• 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!

Spoilers The Vanquishers grade and discussion thread

How do you rate The Vanquishers


  • Total voters
    43
Ok so done some digging and it may be I was wrong about RTD (although I'm sure I'd read something) @diankra may know?

Moffat though? He's said some doozies!









I don't know, what's worse, the wittering of a 16 year old or those of a man in his mid thirties who, by this time, was a TV professional? TBH I think Moffat was exaggerating his thoughts to get a rise out of the others around the table but even so it's hardly flattering (even if I kinda agree with him in places).

Going back to Chibnall, it's interesting because we're about the same age, god knows what kind of tosh you'd get out of me in 1986. What I do love about that clip is what it shows you about Dr Who fans and it holds true today. Chibnall is complaining that it's too run of the mill and needs to be more adult, some of the others are saying it's too convoluted.

The more things change :lol:
Steve wrote a piece for me for InVision, which wasn't too complimentary about the early Doctors. He grumbled about my censoring some of it, and wrote it while very tired, having been up late talking a friend out of suicide.
 
And, you know, opinions change.

The horror, the horror!
What's that got to do with anything? Apparently opinions about such weighty, all-important things as TV shows should be held against their authors forever, regardless of when and under what circumstances they were written / uttered / however communicated.

I've not been overly impressed with Chibnall-era Who but the notion he's fair game for abuse for things he said in 1986, when he was 15 / 16 years old, is bizarre at best.
 
What's that got to do with anything? Apparently opinions about such weighty, all-important things as TV shows should be held against their authors forever, regardless of when and under what circumstances they were written / uttered / however communicated.

I've not been overly impressed with Chibnall-era Who but the notion he's fair game for abuse for things he said in 1986, when he was 15 / 16 years old, is bizarre at best.

I think that is the point The Scrooge Doctor was making.
 
What's that got to do with anything? Apparently opinions about such weighty, all-important things as TV shows should be held against their authors forever, regardless of when and under what circumstances they were written / uttered / however communicated.

I've not been overly impressed with Chibnall-era Who but the notion he's fair game for abuse for things he said in 1986, when he was 15 / 16 years old, is bizarre at best.

Oh, I think it’s more the case that (a) a full on TV recording is different to a fan letter, and at the least he should be aware of its ability to haunt him. If I had been scathing about Trial of a Timelord and eighties who, I would not be so ready to undertake things that are very similar to that era, to avoid uncomfortable comparisons and (b) it’s more the case that if Chibnall can express negative opinions against the then current era of the show, then people — not him, unless he is here amongst us — can also express their negative opinions about the current era of the show.
Basically, that clip serves to show ‘people have opinions, and express them’ and in his specific case, it’s going to be mildly embarrassing given all the context.
 
Great production values and actors let down badly by careless, messy writing. Fun, and epic in scope, but hollow, with so much hand-waving and redundancy most of the satisfaction was drained out. Keep the story simple and contained, and Chibnall can do good things, but grand-scale, he's flailing.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top