I enjoyed last night's episode and was pleasantly surprised to see Ben Browder playing the part of Isaac. I'm a great Stargate fan and loved him as Cam Mitchell.
What was wrong with tonights ep?, it was great!
2 of 3
Really enjoyed the episode, probably because it WASN'T childish and silly, to start with 
Also the rather limited exposure of Amy tends to make things better for me, as I am one of those who can't wait to see her gone.
So, lovely episode for me and I am reconciled with the show for the time being
Also the rather limited exposure of Amy tends to make things better for me, as I am one of those who can't wait to see her gone.
So, lovely episode for me and I am reconciled with the show for the time being
I think the problem with most Doctor Who episodes is quite simply people expectations. If people who don't like certain episodes lowered their expectations to begin with they would enjoy the escapism much more than they are doing.
I'd give Town Called Mercy a healthy 7.5 out of ten. I just thought a few lines here and there were a bit corny, but on the whole it was good TV
I'd give Town Called Mercy a healthy 7.5 out of ten. I just thought a few lines here and there were a bit corny, but on the whole it was good TV
Originally Posted by Josh Pinder:
“ but i really lvoed the does to Spaghetti Westerns, i loved the Terminator vibes a got from it too.”
“ but i really lvoed the does to Spaghetti Westerns, i loved the Terminator vibes a got from it too.”
That was the problem - lazy script writing and stereotypical western characters from films that went out of fashion 30 years ago! It was a Terminator and Yul Brynner Westworld rip-off.
Is the show being dumbed down for an American audience?
Had a look at the comments section under the DS headline on the ep and have to agree with one poster there, it was a typical Doctor moral dilemma with some humour thrown in, but the glimpses of the more vengeful Doctor we are seeing this series are significant IMO. We know there's some more serious stuff coming, and this was part of the build up.
Originally Posted by alan_m:
“That was the problem - lazy script writing and stereotypical western characters from films that went out of fashion 30 years ago! It was a Terminator and Yul Brynner Westworld rip-off.
Is the show being dumbed down for an American audience?”
“That was the problem - lazy script writing and stereotypical western characters from films that went out of fashion 30 years ago! It was a Terminator and Yul Brynner Westworld rip-off.
Is the show being dumbed down for an American audience?”
Just about every scenario you can think of where the Doctor goes to a historical setting can be summed up as being a stereotype due to prior Hollywood or costume drama etc treatment.
The writers very deliberately put those things in precisely because they wanted to reuse those things from old films. Not out of laziness. Out of wanting to do that.
It didn't have much relation to the story told in Westworld (none). I think it might be slightly lazy to bring that film up as if that's all one need say to prove a point.
Terminator, granted, is iconic for any metal showing through skin type thing. But at least this wasn't a robot. It turned out to be a man. That was rather the point. So not exactly a rip off, really.
I think it is interesting that Doctor Who did a Western back in the early sixties that did things that even back then were cliches of the genre. The makers of that story KNEW they were cliches. The makers of this story KNOW they are cliches. Reuse is why they are cliches. Eastwood made Unforgiven knowing that he was revisiting cliches of a genre that was out of fashion. The reason these things work (or not) is what you do with them. It is not bad simply because you have set your story in a cliche ridden genre.
Originally Posted by nebogipfel:
“Just about every scenario you can think of where the Doctor goes to a historical setting can be summed up as being a stereotype due to prior Hollywood or costume drama etc treatment.
The writers very deliberately put those things in precisely because they wanted to reuse those things from old films. Not out of laziness. Out of wanting to do that.
It didn't have much relation to the story told in Westworld (none). I think it might be slightly lazy to bring that film up as if that's all one need say to prove a point.
Terminator, granted, is iconic for any metal showing through skin type thing. But at least this wasn't a robot. It turned out to be a man. That was rather the point. So not exactly a rip off, really.”
“Just about every scenario you can think of where the Doctor goes to a historical setting can be summed up as being a stereotype due to prior Hollywood or costume drama etc treatment.
The writers very deliberately put those things in precisely because they wanted to reuse those things from old films. Not out of laziness. Out of wanting to do that.
It didn't have much relation to the story told in Westworld (none). I think it might be slightly lazy to bring that film up as if that's all one need say to prove a point.
Terminator, granted, is iconic for any metal showing through skin type thing. But at least this wasn't a robot. It turned out to be a man. That was rather the point. So not exactly a rip off, really.”
