I've Given Up...

[The]

and new Silurians are complete abominations.

Whoa! What? How can they be "abominations" when we haven't really seen much of them yet? Jeez Bones, jumping the negative-gun, aren't we?

I meant their appearance. Though having a silly whipping tongue and talking like bad actresses doesn't help.

Man, how was that bad in any way? I love the Classic show, and the Silurians. But, a really bad rubber-suit versus the beautiful prosthetics-work we got in this one? Or, are you talking about that they didn't look exactly like the old series?

 

[Bones2]

Not really sure this is the place for raking over the Silurian design discussion again. But to reiterate, they have a human face and look less like the Silurians and more like some forgettable Voyager aliens. Your only defence is to keep criticising the old design, which considering the budget and technique of the time holds up pretty well in my view. At least they looked genuinely unusual. These are completely unmemorable.

 

[The]

Not really sure this is the place for raking over the Silurian design discussion again. But to reiterate, they have a human face and look less like the Silurians and more like some forgettable Voyager aliens. Your only defence is to keep criticising the old design, which considering the budget and technique of the time holds up pretty well in my view. At least they looked genuinely unusual. These are completely unmemorable.

Umm...I never had any Silurian discussion with you. So, when you say "Your only defence is to keep criticising the old design", I'm not sure who you're talking about/to. All I brought up (once) was the rubber suits the actors used to wear. You cannot compare those...no matter how well they "hold up"...to the modern prosthetics. You just can't. It's like holding up something made in a school play in comparison to something from Hollywood...the same Hollywood that made those "forgettable Voyager aliens".

Honestly man...I sometimes think your primary goal is to take an opposing side to everything.

No, wait. That's Sci.

 

[Bones2]

Have we not discussed the new Silurian design here? I thought we had. Well, there's my view anyway. Human face, looks rubbish. Just because the scales look more scaly, you can't get over the fact it looks like one of a dozen races of the week that may have cropped up on the Treks. The old Silurian design was a good one in my view, and that done with the benefit of modern techniques could have been quite special. Didn't get reptiles with breasts back in those days either.

One thing glimpsed in this week's Confidential was:

That would have been perfect. It shows they were thinking of going for an updated version of the original design, but sadly didn't.

As to the allegation that I try and take the opposing view in everything, that's not true. I have my own considered opinion, and I don't adjust it depending on the opinions of others (unless they bring to light points and reasoning I may not have considered). Even so, considering how much Sci and I disagree, we can't possibly be doing the same thing.

 

[Cutter John]

I sorta have to agree with Bones (yeah I know. I'm scared too). While it didn't ruin the episode, I was kinda dissapointed with the redesign. Especially when there really wasn't a need for it.

I guess they figured it would be easier from mr average viewer to sympathize with the Silurians if they had a human face rather than scary latex lizards.

I hope they at least have a callback next week, and use the original head design in a painting or a scuplture on the set.

And I'll be REALLY annoyed if there isn't at least one pet dinosaur wandering about.

 

[I am not Spock]

The further away from RTD the series gets, the better.

Yeah, he was rubbish wasn't he?

On the subject of Rory, I'm not so bothered by him. I thought he did quite well in Amy's Choice. More likeable than Amy's shaping up.

Yeah, most of the time, he was! . Apart from a few good outings (Midnight, Turn Left, The Waters of Mars, Torchwood: Children Of Earth), most of the eps he wrote, sucked.

My mum has given up on the new series, actually. She just doesn't like Matt Smith's Dr. No matter how much I try to persuade her that the scripts under Moffatt's era will be miles better than Davies reign of terror (), she will not budge on this issue!

I think that under RTD, Who was trying too hard to apologise for being Who. 'Look, we're updating to the modern age, we're not some geeky sci fi show for nerds, our Doc wears a leather jacket, we have romances' etc. Under Moffatt, it seems to have proved itself, and can now be as unabashedly Dr Who as it likes!

 

[Shazam!]

She just doesn't like Matt Smith's Dr. No

Is that the part of the latest Bond reboot?

 

[I am not Spock]

^Oops. I meant to write: 'She just doesn't like Matt's Smith's Doctor (full stop). No matter how I try to...'

Come to think of it, I can't really picture Matt Smith playing Dr No!

 

[HappyDayRiot]

and new Silurians are complete abominations.

Whoa! What? How can they be "abominations" when we haven't really seen much of them yet? Jeez Bones, jumping the negative-gun, aren't we?

I meant their appearance. Though having a silly whipping tongue and talking like bad actresses doesn't help.

How is a reptile offshoot having a whipping, venomous tongue sillier than a reptile offshoot having a heatseeking third eye (or whatever it was for)? Seemed pretty plausible to me. And as for talking like bad actresses, the clips on Confidential of the old Silurians were pretty dull actors as well.

Sure, the humanoid aspect is disappointing and not very memorable I'd agree with you on that. However, we've only had one onscreen for about 10 minutes. Let's give her and the rest of her branch of Homo Reptilis a little more of a chance shall we? About 42-45 minutes should do it

Oh, and what have I told you about overusing 'silly' as a descriptive word before?

