>>68962933
>>69007796
shit OP edition
>>69007933
Glad to see you're continuing the trend with your shit post .
>>69008005
just dont make the thread if you dont know how to do it, okay kid? nothing personal
>>69007796
>making a new thread early when /who/ is dead af
>and with such a pointless OP
This is a new kind of autism.
Hey guys.
So what's Doctor Who related with you? I bought a little Time And Relative Dimensions in Space shaped cup. I like it. I also rewatched Hell Bent and found it rather enjoyable. What do you think of it?
>>69008246
>that fucking picture
>>69008005
my least favorite doctor.
sorry but is true
>>69008285
I misremembered this picture. The emotion I wanted to convey was more horrified and less amused.
>>69008246
I was re watching the Last of the Time Lords yesterday and it still is as epic as I remembered it.
>>69008246
I listened to the last installment of Only the Monstrous. It wasnotvery good.
Still, I'm hyped about the War Doctor in general lately for some reason. So I want more.
>>69008062
So long as it contains "dr who" and /who/ it's a perfectly fine OP. Stop being an autist.
>>69008315
He used to be my favourite but I've gone off him. Now Colin is top of my Docs.
>>69008246
I'm trying to make my mind up which story to watch today. I'm in the mood for some late Pertwee or Early Tom. Any suggestions?
>>69008371
Was it just me or could you really hear John Hurt's false teeth on that last disc? The second boxed set is much better.
>>69008683
>I'm trying to make my mind up which story to WATCH today
I've highlighted the important word.
>>69008443
>So long as it contains "dr who
you mean "doctor who", youFUCK
>>69008785
Tbh even "dr who" isn't that important. The only part that really matters is that it contains "/who/"
>>69008790
Lel. That was pretty funny. You're still a shit trip though. Fuck off Cats.
>>69008849
i assume you get the reference?
>>69008874
That /who/ doesn't tolerate dissenting opinions?
>>69008966
its the new loss
>>69009027
That one was unfunny shite. Is that the same comic where the miscarriage meme came from?
>>69009103
no its a different comic but they're equally shit in a hilarious way
>>69009146
I just googled "miscarriage meme" to check and found this one. Tbh I find the originals painfully bad to read. I do like the piss takes though.
>>69009255
isn't loss bannable or is that only on /v/?
that one was made by bum tickley himself btw
>>69009308
Oh dear. Should I reset my router?
to my older brother who is browsing /who/ right now:
>fuck offerino
>>69009369
you're screwed m8
>>69008790
LOL
>>69009401
you're the one who fucking WOKE ME UP to come and see your shitty memes why do i even listen to you
>>69009480
anything to piss you off :)
Cats, fuck off. You are a shitty meme and so is your brother.
>>69009642
urinal cakes
Does anyone have the 9 picture that's commonly used against cats? I thought I saved it.
>>69010259
this one???
>>69010363
No. It's a still image and it is usually accompanied by something like "HAHA GET REKT CATS"
>>69010442
oh i have that image but i'm not giving it to you
joker anon always used it
>>69010517
Please?
what was his purpose?
>>69010517
>joker anon always used it
Kek were you traumatised by him?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/ex-doctor-who-star-matt-7871655
>>69010960
>it's real
No ;_;
>>69010960
>“I had arranged stunt doubles to ride my horses because Claire and Matt both said they couldn’t ride.
>“There’s a scene where Elizabeth and Phillip gallop off for a bit of romance in the bushes and try and escape their bodyguards.
>”We shot it from a helicopter and I got stunt doubles to do that. But when I was moving locations with some of my animals and had my back turned, Matt climbed on the horse himself, and it was a near disaster.”
>He added: “The horse took off charging through the equipment, lighting stands, into cameras, at a terrific speed and Matt had no helmet on.
>“He was very lucky he didn’t get seriously hurt but was very shaken, white as a sheet. He bit off more than he could chew.
That wasn't very smart of Matt 2bh.
>>69010960
>”We shot it from a helicopter and I got stunt doubles to do that. But when I was moving locations with some of my animals and had my back turned, Matt climbed on the horse himself, and it was a near disaster.”
matt's a fucking absolute madman!
the way this reads it sounds like he just snuck on the horse whenever no-one was looking the cheeky bastard
I haven't watched Doctor Who in about 5 months. What stories would you recommend to help ease me back into the obsession?
Hayley Atwell as the Doctor when??
>>69012157
I support of a big titties dr.
goddamn i love deepart.io
the only i've changed manually here is the text, which was made unreadable
>>69012399
Most of mine turned out pretty crap desu. I like this one though. Any guesses what it is?
>>69012462
the tom baker era time vortex?
or perhaps the pertwee one? i could see it being either one
>>69012521
It's the Death to The Daleks novelisation and a Rorschach test.
>>69012600
I love how these ones turned out.
>>69012652
>>69008818
just fuck offerino already.
>>69008549
It probably was right after he was done with medication so he was feeling like shit. But WarDoc was kinda frail in first box set too.
>>69013076
Based Hurt working through cancer.
>>69007796
Why didn't the cibberman walk around the window?
Why was the window there?
