This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Oxford or Cambridge med?
- Year 10 work experience
- placement problems
- Medicine or something else?
- Official UEA Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entry
- How to become a prescriber?
- Is Physican Associate a good career choice?
- Medicine or dentistry
- Advice on medical school worth applying
- Year 10 medicine work experience
- Medicine-Postgraduate
- what steps to take to become a doctor who does research
- Would it be worth it pursuing a postgraduate degree in graduate entry medicine?
- Can I ever get into Medicine after spending my entire teens in hospitals
- Hate my Course
- Anglia ruskin medicine & east anglia
- A Level Choices
- British Medical degree vs Irish Medical degree
- RAF medical
- WANTED: Speakers for Medical Application Abroad
Doctor Who - Discussion Thread II
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Invisible Man
Possible title for the series 7 Dalek story - Dalek invasion of MIT.
http://io9.com/5905894/dalek-mysteriously-materializes-atop-mit-computer-science-building
http://io9.com/5905894/dalek-mysteriously-materializes-atop-mit-computer-science-building
It can't be that because the title has been confirmed to be"Something of the Some-things" and I presume the dalek title will be"Something of the Daleks".
Original post by Dalek1099
It can't be that because the title has been confirmed to be"Something of the Some-things" and I presume the dalek title will be"Something of the Daleks".
Confirmed as 'Something of the Somethings'?
What a naff title that is as well
Original post by SirMasterKey
Confirmed as 'Something of the Somethings'?
What a naff title that is as well
What a naff title that is as well
It is fairytale stuff remember
Original post by SirMasterKey
Confirmed as 'Something of the Somethings'?
What a naff title that is as well
What a naff title that is as well
The Somethings represent unconfirmed parts of the title and I would still expect the title to be a good title.
Return of the Daleks
Is it me or are the Doctor Who episodes getting more and more complex? :s
I have to wait till the end of the series to fully understand whats just happening
Maybe its just me, what do you think?
I have to wait till the end of the series to fully understand whats just happening
Maybe its just me, what do you think?
I think it isn't that they are complex but they are purposely made confusing due to a seemingly, terribly misinformed, viewpoint that confusing people or making it impossible to follow is somehow a deeper complexity.
I hope Moffat can get rid of this long arc he is creating,its ruining the show and making the show like soaps-I want a fresh start,with a small arc like in Russell T Davies day-Steven Moffat did it right in Series 5 and then went too far in Series 6-the arc should have finished in Series 5.
I don't know about you guys, but I like the fact that the make some things impossible to figure out, or lead you down the wrong paths. I like being fooled in entertainment. Isn't that why we love magicians after all?
I...don't love magicians.
Original post by Hype en Ecosse
I don't know about you guys, but I like the fact that the make some things impossible to figure out, or lead you down the wrong paths. I like being fooled in entertainment. Isn't that why we love magicians after all?
I agree with you that i like being fooled, but sometimes at the end i am confused how the sub plot even started. Like why did we have the whole sudden revelation that River Song was Amy and Rorys child! I just didnt understand why this had to be revealed especially since Amy and Rory are nearly finished now.
I think i preferred river song as a mystery, and is she a time lord or not as that completly confused me????
Original post by KitKatKate
I agree with you that i like being fooled, but sometimes at the end i am confused how the sub plot even started. Like why did we have the whole sudden revelation that River Song was Amy and Rorys child! I just didnt understand why this had to be revealed especially since Amy and Rory are nearly finished now.
I think i preferred river song as a mystery, and is she a time lord or not as that completly confused me????
I think i preferred river song as a mystery, and is she a time lord or not as that completly confused me????
Yeah, she is part time lord. Which came about from being conceived in the tardis.
I like the more complex plots, and the longer story arcs. The separate stories always end up more childish. And longer, multi-episode stories are more traditional for Doctor Who too!
Original post by Feefifofum
I like the more complex plots, and the longer story arcs. The separate stories always end up more childish. And longer, multi-episode stories are more traditional for Doctor Who too!
