plots-wise, character-wise, because of the "love" thingie?
Would he cry less if it was Donna sucked into the void in Doomsday? Would it stop him from fighting monster of the week if it was Donna's face stolen instead of Rose's? Or from saying something in the style of "if I believe in one thing, I believe in Donna!"? (I'm sorry, I'm so sorry
It's not easy to switch companions freely between the stories, but that's because of their characters and story arcs and everything else, not the "love" stuff. It's hard to imagine Rose or Donna in Human Nature, but would the Doctor's or John Smith's decisions really changed if he had a different companion/servant at that moment?
If it was Rose or Donna kidnapped in Gridlock, or drifting away into the sun in 42, would it stop him from trying to get them back exactly the same way he's done with Martha?
Would Rose or Martha changed the outcome of the Pompeii story? I don't think so. Different details ("she is returning" could sound a bit out of place if it was still Rose...
The Doctor always does what he does best (well...), helps and stuff. I never thought "Oh, he's only doing it because he loves her" or "oh, shame he doesn't love her, he would do this instead of that". Maybe that's just me.
No! The doctor's old, quintessential, endearing British eccentricity, the thing that makes him and the show different and the thing that makes him and the show great should, like in classic who, be reflected by what he wears.
It's not the time and space traveling that attracts who it's fans, there are plenty of other shows centred around that and with significantly better CGI, but the quirky character who does that time and space traveling and his funny mode of transport, and a big part of his quirkiness is his odd choice of clothes.
Perhaps you have to be British to get and appreciate that side of the show.
As a nation, we love the fact that he isn't some rippling, gun wielding, heroic hollywood hero but a weedy, celery wearing, mad-hat middle englander saving civilisations in a shed.
We've all met or known someone similarly balmy.
He's Patrick Moore and John Mccririck's Gallifreyan love child.
And the cricket ball, scarf and umbrella are reflective of that.
But why would he wear 2010 clothing when he's, say, in Victorian London? As it is, Smith's costume is contemporary clothing.
And this is where people unfairly criticise Baker's costume. Yes, it is bright and garish, but it was the mid-80s. It really wasn't much more bright and garish than a lot of contemporary clothes. The waistcoat was shop-bought, rather than custom-made, and so was his umbrella.
Isn't he, though? The programme is very comic book-like.
3 definitely had a unique style rather than a costume.
And I think you're overselling the idea that they're ridiculous, for the most part. They're simply anachronous.
1 is simply dressed in an Edwardian suit. 2 is dressed in a scruffy Edwardian suit. Jon Pertwee's costume in his first series was actually a suit of his grandfather's clothes. 4's clothes (scarf excepted) were academic's clothes from a decade or two previously. 5's was an Edwardian cricket costume. 6's was an Edwardian suit again, although one made of patchwork cloth. 7's was just a suit, both in the series and in the movie.
The only one that isn't directly from Earth's history is 6's, and even then it's not off except for the colour. Isn't it actually more unlikely that he'd wear human clothes all the time, rather than alien fashions? Certainly, a time traveller to wear anachronistic clothing is perfectly believable.
Oh well, good thing we don't have smell-o-vision yet! I don't wanna slag some classic S-F stories, but I'm really glad they were wrong with their predictions for the future sometimes.
Well, as long as you didn't follow it with "or are you just happy to see me"...
Not very lady-like!!!
Although I don't know Sontaran rituals that well...
It was visually stunning, the editing, the costumes... easily my favorite classic play with "updated" look. Very simple, but looked and felt much better than any big screen movie version, or (blasphemy alert) any actual theatrical production (to be fair I've never seen one I liked, not that I saw that many anyway...)
But I didn't like the ending.
Maybe RTD is the Shakespeare of today, but even he (known for his "unsatisfying conclusions") wouldn't end a story that way. It's like we had the best bits of T&C, Doomsday, S&J and Midnight rolled together but then someone slapped the ending of Caves of Androzani on top of it! And what's worse, forgot to follow with the regeneration!
There, I said it.
Is it the ending of 'Hamlet' in general which you don't like or specifically the way it was filmed in this production?
