Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
I agree quite often he's not given a huge amount of choice, but on the other hand - a lot of the time he's harsher than he has to be, and other times, harsh pretty much for the sake of being harsh.
And of course - my favourite part, where the Doctor casually snaps the neck of that guy then runs off at the end of the video.
I think that's what was so good about 9 and 10. There was the transition between readily using weapons to kill as a means to an end then only using weapons as a very last resort. Finally the 11th I think was meant to be the 100% pacifist, at least perhaps originally, but now he's just become both extremes at one time or another rather than finding balance.
To be honest this leads onto one of my main gripes with the 11th. He's very good at the wacky, silly side of the character, but when it comes to serious situations he just can't pull off the dark side of the Doctor very well. Whilst that's mostly the writers' faults of course, I also think Matt just doesn't have the face for it. He's just one of those guys who can't seem angry any way you look at them. His foreboding/angry expression just looks like he's despondent to me.
Ovion wrote: The Doctor is hardly a pacifist, and while he claims a dislike of guns, he's often used them (though prefers explosives).
The Doctor has indeed been a good deal more unapologetically killy in the new series, though in fairness in many (though conspicuously not all) of your examples he'd been placed in a "kill or be killed" situation, or was acting in the defence of others. I really didn't approve of the notion of the Doctor blowing up the Cybermen just to make a point.
The Resurrection of the Daleks example is a good one, but it's deliberately atypical, and comes from a time in which the series' writers were mucking about with things for shock value (much as I'm inclined to think they were in A Town Called Mercy). Tom Baker's excellent "Do I have the right?" speech in Genesis of the Daleks (which, regrettably, I can't find on YouTube) sums up rather better the core of the character's ethics.
This is at least part of it...(near the end)
inmygravenimage wrote:Have courage, faith and beer, my friend - it will be done!
Now, if you want to see The Angels Take Manhattan early, there’s going to be a preview screening at the Cineworld in Cardiff’s Mary Ann Street next Wednesday, 6.30pm. To get entered to the draw for a pair of tickets, you need to send your name and e-mail address to:
by midnight tonight. Winners will be notified on Monday. Tickets are non-transferable, and under 16s will need to be accompanied by an adult with their own ticket. Good luck.
good luck to you if you enter !
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/20 14:07:55
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
That just seems unnecessary. We're all seeing it tomorrow anyway, except perhaps holidaying Aussies or whoever it is required to wait a considerable amount of time before it's aired on TV.
Darkvoidof40k wrote: That just seems unnecessary. We're all seeing it tomorrow anyway, except perhaps holidaying Aussies or whoever it is required to wait a considerable amount of time before it's aired on TV.
I dont know, if i had seen this yesterday (before midnight) i would have let me sister know and i can almost guarantee she would have applied (and loved it if she got in!)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/21 18:12:50
inmygravenimage wrote:Have courage, faith and beer, my friend - it will be done!
Preview/interview for episode on in an hour. Really looking forward to this one, interested to see if they put any bigger hints in on the series plot other then lightbulbs breaking.
WARBOSS TZOO wrote:Grab your club, hit her over the head, and drag her back to your cave. The classics are classic for a reason.
Darkvoidof40k wrote: That just seems unnecessary. We're all seeing it tomorrow anyway, except perhaps holidaying Aussies or whoever it is required to wait a considerable amount of time before it's aired on TV.
The preview was/is with regards to the next episode, not the cube one we saw on the 22nd.
.. which.. well.... a few funny lines in it and once again we're treated to some serious british actors/actresses doing thier bit. Not bad as such, nor great either, alas. Just kind of....... alright.....
.. so a bit of a disappointment but nothing too distressing.
End line was painfully corny and unfunny.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
I quite liked "The Power of Three". It was an interesting way to introduce the theme of this season; that of Rory and Amy settling down and having their own life.
