Did i read a different article to most of you???
Terry Pratchett criticises Doctor Who, accuses it of makeitupasyougoalongeum
5 of 8
Originally Posted by dgembadgemba:
“Did i read a different article to most of you???”
“Did i read a different article to most of you???”
Very possibly
from the comments I think many have only read the DS "article" which is a selective cut and paste of the FULL article to be found here http://www.sfx.co.uk/2010/05/03/gues...on-doctor-who/
and personally I think it is a critique not a criticism
Thanks Webby and dgem, I finally read the whole article:
This is one of the excerpts that pretty clearly indicate, that he likes the show:
"And yet, I will watch again next week because it is pure professionally-written entertainment, even if it helps sometimes if you leave your brain on a hook by the door. It’s funny, light-hearted, knows when to use pathos and capable of wonderful moments; I remember the face of David Tennant as the Doctor watching some public schoolboys machine-gunning a bunch of walking scarecrows (a reversion to the cheaper monsters of earlier incarnations) and we know that he knows that the First World War is only just around the corner where the scarecrows are for real. And I remember too, “The Empty Child” – I never once hid from the Daleks but the Empty Child was almost a back of the sofa moment."
I think his problem with old and new Who is that it shouldn't be classed as Science Fiction (if I get him right). I think there was a bit of very clever editing going on
.
This is one of the excerpts that pretty clearly indicate, that he likes the show:
"And yet, I will watch again next week because it is pure professionally-written entertainment, even if it helps sometimes if you leave your brain on a hook by the door. It’s funny, light-hearted, knows when to use pathos and capable of wonderful moments; I remember the face of David Tennant as the Doctor watching some public schoolboys machine-gunning a bunch of walking scarecrows (a reversion to the cheaper monsters of earlier incarnations) and we know that he knows that the First World War is only just around the corner where the scarecrows are for real. And I remember too, “The Empty Child” – I never once hid from the Daleks but the Empty Child was almost a back of the sofa moment."
I think his problem with old and new Who is that it shouldn't be classed as Science Fiction (if I get him right). I think there was a bit of very clever editing going on
.
Originally Posted by Webslark:
“Very possibly
from the comments I think many have only read the DS "article" which is a selective cut and paste of the FULL article to be found here http://www.sfx.co.uk/2010/05/03/gues...on-doctor-who/
and personally I think it is a critique not a criticism”
“Very possibly
from the comments I think many have only read the DS "article" which is a selective cut and paste of the FULL article to be found here http://www.sfx.co.uk/2010/05/03/gues...on-doctor-who/
and personally I think it is a critique not a criticism
”
Originally Posted by lach doch mal:
“Thanks Webby and dgem, I finally read the whole article:
This is one of the excerpts that pretty clearly indicate, that he likes the show:
"And yet, I will watch again next week because it is pure professionally-written entertainment, even if it helps sometimes if you leave your brain on a hook by the door. It’s funny, light-hearted, knows when to use pathos and capable of wonderful moments; I remember the face of David Tennant as the Doctor watching some public schoolboys machine-gunning a bunch of walking scarecrows (a reversion to the cheaper monsters of earlier incarnations) and we know that he knows that the First World War is only just around the corner where the scarecrows are for real. And I remember too, “The Empty Child” – I never once hid from the Daleks but the Empty Child was almost a back of the sofa moment."
I think his problem with old and new Who is that it shouldn't be classed as Science Fiction (if I get him right). I think there was a bit of very clever editing going on.”
“Thanks Webby and dgem, I finally read the whole article:
This is one of the excerpts that pretty clearly indicate, that he likes the show:
"And yet, I will watch again next week because it is pure professionally-written entertainment, even if it helps sometimes if you leave your brain on a hook by the door. It’s funny, light-hearted, knows when to use pathos and capable of wonderful moments; I remember the face of David Tennant as the Doctor watching some public schoolboys machine-gunning a bunch of walking scarecrows (a reversion to the cheaper monsters of earlier incarnations) and we know that he knows that the First World War is only just around the corner where the scarecrows are for real. And I remember too, “The Empty Child” – I never once hid from the Daleks but the Empty Child was almost a back of the sofa moment."
