FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Profile Log in to check your private messages
The Leisure Hive Forum Index  Log in  Register
Doctor Who is now immortal, reveals the BBC
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    The Leisure Hive Forum Index -> The Current Era
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Snodgrass



Joined: 18 Apr 2010
Posts: 191

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote



And so, the Great Leisure Hive Civil War began, as Comrade Professor was attempting to establish the LSSH([b]Livid Smash RTD-Sycophants House) in an attempt to start all-out war against the Third Reich of Gormless Bastards. Comrade B3 along with other notable Comrades of the Leisure Hive, opposed this, saying it would be better to carry on, but Comrade Professor was having none of it...in the ensuing chaos, Comrade B3 was labeled an "Enemy of the Hive" and exiled, several other Comrades of the Leisure Hive were banished also to Gormless Bastards and The Anarchist Zone, Comrade Rani was finished off by an icepick with the words" ENEMY AND CLOWN OF THE HIVE" inscribed on i and the LSSH was estblished, with Comrade Professor as it's Supreme Leader, and Comrade Mike and Comrade Robfilth as his deputies.


Last edited by Snodgrass on Fri Oct 15, 2010 7:51 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
Tash



Joined: 03 Jul 2010
Posts: 893
Location: Atlantis

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 7:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

xM002x wrote:
The Leisure Hive has The Doctor getting decapitated on camera! Laughing


Laughing Laughing

But in all seriousness, the idea of Doctor Who as a kiddies programme been pretty much thoroughly debunked, it was always a family show from the outset and often featured quite adult issues, such as rape and drug smuggling.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
RobFilth



Joined: 08 May 2007
Posts: 9013
Location: Rallying against Rani's Repetitive Rhubarb and Rubbish.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 7:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

renegade wrote:
Rob, you need to face facts.

Fact 1. Holmes and Hinchcliffe said the extra faces in Morbius were of the Doctor. I quoted from them before in this thread, they were very clear on the point. That's a fact.

Fact 2. In the 3 Doctors there were, as the name implies, 3 Doctors, of whom Hartnell was the earliest. If it had been made ten years later with Pertwee, Tom Baker and Davison then Pertwee would have been the earliest. Not FIRST, EARLIEST. So images of previous Doctors on Morbius does NOT contradict 3 Doctors. That's a fact.

You can deny them all you like, but you're just making yourself look like some kind of fanatic who can't face facts.

1. No, the fact is Holmes/Hinchliffe were being mischievious to those who had not earlier watched "The Three Doctors"

2. Nonsense. In "The War Games" at his trial the Time Lords state that the Doctor had changed his appearance ONCE before, not half a dozen times. Dress it up anyway you like, Hartnell was the earliest incarnation and the faces on the screen during the mind-wrestling contest were that of Morbius, and that was why the Doctor won the game because he was bluffing and making Morbius think that he was winning "Back, back!" when really he was depleting Morbius back through his own earlier incarnations.
Hence why Morbius' goldfish bowl suddenly sparks and his brain got a bit smoky and The Doctor won the contest.

There's nothing to stop you maybe pretending that they were past incarnations of The Doctors in a piece of fanfic however. Very Happy

In "The Three Doctors" The Time Lord president does not ask to see the earliest of the last 3 Doctors, he simply says "Show me the earliest one" and who pops up on the screen? Why, surprise surprise, its William fucking Hartnell and not Phillip Hinchcliffe!
_________________


Rallying against Rani's Repetitive Rhubarb and Rubbish.


Last edited by RobFilth on Fri Oct 15, 2010 8:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
RobFilth



Joined: 08 May 2007
Posts: 9013
Location: Rallying against Rani's Repetitive Rhubarb and Rubbish.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 8:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tash wrote:
xM002x wrote:
It was never a children's show though, really. There's fucking rape in it! I don't know what sort of television you're normally accustomed to, but I would be surprised if Bodger and Badger has an episode where Bodger ambushes Badger and rapes him. The fact that in The Time Meddler this was all implied and not actually stated, simply meant that children would be watching; it wasn't MADE FOR CHILDREN.!