Not just historical, Doctor Who has paid 'homage' to many genres of fiction over the years. Tom Baker has said that even back in the 70s he could immediately tell where story elements or ideas had been borrowed from.
An English Literature teacher once told me that the last truly original piece of fiction was written a long long time ago, everything since has been borrowed from a few original works.
Originally Posted by DavetheScot:
“I loved this episode, and thought it the best since Vincent and the Doctor.
I also liked this episode because we lost that awful hectic pace that ruins so much Who now. It moved at a slower space, which meant that all the dialogue could be heard clearly and the plot could be followed. What's more, the background music was actually in the background! Bliss.”
“I loved this episode, and thought it the best since Vincent and the Doctor.
I also liked this episode because we lost that awful hectic pace that ruins so much Who now. It moved at a slower space, which meant that all the dialogue could be heard clearly and the plot could be followed. What's more, the background music was actually in the background! Bliss.”
I have to disagree with you on this. The hectic pace is what makes a good story for me and gives it a bit of oomph. Usually when you don't have that the story suffers but last night's episode didn't do that. Unlike Vincent and The Doctor which bored me to tears, this was actually a good episode and though a bit weird at times it did enough to engage and entertain. I can live with a slower paced story if they were more like this.
Originally Posted by nebogipfel:
“I think it is interesting that Doctor Who did a Western back in the early sixties that did things that even back then were cliches of the genre. The makers of that story KNEW they were cliches. The makers of this story KNOW they are cliches. Reuse is why they are cliches. Eastwood made Unforgiven knowing that he was revisiting cliches of a genre that was out of fashion. The reason these things work (or not) is what you do with them. It is not bad simply because you have set your story in a cliche ridden genre.”
“I think it is interesting that Doctor Who did a Western back in the early sixties that did things that even back then were cliches of the genre. The makers of that story KNEW they were cliches. The makers of this story KNOW they are cliches. Reuse is why they are cliches. Eastwood made Unforgiven knowing that he was revisiting cliches of a genre that was out of fashion. The reason these things work (or not) is what you do with them. It is not bad simply because you have set your story in a cliche ridden genre.”
Spot on!
I was very meh and I was damn drunk when I watched it.
The movie cowboys and aliens did make me think that last nights episode was so badly written. I mean they just call him the gunslinger, not one of them points out he`s got a huge weird gun and eye etc. They`d have thought it was a plague from God or something.
The movie cowboys and aliens did make me think that last nights episode was so badly written. I mean they just call him the gunslinger, not one of them points out he`s got a huge weird gun and eye etc. They`d have thought it was a plague from God or something.
Originally Posted by Tom Tit:
“Oh, for god's sake, it's all a matter of taste and the degree of ''seriousness' or 'childishness' in any given story is entirely in the eye of the beholder.
This story was a classic example of fictional morality, where, the writer being God, he can make the benign moral choice (the one the writer is espousing) turn out to be the correct one, because he controls the fictional reality .”
“Oh, for god's sake, it's all a matter of taste and the degree of ''seriousness' or 'childishness' in any given story is entirely in the eye of the beholder.
This story was a classic example of fictional morality, where, the writer being God, he can make the benign moral choice (the one the writer is espousing) turn out to be the correct one, because he controls the fictional reality .”
But there was no correct choice presented here.....right till the end every character felt and thought differently, and no one really got the ending the way the characters wanted...
Quote:
“Real drama, proper drama, does not do this; it holds a mirror to the real world, and shows us what it is like. Real drama does not provide a cop-out for the hero. And a cop-out in this case is anything other than two things happening: the Doctor giving whatever the guy's name was over to the cyborg or the cyborg destroying the town. This story was as much fairytale as anything you're likely to see. The Doctor magically finding another way - that is the stuff of childish fantasy. That is why I liked last week's episode: the Doctor had a decision to make and he made it. The writer didn't give him a get out of jail free card, nor did he feel the need to have characters talk in pompous (and out of character) speeches about the moral choices they were being presented with.”
“Real drama, proper drama, does not do this; it holds a mirror to the real world, and shows us what it is like. Real drama does not provide a cop-out for the hero. And a cop-out in this case is anything other than two things happening: the Doctor giving whatever the guy's name was over to the cyborg or the cyborg destroying the town. This story was as much fairytale as anything you're likely to see. The Doctor magically finding another way - that is the stuff of childish fantasy. That is why I liked last week's episode: the Doctor had a decision to make and he made it. The writer didn't give him a get out of jail free card, nor did he feel the need to have characters talk in pompous (and out of character) speeches about the moral choices they were being presented with.”