I think his problem with old and new Who is that it shouldn't be classed as Science Fiction (if I get him right). I think there was a bit of very clever editing going on
.”
I see where he is coming from to an extent. Much of the premise of DW is science fiction but it does have a "fantasy" element to it
If Pratchett has guest edited this months SFX then the whole magazine and any writing to go with it will have been put to bed well over a month ago. The throwaway line referring to the kissogram assistant is proof this was written before the current series started... so he's obviously referring to the Ten years.
And just to reiterate that this is typical sensationalist DS news reporting that bears almost no relation to the truth of the full peice that everyone should read purely on the basis of this gem:
What Sir Terry is saying is nothing more than what is regularly posted on these boards by fans of the show. Most of us post here because we love it, but the volume on critique far outweighs the out and out praise. But we love it and so does he.
And just to reiterate that this is typical sensationalist DS news reporting that bears almost no relation to the truth of the full peice that everyone should read purely on the basis of this gem:
Quote:
“"I remember arguing at school about the tune, particularly how long you should go bumdy bum bumdy bum bumdy bum bumdy bum before you got on to the woooooooeeeeeee bumdidy bum bit."”
“"I remember arguing at school about the tune, particularly how long you should go bumdy bum bumdy bum bumdy bum bumdy bum before you got on to the woooooooeeeeeee bumdidy bum bit."”
What Sir Terry is saying is nothing more than what is regularly posted on these boards by fans of the show. Most of us post here because we love it, but the volume on critique far outweighs the out and out praise. But we love it and so does he.
the guy's entitled to his opinion, just as we all are
perseonally i find his books awful, but it doesn't mean i'm right. it also doesn't mean i'm wrong.
perseonally i find his books awful, but it doesn't mean i'm right. it also doesn't mean i'm wrong.
Originally Posted by Trenchard's Hat:
“So what if Doctor Who uses deus ex machina or "makeitupasyougoalongeum" ???
Surely all that matters is how entertaining the stories are? War of the Worlds uses arguably one of the biggest deus ex machinas of ALL TIME but it's still a brilliant story.
Judge each story/episode on its own merits I say.”
“So what if Doctor Who uses deus ex machina or "makeitupasyougoalongeum" ???
Surely all that matters is how entertaining the stories are? War of the Worlds uses arguably one of the biggest deus ex machinas of ALL TIME but it's still a brilliant story.
Judge each story/episode on its own merits I say.”
I was thinking the same thing...
However, there are at least two reasons why the ending of WOTW is a brilliant conclusion and not just a cop out.
1) It actually illustrates mankind's inflated sense of their own importance on this planet. Humanity found itself completely at the mercy of the Martian invaders, only for mere microscopic bacteria to eliminate the alien threat. I'm sure other points could be inferred... maybe our own precarious nature on this planet and the difficulties in settling on another world?
2) The ending may be unexpected, but does not feel contrived. We are, after all, aware of the presence of bacteria. I seem to recall the novel begins with something along the lines of 'humanity was unaware of an alien intelligence observing it in the same way scientists examine microbes under a microscope'?
Sorry to get away from DW! I don't expect DW to reach the heights of H.G.Wells, if it makes some sort of sense and has believable dialogue and a sympathetic protagonist then I'm happy.
Originally Posted by alongfortheride:
“the guy's entitled to his opinion, just as we all are
perseonally i find his books awful, but it doesn't mean i'm right. it also doesn't mean i'm wrong.”
“the guy's entitled to his opinion, just as we all are
perseonally i find his books awful, but it doesn't mean i'm right. it also doesn't mean i'm wrong.”
yes the guy is entitled to his opinion
which happens to be that he really enjoys the show
but that little bit of information seems to have bypassed the majority of posters here today
Originally Posted by SixtySeven:
“Mr Pratchety certainly has a point. One that instantly springs to mind is Journeys End when Donna defeats a Dalek army but rocking up and turning some dials.
However, eBay he describes is The Tenth Doc's persona. He was a Doctor that truly believed his own hype, right from his encounter with the Sycorax to the Waters of Mars. He only really humbled in End if Time when he realised his game was up. He was genuilely full of life when the Timelords were defeated - and then Wilf knocked four times.