Don't forget the scene in The Keys of Marinus when Vasor sends Ian off into the woods to be eaten by wolves so he can keep Barbara as his sex slave.

Don't forget Professor Solon in "The Brain Of Morbious" also contemplates leaving the blinded Sarah Jane Smith as being the trophy plaything of his assistant Condo too, and I would have thought that "hide the sausage" would have been one of the games for him to play with her on the agenda too.
_________________


Rallying against Rani's Repetitive Rhubarb and Rubbish.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
Professor



Joined: 15 Apr 2009
Posts: 1948

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Greywoolfe wrote:

Is this the 'royal' we? It's no more controversial that when JNT and Tom Baker courted a bit of controversy by hinting that the next Doctor might be female. I recall Tom saying in an interview "I'd like to take the opportunity to congratulate the lucky person who becomes the next Doctor, whoever he or she may be." and the press had a field day. if there were an internet back then, the levels of apoplexy would have been stratospheric. The press said it, it must be gospel- after all, the press don't lie. Oh? Since when? Remember Piers Morgan fabricating stories about our soldiers at Abu Grahib? Stories can be and often are, made up or at least hyped, so any juicy bit of controversy will be pounced on and lapped up, and RTD knows this full well. NONE of us have seen this episode yet (I won't, as I'm not a fan of the SJA, so no loss to me) so none of us knows the actual line, or the context in which it is said. Therefore, it's utterly futile gwetting all bent out of shape about bugger all, until it happens. Who knows- this line might have been an out-take that was deliberately put in to the preview screening for just such a reaction? It's not the first time that RTD has led us up the garden path.


There's a difference between Tom having a joke and it being picked up by fanzines and RTD putting out false stories to the press purely for column inches with his name in them. Either it is false in which case it's all a publicity stunt, not for Doctor Who, but for RTD. His name gets mentioned more times in the article than Matt Smith and somehow he is attributed as the creator of the character of Sarah Jane. In which case it is reprehensible behaviour proving my point that he is a monomaniac. Or it is true, proving my point that he is a monomaniac and a complete arse.

Quote:

It's often been mentioned here that Who fans should never have been given the chance to write Who stories, and it's often cited that RTD is a case in point- yet on the thread next door, everyone seems to be tripping over each other to start their own canon of the series, with their own continuity. Why is it OK for some fans to write Who stories and others not? Have any of you taken a step back and looked at how hysterical and frankly ridiculous you're all getting?


Not sure that I've stated this, (although it's possible I may have). But it misses the point. Dicks, Whitaker, Holmes, Nation et al were professional writers. Whether we like it or not, from the NA's onwards, fans took over, and as Mad Larry has stated in his blog, everything became extremely self referential, following on from the JNT years.

But as I say, you're missing the point. the continuity isn't really the issue. The continuity is the last straw in five years of shit shit writing. We all got really optimistic when RTD finally went, and we all love Matt Smith,, but then RTD turns up yet again and gives us yet another piece of shit writing, that retcons a major plank of continuity without a by or leave. Retcons work if they are sold to us. The War Games sold us. Genesis of the Daleks sold us. Deadly Assassin sold us. Even the TVM sold us (Eventually). They sold us because the quality was bloody good, the retcons, if not subtle, at least compatible with what went before with a bit of viewer imagination.

Death of the Doctor has foam fucking vultures in it that look more fake than Rod Hull's arm. The retcon is thrown away without any consideration of the past. The clips we've seen have unbelievably shit acting from both Katy and Liz. This is not selling us the goddamn story, let alone the retcon. The quality is just utter pants. I direct script to stage performances every now and again that we rehearse and perform in 2 hours flat, script in hand, that are of better quality than most of RTD's Who. In fact much better quality even if I do say so myself.


Quote:

No, the hive has NOT 'collectively' done anything of the sort. JPF doesn't appear to reject post-2005 Who, neither does Rani, and neither do I. That's hardly what I would label as 'collective'. You can 'collectively' include me out, if this is the way things are to be here. You can say what you like about me, Rani or JPF as well (You seem to relish it with regards to Rani), but you don't know me from Adam, and anything you choose to say to me or level at me is utterly redundant, as if you have the right to judge me for my opinions in the first place.