>>69009027
>new
Loss is timeless and that comic is almost as old
>>69013248
TO SHOW HIS AWESOME POWER!!!No wonder this show was cancelled if this is all normies saw of it.
>>69013288
>Loss is timeless
oh absolutely f_am
>and that comic is almost as old
yeah but it isnt as popular
it could be tho
its fucking hilarious
>>69013220
>Based Hurt working through cancer.
Makes you really appreciate that actor of such caliber works ill while Ecclesex still playing drama queen.
>>69012600
>>69012652
>>69012682
These ones are howlingly good
>>69013076
It sorta works well since at that point he's OldWar Doctor and getting sick of the war. There should be a semi-regular War Doctor book series that features Young Hurt, since that's the only medium you can do that (or comics too I suppose)
>>69013734
>OldWar Doctor and getting sick of the war
>>69008549
>Was it just me or could you really hear John Hurt's false teeth on that last disc? The second boxed set is much better.
False teeth you say? Why couldn't Doc have 'em?
As we all not First had prothesic hand all along!Who thought it was a good idea for an anthology book?
>tfw hurterino will never have his own tv series
and we thought 1-movie-mcgann was bad
>>69013952
Who could play a young John Hurt?
>>69013976
>Who could play a young John Hurt?
Old McGann?
>>69013695
Yeah, I'm going to try a few more with the same style.
>>69013860
>First had prothesic hand all along!
What?
>>69013996
Not gravelly enough.
>>69013952
8, War and 9 will never meet on-screen, not even audio because Hurt will pass away before Eccelsex comes round.
seriously most incarnations would just bicker with each other, this would actually be the most 'intense'
>>69014011
>What?
It's 50th anniversary book from "11 Doctors, 11 stories".
As it turned out, Doc lost his hand to space pirates before he met Ian and Barbara and while travelling with Susan.
>Within minutes the surgeon was tugging on the thought-responsive plasti-skin glove and stepping back to admire his work.
> ‘Well, give ’er a wiggle.’
> The Doctor did so and discovered, to his embarrassment, that the fingernails were painted.
> ‘Would this, by any chance, be a lady’s hand?’
> ‘Yep,’ confessed Aldridge. ‘But she was a big lady. Very manly like yourself. Hated laughing and such, so you two should get on very well.’ ‘Two days,’ said the Doctor, pointing a finger tipped by a curved nail coated with ruby lacquer. Aldridge tried so hard to hold back a fit of giggles that one of his bristles thunked into the wall. ‘Sorry, Mister Time Lord, sir. But it’s really difficult to take you seriously wearing nail polish.’
>>69014167
>she was a big lady
>>69014133
That would be fantastic. The three Drs with the least screen time and they're all some of the best actors to have played him. It's a damn shame it will never happen. The script would probably be shit anyway.
>>69014218for you
>>69014243
I like to imagine if 9 met war, the first thing he would do would be to punch him in the face.
They would then just get on with whatever was happening. War sort of knowing he had it coming.
>>69014355
I can imagine Nine being incredibly hostile but not so directly violent.
>>69015115
just one punch, to get it of system.
It appears I'm imagining 9 as a lazily written 90's action hero.we'll never know anyway
>>69008371
wat
Only the Monstrous is bretty good, Anon. 7/10 minimum.
>>69014167
> pre-season 1 characters knowing who the Time Lords are
harumph
Didn't it bother Hurt that Big Finish HQ has a sofa with a huge brown hole in the centre of it where Colin Baker goes to take a shit?
>>69015325
Nah, it's pretty lazily done and painfully average. 5/10, 6/10 at the absolute best.
ZOWIE ZOWIE ZONG
>>69015688
>faithfulness to the era
Am I the only one who genuinely couldn't care less about that particular aspect of DW fiction?
>>69016142
You can't be, I guess, but I think it would be more interesting to only draw on what we knew in that era.
This is the best Doctor.
Did anyone here see Chibnall's Camelot?
Must... contain... the boner
>>69016305
>>69016336
Stop spamming yourself.
>>69016386
>implying I even look half as good as him
>>69016305
I'd take his umbrella anytime if you know what I mean.
nerds
>>69016443
>>69016519
OK, I'll bite - who is this pallid goof?
>>69016541
>he doesn't know about based Fady
>>69016541
>clearly brown skin
>pallid
You alright there mate?
>>69015814
Garbage opinion.
>>69016620
He looks like Turkish guys do when they've been working under artificial light for too long.
>>69016142
each one is unique and that is lost if they bleed into each other.
It's not a major thing. It would seem odd if the TV first doctor kept quiet about his people but in a book he acknowledged them.
>>69016643
He's probably Egyptian.
>>69016774
Yeah, well who is he, anyway? Someone from The Voice?
>>69016623
Are you sure you're not just inflating the rating because the novelty of the fact that it's "holy shit War Doctor audios" is eclipsing the fact that the actual quality of the content is mediocre?
>>69016941
This. Also, it can't be great for an actor of Hurt's calibre to act with the whiff of that wretched couch COVERED IN COLIN BAKER'S SHIT they have in the green room at Big Finish in his mind's nostrils.
>>69017035
>>69016281
I disagree. I can see the value in making a story that feels like it belongs in the era it's set in, but I find it terribly boring when nothing different is ever attempted.