I agree that good drama does hold up a mirror to the the real world (something which I feel sci-fi really is good at doing, and was mostly lacking in series 5 and 6 with exception of a few stories, but has come back with a bang in the last three stories)...and this did. It talked about the politics of war, grey areas of justice, and baggage of guilt a person carries in both of those things. Those things were explored with no one right or wrong answer. And i did not feel that it was a cop out at all, but very consistant, even with the events of the last epsiode. With Solomon, as you say the writer gave the Doctor a choice, but at no point was killing Solomon an actual option as he could easily have been saved, it was the ship that needed to be destroyed. What the Doctor did was deal his own justice. Solomon begged in the way Doctor felt the Sulirians would have, so that was his reason. The main difference between that and Mercy is that when the Doctor was going to deal out his Justice to Jex, Amy, his companion was there, which she was not when he was on the ship. If she had been, we probably would have been presented with a similar situation (here he was with Neffy, who being an egyptian queen, wouldn't have given a second thought of killing someone like Sololmon). So there was always going to be another choice in Mercy, becuase there was more than one voice.
And this isn't anything new this what you call a "characters talk in pompous" speech to present the moral choice....when it comes to the Doctor and his companions, it has always been there, and would be there in reality becuase we all have different morality. Here everyone was true to the their own morality....the Doctor has been travelling alone, and loneliness is known to affect him, where his sense of justice is inreased... And Amy, having killed Madam Korvian, regretted her actions, would question this justice act of the Doctor. Issac, being that his job is to protect, and sticking to his beliefs that everyone deserves a second chance, naturally would be the type of character who would give up his life to save another. His death, would naturally change the course of the Doctor's need for justice, as for him then Isaac would have died for nothing....
For me, the morality, and the need to look for another option were presented in a very natural course due to the events that took place and the views that were shared. nothing out of character, and no cop-outs.
Quote:
“Anyone who thinks this latest episode made the slightest useful comment or observation about real world morality is childish, in my view. And see, that's the point: it's all relative to one's own mindset. So can we stop this kind of crap about whether episodes have a suitable gravitas or sobriety to them and judge them on the terms of what they were actually trying to be?
My judgement of this episode: it was just too banal for me”
“Anyone who thinks this latest episode made the slightest useful comment or observation about real world morality is childish, in my view. And see, that's the point: it's all relative to one's own mindset. So can we stop this kind of crap about whether episodes have a suitable gravitas or sobriety to them and judge them on the terms of what they were actually trying to be?
My judgement of this episode: it was just too banal for me”
I can agree that we will see things quite differently....as my judgement was that this was very adult in the way it presented the issues....
I loved the episode, but looking at some people's comments on this forum, it as probably a marmite episode, like Attack of the Cybermen, but much better. I think more people liked it than hated it.
Originally Posted by alan_m:
“That was the problem - lazy script writing and stereotypical western characters from films that went out of fashion 30 years ago! It was a Terminator and Yul Brynner Westworld rip-off.
Is the show being dumbed down for an American audience?”
“That was the problem - lazy script writing and stereotypical western characters from films that went out of fashion 30 years ago! It was a Terminator and Yul Brynner Westworld rip-off.
Is the show being dumbed down for an American audience?”
Someone on Points of View suggested that it was a Westworld rip-off, but I don't see it. They both use certain Western cliches and both feature a gunslinger (in Westworld a robot, in this a cyborg) but the similarities end there.
Originally Posted by daveyboy7472:
“I have to disagree with you on this. The hectic pace is what makes a good story for me and gives it a bit of oomph. Usually when you don't have that the story suffers but last night's episode didn't do that. Unlike Vincent and The Doctor which bored me to tears, this was actually a good episode and though a bit weird at times it did enough to engage and entertain. I can live with a slower paced story if they were more like this.
”
“I have to disagree with you on this. The hectic pace is what makes a good story for me and gives it a bit of oomph. Usually when you don't have that the story suffers but last night's episode didn't do that. Unlike Vincent and The Doctor which bored me to tears, this was actually a good episode and though a bit weird at times it did enough to engage and entertain. I can live with a slower paced story if they were more like this.
