Sprinkler Systems Uhaul move Lawn care Roses and trees Ford Parts Chrysler Parts Lake Powell New IPod Touch Apps New IPhone Apps IPhone Apps IPad Information IPad Apps Android APPS Android Games APPS Android Systems Android Tablets APPS and Beyond Smartphone Apps Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools Tablet PC Car Sharing Car Leasing Tabler Pc Fly Fishing Toyota Cars Vacation Rentals Stock market NYSE SSE Stock Freight & Shipping News Gluten Lactose Gout My Coupon Life Campgrounds Check Outdoor Kitchen Design and Redoo Bath Remodeling Palm Springs Las Vegas Vacation Tipps Lake Powell Boating Homes for lease Electric and green Car Blog Pearls and diamonds Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog
Reader


[Suche]  [Administrator]  [Hinweise zum Reader]  [Startseite]
Miscellaneous / Verschiedenes » alt.fan.james-bond » Part OT: further CR and Doctor Who news
Part OT: further CR and Doctor Who news [message #295655] Mi, 05 Juli 2006 03:23
phil.gerrard1  
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5145666.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5146666.stm

Best

Phil
Re: Part OT: further CR and Doctor Who news [message #295672 ] Mi, 05 Juli 2006 16:39
Mike Feeney  
phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5145666.stm
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5146666.stm
>
> Best
>
> Phil


How does the 2nd season compare to the 1st season? (We've only seen the
1st season over here in the States). No spoilers, please -- just your
views on the quality of the show. I thought the 1st season was
excellent. Eccleston was brilliant in the role, I thought, and is now
my 2nd favorite Doctor (behind Tom Baker). Did he ever give any
explanation as to why he quit after just one season? How does the new
guy measure up? I still have 3 more episodes to watch (the last
three), but so far the two-parter "The Empty Child"/"The Doctor Dances"
is my favorite of the 1st season. And my favorite single line is from
"The Long Game" when the ladies ask The Doctor why he is asking so many
questions and he responds "Look at me -- I'm stupid!" with a big smile
on his face. LOL!

Mike
Leiter: "If that bird isn't stopped, the entire European economy could
be wiped out."
Bond: "Yes, I know. But enough about Heather Mills. We've got to
find that pterodactyl that's on the loose."
>From Bond 22: BEAK OF THE PTERODACTYL, in movie theaters November 2007
Re: Part OT: further CR and Doctor Who news [message #295674 ] Mi, 05 Juli 2006 17:01
phil.gerrard1  
Mike wrote:

> How does the 2nd season compare to the 1st season? (We've only seen the
> 1st season over here in the States). No spoilers, please -- just your
> views on the quality of the show.

Pretty much even in terms of overall quality, I would say. There's
certainly a little more for long-term fans, without anything getting so
obscure or self-referential as to alienate newer converts.

> I thought the 1st season was
> excellent. Eccleston was brilliant in the role, I thought, and is now
> my 2nd favorite Doctor (behind Tom Baker). Did he ever give any
> explanation as to why he quit after just one season?

I was unsure about Eccleston at first, but as the series went on, and
particularly by the end, I was thoroughly convinced. Apparently, he
had only ever intended to do one season, which is a shame, but it's
clear from the manner of his exit that it had been planned from the
start.

> How does the new guy measure up?

I think he's terrific. David Tennent's Doctor is a very different type
of character from Eccleston's, but IMHO Tennent's better at the impish
stuff with which Eccleston occasionally seemed to struggle. Tennent's
a very natural fit with the role, and he's able to handle its
multi-faceted nature - for example, abrupt transitions from whimsy to
earnestness - with ease and grace. He makes it all look spontaneous
rather than actorly, and that's quite a trick to pull off.

> I still have 3 more episodes to watch (the last
> three), but so far the two-parter "The Empty Child"/"The Doctor Dances"
> is my favorite of the 1st season.

It's one of mine as well, but let us know what you make of the finale,
and your first glimpses of Tennent. I hope you're going to find that
the second season lives up to the first, and as with the first season I
think it gets better as you watch it through from beginning to end.

Best

Phil

(Biting my tongue to avoid spilling the beans about some of the
stories, and especially to avoid telling you what the final story of
season two has in store. All I'll say is that there's some stuff there
to warm the heart of a Baker-era fan.)
Re: Part OT: further CR and Doctor Who news [message #295691 ] Mi, 05 Juli 2006 18:57
Jeremy Kareken  
I think this season's more of a mixed bag than the first. There are
some superlative moments. Tennant's a much more sentimental actor.
And the more upper-class Doctor works better than Eccleston. Working
class blokes ... when they act weird, they're just weird. Upper class?
They're eccentric.