>>69016649
>each one is unique and that is lost if they bleed into each other.
Every era definitely has its own style, but the point of that style isn't continuity elements like a mention of Time Lords. It's more about the kind of stories that got made during that era, the plots and the characters.
And even then, you've got to try something a bit more original every once in a while, or all you're left with is nostalgia pandering.
>It's not a major thing. It would seem odd if the TV first doctor kept quiet about his people but in a book he acknowledged them.
Oh, the Doctor's characterization has to remain faithful to what it was on TV, absolutely. I just don't know how the fact that the Doctor is a Time Lord came up in that story, so I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt.
>>69017098
There he goes... settling in like butter wouldn't melt, having had a GOOD CLEAR OUT at work.
>>69016941
Yes. It's genuinely enjoyable. I think you're just one of those people who have to shit all over everything under the guise that you're "critically engaging" with a given work.
>>69017187
To me, there's little real nostalgia among modern fans for the Hartnell era. It's got the shock of the old about it, which is why writing something in that style is more interesting.
>>69017285
I think you're just indiscriminate - what am I saying, you listen to Big Finish audios, of course you're indiscriminate.
You know what's better than any and all Big Finish audios? Pushing your own shit through a kitchen sink plughole, piece by piece, over two hours in the middle of the night.
>>69017285
>shit all over it
I didn't think it was shit. Like, at all. I just found it disappointing. I wanted it to be better than it was. The War Doctor has insane amounts of potential and the stories didn't really live up to those (admittedly high) expectations. Would it shock you to know that I found the overall set enjoyable too? I still enjoyed it, hell I'll probably enjoy anything with the War Doctor in it, I just don't think it was exceptional in the slightest or anything above average, which means on a correctly balanced ratings scale it was a 5/10 for me. And that's a little disappointing for me because of the squandered potential.
>>69016623
>Garbage opinion.
Because he gave it two points less than you did? Seriously?
>>69007796
What a terrible thread, you should really conside suicide.
>>69008005
I don't even have to click this, I'm 90% sure it'll be the McCoy wink.
>>69017554
Why do you think the War Doctor has potential? He's only interesting because he's notionally the character he isn't. 'Ooh, this not-Doctor isn't like the Doctor!' In practice you're just listening to an old whore of a character actor too broke to be proud playing a generic Warhammer bellend.
>>69017519
>You know what's better than any and all Big Finish audios? Pushing your own shit through a kitchen sink plughole, piece by piece, over two hours in the middle of the night.
Is there a story you want to share with us, anon?
>>69017187
the first doctor has stories/tropes which aren't prevalent in the alter eras.
>This Doctor is more vulnerable
>This Doctor doesn't know how to fly
>This Doctor gets more pure historicals
if you change that you might as well do a later Doctor story.
>>69017799
It's a story too broad and too deep for the small screen.
>>69016867
Bill's best friend.
>>69017686
It's a flawed idea based on the retarded modern idea that the Doctor always "finds a way" regardless of the situation.
Nothing the War Doctor does seems any different, to me, than what any other Doctor would do in a no-win scenario.
The problem is the 11th Doctor is really a time meddler who rewrites, without any authority, anything he doesn't like.
It's this incarnation who should not be using the name of the Doctor, IMO.
>>69017889
>IMO
Exactly. In YOUR opinion. Not in my opinion, not in the writer's opinion, not in anyone else's opinion. In YOUR opinion. And that's why you'll never write for the show.
>>69018218
I already have.
>>69017889
different guy here,
using the logic where given - I thought it was odd that the 7th doctor kept his name while this versions didn't.
In Evil of the Daleks the second 2nd was willing to sacrifice his life and the lives of people around him to stop the Daleks.
In the future some potential show-runner might want to see the doctor do something similar but I'm guessing he won't have the character give up the name.
I guess you could say he's not the doctor because he's given up on himself, he just doesn't 'feel' like the Doctor.
>>69018293
Hi Gareth.
>>69018218
Check out Dr. Johnson on this fallacy.
>>69018340
He's not the Doctor because Ecclescake didn't come back. That's the only reason he exists, and it's a shit one.
>>69018403
Who?
>>69018403
Save it, kid. You've embarrassed yourself enough already. Nothing personnel – just business.
>>69018340
>using the logic where given - I thought it was odd that the 7th doctor kept his name while this versions didn't.
Why? He didn't change established events. Not even once.
>>69018476
Dr. Johnson. Google 'dr. johnson make tables'.
>>69018488
>personnel
> moving my mouth while i type, i cannot spell, only piss myself
>>69018580
You got memed on, senpai.
>>69017812
>This Doctor is more vulnerable
>This Doctor doesn't know how to fly
These make sense, because they're character traits of that Doctor.
>This Doctor gets more pure historicals
>if you change that you might as well do a later Doctor story.
And this doesn't. Why should writers limit themselves to just redoing things that have already been done perfectly well fifty years ago? What if I want to bring the characters of that era to new places, to see how the First Doctor, Ian Barbara and Susan would react to the Earth Empire of the Pertwee era, or to a Hinchcliffe horror, or to a parallel universe that's made of cheese?
>>69018218
What a laughable little cunt you are.
