Rich Morris' Comics - YAFGC and The ComixBlog

Discussion forum for fans of YAFGC and Rich's ComixBlog. Because all the cool webcomics have one.

Jump to YAFGC / Jump to The ComixBlog

It is currently Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:28 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 7
 [ 101 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Paul McGann - The Fox Film - DID NOT SUCK: discuss:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:45 am 
Creator
Creator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 1:48 pm
Posts: 2161
Location: Halifax
Present your arguments, people. For or against.

I'll start:
Like it or not, it's still better then the worst of the rest of the series, new or old.

_________________
"Goblins are evil too, Dad."
"No, son. Goblins are just... sorta bad."
-Bob & Ben


Top
 Profile WWW YIM  
 
 Post subject: Re: Paul McGann - The Fox Flim - DID NOT SUCK: discuss:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:39 am 
Orc
Orc
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 7:53 am
Posts: 60
For! It was the first new canon Who for seven years (and one of the pitifully few home-grown sci-fi shows)! It gave us diehard fans hope that more could come, that it hadn't gone forever. And it was a success (9m viewers here in the UK)! It added a bit more reality to the show with the Doctor actually 'noticing' his companion. And the TARDIS set design? WOW!
The shoes were perfect, too! ;)

_________________
'Eldrad MUST live!'


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Paul McGann - The Fox Flim - DID NOT SUCK: discuss:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 10:39 am 
Puce Guardian
Puce Guardian
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 1109
I enjoyed it - I agree the Tardis was the best design they'd come up with, something that really suited the Doctor's many personalities.

I even liked Eric Roberts as the Master, up until he changed costume and became campy town camp. Before that he enjoyed manipulating everyone, enjoying a game of words, teasing the Doctor and his companion as much as threatening him. Ruthlessly murdering, playful, with a touch of camp (the Master often had a touch of camp, particularly in his mustache twirling Ainley days) I thought it was interesting for a while. Then he changed costume, and well, went for the brass ring of Camptown in manner that outdid Ainley's best camp, but till then, he worked for me.

Paul McGann was a great Doctor and really nailed the part in the one ep. Since then I've come across his audio eps and have been impressed with how well he carries the part onward. (If you're in the mood for a good spoof of old time radio shows, get a copy of Invaders From Mars - Simon Pegg's in that too, I believe - yes, they have Orson Wells War of the Worlds airing as part of the adventure)


Top
 Profile WWW  
 
 Post subject: Re: Paul McGann - The Fox Film - DID NOT SUCK: discuss:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 2:32 pm 
Orc
Orc
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 1:59 pm
Posts: 50
I liked the film. Eight himself was flawless, aside from the whole 'half human' thing.

Admittedly I didn't love the movie at the time, but looking back now it seems like a good way to bridge the gap between old who and new who.

And ok so we never did find out what happened to ace, and we never saw grace travel in the tardis, but these things weren't essential for the story.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Paul McGann - The Fox Film - DID NOT SUCK: discuss:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 11:56 pm 
Minotaur
Minotaur
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 12:06 am
Posts: 116
I cast one more vote FOR the Fox film.
And for those who didn't like the "Half Human" thing, I suggest you do what I do: ignore it. The Doctor says a lot of things, especially during his post-regeneration crazies. (I mean, heck, Nine claimed to be only 900 years old, but let's not go there again.)
I liked the TARDIS set. I still like it better than the one in the new series, except for those steel girders around the console. I remember a newspaper preview that alluded to the sleek, futuristic sets of most sci-fi shows, and called the TARDIS set "a wonderful Victorian-Edwardian throwback to the days of Jules Verne."

I agree about Eric Roberts, though. At least John "Craaaazy Master" Simm had the excuse of having actually regenerated (meaning that it was perfectly reasonable that his personality would change). But the Eric Roberts Master was the result of another body theft. Why would he suddenly become so camp -- unless perhaps that trait was something that carried over from his host ...

