Oh groan, Weakest Link/Big Brother in next week's Dr Who
binar...@onetel.net.uk
in Dr Who?
Sorry, but this looks plain crap.:( Running out of ideas already.
Stephen Wilson
<binar...@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
news:1117910779....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Suppose the Daleks make up for it but The Weakest Link and Big Brother
> in Dr Who?
>
> Sorry, but this looks plain crap.:( Running out of ideas already.
Especially as I'd guess both the Weakest Link and Big Brother have a limited
life span. I'd be surprised if either are still running in a couple of
years. So it's surprising that Dr Who would base an entire episode on shows
that are so tedious and irrelevant...
Ian Oxley
I normally try not to judge based purely on the trailer, but this week I
am forced to agree. Just tell me that bloody Anne Robinson won't be in
it, please!!!!
---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0522-14, 04/06/2005
Tested on: 04/06/2005 20:14:32
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com
The Mole
> am forced to agree. Just tell me that bloody Anne Robinson won't be in
> it, please!!!!
the Sixth Doctor!!!)
Fooled you! I tell a lie, the coffee is not included in the plot.
Stephen Wilson
"Ian Oxley" <ia...@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:42a1f...@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com...
> binar...@onetel.net.uk wrote:
>> Suppose the Daleks make up for it but The Weakest Link and Big Brother
>> in Dr Who?
>>
>> Sorry, but this looks plain crap.:( Running out of ideas already.
>>
>
> I normally try not to judge based purely on the trailer, but this week I
> am forced to agree. Just tell me that bloody Anne Robinson won't be in
> it, please!!!!
I think she plays Anne-Droid (hah-bloody-hah...)
Mike
> in Dr Who?
>
> Sorry, but this looks plain crap.:( Running out of ideas already.
yep it does but what annoys me about this new series is there has been some
very good episodes such as Dalek, Fathers Day and the World War 2 one but
then mixed in have been some crap and just plain embarassing episodes too
like (as you say) next weeks looks like being. there is some great
potential in this new series but so far the good stuff is in the minority.
hopefully it gets better next series.
Gordon Hudson
> in Dr Who?
>
> Sorry, but this looks plain crap.:( Running out of ideas already.
Look it could be worse.
They could have reintroduced Bertie Bassett.
Ian Oxley
LOL! She could even be Davros.
---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0522-14, 04/06/2005
Tested on: 04/06/2005 21:02:34
The Doctor
Up next, Bad Wolf.
--
Member - Liberal International
This is doc...@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doc...@nl2k.ab.ca
God Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising!
nk.ca started 1 June 1995
The Doctor
Anybody
binar...@onetel.net.uk wrote:
> Running out of ideas already.
That was my exact response on reading the subject ... and we haven't
even started the new series here yet. :-(
Rob Nicholson
Actually, she will be:
Anne Robinson .... The Anne Droid (voice)
from IMDB...
Anybody
<rob.ni...@nospam-unforgettable.com> wrote:
IMDB is hopeless, and utterly uselss for anything that's still upcoming
or planned. All the "information" there is supplied by the users and
never checked, so much of it is complete rubbish based on Internet
rumour or lies. NEVER believe anything you read on IMaDumBum.com. :-(
Matt Probert
<gor...@usenet2.hostroute.co.uk> spluttered
Oh don't! Wasn't that just the worse season ever?
Matt
--
The Probert Encyclopaedia - Beyond Britannica
http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com
Rob Wynne
No, they aren't "running out of ideas". They're coming up with ideas
you don't like.
You don't have to like them, but try not to confuse the one for the other.
-R
Anybody
wrote:
If they continue to come up with silly ideas, then they ARE running out
of (good) ideas. Only what they do next will prove it one way or the
other.
tangeri...@hotmail.com
shows currently dominating TV. I'm quite looking forward to it.
Andy
> in Dr Who?
>
> Sorry, but this looks plain crap.:( Running out of ideas already.
I thought the Big Brother clip was excellent, especially the look on the
Doctor's face :-) In many ways it means the Doctor is not in control, at
least to start with, which is always good for the storyline. It was only
when the Daleks showed up that I went groan... Daleks have been done
before, they're not even very convincing (the mindset is okay, just not the
physical execution) even though it may be heresy to say so. The Big Brother
idea would at least be new afaik. I shall withhold judgement until I've
seen it though.
Andy
masonReloaded
tangeri...@hotmail.com wrote:
> I think it's an interesting idea, a direct reflection of all the crap
> shows currently dominating TV. I'm quite looking forward to it.
Maybe some sort of Alien/future gameshow, would be a good idea, making
sly digs at our own shows. But directly parodying current shows like
Big Bro, Weakest Link etc. is lazy, tacky and 4 years too late...