Kilkrazy wrote: I wasn't greatly impressed by tonight's "Slow Invasion". It was filler rather than pillar or killer, as our marketing department rates things.
I liked it. I like Rory's Dad. Is it me or is the Chick's accent getting stronger?
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Kanluwen wrote: I quite liked "The Power of Three". It was an interesting way to introduce the theme of this season; that of Rory and Amy settling down and having their own life.
I thought that led more towards them being killed off instead of settling down tbh. They made the concious choice to have their 'Doctor life', and with the (not so cryptic) lines towards 'keeping them safe' and whatnot, i see some deaths occuring in the near future...the problem is, its starting to get a bit x-men-like, as in 'it doesnt matter if they die, they will just come back a few episodes later/ later in the same episode'....like Jean Grey (who, IIRC, one of the other characters actually makes a reference to her inability to die in one of the comics ).
But yeah, alright episode, bit disappointing, and with no explanation of the Chandra (sp?) at all which sucked. Why are there 7 of them? How are they the rat catchers of the universe? Why are they trying to stop humanity exactly? What was that giant energy field around the Earth? so many missing details it was scary....
next episode:
River...really? ffs...
inmygravenimage wrote:Have courage, faith and beer, my friend - it will be done!
Kilkrazy wrote: I wasn't greatly impressed by tonight's "Slow Invasion". It was filler rather than pillar or killer, as our marketing department rates things.
I liked it. I like Rory's Dad. Is it me or is the Chick's accent getting stronger?
Rory's dad is cool, it would be awesome if he was a companion full-time.
Also, I would love to see a River episode with Tennant doing a cameo, as in it's cleverly orchestrated by the 11th so that he never meets himself from his own personal past. It would actually beat some life back into the horse.
Oh, with regards to the last episode. On the ship, they just left all those kidnapped people there to die - PLUS it was never even explained why they were there in the first place.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/24 15:38:30
Another Doctor Who set in America? fething seriously? How many Doctor Whos have been set in Nottingham, Manchester, Birmingham, Sheffield, York, Southamton...
If they want to make an American Doctor Who, they should at least go ahead and do it. Stop Yankeefying out national treasure!
Just to clarify, I'm not complaining about the "modern" bias. It's obvious that more stories would be set in modern England than say, ancient Mesopotamia.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/29 18:30:09
Unnessesarily extravegant word of the week award goes to jcress410 for this:
jcress wrote:Seem super off topic to complain about epistemology on a thread about tactics.
Well, He is kinda A time Traveling alien, Why would he go to only one country on earth?
And didnt we just get one set in london?
What we should be upset about is the fact that its new york.
I hate that city, its in everything.
It's concentrated in Britain because it's a British show aimed at a British public, who pay the licence fee to get it made in the first place.
I'm not saying ALL shows should be set in Britain, but it seems like the ones that aren't are disproportionally set in the USA, and it's no secret that this is a deliberate attempt to pander to the American market.
Unnessesarily extravegant word of the week award goes to jcress410 for this:
jcress wrote:Seem super off topic to complain about epistemology on a thread about tactics.
I liked how it seemed like a dues ex machina ending, then people died.
Thought the angels were much better then in series 5, but not just as good as they were in there original apearence and the babys weren't as bad as I assumed they would be.
It was a little bit cheesy.
WARBOSS TZOO wrote:Grab your club, hit her over the head, and drag her back to your cave. The classics are classic for a reason.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Well, He is kinda A time Traveling alien, Why would he go to only one country on earth?
And didnt we just get one set in london?
What we should be upset about is the fact that its new york.
I hate that city, its in everything.
Agreed. I think it would be better if he went so loads of different countries at particularly interesting times with more serious themes, allowing the Doctor to provide the satire and the companions to bring along the red n' white.
Lots of unanswered questions and untied loose ends.
Like what? The whole River Song/Rory/Amy thing never made much sense to me anyway.