I love the ending of 'Hamlet' - for me, it is the only outcome possible after all the procrastinating and indecision.
I watched Confidential this morning and I remembered something else I meant to say about the beat the Master hears (I keep remembering little things I meant to mention!)
Mr E was out with his brother and sister this week and he found out something which I would have squeed about ages ago if I had known. His sister is a bit obsessed with John Barrowman - she is not really a DW or TW fan, just a JB fan. Anyway, she had been out with her boyfriend to the concert which was filmed for the DVD release which was out recently and they went for a drink in the Concert Hall bar afterwards. Her boyfriend is one of these types who will talk away to anyone and dragged her over to some folk who were standing by themselves in a corner. Turns out that it was JB's mum and dad, who were waiting for JB to finish up. JB's husband Scott also came to chat and they ended up all having a drink together. They didn't meet JB himself, but said that his parents and Scott were absolutely lovely!
I've managed to rewatch tEoT and again with the commentary. Some very interesting discussions between RTD and JG there, especially the one about Donna. Not many clues to the finale, but one or two small ones.
Watching again I found the episode to be even more spectacular that the first time. I didn't think it was possible, but it it really is a great episode. I'm still counting down the minutes until we get the resolution and it's killilng me. So many unanswered questions and I definitely get the impression that this is only the beginning. There's so much we can't make sense of and I'll bet some things that we think we've made sense of that lead somewhere else entirely.
I didn't like the re-incarnation of the Master the first time round, but it seemed much better on second viewing. I doubt somehow we'll learn about the origins of the 'Book of Saxon', it's obviously something related to the Master only because he is the only Saxon. It must be something he left behind relating how he could be brought back to life.
I too was disappointed we didn't see more of Lucy though.
The acting was just superb. The cafe scene will become / is already a classic moment. It says and means so much.
Ooooh Squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! Sorry, just slipped out.
I also watched Hamlet last night and enjoyed it very much. What I enjoyed was the acting. I thought the performances were spot on. I wasn't quite so keen on the setting and staging, but I still loved it.
And I finally got around to watching CT's own show, which was very funny. These three shows just show how marvelous and versatile DT is at his craft.
I started to listen to the latter last night, but fell asleep towards the end. I'm hoping this doesn't mean I'll fall asleep when listening to the audios as I intend to do after all the Christmas madness is over and the family have left (which may not be until the beginning of Feb, I discovered yesterday).
Which audio did you start with Solamenn? I must go back and find all tf's advice about them. And Eowyn? I want to do this right - so what order should I do it in?
Hey SheMoore - good point - three appearances within 24 hours and so very different each time.
You know me - I can't do things out of order, so started at number 1!
I think that Eight has the most common thread running through his stories, so would definitely be sure to do his in order. The others, maybe not so big a deal, but I would listen to 'The Marian Conspiracy' before any other Six audios as it introduces a new companion.
I'm really looking forward to this actually. I've always steered away from the audios before because I thought they might confuse me re timelines etc, but I've got a timeline with all the stories in order from all media. I think trollface posted it. And I've got all of you now to keep me on track. :cool:
Which reminds me, I've been meaning to say HAPPY ANNIVERSARY to the thread and its posters / readers. I can't believe its a whole year! What a journey, it is hard to imagine Tigger now as a new viewer. What a year it's been and here's to many more years of Whoonie happiness.
*raises glass*
Sorry it didn't do it for you Sid. Hopefully part 2 will make up for it for you.
Bye the way, I've finished A2A the second series. And I am confused beyond belief. So when you are next on please drop me a bell.
Oh dear, why can't people just be nice. The theory, if you haven't anything nice to say don't say it at all would work very well on these forums occasionaly.
Yes welcome welcome all those joining us for the finale. Here we respect all opinions even if we don't agree with them.
Some of us loved EoT pt 1. Some of us didn't. Some of us haven't got a bloomin' clue what it was all about, like me.
Good good. Because to my disgrace I have no idea what Hamlet is about.
Definitely prefer the first pic. I'm a brown/pink girl through and through.
See I knew my number plate bus theory would have meaning in the end. We just don't know what it is yet.:D
Yes like the swishy coat.