| |
New Doctor Who |
| |
Mark76 (22:10 3/1/2009)
trevj (09:29 16/4/2010)
filecore (10:03 18/4/2010)
Mark76 (18:13 18/4/2010)
Acornut (18:47 18/4/2010)
Mark76 (19:56 18/4/2010)
rich (20:29 18/4/2010)
monkeyson2 (21:40 18/4/2010)
rich (00:00 25/4/2010)
monkeyson2 (01:35 25/4/2010)
rich (06:46 26/4/2010)
filecore (08:20 26/4/2010)
VincceH (09:10 26/4/2010)
monkeyson2 (12:09 26/4/2010)
monkeyson2 (21:02 27/4/2010)
trevj (06:03 28/4/2010)
rich (11:13 1/5/2010)
Mark76 (12:45 1/5/2010)
monkeyson2 (17:52 1/5/2010)
rich (08:36 2/5/2010)
monkeyson2 (09:55 2/5/2010)
monkeyson2 (10:01 2/5/2010)
rich (10:14 2/5/2010)
monkeyson2 (10:48 2/5/2010)
swirlythingy (11:14 2/5/2010)
VincceH (10:52 2/5/2010)
swirlythingy (11:13 2/5/2010)
|
| |
|
Mark |
Message #109086, posted by Mark76 at 22:10, 3/1/2009 |
Posts: 122
|
Is Matt Smith, age 26 from Northampton.
Yes! That's right. The new Doctor is an East Midlander.
And he played footie for Leicester City U15s 
http://www.gallifreyone.com/cgi-bin/viewnews.cgi?id=EkFEppVVuuScfpXBor&tmpl=newsrss&style=feedstyle |
| |
 [ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Trevor Johnson |
Message #113990, posted by trevj at 09:29, 16/4/2010, in reply to message #109086 |
Member
Posts: 660
|
Entertaining, although I find the plausibility of star whales to be on a par with that of the TARDIS itself.
(Sidney Perkowitz v. David Mitchell for anyone who's interested.) |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #113997, posted by filecore at 10:03, 18/4/2010, in reply to message #109086 |
Posts: 3867
|
And he played footie for Leicester City U15s He played football on a submarine? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Mark |
Message #113999, posted by Mark76 at 18:13, 18/4/2010, in reply to message #113997 |
Posts: 122
|
Under 15s
It's an abbreviation  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Blind Moose |
Message #114000, posted by Acornut at 18:47, 18/4/2010, in reply to message #113999 |
 No-eye-deer (No Idea)
Posts: 487
|
..played football on a submarine?.. I think, you'll find, Jason was being facetious! 
Good job they don't wear RED, otherwise he might have included them being a bit 'cheesey'.  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Mark |
Message #114001, posted by Mark76 at 19:56, 18/4/2010, in reply to message #114000 |
Posts: 122
|
Sometimes it's hard to tell with him
So what does everyone think of Matt and Karen so far?
And Series 5 in general. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Richard Goodwin |
Message #114003, posted by rich at 20:29, 18/4/2010, in reply to message #114001 |
 Dictator for life
Posts: 6828
|
Thought the Dalek one was treading water a bit. It was OK, just didn't say anything new - it was just there to (re-)introduce the shiny new Daleks.
________
 Cheers,
Rich.
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Phil Mellor |
Message #114004, posted by monkeyson2 at 21:40, 18/4/2010, in reply to message #114003 |
 Please don't let them make me be a monkey butler
Posts: 12380
|
Thought the Dalek one was treading water a bit. It was OK, just didn't say anything new - it was just there to (re-)introduce the shiny new Daleks. Which the Radio Times had already done earlier in the week.
There was very little about this episode that we didn't already know - Professor Cyborg was the only real surprise.
I think this series is being spoiled by all the pre-publicity. RTD did a much better job of keeping the show in the spotlight without giving much away. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Richard Goodwin |
Message #114117, posted by rich at 00:00, 25/4/2010, in reply to message #114004 |
Dictator for life
Posts: 6828
|
Much, much better this week.