Fair enough, see my post above, like I said to B3 and CV, wrong choice of words. Majority opinion perhaps, judging from the "next door thread". I'm happy to put up a poll so we can get quantitative data.

Quote:

This would be the non-existent video tape that was periodically wiped for economy reasons, and led to so many lost episodes? Right. Whether Terry had his own video archive or not, he'd have to be a bloody fool to not keep copies of his own scripts to refer back to- or had that thought not occurred?


I'm not talking about the Master Tapes, I'm talking about VHS, there was no home recording (Except through pointing a film camera at a tv) while Nation was writing for TV. Nevertheless, of course Nation had his own scripts. He turned in the same bloody one each time. But you have to remember that at the time, Who was only expected to run for a few years at most. Continuity was variable at best, there were no repeat viewings to refresh the audience's memories and it most certainly would not have figured high on Nation's list of important script elements. His continuity errors are therefore explainable and forgivable.

RTD's in the modern era, are not. I have a friend who works on a soap. Their job is to go through every episode and list the incidents that happen to every character for the sake of continuity, so if a writer wants to refer to a character's past, it's all there for them. For a Soap, this is very complicated. For Doctor Who, with three or four main characters, it is not The fact that RTD can't do this within the space of five episodes, all of which he himself wrote, and having overseen the whole production for five years, shows that he really doesn't care about continuity. Which is fair enough. No one is asking him to, but it makes for a nonsensical tv show where the characteristics of the main characters change from week to week, let alone series to series.

We may have said that fans should not write for Who, but what we have more often said is that RTD needed a good script editor more than anything else in the world.

Having said all that, maybe fans shouldn't write for Doctor Who, but seeing as RTD and Moffatt and Briggsy and Gary Russell and Paul Cornell and all the others do, what's the problem in us doing it too, unofficially? If the current qualifications for writing for the show are that you are a fan, then we are all qualified, and while none of us may claim to be genius writers, I'm pretty damn certain that we can rise above the level of a Chibnall script, and indeed an RTD script.


Quote:

There wasn't that much continuity in the classic series, either, hence the theories about Season 6B, UNIT dating and the like. When JNT decided to use Ian Levine as continuity advisor, the series began to disappear up it's own fundament, and critics and new fans alike were left baffled by all the obscure continuity references, and promising stories like Attack Of The Cybermen became continuity fanwank-fests. If anything, Grade probably did the series a favour by resting it. What sticks in your craw, I think, is that a series that once had 'niche' or 'marginal' appeal has now gone mainstream, and what was once laughed at by many TV watchers is now the most popular show out there. You seem to be 'disenfranchised,' somehow. (DYSWIDT?)


And the continuity fanwank ended when Saward left. Part of Ccartmel's Masterplan was to restore mystery to the Doctor by rising above the continuity (though not ignoring or changing it) and doing new things. That idea may have got bogged down in the NA's but seasons 25 and 26 have some of the most inventive and wonderful ideas since season 1,2 and 3. Look at Fenric, Ghost Light, Greatest Show, Survival. Grade canceled Who at precisely the wrong time. The show had renewed itself and was on the up. Despite being pushed into suicide slots by Grade, the audience share was once again rising.

Your assumption that we hate NuWho because it is popular is so derisory as to be laughable. Doctor Who was at it's most popular during the seventies with Pertwee and Baker. I wasn't around then, but others on here were. I grew up with McCoy when society regarded Who as a joke. All I ever wanted to do was be able to talk about Doctor Who. But to do so would get you laughed at. It would have been wonderful if the show hadn't become regarded outside fandom as a joke.

Nowadays NuWho is massive. Great, wonderful. When I'm teaching acting I have kids acting out Doctor Who scenarios. It's great to see. It's just really unfortunate that the quality of the show has become utter shit. CGI means laziness, whereas with model work, designers had to be inventive. RTD was not a bad writer, but he became one, by becoming too self important, by being surrounded by Yes Men, by coming to think that he was Doctor Who. Kids of today are weaned on Star Wars. Not the original Star Wars, but the prequels. On Avatar, on effects driven movies. They think that the bigger the effect, the better. They've lost all concept of characterisation, of story telling, of drama. And again, in the acting classes I run, it's those kids acting out Doctor Who who are worst affected.

