bbc [Official] Doctor Who Thread

[Guest DewThePDX]

On 26/11/2023 at 10:18, FloatingFatMan said:

You didn't prove ######, mate.

That's just the chef's kiss to this whole chain...

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

On 26/11/2023 at 18:10, FloatingFatMan said:

It was originally designed to be a family educational show, yes...  To teach kids about history in a science fiction setting. But it very quickly turned into an adventure show because that's what the public demanded.  It was never written to be a social commentary show...

I’d argue that any literary art offer social commentary

[FloatingFatMan]

On 26/11/2023 at 20:46, Dick Montage said:

I’d argue that any literary art offer social commentary

Y'know... I've loved Doctor Who since the early 70's, but calling it a literary art is like comparing a 5 year olds ABC's practice with Shakespeare... 

[Steven P. Administrators]

Enjoyed the show and groaned at the pronouns bit

but I need some assistance here:

Spoiler

Did the wheelchair bound woman from Unit casually throw her leg over the other when she first met the Doctor? I kept waiting for her to stand up and surprise everyone.

And:

Spoiler

It's been 15 years and Donna now has a daughter. Are we supposed to believe she's just 13-14 years old? Or is Donna the step mum, I couldn't quite get that. She looked like a young twenty-something to me?

Other than that, I enjoyed the special effects and costume design.

[David B.]

On 26/11/2023 at 13:18, FloatingFatMan said:

You didn't prove ######, mate.

Your anger clearly says otherwise

I had more to say, but it's a waste of time to be honest

[Steven P. Administrators]

On 27/11/2023 at 00:57, David B. said:

It's 2023. Time to grow up. 

Agreed. In science and biology and nature, there are two genders, no matter how many times people make up new make-believe ones.

I agree that people should be able to live their life believing and doing as they are the opposite gender, or neither! But the biological fact remains.

Also, I see you edited your post, it's a shame you believe it's a waste of time.. You inserted yourself into this topic and then announced it's a waste of time to share your opinion! How would you feel if I felt responding to you was a waste of time? You don't have to agree with me or FloatingFatMan, we can also respect one another's views if they are backed up by thought and not just chucked in a comment, which may leave the person you're responding to dismissive because of the way you handled it.

[margrave]

Rose was the daughters name, that was Donna.

 

15 years? To a time traveler does time really matter?

[margrave]

On 26/11/2023 at 13:00, DewThePDX said:

I think the boss will be The Toymaker.

OOOOOO I forgot the Toymaker! That's a very good possibility too!

 

Links right into Rose making toys too. And the Meep...... which was basically space Gremlins.

 

Meep is space Mogwai.

[+mram Subscriber²]

On 26/11/2023 at 16:26, Steven P. said:

Agreed. In science and biology and nature, there are two genders, no matter how many times people make up new make-believe ones.

I agree that people should be able to live their life believing and doing as they are the opposite gender, or neither! But the biological fact remains.

Actually what you phrased there is the most common misconception, especially if you're going to be scientific about it.

Gender and Sex: Understand The Difference | Merriam-Webster

In science and biology and nature, there are two sexes, but gender is often the more cultural or psychological distinction.  Yes, you can absolutely (within margins of physical oddities) state that you are born with physical parts but that doesn't define the gender, even if there is a believe that "people make up new make-believe ones".  Hence why trans exists, LGBTQIA -- you can't just put gender or sexuality in a box of absolutism.  Sexual parts, sure.  But context is everything.  I'm not trying to argue with you sir, just stating that the scientific separation of sex vs gender in cultural understanding is growing and fortunately getting better, despite this thread.

To the thread...

Having watched the episode and probably DW longer than most people I'd wager, people need to just grow up.  It's a whimsy show about anything and has never taken itself seriously at all, and constantly reinvented.  If you think "old who" was better, you should rewatch a few, there was blatant sexism and like many things in culture, not exactly something to be prideful about, and even though I love Tom Baker to death or Pertwee, holy hells man.  People who get all butthurt over gender assumptions or wheelchairs need to just grow up.  It's a ridiculous show about ridiculous things that is just a fun ride.