_________________
You don't need to see my identification.
This isn't the post you're looking for.
I can go about my business.
Move along.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Paul McGann - The Fox Film - DID NOT SUCK: discuss:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 12, 2009 12:21 am 
Puce Guardian
Puce Guardian
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 1109
It was apparently an allergic reaction to gallifreyian style clothes on his stolen body Image


Top
 Profile WWW  
 
 Post subject: Re: Paul McGann - The Fox Film - DID NOT SUCK: discuss:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 12, 2009 8:28 am 
Goblin
Goblin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:21 am
Posts: 16
Even though I know McGann had to come in, the way that they took McCoy out reminded me of how he came in from a prat fall.

The gang aspect... ugh. Just no, please.

The Master as a Ghost Lizard? When did that happen?

Half Human... All right, I think that was a lie so he could snog the girl. :P

The only thing that saved the movie was Paul McGann. However, him walking through a glass wall was just weird.

On a scale of one to ten, it was a three. Roberts really killed it for me.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Paul McGann - The Fox Film - DID NOT SUCK: discuss:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 12, 2009 3:14 pm 
Goblin
Goblin

Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 2:50 pm
Posts: 28
While I am for this film, I am not asking anyone who doesn't like it to change their mind. That's not the issue.

As a defender of this film I will readily admit it was far from perfect and had it's flaws (though the Doctor himself explains the Half-Human thing to Grace when they are in the Institute, and people keep forgetting that). Again, feel free to hate it if you want to, I'm not arguing that.

It's when people who hate the tv movie turn around and praise the new series, when the new series makes the same mistakes and far worse ones....that is what drives me up a wall.

You hated the TV Movie because it was "American"? Fine, then you hate Captain Jack in New Who and his leadership of Torchwood, too.

You hated the TV Movie because of Roberts!Master? Fine, then you hate Simm!Master too, who was even worse. At least Roberts tried to be the Master. Simm wasn't the Master at all. Though in Simm's defense, I think that was largely because of how RTD told him to play the part. What really galls me about this is the blink-and-you'll-miss-him Jacobi!Master. Why couldn't RTD have kept him around for 3 epispodes?!? I know, because he wanted Tennant-through-a-mirror-darkly as the Master. Which is part of why Simm!Master fails.

You hated the TV Movie because of the Doctor-Grace kisses? Fine, then you hate Rose too. And don't tell me it was more "tastefully handled". The Doctor-Grace scenes were more careful and more chaste.

You hate the TV Movie because you think it was poorly written? Fine. Then you hate any scene with Rose's family in it after the one in which she comes back and they thought she was dead, you hate Aliens of London/World War III, you hate Bad Wolf/Parting of the Ways, you hate Runaway Bride, you hate Love and Monsters, you hate Fear Her, you hate Daleks in Manhatten/Evolution of the Daleks (and no, not because of the depiction of America, that was the only pat of that story that *didn't* suck) you hate Sound of Drums/Last of the Time Lords, you hate almost anything in the Donna season except the Agatha Christie story and the Sontaran story.

You hated the TV Movie TARDIS interior? Fine, then you hate the Zygon-vomit new series TARDIS interior too.

And then there are the things that the new series has done wrong that the TV Movie doesn't even try for; The Time War. The Cybus-Men. The insane overuse of the Daleks. The Doctor's over-the-top Emoness, first about the Time War and later about Rose.

I will give the new series credit where it's due. Empty Child/Doctor Dances. The Tenth Doctor. Martha. Blink. Utopia and the almighty Jacobi!Master. The Agatha Christie story. The Sontaran Story. But the bad far outweighs the good. I eagerly await Moffat coming in and fixing things.

I am not here to say you have to like the TV Movie. But everything the TV Movie did wrong, the new series had done wrong and plenty more besides.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Paul McGann - The Fox Film - DID NOT SUCK: discuss:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2009 12:17 am 
Orc
Orc

Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 6:22 am
Posts: 55
I need to watch this now. But where can I find it?