”
I'm surprised you say that, as Iow you are a fan of much of the classic era, where the hectic pace is unknown. I don't think the pace gives it oomph, it just means I'm constantly struggling to mentally process the dialogue.
Originally Posted by DavetheScot:
“Someone on Points of View suggested that it was a Westworld rip-off, but I don't see it. They both use certain Western cliches and both feature a gunslinger (in Westworld a robot, in this a cyborg) but the similarities end there.”
“Someone on Points of View suggested that it was a Westworld rip-off, but I don't see it. They both use certain Western cliches and both feature a gunslinger (in Westworld a robot, in this a cyborg) but the similarities end there.”
I thought it was a Star Trek:TNG ripoff though. They went through the whole script - bad westerns, augmented humans for war, bad/good scientist who created them (aka Dr Frankenstein), dodgy plot exposition and moral dilemma.
I'd have preferred a Clint Eastwood or Yul Bryner homage.
Personally, I found it very ham-fisted. From "we have to be better than him" to "don't you hate that I'm not obviously bad nor purely good... what a complex character I must be". Just downright clumsy writing. (Obviously paraphrasing, but barely)
Much of that latter scene bothered me.. it was like a monologue lifted directly from 50's B-movies. The sort of speechifying Dr. Frankenstein does, just before he yells "look at yourselves, he's not the monster, you are the monsters! for shaaaame!"
Much of that latter scene bothered me.. it was like a monologue lifted directly from 50's B-movies. The sort of speechifying Dr. Frankenstein does, just before he yells "look at yourselves, he's not the monster, you are the monsters! for shaaaame!"
Originally Posted by DavetheScot:
“I'm surprised you say that, as Iow you are a fan of much of the classic era, where the hectic pace is unknown. I don't think the pace gives it oomph, it just means I'm constantly struggling to mentally process the dialogue.”
“I'm surprised you say that, as Iow you are a fan of much of the classic era, where the hectic pace is unknown. I don't think the pace gives it oomph, it just means I'm constantly struggling to mentally process the dialogue.”
Not quite. As you know from out discussion the other week, one of the main reasons I love Earthshock, and indeed The Caves Of Androzani, so much is that they are both reasonably fast paced stories. On the flip side to that is Terminus and Time-Flight which are both crawlers and I'm not so keen on either of those. Indeed, a lot of the historicals from the Hartnell Era I'm not so keen on as they are quite slow paced and tedious at times.
I do like slower-paced stories. For example, Father's Day or The Unicorn and The Wasp, which were both reasonably slow, they were enjoyable because the story was good. That's the case with the majority of Classic Who as well. The problem with the last two Series for me is that most episodes have been slow and boring in equal measure and that's where Saturday's episode was very much an exception. It was slower and enjoyable at the same time.
As for the hectic pace, I just prefer pacier stories because I am by nature an adrenaline junkie. This sort of developed in the 90's after Classic Who had finished and you had shows like Buffy and Angel which were high octane most episodes and then we had the TV Movie plus the RTD Episodes which ran at the sort of pace I'd become accustomed too. Doesn't mean I can't sit down and appreciate a slower paced story when it happens, or still indulge in some Classic Who now and then. I just like to see a good story when the pace slows and that really hadn't happened much for me since SM took over as showrunner.
Originally Posted by ozark1:
“I thought it was a Star Trek:TNG ripoff though. They went through the whole script - bad westerns, augmented humans for war, bad/good scientist who created them (aka Dr Frankenstein), dodgy plot exposition and moral dilemma.
I'd have preferred a Clint Eastwood or Yul Bryner homage.”
“I thought it was a Star Trek:TNG ripoff though. They went through the whole script - bad westerns, augmented humans for war, bad/good scientist who created them (aka Dr Frankenstein), dodgy plot exposition and moral dilemma.
I'd have preferred a Clint Eastwood or Yul Bryner homage.”
Ah well. I don't watch Star Trek, so I wouldn't know about that.
Originally Posted by daveyboy7472:
“Not quite. As you know from out discussion the other week, one of the main reasons I love Earthshock, and indeed The Caves Of Androzani, so much is that they are both reasonably fast paced stories. On the flip side to that is Terminus and Time-Flight which are both crawlers and I'm not so keen on either of those. Indeed, a lot of the historicals from the Hartnell Era I'm not so keen on as they are quite slow paced and tedious at times.
