• 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!

Last Christmas Grading and Discussion Thread

How do you rate Last Christmas?


  • Total voters
    142
You are preaching to someone who hasn't really liked DS9 since Worf joined the cast.

And no, I didn't care for the cheat that was Sisko inserted into "Mirror, Mirror" and pretending it was the Tribbles episode. I guess they counted on most viewers not noticing.

Who said all the clips had to be from TROUBLE WITH TRIBBLES? DS9 Production people never said that. They never said all the scenes we used in this episode are from TwT. I don't see a problem with it since they wanted to add the Sisko/Kirk scene.

I don't recall Paramount pretending that the Sisko/Kirk scene used footage from "The Trouble with Tribbles", Paramount can't be held responsible if viewers assumed all scenes featuring the two cast where from one episode.
 
Funny Worf is the only reason why I kept watching DS9.

Honestly I wouldn't care if they totally forgot about the boy from the finale. That is the only part I didn't like about the finale. It seems like you are causing more heartache for the boy and his family. How does the family explain oh guess what Our son who has been dead for years is back from the dead.

I think it was supposed to be a awwww moment for us and a sad moment to. I don't think we are meant to remember or think about it.
And thus it's assumed the audience is stupid. If people are following the story at all, of course they're going to wonder about the kid and where Orson Pink comes from.

You are preaching to someone who hasn't really liked DS9 since Worf joined the cast.

And no, I didn't care for the cheat that was Sisko inserted into "Mirror, Mirror" and pretending it was the Tribbles episode. I guess they counted on most viewers not noticing.
Who said all the clips had to be from TROUBLE WITH TRIBBLES? DS9 Production people never said that. They never said all the scenes we used in this episode are from TwT. I don't see a problem with it since they wanted to add the Sisko/Kirk scene.
I don't recall Paramount pretending that the Sisko/Kirk scene used footage from "The Trouble with Tribbles", Paramount can't be held responsible if viewers assumed all scenes featuring the two cast where from one episode.
Since the episode was touted as "DS9 meets The Trouble With Tribbles" I'd expect to see footage from the tribbles episode and not some other episode.
 
Honestly I wouldn't care if they totally forgot about the boy from the finale. That is the only part I didn't like about the finale. It seems like you are causing more heartache for the boy and his family. How does the family explain oh guess what Our son who has been dead for years is back from the dead.

That was the problem I had with that bit in the finale. Presumably the kid was killed a few years earlier, long enough for Danny to have been discharged from the army, attend university, get an education degree, and teach at Coal Hill for at least a year. So won't the kid's family be really freaked out when he turns up alive several years later and hasn't aged?

But, no I didn't need an explanation about what happened to him in the finale. I just assumed Clara got in contact with Kate Stewart who in turn tracked down someone within the UN who could get the kid back to Afghanistan and his family. Not everything needs to be spelled out exactly, it's okay for some things to be left in the air as presumed taken care of.
 
Danny's decision may not have been very rational, but that isn't the same thing as not believable.
 
I cant believe we went from Cyber-Brigadier/Iron Man to this in one episode. Thats what I absolutely loathe about this show, wildly wildly inconsistent. That being said, I went in expecting to despise it, ended up really loving it. It was derivative as f**k, but it actually worked for me. I would've liked to have seen the Doctor bring them all back together in the real world, but at the same time I was happy how it ended.
 
No, but it was still a show marketed to 10 year olds when it gained worldwide popularity. I wouldn't want the show to become something else and risk losing its charm.
 
Not really. RTD's format appealed to all groups, but it appealed more to teenagers. Not little kids. A little kid wouldn't appreciate Midnight for instance. Or they would, like many kids love John Carpenter's Halloween, a very adult film.
 
Funny Worf is the only reason why I kept watching DS9.

Honestly I wouldn't care if they totally forgot about the boy from the finale. That is the only part I didn't like about the finale. It seems like you are causing more heartache for the boy and his family. How does the family explain oh guess what Our son who has been dead for years is back from the dead.

I think it was supposed to be a awwww moment for us and a sad moment to. I don't think we are meant to remember or think about it.
And thus it's assumed the audience is stupid. If people are following the story at all, of course they're going to wonder about the kid and where Orson Pink comes from.
Orson Pink, is certainly a fair criticism, that deserves some kind of mention/closure (Clara being pregnant with Danny's kid or mention of a rewrite of the future), but, the Afghan kid, I don't see a problem. Danny's final request was for Clara to get him back to his parents, one would think, despite any issues you may have with their relationship, that she loved him enough to honor that request, and take care of it right away, before The Christmas Special rolled around.
 
I assumed it was taken care of, it would have been nice if Clara got pregnant with Danny's kid. I wonder what wasn't supposed to happen that happened to get rid of Orson from the timeline.

Or maybe we will find a relative no one knew about. (sibling, cousin etc)
 
Was it stated the Afghan boy was known to his family to be dead?

If he just "disappeared" for all they knew it wouldn't be much of a stretch for him to come back, what with it being a warzone.
 
If he just "disappeared" for all they knew it wouldn't be much of a stretch for him to come back, what with it being a warzone.

They'd still think it odd he hasn't aged at all, it what must be something like five years minimum. But even then, Danny's timeline doesn't really make that much sense anyway.
 
There is always that odd chance that Orson is actually Danny. The Doctor did get a chance to talk to him first before dropping in on Clara and Danny's date.
 
Not really. RTD's format appealed to all groups, but it appealed more to teenagers. Not little kids. A little kid wouldn't appreciate Midnight for instance. Or they would, like many kids love John Carpenter's Halloween, a very adult film.

For every Midnight, there's a Partners in Crime (with cute little fat blob creatures) or The Next Doctor (with a giant mecha Cyberman). Considering the face parasites in this Moffatt episode, whether this is targeted at 10 year olds is certainly up for debate as well.

We can all debate who the target audience is, but that's different from saying the target audience should be older because the global audience is older.
 
I have a 10 year old niece and a 12 year old Nephew who have been watching since season 1.

These 10 year olds I spoke of are not fresh off the boat.

They are hardened veterans.
 
Does DW have a specifc target audiance? Given it's slot early evening Saturdays around 19:00 isn't it going for the broadest audiance possible the entire family young/old, male/female?
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top