Like there's a possible 40% vegas odds the same people who believe that wokeness is pushed in Who are going to simply say that Ncuti is the new doctor simply because he's not white ("omg cultural representation, just like the wheelchair, omg...", despite the point that he's an amazing actor.

Good episode.  And omg interior of the TARDIS is ALMOST perfect.  I think the round things should've been hexagon things, but they seem to have moved more toward round things.

[margrave]

The control room of the Tardis did look amazing. Like an updated version of the original black and white version almost. With a coffee maker to boot!

[Guest DewThePDX]

On 26/11/2023 at 16:26, Steven P. said:

Agreed. In science and biology and nature, there are two genders, no matter how many times people make up new make-believe ones.

I agree that people should be able to live their life believing and doing as they are the opposite gender, or neither! But the biological fact remains.

Also, I see you edited your post, it's a shame you believe it's a waste of time.. You inserted yourself into this topic and then announced it's a waste of time to share your opinion! How would you feel if I felt responding to you was a waste of time? You don't have to agree with me or FloatingFatMan, we can also respect one another's views if they are backed up by thought and not just chucked in a comment, which may leave the person you're responding to dismissive because of the way you handled it.

I'm extremely disappointed on a personal level seeing this...considering we have at least one mutual trans friend.

😔

Edited November 27, 2023 by DewThePDX

[Guest DewThePDX]

On 26/11/2023 at 17:31, mram said:

Actually what you phrased there is the most common misconception, especially if you're going to be scientific about it.

Gender and Sex: Understand The Difference | Merriam-Webster

In science and biology and nature, there are two sexes, but gender is often the more cultural or psychological distinction.  Yes, you can absolutely (within margins of physical oddities) state that you are born with physical parts but that doesn't define the gender, even if there is a believe that "people make up new make-believe ones".  Hence why trans exists, LGBTQIA -- you can't just put gender or sexuality in a box of absolutism.  Sexual parts, sure.  But context is everything.  I'm not trying to argue with you sir, just stating that the scientific separation of sex vs gender in cultural understanding is growing and fortunately getting better, despite this thread.

To the thread...

Having watched the episode and probably DW longer than most people I'd wager, people need to just grow up.  It's a whimsy show about anything and has never taken itself seriously at all, and constantly reinvented.  If you think "old who" was better, you should rewatch a few, there was blatant sexism and like many things in culture, not exactly something to be prideful about, and even though I love Tom Baker to death or Pertwee, holy hells man.  People who get all butthurt over gender assumptions or wheelchairs need to just grow up.  It's a ridiculous show about ridiculous things that is just a fun ride.

Like there's a possible 40% vegas odds the same people who believe that wokeness is pushed in Who are going to simply say that Ncuti is the new doctor simply because he's not white ("omg cultural representation, just like the wheelchair, omg...", despite the point that he's an amazing actor.

Good episode.  And omg interior of the TARDIS is ALMOST perfect.  I think the round things should've been hexagon things, but they seem to have moved more toward round things.

💯

 

On all of it.

 

Sadly I don't think facts are going to matter.

[Matthew S.]

On 26/11/2023 at 19:26, Steven P. said:

Agreed. In science and biology and nature, there are two genders, no matter how many times people make up new make-believe ones.

I agree that people should be able to live their life believing and doing as they are the opposite gender, or neither! But the biological fact remains.

Also, I see you edited your post, it's a shame you believe it's a waste of time.. You inserted yourself into this topic and then announced it's a waste of time to share your opinion! How would you feel if I felt responding to you was a waste of time? You don't have to agree with me or FloatingFatMan, we can also respect one another's views if they are backed up by thought and not just chucked in a comment, which may leave the person you're responding to dismissive because of the way you handled it.

Wether people like it or not, our outward-facing characteristics will always have people "assuming" our Gender.  

On 26/11/2023 at 20:31, mram said:

Actually what you phrased there is the most common misconception, especially if you're going to be scientific about it.