I like multi episode stories(2 and 3 parters) but not complex arcs and I also hate how Moffat is making every monster kind and stupid-its ridiculous.
Original post by Dalek1099
I also hate how Moffat is making every monster kind and stupid-its ridiculous.
Any examples?
Original post by Hype en Ecosse
Any examples?
Humans at fault for space whale.
The vampires just wanting to save their race
The eye creatures not being real
Silurians(believing that they deserved to own the land idn't have a problem,with this one it is just in here for comparison)
Krayfrais(scared)
The Lodger Ship(just wanting a pilot)
Siren-kind not nasty
Clones-meant to be kind(didn't have a problem,with this one it is just in here for comparison)
The robot trying to get rid of criminals instead of killing people
The dolls not being real and in a child's brain
The handbots(killing though kindess again didn't have a problem,with this one it is just in here for comparison)
The Minotaur(not wanting to kill them)
The Trees(just wanting to save their species)
I'm sick of all these so called kind/stupid monsters that moffat is coming up with-some of them are alright but there are too many of these monsters.Generally monsters should be evil,killer and real,with a few exceptions.We only had the Silence and Cybermen in Series 6
Original post by Dalek1099
Humans at fault for space whale.
The vampires just wanting to save their race
The eye creatures not being real
Silurians(believing that they deserved to own the land idn't have a problem,with this one it is just in here for comparison)
Krayfrais(scared)
The Lodger Ship(just wanting a pilot)
Siren-kind not nasty
Clones-meant to be kind(didn't have a problem,with this one it is just in here for comparison)
The robot trying to get rid of criminals instead of killing people
The dolls not being real and in a child's brain
The handbots(killing though kindess again didn't have a problem,with this one it is just in here for comparison)
The Minotaur(not wanting to kill them)
The Trees(just wanting to save their species)
I'm sick of all these so called kind/stupid monsters that moffat is coming up with-some of them are alright but there are too many of these monsters.Generally monsters should be evil,killer and real,with a few exceptions.We only had the Silence and Cybermen in Series 6
The vampires just wanting to save their race
The eye creatures not being real
Silurians(believing that they deserved to own the land idn't have a problem,with this one it is just in here for comparison)
Krayfrais(scared)
The Lodger Ship(just wanting a pilot)
Siren-kind not nasty
Clones-meant to be kind(didn't have a problem,with this one it is just in here for comparison)
The robot trying to get rid of criminals instead of killing people
The dolls not being real and in a child's brain
The handbots(killing though kindess again didn't have a problem,with this one it is just in here for comparison)
The Minotaur(not wanting to kill them)
The Trees(just wanting to save their species)
I'm sick of all these so called kind/stupid monsters that moffat is coming up with-some of them are alright but there are too many of these monsters.Generally monsters should be evil,killer and real,with a few exceptions.We only had the Silence and Cybermen in Series 6
•
Moffat didn't create all these monsters. Doctor Who has other writers, believe it or not.
•
Notable monsters that he did create include Gas Mask children, Weeping Angels, The Silence and Vashta Nerada.
•
The view that monsters should largely be evil, kill and real is an overly cliched, boring and an ill conceived view.
•
The suggestion that Moffat exclusively does this, or that this is entirely new to DW, implies that RTD (and other writers) didn't do the exact same thing.
•
The view that all monsters should have no motivations (survival, programming or inherent belief) other than 'omgz hai let's all try and be pure evil and rule the world and kill people for no reason' is another boring, cliched and ill conceived view. We have enough of those villains/monsters.
Let's hang the writers for daring to inject some variety in the actions and motivations of antagonists.
Original post by Ape Gone Insane
Let's hang the writers for daring to inject some variety in the actions and motivations of antagonists.
•
Moffat didn't create all these monsters. Doctor Who has other writers, believe it or not.
•
Notable monsters that he did create include Gas Mask children, Weeping Angels, The Silence and Vashta Nerada.