And in 10/20 years, the program will be totally dated. Imagine if they
had a done a Peter Davison gets stuck in Bullseye episode??
tangeri...@hotmail.com
>sly digs at our own shows. But directly parodying current shows like
>Big Bro, Weakest Link etc. is lazy, tacky and 4 years too late...
Lazy how? Why not directly use those shows? These are shows that the
audience knows and understands, whay create something different for the
sake of it?
Tacky - How?
4 years too late? - those shows are still very popular, and are formats
seen throughout the world! The entire audience knows those shows....
>And in 10/20 years, the program will be totally dated. Imagine if they
>had a done a Peter Davison gets stuck in Bullseye episode??
What's the problem with being dated? The TV show is made for todays
audience. If it is still relevant in 10 years time then that's a
bonus. Lots of the old show is incredibly dated, and that's part of
the charm.
We'll just have to wait and see.....
masonReloaded
> >Maybe some sort of Alien/future gameshow, would be a good idea, making
> >sly digs at our own shows. But directly parodying current shows like
> >Big Bro, Weakest Link etc. is lazy, tacky and 4 years too late...
>
> Lazy how? Why not directly use those shows? These are shows that the
> audience knows and understands, whay create something different for the
> sake of it?
It wouldnt be "for the sake of it" - it would at least add a touch more
realism that the Doctor be in a future gameshow called "Last Man
Standing" or something, rather than "The Weakest Link". And creating
something different is called creativity and imagination, which is what
the writers of Doctor Who are there for.
Doctor Who, and Sci-Fi as a whole is at its best when using Science
Fiction to comment on society, or relevant issues. Having a robot
version of the Weakest Link where if you lose, you die is predictable
and boring.... Its as thinly disguised an attack on gameshows as the
anti-death penalty episode.
In fact, in this season, RTD has proven that while his new Doctor Who
is fantastically enjoyable, some of his social commentary could be a
little more subtle. "Massed weapons of destruction 45 seconds away."
The Long Game's hit-you-over-the-head-with-a-hammer, anti-media
message... and so on...
tangeri...@hotmail.com
>It wouldnt be "for the sake of it" - it would at least add a touch more
>realism that the Doctor be in a future gameshow called "Last Man
>Standing" or something, rather than "The Weakest Link". And creating
>something different is called creativity and imagination, which is what
>the writers of Doctor Who are there for.
If you are going to parody the weakest link/big brother, then why
bother to make up a new game show? This version of Dr Who is very much
of it's time. I think it'll probably look very dated in 10 years time,
but that doesn't bother me - I'm enjoying it now.
>Doctor Who, and Sci-Fi as a whole is at its best when using Science
>Fiction to comment on society, or relevant issues. Having a robot
>version of the Weakest Link where if you lose, you die is predictable
>and boring.... Its as thinly disguised an attack on gameshows as the
>anti-death penalty episode.
We'll have to wait and see how predictable and boring this is once it's
aired. who knows what twists and tricks will be in the aired episode?
As RTD says these episodes will "blow you away" (or words to that
effect).
>In fact, in this season, RTD has proven that while his new Doctor Who
>is fantastically enjoyable, some of his social commentary could be a
>little more subtle. "Massed weapons of destruction 45 seconds away."
>The Long Game's hit-you-over-the-head-with-a-hammer, anti-media
>message... and so on...
I agree that it hasn't always been very subtle, but I think this is
primarily down to the length of episodes. RTD has clear messages he
wants to get across, and is attempting character growth, kitchen-sink
drama, social messages, science fiction and storytelling all within 45
minutes. Judging by the comments on RADW he's often failing, but at
least someone on TV is trying, the alternative being wall to wall
reality shows......
masonReloaded
> <snippity snip>
> >It wouldnt be "for the sake of it" - it would at least add a touch more
> >realism that the Doctor be in a future gameshow called "Last Man
> >Standing" or something, rather than "The Weakest Link". And creating
> >something different is called creativity and imagination, which is what
> >the writers of Doctor Who are there for.
>
> If you are going to parody the weakest link/big brother, then why
> bother to make up a new game show? This version of Dr Who is very much
> of it's time. I think it'll probably look very dated in 10 years time,
> but that doesn't bother me - I'm enjoying it now.
As am I.
Maybe it will be a fantastic episode. I just think that a
parody/satire of game shows in general, would be more interesting than
a specific satire of some current "hot" shows. I guess we will see on
Saturday...
Paul Harman
news:1118245536.2...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Maybe it will be a fantastic episode. I just think that a
> parody/satire of game shows in general, would be more interesting than
> a specific satire of some current "hot" shows. I guess we will see on
> Saturday...
From the point of view of parodying these shows in general, what does it
matter that they bare more than a passing resemblance to contemporary shows?
Paul
masonReloaded
parodying specific TV shows, it cheapens the nature of the show.
