|
Post by davisonera on Jun 18, 2006 2:36:07 GMT -5
Even worse than Boom Town. The worst Doctor Who ever. I can't believe RTD actually thought that anyone would like this crap.
|
|
|
Post by amitchell on Jun 18, 2006 6:55:33 GMT -5
His brain probably failed when writing it.
|
|
|
Post by Eryx on Jun 18, 2006 8:03:38 GMT -5
Do you think I can ask for that 45 minutes of my life back?
|
|
|
Post by thevalyard01 on Jun 18, 2006 9:06:55 GMT -5
Do you think I can ask for that 45 minutes of my life back? ive been doing the exact same thing
|
|
|
Post by Dominic Smith on Jun 18, 2006 10:16:01 GMT -5
I read this on the Outpost Gallifrey message boards:
According to Russell T Davies on the commentary for 'Love & Monsters', this episode came about because of the Christmas special, this episode was short parallel to episodes eight and nine because if it was shot with the Doctor and Rose featuring largely in it the shooting schedule for the series on the whole would be coming up to nearly a whole year.
Basically what he said was that to keep the shooting schedule as close to the series 1 one as possible (in terms of length), and in order to include the Christmas episode there will be at least one Doctor and Companionless-less episode each season.
Make of that what you will...
|
|
|
Post by The Thinker on Jun 18, 2006 11:38:19 GMT -5
It doesn't excuse poor writing though.
|
|
|
Post by The Thinker on Jun 18, 2006 11:39:15 GMT -5
Do you think I can ask for that 45 minutes of my life back? ive been doing the exact same thing Same thing over at this end.
|
|
|
Post by Eryx on Jun 18, 2006 12:12:19 GMT -5
According to Russell T Davies on the commentary for 'Love & Monsters', this episode came about because of the Christmas special, this episode was short parallel to episodes eight and nine because if it was shot with the Doctor and Rose featuring largely in it the shooting schedule for the series on the whole would be coming up to nearly a whole year. Basically what he said was that to keep the shooting schedule as close to the series 1 one as possible (in terms of length), and in order to include the Christmas episode there will be at least one Doctor and Companionless-less episode each season. Thats quite pathetic actually. If American shows can easilt film 22 episodes for a year, I'm sure the BBC can manage the paltry 13 we get plus a Christmas Special, without giving us an awful no-Doctor episode. Bah!
|
|
|
Post by Dominic Smith on Jun 18, 2006 12:22:17 GMT -5
According to Russell T Davies on the commentary for 'Love & Monsters', this episode came about because of the Christmas special, this episode was short parallel to episodes eight and nine because if it was shot with the Doctor and Rose featuring largely in it the shooting schedule for the series on the whole would be coming up to nearly a whole year. Basically what he said was that to keep the shooting schedule as close to the series 1 one as possible (in terms of length), and in order to include the Christmas episode there will be at least one Doctor and Companionless-less episode each season. Thats quite pathetic actually. If American shows can easilt film 22 episodes for a year, I'm sure the BBC can manage the paltry 13 we get plus a Christmas Special, without giving us an awful no-Doctor episode. Bah! It might not be true, perhaps as the production crew go on they'll be able to cut down on the long time taken for shooting and we won't have to have a Doctor-less episode. I think the whole problem could be avoided by putting the series on in winter, okay there's no Christmas special but that's no real loss, Christmas episodes are rarely very different from regular episodes anyway Plus there's the added bonus of higher ratings because nobody will want to be out in the rain. Mind you that does mean filming during the spring which could prove a bit problematic in terms of weather but I'm sure they could cope.
|
|
|
Post by The Thinker on Jun 18, 2006 12:30:16 GMT -5
Still, Eryx has got a point though.
|
|
|
Post by amitchell on Jun 18, 2006 14:05:17 GMT -5
Absolutely. It seems to me that Davies is just making excuses for what was, quite frankly, crap writing.
|
|
|
Post by sontaran on Jun 18, 2006 19:07:38 GMT -5
Where's your sense of humour guys? "Love & Monsters" is novel, it gave David and Billie a mini-holiday (remember when Hartnell/whoever had a week off and didn't appear in an episode at all?), it's actually very clever, funny, and slick, and personally it's great to see a completely new tone after the wonderfully dark "Satan Pit". Imho the romance that has been prominent in this series is very welcome, Doctor Who can be many things, many styles, including romantic! Remember how Tom Baker's early seasons shifted tonally? How "Masque of Mandragora" was a shift to include swashbuckling science-fantasy, just as "Castrovalva" tried to steer back to hard science? This is rejuvenated Doctor Who aimed primarily at a young new audience in the times we live in, and the scripts this year have been lyrical and outstanding! Open your eyes and your minds, see things new and afresh, and with wonder! The last two series of TV Doctor Who have been more exciting than I could ever have imagined; let's see what happens with Rose and Series 3, in the future!
