|
||||||||
Dr Who 7th May |
| View Poll Results: What did you think to the show? | |||
| Very poor |
|
21 | 3.74% |
| Poor |
|
23 | 4.09% |
| Fair |
|
88 | 15.66% |
| Good |
|
147 | 26.16% |
| Very Good |
|
163 | 29.00% |
| Excellent |
|
120 | 21.35% |
| Voters: 562. You can't vote on this poll right now - are you signed in? | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#326 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Brighton
Posts: 3,915
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Szlater
I don't think that we'll see another sci-fi show on ITV in the same timeslot as Doctor Who. The reason being that it would split the viewing audience, rather than attracting new viewers. ITV may introduce their Patrick Stewart vehicle in the post-Who slot, to capitalise on the Who audience, rather than trying to compete with it.
I also doubt that the new Battlestar would be screened as early as 7pm, it's a much more adult programme, and is more likely to be shown in a post-watershed slot. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#327 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: A Crack In Time
Posts: 13,646
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Szlater
I don't think that we'll see another sci-fi show on ITV in the same timeslot as Doctor Who. The reason being that it would split the viewing audience, rather than attracting new viewers. ITV may introduce their Patrick Stewart vehicle in the post-Who slot, to capitalise on the Who audience, rather than trying to compete with it.
I also doubt that the new Battlestar would be screened as early as 7pm, it's a much more adult programme, and is more likely to be shown in a post-watershed slot. I was just using them as examples. EastEnders was once triumphant in the ratings battle with Coronation Street and look how that has changed. All I am saying is we the viewers and the production team shouldn't become complacent and assume that the current trend will continue. I hope and want DW to do well and strive to keep this up with the rest of the series and series 2. Viewing habits vary and the television industry is a fickle world and things can change. If ITV muster themselves who knows what they can pull out of the bag. RTD himself said it is dangerous to listen to people who continually lavish praise on you. |
|
|
|
|
|
#328 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brighton
Posts: 882
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Guardian
I was just using them as examples. EastEnders was once triumphant in the ratings battle with Coronation Street and look how that has changed. All I am saying is we the viewers and the production team shouldn't become complacent and assume that the current trend will continue. I hope and want DW to do well and strive to keep this up with the rest of the series and series 2. Viewing habits vary and the television industry is a fickle world and things can change. If ITV muster themselves who knows what they can pull out of the bag. RTD himself said it is dangerous to listen to people who continually lavish praise on you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#329 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: A Crack In Time
Posts: 13,646
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimboc
I quite agree, but I don't think RTD is likely to get complacent. From all I seen/read/heard him say - he seems all to aware of the competitive nature of TV world.
I consider myself an eager follower of the series but I am not blinded to how trends can be bucked or that in this fickle old world we live in, what was hot property yesterday can be tomorrows chip paper! |
|
|
|
|
|
#330 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NW London
Posts: 19,904
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lino
If you go to the products section of the Geocomtex page..
Here are some of our world-gripping products: [list][*]IE core chip transistors[*]Gravitic technology research[*]Bubble memory[*]Argentum Ordnance (6/9/32 piece packs)[*]Psychtronic - Electronic Interface hardware[*]Node Stabilised (Lupus and Nocens variants)[*]Ether beam sensing technology[*]Telebiogenesis[*]Reduced stature nebulalloy[*]Bonded polycarbon[/list]See what it says in brackets after Node Stabilised? Lupus is Latin for wolf and Nocens is Latin for bad.. It's probably been mentioned elsewhere, but man alive I do hope we're not all going to be angry with RTD when this all ties together.. If it does! Last nights episode I voted as good, the whole Blade Runner look was a little tired I thought, can't go wrong with a little Pegg though! ![]() K |
|
|
|
|
|
#331 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: The United Kingdom
Posts: 15,551
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Szlater
For much the same reasons as I disagreed with the Gallifreyans are humans conjecture last night.
