1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Doctor Who: The Doctors Revisited

Discussion in 'Now Playing - TV Show Talk' started by cheesesteak, Jan 28, 2013.

  1. May 31, 2013 #81 of 173
    dianebrat

    dianebrat I refuse to accept your reality TCF Club

    10,116
    73
    Jul 6, 2002
    boston'ish
    You may want to change that out of courtesy, considering this is a series of specials to help introduce new viewers to the old Doctors, you just hit me with a significant spoiler I wasn't expecting.
     
  2. May 31, 2013 #82 of 173
    lambertman

    lambertman To see you, Nice

    3,156
    0
    Dec 20, 2002
    Indianapolis...
    "Vengeance on Varos" will be the 6th Doctor Revisited Story according to doctorwhonews.net.
     
  3. May 31, 2013 #83 of 173
    TonyD79

    TonyD79 Active Member

    7,870
    14
    Jan 4, 2002
    Columbia, MD
    Really? A spoiler from 30 years ago? Especially when they didn't exactly hold it back until it happened on the show itself. They talked about it all night.

    Do you know who shot JR?
     
  4. May 31, 2013 #84 of 173
    cheesesteak

    cheesesteak Meh.

    29,348
    129
    Jul 24, 2003
    15 mins...
    I commented in the other (wrong) Doctor Who thread. I'd link to it but don't know how to link to a specific post.
     
  5. May 31, 2013 #85 of 173
    sieglinde

    sieglinde New Member

    5,375
    0
    Aug 11, 2002
    Sebastopol, CA
    They revealed that both "surprise" plot points in the introductory matter about the Doctor. The next time I heard about the Doctor was the one with the long scarf and then the one with the cricket bat. Either few people wore Doctor Who costumes at the SF cons or the subsequent Doctors weren't distinctive. There were always fan clubs and Doctor Who themed cons. But I never watched Doctor Who until BBCA started the new series.
    I am curious as to why the laser gun effects were so bad when ST:TOS did a better job and it was 15 years earlier. I doubt if the methods of doing those effects were a big secret.
     
  6. May 31, 2013 #86 of 173
    dianebrat

    dianebrat I refuse to accept your reality TCF Club

    10,116
    73
    Jul 6, 2002
    boston'ish
    I wasn't accusatory, but yeah, I think in this instance a courtesy spoiler tag would have been useful, especially considering the new viewers they have from the new series that never saw the old ones, and I'm one of them. I haven't watched the special yet, so I didn't know that it was mentioned heavily in it.
     
  7. May 31, 2013 #87 of 173
    Rob Helmerichs

    Rob Helmerichs I am Groot! TCF Club

    38,367
    154
    Oct 17, 2000
    Minneapolis
    Money. Star Trek was made by a major Hollywood studio; Doctor Who by the BBC (who were so notoriously cheap, Tom Baker reportedly had to leave the show because after 7 years of pay raises that didn't keep up with inflation, he couldn't afford to work there any more).

    So Star Trek may have been cheap by major Hollywood studio standards, but at least it was major Hollywood studio standards and not BBC standards.
     
  8. May 31, 2013 #88 of 173
    cheesesteak

    cheesesteak Meh.

    29,348
    129
    Jul 24, 2003
    15 mins...
    But then we could never have a non-spoiler tagged discussion of any tv show, movie or book because there's always going to be people who haven't seen or read them. The episode is 30 years old. Is there no statute of limitations?
     
  9. May 31, 2013 #89 of 173
    gchance

    gchance 4 8 15 16 23 42

    12,632
    0
    Dec 6, 2002
    Olivehurst, CA
    It's also why outdoor vs. indoor scenes were always so dramatically different, which only changed within the past 10 or 15 years or so. It always bothered me that in all BBC productions, they would use film for outdoors and video for indoors, with such a startling difference in quality. It would have been fine if they had been all video or all film. Monty Python even riffed on it at one point in a sketch, when they went outside and suddenly shouted, "We're on film!"