That was exactly like you jumping up and down, stamping your feet and shouting, "You're a smelly poo head! You're wrong!! I hate you!!!"
You're a fucking imbecile. All you did there was burst into tears and hurl a limp insult.
Go and play with your pots and pans, Ruprecht.
>>69018684
>being this buttmad
Top cake, friend-o. Thanks for the laugh :^)
>>69018530
>Why? He didn't change established events. Not even once
hang on, what do you mean?
I'm talking about the reasons why War Doctor didn't call himself the doctor.
> The Doctor was fighting a war and thus wasn't travelling as usual?
> The Doctor was willing to do darker things that before?
> The Doctor had given up on himself at this point?
not sure what changing established events makes him a none-doctor, unless you're going for an out-of-universe reason?
>>69018684
>>69018727
>pretending to laugh at things that aren't funny just to seem cool and in control
baka at both of you.
>>69018646
If you do that, you'll fail, because the characters and the places are of a piece. You can't have characters who want to get back to 'England' rather than Earth, who infodump schoolbook history at each other, and who disappear for stretches of screentime because their actors were on holiday, and put them in one of Bob Holmes' Phantom of the Opera ripoffs. It would be like having Peter Rabbit meet Darkseid.
>>69018757
I have literally no idea what point you made then
>>69018727
You're a moron.
>>69018727
>being this buttmad
>Top cake, friend-o
Do you speak English, kid?
>>69018871
The point is, the chessmaster 7th did shit as bad as War without changing his name. He didn't change his name because THE WAR DOCTOR HAS NO REASON TO EXIST OUTSIDE OF A FUDGE TO GET AROUND ECCLES' NON-PARTICIPATION. Why are people pretending this shit is valid?
>>69018786
>>>69018646 (You)
>If you do that, you'll fail, because the characters and the places are of a piece. You can't have characters who want to get back to 'England' rather than Earth, who infodump schoolbook history at each other, and who disappear for stretches of screentime because their actors were on holiday,
You aren't saying anything significant about the characters, just mentioning random things about the writing of that era.
>It would be like having Peter Rabbit meet Darkseid.
That's a pretty big hyperbole you have there, my friend.
>>69018971
So, you are literally saying the exact same thing I said in my initial post.
>>69018778
>trying to make me look like the retarded one after I trolled the fuck out of you
Problem, officer? :^)
>>69018971
>THE WAR DOCTOR HAS NO REASON TO EXIST OUTSIDE OF A FUDGE TO GET AROUND ECCLES' NON-PARTICIPATION. Why are people pretending this shit is valid?
Because the way stories are told is always influenced by real-world, behind the scenes events and that's just a fact of television?
>>69019026
The writing *is* the characters. No, it's about on that level - early Hartnell is too different for its characters to work visiting any other era's style.
>>69019233
But you've limited your options to prove your point.
How many Hartnell companions were Shanghaied and wanted to go home asap?
>>69019148
But it's not even a good story. Now the 50th is over, there's no reason to carry on doing War Doctor stories. It's like doing a series of audios about the David Banks Doctor who appeared in The Ultimate Adventure when Pertwee was ill.
>>69019233
>>>69019026 (You)
>The writing *is* the characters.
To a point. Infodumping history and making characters disappear for whole episodes was done because the plor or the scheduling of a particular story required it, not for any character-related reasons.
>No, it's about on that level - early Hartnell is too different for its characters to work visiting any other era's style.
Looks like we must agree to disagree on that.
>>69019233
That's silly. Writing in a different medium is necessarily going to change the feel of the stories so there's no point trying to faithfully recapture the Hartnell era in books anyway. Some of the best Doctor Who stories ever were unlike anything else in their era, e.g. The Mind Robber. If that hadn't been made in 1969 would you be saying that putting the 2nd Doctor in a Moffat-esque fantasy story set in the land of fiction is a bad idea because it's not like the rest of the 2nd Doctor era?
>>69019329
No, I haven't, I'm talking about those characters particularly because we were originally talking pre-season 1.
>>69019400
There is virtually no distinction between character and pragmatics in something as purely plot-based as classic Who.
Keith Topping wrote a novel where Ian swears and has a cockney accent because 'they'd have done that if they could'.
A Big Hand for the Doctor is complete and utter fucking shite, though.
>>69019442
No, writing in a different medium can capture the same feel if people are interested in doing it. To me, it would be more interesting to read someone attempting what David Whitaker might have done with an original novel commission in 1964 than having the characters just act like the Doctor and companions of any other era.
>>69019524
>There is virtually no distinction between character and pragmatics in something as purely plot-based as classic Who.
Yes, there is, as there is in any story. Especially if you're seriously saying that Ian or Barbara wouldn't be themselves if they didn't disappear for a while once every few episodes, because I'm sorry but that's just dumb.
>>69019625
>To me, it would be more interesting to read someone attempting what David Whitaker might have done with an original novel commission in 1964 than having the characters just act like the Doctor and companions of any other era.
Again, you are saying that putting the characters into a different sort of plot from what you'd get in 1963-1964 automatically makes them act out of character. That's just not how it works.
You know who was great at getting the tone of the era while being playful with it? Paul Magrs.