The events in 'Genesis of the Daleks' in which Davros creates the Daleks happens in about 5300BC. Your idea would mean that Adam as Davros would have to invent time and space travel, only to subsequently forget about it. Look at the Back to the Future films. In Part 1, Marty goes back in time with the Video and the Doc on the Video explains how to build the time machine. So we have a future Doc telling a Past doc how to build the machine thus creating a time paradox. Without these sorts of paradoxes, SciFi becomes boring
|
|
|
|
|
|
#332 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: London
Posts: 1,076
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by munta
I don't see why Adam would need to invent time travel. This is SciFi after all.
Look at the Back to the Future films. In Part 1, Marty goes back in time with the Video and the Doc on the Video explains how to build the time machine. Quote:
Originally Posted by munta
Without these sorts of paradoxes, SciFi becomes boring
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#333 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: The United Kingdom
Posts: 15,551
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Szlater
No, he explains how to POWER the time machine, the Doc already knew how to build one after having the idea for the flux capacitor earlier that day (when he fell off the toilet).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Szlater
Not in a series based around time travel with an extraordinary history you don't. The way to alienate the Dr Who fans would be to mess with the backstory in such an extremely stupid way.
As you point out, the Gallifreyans invented time travel in 10,000,000 BC and that Davros creates the Daleks in about 5300BC. So on this basis, Adam doesn't need to invent time travel because he only needs to become Davros at around 5300BC, long after time travel was invented. This leaves the Gallifreyans as the inventors of time travel and thus the key background to the story remains faithful. This only leaves the paradox that the Daleks are invented due to Adam having seen a Dalek ! I don't see this a major problem as any program that deals with time travel is by its nature dealing with paradoxes. In fact, we see one of these next week when Rose and the Doctor are in two places at one. If you wish to argue that paradoxes shouldn't occur in Dr Who then you are arguing that the whole program is flawed. But the program isn't based upon the real world physics of Hawking and his Contemporaries so I think most other people are prepare to suspend their beliefs for 45 minutes a week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#334 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: London
Posts: 1,076
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by munta
But without the power, there would have been no machine. So present Doc was instumental in Helping past Doc build the machine
Quote:
Originally Posted by munta
As you point out, the Gallifreyans invented time travel in 10,000,000 BC and that Davros creates the Daleks in about 5300BC. So on this basis, Adam doesn't need to invent time travel because he only needs to become Davros at around 5300BC, long after time travel was invented.
Quote:
Originally Posted by munta
This leaves the Gallifreyans as the inventors of time travel and thus the key background to the story remains faithful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by munta
This only leaves the paradox that the Daleks are invented due to Adam having seen a Dalek !
Quote:
Originally Posted by munta
I don't see this a major problem as any program that deals with time travel is by its nature dealing with paradoxes. In fact, we see one of these next week when Rose and the Doctor are in two places at one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by munta
If you wish to argue that paradoxes shouldn't occur in Dr Who then you are arguing that the whole program is flawed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#335 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: The United Kingdom
Posts: 15,551
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Szlater
Being in two places at once isn't a paradox.
As far as your other points, time IS by its nature full of paradoxes. You can't have a program about time travel with out them. Try google (time travel paradox) there over 600,000 pages for you to read. Or if you wish to narrow down your search, include Hawking in your search. |
|
|
|
|
|
#336 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Leeds, Yorkshire
Posts: 600
|
Going off on a complete tangent... why was it Space Station 5?
Perhaps stations 1-3 were destroyed during construction, while four disappeared shortly after it went live... And the Doctor is The One (Time Lord, I mean). RTD = JMS. I'll get my coat... Gary |
|
|
|
|
|
#337 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: London
Posts: 1,076
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by munta
As far as your other points, time IS by its nature full of paradoxes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#338 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brighton
Posts: 882
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Guardian
Sorry if it came across as patronising...wasnt my intention at all. Working in the 'industry' I appreciate how things can change very quickly, programmes that perform consistently well can go through a rocky patch as EastEnders has done but is now recovering.
I consider myself an eager follower of the series but I am not blinded to how trends can be bucked or that in this fickle old world we live in, what was hot property yesterday can be tomorrows chip paper! (Actually, having thought about it - I'm not sure I would want to work on DW - it'd spoil all the fun we're having second guessing RTD et al....
|
|
|
|
|
|
#339 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,985
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary of Beeston
Going off on a complete tangent... why was it Space Station 5?
