Michelle Gomez is superb.
Results:How would you rate "Dark Water" ... ?
Excellent
332 (63.36%)
Good
113 (21.56%)
Average
36 (6.87%)
Meh!
21 (4.01%)
Rubbish!
22 (4.20%)
Voters: 524. You can't vote on this poll right now - are you signed in?
Doctor Who - S8E11 - Dark Water - 1st Nov '14 - BBC One (HD) @ 8.15pm
4 of 42
Originally Posted by CD93:
“Michelle Gomez is superb.”
“Michelle Gomez is superb.”
I've only seen her in 'Bad Education' but she was great in that, and I've liked her Missy appearances so far in series 8.
The big question though is:
Who's Missy!!
Originally Posted by Kapellmeister:
“I've only seen her in 'Bad Education' but she was great in that, and I've liked her Missy appearances so far in series 8.
The big question though is:
Who's Missy!!”
“I've only seen her in 'Bad Education' but she was great in that, and I've liked her Missy appearances so far in series 8.
The big question though is:
Who's Missy!!”
"Who are you?
"I'm Missy...."
"Who's Missy?"
"What do you mean?"
"Who are you, really?"
"I just told you."
"Told me what?"
"I'm Missy."
"But who is Missy?"
"Missy is me. I am Missy."
"But who are you?"
"Gatekeeper of the Nethersphere?"
"Who's that?"
"Me."
"Who are you?"
"MISSY!"
I hope The Doctor and Seb get to discuss their favorite sci-fi films.
Originally Posted by CD93:
“"Who are you?
"I'm Missy...."
"Who's Missy?"
"What do you mean?"
"Who are you, really?"
"I just told you."
"Told me what?"
"I'm Missy."
"But who is Missy?"
"Missy is me. I am Missy."
"But who are you?"
"Gatekeeper of the Nethersphere?"
"Who's that?"
"Me."
"Who are you?"
"MISSY!"”
“"Who are you?
"I'm Missy...."
"Who's Missy?"
"What do you mean?"
"Who are you, really?"
"I just told you."
"Told me what?"
"I'm Missy."
"But who is Missy?"
"Missy is me. I am Missy."
"But who are you?"
"Gatekeeper of the Nethersphere?"
"Who's that?"
"Me."
"Who are you?"
"MISSY!"”
Hopefully that's not taken from Moffat's script!
Originally Posted by Kapellmeister:
“ Hopefully that's not taken from Moffat's script!”
“
Hopefully that's not taken from Moffat's script!”
Reading it back it looks like prep for an Aaron Sorkin installment.
Theregoestheday has a better time of it, this week, but also shares serious concerns about the subject matter.
Originally Posted by Kapellmeister:
“I've only seen her in 'Bad Education' but she was great in that, and I've liked her Missy appearances so far in series 8.
The big question though is:
Who's Missy!!”
“I've only seen her in 'Bad Education' but she was great in that, and I've liked her Missy appearances so far in series 8.
The big question though is:
Who's Missy!!”
Whoever she is, I luuuurve surprises .......
Originally Posted by CD93:
“Missy's identity revealed
http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Missy_(...are_in_Silver)”
“Missy's identity revealed
http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Missy_(...are_in_Silver)”
Lol, I think Minky and a few others suggested this. If I'm honest I can't remember that Missy or much else from the episode .......
Originally Posted by Kapellmeister:
“ Hopefully that's not taken from Moffat's script!”
“
Hopefully that's not taken from Moffat's script!”
The clip from the episode I saw on another thread started off a bit like that so likely!
Seen a couple of reviews which say something like the following:
"Dark Water isn't a bad episode, but it only feels like half a story."
I think the gap since the last two-parter has started to really mess with people.
"Dark Water isn't a bad episode, but it only feels like half a story."
I think the gap since the last two-parter has started to really mess with people.
Originally Posted by CD93:
“Seen a couple of reviews which say something like the following:
"Dark Water isn't a bad episode, but it only feels like half a story."
I think the gap since the last two-parter has started to really mess with people.”
“Seen a couple of reviews which say something like the following:
"Dark Water isn't a bad episode, but it only feels like half a story."
I think the gap since the last two-parter has started to really mess with people.”
lol yes the people reviewing are definitely forgetting what a two-parter is supposed to do!
Originally Posted by CD93:
“Seen a couple of reviews which say something like the following:
"Dark Water isn't a bad episode, but it only feels like half a story."
I think the gap since the last two-parter has started to really mess with people.”
“Seen a couple of reviews which say something like the following:
"Dark Water isn't a bad episode, but it only feels like half a story."