But some of the stories have been downright boring. There's one that's
particularly controversial, but I certainly liked it... it was a nice
change of pace.

I just wish they'd do one story called The Planet of the Evil of The
Deadly Death


phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:
> Mike wrote:
>
> > How does the 2nd season compare to the 1st season? (We've only seen the
> > 1st season over here in the States). No spoilers, please -- just your
> > views on the quality of the show.
>
> Pretty much even in terms of overall quality, I would say. There's
> certainly a little more for long-term fans, without anything getting so
> obscure or self-referential as to alienate newer converts.
>
> > I thought the 1st season was
> > excellent. Eccleston was brilliant in the role, I thought, and is now
> > my 2nd favorite Doctor (behind Tom Baker). Did he ever give any
> > explanation as to why he quit after just one season?
>
> I was unsure about Eccleston at first, but as the series went on, and
> particularly by the end, I was thoroughly convinced. Apparently, he
> had only ever intended to do one season, which is a shame, but it's
> clear from the manner of his exit that it had been planned from the
> start.
>
> > How does the new guy measure up?
>
> I think he's terrific. David Tennent's Doctor is a very different type
> of character from Eccleston's, but IMHO Tennent's better at the impish
> stuff with which Eccleston occasionally seemed to struggle. Tennent's
> a very natural fit with the role, and he's able to handle its
> multi-faceted nature - for example, abrupt transitions from whimsy to
> earnestness - with ease and grace. He makes it all look spontaneous
> rather than actorly, and that's quite a trick to pull off.
>
> > I still have 3 more episodes to watch (the last
> > three), but so far the two-parter "The Empty Child"/"The Doctor Dances"
> > is my favorite of the 1st season.
>
> It's one of mine as well, but let us know what you make of the finale,
> and your first glimpses of Tennent. I hope you're going to find that
> the second season lives up to the first, and as with the first season I
> think it gets better as you watch it through from beginning to end.
>
> Best
>
> Phil
>
> (Biting my tongue to avoid spilling the beans about some of the
> stories, and especially to avoid telling you what the final story of
> season two has in store. All I'll say is that there's some stuff there
> to warm the heart of a Baker-era fan.)
Re: Part OT: further CR and Doctor Who news [message #295702 ] Do, 06 Juli 2006 03:41
ahk  
At 7:39am -0700, 07/05/06, Mike Feeney <stromberg77 [at] sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>How does the 2nd season compare to the 1st season? (We've only seen the
>1st season over here in the States). No spoilers, please -- just your
>views on the quality of the show. I thought the 1st season was
>excellent. Eccleston was brilliant in the role, I thought, and is now
>my 2nd favorite Doctor (behind Tom Baker).

Eccleston was fine. I thought many of the scripts were weak. I don't care
for the changes to the back story. Didn't like Capt Jack. I miss the old
serial format.

>I still have 3 more episodes to watch (the last three), but so far the
>two-parter "The Empty Child"/"The Doctor Dances" is my favorite of the 1st
>season.

Empty Child was good. Didn't like the resolution.
Re: Part OT: further CR and Doctor Who news [message #295708 ] Do, 06 Juli 2006 10:05
Mac  
phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:

>> How does the new guy measure up?
>
> I think he's terrific. David Tennent's Doctor is a very different
> type of character from Eccleston's, but IMHO Tennent's better at the
> impish stuff with which Eccleston occasionally seemed to struggle.
> Tennent's a very natural fit with the role, and he's able to handle
> its multi-faceted nature - for example, abrupt transitions from
> whimsy to earnestness - with ease and grace. He makes it all look
> spontaneous rather than actorly, and that's quite a trick to pull off.

The only problem I have with Tennant is that sometimes he can be
a little *too* exuberant. The constant face-pulling can be a bit
much. He's got wacky off to a tee, but I don't think he has quite
the gravity Eccleston brought to his interpretation (I'll never forget
Eccles' spittle-fuelled rant at the Dalek). I also loved the way
Eccleston just looked at Rose and laughed when the Slitheen spaceship
went soaring over their heads!

Tennant won me over in THE CHRISTMAS INVASION with the
shouting bit. I'll say no more, Mike, but Phil and anyone who saw it
knows what I am referring to.
--
-- Mac

"Barb's hots for him isn't too far off from the truth. You did see
that shot of those nippies of hers practically popping through her
T-shirt while standing next to him, didn't you?"