Gender and Sex: Understand The Difference | Merriam-Webster

In science and biology and nature, there are two sexes, but gender is often the more cultural or psychological distinction.  Yes, you can absolutely (within margins of physical oddities) state that you are born with physical parts but that doesn't define the gender, even if there is a believe that "people make up new make-believe ones".  Hence why trans exists, LGBTQIA -- you can't just put gender or sexuality in a box of absolutism.  Sexual parts, sure.  But context is everything.  I'm not trying to argue with you sir, just stating that the scientific separation of sex vs gender in cultural understanding is growing and fortunately getting better, despite this thread.

To the thread...

Having watched the episode and probably DW longer than most people I'd wager, people need to just grow up.  It's a whimsy show about anything and has never taken itself seriously at all, and constantly reinvented.  If you think "old who" was better, you should rewatch a few, there was blatant sexism and like many things in culture, not exactly something to be prideful about, and even though I love Tom Baker to death or Pertwee, holy hells man.  People who get all butthurt over gender assumptions or wheelchairs need to just grow up.  It's a ridiculous show about ridiculous things that is just a fun ride.

Like there's a possible 40% vegas odds the same people who believe that wokeness is pushed in Who are going to simply say that Ncuti is the new doctor simply because he's not white ("omg cultural representation, just like the wheelchair, omg...", despite the point that he's an amazing actor.

Good episode.  And omg interior of the TARDIS is ALMOST perfect.  I think the round things should've been hexagon things, but they seem to have moved more toward round things.

While the dictionary definition has been updated to appease these people it has not been recognized as a scientific fact as of yet.

Also, the LGBT acronym, what version is this, that's like the 3rd or 4th time this year alone it's changed, There is so much infighting within that community right now it's not even funny, and it IS being caused by these "some random gender"-identifying people.

And we are only using English as an example here, what about Spanish which has built-in genders? 

 

Anyway back on topic, it was an okay episode, again I agree with FFM and Steve, there's too much pandering to specific groups.  While in a sense they did try to make it work (Hey, aliens could have pronouns used to identify Male and Female.)  they really shouldn't have just thrown in a "your assuming it's pronouns".

[Steven P. Administrators]

On 27/11/2023 at 02:56, DewThePDX said:

I'm extremely disappointed on a personal level seeing this...considering we have at least one mutual trans friend.

😔

Did you completely skip over the part where I said I respect a person's choice? Who am I to decide anyway? I don't have a problem with it. I have a problem with made up "sexes" (since it was pointed out to me that I mistakenly used the term "gender" as scientific fact). Also, what Matthew S said is true, the dictionary does update terms, certain words have a very different meaning to what they had 100 years ago, usually because a people decide to adopt the word under a different meaning, or a group of people decide that a word has become socially unacceptable.

Anyway back to the topic, no-one answered my questions from the episode yet.

[Guest DewThePDX]

On 27/11/2023 at 01:02, Steven P. said:

Did you completely skip over the part where I said I respect a person's choice? Who am I to decide anyway? I don't have a problem with it. I have a problem with made up "sexes" (since it was pointed out to me that I mistakenly used the term "gender" as scientific fact). Also, what Matthew S said is true, the dictionary does update terms, certain words have a very different meaning to what they had 100 years ago, usually because a people decide to adopt the word under a different meaning, or a group of people decide that a word has become socially unacceptable.

Anyway back to the topic, no-one answered my questions from the episode yet.

Margrave did, 8 hours ago.

 

I'm not the one skipping over things...

[+DoctorD Subscriber²]

Controversy creates cash, think about that for a moment.   The buzz worldwide that a side character created in the show was well known when RTD took the helm and showed who was in the cast so if you are a fan, you shouldn't have been shocked in the slightest.  One new episode by RTD has done more for the series as a whole then the last few years of Who combined (now that was a dumpster fire).  Choosing to focus on a side character that was used as a plot hole filler and you choosing to be angry goes to show just how good RTD is creating a story. 

[margrave]

For good or bad, we're all still talking about the episode.

[Guest DewThePDX]

On 27/11/2023 at 04:02, margrave said:

For good or bad, we're all still talking about the episode.

Exactly.

 

That's why that "back to the topic" cracks me up. This is the topic...

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

On 26/11/2023 at 22:28, FloatingFatMan said:

Y'know... I've loved Doctor Who since the early 70's, but calling it a literary art is like comparing a 5 year olds ABC's practice with Shakespeare... 