    Greg
     
  10. May 31, 2013 #90 of 173
    dianebrat

    dianebrat I refuse to accept your reality TCF Club

    10,116
    73
    Jul 6, 2002
    boston'ish
    In general I agree with you, and I don't think it should be a rule, but I do think in this specific instance, a bit of courtesy spoilproofing might have been a nice gesture.
    I'm sure I'm not the only person being introduced to older Who this year.
     
  11. May 31, 2013 #91 of 173
    Rob Helmerichs

    Rob Helmerichs I am Groot! TCF Club

    38,367
    154
    Oct 17, 2000
    Minneapolis
    On the other hand, when they spend much of the first part of the show discussing that very plot point, it's hard to expect ANYBODY not to be spoiled by the time they get to the second part of the show...
     
  12. May 31, 2013 #92 of 173
    Langree

    Langree The Gimp

    17,255
    0
    Apr 29, 2004
    Freezinmyass...
    Sure, but I hate to say it. It's a risk you're taking coming into a thread that discusses specifically classic episodes of a 50 year old show.

    By showing an episode with the death of "main" character BBCA in a sense spoiled you more than the posts here.
     
  13. May 31, 2013 #93 of 173
    dianebrat

    dianebrat I refuse to accept your reality TCF Club

    10,116
    73
    Jul 6, 2002
    boston'ish
    I did give the disclaimer I haven't gotten to that special yet, I'm still on the one before it :D
     
  14. May 31, 2013 #94 of 173
    cal_s7

    cal_s7 Member

    853
    1
    Oct 1, 2003
    Hmm. I watched the first one last night. Or at least the start of it. Are they all like this? About 30 min of talking about the doctor and then 1.5hours of an old ep. In this case the Aztec stuff.

    I am only interested in the first talking bit. I've seen all the shows. I was expecting 2 hours of talk. So, just wondering if they are all a small bit of talking and then a couple of old shows?
     
  15. May 31, 2013 #95 of 173
    Langree

    Langree The Gimp

    17,255
    0
    Apr 29, 2004
    Freezinmyass...
    Yes, each show features an old episode of the Doctor being discussed.
     
  16. May 31, 2013 #96 of 173
    cal_s7

    cal_s7 Member

    853
    1
    Oct 1, 2003
    Thanks.
     
  17. May 31, 2013 #97 of 173
    TonyD79

    TonyD79 Active Member

    7,870
    14
    Jan 4, 2002
    Columbia, MD
    Yeah. The discussion length varies based on the length of the episode they show. All the episodes they have shown so far are readily available on Netflix, amazon prime, etc. So even if you hadn't seen them, you don't have to have a three hour program in your dvr to watch them.
     
  18. May 31, 2013 #98 of 173
    mattack

    mattack Active Member

    20,734
    4
    Apr 9, 2001
    sunnyvale
    Wait, which doctor exactly were you referring to? TOS premiered in 1966. Oh, I guess you're right about 15 years, if you're talking about Davison.

    As others have said, money. As much as people complain about Star Trek's effects nowadays, and (at least based on books I've read about it), those on the show complained about them, they were pretty darn high tech for the time.
     
  19. May 31, 2013 #99 of 173
    mattack

    mattack Active Member

    20,734
    4
    Apr 9, 2001
    sunnyvale
    BTW, I happened to see these listed on BBC America.. and at least last week, they were available On Demand.
     
  20. Jun 1, 2013 #100 of 173
    sieglinde

    sieglinde New Member

    5,375
    0
    Aug 11, 2002
    Sebastopol, CA
    Yeah 1966 and I was comparing it ti the effects I saw on the episode shown with the Fifth Doctor. The other episodes did it the smart way by not using very many special effects. Inassume that the newer 2005 and newer series have bigger budgets or CGI makes things cheaper.
     

Share This Page