Jodie Whittaker as Dr Who

martian boy · 28 Oct 2018

61653 HTAFC said:
I'm not going to throw a bible at you, as I imagine that would simply reinforce your mediaeval views! They haven't had to retcon the canon to make a female doctor, so it shouldn't be a problem.

Pick on ONE "Shatterer", you pick on us all!

Why are they mediaeval? So everything now has to be ok for male or female, gender neutral?

Sorry, but there are many fans of this programme who do not want a female Doctor Who.

I hear there is going to be a new series of Charlie’s Angels, the Angels are all going to be men for PC sake.

RailUK Forums

61653 HTAFC · 28 Oct 2018

Skymonster said:
Personally I'm getting a bit fed up with all the behavioural messaging going in the new series. First episode it was about the dangers of getting onto railway tracks and climbing on equipment such as cranes, next it was preaching about how bad guns are, and last week was a pretty overt play on the evils of racism. I appreciate that the main target audience is the [possibly still] impressionable younger generation, but its a bit over the top for my liking an putting me off watching more. One last chance this weekend...

Hold on... every time there's an incident on the real-world railway reported on here, we end up with post after post of "why don't we educate young children about the dangers?" and "don't they show "Robbie" to schoolkids any more?" Perhaps today's kids will be more likely to absorb those messages through the medium of mainstream TV rather than all being sat in the assembly hall in front of a flickering TV set on a trolley?

I do feel that some of the messaging is less subtle than it has been in the past though, which could slightly take away the enjoyment for older viewers.

martin2345uk said:
View attachment 54411

Edit: image shows end credits from episode 1 with William Hartnell as “Dr Who”.

Touché

martin2345uk · 28 Oct 2018

martian boy said:
Why are they mediaeval? So everything now has to be ok for male or female, gender neutral?

Sorry, but there are many fans of this programme who do not want a female Doctor Who.

I hear there is going to be a new series of Charlie’s Angels, the Angels are all going to be men for PC sake.

True but thankfully there are many more fans who are cool with it, so I think the show’s safe for now.

61653 HTAFC · 28 Oct 2018

martian boy said:
Why are they mediaeval? So everything now has to be ok for male or female, gender neutral?

Sorry, but there are many fans of this programme who do not want a female Doctor Who.

I hear there is going to be a new series of Charlie’s Angels, the Angels are all going to be men for PC sake.

The Doctor doesn't "have" to be female but there's no reason that the character can't be, and it just so happens that the current actor playing the role is female. There are bigger things to worry about. I agree that there's an argument to be made about gender switches in the other direction, but much like Dr. Who they would have to fit in with the established canon or be retconned in.

There's no reason we can't have a show called "Alan in Wonderland" or "Buddy the Vampire Slayer" if there's demand for it and someone is prepared to write it. You could pitch either of those to Netflix or Amazon Prime, apparently they'll greenlight pretty much anything...

I'm not familiar enough with the Charlie's Angels universe to know how it would work in that case, mind. As angels are generally portrayed in renaissance art as male infants, at least the name wouldn't need changing!

martin2345uk · 28 Oct 2018

I’d be totally up for Charlie’s Angels with 3 hot guys as the angels, by the way :lol:

AM9 · 28 Oct 2018

Some of the dinosaurs in this thread should write to the editor of the Radio Times and of course, sign off like this:
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/e1cddf5f-3768-470c-9dc5-fecb2e02e9d6

martin2345uk · 29 Oct 2018

Wasn't too keen on last night's episode, it was "only ok" to me, the resolution seemed rushed and she would have happily let that queen spider suffocate to death slowly!

theblackwatch · 29 Oct 2018

DynamicSpirit said:
I have to say I was much more impressed with last night's episode than the previous ones. An amazingly good story, and quite emotional in places.

I'm a little behind (due to being busy with work last week) and only got round to watching the Rosa Parks episode last night. I thought it was great - one of the best I have seen. Quite educational for youngsters (and others) watching it shows how the world has progressed since the 1950s. I do agree with the lack of smoking though (but hadn't noticed it till I read it here!) - we shouldn't be trying to deny that social activities of the past, even if they are frowned upon now, existed.