--WQ 6/7/06
Re: Part OT: further CR and Doctor Who news [message #298222 ] Do, 06 Juli 2006 18:55
jra_page  
Wow.

The casting on WHO is as incestuous as BOND!

=
J

phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5145666.stm
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5146666.stm
>
> Best
>
> Phil
Re: Part OT: further CR and Doctor Who news [message #298230 ] Fr, 07 Juli 2006 01:31
phil.gerrard1  
Mac wrote:

> The only problem I have with Tennant is that sometimes he can be
> a little *too* exuberant. The constant face-pulling can be a bit
> much. He's got wacky off to a tee, but I don't think he has quite
> the gravity Eccleston brought to his interpretation (I'll never forget
> Eccles' spittle-fuelled rant at the Dalek). I also loved the way
> Eccleston just looked at Rose and laughed when the Slitheen spaceship
> went soaring over their heads!
>
> Tennant won me over in THE CHRISTMAS INVASION with the
> shouting bit. I'll say no more, Mike, but Phil and anyone who saw it
> knows what I am referring to.

Tennent's certainly, um, *expressive* but I wonder whether that's just
one of those accidents of birth which never really get corrected by
training. Some people simply have that kind of face, just as some
people who never seem to change their physical expression can still
express all kinds of emotions without moving a muscle. Curious thing,
acting.

One other thing I would say about Tennent is that he's bloody good when
delivering longish speeches, of which he's had a few in this series.
They're pretty rare in TV drama - partly because the powers that be
have deemed that they're not particularly suited to the small or big
screen, and partly because they're very difficult to deliver
shot-by-shot rather than as a whole - but he's got a real knack for
giving them shape and variety.

Best

Phil
Re: Part OT: further CR and Doctor Who news [message #298358 ] So, 09 Juli 2006 05:15
leeinlimbo  
phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5145666.stm
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5146666.stm
>
> Best
>
> Phil

I find that I am eagerly awaiting both Casino Royale and the finale of
this second season of Doctor Who, even though I'm dreading certain
resolutions. I've really genuinely enjoyed the last two seasons for
both the drama and the humour, and feel that both Eccleston and Tennant
have shown great skill and finesse with the sentimental musing, the
outlandish humour, the dark brooding and the unbridled fury that Colin
Baker and Sylvester McCoy reintroduced to the character (William
Hartnell used to get livid, but Toughton, Pertwee, Tom Baker and
Davison all made him a slightly calmer, less explosive character
overall. Colin and especially McCoy brought back the furious Doctor,
but no one seems to recall that).

And Mike? I think you'll really enjoy the humourousness of the second
season. You'll probably appreciate it more than a lot of diehard
Whovians, actually. Myself, I think it pushes the line a bit, but I've
loved every episode, warts and all. Actually, especially with the
warts. It's the quirkiness that makes it Doctor Who, even with the
bigger budgets and the sharper dialogue.

Lee Edward McIlmoyle,
enjoying his British Icons of Fiction immensely lately
Re: Part OT: further CR and Doctor Who news [message #298409 ] Mo, 10 Juli 2006 03:28
Mike Feeney  
leeinlimbo [at] gmail.com wrote:
> phil.gerrard [at] ntlworld.com wrote:
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5145666.stm
> >
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5146666.stm
> >
> > Best
> >
> > Phil
>
> I find that I am eagerly awaiting both Casino Royale and the finale of
> this second season of Doctor Who, even though I'm dreading certain
> resolutions. I've really genuinely enjoyed the last two seasons for
> both the drama and the humour, and feel that both Eccleston and Tennant
> have shown great skill and finesse with the sentimental musing, the
> outlandish humour, the dark brooding and the unbridled fury that Colin
> Baker and Sylvester McCoy reintroduced to the character (William
> Hartnell used to get livid, but Toughton, Pertwee, Tom Baker and
> Davison all made him a slightly calmer, less explosive character
> overall. Colin and especially McCoy brought back the furious Doctor,
> but no one seems to recall that).
>
> And Mike? I think you'll really enjoy the humourousness of the second
> season. You'll probably appreciate it more than a lot of diehard
> Whovians, actually. Myself, I think it pushes the line a bit, but I've
> loved every episode, warts and all. Actually, especially with the
> warts. It's the quirkiness that makes it Doctor Who, even with the
> bigger budgets and the sharper dialogue.
>
> Lee Edward McIlmoyle,
> enjoying his British Icons of Fiction immensely lately

Thanks, Lee. I just finished watching Season 1, and loved it. Sad to
see Eccleston depart so soon, but everyone here seems to be quite happy
with Tennant so I'm optimistic. I just wish we could get the episodes
over here sooner. There's still no word (that I could find) on when
Season 2 will air in the U.S., much less be available on dvd. Arghh.
I don't want to have to wait 12 months to see Season 2.... the delay is
ridiculous, really. I might just have to buy a region-free dvd player
after all.

