Nah, it doesn't. I don't give a fig about that show and I loved "Rogue."
But it does help if you enjoy Jane Austen like I do.
Spoilers Russell T. Davies Returns to Doctor Who as New Showrunner
- Thread starter Allyn Gibson
- Start date
But it does help if you enjoy Jane Austen like I do.
Sure. I read a Jane Austen novel every July for Jane Austen July. It's interesting reading romance stories written by someone who never married or had any children.Nah, it doesn't. I don't give a fig about that show and I loved "Rogue."
But it does help if you enjoy Jane Austen like I do.
That's a lot different from modern authors writing regency romance.
I don't think they're the same.
I’ve… experienced Bridgerton. And Austen. (I am being slightly jokey here, Bridgerton is alright, and Austen is famously considered one of the originators of the novel form.)
Rogue is to Doctor Who as modern pulp Regency Romance is to Austen.
Written by people who are of a different cultural and linguistic background entirely (American influenced modernity) who model current social trends onto a form it does not entirely suit, and full of somewhat cludgey messaging about a subject that they do not have firsthand experience of, with added sex obsession inserted as ‘spice’.
In this case, they don’t understand the term ‘cosplay’ and the most fanfic element is Legally Distinct Captain Jack. It also has that slashfic element of women writing gay men.
Fine for AO3, but cringe for Saturday family TV.
Rogue is to Doctor Who as modern pulp Regency Romance is to Austen.
Written by people who are of a different cultural and linguistic background entirely (American influenced modernity) who model current social trends onto a form it does not entirely suit, and full of somewhat cludgey messaging about a subject that they do not have firsthand experience of, with added sex obsession inserted as ‘spice’.
In this case, they don’t understand the term ‘cosplay’ and the most fanfic element is Legally Distinct Captain Jack. It also has that slashfic element of women writing gay men.
Fine for AO3, but cringe for Saturday family TV.
Count me in the "never seen/read Bridgerton and loved Rogue" crowd. Sometimes a good episode is just a good episode regardless.
And a very kind "fuck you homophobes" to those who disliked the episode for that reason.
And a very kind "fuck you homophobes" to those who disliked the episode for that reason.
Disclaimer — I also found ninety percent of Ten’s amorous tendencies pretty cringeworthy, particularly the Queen Elizabeth joke in End of Time.
But the Kylie stuff in Rogue was even more cringeworthy.
I think also there’s a difference between a romantic spark and a lusty one, and Rogue was heading into Carry On territory. In fact Carry On is what that episode brings to mind most strongly.
(To be fair, Bridgerton also inhabits that Carry On space, but thats pretty much part of its identity.)
Another image from the original ending of S2 has slipped out.
Poppy cosplaying her daughter's outfit from The Five Doctors.
Poppy cosplaying her daughter's outfit from The Five Doctors.
Wasn’t that the bit where she popped up in Story and the Engine?
One of the directors, Peter Hoar has come out and said "something went wrong"
Doctor Who director says "something went wrong" with Disney deal: "It wasn't a better show with more money"
Peter Hoar, who directed The Robot Revolution and Lucky Day, was speaking about his new "genre-based" production company.
www.radiotimes.com
Honestly...for all of the discourse in this forum about the show in recent years, I think his point about money not making the show better is the one thing that we could all agree on.
> It wasn't a better show with more money
I hope more creative people realise this.
Money isn't a substitution for creativity. Red Dwarf - especially seasons 1-6, but also 10-13, was amazing despite having a budget smaller than a Napoleanic flea
I hope more creative people realise this.
Money isn't a substitution for creativity. Red Dwarf - especially seasons 1-6, but also 10-13, was amazing despite having a budget smaller than a Napoleanic flea
Yeah, but the Earth Starship Enterprise and Vulcanian thing went on well into the series, at least to the end of Season 1 and possibly even into Season 2, so it was a lot more than just the first few episodes.
Yeah, while I did grow to like the new Klingons, I was extremely relieved when they more or less retconned them out of existence after the second season of Discovery.
But they didn't rewrite anything, all they did was add an extra layer to the earlier part of the Doctor's life, which the shows never really dealt with anyways.
