|
||||||||
Blink - Overrated Tosh or Modern Masterpiece. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 11
|
Weeping Angels
What I like about the Weeping Angels episode is when Sally has her back to them when she gets the Tardis Key, we, the audience, can still see them, so they still don't move because of the quantum lock. Clever.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,652
|
Quote:
It's true though
![]() When I first watched 'Blink', I had an instant Who-high, but I've found that's dissipated over the course of time. Maybe the script is a bit too obviously clever, a bit too 'what-you-see-is-what-you-get'. With the exception of the wibbly-wobbly-timey-wimey stuff, I've not found that much in the way of enduring elements that bring me back time and time again. But still, I admire its, well, cleverness. But 'Turn Left' is far more layered, IMHO, and the superior episode. Regards, Cypher |
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: County Durham
Posts: 15,061
|
Quote:
What I like about the Weeping Angels episode is when Sally has her back to them when she gets the Tardis Key, we, the audience, can still see them, so they still don't move because of the quantum lock. Clever.
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1
|
i never like how the weeping angels killed. i mean they as the doctor calls it (kill you nicely) and it is. not to mention why no one who is sent think hay i could stop a bad thing happening in history and be a hero.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 497
|
I think it's a brilliant Doctor-lite episode.
I think it's a brilliant Doctor Who episode generally. What I can't understand is why people (Neil Gaiman included) think it's a good introductory episode. Surely if you want to choose an episode to introduce someone to Doctor Who, you choose the most typical? It doesn't have to be the best, just one that demonstrates the format of the show. Blink is the opposite of that. Surely we love it because it's not a typical episode and the doctor isn't doing what he normally does because 'saving the day' is left to someone else (Sally)? If you show Blink to a non-Who person, you could convince them that that's how the doctor turns up in the episode each week! One week he's on DVDs, the next week he's on a film reel... 'Partners In Crime' is never talked about as the best story, but surely it showcases, the format of the show better than Blink. A Doctor and his companion saving the world from aliens. Like I said, it is brilliant, though. I just wanted to get that off my chest. |
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,080
|
In a very belated answer to the OP's question....neither.
But it is a very strong episode. It's actually not even my favourite Doctor-lite episode; personally just about prefer Turn Left. Off on a tangent, don't think Matt really had a Doctor-lite episode? Guess The Girl Who Waited came closest, but still didn't really feel like it somehow. |
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,205
|
Outstanding piece of TV and well deserved it's HUGO award.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Steven Moffats pantry
Posts: 8,808
|
Its good to see that even all those years ago the hyperbole problem was going strong. The usual problem that something has to be either the greatest thing ever or the worst thing ever. Of course the truth is much more complicated.
As for Partners in Crime? I can't imagine many worse episodes to introduce a new person to Doctor Who. Embarrassingly childish. Take any other opener and it trounces that horror show. |
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,342
|
Quote:
Its good to see that even all those years ago the hyperbole problem was going strong. The usual problem that something has to be either the greatest thing ever or the worst thing ever. Of course the truth is much more complicated.
As for Partners in Crime? I can't imagine many worse episodes to introduce a new person to Doctor Who. Embarrassingly childish. Take any other opener and it trounces that horror show. |
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Steven Moffats pantry
Posts: 8,808
|
Quote:
Are you being deliberately ironic with those 2 paragraphs?
Though I'm no fan of Partners in Crime I must say. Its a great framing story for a new companion and set up for the series but with a truly woeful central 'threat'. I much prefer Smith and Jones. A gem of an episode. |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 272
|
Quote:
It's certainly over-rated. But that's only because of the hyperbole with which fans appear to inject their opinions at the moment.