So your assumption is plain wrong. I don't want Who to be just for me or for my clique. I just want Who not to be embarrassing. I want to watch it and be proud of it. I can find good things to say about Twin Dilemma, Time and the Rani. I can be proud of being a fan of them even if superficially they struggle in the acting and effects department. But there is no way on earth I could ever watch the Slitheen episodes, Love and Monsters, Journey's end, End of Time and be proud of such episodes. They are embarrassing in their complete and utter narrative failure. All drama begins with the writing. Actors and effects can make Shakespeare wonderful or dire, but it is Shakespeare that makes Shakespeare. Likewise, RTD makes NuWho and unfortunately RTD is nowhere near being up to the job. He's simply deficient in all the writing abilities that made Bob Holmes, Terrance Dicks or David Whitaker great writers. Like I say. Moffatt isn't perfect, but he's a million times better than RTD (Shame he keeps handing out writing duties to Chibnall and Curtis). It's the return of RTD and the shitness he embodies that is the straw breaking the camels back.

Quote:

If RTD is laughing at anyone, I rather suspect it's yourself and others like you, and the pitiable thing is that you're so focussed on your ire and bitterness that you don't even realise that you are the butt of his jokes. When all's said and done, Doctor Who was originally meant to be a children's show, which then grew into a family entertainment phenomenon. I loved it as a kid, and during Saturday evenings, I get to be that same kid again- and as a certain immortal ( ;) ) character once said, "What's the point of being a grown-up if you can't be childish once in a while?" I'd much rather be a child at heart and enjoy a bit of entertaining telly than be childish and precious about something I had no hand in creating, to the point where I get bitter and angry toward other people who still enjoy it.


And? I don't care who RTD is laughing at. I consider him so intellectually and artistically insignificant and so objectionable and offensive in what he says and does in his own self promotion, that I wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire. he can laugh his arse off at me, it makes no difference to my idea of Doctor Who and my own personal continuity. Personally I doubt whether the Hive is even on RTD's radar.

You perhaps need to do some research into the fans RTD does hold in contempt, it might surprise you. He's criticised the fawning fans on GB (Or was it OG?) he's called the mainstream fans extremely unpleasant things, (Look back through the forum history). He wrote Love and Monsters for heaven's sake.

Your last point, about us being bitter and angry against those who don't enjoy NuWho is arse about tit. We're not on this forum because we hate NuWho, we're here because our entirely rational and sensible views, to which we have a perfect right, we're modded into oblivion on GB. Ok, with no modding here sometimes we go a little overboard, but it was the hostility of NuWho fans who got bitter and angry at us, the twats like Blum, who insist that a failure to like NuWho is because we are lesser people who cannot see RTD's mastery of the written word, that created the Hive, not the other way round. And in some way, you are reinforcing this, again, by saying that the fault is within us, rather than just allowing us to dislike a tv show.

That's all we're doing. Disliking a TV show. We're even on a forum away from mainstream fandom so that we don't upset mainstream fans too much (ok, a bit of trolling, just a bit). And you are accusing us of being bitter and angry towards other fans. We are nothing of the sort. We are bitter and angry towards RTD, and towards fools like Blum who ride roughshod over everyone else's views and call them deluded, but apart from that we're very nice people really Smile
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
Snodgrass



Joined: 18 Apr 2010
Posts: 191

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 8:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Professor, that reply was so epic, I think I'll support your idea for a special continuity. Very Happy

Long live the Hive!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
Moderator General



Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 1149
Location: City of the Damned

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 9:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was miles away from civilization and without internet access (well, Wales) when I read that Guardian article so I missed the opportunity to vent on here. Mrs MG just tells me not to take it all so seriously (mind you, she's never got over Miss Shaw being dumped in favour of Jo Grant).