Also as Freudian as this sounds, I really don't want River Song (stupid name anyway) with the doctor in EVERY episode. A companion in a couple of episodes is fine but she's just too boring to carry it all the time.
Unnessesarily extravegant word of the week award goes to jcress410 for this:
jcress wrote:Seem super off topic to complain about epistemology on a thread about tactics.
What the hell was some rich American collecting statues for?
What happened to the surviving statue?
Why not land in New Jersey in 1938 and take a cab over the river?
I found it quite lightweight and unsatisfactory. I'm not bound up in Rory, Amy and the Doctor's emotional toils, partly because there have been so many of them it is more than overdone already.
The Angels seemed to simply be in the background, while something happened that had be confused and laughing.
The episode Blink, which introduced the Angels was brilliant, now, the Angels are laughable villains, and the state of liberty Angels was ridiculous.
Spoiler:
Taking out the stupid angels and plot devices, the character interaction at least was pretty good. I enjoyed it, though I was sad the detective at the beginning didn't feature. I thought he would and he did in all the ways I envisaged, but far less than expected. As in, I thought as an old man he'd hold the key to escape or something and thus help the doctor with his dying words, as cliché as that is.
But I am sad, the angels are even better villains than the Daleks because they were so unique, now, as you quite rightly said, are ridiculous and laughable. There's a reason Blink was something like the top 3rd episode ever.
Atleast there was no moving angels, no laughter and the chained up angel was pretty good.
The massive one was meant to be a statue of liberty? I thought the population believed it was like a giant plastic thing, like ontop of donut shops in the Simpsons.
The idea of a giant angel was silly enough but I could let that go because there was a decent ending for once.
WARBOSS TZOO wrote:Grab your club, hit her over the head, and drag her back to your cave. The classics are classic for a reason.
blood reaper wrote: Isn't the Statue made of copper, not stone, so it can't be a weeping angel, as they are stone.
Or are we saying that every statue ever is a weeping angel?
I didn't even click on that one, should have remembered that. Easy mistake I suppose.
But yeah, the idea that the freaking statue of liberty could come alive, repeatedly, and not be noticed by the whole of New York, is fething special needs.
Testify wrote: Another Doctor Who set in America? fething seriously? How many Doctor Whos have been set in Nottingham, Manchester, Birmingham, Sheffield, York, Southamton...
If they want to make an American Doctor Who, they should at least go ahead and do it. Stop Yankeefying out national treasure!
Just to clarify, I'm not complaining about the "modern" bias. It's obvious that more stories would be set in modern England than say, ancient Mesopotamia.
As an American, I feel that American Doctor Who would be horrible. Look at American Being Human....
I also believe that if it's justifiable to visit Cardiff so many times, then a few trips to NYC are quite reasonable.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
blood reaper wrote: Isn't the Statue made of copper, not stone, so it can't be a weeping angel, as they are stone.
Or are we saying that every statue ever is a weeping angel?
Anything that bears the image of an angel becomes an angel.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/30 02:00:19
Ok, Um Alot of Gripes and one big TY to the producers
Spoiler:
1: As people have said, The Statue, I'm not going to go into it. But there was quite a bit of time no one had their eyes on it
2: The baby Angels, How are they made?
3: Its said that they used it as a farm, Ok makes sense, But how did they get fed? It said they can't leave, and i think the angels would raise a few eybrows at the grocery store
4: JOY TO THE WORLD, AMY AND RORY ARE GONE!!!!!!!!
5EATH TO THE WORLD, River is in.
6: Rory dies more often then Daniel Jackson.
Guys the reasons there's Doctor Who in the US is because there are a lot of fans here as well as the UK and the cost of producing an episode cost about the same. Hell, I'd love to see the Doctor in Canada, Singapore, Sydney, Japan but it can't be done cheaply.
).
5000pts 
6000pts 
3000pts
New Shangri-La Peace Force
Combined Army Shasvastii painting Blog