"I liked that" becomes "that was the bestest thing in the history of everything EVER!" because those who like an episode somehow feel they have to compensate for those who didn't. And, on the other side of the coin, "I didn't enjoy bits of that" becomes "that was the worstest thing in the history of everything EVER! And anyone who disagrees obviously just doesn't have any critical faculties and is just not as intelligent as ME!" (Normally expressed more vigourously than the positive side of things as these posters tend to know they're in a TINY minority but feel that shouting loudly validates their opinion, especially if they can "intellectually" dismiss the opposing viewpoint by (mis)using terms like "Deus Ex Machina," which they've heard at some point but obviously have no idea what it actually means.) I can see why someone would think it was a good introduction to Doctor Who as it made no assumptions that you knew anything about the Doctor. Hopefully it would have made you as curious as Sally was to find out about him, so fair play to Neil Gaiman for that view. That aside, good, yes; original, yes; best episode ever? No. An opinion of course, but I am one of those who think it was probably a shame to bring back the Angels. As someone else said, even in that series, Human Nature surpasses it for me and at least half a dozen episodes from other series. |
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,342
|
Quote:
Yep! I was worried it was a bit subtle so I might just look a dick.
Though I'm no fan of Partners in Crime I must say. Its a great framing story for a new companion and set up for the series but with a truly woeful central 'threat'. I much prefer Smith and Jones. A gem of an episode. ![]() I love Partners In Crime, particularly the mime sequence, but I can see why some might not rate it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 497
|
Well, I just used Partners In Crime as an example of a season opener. The point I was trying to make was that a season opener is a better introduction to Doctor Who that a Doctor-Lite.
(With the exception of TIA/DOTM, which was a 2-parter, I don't think any of the openers have a particularly powerful central threat compared to other episodes, and that's intential because the more powerful enemies always need to be saved for the end of the series.) |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,342
|
As for Blink, I think it's Who at it's finest, and I'm sure many will disagree with me here but I think it's Moffat's best Who story be a country mile.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Steven Moffats pantry
Posts: 8,808
|
Quote:
Phew that's a relief.
![]() I love Partners In Crime, particularly the mime sequence, but I can see why some might not rate it. As I say. Partners in Crime has its moments. I just hate the Adipose storyline and as an episode to win over a new viewer I think it veers to close to being childish that it might just reinforce the stereotype of Doctor Who being just a 'kids' show. I see why people like it but it doesn't get the balance right like RTDs other season openers. I even prefer New Earth which I know isn't very well loved from what I've read. As for Blink while it isn't my personal favorite of Moffats episodes looking at it in an objective sense I would almost agree it is his best episode in the sense that every element works perfectly. Its almost like a wonderful demo reel of what Moffats Who would become but without the occasional excesses we have seen since. It contains nearly every one of his familiar calling cards as a writer but all in perfect balance which hasn't always been the case since. And I do consider it a classic. I remember at the time what a fuss it caused and even people who were mostly ambivalent to Doctor Who were talking about it. In a good way. And the original conceit of The Weeping Angels was a true original that transcends Doctor Who and has become a classic of the genre. I am not aware of anything before Blink that used a similar plot device though I am sure some more educated sci-fi fans could perhaps point to some influences that pre-dated it. Even those who have since come to dislike Moffats version of the show would have to admit that as an audition/job application for show runner they don't come much better than this and as such it was obvious from the day oy first broadcast that Moffat should be next in line. |
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Steven Moffats pantry
Posts: 8,808
|
Quote:
i never like how the weeping angels killed. i mean they as the doctor calls it (kill you nicely) and it is. not to mention why no one who is sent think hay i could stop a bad thing happening in history and be a hero.
Think of it like Back to the Future 2 and Biff Tannen with the Sports Almanac but with the obvious twist and differences. If you were aware of the legend of The Weeping Angels and had delusions of grandeur and/or little to live for in your current time would it not make sense to search one out so it deliberately sends you back in time? Of course there's a lottery to when and where you would end up but even so think of all the knowledge you would be taking with you! The things yet invented, the ability to know what's to come, hell even just the chance to make a hell of alot of money by betting on sporting events in a Biff style. One could become at least very rich and famous and at worst become dangerously powerful to an extent that the entire future is changed. If you're sent back by an Angel one assumes everything goes back with you so even if you just had an Iphone in your coat the implications for changing history are massive. And yet so far we just see people sent back who choose to blend in and benignly live out there days in the background with no impact at all on the timeline. Even Amy Pond could have basically invented modern science fiction writing if she had wanted! Amy wonders into a publishing office with an idea about a Wizard called Harry...Kerching! And Rory bless him could've moved from Nurse to Nobel prize winning hero. Oh and wasn't he in a band once? He could invent rock and roll. Maybe I've thought about this a bit much. I started sketching out the story details but it kept being too Back to the Future so I gave up. Any one else feel free to steal this idea! Moffat, if you're reading... |
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,355
|
Brilliant episode, but not the towering classic that it oftens seems to be made out to be. Was a relief at the time, after love and monsters to see that, If they had a need to continue doctor lite episodes that they had at least figured out now how to do them well. From that point on though they came up with using the concept of one doctor lite/companion heavy episode and vice versa as in MIdnight and turn left which was a much better way to do it as you barely noticed the lack of characters as much as when both weren't in it.