I do like slower-paced stories. For example, Father's Day or The Unicorn and The Wasp, which were both reasonably slow, they were enjoyable because the story was good. That's the case with the majority of Classic Who as well. The problem with the last two Series for me is that most episodes have been slow and boring in equal measure and that's where Saturday's episode was very much an exception. It was slower and enjoyable at the same time.
As for the hectic pace, I just prefer pacier stories because I am by nature an adrenaline junkie. This sort of developed in the 90's after Classic Who had finished and you had shows like Buffy and Angel which were high octane most episodes and then we had the TV Movie plus the RTD Episodes which ran at the sort of pace I'd become accustomed too. Doesn't mean I can't sit down and appreciate a slower paced story when it happens, or still indulge in some Classic Who now and then. I just like to see a good story when the pace slows and that really hadn't happened much for me since SM took over as showrunner.
”
“Not quite. As you know from out discussion the other week, one of the main reasons I love Earthshock, and indeed The Caves Of Androzani, so much is that they are both reasonably fast paced stories. On the flip side to that is Terminus and Time-Flight which are both crawlers and I'm not so keen on either of those. Indeed, a lot of the historicals from the Hartnell Era I'm not so keen on as they are quite slow paced and tedious at times.
I do like slower-paced stories. For example, Father's Day or The Unicorn and The Wasp, which were both reasonably slow, they were enjoyable because the story was good. That's the case with the majority of Classic Who as well. The problem with the last two Series for me is that most episodes have been slow and boring in equal measure and that's where Saturday's episode was very much an exception. It was slower and enjoyable at the same time.
As for the hectic pace, I just prefer pacier stories because I am by nature an adrenaline junkie. This sort of developed in the 90's after Classic Who had finished and you had shows like Buffy and Angel which were high octane most episodes and then we had the TV Movie plus the RTD Episodes which ran at the sort of pace I'd become accustomed too. Doesn't mean I can't sit down and appreciate a slower paced story when it happens, or still indulge in some Classic Who now and then. I just like to see a good story when the pace slows and that really hadn't happened much for me since SM took over as showrunner.
”
I wouldn't consider Earthshock or Caves of Androzani to be hectic; not in the way that too many New Who episodes are.
Take The Lodger, for instance; I actually didn't know what that was about because Matt's explanation at the end was at such breakneck speed I could barely make out a word. Even playing it over on the iplayer didn't help. Only reading on here afterwards did I get the plot. A Town Called Mercy had no such problems.
Originally Posted by DavetheScot:
“I wouldn't consider Earthshock or Caves of Androzani to be hectic; not in the way that too many New Who episodes are.
Take The Lodger, for instance; I actually didn't know what that was about because Matt's explanation at the end was at such breakneck speed I could barely make out a word. Even playing it over on the iplayer didn't help. Only reading on here afterwards did I get the plot. A Town Called Mercy had no such problems.”
“I wouldn't consider Earthshock or Caves of Androzani to be hectic; not in the way that too many New Who episodes are.
Take The Lodger, for instance; I actually didn't know what that was about because Matt's explanation at the end was at such breakneck speed I could barely make out a word. Even playing it over on the iplayer didn't help. Only reading on here afterwards did I get the plot. A Town Called Mercy had no such problems.”
I agree, what I think I meant was that they are faster paced than the other stories of the era. Compared to what immediately followed both stories they certainly are.
I agree about Matt Smith also. My one single criticism of his Doctor is that sometimes her rattles of the explanations a bit too quickly for my liking but on the other hand that is actually a small part of The Doctor's character that he does that.
Didn't really like this episode, mainly because it was quite easy to work out the ending after 5 minutes and the pace of the episode really let it down. The doctor flitting from kill, kill, kill to save everyone in a matter of seconds was just plain annoying. Then half the town are against him and he gives a 30 second speech and everything is fine? To top it all off the gunslinger never really carried any menace and Isaac was always going to end up dead, being the best guy in town (and also the most convincing character in the story).
To be fair though I probably won't really enjoy this series as much as others because I prefer a strong story arc, which is quite clearly missing from the start of the series. I think this series is more about stand alone episodes with a theme i.e. morality.
I'll still watch every episode though as it is easily one of the best shows on TV.
To be fair though I probably won't really enjoy this series as much as others because I prefer a strong story arc, which is quite clearly missing from the start of the series. I think this series is more about stand alone episodes with a theme i.e. morality.
I'll still watch every episode though as it is easily one of the best shows on TV.
2 of 3