>>69019805
Hi Paul
>>69019755
Yes, that's how it works. They're all made out of the same words. Without the restriction of the period and original concept, there wouldn't be two parent-surrogates in their mid-thirties travelling with the Doctor, and they're far too naturalistic to fit in 3's space opera or 4's Hammer plagiarism.
Oh, PUH-LEASE !!!
Go and fuck yourself, Morris. You loathsome cunt.
>>69019805
His era of choice, I mean, not the early Hartnell one under discussion.
>>69019946
What?
>>69019346
>But it's not even a good story. Now the 50th is over, there's no reason to carry on doing War Doctor stories. It's like doing a series of audios about the David Banks Doctor who appeared in The Ultimate Adventure when Pertwee was ill.
It's not even remotely same things
>>69020034
The only way it differs is that David Banks' Doctor was reportedly fun to watch.
>>69019903
>and they're far too naturalistic to fit in 3's space opera or 4's Hammer plagiarism.
M8 are you sure you've watched the 1st Doctor era? Ian and Barbara fit just fine in pulp scifi, historical drama, historical comedy, weird shit for the sake of weird shit, existential horror, a Shakespeare ripoff, and a video game plot written 20 years too early. But nah, space opera and Hammer Horror would just break the characters, there's no way that could work.
>>69019903
>Without the restriction of the period and original concept, there wouldn't be two parent-surrogates in their mid-thirties travelling with the Doctor
True.
>and they're far too naturalistic to fit in 3's space opera or 4's Hammer plagiarism.
Here you're assuming that because we're taking certain elements of one era everything else has to be changed to fit into that era. It's not true. In my original post, I only mentioned the plot element of the Earth Empire and the generic feeling of the Hinchcliffe-era horror story. That doesn't mean you have to drag everything else from those eras with you.
>>69020018
EXPECT THE PHUCKING UNEXPECTED !!!
>>69019346
>It's like doing a series of audios about the David Banks Doctor who appeared in The Ultimate Adventure when Pertwee was ill.
always wondered why they didn't do that. They even got Trevor Martin for a one-off
>>69020195
Those are all done within the tone of that era. lt's not about genre, it's about style and tone.
>>69020352
We must be thankful for small mercies.
>>69020249
What's he done recently to piss you off, though? Is there some breaking story I'm missing?
>>69020435
More slanderous derision which I shall make public in due course.
For now it is legally classified.
I intend to make a rare post on a public forum within the next three weeks.
All I will say now on the matter is that several loathsome members of the BBC have decided to backtrack on a major issue which many Doctor Who fans hold close to their hearts.
NOT PHUCKING ON !!!
I FEEL SICK.
>>69020357
The absence of the words "Time Lord" and the actors going on vacation for a few episodes aren't part of the tone and style of the era.
>>69019805
Horseshit. All he does is do camp parodies and the occasional camp melodrama.
His first two novels are still fucking brilliant.
>>69020241
> Here you're assuming that because we're taking certain elements of one era everything else has to be changed to fit into that era. It's not true. In my original post, I only mentioned the plot element of the Earth Empire and the generic feeling of the Hinchcliffe-era horror story. That doesn't mean you have to drag everything else from those eras with you.
Earth Empire would work from Lloyd on, but again, Lambert's regulars are from *England*. As soon as you imagine anyone speaking with a foreign accent it doesn't mesh. I don't think you could mix them with Hinchcliffe grue, either. Well, actually, you could do anything, here -
"Ian looked in horror at the circle of guts juice spreading out from the wound in the dead guy's chest. He was snookered, and that's for true."
- but it doesn't fit, does it?
>>69020752
The Hinchcliffe era never showed gore you moron. It rarely showed even a little blood.
>>69020698
Yes they are, of course they are. Did you believe that 'this is what Doctor Who always wanted to be' horseshit from RTD in 2005? Doctor Who was a filler that filled whichever bill was required. In the first years of its run, what was wanted was a slow educational amble. The Sensorites and The Robots of Death only share an audience because they're ostensibly part of the same continuity, but whose idea of fun is The Sensorites? It's an entirely different dramatic metabolism. Mixing them up is like writing a story where Billy Bunter gets his nipples clamped by Fu Manchu.
>>69019524
>purely plot-based
Not actually a fact. This is a modern received opinion, probably disseminated in the main by people who have never watched the era at all.
The same people probabyl call Class Who "emotioneless" which is also not true.
Classic Who did not spend much time on sentimentality - scenes where the plot stopped and characters just emote.
There are plenty of other emotions in it, though, from light hearted comedy scenes through thrills to moments of creepy unease.
Scooby Doo is virtually emotionless, for example. Classic Who is not, it just skirts around mawkish sentiment, mostly, because it was a weekly adventure serial and not a soap opera.
>>69020880
Bob Holmes told Whitehouse that to fob her off, but you and I know there were gore effects in the Hinchcliffe era.
>>69020996
Sorry, no, I'm a classic Who fan from way back, and moments of real emotion were rare, and usually swept away by the next thrill. Most of the emotion was [insert appropriate response here].