I think the gap since the last two-parter has started to really mess with people.”
I hope these people never watch an episode from 1963-1989 series then. "The Dead Planet isn't a bad episode but it only feels like a seventh of the story..."
I really hope the general audience are going to be amazed by this episode on Saturday. Fans are always amazed (whether positive or negative), but ultimately it will be down to the casual viewers.
I realise that sound particularly controversial on a forum such as this, but the show wouldn't have become successful again without a huge proportion of the public, who don't usually watch sci-fi, to come with us. And it is to them I thank.
I realise that sound particularly controversial on a forum such as this, but the show wouldn't have become successful again without a huge proportion of the public, who don't usually watch sci-fi, to come with us. And it is to them I thank.
Originally Posted by CD93:
“DWTV's preview is as ambiguous as expected - and speculates that Missy is be a major player in the Whoniverse.”
“DWTV's preview is as ambiguous as expected - and speculates that Missy is be a major player in the Whoniverse.”
ALL the previews have been ambiguous, as reviewers have been asked not to divulge some specific plot points and (at least in the preview copy I have from the BBC) there are two short sequences which have been removed because they contain a major spoiler that the BBC absolutely, positively do not want to leak out.
Originally Posted by CD93:
“Seen a couple of reviews which say something like the following:
"Dark Water isn't a bad episode, but it only feels like half a story."
I think the gap since the last two-parter has started to really mess with people.”
“Seen a couple of reviews which say something like the following:
"Dark Water isn't a bad episode, but it only feels like half a story."
I think the gap since the last two-parter has started to really mess with people.”
As any writer will tell you - the first part of a two parter should still stand as a story in its own right with intro, rise and resolution. You NEVER just take a script and chop it in half. That is not how a two part story is structured. The skill with two parters is making part one work in its own right AND setting up part two.
That's probably why it's been so long since DW has done one - they're difficult to write well.
The reviewers who are saying this aren't daft and obviously do understand how two parters should work.
I am confident Dark Water has a beginning, a middle and an end (this man knows his cliffhangers) in it's own right. But it's still half of a bigger story - I hope.
Hey slouchingthatch, set us right - has the script been cut in half?
Hey slouchingthatch, set us right - has the script been cut in half?
Originally Posted by claire2281:
“As any writer will tell you - the first part of a two parter should still stand as a story in its own right with intro, rise and resolution. You NEVER just take a script and chop it in half. That is not how a two part story is structured. The skill with two parters is making part one work in its own right AND setting up part two.
That's probably why it's been so long since DW has done one - they're difficult to write well.
The reviewers who are saying this aren't daft and obviously do understand how two parters should work.”
“As any writer will tell you - the first part of a two parter should still stand as a story in its own right with intro, rise and resolution. You NEVER just take a script and chop it in half. That is not how a two part story is structured. The skill with two parters is making part one work in its own right AND setting up part two.
That's probably why it's been so long since DW has done one - they're difficult to write well.
The reviewers who are saying this aren't daft and obviously do understand how two parters should work.”
Pretty sure none of the two parters in Doctor Who do that, other than A Good Man Goes To War and Let's Kill Hitler if they count as one.
And if they're not written correctly, how are some of them are incredibly popular e.g Empty Child/Doctor Dances, Impossible Planet/Satan Pit, Human Nature/Family Of Blood and Pandorica Opens/Big Bang.
Cultbox's David Lewis' words about Dark Water.
Originally Posted by CD93:
“I am confident Dark Water has a beginning, a middle and an end (this man knows his cliffhangers) in it's own right. But it's still half of a bigger story - I hope.
Hey slouchingthatch, set us right - has the script been cut in half?”
“I am confident Dark Water has a beginning, a middle and an end (this man knows his cliffhangers) in it's own right. But it's still half of a bigger story - I hope.
Hey slouchingthatch, set us right - has the script been cut in half?
”
Well, yes! It's clearly the first part of a two-parter, but there's a definite sense of this being a more or less self-contained first part of two. As has been speculated (and reported in other people's previews), not all the scenes in the "next time" trailer are from part 1 - basically all the action scenes are from the second part. The trailer currently running on BBC1 is only featuring scenes from part 1, though.
Dark Water has two big moments - one pre-credits that sets the impetus for the entire episode, and one at the end which is so top secret that two short sequences have been deleted from the online preview I have access to.
I'll leave it to everyone's imaginations what those are. I genuinely don't know what's been deleted from the ending, but it's clearly a big spoiler!
