Weeping Angels=Who's Borg?

[Whofan]

Now, you might be thinking the Cybermen have more in common, but when you think about it from a different, less cosmetic POV....


-Both are more popular attempts at a new villain in a new franchise show other than returning classics (Klingons, Romulans/Daleks, Cybermen) or the initial recurring bad guys (Ferengi/Slitheen) who were more obnoxious than scary.

-Both have been retconned in their second appearence. Originally, the Angels teleported you to the past and feed on your time energy-the years you would've had. However for Time Of Angels they seemed just to kill outright. Likewise, the Borg initially seemed interested only in technology and didn't need humans. However Best of Both Worlds had them suddenly become interested in humans.

-Both are largely silent, requiring someone with knowledge to explain them initially (Q/The Doctor) and secondly, a converted human representative (Locutus/Angel Bob).

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

(Ferengi/Slitheen) who were more obnoxious than scary.

And comical, see also: ridiculous, silly, inane.
But at least the Ferengi hit their stride when the writers went the intentionally comical route (in my opinion).

Likewise, the Borg initially seemed interested only in technology and didn't need humans. However Best of Both Worlds had them suddenly become interested in humans. (Ferengi/Slitheen) who were more obnoxious than scary.

It always seemed to me that the Borg's increased interest in Humans was due to them somehow getting foiled by those Humans.


But definitely they are both the best of the latter day villains of their respective programmes.

 

[The Wormhole]

So does this mean the Doctor is going to have a Weeping Angel as a companion someday who is going to be turned human and learn what it means to be human, while constantly and ridiculously easily defeating the other Weeping Angels at every turn and even foiling the evil plans of the Weeping Angel Queen? Ulitmately making everyone sick of the Weeping Angels? Or am I just taking the analogy too far?

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

^ An Analogy Too Far, great movie.

 

[23skidoo]

So does this mean the Doctor is going to have a Weeping Angel as a companion someday who is going to be turned human and learn what it means to be human, while constantly and ridiculously easily defeating the other Weeping Angels at every turn and even foiling the evil plans of the Weeping Angel Queen? Ulitmately making everyone sick of the Weeping Angels?

As long as she looks like Jeri Ryan, I won't complain.

Alex

 

[Jax]

Originally, the Angels teleported you to the past and feed on your time energy-the years you would've had. However for Time Of Angels they seemed just to kill outright.

I was watching that episode the other day and the Doctor stated it was strange because thats what they normally do. It become clear as the episode goes on that the Angels aren't feeding in that way because they are using the ships core and the crack in time itself for energy...were not needed so they kill us for well fun.

There has been no retconned.

 

[Bones2]

Sending someone back in time and feeding off the energy that well whatever doesn't really make sense when you think about it, but it's a forgiveable part of Blink's excellent and effective conceit.

 

[Davros]

I would say the Borg are Star Trek's Cybermen.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

I would say the Borg are Star Trek's Cybermen.

The Cyberman did finally say "assimilated" in Pandorica Opens.

 

[Davros]

I would say the Borg are Star Trek's Cybermen.

The Cyberman did finally say "assimilated" in Pandorica Opens.

But they've been trying to assililate people since Tenth Planet.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

So does this mean the Doctor is going to have a Weeping Angel as a companion someday who is going to be turned human and learn what it means to be human, while constantly and ridiculously easily defeating the other Weeping Angels at every turn and even foiling the evil plans of the Weeping Angel Queen? Ulitmately making everyone sick of the Weeping Angels?

As long as she looks like Jeri Ryan, I won't complain.

Alex

That's the day that I'll stop watching Doctor Who and turn my entire focus to The Vampire Diaries. At least the hot people in that one are men.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

I would say the Borg are Star Trek's Cybermen.

The Cyberman did finally say "assimilated" in Pandorica Opens.

But they've been trying to assililate people since Tenth Planet.

Oh, I know. But "assimilate" put it over the top.

 

[G2309]

Sending someone back in time and feeding off the energy that well whatever doesn't really make sense when you think about it, but it's a forgiveable part of Blink's excellent and effective conceit.

Does Dr Who ever make sense when you think about it with any seriousness?

 

[Bones2]

Sending someone back in time and feeding off the energy that well whatever doesn't really make sense when you think about it, but it's a forgiveable part of Blink's excellent and effective conceit.

Does Dr Who ever make sense when you think about it with any seriousness?

*Doctor

Yes, it does. Or at least, the classic show mostly did its best to a lot of the time. RTD Who seemed to think it was a virtue to be a complete nonsense, so long as you had Wose creasing her face up to some Disney music after. In fact, the places where I think Moffat's gone wrong in some of his stories (and don't get me wrong - he's a great writer and has written some great Doctor Who) is where he's been too much like RTD. Pointless unfunny gratuitous sex references in TEC/TDD, a prancing tit Doctor snogging peoples' faces off in TGITF, some unnecessary stupidity and a deus ex machina in TTOA/FAS, and the outright rubbish of The Big Bang - all these things are the kind of thing RTD's stories were completely full of. Thankfully though, his plotting is often much cleverer than that, and Moffat at his absolute best could rival Robert Holmes. I'm glad we have the combination of a great writer showrunner and a terrific Doctor in Matt Smith now, and hope they can build on the improvement that was much of series 5 to bring us some great Doctor Who. It's just a shame the BBC didn't choose him to bring the show back in 2005.

 

[Jax]

Yes, it does. Or at least, the classic show mostly did its best to a lot of the time

The original show was much more chessy and weird than the new show could ever be. Though I will admit Moffat stuff since 2005 is generally better to what RTD did.