>>69020193
>bringing back an actor who only played the doctor when pertwee was sick on the stage shows no one even remembers and aren't canon is the same as bringing back John Fucking Hurt who played The Doctor in the big 50th Anniversary special who's Doctor played a pivotal role in show and most people remember him
>>69020939
I don't see what that has to do with my post. Honestly it doesn't sound to me like you think very highly of the 1st Doctor era as entertainment so I don't know why you feel strongly about this.
>>69021118
Complete shite and you ignored everything else said in the post instead of refuting it.
>>69021118
>I'm a classic Who fan from way back
Wow, I'm impressed. Share with us more of your Old Fan wisdom.
>>69021147
They're roughly equal in terms of pragmatic contrivance.
>>69021231
In terms of what?
>>69021148
I LOVE the early Hartnell era. To me, the comfy old-fashioned quality of so much of that era is what makes it enjoyable. I'd rather watch a season one story than a season fourteen story.
Why is no one discussing Matt Smith?
>>69021206
Do you actually think Doctor Who was character rather than plot driven in the old days, or do you just think you have to oppose everything that sounds like it might be insulting? Because I'm not suggesting being plot driven is a problem.
Reminder that Matt Smith nearly died recently:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/ex-doctor-who-star-matt-7871655
/who/ memes are coming true
>>69021394
In terms of only happening for real-world reasons, with no internal merit or meaning as dramatic decisions.
>>69021499
>tfw its real
hope hes ok
>>69020939
>first years of its run, what was wanted was a slow educational amble
Nope.
Another received opinion not entirely based on fact.
The early remit was this - historical stories should be as historically accurate as possible. They didn't want kids to learn false ideas about history.
And this only lasted 14 months until The Romans came along.
And in that first year it only applied to THREE stories. Marco Polo. The Aztecs. The Reign of Terror.
The Daleks. The Edge of Destruction. The Keys of Marinus. The Sensorites. Planet of Giants. The Dalek Invasion of Earth.
You "first years of its run, what was wanted was a slow educational amble"
Sorry mate but you are talking utter shit apart from the initial 'historical accuracy in historical stories' thing I already mentioned.
>>69021470
No you are trying to say it was never character driven and that is blatantly not true.
A mixture of plot and character? Yes.
>>69021118
>I'm a classic Who fan from way back
How way back? Because if you're talking about the 90s then phuck off.
>>69021517
>In terms of only happening for real-world reasons, with no internal merit or meaning as dramatic decisions.
If it's not the same when it's played out in-story which wasn't in case of bloody Banks.
Compare Hurndall in 5 Doctors and Hamish Wilson in Mind Robber. Nobody would bloody play Hurndall.
>>69021499
Matt Smith as Prince Phillip
Jenna-Louise Coleman as Queen Victoria
>>69021517
Still different.
>>69020752
>Earth Empire would work from Lloyd on, but again, Lambert's regulars are from *England*. As soon as you imagine anyone speaking with a foreign accent it doesn't mesh.
>I don't think you could mix them with Hinchcliffe grue, either. Well, actually, you could do anything, here -
>"Ian looked in horror at the circle of guts juice spreading out from the wound in the dead guy's chest. He was snookered, and that's for true."
>- but it doesn't fit, does it?
So we're talking about the characters' accents now? I'm sorry, but I don't see how they would break the story to anywhere near that degree.
Oh, and just for the record: I'm not talking about making a Lambert-era story.
I'm talking about the idea of a story featuring the characters of the Doctor, Ian Chesterton, Barbara Wright and Susan "Foreman" published in the 21st century. These are completely different things that have only the element of the main characters in common, and I still don't see why the latter should be just an imitation of the former.
>>69020752
You really wouldn't like the "First Doctor ad friends end up stujck on a death world, hunted by bloodthirsty creatures" story I've been writing.
>>69021563
Have you watched the stories you're listing as containing no educational element? All the science-fiction ones have moments where a real-world scientific concept gets explained in dialogue. The only exception I can think of is Inside the Spaceship, but even that has the tagged on creation of a solar system speech.
>>69021499
>/who/ memes are coming true
Let's meme something nice for a change then
Like that fake news about Bill being 80s wannabe rock star and 1st episode is a musical
>>69021812
>1st episode is a musical
Phuck no, that sounds awful.
>>69021747
>Ian looked in horror at the circle of guts juice spreading out from the wound in the dead guy's chest. He was snookered, and that's for true."
You know Ian was made a Knight of Jaffa and was in several bloody sword battles, right?
He also lifted an horrific Dalek mutant out of a casing and later he watched a guy shot in the belly with a sub machine gun by his Robotised brother?
He was also once a gally slave, chained to an oar and beaten, and made to fight in a gladiatorial arena for the Emperor Nero?
>>69021812
if who memes are coming true...jazz hands approaches?
>>69021665
Give me an example of a character driven plot in classic Who other than 3's arc, which is so remarkable precisely for being such an exception.
>>69021782
I'm sorry mate but you are literally just talking desperate shit now.
let's read your statement once again
"first years of its run, what was wanted was a slow educational amble"
Bollocks.
That's Gareth!
Why aren't spoilers working?
>>69021903
>character driven plot
The Aztecs
>>69021943
/conversation
>>69021747
Because there is absolutely no reason to revive those characters if they're not going to act like themselves. Again, Keith Topping's cockney Ian - they didn't do it at the time because they couldn't, but doing it now adds nothing.