 

[Bones2]

I sorta have to agree with Bones (yeah I know. I'm scared too).

Why must people always say something like that when agreeing with me? You should be glad to be agreeing with such a well-respected figure.

<snip>

I like you. You should post here more often.

How is a reptile offshoot having a whipping, venomous tongue sillier than a reptile offshoot having a heatseeking third eye (or whatever it was for)? Seemed pretty plausible to me. And as for talking like bad actresses, the clips on Confidential of the old Silurians were pretty dull actors as well.

Well for a start, the third eye was established as a Silurian thing. This is the same show, as ashamed as some fans seem to be. As for criticising the acting of previous Silurians...what the bloody hell? That's your answer to the woman in The Hungry Earth being so poor? That you think from the clips on Confidential that the actors then were as well? Clearly you're not even seen Doctor Who and the Silurians anyway. As for the tongue, it's absolutely ridiculous to see that coming from a humanoid.

Sure, the humanoid aspect is disappointing and not very memorable I'd agree with you on that. However, we've only had one onscreen for about 10 minutes. Let's give her and the rest of her branch of Homo Reptilis a little more of a chance shall we? About 42-45 minutes should do it

Yeah, alright.

Oh, and what have I told you about overusing 'silly' as a descriptive word before?

Silly's my word for these things. It doesn't sounds as nasty and forthright as "stupid" or "asinine" or the like, but still conveys that sense of daftness. I might start giving episodes a Silly Rating.

 

[davejames]

I think by-and-large, the plus points far outweigh the negative ones. I love how we're back in rural England as opposed to urban estates and that The Doctor is an out-and-out nerd again. The relative low-key-ness of the episodes is also a major plus factor.

Agreed. I think the thing that's throwing people off is that low-keyness-- compared to the RTD era where it seemed like almost every story (no matter how small it started) would end up as something huge and epic and emotional.

Moffat's Who feels a bit smaller and more self-contained somehow.

Not to mention the fact Smith's Doc is a lot quirkier and less warm and embracing than Tennant's, which probably also affects the general mood of the show.

 

[The]

As for criticising the acting of previous Silurians...what the bloody hell? That's your answer to the woman in The Hungry Earth being so poor? That you think from the clips on Confidential that the actors then were as well? Clearly you're not even seen Doctor Who and the Silurians anyway. As for the tongue, it's absolutely ridiculous to see that coming from a humanoid.

Your "rules" are hilarious. As is your obvious and complete bias...

 

[davejames]

I thought the Silurian actress was perfectly fine myself. She held her own with Smith in the interrogation scene and the bitterness in her voice and attitude came through strong enough (she reminded me a lot of the Romulan commander in Face of the Enemy, in fact).

I agree her character was undermined a bit by the uninspired makeup, but I don't see what that had to do with her performance.

 

[HappyDayRiot]

Well for a start, the third eye was established as a Silurian thing. This is the same show, as ashamed as some fans seem to be. As for criticising the acting of previous Silurians...what the bloody hell? That's your answer to the woman in The Hungry Earth being so poor? That you think from the clips on Confidential that the actors then were as well? Clearly you're not even seen Doctor Who and the Silurians anyway. As for the tongue, it's absolutely ridiculous to see that coming from a humanoid.

Again, is it really as ridiculous as a heat-seeking third eye on a humanoid? Come to that, is it as ridiculous as a cold blooded humanoid, as Silurians and Cardassians are (NB that may be a perfectly plausible, I don't know. First analogy I thought of). You're right though I haven't seen that serial. I've read the novel version of it though, some time ago.

It makes no odds anyway, because THE clearly stated this was a different branch of Silurians to those in that serial. As with the Cybermen (no need to mention you don't like the new ones, I know), the new series has made sure it can use old enemies but update or change them without trampling on the originals. May not be to your taste, and your reasons for disliking the new design are valid, but there's no point getting all worked over a missing eye and a silly tongue, is there?

Oh, and what have I told you about overusing 'silly' as a descriptive word before?

Silly's my word for these things. It doesn't sounds as nasty and forthright as "stupid" or "assinine" or the like, but still conveys that sense of daftness. I might start giving episodes a Silly Rating.[/QUOTE]

Heh. I could get along with that. Great typo there as well, maybe you should use that instead.

ETA I suppose this is getting off-topic now - we can continue this in the Cold Blood thread I'm sure. So, current revival of enjoyment notwithstanding, what would it take for you to give up on the show?

 

[Bones2]

As for criticising the acting of previous Silurians...what the bloody hell? That's your answer to the woman in The Hungry Earth being so poor? That you think from the clips on Confidential that the actors then were as well? Clearly you're not even seen Doctor Who and the Silurians anyway. As for the tongue, it's absolutely ridiculous to see that coming from a humanoid.

Your "rules" are hilarious. As is your obvious and complete bias...