To put this into context, there's a lot more sensitivity around spoilers for Who than there are other BBC shows. Access to previews is controlled much more tightly than other shows (The Apprentice is similar), and pretty much every week reviewers are instrucuted not to divulge some specific plot points.
So, for instance, for In the Forest of the Night, we were told not to talk about Maebh's background or the forest creatures she sees, while for Mummy on the Orient Express we weren't supposed to hint at anything to do with the Foretold's origin or that only its intended victims could see it.
This is the first time this season, however, that a scene has been physically removed.
Hope that helps.
You know what, I wouldn't put it past the Moff to actually make Missy the Rani just to completely mess with the fans. Those of us laughing and joking and calling everyone the Rani would certainly be left stunned.
Also, in the absence of the Master, she is amongst the most well-known Time-Lady out there.
Also, in the absence of the Master, she is amongst the most well-known Time-Lady out there.
Originally Posted by Whovian1109:
“You know what, I wouldn't put it past the Moff to actually make Missy the Rani just to completely mess with the fans. Those of us laughing and joking and calling everyone the Rani would certainly be left stunned.
Also, in the absence of the Master, she is amongst the most well-known Time-Lady out there.”
“You know what, I wouldn't put it past the Moff to actually make Missy the Rani just to completely mess with the fans. Those of us laughing and joking and calling everyone the Rani would certainly be left stunned.
Also, in the absence of the Master, she is amongst the most well-known Time-Lady out there.”
Or he could really mess with fans and she could turn out to be the famous Timelord and cricketer, Ronnie Irani........... (ones for those with some cricket knowledge there).
Originally Posted by saladfingers81:
“The Radio Times is a sad and sorry old brand waiting to be chucked on the scrap heap. Its writers are utterly piss poor and its laughable attempts at remaining relevant with its online content are exactly that. Laughable. I wouldn't waste a second reading anything they say good or bad about the show.”
“The Radio Times is a sad and sorry old brand waiting to be chucked on the scrap heap. Its writers are utterly piss poor and its laughable attempts at remaining relevant with its online content are exactly that. Laughable. I wouldn't waste a second reading anything they say good or bad about the show.”
I have to be honest, saladfingers81, I only bought it because Peter Capaldi was on the cover. By the time I had read all the Doctor Who related articles, I wished I hadn't bothered. I was all just oddly negative. Even the positive bits were only just positive.
And when I got to Patrick Mulkern's comment "A lot of this episode will appear crass and in poor taste to anyone who's suffered a bereavement. Which is most of us." I thought are you having a laugh?
God help him if he ever watched True Blood!
So I can't disagree with your comments about the RT. I won't be wasting my money on it again.
The removal of scenes can only point to Missy's identity not only being revealed but that it is someone we will know when comes. Especially the reaction we've heard about the ADR recording session.
That points to either The Master or a Future Clara tbh.
If Gomez does regenerate into Dance, that's gonna be a hell of an awkward post regen scene
That points to either The Master or a Future Clara tbh.
If Gomez does regenerate into Dance, that's gonna be a hell of an awkward post regen scene
Originally Posted by claire2281:
“As any writer will tell you - the first part of a two parter should still stand as a story in its own right with intro, rise and resolution. You NEVER just take a script and chop it in half. That is not how a two part story is structured. The skill with two parters is making part one work in its own right AND setting up part two.”
“As any writer will tell you - the first part of a two parter should still stand as a story in its own right with intro, rise and resolution. You NEVER just take a script and chop it in half. That is not how a two part story is structured. The skill with two parters is making part one work in its own right AND setting up part two.”
Most Classic Who episodes do not stand as a story in their own right.
Actually, most New Who two-parters don't either.
Originally Posted by claire2281:
“As any writer will tell you - the first part of a two parter should still stand as a story in its own right with intro, rise and resolution. You NEVER just take a script and chop it in half. That is not how a two part story is structured. The skill with two parters is making part one work in its own right AND setting up part two.
That's probably why it's been so long since DW has done one - they're difficult to write well.
The reviewers who are saying this aren't daft and obviously do understand how two parters should work.”
“As any writer will tell you - the first part of a two parter should still stand as a story in its own right with intro, rise and resolution. You NEVER just take a script and chop it in half. That is not how a two part story is structured. The skill with two parters is making part one work in its own right AND setting up part two.
That's probably why it's been so long since DW has done one - they're difficult to write well.
The reviewers who are saying this aren't daft and obviously do understand how two parters should work.”
I can't name a single two parter that hasn't had the first part feel like half a story, except perhaps The Pandorica Opens/The Big Bang. Yet they are still superb.
4 of 42