I think the majority of us had accepted that the 13 regen limit was on its way out and that Fathead would come up with an utterly shit explanation, but I think he played a blinder in simply offering no explanation and pretending there never was a 13 regen limit. Did even we, his sternest critics, think he was that shit?

So this effectively pulls the rug from under Deadly Assassin, Keeper of Traken, Five Doctors and Trial of a Time Lord (if you believe the Time Lords were genuine in offering the Master a new regen cycle) since a basic premise of those stories was the 13 regen limit?

It also belittles the War Games since forcing the Doctor to regenerate was surely part of the punishment.

Have these stories been wiped from continuity or do they just sit there not really making sense any more in the new continuity?

Or are we supposed to wait for someone to come along and contrive some fanwank explanation to reconcile the perfectly good old version with the entirely daft new version?

The one thing you have to give Fathead credit for is that, when you think he's bottomed out, he always manages to confound you.

I do hope that, one day, classic Who will return and Fathead's skidmarks will be wiped from history with the contempt they deserve.


Quote:
I was at the screening and the actual dialogue goes something like this (very much paraphrased):

Clyde: So, can you like, change colour?

The Doctor: Yes, of course.

Clyde: How many times can you change?

The Doctor: 507


If that quote is anywhere near accurate, I suppose it's possible he may not regenerate 507 times but might simply change colour 507 times, strobing away like one of those Maplin disco lights the Sontarans used to light their hidden base in The Sontaran Stratagem. That seems like an utterly ludicrous suggestion that no-one in their right mind could take seriously so do you think it'll be in the Xmas special or the mid-season cliffhanger?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
renegade



Joined: 08 Jan 2010
Posts: 670

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 11:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cornelia wrote:
renegade wrote:


Fact 1. Holmes and Hinchcliffe said the extra faces in Morbius were of the Doctor. I quoted from them before in this thread, they were very clear on the point. That's a fact.



Nonetheless,this does raise the question of why Peter Davison didn't die at the end of Caves of Androzani if he was on his thirteenth life. There was nothing to indicate that the Time Lords had decided to give him a new regeneration cycle, so how could he have regenerated?


Because in Classic Who continuity was what little bits the people making a story could remember. Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
RobFilth



Joined: 08 May 2007
Posts: 9013
Location: Rallying against Rani's Repetitive Rhubarb and Rubbish.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 11:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

renegade wrote:
Cornelia wrote:
renegade wrote:


Fact 1. Holmes and Hinchcliffe said the extra faces in Morbius were of the Doctor. I quoted from them before in this thread, they were very clear on the point. That's a fact.



Nonetheless,this does raise the question of why Peter Davison didn't die at the end of Caves of Androzani if he was on his thirteenth life. There was nothing to indicate that the Time Lords had decided to give him a new regeneration cycle, so how could he have regenerated?


Because in Classic Who continuity was what little bits the people making a story could remember. Very Happy

Classic Who was still more consistent in its continuity in 26 years and many.many change overs of producer/script editor and scores of writers than Fathead has managed in 5 years and helping himself to a lions share of the scripts.

Who wants to watch a boring fucking sterile immortal lecture cybermen about the preciousness of life and telling his companions to live life for the moment when he's an outright fucking hypocrite for whom there is no life or death consequences?
_________________


Rallying against Rani's Repetitive Rhubarb and Rubbish.


Last edited by RobFilth on Fri Oct 15, 2010 11:12 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
renegade



Joined: 08 Jan 2010
Posts: 670

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 11:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RobFilth wrote:
renegade wrote:
Rob, you need to face facts.

Fact 1. Holmes and Hinchcliffe said the extra faces in Morbius were of the Doctor. I quoted from them before in this thread, they were very clear on the point. That's a fact.

Fact 2. In the 3 Doctors there were, as the name implies, 3 Doctors, of whom Hartnell was the earliest. If it had been made ten years later with Pertwee, Tom Baker and Davison then Pertwee would have been the earliest. Not FIRST, EARLIEST. So images of previous Doctors on Morbius does NOT contradict 3 Doctors. That's a fact.