And now I do have a spoiler request, sort of...

SPOILER ALERT FOR DOCTOR WHO SEASON 1
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..

Having just finished Season 1, I'm still not quite sure what the whole
"Bad Wolf" stuff was about. Maybe I'm a bit daft, but could someone
explain it to me? From what I could make out, it wasn't part of the
Daleks' plan. It seemed like somehow the "time vortex" itself is alive
and it was responsible for the Bad Wolf messages because it was leaving
clues for itself? For what purpose? This doesn't make a whole lot of
sense to me, so I'm pretty sure I must have gotten it wrong.

Thanks,

Mike
Re: Part OT: further CR and Doctor Who news [message #298410 ] Mo, 10 Juli 2006 03:38
phil.gerrard1  
Mike, respecting your spoiler alert as best I can:
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
>
> Having just finished Season 1, I'm still not quite sure what the whole
> "Bad Wolf" stuff was about. Maybe I'm a bit daft, but could someone
> explain it to me? From what I could make out, it wasn't part of the
> Daleks' plan. It seemed like somehow the "time vortex" itself is alive
> and it was responsible for the Bad Wolf messages because it was leaving
> clues for itself? For what purpose? This doesn't make a whole lot of
> sense to me, so I'm pretty sure I must have gotten it wrong.

There isn't any elucidation beyond the idea that these might have been
clues Rose left for herself. If anybody has any better ideas, I'd love
to hear them, since I'm not sure I understood this either.

Best

Phil
OT: further Doctor Who musing [message #298419 ] Mo, 10 Juli 2006 08:08
leeinlimbo  
Mike Feeney wrote:

> Having just finished Season 1, I'm still not quite sure what the whole
> "Bad Wolf" stuff was about. Maybe I'm a bit daft, but could someone
> explain it to me? From what I could make out, it wasn't part of the
> Daleks' plan. It seemed like somehow the "time vortex" itself is alive
> and it was responsible for the Bad Wolf messages because it was leaving
> clues for itself? For what purpose? This doesn't make a whole lot of
> sense to me, so I'm pretty sure I must have gotten it wrong.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike

As Phil indicated, the entire Bad Wolf cycle was both a clue and a
deliberate effort to herd the Doctor and Rose to the place they find
themselves at the end of episode 13 of the first season. Every episode
was in fact part of the manipulation to get them to that end sequence.

It isn't until Rose reveals what she has done that it becomes clear
that everthing that had happened to them were in part due to the
efforts of the sentient power core of the TARDIS itself to lead them to
defeat their ancient enemy, the Daleks. It just had no other way of
spelling it out to him (The Doctor isn't always in perfect tune with
the TARDIS, and often needs to be nudged. Why it doesn't just write him
a message on his monitor I have no idea).

It's all a bit Deus ex Machina, but then, there's been plenty of that
in the series. It only seems slightly muddled because it's the TARDIS
and Rose together who defeat the Daleks, though it seems to be Rose who
makes the decision to do it,a tthe risk of losing her existence.

I've read a lot of diehards who get a little uptight over such
inconsistencies, but it's impossible to watch a series like this
without having your preconceived notions of how time works challenged
regularly. Either the TARDIS was leaving hints building up to the
finale, or Rose did every single part of it in that brief time she was
united with the TARDIS.

Either way, you get a massive paradox, with either Rose retrofitting
their entire timeline to subtly guide them there AFTER THE FACT, or the
TARDIS knowing ahead of time what was going to happen, and planting
clues or organizing several instances of time meddling to make it all
come together. Utterly impossible, but wasn't it mind blowingly cool?

