Spoilers, dear reader. Do not proceed until you have perused the latest >chapter in the Doctor Who canon. You have been warned.
“This is so Bridgerton”
Well. If that doesn’t tell you that RTD needs to let more writers into his >sandbox more often, nothing will. That was perfectly pitched, excellently >paced, beautifully written modern Who - comedic, horrific, romantic and >offbeat. It’s exactly what I was hoping for from the Gatwa era, and what I >hadn’t seen until now.
NOW, he’s the Doctor.
“Bad Guy”
There’s more than a hint of “greatest hits remix” about this story, though
- which is a slight pity. If this had felt wholly original it would be a >clear 10. It still knocks the rest of the series so far into a lower
league.
Captain Jack Harkness MK II - oops, sorry, I mean, hello, Rogue. Or is he >Madam Pompadour MK II - the Doctor’s ill-fated love interest caught between >costume drama history and science fiction?
Shape shifting blood lusting aliens - the Chuldur - or The Family of Blood
MK II?
“Can’t Get You Out of My Head”
As a sixty-something heterosexual brought up in the seventies, I have to
say that the short-lived romance between Rogue and the Doctor was - >beautifully and tastefully done. Great stuff. And I wouldn’t mind seeing >Jonathan Groff again. The on screen chemistry between him and Gatwa was >palpable.
“Poker Face”
Gotta get me some of that psychic jewellery. Much more discreet than Joe >90’s bottle-glass specs! Fun twist, just when I thought we might also be >revisiting “Face the Raven”.
Overall, 9/10 - but wait.
Who did we see in that scan? The 14 other numbered Doctors, War and the >Fugitive … and one more. Richard E Grant, the Shalka Doctor. So … is he >meant to be a second War Doctor? Are unbound Doctors leaking in from other >dimensions in the jigsaw puzzle the Toymaker has made of the Doctor’s >lives? Or if I rewatch Shalka, could there be a case for him coming before >Hartnell? Intriguing.
I would have really loved one more - but as David Warner is no longer with >us, and he was only ever on Big Finish audio, I guess I can live with it.
His Benny stories as the irascible, pragmatic “other Third Doctor” are >sublime.
(The rest of the unbound Doctors have been one-offs - two at a push - so
less prominent.)
And right there at the end of the titles - a memorial note for William >Russell. In loving memory. So pleased he got to come back, one last time, a >couple of years ago.
OK. You win, dammit, RTD. 10/10. First episode of the season worth a
rewatch, in my opinion.
--
“Most of the Universe is knackered, babes.” - The Doctor
The Doctor wrote:
Can you not m ake one posts and crosst post it accordingly?
What a waste of bandwitdh!
What a waste of an education!
Can you not m ake one posts and crosst post it accordingly?
What a waste of bandwitdh!
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Can you not m ake one posts and crosst post it accordingly?
What a waste of bandwitdh!
What a waste of an education!
Bandwidth. For a couple of thousand text characters? In 2024? The mind >boggles. In the chump change of Internet bandwidth these days, UseNet text >traffic doesn’t amount to more than a wooden penny.
As to Dave’s question about cross posting, I don’t like cross posting. And >I was hoping the idiot wouldn’t feel the need to respond to each of my >near-identical posts in three newsgroups, each of which has a differing >readership. But I guess he probably did.
--
“Most of the Universe is knackered, babes.” - The Doctor
The Doctor wrote:
Can you not m ake one posts and crosst post it accordingly?
What a waste of bandwitdh!
What a waste of an education!
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Can you not m ake one posts and crosst post it accordingly?
What a waste of bandwitdh!
What a waste of an education!
Bandwidth. For a couple of thousand text characters? In 2024?
The mind boggles. In the chump change of Internet bandwidth
these days, UseNet text traffic doesn’t amount to more than a
wooden penny.
As to Dave’s question about cross posting, I don’t like cross
posting. And I was hoping the idiot wouldn’t feel the need to
respond to each of my near-identical posts in three
newsgroups, each of which has a differing readership. But I
guess he probably did.
The Last Doctor wrote:
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Can you not m ake one posts and crosst post it accordingly?
What a waste of bandwitdh!
What a waste of an education!
Bandwidth. For a couple of thousand text characters? In 2024?
The mind boggles. In the chump change of Internet bandwidth
these days, UseNet text traffic doesn’t amount to more than a
wooden penny.
Dave lives in the past. Because bandwidth might have been an
issue for text newsgroups in the 1990's, he thinks it's the same
today.
As to Dave’s question about cross posting, I don’t like cross
posting. And I was hoping the idiot wouldn’t feel the need to
respond to each of my near-identical posts in three
newsgroups, each of which has a differing readership. But I
guess he probably did.
Dave thinks cross-posting to six groups is the way to go... he's
been on Usenet since 1991 and has learned nothing. Which kind of
sums him up. Which is why he resides is so many people's
killfiles.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 465 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 46:47:48 |
Calls: | 9,401 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 13,572 |
Messages: | 6,099,293 |