Doctor Who opinions

I agree. The treatment of Mickey really angered me and Rory is my favorite companion because, in the end, he was the most useful of the bunch, IMO. He was steadfast and did his ****ing job.

I loved Rory, too. I wish we had've gotten Doctor/Rory solo adventures, because they had potential to be similar to my favorite Doctor/Companion pair, Second and Jamie.
 
Minor typo from me-- I meant to say it was nerd fodder and not meant for the masses--

But your point is dead on. It's not just a question of reaching the masses, it's also having to compete in much bigger market. Classic Who was made just for BBC audiences, if it got to America, great-- but they weren't counting on it. The first couple seasons of the revival were meant to be big-- but even then-- they had a simulcast deal with SyFy and that was it. Once BBC America was created you can see the shift. Compare the production value of Smith and Capaldi to Eccelson and Tennant and there's no contest.


Actually the first couple of seasons of NuWho were a co-pro with the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corp)... that's how they got the $$ to get it off the ground those first couple of years before it really started to take off...
 
I am disappointed with the choice to make the Doctor a woman. If the Doctor had been a woman from the start and they changed her into a man I would feel the same way about that as I do this. Why does it have to involve some social commentary just because I don't agree with the shows choice.
 
I am disappointed with the choice to make the Doctor a woman. If the Doctor had been a woman from the start and they changed her into a man I would feel the same way about that as I do this. Why does it have to involve some social commentary just because I don't agree with the shows choice.
It's a part of the times. If the new Doctor was Chinese then some people would automatically be screaming "pandering!". And then other people would automatically point out that those people are anti-Chinese. It is basically, and sadly, the Monty Python argument sketch.

Sent from my Hewlett Packard 48G using Tapatalk
 
I don't think it's inherently political-- I think anyone's reaction when somebody doesn't like what they like is to be offensively defensive. That's the cornerstone of message boards. But when it aligns with current issues, it gets heavier.

I wouldn't say somebody "who just doesn't like" a female Doctor is automatically a misogynist, but I would like for them to push deeper to figure out why.
 
It seems just being (or becoming) a woman is considered a political act by some people these days.

Just because straight, cis, white men have been the majority in TV and Film for generations, doesn't mean we can't have change.
Just because it was the 'default' for so long, doesn't mean it was 'normal' and that anything else is other/different.

And for goodness' sake! The Doctor has worried about regenerating into a different species, or having different numbers of arms/legs/heads! Romana considered becoming blue, or a dwarf! The only thing that's going to upset The Doctor about this incarnation? Still not ginger! :D
 
Rose Tyler was designed as a chav, which in British parlance, is "a young lower-class person who displays brash and loutish behaviour and wears real or imitation designer clothes." She is what I said by definition.
I hate to address this - especially with the disgusting comments you originally made. But, here goes...

"Chav" has many connotations. One of which is that it's a negative epithet and stereotype - it's derogatory word, it's the kind of word that starts fights. It's a term that the upper class often uses to describe typical working class behavior. It's currently used by many to describe the current youth anti-social movement in the UK.

Yes, Billie Piper described Rose as "a bit of a chav" and the character has been described that way by many. Her clothing and London accent might lead many to that - but, she was a "common" - or working class. But, other than Piper's comment - there is nothing that says otherwise.
 
Rose Tyler was designed as a chav, which in British parlance, is "a young lower-class person who displays brash and loutish behaviour and wears real or imitation designer clothes." She is what I said by definition.

I wasn't questioning your definition of Rose's character....I was more highlighting the fact that you seem to have a rather smug attitude toward others who perhaps aren't at the same social level as yourself, given that you'd said that she had "everything you HATE in a human being". So clearly a fictional character--in this case Rose--embodies all that you actively hate about real humans around you, which apparently are uneducated and low class.

These are your words...I was merely highlighting that it reveals (at least the appearance of) an elitist slant to your personality.

If this is not the case, then clarification might be in order... but it is the vibe which came across with a plain reading of your post.
 
It seems just being (or becoming) a woman is considered a political act by some people these days.

Just because straight, cis, white men have been the majority in TV and Film for generations, doesn't mean we can't have change.
Just because it was the 'default' for so long, doesn't mean it was 'normal' and that anything else is other/different.

And for goodness' sake! The Doctor has worried about regenerating into a different species, or having different numbers of arms/legs/heads! Romana considered becoming blue, or a dwarf! The only thing that's going to upset The Doctor about this incarnation? Still not ginger! :D

Which is further iroinc (to me at least) because she dyed here hair blonde for the part (apparently) - could have made the dr's dream come true and died it red :)
 
The only thing I'm worried about is the petty human obsession with gender and it's associated stereotypes. No one is above it, whether or not they admit it. And it'll show in the writing and (it already does) in the reception.
 
You can't cite uneven fandom ridiculousness as evidence of what the actual writing (that has yet to happen) will actually be.
 
You can't cite uneven fandom ridiculousness as evidence of what the actual writing (that has yet to happen) will actually be.

Oh I'm not. I'm citing humanity as evidence.

Also something that bothers and puts me off from the idea is that people are breaking the cycle. You know, the "who is this new person, they'll never replace [current doctor]" --> "okay, this person is starting to grow on me" --> "I love this person, I hope they never leave!" cycle. No one is treating her like the next doctor, it's either she's your lord and savior or you're a misogynist creep.
 
I said a couple posts back that I didn't assume misogynist creep just because somebody was against it. I just said I'd love for them to go deeper than "I just don't like it."

that said, if you look at who is most vocally against it, and look at their rhetoric on other topics, a pretty clear profile forms.

it reminds me of every time a black actor is cast in a traditionally white role. You get the "I'm not racist but... why not make a new black superhero/spy/whatever instead..." voices and 95% of the time it's a white dude. You hardly ever see a member of the minority in question saying that.
 
Oh I'm not. I'm citing humanity as evidence.

Also something that bothers and puts me off from the idea is that people are breaking the cycle. You know, the "who is this new person, they'll never replace [current doctor]" --> "okay, this person is starting to grow on me" --> "I love this person, I hope they never leave!" cycle. No one is treating her like the next doctor, it's either she's your lord and savior or you're a misogynist creep.

Frankly, i'm treating her as i've treated each new doctor since 2006. That being, hmmm...we'll have to see how it goes. Anyone having a different is pure speculation. Hell, we haven't even seen her 60 seconds worth in a regeneration episode. She could be great, she could be terrible. We won't know until a few episodes have aired.
 
This thread is more than 3 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top