Commenting on society in general? Yes. Commenting on gameshows in
general? Perhaps. But an Anne Robinson robot? No.
Much as the Long Game would have been cheapened, in my view, if the
media was controlled, by say the BBC of the future, rather than a
generic media entity... It just takes away from the realism of the
show for me...
Stephen Wilson
Personally, I agree 100%
L. Ross Raszewski
Just like The Mind Robber was cheapened by using Gulliver instead of
some generic fantasy hero.
Oh, and putting Charles Dickens in The Unquiet Dead? Come on. We all
know that the real dickens never met any aliens. It would have worked
so much better if he'd just been a fictitious 19th century novelist.
Nomen Nescio
>Personally, I think that Doctor Who should not be in the business of
>parodying specific TV shows, it cheapens the nature of the show.
>Commenting on society in general? Yes. Commenting on gameshows in
>general? Perhaps. But an Anne Robinson robot? No.
>
>Much as the Long Game would have been cheapened, in my view, if the
>media was controlled, by say the BBC of the future, rather than a
>generic media entity... It just takes away from the realism of the
>show for me...
>
It will be quite interesting to see how RTD handles this. Although I have never seen either The Weakest Link or Big Brother, from what I have read both of them have already degenerated to the stage of self-parody. How do you parody a parody?
I Once watched an interesting and very amusing British TV series called "The thin Blue line" about the training of a police force. At the time I thought that it was a parody of reality television but in retrospect I am not so sure. Maybe they were real policemen, maybe that is how the British really do train their cops. I wonder how many of the viewers next Saturday will imagine that they are watching the real "Big Brother" or is it "The Weakest Link"?
Blurring the somewhat tenous line between TV "reality" and TV "unreality" may not always be a good idea.
masonReloaded
Doctor has often crossed paths with famous people in history, and it is
entirely likely that given the amount he travels that he would do so.
Its the references to gameshows from 2005 in a show set centuries in
the future, which are unrealistic. Will we get a cutting parody on
money in sport next season, where a robot Malcolm Glazer XXVIII takes
over a team called Moonchester United in the year 2611?
spur...@hotmail.com
These comparisons don't really work.
The Master in 'The Mind Robber' was kidnapped from 20th century Earth.
It makes perfect sense that he was familiar with _Gulliver's Travels_.
The Charles Dickens thing is so unrelated to the matter at hand that I
literally don't know where to start in pointing out the hole in your
reference to it.
In 'Bad Wolf', at least as far as we know to date, we are expected to
believe that three early twenty-first century TV shows are still around
in the early two-thousand-and-first--or at the very least that they've
been revived some one-hundred-and-ninety-eight-thousand years later.
Now, there may be a reasonable reason for it (Adam springs to mind),
but elsewise it's a bit of a stretch.
It's a question of relevence vs realism. Realistically, the world will
be unrecognisable in 200,100--and it certainly won't be airing _What
Not To Wear_. The audience, on the other hand, is familiar with these
shows, and will 'get the joke', as it were.
RTD does this a lot--sacrificing credibility for the sake of a quick
gag or plot point. 'Lots of planets have a North', Cassandra's iPod,
the Slitheen farting and the wheelie bin are all nods to the audience,
not the world within the show. Were BW to be set in the year 2020, it
would have made a lot more sense.
There's a reasonably well known quote from Johnson, which is:
"I would say to Robertson what an old tutor of a college said to one of
his pupils: 'Read over your compositions, and where ever you meet with
a passage which you think is particularly fine, strike it out.'"
RTD would often do well to follow said advice.
Rodney
masonReloaded
L. Ross Raszewski wrote:
> Oh, and putting Charles Dickens in The Unquiet Dead? Come on. We all
> know that the real dickens never met any aliens.
Well we all know that ALiens never crashed into Big Ben either, and
that Daleks have never tried to invade Earth. DW's universe is not
ours. It's not about whether something actually happened, its about
how far you are willing so stretch suspension of disbelief. Can I
believe (in the context of Doctor Who) that a timetraveller to the 19th
century might meet Dickens? Yes. Can I believe that in 1000s of years
time there will be a robotic version of Anne Robinson? No.
Stephen Wilson
"L. Ross Raszewski" <lrasz...@loyola.edu> wrote in message
news:0_Kpe.15898$yS2.14743@trnddc07...
I think the problem is that RTD is making a programme that a present-day
audience might find amusing because he's making (bad) puns that most of us
will pick up on (in Britain at least). But 10 or 20 years from now, the puns
will be totally lost. So not only is it a programme that has become
self-aware but also one that will not stand the test of time. And he's
expecting us to believe that things we *know* will not be around in just a
few years will leave a legacy and still be influencing the world 1,000s of
years in the future.