>>69021877
Have you seen those episodes? With the exception of the missing Crusades ones, I have. The level of verisimilitude isn't comparable to the Hinchcliffe era.
>>69021983
What a suprise. Now give us all a laugh - tell us all your special definition of "character driven".
>>69021923
No, the stories you've mentioned all have educational elements. Try again.
>>69022083
OK, you're a fucking retard. I get it now :)
"first years of its run, what was wanted was a slow educational amble"
Fuck off, you idiot :D
>>69022018
>Again, Keith Topping's cockney Ian
I don't know why you're hung up on this since no one is suggesting anything like it.
>The level of verisimilitude isn't comparable to the Hinchcliffe era.
I agree on The Romans and The Daleks but The Dalek Invasion of Earth was pretty brutal m8. It could have been a VMA.
>>69021943
The 'you can't change history' bit is the determiner, and that's plot. Not having a character driven plot doesn't equal having no characterisation, in case that's what you thought I was saying. The characterisation always comes second to the requirements of plot, however.
>>69022148
Your sperging out isn't going to change anything. The stories you mentioned, forgetting that one character is a science teacher and the science elements were intended to be as educational as the historical ones, all had educational elements in them. Try again.
>>69021877
I know that, but I think you wanted to reply to the post I was quoting.
>>69022018
>Because there is absolutely no reason to revive those characters if they're not going to act like themselves.
Again, this is bullshit. Nothing about putting the characters in a different sort of story changes who they are. The First Doctor and Steven didn't have to deal with a gay character in 1966. They do that in a Big Finish audio story. It's still the same character. Jo never had to do a musical number in 1973. She does that in an audio story. It's still her.
>Again, Keith Topping's cockney Ian - they didn't do it at the time because they couldn't, but doing it now adds nothing.
I have no idea what your point even is here. I always maintained that the characterization should be faithful to the original story, so no, I don't support changing a character's accent for no reason.
>>69022175
It's brutal for what it is, but it's mostly a question of atmosphere (most of which is cribbed from WWII movies).
>>69022231
Can you name a 21st century story with no plot driving it?
Bearing in mind, The Aztecs is driven by Barbara's attempt to change history.
>>69022294
""first years of its run, what was wanted was a slow educational amble""
You can dig your heels in as much as you like, Aspie boy but this statement will never not be complete shit and you know it.
>>69022301
>The First Doctor and Steven didn't have to deal with a gay character in 1966. They do that in a Big Finish audio story. It's still the same character.
Meant "they're still the same characters".
>>69022301
>Nothing about putting the characters in a different sort of story changes who they are. The First Doctor and Steven didn't have to deal with a gay character in 1966. They do that in a Big Finish audio story. It's still the same character. Jo never had to do a musical number in 1973. She does that in an audio story. It's still her.
This. Saying a character can only function within the very specific tropes and style of the specific type of story they were originally written for is the same as saying they have no depth.
>>69022301
> Again, this is bullshit. Nothing about putting the characters in a different sort of story changes who they are. The First Doctor and Steven didn't have to deal with a gay character in 1966. They do that in a Big Finish audio story. It's still the same character. Jo never had to do a musical number in 1973. She does that in an audio story. It's still her.
The second one just about works, the first one clearly doesn't. The thing here is, I'm not trying to pretend on any level that these are adventures really happening to characters that actually exist. I'm talking about them as written ideas. A Steven who meets a gay person is not the same idea as the Steven who appeared on television. It's got the same name, you're meant to picture the same guy, but the audience, the meaning, the context are all quite different. To me, uninterestingly so. 'Muffin the Mule meets a gay dude' is not an interesting logline for me.
>>69022361
I never said no plot or no characterisation.
>>69022401
You're just sticking your fingers in your ears.
>>69022616
>A Steven who meets a gay person is not the same idea as the Steven who appeared on television.
You have lost the plot, mate, literally.
Steven may have known many gay people before he appeared in the TV episodes, or Steven might be gay or bisexual himself. Or those terms might not even exist in his time.
You are genuinely not making any sense.
>>69022552
No it isn't, it's saying that these imaginary people don't exist outside the texts. They are pure text. Change the text and they no longer mean the same thing.
>>69022690
>>69022725
wow. Look at this fucking retard.
This person is either trolling for 'fun' or seriously damaged. He is trying to waste everyone's time.
>>69022725
The response of a child. Go and waste your own life, not ours.
>>69022754
> thinks fictional characters are real
> says I've lost the plot
>>69022878
We know you are a troll now.
>>69022616
>The second one just about works, the first one clearly doesn't. The thing here is, I'm not trying to pretend on any level that these are adventures really happening to characters that actually exist. I'm talking about them as written ideas. A Steven who meets a gay person is not the same idea as the Steven who appeared on television.
Yes he is. He has the same exact set of experiences, the same personality.
>It's got the same name, you're meant to picture the same guy, but the audience, the meaning, the context are all quite different.
Context and meaning are not features of the character, but of the story. And as I was specifically making the example of stories that aren't traditional, of course context and meaning are different.
>To me, uninterestingly so. 'Muffin the Mule meets a gay dude' is not an interesting logline for me.