Although what's the point of concealing River Song's identity in the first few minutes when she's been shown all over the place in the previous week?
________
Cheers,
Rich.
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Phil Mellor |
Message #114120, posted by monkeyson2 at 01:35, 25/4/2010, in reply to message #114117 |
Please don't let them make me be a monkey butler
Posts: 12380
|
Much, much better this week.
Although what's the point of concealing River Song's identity in the first few minutes when she's been shown all over the place in the previous week? I haven't thought about the episode at all - I'm still seething about the sodding cartoon Norton popping up at the end. Totally spoiled the show. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Richard Goodwin |
Message #114141, posted by rich at 06:46, 26/4/2010, in reply to message #114120 |
Dictator for life
Posts: 6828
|
I haven't thought about the episode at all - I'm still seething about the sodding cartoon Norton popping up at the end. Totally spoiled the show. It was annoying, but get a grip - it was only a few seconds out of an entire program!
________
Cheers,
Rich.
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #114142, posted by filecore at 08:20, 26/4/2010, in reply to message #114141 |
Posts: 3867
|
From the BBC:
It is not the first time an unexpected appearance by Norton has angered Doctor Who fans.
When the series returned in 2005 after a 16-year break, a technical error caused Norton's voice to be briefly heard over the episode's opening scenes. That said, I dislike all these flashy, animated, oversized adverts that pop up during shows. I first saw it when watching US content over the internet, and I laughed at how hideous it was (often taking as much as a quarter of the screen, obscuring actors' faces, ruining the moment, etc) but now it's come to local TV here too  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #114143, posted by VincceH at 09:10, 26/4/2010, in reply to message #114141 |
 Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
I haven't thought about the episode at all - I'm still seething about the sodding cartoon Norton popping up at the end. Totally spoiled the show. It was annoying, but get a grip - it was only a few seconds out of an entire program!
Yes, and it's interesting to note that while I did see it, I barely even registered that it had happened. I realised afterwards that something had appeared, but until I saw Monkeyson's comments on Twitter, I didn't know what it was.
I used to get very annoyed by these things, but I think what's happened is that I've been seeing it for so long now on other channels* that I've started to automatically tune them out at a subconscious level or something.
* The rot probably started for me with the Big Breakfast Clock during the final five episodes of Babylon 5. I was too impatient to wait for the late night/small hour screenings.
Edit: After I posted I realised I'd written "Big Brother" instead of "Big Breakfast", and I don't even watch Big Brother. The crap just gets everywhere.
[Edited by VincceH at 09:14, 26/4/2010] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Phil Mellor |
Message #114144, posted by monkeyson2 at 12:09, 26/4/2010, in reply to message #114143 |
Please don't let them make me be a monkey butler
Posts: 12380
|
Yes, and it's interesting to note that while I did see it, I barely even registered that it had happened. I realised afterwards that something had appeared, but until I saw Monkeyson's comments on Twitter, I didn't know what it was.
I used to get very annoyed by these things, but I think what's happened is that I've been seeing it for so long now on other channels* that I've started to automatically tune them out at a subconscious level or something. Then you're part of the problem. Thanks. I am still livid that the BBC are making their top channels and programmes look like low rent, crappy Freeview efforts.
I really don't know how you could miss it - a bright yellow rectangle over a dark picture, and it covered up the Doctor's mouth when he was talking very quickly and lipreading would be helpful.
Totally unnecessary - it really annoys people like me (39% of the audience), and has no positive or negative effect on people like you (55%). So why bother? For the 4% of people who welcome them? (See page 20 of this Ofcom report).
I'd rather the BBC sent free copies of the Radio Times to those few people, or commissioned a special Saturday night programme that taught people how to use a television.
This is a good article, and more reasoned than I am about it: http://blogs.thestage.co.uk/tvtoday/2010/04/if-idents-only-had-a-brain/ |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Phil Mellor |
Message #114154, posted by monkeyson2 at 21:02, 27/4/2010, in reply to message #114144 |
Please don't let them make me be a monkey butler
Posts: 12380
|
I got their apology. I’m a stubborn bastard and it wasn’t good enough.
