|
||||||||
Osgood and Zygons for Series 9 |
| View Poll Results: Most excited for...? | |||
| Osgood |
|
14 | 40.00% |
| Zygons |
|
16 | 45.71% |
| Peter Harness writing |
|
5 | 14.29% |
| Voters: 35. You can't vote on this poll right now - are you signed in? | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#76 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
Fake name used to avoid revealing the actress in question? One Who previously played (fake) Cleopatra maybe?
Steven Moffat needs to put his romantic feelings for River Song aside and focus on bringing back characters who need to return like Captain Jack. |
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#77 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 612
|
Quote:
http://i.imgur.com/3IH8Q8l.gif
Steven Moffat needs to put his romantic feelings for River Song aside and focus on bringing back characters who need to return like Captain Jack. |
|
|
|
|
|
#78 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
Jack doesn't need a return whatsoever though.
|
|
|
|
|
#79 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 612
|
Quote:
I think he does. 12 would be hilarious alongside Captain Jack.
Just grinds my gears when you say stuff like "Steven Moffat should focus more on X/Y/Z who need returns, instead of bringing back A/B/C." Steven Moffat doesn't need to do anything. He doesn't need to bring anyone back. You're just stuck in the past and want the return of ruddy everyone; K9, Jack, Docs 10 and 11... just let it go, and see what happens. |
|
|
|
|
|
#80 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
Well I don't think he does. *shrug*
Just grinds my gears when you say stuff like "Steven Moffat should focus more on X/Y/Z who need returns, instead of bringing back A/B/C." Steven Moffat doesn't need to do anything. He doesn't need to bring anyone back. You're just stuck in the past and want the return of ruddy everyone; K9, Jack, Docs 10 and 11... just let it go, and see what happens. |
|
|
|
|
#81 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 612
|
Quote:
Not everyone. I don't want to see River Song, Martha Jones or Danny Pink return.
I dunno, maybe I'm a minority, but I long for the day when we get a series - just one series - with no callbacks or returning elements/monsters/etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
#82 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,080
|
Still got my fingers crossed for Pigbin Josh to return, personally. Back story completely unexamined.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#83 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,406
|
Quote:
I dunno, maybe I'm a minority, but I long for the day when we get a series - just one series - with no callbacks or returning elements/monsters/etc.
Love em all dearly but they do feel rather over used of late and the show is beginning to get a little formulaic in that respect. |
|
|
|
|
|
#84 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
I would certainly welcome a series without the Daleks, Cybermen or Paternoster Gang.
Love em all dearly but they do feel rather over used of late and the show is beginning to get a little formulaic in that respect. |
|
|
|
|
#85 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 612
|
Quote:
No thanks. That would be boring.
Nah, sorry DB. Returning monsters and characters all the damn time is boring. (Hey look, different opinions!) Having a series sans returnees would force them to be more creative for 12 whole weeks/episodes. Then it'll also allow time for people to actually miss stuff like the Daleks, so their return after that will be a little more special. |
|
|
|
|
|
#86 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 612
|
Sorry, accidental double post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#87 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 1,428
|
I'm non-plus about this news and I can't say that I'm surprised. If anything, I'm leaning towards the negative vibe tbh, as in 'does death for a character not mean anything anymore'? Heck, it'll be Sara Kingdom, Katrina or Adric next!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#88 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 16,034
|
Quote:
Well, if by "demanding that everyone else restricts their discussion" you mean "wishing that everyone carries out their discussion in the best place for it" then, yes.
Never heard of "the tyranny of the majority"? http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s7/do...octor-who.html This very site ran with the story. So it's deeply unpleasant to advocate Forum Apartheid in here and tell people they should go and discuss the piece of NEWS at the back of the bus. If you don't want to accidentally happen across a piece of Doctor Who NEWS, then you're going to have a hard time navigating any Doctor Who-related forum. Clue: It's NEWS. |
|
|
|
|
|
#89 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 475
|
Quote:
Telling people where they can post a piece of NEWS direct from BBC NEWS is ludicrous. Doctor Who NEWS is of general interest.
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s7/do...octor-who.html This very site ran with the story. So it's deeply unpleasant to advocate Forum Apartheid in here and tell people they should go and discuss the piece of NEWS at the back of the bus. If you don't want to accidentally happen across a piece of Doctor Who NEWS, then you're going to have a hard time navigating any Doctor Who-related forum. Clue: It's NEWS. But I'll pretend you're still interested in debating this anyway... Being news and being a spoiler aren't mutually exclusive. Why do you think they should be? |
|
|
|
|
|
#90 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 612
|
Spoiler
|
|
|
|
|
|
#91 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 16,034
|
Quote:
Funny thing about online debates. Whenever someone starts ranting with the Capslock Of Rage, it nearly always means, "I know I've lost the argument but I'm too stubborn to admit it, so I'll just try to shout my opponents down instead and hope they don't notice."