_________________
Fan of the Sixth Doctor - because all the other Doctors... just aren't him!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Paul McGann - The Fox Film - DID NOT SUCK: discuss:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2009 7:10 am 
Orc
Orc
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 5:15 am
Posts: 97
Hmmm. Well, I can't address how it stacks up against the new series, except to say that, as Arcalian pointed out, the first thing I think of is how it REMINDS me of the new series. Mainly because of the fact that it brings in the (sigh) romance angle...

But really, it does seem to kind of bridge the writing styles and just...overall _attitudes_ of the writers, but also just...ideals of HOW to make a successul show in general, what the viewers "want", marketing strategies, etc. between the old show and the new.

Although, something interesting I've noticed, going through the original series chronologically: If you do watch them all in order, you keep running into aspects of the new series _way_ earlier than expected. I forget all the things I found, now (I wasn't writing them down or anything) but I kept finding things that I USED to associate with only the new show, in Classic Who. Now, the new one still does these things far more _frequently_, sure, but...

My main problem with how the TV movie was handled is not that it was "American". I mean, I'M American. From California, same as Grace. (And Peri, who is now my Gravatar, for crissake.) It's that it was, as I like to put it, "Hollywooded Up". Same fate that befell the Hitchhiker's Guide movie, only not quite AS extremely.
Basically, "Hollywooded Up" is when you take something foreign or independent that's _meant_ to be kind of quirky and different...and put in the typical Hollywood blockbuster cliche things such as big explosions and (gag me) LOVE. STORIES. A_hem_. The second the Doctor is in the hands of Hollywood movie directors? He kisses his Companion. The second Arthur Dent is in the hands of Hollywood? His kind of background attraction to Trillian turns into a full-blown sappy Happy Ending. Dear god.

So, not that I hate it because it's _American_, necessarily. I hate when things get...declawed, and made all the same. If made by American _independent_ filmmakers, who also happened to be Whovians, we might've got something more along the lines of the quirkness and..._realness_ of the TV version of Hitchhiker's. Only less comedy, and with glitzier '90s special effects and CGI. I would be all _over_ that, man!

As for the Master...yeah, I would've _loved_ Jacobi as the Master. He's awesome! I've liked him in everything I've seen him in. I get what they were trying for with Simm-Master and the "Dark Mirror" thing, and also why it didn't work. (Couldn't he at least have had a beard, for old times' sake? :P) I do kind of see _why_ they were trying for that, though, 'COS, if you think about it...the very FIRST Master was really rather a dark reflection of the Doctor!
Thing is, though, the Doctor at _that_ time was Three, and if you want slick, smooth _elegance_ in your villian...THAT'S a good one to mirror. David Tennant...notsomuch. Bless him. :P

As for the new episodes Arcalian mentions as being "poorly written"...um...I kind of _like_ a fair few of those...

And dude! I LOVED the movie's TARDIS interior! Steampunk so _works_, for him. Old-fashioned + futuristic + eclectic, not matching = Doctor! :)
Now, me, I still have a soft spot for the original look--I mean, sure, it's retro, but simple and clean. Spacious-feeling. And a circle cannot go out of style. I mean...it's a _circle_. But if we HAD to have an alternate, than I'd much rather Eight's version than the new one. Which just...I dunno. It suffers from that modern sci-fi conceit that EVERYTHING that's meant to look futuristic, has to look..._organic_...
(That, or the way Three had it done up in (only!) "Ambassadors of Death". Victorian wallpaper, overstuffed furniture, big old-timey globe, mahogany bookcases and shelves full of random bits of inventions? :heart: )

It also rather reminds me of "the old control room" Four had for a while (it was dark wood and brass, etc.) so the movie version kinda DOES have some precedence in the classic series, too. (nodnod) Just, bigger and...bigger budget.

