|
|
Post by K-Box on Jun 15, 2011 20:31:15 GMT -8
What's especially ironic about Davies' constant deification of the Doctor is that Davies is an atheist who, as far as I recall, has actually said that he DOES harbor an explicit grudge against religion.
|
|
|
|
Post by jbhelfrich on Jun 16, 2011 7:55:23 GMT -8
Also, Father Octavian and the Church military fighting the Angels happened some period of time AFTER "A Good Man," from River's perspective. Are we sure of that? I'd gotten the impression it was the other way around--the earlier church imprisons River for whatever she did, but then grows more militant. |
|
|
|
Post by jbhelfrich on Jun 16, 2011 8:05:40 GMT -8
What's especially ironic about Davies' constant deification of the Doctor is that Davies is an atheist who, as far as I recall, has actually said that he DOES harbor an explicit grudge against religion. Enh, it's not that unusual. I'm an Atheist who feels that organized religion in general, and the Abrahamic religions in particular, are better described as crimes against humanity than as helpful parts of civilized society when you consider the totality of their actions. And yet I always end up playing Paladins in games. There's something attractive, at least to me, about a being who is godlike, who chooses to take on those responsibilities out of an obligation to do the right thing rather than hubris, and who, most importantly, can be yelled at until he admits to screwing up. |
|
|
|
Post by K-Box on Jun 16, 2011 21:27:31 GMT -8
What's especially ironic about Davies' constant deification of the Doctor is that Davies is an atheist who, as far as I recall, has actually said that he DOES harbor an explicit grudge against religion. Enh, it's not that unusual. I'm an Atheist who feels that organized religion in general, and the Abrahamic religions in particular, are better described as crimes against humanity than as helpful parts of civilized society when you consider the totality of their actions. And yet I always end up playing Paladins in games. There's something attractive, at least to me, about a being who is godlike, who chooses to take on those responsibilities out of an obligation to do the right thing rather than hubris, and who, most importantly, can be yelled at until he admits to screwing up. Yes, but the problem with RTD's portrayal of the Doctor was that, except for some very brief moments, the rest of the cast ultimately wound up being a bit too worshipful of him for my tastes, to the point that Martha actually became his John the Baptist on the Master's Earth, whereas Moff, although he portrays the Doctor as mostly decent and extraordinarily gifted, has people call the Doctor out on his reputation and his mistakes all the time. You're coming at this from the standpoint of wanting an accountable and humane Jesus, whereas Davies made the Doctor less and less humane OR accountable as time went on, and again, with rare exceptions like "The Waters of Mars" and the long-term aftermath of Harriet Jones, our sympathies were clearly meant to lie with the Doctor. |
|
|
|
Post by jbhelfrich on Jun 20, 2011 11:57:25 GMT -8
You're coming at this from the standpoint of wanting an accountable and humane Jesus, whereas Davies made the Doctor less and less humane OR accountable as time went on, and again, with rare exceptions like "The Waters of Mars" and the long-term aftermath of Harriet Jones, our sympathies were clearly meant to lie with the Doctor. I'm not sure. I think it was more setting up the audience the same way he was setting up the Doctor--that realization at the end of Water of Mars that *he* had gone to far (though to be fair, that might have been a belated realization on RTD's part. ) I wish there had been more time to explore that before the character change. |
|
|
|
Post by jkcarrier on Jun 21, 2011 6:49:50 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by jensaltmann on Jun 21, 2011 8:34:58 GMT -8
LOVE
|
|
|
|
Post by jbhelfrich on Jun 21, 2011 10:30:59 GMT -8
I must say that I'm surprised we've gone this long without bringing up the title card they showed for the next episode. I just about fell out of my chair.
|
|
|
|
Post by paulpogue on Jun 21, 2011 10:42:24 GMT -8
I think because it's so freakin' bizarre and out of left field -- even by Who standards -- that we have no idea what Moffat is actually going for here.
|
|
|
|
Post by michaelpaciocco on Jun 21, 2011 12:17:42 GMT -8
I have no idea what you're talking about on that score.
A couple thoughts entered my head;
1) Because of Big Bang Two...maybe now River won't die?
2) If the TARDIS can stabilize a Flesh Copy...then why didn't it do that for Amy-Flesh-clone?
|
|
|
|
Post by jbhelfrich on Jun 21, 2011 15:46:29 GMT -8
Which score? The title card? It was something like "Doctor Who returns later this summer in 'Lets Kill Hitler!'" Which just makes me want to send Moffat the time travel wiki story, but I'm probably not the first.
Hmm. River just escaping the library like that seems...tacky somehow. As for flesh Amy, I predict that it only stabilizes Flesh clones that are severed from the template. *mysterious hand waiving*
|
|
|
|
Post by jensaltmann on Jun 21, 2011 22:49:28 GMT -8
2) If the TARDIS can stabilize a Flesh Copy...then why didn't it do that for Amy-Flesh-clone? Because the Doctor didn't want it to. He cut off the transmission, and then used the sonic screwdriver to, essentially, switch off the Flesh Amy. |
|
|
|
Post by paulpogue on Jun 29, 2011 9:18:16 GMT -8
A bonus screenshot for Kirk, from the "Earth Story" DVD: Mary Tamm today:  Okay, maybe it's for me too, as older imperious women in glasses just DO something for me. The lady in "Partners in Crime" was particularly delectable ... |
|
|
|
Post by K-Box on Jun 29, 2011 20:21:56 GMT -8
A bonus screenshot for Kirk, from the "Earth Story" DVD: Mary Tamm today: Okay, maybe it's for me too, as older imperious women in glasses just DO something for me. The lady in "Partners in Crime" was particularly delectable ... RELEVANT TO MY INTERESTS |
|
|
|
Post by paulpogue on Jun 30, 2011 13:17:59 GMT -8
GodDAMN, her website has some more fun photos: www.marytamm.com/page2.htmwww.marytamm.com/page4.htmSurprisingly enough, I think she photographs better in candid than posed; the heavily posed recent shots that try to glam her up are attractive, but in a way almost emphasizes the age in an unnatural manner. She looks a lot more at ease in the book signing photos. |
|
