• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Well... THAT was different! :-)

I personally have no problem with the Doctor being half-human. Hell, I make a direct mention of his human mother in "The Spindle of Necessity." :)

You do? Whoa, I thought that was something DW authors generally avoided like the plague.

Does the Eighth Doctor actually say the Master was the enemy he wanted to fool in The Forgotten? Maybe the Seventh tried to become human to prevent something nasty happening to him due to his Gallifreyan origin, but only partially succeeded (The narrative does say that the Chameleon Arch he used was damaged) and when it was over he decided to stick with being half-human a little while longer to see what it was like?
 
I personally have no problem with the Doctor being half-human. Hell, I make a direct mention of his human mother in "The Spindle of Necessity." :)

You do? Whoa, I thought that was something DW authors generally avoided like the plague.
Depends on the author-- Jon Blum & Kate Orman embraced it in their books, and we even saw a character strongly implied to be the Doctor's father.
 
I'm sorry, but that film is just plain bad. Seriously, it's like Highlander II in its stupidity.

Oh I dunno, it is a bit silly plotwise but it does all make sense. Highlander 2 is just a mess, so badly put togeather that people change clothes and swords mid fights!:lol:
 
Personally, I love the Roberts Master.

"As well as you."

Definitely. That cracks me up. I genuinely thought he was fine. Very arch, but I could imagine a half-crazed snake Master might revel in his surroundings when faced with a Doctor who has lost his memory.
 
McGann was great. The movie itself was dire. As others have said, the half human-thing never happened.

It's funny how it's always referred to now as "the half-human thing" as if it's some unmentionable thing of almost universal embarrasment to fans. Which it is, of course.

Not to this fan.
 
I'm sorry, but that film is just plain bad. Seriously, it's like Highlander II in its stupidity.

Oh I dunno, it is a bit silly plotwise but it does all make sense. Highlander 2 is just a mess, so badly put togeather that people change clothes and swords mid fights!:lol:

It wasn't so much that which annoyed me, as the fact that the writers and filmmakers blatantly mutilated so much of the original Highlander mythos (Immortals as aliens, etc). The Dr Who movie also seems to show very little regard to the original material.
 
The Dr Who movie also seems to show very little regard to the original material.

Except for the half-human thing, and the kiss, I couldn't disagree more. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that what killed the TVM was the fact that it was buried under thirty-years of continuity trying to be shoved in an hour-and-a-half...
 
I admit I'm actually not quite as offended by the Doctor kissing Grace as I used to be, after seeing the ninth and tenth Doctors get their share of romance. But then again, the new series approached that angle far better.
 
McGann is a bloody brilliant Doctor, Roberts is unintentionally hilarious and it was nice of them to bring back McCoy but overall this stands as one of the worst films I've ever seen. As a way-in for new viewers having a film about two warring time travellers where their status as time travellers is utterly irrelevent is bonkers.
 
The whole kissing Doctor never really bothered me that much. I suspect that as much as he's travelled and wierdness he's seen, a kiss has about as much meaning as a handshake, or rubbing elbows with someone from Floricon Delta. :)

Roberts was okay until he started prancing about in that Gallfreyan robe near the end. And like everyones said, McGann, and McCoy are really the only things that shine in the TVM. Though Grace was a pretty neet character as well. I could have stood to have seen more stories with her.


I like Grace's excuse "he's British" to explain his odd behaviour. Then: "Yes, I suppose I am." So the Doctor is not only half-human, but British too (not that there's anything wrong with that). :D

I've always considered the Doctor to be virtually British. There is so much about him that's British I even made an icon (featuring 10 rather than 8, though)! :lol:

Makes one wonder how things might have been different if Totters Lane had been located in a back alley in New York. :D
 
Makes one wonder how things might have been different if Totters Lane had been located in a back alley in New York. :D

The Doctor would have been shot by gang-bangers a lot earlier.

That may have been a stupider way for him to go than tripping over a brick :rolleyes:
 
I'm sorry, but that film is just plain bad. Seriously, it's like Highlander II in its stupidity.

Oh I dunno, it is a bit silly plotwise but it does all make sense. Highlander 2 is just a mess, so badly put togeather that people change clothes and swords mid fights!:lol:

It wasn't so much that which annoyed me, as the fact that the writers and filmmakers blatantly mutilated so much of the original Highlander mythos (Immortals as aliens, etc). The Dr Who movie also seems to show very little regard to the original material.

Making it all the more annoying that Highlander 2 is actually by the people who made Highlander, then again the original is one of those films that succeeds inspite of itself. It really shouldn't work but it does. And it really never needed a sequel!

I agree with The I'm afraid, if anything they were too faithful in many respects and ended up with some bastard child of Dr Who that didn't do enough to satisfy the fans, but which was too jammed full of stuff for the casual viewer. I don't know if it affected how RTD chose to bring the show back, but you have to admit his tactic worked best. Don't show the regeneration, start with the Doctor in the middle of an adventure and don't get bogged down with much of what's gone before right away and what you end up with is a highly succesful series that, after 4+ years of drip feeding us history, now has few past major revelations to really reveal, IMO.
 
I really enjoyed the cinematography the telemovie brought to Doctor Who. The show went from having this incredibly simplistic, stifling cinematography to actually looking like it was produced for more than twopence.
 
That's because it was made for more than tuppence! And yet for all that money, all that budget and effects and camerawork it's still inferior characterwise and storywise to those guys who made decades of Who on a budget of tuppence.

How utterly brilliant :lol:

In fact the entire classic series should be ref'd in the Britishness avatar contest, because there's nowt more British than brilliance and exellence on a budget :techman:
 
^Agreed. Sci always enjoys reminding us that he does not approve of the Classic Series because it was made with no budget, and before he was born. :p

In fact, I'd so far as to say it takes far more brilliance and talent to keep a monster franchise like Doctor Who alive and onscreen for thirty-years with none of the modern resources available, as it does for someone to write a grand script and shove a million bucks into it...
 
^Agreed. Sci always enjoys reminding us that he does not approve of the Classic Series because it was made with no budget, and before he was born. :p

In fact, I'd so far as to say it takes far more brilliance and talent to keep a monster franchise like Doctor Who alive and onscreen for thirty-years with none of the modern resources available, as it does for someone to write a grand script and shove a million bucks into it...

I make no claims about the original series (right now, anyway) other than that it really should have had a better cinematography.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top