Eleven is different and is being written differently. Rather than coming up with it all in his head, the clues if how to solve the episodes big problem are being seeded throughout the episode, to the new series' credit.
I reckon, if I really think about it, I could up with a list of solutions that I accepted at the time and thought which just seemed silly. Whatever the case, I too will be watching each week.”
“Mr Pratchety certainly has a point. One that instantly springs to mind is Journeys End when Donna defeats a Dalek army but rocking up and turning some dials.
However, eBay he describes is The Tenth Doc's persona. He was a Doctor that truly believed his own hype, right from his encounter with the Sycorax to the Waters of Mars. He only really humbled in End if Time when he realised his game was up. He was genuilely full of life when the Timelords were defeated - and then Wilf knocked four times.
Eleven is different and is being written differently. Rather than coming up with it all in his head, the clues if how to solve the episodes big problem are being seeded throughout the episode, to the new series' credit.
I reckon, if I really think about it, I could up with a list of solutions that I accepted at the time and thought which just seemed silly. Whatever the case, I too will be watching each week.”
Is he really? Like I said earlier in the thread....inTEH he gets rid of the Atraxi by telling them to go, and then inTOTA he tells the angesl that they shouldn't have him in a trap. And that gravity ball solution, I'm sorry to say, came out of knowwhere. we have had that gravity light in the Satan pit....why didn't the Doctor use it then? And then Amy coming up with two solutions....by her thoughts and feelings...not logic
Originally Posted by Scratch1977:
“Having a quick read of the full article in the SFX blogs, it does appear that he's referring more to the Tennant doctor.
In the whole article I think the only reference he makes to the current series is that "I might shout at the screen again, but I will be watching on Saturday. Besides he now has a kissogram girl for his sidekick, so things can only get better", which leads to think his gripe is not with the current series, but with the events that went before...Dr Who being lifted by angels in the episode with the Titanic, everyone praying for Dr Who...the man has a point, Dr Who was being made god-like, and that was wrong. He's a time traveller, not a deity.”
“Having a quick read of the full article in the SFX blogs, it does appear that he's referring more to the Tennant doctor.
In the whole article I think the only reference he makes to the current series is that "I might shout at the screen again, but I will be watching on Saturday. Besides he now has a kissogram girl for his sidekick, so things can only get better", which leads to think his gripe is not with the current series, but with the events that went before...Dr Who being lifted by angels in the episode with the Titanic, everyone praying for Dr Who...the man has a point, Dr Who was being made god-like, and that was wrong. He's a time traveller, not a deity.”
I've said it before....he isn't a shown as a messiah....apart from the angel scene in Titanic, and the so called ressurection scene, there have been no other out and out right religious imagery....everytime even when that happens....his so called powers are challegend in some form.
But what TP is really saying is how the Doctor himself has become a DEM....in that he seems to have the solutions, and the reasoning behind them is given by the doctor quickly talking...and left at that. Infact his favourite story Human Nature/FOB is exactly that....the Doctor is the solution....we already know in that story that once the Doctor comes back, he will have a plan to sort out the family...but what is his plan....to press a few buttons to blow up a ship, and then throw the family into eternity. So those very criticisms fit very much into his favourite story...even the Empty Child....where the Doctor waves his hands and "upgrades" the nanogenes....yet we have had nothing toindicate that was possible. But what makes those stories work is that it isn't about what the solution is, its about the story, the characters and what those moments mean to them....its the story about how hard this is for the Doctor/John Smith, Joan and Martha....its about the Ninth doctor being about to leave from an adevture where no one dies. And that is why is able to enjoy it....that is why he doesn't mind the Titanic flying over london because its fun!
Originally Posted by dgembadgemba:
“Did i read a different article to most of you???”
“Did i read a different article to most of you???”
It feels that not only have some people not read it....but seems to be making things up in their own minds too.