Perhaps stations 1-3 were destroyed during construction, while four disappeared shortly after it went live... And the Doctor is The One (Time Lord, I mean). RTD = JMS. I'll get my coat... Gary Cj |
|
|
|
|
|
#340 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 147
|
Sci-Fi Forum
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenWatts
Regarding our request for a seperate sci-fi forum, did anyone else see the reply from Beth at the end of last week's thread? I've copied it out below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have read the comments on this thread about getting a sci-fi forum, as has been mentioned this has been discussed among the team and it was decided there weren't enough threads, posts or potential programmes to warrent a sci-fi forum on the front page. It has been pointed out that the site has smaller forums but they are not on the front page and are specific programme forums within a genre which is very busy on the forum. The reality sub-forums together contain more posts and threads than the TV Programmes forum does. It would be very disruptive to start adding sub forums into TV Programmes as each new forum would add more space at the top to scroll down. With one forum it wouldn't be too bad but it would be unfair to then deny Comedy a forum, maybe then News and Current Affairs and perhaps Sports. Added to this there would then be even more confusion about where to post - despite the announcement at the top of the forum people are still posting 'Soaps and Drama' and 'Reality TV' threads in here. This is not a 'no, not ever' this is a 'no, not now' - starting more threads won't help if they are covering the same subjects they will be merged anyway. I hope this goes some way to explaining the reason for our decision. If you have any further comments to make on the matter I'd appreciate it if you could send them to us via 'feedback'. Thanks. Beth. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Enjoyed The Long Game - thought it was classic behind-the-sofa fare, although I agree that the plotting was rushed because of time constraints and Adam's "Turlough behaviour" wasn't explored enough. Still miles better than anything else on this weekend! |
|
|
|
|
|
#341 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Manchester
Posts: 243
|
Simon Pegg was good.
show was good. I thought it was the second worst episode after number 2. I though the ending was funny though |
|
|
|
|
|
#342 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: A Crack In Time
Posts: 13,646
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimboc
Wise words BG - I'm talking from within the fickle ol' TV world too - (although I'd give my right leg to work on the show itself!). And FICKLE is definitely the word to describe the viewing public!
(Actually, having thought about it - I'm not sure I would want to work on DW - it'd spoil all the fun we're having second guessing RTD et al.... ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#343 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NW London
Posts: 19,904
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary of Beeston
Going off on a complete tangent... why was it Space Station 5?
Perhaps stations 1-3 were destroyed during construction, while four disappeared shortly after it went live... And the Doctor is The One (Time Lord, I mean). RTD = JMS. I'll get my coat... Gary K |
|
|
|
|
|
#344 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: London
Posts: 1,076
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by KennyT
Nah, sorry, don't get the reference - please enlighten me as I hate to miss a good joke!
K
|
|
|
|
|
|
#345 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Brighton
Posts: 882
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Guardian
A high standard (with one or two exceptions) has been set by this series and we still have 7 episodes to go and I just want them to keep it up and perhaps shine even brighter in series 2, whatever the competition is!
![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#346 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,985
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by soleus
That would all make sense ofcourse, if it weren't for the fact that both The Farm (Z-list Channel 5 celebs engaged in dubious animal realetd activites) and the X-Factor (less than successful Pop Idol rip-off) both have their very own separate forums at the same level as the TV prgrammes forum. Why not just amalgamate them into the reality TV forum where they belong, and allow a new SciFi forum? The numbers speak for themselves - the Farm forum only has 188 posts in total: bit of a waste of space if you ask me! There seems to be a fair consensus about the need for the forum, the only dissentors being the mods. Aren't these forums for our convenience?