Tracked · 29 Oct 2018

Skymonster said:
Personally I'm getting a bit fed up with all the behavioural messaging going in the new series. First episode it was about the dangers of getting onto railway tracks and climbing on equipment such as cranes, next it was preaching about how bad guns are, and last week was a pretty overt play on the evils of racism. I appreciate that the main target audience is the [possibly still] impressionable younger generation, but its a bit over the top for my liking an putting me off watching more. One last chance this weekend...

Actually, it looks like you've missed the "always eat your greens" message in the first episode ...

It's been good so far, the only thing that's starting to become a bit of an issue is the threats, so far we've had; a blue man with teeth, sniper bots and sentient bath towels(?), Future Racist Man, and some Big Spiders (I'm not sure if they're the Hungry Horny House spiders the Derbyshire Times was on about last year?). Can they do some more alien aliens soon?

EM2 · 29 Oct 2018

martian boy said:
I hear there is going to be a new series of Charlie’s Angels, the Angels are all going to be men for PC sake.

Why would that be a problem?
Charlie is a common diminutive of Charlotte, and there are plenty of male angels (Gabriel, Michael, Aziraphale in 'Good Omens', even Satan is a fallen angel).

DynamicSpirit · 29 Oct 2018

martin2345uk said:
Wasn't too keen on last night's episode, it was "only ok" to me, the resolution seemed rushed and she would have happily let that queen spider suffocate to death slowly!

Me neither. An idea that was basically a rehash of The Green Death (minus the evil supercomputer). 3 companions not one of whom seems to have a personality. And as for the plot...

(Spoiler in case anyone hasn't watched it yet)

The Doctor decides that it's not fair to give the spiders a quick death by shooting them, and instead they all deserve a natural death that apparently involves them very slowly starving to death in a locked safe room. Yes, that sounds very humane doesn't it! They apparently lure the spiders in with a ghetto blaster (which presumably was just lying around somewhere), because obviously a ghetto blaster will make way more vibrations than - say - any passing lorries. And they all just trust that they did successfully lure every single one of the spiders into the safe room, even though they already know that some of the spiders had already found their way onto the local housing estates. And what about all the waste that's presumably been left in the landfill. Won't that just create more giant spiders?

Sigh. I know it's very hard to create a compelling plot that makes good entertainment that you can't pick minor holes in somewhere, but ... this week makes me wonder.... did Chris Chibnall actually bother to engage his brain at all when writing this script?

Teflon Lettuce · 29 Oct 2018

DynamicSpirit said:
Me neither. An idea that was basically a rehash of The Green Death (minus the evil supercomputer). 3 companions not one of whom seems to have a personality. And as for the plot...

(Spoiler in case anyone hasn't watched it yet)

There was a plot on last night's episode? there was me thinking it only had a "worthy message" to preach... just like every other episode so far in this series...

Butts · 30 Oct 2018

theblackwatch said:
I'm a little behind (due to being busy with work last week) and only got round to watching the Rosa Parks episode last night. I thought it was great - one of the best I have seen. Quite educational for youngsters (and others) watching it shows how the world has progressed since the 1950s. I do agree with the lack of smoking though (but hadn't noticed it till I read it here!) - we shouldn't be trying to deny that social activities of the past, even if they are frowned upon now, existed.

Agree totally in relation to the depiction of smoking in a historical context. To be fair Dr Who is not alone with regard to trying to pretend it never existed to any great extent contrary to the truth as a cursory glance at archive footage would reveal.

jellybaby · 30 Oct 2018

Butts said:
Agree totally in relation to the depiction of smoking in a historical context.

Is an historical context a 'strong editorial justification'? I'd say not as background only. On that basis it would fail the OFCOM code and perhaps similar regulations in other parts of the world it is sold to. https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-a...t-code/section-one-protecting-under-eighteens

It seems likely there will be even less smoking on screen in the future based on evidence like http://ash.org.uk/media-and-news/pr...tv-and-in-films-is-encouraging-child-take-up/

Clip · 30 Oct 2018

Butts said:
With regard to Saturday's episode I thought it was quite brave to tackle a subject regarding the subjugation of non-Caucasians in 1940's/50's America.

However this somewhat progressive story line faltered in one major aspect regarding historical accuracy.

Namely the absence of anyone smoking or any associated paraphernalia depicted within it's confines.

Is it a sad state of affairs when a serious subject is given airtime but the makers feel unable to portray a normal social activity from the era ?

Yes, there would have been people smoking on the bus, in the cafe, in the Pool Hall and on the streets. Martin Luther King was also a chain smoker.