•
The view that monsters should largely be evil, kill and real is an overly cliched, boring and an ill conceived view.
•
The suggestion that Moffat exclusively does this, or that this is entirely new to DW, implies that RTD (and other writers) didn't do the exact same thing.
•
The view that all monsters should have no motivations (survival, programming or inherent belief) other than 'omgz hai let's all try and be pure evil and rule the world and kill people for no reason' is another boring, cliched and ill conceived view. We have enough of those villains/monsters.
Let's hang the writers for daring to inject some variety in the actions and motivations of antagonists.
Something drives me insane with sci fi more than anything is how every single being on a planet will have the exact same motivations and be essentially clones of eachother with one generic opposite person. If the race is essentially good then the opposite guy has a moustache so you know he is evil. If the race is evil the opposite guy will be blonde and ripped
Original post by Ape Gone Insane
Let's hang the writers for daring to inject some variety in the actions and motivations of antagonists.
•
Moffat didn't create all these monsters. Doctor Who has other writers, believe it or not.
•
Notable monsters that he did create include Gas Mask children, Weeping Angels, The Silence and Vashta Nerada.
•
The view that monsters should largely be evil, kill and real is an overly cliched, boring and an ill conceived view.
•
The suggestion that Moffat exclusively does this, or that this is entirely new to DW, implies that RTD (and other writers) didn't do the exact same thing.
•
The view that all monsters should have no motivations (survival, programming or inherent belief) other than 'omgz hai let's all try and be pure evil and rule the world and kill people for no reason' is another boring, cliched and ill conceived view. We have enough of those villains/monsters.
Let's hang the writers for daring to inject some variety in the actions and motivations of antagonists.
I want the antagonists to have motivations but motivations which aren't kind or moral.
Original post by Dalek1099
I want the antagonists to have motivations but motivations which aren't kind or moral.
No, it seems clear to me that you want every monster to emulate the Daleks (let's conquer the universe) and Cybermen (let's upgrade everyone). Have you noticed how utterly boring that becomes? The Vampires, as you stated, had motivations to the survival of their own species even if it meant killing humans but you discounted that too as something you disliked. It's like you really just want the same villain again and again who attempts to take over the world for no other reason than taking over the world or build some superuberduperultimatebadass-weapon to destroy everything. If I'm reading your other post right, you cite the Silence (and Cybermen) as one of the monsters that do fit this ideal criteria of yours. Yet The Silence were trying to prevent the Doctor from something terrible that was going to happen if he answered a question - arguably making their religious movement a moral cause to kill this 'dangerous' person?
It's not necessary to have antagonists as purely mindless evil entities, just to have their motivations/interests conflict with the protagonists.
Original post by Mess.
Something drives me insane with sci fi more than anything is how every single being on a planet will have the exact same motivations and be essentially clones of eachother with one generic opposite person. If the race is essentially good then the opposite guy has a moustache so you know he is evil. If the race is evil the opposite guy will be blonde and ripped
A heavily stereotyped hivemind basically, I try and avoid that like a plague.
Related discussions
- Oxford or Cambridge med?
- Year 10 work experience
- placement problems
- Medicine or something else?
- Official UEA Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entry
- How to become a prescriber?
- Is Physican Associate a good career choice?
- Medicine or dentistry
- Advice on medical school worth applying
- Year 10 medicine work experience
- Medicine-Postgraduate
- what steps to take to become a doctor who does research
- Would it be worth it pursuing a postgraduate degree in graduate entry medicine?
- Can I ever get into Medicine after spending my entire teens in hospitals
- Hate my Course
- Anglia ruskin medicine & east anglia
- A Level Choices
- British Medical degree vs Irish Medical degree
- RAF medical
- WANTED: Speakers for Medical Application Abroad
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 month ago
Favourite anime of all time - remove 4 and add 4 from the last posterTV shows
39
Trending
Last reply 1 month ago
Favourite anime of all time - remove 4 and add 4 from the last posterTV shows
39