My bias towards good things? Really though, why would I have a vested interest in disliking something?

Heh. I could get along with that. Great typo there as well, maybe you should use that instead.

Oh blimey, look at that.
*goes and hides under rock with embarrassment*

ETA I suppose this is getting off-topic now - we can continue this in the Cold Blood thread I'm sure. So, current revival of enjoyment notwithstanding, what would it take for you to give up on the show?

Me personally? Erm, not sure. I still say this series is the best one of new Who yet. The Moffat episodes have been decent and Smith is my favourite new Who Doctor. Makes having to suffer these daft Daleks and silly Silurians all the worse. Some changes in writers could yield big improvements too. Give Cornell a regular episode or two-parter, get rid of Gatiss, Chibnall, and Roberts, hire...erm...some of the better suggestions in that thread what I done.

As for what would make me stop watching, I'm not sure. I mean, during the series 2 nadir, I still watched every week, though I may not have watched very closely if you get what I mean. Like, I'd flip through the paper while it was on and maybe go out and make a cup of tea.

 

[Starkers]

I sorta have to agree with Bones (yeah I know. I'm scared too).

Why must people always say something like that when agreeing with me? You should be glad to be agreeing with such a well-respected figure.

Nice to see you're developing a sense of humour about these things

I sort of agree with you (but not enough to be scared by it) A more traditional look would have been good, but I do understand why they went in the direction they did, it does allow for a lot more facial expression. I think the tongue was a bit silly (if only because she surely should have used it on everyone whilst locked up in the cellar) but I thought the actress did quite a decent job.

 

[Davros]

I sat through the first 10 mins last night, and decided I'd had enough.

Well obviously it's not for everyone. I'm enjoying it quite a lot.

I think Matt Smith genuinely has the ability to be a great doctor

I think Matt Smith is a great Doctor.

I agree with both points.

 

[The]

My bias towards good things? Really though, why would I have a vested interest in disliking something?

I don't think you have a vested interest in disliking anything. I think you lack a shred of objectivity in your judgments on the new show. I think Russel Davies burned you so badly, that you just can't let go of the anal-retentive details that matter little to anyone else, other than fans exactly like you. I think the show isn't how you personally picture Doctor Who, and that slants your every opinion. You create your own criteria with each episode, and not a single episode has ever lived up to your pre-conceived notion of what you believe Doctor Who to be. And, it quite simply never will.

Let me ask you: What is a four-star Classic episode of Doctor Who? Why does that particular episode rate four-stars, and not any of the current series?

I'm genuinely curious. I want to understand you, Bones. You task me because you're one of the only posters here I cannot get a clear "read" on. Are you a woman posting as a man just to throw us off? But, really, what's up with that av? Does she look hot out of makeup? Why a shot of the actress all fuglied-up?

 

[Count Zero]

Mmh, I think some people are unduely obsessed with Bones. It's inexplicable to me. It's very likely that we won't agree on anything regarding Doctor Who, but I don't get this obsession with him.

(And no, that's not directed at you, The, but just a general observation.)

 

[Bones2]

I sorta have to agree with Bones (yeah I know. I'm scared too).

Why must people always say something like that when agreeing with me? You should be glad to be agreeing with such a well-respected figure.

Nice to see you're developing a sense of humour about these things

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLG0F7suqSI

My bias towards good things? Really though, why would I have a vested interest in disliking something?

I don't think you have a vested interest in disliking anything. I think you lack a shred of objectivity in your judgments on the new show. I think Russel Davies burned you so badly, that you just can't let go of the anal-retentive details that matter little to anyone else, other than fans exactly like you. I think the show isn't how you personally picture Doctor Who, and that slants your every opinion. You create your own criteria with each episode, and not a single episode has ever lived up to your pre-conceived notion of what you believe Doctor Who to be. And, it quite simply never will.

None of this is true. The new Silurians looking so poor is not a minor thing. But the episode itself was a snore where nothing happened anyway.

Let me ask you: What is a four-star Classic episode of Doctor Who? Why does that particular episode rate four-stars, and not any of the current series?

Well, for me the maximum rating is 5. Growing up with the Radio Times and all. Of the current series, I liked The Beast Below very much, more than most other people did in fact. That's a 4 or a 4.5 in my view. It was interesting, clever, fun, and moving.

I'm genuinely curious. I want to understand you, Bones. You task me because you're one of the only posters here I cannot get a clear "read" on. Are you a woman posting as a man just to throw us off? But, really, what's up with that av? Does she look hot out of makeup? Why a shot of the actress all fuglied-up?

I like Cardassians. This is a Star Trek forum after all. And Gul Ocett was a great character. Yes, a great character

As for me myself, I don't put any special effort into trying to be mysterious (lest I end up a smug unlikeable bitch like River Song). It's nice that you're curious about me though.

Mmh, I think some people are unduely obsessed with Bones. It's inexplicable to me. It's very likely that we won't agree on anything regarding Doctor Who, but I don't get this obsession with him.

...so you won't go on webcam with me?