I replied:Dear BBC,
Thank-you for the apology. I am pleased that the BBC did not ignore the complaints and responded promptly but I am still concerned by the processes leading to the mistake.
I think the BBC is a quality public service broadcaster and a role model to other broadcasters around the world. I hope it now realises that it should not be using in-programme promotions at all and that the 5500+ complaints are indicative of the frustration that these distractions cause to viewers of all programmes, not just Doctor Who.
I do not understand how the trailer could have made it to air without somebody in the organisation realising that it would be detrimental to viewers of the show. This isn’t just a case of somebody in the control room pressing the wrong button – the trailer was commissioned and produced with the intention of showing it during Doctor Who or Total Wipeout. I fear that a pernicious attitude is spreading through the BBC that this type of marketing is acceptable and necessary. It is not.
I understand that the BBC has to make the public aware of its programmes and services. But there is so much that could be done before resorting to in-programme trailers:
- an awareness campaign about electronic programme guides
- scheduling programmes at consistent times each week
- opt-in reminder services (e.g. text message alerts)
In order to resolve my complaint, please could you explain in more detail -
a) Whose decision it was to broadcast the in-programme trailer
b) What evidence the BBC has that the trailer would benefit viewers watching the programme (an Ofcom report indicates that only 4% of viewers welcome IPPs whilst 39% object – see page 20 of http://www.ofcom.org.uk/research/tv/reports/promotion/viewers/promoviewers.pdf )
c) What steps are being taken to ensure the mistake will not happen again |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Trevor Johnson |
Message #114155, posted by trevj at 06:03, 28/4/2010, in reply to message #114154 |
Member
Posts: 660
|
I got their apology. I’m a stubborn bastard and it wasn’t good enough. Nice one! Have you copied to Ofcom and your MP (not that there are any of those ATM)?
[Edited by trevj at 07:53, 28/4/2010] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Richard Goodwin |
Message #114224, posted by rich at 11:13, 1/5/2010, in reply to message #114144 |
Dictator for life
Posts: 6828
|
Then you're part of the problem. Thanks. I am still livid that the BBC are making their top channels and programmes look like low rent, crappy Freeview efforts. You are Charlie Brooker and I claim my five pounds.
Seriously, it's just a TV program.
________
Cheers,
Rich.
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Mark |
Message #114225, posted by Mark76 at 12:45, 1/5/2010, in reply to message #114224 |
Posts: 122
|
Wash your mouth out 
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Phil Mellor |
Message #114228, posted by monkeyson2 at 17:52, 1/5/2010, in reply to message #114224 |
Please don't let them make me be a monkey butler
Posts: 12380
|
Then you're part of the problem. Thanks. I am still livid that the BBC are making their top channels and programmes look like low rent, crappy Freeview efforts. You are Charlie Brooker and I claim my five pounds.
Seriously, it's just a TV program.
On the BBC! Not sodding Fiver! |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Richard Goodwin |
Message #114232, posted by rich at 08:36, 2/5/2010, in reply to message #114228 |
Dictator for life
Posts: 6828
|
Then you're part of the problem. Thanks. I am still livid that the BBC are making their top channels and programmes look like low rent, crappy Freeview efforts. You are Charlie Brooker and I claim my five pounds.
Seriously, it's just a TV program.
On the BBC! Not sodding Fiver!
So that justifies whittering on about it for over a week, spending all that time concentrating on the thirty seconds of annoyance, rather than making any reference to the other two hours of the actual story? I condemn you to watch endless YouTube repeats of the incident, rather than the rest of the series.
Anyway, in reference to the ACTUAL STORY, I saw this on Sickipedia...
So it just goes to show, even a Time Lord won't fuck a ginger. Discuss.
________
Cheers,
Rich.
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Phil Mellor |
Message #114233, posted by monkeyson2 at 09:55, 2/5/2010, in reply to message #114232 |
Please don't let them make me be a monkey butler
Posts: 12380
|
So that justifies whittering on about it for over a week, spending all that time concentrating on the thirty seconds of annoyance, rather than making any reference to the other two hours of the actual story? Yes.