The Mind Robber didn't need a generic fantasy hero. Gulliver was as good as
any. Interactions with real people is not the issue. It just seems that RTD
has no problem inserting puns at the expense of believability. Yes,
"Anne-Droid" would be a great joke for a satirical show. For Dr Who it's out
of place and cheapens the show.
Frankymole
> No, Dickens was a real person and a classic historical figure, the
> Doctor has often crossed paths with famous people in history, and it is
> entirely likely that given the amount he travels that he would do so.
> Its the references to gameshows from 2005 in a show set centuries in
> the future, which are unrealistic.
Centuries? Hundreds of millennia, actually (200,000 years).
--
Frankymole
masonReloaded
My mistake.
But this actually makes it even more unrealistic...
Glyn
> RTD does this a lot--sacrificing credibility for the sake of a quick
> gag or plot point. 'Lots of planets have a North', Cassandra's iPod,
> the Slitheen farting and the wheelie bin are all nods to the audience,
> not the world within the show.
With you on most of those, but how is "lots of planets have a North"
sacrificing credibility? It's not really answering the question that
prompted it, and it's definitely there as a gag, but any planet with a
magnetic core has a North (although according to Dalek Invasion, that's
still only Earth...).
Glyn
--
Glyn Kennington - Opinionated elitist and part-time grammar nitpicker
it's: abbreviation for "it is"; its: belonging to it (cf. his, hers)
Plurals don't need apostrophes, except to indicate possession.
spur...@hotmail.com
Glyn wrote:
> With you on most of those, but how is "lots of planets have a North"
> sacrificing credibility? It's not really answering the question that
> prompted it, and it's definitely there as a gag, but any planet with a
> magnetic core has a North (although according to Dalek Invasion, that's
> still only Earth...).
You may be right.
Well, you _are_ right, most planets probably do have a north. But not
necessarily a _North_ in the sense that the Doctor meant it, as in, an
equivalent of northern England.
Nonetheless I think you are right, that gag wasn't stretching
credibilty too much. It kind of works if we assume the Doctor was
avoiding the question for some reason. One idea that I like (hey, I
thought of it, of course I do) is that the Doctor is a reverse snob
(remember Eccleston's pre-series comments: he couldn't identify with
all those 'posh' Doctors) and has co-opted the accent as a form of
childish rebellion--perhaps against his earlier selves. But he's
embarrased, because he knows how childish it is. So he makes a kind of
petulant joke about it.
Where it does strain credibility, for me, is when we look at the scene
the way I think it was intended. Rose, asking the accent question, is
basically asking how the Doctor can be an alien if he has an English
accent. Taken in that context, his comment can only be seen as:
1. An metatextual joke
2. Nonsensical (even if other planets have Norths, as most of the
surely do, they don't have norths of England, and they almost certainly
shouldn't produce English accents).
Either way, it's breaking the fourth wall. Much like the iPod, the
farting and the wheelie bin, there's no _intended_ reason for any of
them within the 'logic' of the show. Post hoc explanations are
possible, of course.
Rodney
Glyn
> Glyn wrote:
> > With you on most of those, but how is "lots of planets have a North"
> > sacrificing credibility?
>
>
> Where it does strain credibility, for me, is when we look at the scene
> the way I think it was intended. Rose, asking the accent question, is
> basically asking how the Doctor can be an alien if he has an English
> accent. Taken in that context, his comment can only be seen as:
>
> 1. An metatextual joke
>
> 2. Nonsensical (even if other planets have Norths, as most of the
> surely do, they don't have norths of England, and they almost certainly
> shouldn't produce English accents).
>
> Either way, it's breaking the fourth wall. Much like the iPod, the
> farting and the wheelie bin, there's no _intended_ reason for any of
> them within the 'logic' of the show. Post hoc explanations are
> possible, of course.
Coming right up...
It could equally be argued that as well as having a physical North, many
civilisations/countries on other planets have a social equivalent of the
North of England - the bit further from the capital (or largest) city,
where, among other things, the accents are slightly different to the
official pronunciation used in that country. The Doctor's rejection of
his former "posh" self would mean adopting the appropriate accent in
whatever place he visits. Although this means that he's choosing to
speak like that, rather than it being an accent that he can't shake off,
it doesn't stop his explanation from making some kind of sense.
It could even be the TARDIS choosing an appropriate accent for his
purposes, though I think that's less likely - the Doctor probably speaks
English fluently without the aid of the TARDIS technology.
nei...@virgin.net
personal opinions in this HG), I don't mind humour in DW as long as it
is subtle, intelligent and doesn't interfere with the plot.
Unfortunately, I think some of this series's humour has been slapstick,
embarrasing and detracting. I have visions of RTD being one of those
people who laughs at his own jokes at parties - even when no-one else
does. Personally, that is.