Originally Posted by lach doch mal:
“Thanks Webby and dgem, I finally read the whole article:
This is one of the excerpts that pretty clearly indicate, that he likes the show:
"And yet, I will watch again next week because it is pure professionally-written entertainment, even if it helps sometimes if you leave your brain on a hook by the door. It’s funny, light-hearted, knows when to use pathos and capable of wonderful moments; I remember the face of David Tennant as the Doctor watching some public schoolboys machine-gunning a bunch of walking scarecrows (a reversion to the cheaper monsters of earlier incarnations) and we know that he knows that the First World War is only just around the corner where the scarecrows are for real. And I remember too, “The Empty Child” – I never once hid from the Daleks but the Empty Child was almost a back of the sofa moment."
I think his problem with old and new Who is that it shouldn't be classed as Science Fiction (if I get him right). I think there was a bit of very clever editing going on.”
“Thanks Webby and dgem, I finally read the whole article:
This is one of the excerpts that pretty clearly indicate, that he likes the show:
"And yet, I will watch again next week because it is pure professionally-written entertainment, even if it helps sometimes if you leave your brain on a hook by the door. It’s funny, light-hearted, knows when to use pathos and capable of wonderful moments; I remember the face of David Tennant as the Doctor watching some public schoolboys machine-gunning a bunch of walking scarecrows (a reversion to the cheaper monsters of earlier incarnations) and we know that he knows that the First World War is only just around the corner where the scarecrows are for real. And I remember too, “The Empty Child” – I never once hid from the Daleks but the Empty Child was almost a back of the sofa moment."
I think his problem with old and new Who is that it shouldn't be classed as Science Fiction (if I get him right). I think there was a bit of very clever editing going on.”
Exactly....
Originally Posted by GerriP:
“If Pratchett has guest edited this months SFX then the whole magazine and any writing to go with it will have been put to bed well over a month ago. The throwaway line referring to the kissogram assistant is proof this was written before the current series started... so he's obviously referring to the Ten years.
And just to reiterate that this is typical sensationalist DS news reporting that bears almost no relation to the truth of the full peice that everyone should read purely on the basis of this gem:
What Sir Terry is saying is nothing more than what is regularly posted on these boards by fans of the show. Most of us post here because we love it, but the volume on critique far outweighs the out and out praise. But we love it and so does he.”
“If Pratchett has guest edited this months SFX then the whole magazine and any writing to go with it will have been put to bed well over a month ago. The throwaway line referring to the kissogram assistant is proof this was written before the current series started... so he's obviously referring to the Ten years.
And just to reiterate that this is typical sensationalist DS news reporting that bears almost no relation to the truth of the full peice that everyone should read purely on the basis of this gem:
What Sir Terry is saying is nothing more than what is regularly posted on these boards by fans of the show. Most of us post here because we love it, but the volume on critique far outweighs the out and out praise. But we love it and so does he.”
But that doesn't mean he won't think the same of the new series.....its not like he says of Blink and Human Nature that they were perfect sci-fi does he? No he talks about different elements of them that he loves....like John Smith watching the children shoot the Scarecrows
He knows that such things are going to continue....I don't really see his reaction to the Doctor getting the virus out of the air, and sending the Atraxi packing, or Amy defusing a bomb with love, or the crack making a big appearance as something as pure and proper sci-fi.....he will feel that same that it still isn't sci-fi...and yet he will still watch...because the Kissogramme is a plus!
Originally Posted by Omega70:
“I was thinking the same thing...
However, there are at least two reasons why the ending of WOTW is a brilliant conclusion and not just a cop out.
1) It actually illustrates mankind's inflated sense of their own importance on this planet. Humanity found itself completely at the mercy of the Martian invaders, only for mere microscopic bacteria to eliminate the alien threat. I'm sure other points could be inferred... maybe our own precarious nature on this planet and the difficulties in settling on another world?
2) The ending may be unexpected, but does not feel contrived. We are, after all, aware of the presence of bacteria. I seem to recall the novel begins with something along the lines of 'humanity was unaware of an alien intelligence observing it in the same way scientists examine microbes under a microscope'?
Sorry to get away from DW! I don't expect DW to reach the heights of H.G.Wells, if it makes some sort of sense and has believable dialogue and a sympathetic protagonist then I'm happy.”
“I was thinking the same thing...