 

[Starkers]

Point 1. Understanding Moffat as a writer it's important to accept that he is in fact far more likely to insert romance into his notion of Who than even RTD was. Coupling, Press Gang etc, in fact even Jekyll hung around the notion of love conquering all. In fact let's look further. Whilst RTD had the notion of a companion and Doctor in love it was, mawkish though it was, somewhat innocent and quite sexless. Compare than to Moffat where first Amy smiles as she watches the Doctor undress and then basically tells him she's gagging for it. As for the romantic references in his episodes written whilst RTD was exec producer, it's important to remember that Moffat is pretty much the only writer that RTD didn't doctor some or all of the script on. References to dancing, love, romance, sex etc in Moffat's work aren't there because Russell T Davies told him to put em there, they're there because Moffat wants them there. Take Blink and just count the different mentions to love and romance in there. Kathy goes back in time and marries a good man, then Sally flirts with a copper who goes back in time and makes particular reference to marrying someone, then of course Sally chooses to make a go of a relationship with Kathy's brother.

2.Moffat's said if he'd been in RTD's shoes he'd have hired David Tennant too.

 

[Bones2]

Yes, it does. Or at least, the classic show mostly did its best to a lot of the time

The original show was much more chessy and weird than the new show could ever be. Though I will admit Moffat stuff since 2005 is generally better to what RTD did.

Nothing wrong with chess. More TV should be like it. As for being weird: Doctor Who is weird. Weird is good. The best stories are often weird. Weird certainly doesn't equate to stupid.

Point 1. Understanding Moffat as a writer it's important to accept that he is in fact far more likely to insert romance into his notion of Who than even RTD was. Coupling, Press Gang etc, in fact even Jekyll hung around the notion of love conquering all. In fact let's look further. Whilst RTD had the notion of a companion and Doctor in love it was, mawkish though it was, somewhat innocent and quite sexless. Compare than to Moffat where first Amy smiles as she watches the Doctor undress and then basically tells him she's gagging for it. As for the romantic references in his episodes written whilst RTD was exec producer, it's important to remember that Moffat is pretty much the only writer that RTD didn't doctor some or all of the script on. References to dancing, love, romance, sex etc in Moffat's work aren't there because Russell T Davies told him to put em there, they're there because Moffat wants them there. Take Blink and just count the different mentions to love and romance in there. Kathy goes back in time and marries a good man, then Sally flirts with a copper who goes back in time and makes particular reference to marrying someone, then of course Sally chooses to make a go of a relationship with Kathy's brother.

Yeah, Amy being a strippergram who makes a point of having a good look at the Doctor's nob when the opportunity presents felt like a ham-fisted way to say "isn't she sassy, look". As for writing a version of WW2 London where every man's a homosexual, it seemed to me to be a case of keeping the guv'ner happy. I don't know that of course; for all I know Moffat would have written it that way if it wasn't RTD holding the office keys, Captain Jizz and all. But that's how it seems.

As for the difference between romance and sex references in a kids show, this has been debated endlessly. I think The End of the World is a good example of it just being an unfunny attempt to slip one past the kids: they get out of the Tardis into something looking like a community center, and meet a tree woman who immediately says to the Doctor "Who's blondie there then? You paying her for it? You given her one up the garden?". What's this doing in a family show? It's not funny, and it's not clever.

2.Moffat's said if he'd been in RTD's shoes he'd have hired David Tennant too.

Tennant's a good actor, and could have been a great Doctor. If Moffat had been in charge, he could well have been quite different. Instead we got a prancing tit snogging up the wimmenz like he's Captain Kirk and being so sorry and crying the rest of the time, mugging all the while. But at his best, Tennant could still convey a gravitas that showed there was potential for being a great Doctor in there, and I think it's more a case of unrealised potential than being rubbish. Tennant was, of course, a fan before and probably played up the gurning in a way like he was imitating Tom Baker without really understanding why the Fourth Doctor worked. And when you're popular in the way Tennant was (among the Radio Times idiot crowd and teenage girls who wet themselves over a handsome man), there's probably no reason for him to think he was doing anything wrong in the role. But I don't think posterity will be as kind to the Tenth Doctor.

 

[Starkers]

So RTD is responsible for everything bad about Who, even down to Tennant's acting style and Moffat's scripts.

I shall leave you and your hate in peace...

 

[Jax]

The problem with his logic is DT was a succesful Doctor, the majorty of the fanbase took to him and hes now up there with Tom Baker as the most popular Doctor. Bones own opinion doesn't change the fact the masses love Doctor Who under RTD and David Tennant as The 10th Doctor. He'll come back with the "idiots" thing about the masses because somehow Bones knows better than about the 10 million + average audience (counting more than Live viewers) DT got in the UK alone over his 4 year run.

 

[Bones2]

So RTD is responsible for everything bad about Who, even down to Tennant's acting style and Moffat's scripts.

I shall leave you and your hate in peace...

That's not exactly what I've said, but I'd hope you'd at least follow my reasoning rather than be that glibly dismissive.

The problem with his logic is DT was a succesful Doctor, the majorty of the fanbase took to him and hes now up there with Tom Baker as the most popular Doctor. Bones own opinion doesn't change the fact the masses love Doctor Who under RTD and David Tennant as The 10th Doctor. He'll come back with the "idiots" thing about the masses because somehow Bones knows better than about the 10 million + average audience (counting more than Live viewers) DT got in the UK alone over his 4 year run.

Another ad populum? Oh you. You just can't help yourself. Noel's House Party used to pull in 15 million viewers. I suppose that's even better than Doctor Who, is it?