[groan]
Disliking the way politics are handled in a story does NOT make you a neo-nazi/"Reform correspondent". Doing so exposes you as no better than the people you accuse others of being.
Spoilers The War Between the Land and the Sea discussion thread
- Thread starter The Grinch Doctor
- Start date
Disliking the way politics are handled in a story does NOT make you a neo-nazi/"Reform correspondent". Doing so exposes you as no better than the people you accuse others of being.
You do talk some utter bollocks. Insulting too.
I’m about as far from Reform as it’s possible to get without joining the Socialist Worker Party. Or the Greens I suppose.
I talk about the show, I look at it’s writing and production, and it’s something I have decades of experience of as a hobby (and qualifications etc insofar as actual writing and analysis goes) and Who specifically.
If you can’t read or think, then don’t bother to write either. Save the bandwidth.
Oh, for crying out loud.
This is a thread about The War Between the Land and the Sea.
Not whatever damn politics you follow.
NOR is it the "bash Davies like you bashed Chibnall like you bashed Moffat like you bashed Davies the first time" ad fucking nauseum.
Just. STOP.
Either talk about the miniseries or don't post in this thread at all.
That's not so much to ask for
This is a thread about The War Between the Land and the Sea.
Not whatever damn politics you follow.
NOR is it the "bash Davies like you bashed Chibnall like you bashed Moffat like you bashed Davies the first time" ad fucking nauseum.
Just. STOP.
Either talk about the miniseries or don't post in this thread at all.
That's not so much to ask for
I understand your frustration.
It drifted slightly, but it is talking about the miniseries and its context. War Between thus far is an Enivornmental Polemic, and maybe a hint of a Colonisation Polemic/Allegory, tale. (as really all alien invasion stories sort of are)
It’s doing ok, though a bit heavy handed at times — and the people making it are the same people who made the most recent series of Who.
It’s got a bigger audience than that most recent series, and sometimes it’s the polemic stuff that is seen as affecting audience numbers on yhe recent series.
Even when I answered the question about that, while referring to recent and past Who — which War Between is tied to narratively and behind the scenes — I said that one of the best points of comparison will be the Zygon Inversion. (And not previous Sea Devil stories. Though who wouldn’t like to see a new Myrka?)
Critique is not bashing (though especially as fans it’s so,e times difficult not to let it be framed a bit bashy… thats fandom. Ask football fans about managers or players.) though it’s also not all going to be ‘this is lovely isn’t it?’ (Unless it miraculously is a perfect story.)
As to politics? I personally haven’t touched the subject, except for what might be considered political things brought up by the makers of the series themselves in relation to how they are approaching making it. Even then it’s about their approach and not the actual political position.
These days it’s almost inevitable not to touch on politics (or at least, certain views) because the current production team have made it an overt part of the discussion, and brought it into fan debate more than ever.
If anything it’s been quite restrained here as part of the discussion — no pointing out a gay actor is playing a straight man in a story that has elements that are related to his sexuality (Barclay’s family, ex wife, the attractiveness of Salt to him) even when RTD is very much on the record about how the reverse should no longer be allowed.
Probably because we don’t really care about that (I know I don’t) and it would be sliding more into bashing RTD than critique.
But elsewhere, it is a point of discussion among fans and viewers of Who.
"Slightly"?
Yeah, slightly. I guarantee once War Between episode 3 drops, we'll focus on the quality of the episode in discussions... or not in my case, since I have zero interest."Slightly"?
"Slightly"?
Well, we were discussing the inclusivity and similar aspects in the current ‘Whoniverse’ including and even focused on War Between, and their affect on audience and viewers. We were discussing the writer of episode one, and the overall thing.
Even when I was answering the question on whether some of that has pushed audiences away (rather than audiences taking themselves away) I was referencing recent Who, by RTD, and two previous stories involving UNIT (one new, one classic) and yet another with blue sea creatures and military involvement in passing.
And I still specifically mentioned War Between as thats the crux of what we are talking about.
I haven’t gone off and discussed other RTD work, or other SF, or other franchises that are struggling for audiences, I haven’t been fussed about ‘woke’ accusations or whatever the popular anti thing is in media criticism. Not really my style for a start.
Basically, there was discussion of the wider Who franchise of late, and it’s showrunner, both as they relate to War Between.
Which is slightly off-topic, if at all, let’s be honest.
Would it be off topic to talk about TNG Klingon stories when discussing a DS9 Klingon story?
Or off topic to talk about sexual elements or symbols or tropes when discussing a Brannon Braga episode?
Not another death flag.
They’re always ‘Silurians, but less developed and interesting, and… wet.’
The Master helped zhuj up their first story, but it was a retread (same with Terror of the Autons and Spearhead in someways) and in Warriors of the Deep they’re co stars anyway and largely because of the setting.
Kung Fu super jumping Mario versions in the Jodie days didn’t give a great impression, I can’t even remember the point of the story or it’s plot tbh, and in *some* ways War Between has many similarities with the first time the Silurians came back in NuWho — but on a bit of a grander scale because that’s how the production makes up for a lack of Doctor character.
Perhaps it’s because they always have to be put back at the end, and it’s a difficult story to tell more than once with anything new added. Then there’s the political subtext (they’re the indigenous species after all, but also the alien invaders… who also enslaved our ancestors) thats difficult to get a purchase on. Bringing in the environmental aspect should be something useful, good, and fresh — but has the potential to also be hard to marry with the history of the species, and could just end up making it a mash up of other Who environment stories (that don’t always go well recently) but now with Sea Devils.
Maybe it’s better for the not-we watching, since it’s Who in BBC premium drama clothing.
I am sort of looking forward to watching tonight’s, but more in the sense that it’s new, and Who, and hasn’t completely crashed out yet. Also my opinion of it isn’t fully formed, not least as there’s some really ropey bits as well as some decent bits.
Ok, seen 3 and 4 and…
It’s terrible. Truly awful.
Scenes happening with no linking narrative, motivations and actions that exist independent of cause and effect, some off the rails drama student shite.
It started wobbly but ok, and then… it just nosedived, hard.
Standard for this team. Honestly. Give a bad name to writers.
A shame.
It’s terrible. Truly awful.
Scenes happening with no linking narrative, motivations and actions that exist independent of cause and effect, some off the rails drama student shite.
It started wobbly but ok, and then… it just nosedived, hard.
Standard for this team. Honestly. Give a bad name to writers.
A shame.
Similar threads
- Poll