However, there are at least two reasons why the ending of WOTW is a brilliant conclusion and not just a cop out.
1) It actually illustrates mankind's inflated sense of their own importance on this planet. Humanity found itself completely at the mercy of the Martian invaders, only for mere microscopic bacteria to eliminate the alien threat. I'm sure other points could be inferred... maybe our own precarious nature on this planet and the difficulties in settling on another world?
2) The ending may be unexpected, but does not feel contrived. We are, after all, aware of the presence of bacteria. I seem to recall the novel begins with something along the lines of 'humanity was unaware of an alien intelligence observing it in the same way scientists examine microbes under a microscope'?
Sorry to get away from DW! I don't expect DW to reach the heights of H.G.Wells, if it makes some sort of sense and has believable dialogue and a sympathetic protagonist then I'm happy.”
And all those reasons can be applied to the so called DEM's of the RTD era....for example LOTTL, the people were being controlled by thoughts through the Archangel Satilites, and some managed to resist that control, showing that the Master hadn't really taken full control of the way humans thought, but only had made them think he had with the fear...and the Doctor used this to his advantage....the so called message was about the people thinking for themselves....the one word "Doctor" was a statement like "i am spartucus!" it represesnted freedom of thought, the concentration that words have power, which was established all the way in the Shakespeare Code. the whole power of words wasn't about prayer, which is why the Master first mocked it....it was about humans finally taking control and saying something that went against the control....a bit like when Jo Grant starts reciting nursery ryhmes to avoid the Master for hypnotising her.
Its not a simple DEM as people make it out to be...
When you read the full article the tone comes across. He obviously regards DW with affection.
Quote:
“I remember arguing at school about the tune, particularly how long you should go bumdy bum bumdy bum bumdy bum bumdy bum before you got on to the woooooooeeeeeee bumdidy bum bit.”
“I remember arguing at school about the tune, particularly how long you should go bumdy bum bumdy bum bumdy bum bumdy bum before you got on to the woooooooeeeeeee bumdidy bum bit.”
Quote:
“And yet, I will watch again next week because it is pure professionally-written entertainment, even if it helps sometimes if you leave your brain on a hook by the door. It’s funny, light-hearted, knows when to use pathos and capable of wonderful moments; I remember the face of David Tennant as the Doctor watching some public schoolboys machine-gunning a bunch of walking scarecrows (a reversion to the cheaper monsters of earlier incarnations) and we know that he knows that the First World War is only just around the corner where the scarecrows are for real. And I remember too, “The Empty Child” – I never once hid from the Daleks but the Empty Child was almost a back of the sofa moment.”
“And yet, I will watch again next week because it is pure professionally-written entertainment, even if it helps sometimes if you leave your brain on a hook by the door. It’s funny, light-hearted, knows when to use pathos and capable of wonderful moments; I remember the face of David Tennant as the Doctor watching some public schoolboys machine-gunning a bunch of walking scarecrows (a reversion to the cheaper monsters of earlier incarnations) and we know that he knows that the First World War is only just around the corner where the scarecrows are for real. And I remember too, “The Empty Child” – I never once hid from the Daleks but the Empty Child was almost a back of the sofa moment.”
Originally Posted by Aarghawasp!:
“When you read the full article the tone comes across. He obviously regards DW with affection.
”
“When you read the full article the tone comes across. He obviously regards DW with affection.
”
Unfortunately, a lot of posters are getting their daily exercise by jumping to conclusions
Originally Posted by Omega70:
“I was thinking the same thing...
However, there are at least two reasons why the ending of WOTW is a brilliant conclusion and not just a cop out.
1) It actually illustrates mankind's inflated sense of their own importance on this planet. Humanity found itself completely at the mercy of the Martian invaders, only for mere microscopic bacteria to eliminate the alien threat. I'm sure other points could be inferred... maybe our own precarious nature on this planet and the difficulties in settling on another world?
2) The ending may be unexpected, but does not feel contrived. We are, after all, aware of the presence of bacteria. I seem to recall the novel begins with something along the lines of 'humanity was unaware of an alien intelligence observing it in the same way scientists examine microbes under a microscope'?