Discuss. I'm annoyed that the Graham Norton cliffhanger wasn't resolved. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Phil Mellor |
Message #114234, posted by monkeyson2 at 10:01, 2/5/2010, in reply to message #114233 |
Please don't let them make me be a monkey butler
Posts: 12380
|
I don't think the angels were quite so menacing or creepy as in Blink - perhaps down to the direction? In Blink they seemed to jump out at you much more effectively, and actually moved when somebody walked infront of them. Didn't see so much of that this time.
Other than that - ace. Liked the wibbly-wobbly gravity-wavity at the start, Amy counting down, so many good lines (comfy chairs and a forest! She won't die if we lie to her! and more that I can't remember), and that the story arc about the Doctor's crack is being dealt with now rather than in the finale.
Speaking of which - is 26.06.2010 the date of the 12th or 13th episode? I guess it depends if it takes a week off for Eurovision this year. (YOU KNOW WHO at it again!)
EDIT: Oh yes, and the ending. Funny! Nice to see the Moff just making the character horny in order to get the compulsory nu-Who Doctor/Companion kiss (instead of the usual genetic-bio-wotsit-madoodle-transfer excuse). And I thought Amy's body language was a bit racy for that time in the evening - but I'm not complaining. For once.
[Edited by monkeyson2 at 10:09, 2/5/2010] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Richard Goodwin |
Message #114235, posted by rich at 10:14, 2/5/2010, in reply to message #114234 |
Dictator for life
Posts: 6828
|
What I want to know is:
* who is River Song? They're hinting that "his wife" would be too easy, and some people saying that she's his mum seem to forget we saw his mum during the Timothy Dalton Time Lord story.
* Who does she kill? if it's him, how can this be? Or would that also be too simple and obvious?
* How does she know how to fly the tardis? In that, she seems to know more than the Doctor (brakes and stabilisers), so unless it's a deliberate paradox (she's taught him so he can teach her) it seems impossible, what with there being a distinct lack of other Tardis owners around.
But then, we've just learned that time can be re-written, so who knows.
As for Amy - would. Or indeed, wood.
________
Cheers,
Rich.
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Phil Mellor |
Message #114237, posted by monkeyson2 at 10:48, 2/5/2010, in reply to message #114235 |
Please don't let them make me be a monkey butler
Posts: 12380
|
* Who does she kill? if it's him, how can this be? Or would that also be too simple and obvious? He smiles at the end as he realises that time can be rewritten.
So, yes, she kills him - but something crack related means that she doesn't.
But they stated that so clearly in the episode that I think it must be misdirection.
* How does she know how to fly the tardis? In that, she seems to know more than the Doctor (brakes and stabilisers), so unless it's a deliberate paradox (she's taught him so he can teach her) it seems impossible, what with there being a distinct lack of other Tardis owners around. I subscribe to The Julian Theory. (Caution! Spoilers! It's just a man on the internet having an idea, but it's so good I think it might be true.)
But then, we've just learned that time can be re-written, so who knows. Which seems to be the opposite of what we were taught in The Waters Of Mars. What happens if one of these cracks appears in Pompeii or Bowie Base One?
As for Amy - would. Or indeed, wood. She just wanted to try the Doctor's fish custard.  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #114238, posted by VincceH at 10:52, 2/5/2010, in reply to message #114232 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
So it just goes to show, even a Time Lord won't fuck a ginger. Discuss.
http://www.flabber.nl/linkdump/video/run-ginger-run-4911 |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Martin Bazley |
Message #114239, posted by swirlythingy at 11:13, 2/5/2010, in reply to message #114238 |
Posts: 460
|
So it just goes to show, even a Time Lord won't fuck a ginger. Discuss.
http://www.flabber.nl/linkdump/video/run-ginger-run-4911
Anyone speak Dutch? Or, indeed, Flash? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Martin Bazley |
Message #114240, posted by swirlythingy at 11:14, 2/5/2010, in reply to message #114234 |
Posts: 460
|
the story arc about the Doctor's crack is being dealt with now ...That could be taken so wrongly. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