Enjoyed The Long Game - thought it was classic behind-the-sofa fare, although I agree that the plotting was rushed because of time constraints and Adam's "Turlough behaviour" wasn't explored enough. Still miles better than anything else on this weekend! Simon Pegg wa very good, I liked the dialogue with Suki, all that Liar! stuff- great acting I think the idea of Adam turning greedy was a good idea but could have been developed more but once again that feels like a timing issue. My favourite part was at the end when Adam begged to be let back on the Tardis but the doctor said "I only have the best. I have Rose" The look on her face was priceless! Great acting Billie Cj |
|
|
|
|
|
#347 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: AccountKiller
Posts: 8,749
|
With reference to the Bad Wolf saga. Could it just be
Russell T. Davies doing his version of 'an elf with a gun.' That was a reoccurring character in an old comic book, called The Defenders. Each month, the elf would appear and shoot someone. The writer assured his editor that it would all make perfect sense. But in the end the joke was on the company, 'cause the elf with a gun had no special meaning or relevance to the plot!
|
|
|
|
|
#348 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: A Crack In Time
Posts: 13,646
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alrightmate
Thanks, actually you might be right in thinking it would be a shame, because we do still want to be surprised really don't we?
I'm hoping that when we find out how it all fits together we'll be kicking ourselves. Mind you, the reality TV thing would be sinister, very sinister. Especially if it's just a piece of sideshow entertainment as a supplement to major wars and deaths of planets. The destruction of Gallifrey was probably watched as reality entertainment. In a way that would be more horrific than if it was just a conventional war. To know that it is being enjoyed as light entertainment by people makes it much worse than it normally would be When I say that events may be viewed as reality TV entertainment, I don't mean it's all pretend. I'm imagining events as real wars where millions actually die for real. I'm just speculating that observers are just watching such things for their own pleasure and profit. They may probably even try to influence events to some extent, by messing with time a bit. There was something I read about the Daleks being involved in the destruction of Gallifrey, or something vague like that. If so, then maybe they were given a little push in the direction to attack Gallifrey. If it was in the Face of Boe's interests then they might be financing a project set up by someone else... Just a thought to add to the mix |
|
|
|
|
|
#349 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: A Crack In Time
Posts: 13,646
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimboc
We're of the same mind then Black Guardian - you're more friendly to the good Doctor than your namesake was I may add.
![]() I pay homage to you with the air from my lungs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#350 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: The United Kingdom
Posts: 15,551
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Szlater
Can you give some examples, I'm a microbiologist and not a quantum physicist, so I'm quite intrigued.
http://www.cix.co.uk/~antcom/gp.html - this discusses this paradox with reference to "Back to the Future" "The Flipside of Domanic Hyde" had an interesting play on this paradox. This is known as the Predestination paradox. In this paradox, you travel back in time and become the cause of an event that causes you to travel back in time. This paradox is the usual SciFi paradox due to its complexity. Examples include - Terminator, Harry Potter, Back to the Future, Bill and Ted. Not all bad writting, I'm sure you will agree. Oh and Doctor Who - Day of the Daleks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predestination_paradox Conservation of energy. As Einstein correctly summised, Matter and energy are interchangable. The first law of Thermodynamics states that energy can not be created or destroyed. These two fact therefore mean that the amount of energy in the universe is fixed. If time travel were possible, this would mean that the energy in any one time line would be greater than the amount allowed. This is why the same thing cannot be in two places at the same time. Total Energy. Current understanding of the universe suggests that the only method of time travel would be to travel faster than the speed of light. As you approach the speed of light, you get heavier and therefore require more energy to increas your speed. This means that to reach the speed of light requires an infinate amount of energy. As the amount of energy in the universe is finite, then time travel isn't possible. There are theoretical physicysts who are trying to over come these obstacles but they remain just theories at the moment. These include multi dimentional universe, Infinate number of time lines and so on. Going back to two thing being in two places at the same time, this is only possible at the Quantum level. I couldn't do justice to explaining how this can happen. In fact, its not really know how it can occur but only that is has been proven through experimentation. The way they proved this was to take two slits and shine a light through these slits. This causes the light waves to interfear with its self and creates bands of light and darkness. If you reduce this to a single photon, you still see the interferance pattern. So the single photon must have travelled through both slits. This has lead to some interesting research on quantum entanglement. I won't even attempt to explain this but it allows communication between two quantum particles at the speed of light
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 20:23.