And as for Arcalian's paragraph about "the things the new series has done wrong that the TV movie doesn't even try for"..um...
Yeah. I'm gonna have to just flat out agree with that whole bit. Oy. That's...that's pretty much my whole problem with the new series. Time War, Emo-Doctors, and romance.
Also, the Doctor flipping out THAT MUCH over just _her_ makes it kinda feel like...well what were the _other_ Companions, then? Chopped flarn? What about the other ones who _died_, or were wrenched violently from him in creepy ways? What about the other ones he was really close to, such as Jamie, Jo, Sarah Jane, or Romana? What about those that he argued with, but they spent nearly an entire incarnation's worth of adventures by his side? And what about SUSAN, who was his own flesh and blood?

Rose. Gets stronger of a reaction than all of those. Really? You have _got_ to be kidding me.
(Of course, it's just because the new series is more emotional _in general_, but still...Mary Flipping Sue.)

So basically...I guess...

The things that I don't like about the TV movie that the new series does as well, I don't like in _either_. So I am at least consistent. But the jury is still out on the movie as a whole.

...Notorious


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Paul McGann - The Fox Film - DID NOT SUCK: discuss:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2009 3:06 pm 
Goblin
Goblin

Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 2:50 pm
Posts: 28
Well the thing about either the TV Movie or New Who being "Hollywooded Up" is the one and only thing I really can't hold against the new series, or the TVM, or any other reinvention of Who, much as I'd like to. That was inevitable. And that's why the Sontaran two parter is one of the few new who stories I liked, because it felt like old who, only with a decent effects budget. I can't slag on new Who for beeing Hollywood-ified. I can slag on it for being Buffy-fied. If you see what I mean.

Six is love: If you're in the UK, you can get the TV Movie on DVD. If you're in the US, you're out of luck. I have a VERY old VCR dub, which I guard jealously and have to rewind carefully. Last time I saw the TVM on Youtube, it had been dubbed in to German, which was....interesting. You can find various tributes to Eight, though.

Edit: Oh, and I think it's a mistake to view Delgado as merely a dark mirror of Pertwee. In fact, I think that's exactly the mistake RTD made. Delgado!Master was a rival and cotemporary of Pertwee's Doctor; he was more complicated and sophisticated than an evil reflection. Simm wasn't, and that is his failure.

Edit 2: And wasn't Peri's character meant to be originally from Boston?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Paul McGann - The Fox Film - DID NOT SUCK: discuss:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2009 7:36 pm 
Orc
Orc

Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 6:22 am
Posts: 55
I think feeling like Old Who but with better effects + budget is precisely what the show is meant to do, but is prone to lapses caused by eccentric producers' decisions.

Since Stephen Moffat may be having another "overhaul" of the interior again, I think it should be something like the tv movie version, but also a slightly darker and more 'justified' classic white interior. Maybe some sort of grey. I don't know...
I think I was wrong to wish for a modern TARDIS console playset from CO. It really is worse than the Leopard Skin.

I can understand the argument of things being "Hollywooded up" (even though I... actually liked the HHGttG movie...) but I thought the reason that Rose gets a stronger reaction is that it's after the Time War and he either can't or won't go back and visit those people again (especially Romana, obviously) and he's just glad to have anyone with him. Or something. Maybe it is a little odd...

I don't live in the UK or US, I'm in Australia. I get sick of all these "UK only" things. Maybe there's a torrent or something somewhere. *malicious evil grin*

_________________
Fan of the Sixth Doctor - because all the other Doctors... just aren't him!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Paul McGann - The Fox Film - DID NOT SUCK: discuss:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2009 7:41 pm 
Creator
Creator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 1:48 pm
Posts: 2161
Location: Halifax
Arcalian wrote:
And that's why the Sontaran two parter is one of the few new who stories I liked, because it felt like old who, only with a decent effects budget. I can't slag on new Who for beeing Hollywood-ified. I can slag on it for being Buffy-fied. If you see what I mean.


Not a freakin' clue. Could somebody please explain what the difference is between "bigger budget & better effects" and "hollywoodized" or "Americanized"?

To me, the FOX film and New Who are simply that. Extensions of the show with better spfx. You must be seeing something I'm missing.