You can deny them all you like, but you're just making yourself look like some kind of fanatic who can't face facts.

1. No, the fact is Holmes/Hinchliffe were being mischievious to those who had not earlier watched "The Three Doctors"

2. Nonsense. In "The War Games" at his trial the Time Lords state that the Doctor had changed his appearance ONCE before, not half a dozen times. Dress it up anyway you like, Hartnell was the earliest incarnation and the faces on the screen during the mind-wrestling contest were that of Morbius, and that was why the Doctor won the game because he was bluffing and making Morbius think that he was winning "Back, back!" when really he was depleting Morbius back through his own earlier incarnations.
Hence why Morbius' goldfish bowl suddenly sparks and his brain got a bit smoky and The Doctor won the contest.

There's nothing to stop you maybe pretending that they were past incarnations of The Doctors in a piece of fanfic however. Very Happy

In "The Three Doctors" The Time Lord president does not ask to see the earliest of the last 3 Doctors, he simply says "Show me the earliest one" and who pops up on the screen? Why, surprise surprise, its William fucking Hartnell and not Phillip Hinchcliffe!


OK, so can you post a link to somewhere quoting Hinchcliffe and Holmes saying they were being mischievious? Because I provided a link to quotes from them, including how they ended up with the pictures for the 8 previous Doctors. A link where they are quoted as saying their intention was for there to have beed Doctors before Hartnell.

Some evidence please, other than what you want it to be.

You bring up Wargames. The Doctor is sentanced to Exile, not to Exile and having one of his 13 lives used up. Big difference.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
RobFilth



Joined: 08 May 2007
Posts: 9013
Location: Rallying against Rani's Repetitive Rhubarb and Rubbish.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 11:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

renegade wrote:
RobFilth wrote:
renegade wrote:
Rob, you need to face facts.

Fact 1. Holmes and Hinchcliffe said the extra faces in Morbius were of the Doctor. I quoted from them before in this thread, they were very clear on the point. That's a fact.

Fact 2. In the 3 Doctors there were, as the name implies, 3 Doctors, of whom Hartnell was the earliest. If it had been made ten years later with Pertwee, Tom Baker and Davison then Pertwee would have been the earliest. Not FIRST, EARLIEST. So images of previous Doctors on Morbius does NOT contradict 3 Doctors. That's a fact.

You can deny them all you like, but you're just making yourself look like some kind of fanatic who can't face facts.

1. No, the fact is Holmes/Hinchliffe were being mischievious to those who had not earlier watched "The Three Doctors"

2. Nonsense. In "The War Games" at his trial the Time Lords state that the Doctor had changed his appearance ONCE before, not half a dozen times. Dress it up anyway you like, Hartnell was the earliest incarnation and the faces on the screen during the mind-wrestling contest were that of Morbius, and that was why the Doctor won the game because he was bluffing and making Morbius think that he was winning "Back, back!" when really he was depleting Morbius back through his own earlier incarnations.
Hence why Morbius' goldfish bowl suddenly sparks and his brain got a bit smoky and The Doctor won the contest.

There's nothing to stop you maybe pretending that they were past incarnations of The Doctors in a piece of fanfic however. Very Happy

In "The Three Doctors" The Time Lord president does not ask to see the earliest of the last 3 Doctors, he simply says "Show me the earliest one" and who pops up on the screen? Why, surprise surprise, its William fucking Hartnell and not Phillip Hinchcliffe!


OK, so can you post a link to somewhere quoting Hinchcliffe and Holmes saying they were being mischievious? Because I provided a link to quotes from them, including how they ended up with the pictures for the 8 previous Doctors. A link where they are quoted as saying their intention was for there to have beed Doctors before Hartnell.

Of course they were being mischievious, they were teasing the audience who were not aware that Hartnell had already been named as "The earliest one" by the Time Lords as to the possibility that there may have been more. That was their intention.

Along with the 13-life limit which Holmes later devised because Hinchcliffe was aware most kids were pulling their noses up at the jepardy of the cliffhangers after seeing Jon Pertwees regeneration and saying "Ah phooey- he won't die, he'll just change again!"