And here we get to the heart of the matter. To YOU, a First Doctor story that doesn't feel like it came out of the pen of David Whitaker and Dennis Spooner is automatically uninteresting. And that's fine, I'm not here to tell you what to like.
But that doesn't mean it doesn't work as a story.
>>69022616
>A Steven who meets a gay person is not the same idea as the Steven who appeared on television. It's got the same name, you're meant to picture the same guy, but the audience, the meaning, the context are all quite different.
The audience, and the context are already vastly different even if all you're doing is watching old episodes as someone born after the 1960s. The meaning too, depending whether you mean the author's or the audience's.
>>69022802
That's what I've been saying though, it applies to ANY attempt to write fiction based on a past era of Doctor Who, especially in a different medium. A Steven who does anything that he didn't do onscreen from 1965-66 is a different idea from the Steven seen onscreen in that era. Hell, The Steven in The Massacre is a substantially different idea from the Steven in The Chase.
>>69022873
No, as I've said, it's a matter of fact that that era included educational elements. If you want to attempt to lord your knowledge of the show over others, you're going to have to find someone even more ignorant than you to listen to you. I'm not that person.
>>69022919
Trolls are fantasy creatures m8, they aren't real.
>>69022967
He's trolling you, mate.
>>69022754
desu Steven always did seem a bit gay to me. Can't put my finger on why.
>>69023120
It's the stuffed panda. (And for the record, why didn't anyone do an elaborate fanwank novel about why Panda from Iris Wildthyme is the same character as Hi-Fi?)
>>69022967
You do understand the difference between in-universe and real-world explanations, right? Of course a Steven who's now met a gay person isn't the same as the character in the children's show. They've changed the character.
Characters don't exist seperately from their stories.
No, I'm interested in any first Doctor story that William Hartnell would have realistically acted in, which covers a wider range than those two people - Hartnell is a total fish out of water in his season four stories but he swallowed his gorge and saw his contract through.
>>69022992
> The audience, and the context are already vastly different even if all you're doing is watching old episodes as someone born after the 1960s. The meaning too, depending whether you mean the author's or the audience's.
I mean the author's meaning, but the rest of this is true, absolutely.
> A Steven who does anything that he didn't do onscreen from 1965-66 is a different idea from the Steven seen onscreen in that era.
That's right. To me, the only way out is either to enjoy the norms of the period in a completely 'fan', unironic way where as with Dicks' novelisations every fourth chapter is the cliffhanger ending, or else take Paul Magrs' 'let's have fun with these cardboard cut-outs' approach.
I will be making a public post on my official Facebook page within the next four weeks regarding the latest missing episodes scandal.
I call him Paul Magrshole.
>>69023475
Aren't you clever. Did you think of that all by yourself?
Actually responding to a shitty Ian Levine parody or the same cunt responding to himself?
>>69023424
can boyishnumbers leak the news?
>>69023569
Oh right, it's a parody? I honestly wouldn't be surprised by Levine posting without any identification and expecting to be recognised.
>>69023536
Hi Paul! Have you written any more appalling camp Doctor Who parodies, laden with trite homosexual references, recently?
I'm not homophobic, by the way, I just don't like reading the same camp crap over and over.
I also intend to address the monumental COCK UP the (presently) dire BBC have made with the scheduling and production of the tenth series of Doctor Who.
I did not want to address this during the Private Eye leak last August, but I am absolutely appalled, disgusted and saddened that the BBC have made this simply PISS POOR executive decision.
I feel absolutely nauseated and betrayed.
THEY ARE LETTING MILLIONS OF FANS DOWN.
I will also be giving a rare interview on a popular Doctor Who podcast within the next two months to set the record straight concerning the cancelled Colin Baker series.
>>69023401
We know you're a troll. You can stop now.
>>69023624
Ian is a nutjob but he wouldn't post here ever. Honestly he'd have another stoke after a day reading this stuff.
>>69023682
You're saying that in response to what? If you accept the basic fact that Steven Taylor is a fictional character, how can anything in that post seem trollish to you?
>>69023672
Shouldn't you be announcing this on Planet Kemble?
>>69023694
He would be livid, indeed. Though I think even he would accept the point that the characters in Doctor Who are madeup, something that one anon here at least is having difficulty accepting.
>>69023401
>To me, the only way out is either to enjoy the norms of the period in a completely 'fan', unironic way where as with Dicks' novelisations every fourth chapter is the cliffhanger ending, or else take Paul Magrs' 'let's have fun with these cardboard cut-outs' approach.
Well I think the opposite. Since characters don't exist separate from their stories and there's no way to really recapture the original stories without the context, you might as well push the characters and stories in new directions. A Steven who meets a gay person definitely is a new idea, but it's not like it's impossible to extrapolate it from his tv character.
>>69023944
>first years of its run, what was wanted was a slow educational amble
And this guy! What a fucking CUNT!
"first years of its run, what was wanted was a slow educational amble"
>>69024131
>there's no way to really recapture the original stories without the context
Why not? A good writer can be both faithful and original - for example The Fearmonger feels very much like a S26 story, has the same atmosphere and themes, while at the same time dong a story fairly different from anything on TV.