Sorry to get away from DW! I don't expect DW to reach the heights of H.G.Wells, if it makes some sort of sense and has believable dialogue and a sympathetic protagonist then I'm happy.”
“I was thinking the same thing...
However, there are at least two reasons why the ending of WOTW is a brilliant conclusion and not just a cop out.
1) It actually illustrates mankind's inflated sense of their own importance on this planet. Humanity found itself completely at the mercy of the Martian invaders, only for mere microscopic bacteria to eliminate the alien threat. I'm sure other points could be inferred... maybe our own precarious nature on this planet and the difficulties in settling on another world?
2) The ending may be unexpected, but does not feel contrived. We are, after all, aware of the presence of bacteria. I seem to recall the novel begins with something along the lines of 'humanity was unaware of an alien intelligence observing it in the same way scientists examine microbes under a microscope'?
Sorry to get away from DW! I don't expect DW to reach the heights of H.G.Wells, if it makes some sort of sense and has believable dialogue and a sympathetic protagonist then I'm happy.”
Yeh I agree with all of that. It's actually been done in films a fair amount over the years, for example, Superman reversing time by flying round the Earth, making it spin backwards, and instantly returning everything to normal - blatant deus ex machina, but it's plausible and so doesn't seem totally silly.
I think the bottom line is, it's not the use of a deus ex machina itself, but how believable/contrived/silly etc the audience perceive it to be - and like anything, that's a sliding scale.
In WotW/Superman etc, it doesn't seem contrived or silly because it is actually plausible.
Now it's my opinion (which clearly not everyone is going to share) that even though RTD did use them to resolve plots rather a lot, they never seemed so silly as to make the whole thing look ridiculous (apart from Last of the Time Lords, obviously).
I also don't think that using a DEM is the same as making a story up as you go along, which is what TP seemed to be suggesting, although clearly his comments were taken out of context.
Originally Posted by Webslark:
“Unfortunately, a lot of posters are getting their daily exercise by jumping to conclusions”
“Unfortunately, a lot of posters are getting their daily exercise by jumping to conclusions
”
That's brilliant, can I use this in the future
Originally Posted by teenagemartyr:
“http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/cult/s7/...ludicrous.html
I'm inclined to agree with much of what he says, to be honest...”
“http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/cult/s7/...ludicrous.html
I'm inclined to agree with much of what he says, to be honest...”
Yes Pratchett makes some very valid points.
Hopefully now though the series is on the road to recovery.
I have seen no deus ex machina, nor the god-like Doctor so far in Series 5.
Originally Posted by poppycod:
“Yes Pratchett makes some very valid points.
Hopefully now though the series is on the road to recovery.
I have seen no deus ex machina, nor the god-like Doctor so far in Series 5.”
“Yes Pratchett makes some very valid points.
Hopefully now though the series is on the road to recovery.
I have seen no deus ex machina, nor the god-like Doctor so far in Series 5.”
No ofcourse you hadn't.....if any of those five episodes had the name RTD attached to it....the DEM's and god-like doctor would be more visible all of a sudden to you....that is how you work
Originally Posted by teenagemartyr:
“http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/cult/s7/...ludicrous.html
I'm inclined to agree with much of what he says, to be honest...”
“http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/cult/s7/...ludicrous.html
I'm inclined to agree with much of what he says, to be honest...”
Is this the man whose "universe" is floating on the back of a giant tortoise or some such crap.
Originally Posted by SixtySeven:
“Mr Pratchety certainly has a point. One that instantly springs to mind is Journeys End when Donna defeats a Dalek army but rocking up and turning some dials.
However, eBay he describes is The Tenth Doc's persona. He was a Doctor that truly believed his own hype, right from his encounter with the Sycorax to the Waters of Mars. He only really humbled in End if Time when he realised his game was up. He was genuilely full of life when the Timelords were defeated - and then Wilf knocked four times.
Eleven is different and is being written differently. Rather than coming up with it all in his head, the clues if how to solve the episodes big problem are being seeded throughout the episode, to the new series' credit.
I reckon, if I really think about it, I could up with a list of solutions that I accepted at the time and thought which just seemed silly. Whatever the case, I too will be watching each week.”