Prefer the story of turn left as well, nice little nostalgia trip back from series 3 to it's present showing just how important the doctor is to the universe (and England in particular ) and how bad things could have gotten without him. Also every time I see the scene where the unit guy says 'the doctor is dead' and his lifeless hand flops from under the sheet and dramatically drops the sonic screwdriver it gives me chills.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 897
|
I usually don't like doctor-lite episodes but Blink is Modern Masterpiece. Alhough it would be even better as a two-parter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 10,236
|
I think it deserves the critical acclaim it gets. It is genuinely brilliant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 356
|
It's brilliant, as most people recognise. Not just in Doctor Who terms either, but TV drama in general. Those citing Turn Left as better.....well, that's an interesting opinion....yes, interesting is the right word.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Steven Moffats pantry
Posts: 8,808
|
Quote:
It's brilliant, as most people recognise. Not just in Doctor Who terms either, but TV drama in general. Those citing Turn Left as better.....well, that's an interesting opinion....yes, interesting is the right word.
![]() Blink introduced the only new who monster that is fit to sit in the pantheon of classics and had a brilliantly original story alongside first class performances from the entire cast. It was show defining. Turn Left is ultimately just an inconsequential bit of fan service that poses a potentially interesting question but answers it with lazy retreads of the 'greatest hits', b movie effects and Z movie acting. As a standalone episode it isn't fit to even be mentioned in the same sentence as Blink. |
|
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: 100 Acre Wood
Posts: 4,110
|
Well, I wouldn't call Blink overated tosh, but it is definately overated. This story did have some good moments though, including Sally meeting Billy Shipton after getting caught in a heavy rain shower, plus the weeping angels and the Tardis scene.
Overall, I thought the episode, on the whole, didn't work for me. As the OP LordOfTime said back in 2008, it was just like Turn Left and Love and Monsters. I don't like episodes where the Doctor and his companion take a back seat for nearly 3quarters of the episode, only appearing for 5 minutes or so, before the end. I thought the show was called Doctor Who? The Doctor should appear in every episode/story. As far as I know, apart from one single episode story, during the Hartnell days, the Doctor has appeared in every story since. For me, personally, I thought the two parter The Time of Angels/Flesh and Stone was the best Weeping Angel story. Plus, it had Alex Kingston as River Song.I'm surprised that someone has ressurected a thread, that has not had any comments on it for years. ![]() Well, that's what happens sometimes. A thread will just sit on DS, taking a back seat for years, nobody bothering to comment, and then...two or three years later, someone finds it in the pages of the DW forum, and decides to comment. I've noticed that with a few other threads, recently. Edit - I do think Carey Mulligan should have come back to DW as Sally Sparrow, and joined the Doctor in the Tardis, on his travels. I think the Eleventh Doctor would have been better with Sally, rather than Amy Pond, but anyway, I don't dislike Karen. She did good as Amy. I still miss her! Damn you, Weeping Angels!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia ♂
Posts: 19,829
|
No not over rated. One of the best episodes of any Who in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,173
|
Quote:
I thought it was brilliant, very suspenseful and didn't suffer from being Doctor-lite.
)I wasn't particularly overwhelmed by Sally Sparrow but she was a nice character for the episode and not the one-liner wisecracking female companion type but a real person. |
|
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 193
|
The acting and character drama in Turn Left knocks Blink for six. Still love Blink though. One of the most original and scary monsters in the series history - apart from the thing in Midnight B-)
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 23:56.







Damn you, Weeping Angels!
)