Holmes/Hinchcliffe were addressing a problem in the format of the series which Fathead T Davies has just cack-handedly re-introduced again, in that the lead character has no life or death threatening consequences for the actions he participates in for himself and comes across as one big fucking hypocrite when lecturing others about the preciousness or fragility of life.

renegade wrote:
You bring up Wargames. The Doctor is sentanced to Exile, not to Exile and having one of his 13 lives used up. Big difference.

The Time Lords say to him "You have changed your face ONCE before, it will change again and that is part of your punishment"

It was established as far back as "The War Games" that there was only one incarnation before Troughton.

It is commonly accepted that the change over from Troughton to Pertwee WAS one of his lives expended, otherwise it wouldn't be much of a punishment would it?
_________________


Rallying against Rani's Repetitive Rhubarb and Rubbish.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
Tash



Joined: 03 Jul 2010
Posts: 893
Location: Atlantis

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 11:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The phrase was actually "Your appearance has changed before, it will change again", leaving how many regenerations the Doctor had gone through ambiguous, it could have been one, it could have been half a dozen. The Second Doctor was effectively executed by the Time Lords, and if Time Lords had unlimited regenerations the punishment wouldn't mean anything.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
RobFilth



Joined: 08 May 2007
Posts: 9013
Location: Rallying against Rani's Repetitive Rhubarb and Rubbish.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 11:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tash wrote:
The phrase was actually "Your appearance has changed before, it will change again", leaving how many regenerations the Doctor had gone through ambiguous, it could have been one, it could have been half a dozen. The Second Doctor was effectively executed by the Time Lords, and if Time Lords had unlimited regenerations the punishment wouldn't mean anything.

True, they still name Hartnell as being "The earliest one" in "The Three Doctors" however.

Perhaps these mysterious incarnations of Hinchcliffe/Holmes/Dicks etc which Renegade favours all took place between Troughton and Pertwee whilst he was exiled on earth and Pertwee had just regenerated from Hinchcliffe when he first see him fall out of the TARDIS in "Spearhead"??

Seems strange that the Time Lords didn't enlist any of their help in defeating Omega though doesn't it?

Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy
_________________


Rallying against Rani's Repetitive Rhubarb and Rubbish.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
Impossible Case



Joined: 02 Jul 2010
Posts: 44
Location: Wichita Falls, TX

PostPosted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 3:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

renegade wrote:
In "The Three Doctors" The Time Lord president does not ask to see the earliest of the last 3 Doctors, he simply says "Show me the earliest one" and who pops up on the screen? Why, surprise surprise, its William fucking Hartnell and not Phillip Hinchcliffe!


At one point I believe the Time Lord President refers to Patrick Troughton as "The Second Doctor" during the course of the story. Of course it's been a while since I last watched it, so someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Author Message
Mistress Rani



Joined: 11 May 2007
Posts: 8621
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 9:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RobFilth wrote:
Mistress Rani wrote:
And there is no evidence he is immortal. The line in question allegedly says he can keep regenerating. Doesn't say he can't be killed. It's your stupidity and that of the journalist that has lead to such nonsense claims and all this clown toss you are coming out with.

Sorry Rani, protest all you like but it IS official. The evidence is in the FACTS.

The BBC SAY he IS immortal and if you don't believe that then suggest you take out a writ on the Guardian newspaper, you fool.

You have to be the biggest clown to have clowned their way out of Clownsbury on the back of a clown-car.
If the BBC have said this then my challenge to you, a simple, 'umble clown is this. Show me exactly where the BBC have stated this nd who at the BBC has done so.
_________________
"I'll be surprised if there's as much as 3 million of the audience left by the time Moffatt finally gets to take over" RobFilth 3/6/08

"I expect the BBC will quietly let Tennant go at the end of this year...." RobFilth 9/6/08
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    The Leisure Hive Forum Index -> The Current Era All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
Page 13 of 15

 
Jump to:  
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
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

© 2007-2008 Informe.com. Get Free Forum Hosting
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
 :: 
BBTech Template by © 2003-04 MDesign