|
|
|
Post by Dominic Smith on Jun 19, 2006 1:25:19 GMT -5
Where's your sense of humour guys? "Love & Monsters" is novel, it gave David and Billie a mini-holiday (remember when Hartnell/whoever had a week off and didn't appear in an episode at all?), it's actually very clever, funny, and slick, and personally it's great to see a completely new tone after the wonderfully dark "Satan Pit". Imho the romance that has been prominent in this series is very welcome, Doctor Who can be many things, many styles, including romantic! Remember how Tom Baker's early seasons shifted tonally? How "Masque of Mandragora" was a shift to include swashbuckling science-fantasy, just as "Castrovalva" tried to steer back to hard science? This is rejuvenated Doctor Who aimed primarily at a young new audience in the times we live in, and the scripts this year have been lyrical and outstanding! Open your eyes and your minds, see things new and afresh, and with wonder! The last two series of TV Doctor Who have been more exciting than I could ever have imagined; let's see what happens with Rose and Series 3, in the future! OK it's novel but hopefully a one off, it just isn't Doctor Who for me. Doctor Who can be many things but those many things have always appealed to many people. I find it hard to believe that apart from the last few scenes with the Doctor, this would appeal to anyone over the age of six because it's not clever, it's juvenile. The chase gag at the beginning has been done so many times in other kiddies shows it's no longer funny, the premise for the Abzorbaloff even being there is just to absorb the Doctor, which is strenuous at best. Why not make it more interesting and make him a hit man, working for some alien race whose planet was destroyd in the Time War, that's a bit more interesting and to be honest scarier; much more inline with the best Doctor Who stories. The narrative and the direction of the episode are poor; especially the little inserts at the start of later scenes (like whenever Elton mentions a name we see a clip of them later in the episode, this makes no sense. I can see that it's trying to direct the film as Elton would but using clips Elton hasn't actually filmed makes no point. Peter Kay admittedly is wonderful, many think over the top but to be honest that's a Doctor Who tradition in itself (although I don't approve of bringing one in every season, it's harmless once every blue moon). What's not a tradition is to aim an episode purely at one area of the audience, yes there are a few scenes which appeal to older viewers but on the whole this is just struggling to be what Doctor Who should never be, consumer friendly-appeal to everyone-commercialism. Back in the early seventies Doctor Who was at a peak, and this was before faceless comedy was being used. Sheer creepiness was how the viewers were pulled in; there were no opinion polls and cataclysmic variation in tone to please everyone, the series had one agenda as to how it would grab the audience and it stuck to it. I do have an open mind, as many people on these boards do and surely the fact that one episode can cause so much unrest between people who all have very different tastes in the show anyway must show that it is the wrong direction for the show to take. 'Boom Town' was apparently a dangerous step it seemed last year judging by the response it got (mind I you I quite liked it) but this was a leap too far. However as I've said in a previous post because of the way the series will be shot from now on (with one episode not featuring the Doctor and Rose a lot) it seems we could be getting more episodes like this, and I only hope that the production team can find a better way of using the time within the series to prove this format works; i.e. loose the abundant humour, replace it with tense atmosphere and throw in a few relevant comedic lines in some of the 'down time' scenes between the action. 'Offbeat' episodes are, in my opinion, not the way to go; why interrupt a series of fantastic stories (as I'd say series two has been up until now) for one that is just puerile. I'm only hoping the production team see the bad resonce this episode has found itself, because another few episodes like this we'll be calling the show 'Doctor What' and not 'Doctor Who'. Well that's my rant over Thanks, Dominic P.S. Welcome to the boards sontaran P.P.S David and Billie didn't actually get a holiday whilst this episode was filmed, they were away filming episodes eight and nine. This was done because with the Christmas special also in need to be shot the shooting schedule for series two was knocking on a whole year which limited the work the two lead actors could do outside of the show on other projects.
|
|
|
Post by dmg111 on Jun 19, 2006 4:24:55 GMT -5
This Episode is Russel T Davies through and through. He loves to be controversial, creating programs such as Queer as Folk and Second Coming. This is the sort of conversation he wants to start.
|
|
|
Post by The Thinker on Jun 19, 2006 10:03:14 GMT -5
I think what we're looking at here is a classic case of a good story followed by a not so good one. In other words had we all seen this one on its own first, we might not think it to be as bad. Even if it is a little bit silly. This last happened in 1984 anyway with 'The Caves of Androzani' and 'The Twin Dilemma'. Anyway when I spoke to one of my parents on this he said he expected it to get some stick anyway, before going on to say he thinks this episode may have been aimed at more of younger people rather than the average Who-buffs like us. Also seeing what was broadcast the week before they just had to follow it on with something lighter in tone. I think.
|
|