If you're trying to say that the new series and the FOX film were more action heavy and low on intelligence, then you're wrong. They have both. If you're talking about stupid scenes and dumb dialogue, I can site a WHOLE lot of examples from classic "Who" that make you feel embarrassed for the actors.

_________________
"Goblins are evil too, Dad."
"No, son. Goblins are just... sorta bad."
-Bob & Ben


Top
 Profile WWW YIM  
 
 Post subject: Re: Paul McGann - The Fox Film - DID NOT SUCK: discuss:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2009 8:14 pm 
Goblin
Goblin

Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 2:50 pm
Posts: 28
No Rich, you're right. Any decent special effects budget Who is going to be considerered Hollywood/Americanized. Which is why I can't slag RTD's Who for that. And if RTD deliberately reinforced that impression with Captain Jack.

One of the points I was making was that any decent special effects Who is going to seem Americanized, which is one of the reasons why people hating the TVM but loving RTD's Who drives me crazy.

The Sontaran Stratagem/The Poison Sky only had the special effects update, but otherwise felt like old Who. I can't even say that about other RTD Who stories that use old Who continuity. Not even Utopia or Blink. The Sontaran story had the formula and structure of old Who, which new Who doesn't usually have.

If it still isn't clear for you, ask someone on one of the older Doctor Who forums about Rad vs Trad.

Buffy-ized, on the other hand, is how new Who has deliberately borrowed that style of story structure, the single-season-story-arc structure. Old Who did this twice, with Key to Time and Trial of a Timelord. But New Who does it all the time, each and every season, usually through building a subplot. It's overused and overtired, not just in Who but elsewhere too, and needs to go.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Paul McGann - The Fox Film - DID NOT SUCK: discuss:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:14 pm 
Creator
Creator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 1:48 pm
Posts: 2161
Location: Halifax
See, I was one of those people who grew up with the classic old Star Trek series. I loved it. The movies were great. But when "The Next Generation" came out, I was mortified by the things they changed (and I've done this rant many times, so feel free to jump off this boat anytime)...Simple, basic continuity that were long accepted as Star Trek was brushed away. Deliberately? Ignorantly? Who knows? Basic things like the fact that security and services divisions wore red. Command division wore gold. This is where the whole "redshirt" joke comes from. But now, suddenly, they've swapped colours? What the hell? And no explanation is EVER given. Old aliens are ignored, changed, renamed, dropped... there was a reinvention that happens everytime a new Star Trek is introduced. Ignore the old stuff. Now it's BETTAR!! (hunh...so says you.)
Because of this, when I saw the FOX film, I expected the changes, but was THRILLED and DELIGHTED by how much was not changed. How, if you ignore a few basics, it still more-or-less fits in with the series. (Reading the novel made it even better, since they fixed almost all the mistakes... like when the Master and Lee are looking at the projections of the Doctor, they see all 7 previous Doctors, not JUST McCoy.)

I was really nervous about the new Doctor Who series, since it was so hard on the heels of Star Trek's then-latest and WORST of the reinventions, the travisty known as "Enterprise". I fully expected to be a curmudgeonly hater of all things NewWho (as I became with Star Trek, to Hilary's mild irritation). But, RTD kept it contiguous. He fixed and ignored the errors of the FOX film, yet kept it as part of the history. He made it so that an overly sensative old fan like myself could enjoy it and embrace it as part of the series I grew up with!

So, I loved the FOX film. I love the new series (Even though I get annoyed by Tenant's need to do some kind of slapstick freakout dance almost every episode.... knock it off, Tenant. That's not as funny as you think it is!).

And yes, it's easy to poke holes in the *NEW* stuff. But you can't ignore some of the GAPING CANYONS that riddles 30+ years of Classic Who. Accept it all, or accept none of it.

_________________
"Goblins are evil too, Dad."
"No, son. Goblins are just... sorta bad."
-Bob & Ben


Top
 Profile WWW YIM  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 7
 [ 101 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Chronicles phpBB2 theme by Jakob Persson. Stone textures by Patty Herford.
With special thanks to RuneVillage