Lee Edward McIlmoyle,
has no problems with his pseudoscience being utterly impossible,
so long as it goes all the way to the top without flinching
Re: OT: further Doctor Who musing [message #298441 ] Mo, 10 Juli 2006 17:13
Mike Feeney  
leeinlimbo [at] gmail.com wrote:
>
> As Phil indicated, the entire Bad Wolf cycle was both a clue and a
> deliberate effort to herd the Doctor and Rose to the place they find
> themselves at the end of episode 13 of the first season. Every episode
> was in fact part of the manipulation to get them to that end sequence.
>
> It isn't until Rose reveals what she has done that it becomes clear
> that everthing that had happened to them were in part due to the
> efforts of the sentient power core of the TARDIS itself to lead them to
> defeat their ancient enemy, the Daleks. It just had no other way of
> spelling it out to him (The Doctor isn't always in perfect tune with
> the TARDIS, and often needs to be nudged. Why it doesn't just write him
> a message on his monitor I have no idea).
>
> It's all a bit Deus ex Machina, but then, there's been plenty of that
> in the series. It only seems slightly muddled because it's the TARDIS
> and Rose together who defeat the Daleks, though it seems to be Rose who
> makes the decision to do it,a tthe risk of losing her existence.
>
> I've read a lot of diehards who get a little uptight over such
> inconsistencies, but it's impossible to watch a series like this
> without having your preconceived notions of how time works challenged
> regularly. Either the TARDIS was leaving hints building up to the
> finale, or Rose did every single part of it in that brief time she was
> united with the TARDIS.
>
> Either way, you get a massive paradox, with either Rose retrofitting
> their entire timeline to subtly guide them there AFTER THE FACT, or the
> TARDIS knowing ahead of time what was going to happen, and planting
> clues or organizing several instances of time meddling to make it all
> come together. Utterly impossible, but wasn't it mind blowingly cool?
>
> Lee Edward McIlmoyle,
> has no problems with his pseudoscience being utterly impossible,
> so long as it goes all the way to the top without flinching

Thanks Lee! I'm very impressed. I wasn't able to glean this theory
from my first viewing of the last episode. To follow up on it some
more:

1) The clues didn't really work, did they? If the intent was to make
the Doctor think "Hey, I recall there was a satellite orbiting the
earth during the 4th Great & Bountiful Human Empire that was run by the
Bad Wolf corporation. Maybe we should make a visit there to see what
these Bad Wolf messages are about" --- then the clues were too subtle
because the Doctor never figured it out. In fact, the only reason they
ended up there (at the time the Daleks were there) was because they
were abducted via the transmat beam. The clues (i.e, the Bad Wolf
messages) did nothing to bring them there. Like you suggested, why not
just write him a more precise message on his monitor?

2) Who used the transmat beam to abduct The Doctor and his party into
the game shows? Was it the Daleks? Why? The Daleks held Rose
hostage because they wanted The Doctor to not interfere with their
invasion plans. So why bring him there in the first place? If the
one person who can stop you is somewhere else in space & time, then the
last thing you'd want to do is bring him to where your invasion is
about to take place. Did they bring him there just to tell him not to
interfere? Doesn't make a lot of sense.

3) If the sentient core of the Tardis wanted the Doctor to be there in
order to stop the Daleks, then it knew ahead of time that their
invasion was going to take place then & there. This opens up a whole
can of worms for the series, I think. Because it should then know
about *all* the future threats that may require The Doctor's
intervention. So why pick just this one event to herd the Doctor to?
Surely there are other equally threatening menaces to come -- so will
it start forcing events such that The Doctor ends up at each of them,
too? In fact, if this is the case -- it leads to the question of
whether The Doctor has ever had any free will in his journeys or if
they have all been arranged by the sentient core. The more I think
about the Tardis having a sentient core, the less I like it.

4) The Doctor was forced to regenerate because all the cells in his
body were dying. Because he had temporarily held the core of the time
vortex (or something like that) inside of him. And no person is meant
to do that . Okay, I can accept that But he got it from Rose! And
she seemed to have held it for a much longer time than he did. So how
come she's completely alright?


While I enjoyed Season 1 enormously, I must say that the final episode
was the weakest (in terms of the plot) by far in my view. Not just
because of the above questions/inconsistencies but also because of the
way the Daleks were defeated. It was the equivalent of Rose rubbing a
magic lantern and a Genie suddenly appears and uses its magical powers
to erase the Daleks ships from the sky. It just wasn't a very
satisfying resolution (for me, anyway).

Mike
Vorheriges Thema:The real "skinny" about trailers...
Nächstes Thema:Branson cameo
Gehe zu:
  


aktuelle Zeit: Sa Mai 26 09:14:03 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,70745 Sekunden
.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.

Powered