New Doctor Who, so far -- short reviews

[serpentstar]

Partly reposted from a comment on ed_fortune 's LJ.

Comments

[greylock]

There are rather promising hints at a possible female incarnation in future.

I am "OH GOD NO" on this argument. Wasn't that justa throwaway joke?

Victory of the Daleks was actually more fun on the second watch. I found it easier to overlook the silliness.

I have big expectations for next week. It's gonna be a schmaltzy Twilight Zone.

[valkyriekaren]

Why are you 'OH GOD NO'? Would you be the same about a black doctor? or a disabled one?

[greylock]

Yes. I would be.

I was also against Mos Def in Hitchhikers.

I'd almost certainly put up with any changes they made, and continue to watch, and I am familiar with all the arguments for, but I am a traditionalist at heart.

I prefer my Doctor white, male and older.

It just is.

You really are a traditionalist

[valkyriekaren]

I prefer my Doctor... unpredictable.

[renniek]

I've liked it more than I expected from the first episoide (loved the scary monster, was disappointed that Matt Smith didn't bring a more different feel to the role - he's improved since, was very disappointed that Amy was a stripogram* - although the character seemed OK, and likewise has improved since). Flesh & Stone had several elements I really loved - River Song and the Bishop both fantastic characters.

*not that I have an issue with characters working in the sex industry - just concern that it was a lame excuse for a typical 'pretty&idiotic&always-needs-saing' famale character, who are far too common across the board in TV & films

[jdurall]

Amy is a kissogram girl, not a stripogram girl... playing in a somewhat different ballpark.

[renniek]

urk - brain fail on typing the right damn words - but I think v similar anyway in terms of why it made me sceptical about the character

[greylock]

Amy was a kissogram, not a stripper.

[captainweasel]

one thing that really bugged me with the end of Vampires - didn't he just leave a lake of 10,000 Juvenile Alien Death Fish alive in Venice? Either they're trapped and eat each other then starve or grow up, escape and eat Venice. Either way, not kind.

[serpentstar]

My assumption (perhaps incorrect) was that given that they didn't have any of the tech down there, they'd only be a significant threat to swimmers, rather than the whole city -- and they would eventually die out, given there were no females.

[captainweasel]

It just sat wrong on me, it's not like the Doctor to just leave them like that. Leaving thousands of lost and hungry children (albeit Alien Fish Carnivore children) to their fate to either starve or die mateless?
And neither of the adults wore any visible life support devices and none were commented on, so it seems the species can survive on land for short times at least.
Either way, it was a big loose end.

[mejoff]

But then RTD would have had him irradiate the water or strangle each one in front of her with his bare hands whilst spouting off about how uhmuyzing the human race is, so it's an improvement at least.

[eremite]

Re bad science in ToA/FaS - I said exactly the same thing somewhere else. That bit really annoyed me. Also, I realise that it was probably there just so that the audience could see what was going on, but there was a lot of ambient light in the Maze of Death thingy, and so the Angels could see each other and, therefore, should have been stoned.

Another niggle... when the Angels got sucked away Dalek-fashion into the Crack, why did they have solid bases like chess pieces? They only turn to stone (only!), they don't become carved-statues-with-frocks so unless they glide (again, Dalek-like) why don't they have feet under their frocks?

I'm really enjoying Matt Smith as the Doc, and the banter makes me smile :D

[valkyriekaren]

Aw, did you miss out on seeing Weeping Angel nadgers?

[eremite]

Never heard feet called "nadgers" before :P

Can't imagine that that would be much fun - always having to shag in pitch dark, lest one's partner's tackle seizes up :(

[mejoff]

They call Nadgers feet all the time in the bible though.

[timgray]

I find it interesting that although I, and probably some others, thought Moffat would come up with a darker and less melodramatic Doctor than Davies (also hinted by the logo change), so far he's gone for almost straight action adventure. Possibly closest to Patrick Troughton on pulp.

Then again, Tennant started off with mostly gleeful running around and got darker later on. So there's plenty of room for development.

And yes, still plenty of silly plot holes if you look for them.

[mejoff]

But then there always were, there has been no single storyline since 1963 which did not have some issues if you go looking for them. I guess it's just nice to have to look :)

[serpentstar]

Yeah -- as I say, I don't *really* expect hard SF from Who. Thing is, I am picky -- perhaps peculiarly picky -- about my SF.

I love hard SF. Give me an Alastair Reynolds or Greg Egan novel, and I am happy.

I like space opera too. Don't worry about the science, let's have some big daft stories, with spaceships exploding. Screw that -- let's have whole worlds exploding. Think Star Wars, or Iain M. Banks, or good Doctor Who (I don't really want MASSIVE plot holes or science holes either, a la RTD).

What I don't like is creators who try to mix the two up -- like Peter Hamilton (attempts hard science, fails miserably, ends up whittering on like an idiot, at great length), or, sadly, it seems, Moffat. I guess I can forgive Moffat more than I could Hamilton. With Moffat, the annoyance is more fleeting, and more readily drowned out by the awesome.

[renniek]

Have you read Red Mars / Green Mars / Blue Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson? I loved it for the hard SF