“Mr Pratchety certainly has a point. One that instantly springs to mind is Journeys End when Donna defeats a Dalek army but rocking up and turning some dials.
However, eBay he describes is The Tenth Doc's persona. He was a Doctor that truly believed his own hype, right from his encounter with the Sycorax to the Waters of Mars. He only really humbled in End if Time when he realised his game was up. He was genuilely full of life when the Timelords were defeated - and then Wilf knocked four times.
Eleven is different and is being written differently. Rather than coming up with it all in his head, the clues if how to solve the episodes big problem are being seeded throughout the episode, to the new series' credit.
I reckon, if I really think about it, I could up with a list of solutions that I accepted at the time and thought which just seemed silly. Whatever the case, I too will be watching each week.”
excellent post.
Yes the Doctor/Donna hybrid thing was cringeworthy and awkward and stupid.
Originally Posted by Dai13371:
“Is this the man whose "universe" is floating on the back of a giant tortoise or some such crap.”
“Is this the man whose "universe" is floating on the back of a giant tortoise or some such crap.”
No, it's the man whose world is carried on the back of a giant turtle. But since he's a fantasy author rather than a sci-fi author, I see no problem with that. Do you?
Originally Posted by Dai13371:
“Is this the man whose "universe" is floating on the back of a giant tortoise or some such crap.”
“Is this the man whose "universe" is floating on the back of a giant tortoise or some such crap.”
He has written a lot of brilliant books, and to be fair, the DS heavily edited version is not a real reflection of what he said in his blog (Webby I'm just stealing your link). It's pretty obvious that he likes Dr Who
.Read it here: http://www.sfx.co.uk/2010/05/03/gues...on-doctor-who/
Originally Posted by crazzyaz7:
“No ofcourse you hadn't.....if any of those five episodes had the name RTD attached to it....the DEM's and god-like doctor would be more visible all of a sudden to you....that is how you work”
“No ofcourse you hadn't.....if any of those five episodes had the name RTD attached to it....the DEM's and god-like doctor would be more visible all of a sudden to you....that is how you work”
Thats because if RTD wrote it there is a racing certainty there would be DEMs (as you refer to them) and jarring God-likel sections.
Moffat has steered clear of such nonsense as have the writers of Series 5 probably because of a diktat.
I thought he was right in what he said on doctor who which is why I don't watch it anymore. I stopped watching after Chris left. it's a good show just not my cup of tea.
Originally Posted by tingramretro:
“No, it's the man whose world is carried on the back of a giant turtle. But since he's a fantasy author rather than a sci-fi author, I see no problem with that. Do you?”
“No, it's the man whose world is carried on the back of a giant turtle. But since he's a fantasy author rather than a sci-fi author, I see no problem with that. Do you?”
And whose world is, for the most part, logically consistent, within its own parameters. It would appear that the source material that DS have cribbed their article from is not being read by people who are being so dismissive ( not you Tingramretro, rather the poster to whom you are replying). I would repost the link, but I see lach has just done so.
Poor TP, he's not very good at managing his own press is he? I seem to remember similar comments he made about JR Rowling being taken out of context.
I see the tabloids are picking up the outrage.
I see the tabloids are picking up the outrage.
Originally Posted by Ja88ed:
“Poor TP, he's not very good at managing his own press is he? I seem to remember similar comments he made about JR Rowling being taken out of context.
I see the tabloids are picking up the outrage.”
“Poor TP, he's not very good at managing his own press is he? I seem to remember similar comments he made about JR Rowling being taken out of context.
I see the tabloids are picking up the outrage.”
Does that mean the Daily Heil have picked it up and are twisting it to their own agenda too?
Originally Posted by poppycod:
“Thats because if RTD wrote it there is a racing certainty there would be DEMs (as you refer to them) and jarring God-likel sections.
Moffat has steered clear of such nonsense as have the writers of Series 5 probably because of a diktat.”
“Thats because if RTD wrote it there is a racing certainty there would be DEMs (as you refer to them) and jarring God-likel sections.
Moffat has steered clear of such nonsense as have the writers of Series 5 probably because of a diktat.”
Like i said you would say that.
5 of 8