Perhaps this was an America from a parallel Universe ?

Maybe it just got overlooked whilst they were making it?

Complaining about the lack of smoking in a TV show is very weird.

Ambient Sheep · 31 Oct 2018

Tracked said:
...Future Racist Man...

or "Racist Time Fonz" as another forum I frequent have christened him.

Tracked · 31 Oct 2018

Ambient Sheep said:
or "Racist Time Fonz" as another forum I frequent have christened him.

Sunday, Monday, Racist Days,
Tuesday, Wednesday, Racist Days,
...

martian boy · 31 Oct 2018

Jelly baby above, seems like some older films, programmes, will be banned from being shown. Heaven help us. PC zealots should be shot.

jellybaby · 31 Oct 2018

martian boy said:
Jelly baby above, seems like some older films, programmes, will be banned from being shown. Heaven help us. PC zealots should be shot.

Yes, it's very likely things like The Black and White Minstrel Show will not be broadcast again. Attitudes change.

martian boy · 31 Oct 2018

jellybaby said:
Yes, it's very likely things like The Black and White Minstrel Show will not be broadcast again. Attitudes change.

And Alf Garnett
Seriously, wait until the Mumsnet brigade start sounding off, then the fireworks will start.

EM2 · 31 Oct 2018

martian boy said:
And Alf Garnett

'Til Death Us Do Part was remade a couple of years ago, with Simon Day in the role of Alf.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-36979491

The BBC is re-shooting episodes of post-war sitcoms of which no recordings survive, as they are missing from its archives.

The special episodes are being recreated by a new cast using the original scripts in front of a studio audience.

Butts · 1 Nov 2018

EM2 said:
'Til Death Us Do Part was remade a couple of years ago, with Simon Day in the role of Alf.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-36979491

Remember it well, utter garbage, toned down and not a patch on the original - bit like Porridge.

EM2 · 1 Nov 2018

Butts said:
Remember it well, utter garbage, toned down and not a patch on the original - bit like Porridge.

Interesting point of view, seeing that it used the same script

underbank · 1 Nov 2018

Clip said:
Complaining about the lack of smoking in a TV show is very weird.

No, it's not. Program makers are always going on about "realism", so they should make it real in all aspects. You can't pick and choose which "real" bits you want as that makes you a hypocrite.

Clip · 1 Nov 2018

underbank said:
No, it's not. Program makers are always going on about "realism", so they should make it real in all aspects. You can't pick and choose which "real" bits you want as that makes you a hypocrite.

Its science fiction pal

61653 HTAFC · 2 Nov 2018

martian boy said:
And Alf Garnett
Seriously, wait until the Mumsnet brigade start sounding off, then the fireworks will start.

You do realise that audiences weren't intended to sympathise with Alf, right? That the character was a satirical device (though one which was a bit too subtle for then, and apparently still is) lampooning bigotry?

martian boy · 2 Nov 2018

61653 HTAFC said:
You do realise that audiences weren't intended to sympathise with Alf, right? That the character was a satirical device (though one which was a bit too subtle for then, and apparently still is) lampooning bigotry?

I’m well aware of this. In fact Johny Speight stated in an interview that he could not understand how Alf became such a hero. He was created to be a vile person, and he sincerely hoped his children would not grow up to be like Alf. Even Warren Mitchel said the joke was on the people who supported Alf’s views.

The trouble is now, it only takes one person to dislike something, or their little darling ends up in tears because something frightened them (in the vast majority of cases, their little darling should not have been watching), they’re on some internet site and everybody else follow like sheep. One complaint, the vast majority are often denied their enjoyment.

Butts · 30 Jan 2020

Well it was off the air for a year and is now back on and ......

Have people got used to a female Doctor yet ? - Whovians seem to have mixed feelings but mainly negative ones.

Personally I think it is being hindered by having to many assistants which seems to preclude the Doctor developing an affinity with any of them. I would keep Bradley Walsh and get rid of the other two.

The Judoon outing being the most recent transmission was probably the best of a bad bunch.

No Davros ...bah

jellybaby · 30 Jan 2020

My kids (13 and 11) enjoy it and I think they are more the target audience than most of the people here?

gordonthemoron · 30 Jan 2020

I think the current series is better than the previous one, isn't stuck in Sheffield for much of the time

Jodie Whittaker as Dr Who

Member

RailUK Forums

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member