You know what I meant

[FloatingFatMan]

On 27/11/2023 at 10:49, DoctorD said:

Controversy creates cash, think about that for a moment.   The buzz worldwide that a side character created in the show was well known when RTD took the helm and showed who was in the cast so if you are a fan, you shouldn't have been shocked in the slightest.  One new episode by RTD has done more for the series as a whole then the last few years of Who combined (now that was a dumpster fire).  Choosing to focus on a side character that was used as a plot hole filler and you choosing to be angry goes to show just how good RTD is creating a story. 

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm thankful for RTD for bringing Who back to us, and I'm hoping he can get it back on track after the last idiot show runners' clusterfrack.  But he also has always had a penchant for bringing topics into the show that just shouldn't be there.  It's not a soap opera, it's not a romance show, it's not a platform for whatever social craze of the week is.  It's a scifi action/adventure show for the family.  I'd rather they just stick to defeating villains, thanks.

If I want to watch people swooning over each other, I'll have my brain ripped out so I can stomach watching garbage like Love Island...

[Guest DewThePDX]

On 27/11/2023 at 11:04, FloatingFatMan said:

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm thankful for RTD for bringing Who back to us, and I'm hoping he can get it back on track after the last idiot show runners' clusterfrack.  But he also has always had a penchant for bringing topics into the show that just shouldn't be there.  It's not a soap opera, it's not a romance show, it's not a platform for whatever social craze of the week is.  It's a scifi action/adventure show for the family.  I'd rather they just stick to defeating villains, thanks.

If I want to watch people swooning over each other, I'll have my brain ripped out so I can stomach watching garbage like Love Island...

Doctor Who has been about social commentary and education from the start.

 

The action and adventure are how it gets dressed up. 

 

 

...and around the same circle we go again.

[FloatingFatMan]

On 27/11/2023 at 20:36, DewThePDX said:

Doctor Who has been about social commentary and education from the start.

 

The action and adventure are how it gets dressed up. 

*sigh* We've been through this once already.  It was educational from the start, ONLY from the start, for series 1.  They dropped that pretty much from season 2 onwards.  It has NEVER been done as a social commentary show, unless you think running away from the monster of the week reflected social issues of the day...

But I guess if you look for stuff believing it's already there, you'll find it.  In which case, EVERY TV show and movie ever made is social commentary.

[BritBronco]

On 27/11/2023 at 12:40, FloatingFatMan said:

*sigh* We've been through this once already.  It was educational from the start, ONLY from the start, for series 1.  They dropped that pretty much from season 2 onwards.  It has NEVER been done as a social commentary show, unless you think running away from the monster of the week reflected social issues of the day...

But I guess if you look for stuff believing it's already there, you'll find it.  In which case, EVERY TV show and movie ever made is social commentary.

Its has done social commentary, pretty much all of 3rd Doc story run with it.

[+DoctorD Subscriber²]

On 27/11/2023 at 14:04, FloatingFatMan said:

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm thankful for RTD for bringing Who back to us, and I'm hoping he can get it back on track after the last idiot show runners' clusterfrack.  But he also has always had a penchant for bringing topics into the show that just shouldn't be there.  It's not a soap opera, it's not a romance show, it's not a platform for whatever social craze of the week is.  It's a scifi action/adventure show for the family.  I'd rather they just stick to defeating villains, thanks.

If I want to watch people swooning over each other, I'll have my brain ripped out so I can stomach watching garbage like Love Island...

Let's see where the next episode goes because I am actually excited to see what is next.  As for soap opera gonna just casually point out the doctor and Rose complete story arc was exactly that a love story... As for extended Whoniverse, Captain Jack and everyone of any gender and species was a whole different level.

[FloatingFatMan]

On 27/11/2023 at 22:22, DoctorD said:

As for soap opera gonna just casually point out the doctor and Rose complete story arc was exactly that a love story... As for extended Whoniverse, Captain Jack and everyone of any gender and species was a whole different level.

Which is exactly what I was saying. Dr Who was never a romance show, until RTD decided to shoehorn it in, to the detriment of the show IMO.