Gotta disagree with you here, we are getting some of the absolute best Trek we have ever gotten right now. Pretty much everything from the Disco time jump on has been absolutely fantastic.
The last three seasons of Disco took the show up to a whole new level from the from the first two seasons.
I enjoyed Season 2 of Picard a lot more than most people, and I absolutely loved Season 3.
Lower Decks was amazing from start to finish, and so far Strange New Worlds has been even better.
And Starfleet Academy is off to an absolutely fantastic start.
I loved Rogue, but I could not stand 73 Yard. I don't know if I'd say 73 Yards is bad, because it does seem to have done a good job doing what it set out to do, I just didn't like what it set out to do.
Last edited:
Bridgerton is pretty much Austen fanfic. And Rogue is making fun of that. Through the lens of poking fun at stuff, I enjoyed the episode. It's not the best Doctor Who, but it's one of the stand out episodes of Ncuti's era.I definitely recommend the book since it has good stuff that looks like it got cut out for time.
One of the problems with Ncuti's era is that the episodes are too short. They should be longer. Typically, shows that only go 8 episodes a season have nearly an hour or longer episodes.
Nothing wrong with the length of the episodes themselves. We got plenty of gems with the usual running time and making them longer wouldn't have made them any better.
There's a fair argument to be made about the length of the seasons themselves, but there's no reason for the episodes to be longer to compensate. Besides, that would've run against the whole point of the shorter season from a production standpoint.
What they should've done is made Space Babies and Devil's Chord longer. This would've lowered production costs for the rest of season one dramatically, as there would've been no one left watching the series to make episodes for.
If what it added flatly contradicted stuff that had been stated and shown and been plot points time and again, and also changed the fundamental nature of the character, then it rewrote it. Which is what happened.
Kid staring into temporal schism? Added, not contradicting anything we got on screen. Sad if you like Looms, but nothing fundamental.
Doctor sleeping in barn, living with Shobogans? Added, no contradictions, again, not great for the NA crowd.
TC? Fundamentally changed the Doctor, fundamentally changes the history of Gallifrey, contradicts a ton of stuff.
I don’t know that it is making fun of it so much as aping it.
I’ve seen quite a bit of Bridgerton, and enjoyed it more than this episode. Bridgerton is the parody tbh. I probably enjoyed it more than some of the actual Austen screen adaptations as a response.
Rogue is going to date horribly though, because it’s too dependent on that ‘Bridgerton era tv’ context. It’s happened before in Davies Who, but at least Bad Wolf got lucky in that Weakest Link and Big Brother made a comeback. What not to wear? Not so much.
It should have hewn to actual historical a teensy bit more perhaps, which tends not to date quite so hard when used in media.
Rogue has a paper thin vaguely-terror-of-the-Zygons body snatchers plot upon which a bunch of stuff was hung. And the Doctor/Rogue interactions were cringe inducing. At least last time the show decided to have the Doctor in something like this situation (girl in the fireplace) there was the implication of scenes occurring off camera to make the sort-of-relationship vaguely plausible. (Though still, a heck of an age gap…)
Here it was by the numbers, cringe inducingly tacky, rushed, and I feel it just didn’t work.
Not helped by the American Musical Theatre Star as Agent Who Travels Through Time and is Gay Captain J— I mean Rogue. We’d seen this character before basically, and done better. Yes, even the casting felt like a retread.
It wasn’t exactly a kind or positive portrayal of homosexual relationships either tbh.
There is a story there that could work. And I can *easily* believe the novel was better. (Much of classic Who for me exists more as literature than screen, because of when I grew up, and many of those are so much better too. I cannot tolerate season 24 for the most part on screen, but in the books? So much better. Especially Time and the Rani and Delta and the Bannermen. Even Dragonfite is better in the book.)
But what we got on screen didn’t work for me, because if nothing else, it felt like it was lazy. Not a meal, but some leftovers from four different meals plopped on a plate and not even reheated so much as given a plop of ketchup.
It has some nice moments within the story itself though, it would be dishonest not to acknowledge that.
I liked Devil's Chord*, one of the better episodes of the Gatwa era. I thought that it was generally well received too.
* insert snobbish jibe about the Beatles
Similar threads