But I'll pretend you're still interested in debating this anyway... Being news and being a spoiler aren't mutually exclusive. Why do you think they should be? If information has been distributed all over the media in a press release, then it is not something that anyone should need to whisper about in a designated corner of the forum. Regardless of whether you regard it to be a "spoiler". |
|
|
|
|
|
#92 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Downtown
Posts: 5,810
|
Quote:
I am being reasonable. I know people have different thresholds of what they consider is and is not a spoiler. A little consideration of others' spoiler thresholds is all I'm asking for.
The fact is, before seeing Lewis's headline thread title I was unaware of Osgood's return. That makes it a spoiler and it certainly spoiled the surprise of seeing her return in the episode. Sure, I might have stumbled across that information elsewhere, but I hadn't. I avoid entertainment "news" as much as possible - I never go to this site's home pages, for example. (BTW, adams66, I'd appreciate a less sarcastic tone, thanks). Lewis's thread title has spoiled the episode for me. If he'd put it in the spoiler thread he would not have spoiled it for me. Hiding from spoilers is like eating half a cupcake just so you can save the rest for later. |
|
|
|
|
|
#93 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 612
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#94 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
Osgood's been rummaging through her dressing up box again, this time seemingly for 7's jumper and a shirt with question mark collars. So she's worn items of 11, 10, 7 and 4/5/6 now. Wonder if she'll reappear again in Series 10 wearing a cape and wearing Hartnell's ring.
|
|
|
|
|
#95 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 475
|
Quote:
Well, I see the "Capslock of Rage" gave you a cheap get-out clause from actually addressing the post about your frankly bizarre idea that people should hide away to discuss widely publicised news.
If information has been distributed all over the media in a press release, then it is not something that anyone should need to whisper about in a designated corner of the forum. Regardless of whether you regard it to be a "spoiler". And another question... How else are we going to discuss existing episodes of DW here without being distracted by any of the upcoming stuff? If you know of a better way of doing it, then say so. |
|
|
|
|
|
#96 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 16,034
|
Quote:
Honestly, I used to be a spoilerphobe, but then I realised that there isn't really a difference between me finding out now, or finding out when it happens. It'll happen either way and it's exciting to see what Osgood's return has in store. You should be looking forward to it.
Hiding from spoilers is like eating half a cupcake just so you can save the rest for later. Unless they can somehow manage to avoid every news source and every single BBC One promo in August, the chances of watching an episode completely "cold" are virtually nil. |
|
|
|
|
|
#97 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 612
|
Quote:
It just seems bizarre to me that people try in vain to avoid discussion of Doctor Who news on a Doctor Who forum, like some sort of sad re-enactment of the No Hiding Place episode of Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads.
Unless they can somehow manage to avoid every news source and every single BBC One promo in August, the chances of watching an episode completely "cold" are virtually nil. |
|
|
|
|
|
#98 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 475
|
Quote:
Honestly, I used to be a spoilerphobe, but then I realised that there isn't really a difference between me finding out now, or finding out when it happens. It'll happen either way and it's exciting to see what Osgood's return has in store. You should be looking forward to it.
If we don't know what happens, we can be caught up in the story, be drawn into the fictional world. If you know what's going to happen, you think, "Oh yes, I remember this," then it reminds you you're just watching a show, and you lose interest in giving the episode your full attention. It's like trying to watch something for a second time: it's just nowhere near as enjoyable because you already know what's coming. Quote:
Hiding from spoilers is like eating half a cupcake just so you can save the rest for later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#99 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 16,034
|
Quote:
A "get-out clause from actually addressing the post"? Really? I asked you a specific question about it. A question which you didn't answer. Which one of us is not "addressing the post"?
And another question... How else are we going to discuss existing episodes of DW here without being distracted by any of the upcoming stuff? If you know of a better way of doing it, then say so. As for your other question about how we could discuss existing episodes of DW here without being distracted by any of the upcoming stuff. Well, that only seems to be a "problem" for just a few members. If it becomes more widespread, maybe a group of people could lobby DS to provide various Doctor Who subforums? But I can't see that happening anytime soon. |
|
|
|
|
|
#100 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 612
|
So the BBC should never have released this Press Release/put this news out there.
And then it would've leaked because they're filming outdoors and being watched/snapped etc. And those moaning now would probably have found out before the series anyway, and been just as upset (if not more upset) cos it'd leaked. They can't win. They released it as news cos they were doing location filming (today). The news is therefore out there. If that really upsets you that much, come off it. There are 12 episodes this series. Osgood and Zygons are just two spoilers, if you're calling them that. There are gunna be more stories, episodes, plot twists, revelations, characters, settings and the like to be surprised by (including, y'know the actual plot of the Zygon/Osgood tale too)! |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 20:14.




