Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

The [Doctor Who] Thread

1737476787999

Comments

  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    Bagginses wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    So, Amy's back. And what looks like Cleopatra. Good. I hope they're a bit more historically accurate with her than what they implied in Series 6... she was not a push-over.

    Just a failure. There are much better strong women from African history, like Mrs. Funmilayo Ransome Kuti, The Queen of Sheba, and Queen Nzingha of Ndongo.
    A failure? Don't be ridiculous. She was politically and socially savvy. She was the member of the Ptolemy dynasty that showed the most knowledge of Egyptian culture and society, and was hugely popular with the people. She managed to wrestle the throne from her brother in the middle of a Roman civil war, and kept Egypt an independent state by personally obtaining the favours of two successive Roman leaders. She also ran one of the first PR wars that we know of in history - when the Romans accused her of being a femme fatale serially seducing Caesar and Antony with her feminine wiles, she had Egyptian coins minted showing her as a plain and unattractive person. For want of a single sea battle, Egypt would have remained an independent state under her rule. In the end she chose to commit suicide as a free and proud ruler, rather than be taken as bounty and displayed as a humiliated prisoner in Augustus' triumph in Rome. 2000 years later, ask anyone to name a Queen of Egypt, and out of the whole 3000 years of Pharaonic history and rulers hers is still the name that will pop first in most people's minds.

    Mainly because she tied herself to two different powerful people who were branded as enemies of the Roman Empire and lost. You tend to show up a lot when you're involved in two different famous rebellions. In the end, she took a relatively powerful kingdom, made a series of failed alliances, and rendered herself the last of her line (also making her the most recent, and therefor most easy to remember). Compare to the warrior queens of Kush, who frequently fought off the Romans and may have fought off Alexander the Great. It's really hard to believe that she kept Egypt as an independent state when the results of her actions was Egypt losing its independence.

    "She was the most recent therefore the most easy to remember" is a silly argument to use when talking about events that occurred 2000 years ago. Pop-quiz: without google or wikipedia, who was the last Roman Emperor? It's the most recent one, so you should have no problem remembering him over the much older Augustus, Nero, Caligula, or Constantine, right? Or maybe it's that we remember the rulers that did something important, rather than just the last one in chronological order.

    Egypt at the time of Cleopatra was hardly at the peak of its power. It had been beaten militarily by Alexander the Great and ruled by the Ptoleme dynasty for seven generations, the last five of which had essentially given up on any kind of efficient ruling of the land and sheltered themselves from the population to focus all their time and energy on family feuds and murders. Turning to Rome for military assistance against one or another sibling was a tradition several generations old by the time Cleopatra came around. Past Ptolemys had had no qualms at being puppet rulers of Egypt who were completely dependent on Roman military power to hold on to the throne. Egypt didn't lose its independence because of Cleopatra, it lost it because of generations of mismanagement and dependence on Rome. Cleopatra tried to turn things around, and actually succeeded for a while. But her success was predicated on personal connections, and when those connections died off (literally) there was nothing left to save Egypt from complete annexation.

    Cleopatra didn't tie herself to powerful people, she tied powerful people to herself. Caesar's affair with Cleopatra earned him resentment in Rome, and Antony eventually fled Rome for Alexandria. And neither of these people were ever branded enemies of the Roman Empire, hell they both died before there even was a Roman Empire. Caesar was the consul of Rome, ruling the city and the Republic with absolute power, and Antony was one of the second triumvirate ruling the Republic and the one that seemed most likely to take over the Republic when that civil war started. You certainly can't fault her choice of alliances.

    RichyFlag.gifsig.gif
  • SniperGuySniperGuy Also known as Dohaeris Registered User, ClubPA regular
    So I'm rewatching Let's Kill Hitler and during the part where he talks to the Amelia Pond interface, he says "I'm going out in the first round, ring any bells?"

    The first bell to come to mind is the Cloister bell we hear on occasion, as that quote seems kinda out of context. I still feel like there's weird things afoot with that part, especially given the whole 32 minutes/tuxedo thing.

    3DS: 2509-1593-4994
    Steam Profile
    PSN ID: Dohaeris210
    Treadmill Desk Twitch Stream : status.php?streamuser=SniperGuy210
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    edited April 2012
    SniperGuy wrote: »
    So I'm rewatching Let's Kill Hitler and during the part where he talks to the Amelia Pond interface, he says "I'm going out in the first round, ring any bells?"

    The first bell to come to mind is the Cloister bell we hear on occasion, as that quote seems kinda out of context. I still feel like there's weird things afoot with that part, especially given the whole 32 minutes/tuxedo thing.

    I think it was a Scotland joke.

    Post edited by AManFromEarth on
    Lh96QHG.png
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Because the proceeding line was "Scotland never conquers anything, you know, not even a Shetland!" and that Amelia was "So Scottish"

    Lh96QHG.png
  • C2BC2B SwitzerlandRegistered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Dr. Who imagined as a (J)RPG.
    http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6749695/dr-who-rpg

    A wild Amelia Pond appears!

    Post edited by C2B on
  • HounHoun Registered User regular
    The only funny thing was the fanfiction joke at the end.

    Steam: DigitalArcanist | PSN: DigitalArcanist | NNID: DigitalArcanist | Backloggery: Houn
  • CyvrosCyvros Look behind you, a three-headed monkey!Registered User regular
    So, uh, that Dalek episode opening series seven? Sounds like it'll be mind-blowing if you like Daleks. At all. Quoth the Moffat:
    We’re going to have the most Daleks we’ve had on screen ever – but they will be from every era, quite deliberately. We’re calling them in from everywhere! All of them! Even the Special Weapons Dalek. They'll all be there…

  • ArthilArthil Henchman 21 Registered User regular
    I'm curious about something, where might someone in the US be able to even catch the new season when it comes around? Or am I doomed to wait 6+ months until Netflix gets around to snagging the next season :(?

    Youtube PSN: Honishimo GW2: Akeche.4867 Steam FitocracyCwcuLUM.jpg
  • BobCescaBobCesca Registered User regular
    Arthil wrote: »
    I'm curious about something, where might someone in the US be able to even catch the new season when it comes around? Or am I doomed to wait 6+ months until Netflix gets around to snagging the next season :(?

    I'm pretty sure it's shown on BBC America the same week (or maybe the the week after) the episode airs in the UK.

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Arthil wrote: »
    I'm curious about something, where might someone in the US be able to even catch the new season when it comes around? Or am I doomed to wait 6+ months until Netflix gets around to snagging the next season :(?

    iTunes or BBC America both generally have the seasons same day as UK release.

    Outside of that Netflix is your only other legal alternative.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • King RiptorKing Riptor Registered User regular
    Cyvros wrote: »
    So, uh, that Dalek episode opening series seven? Sounds like it'll be mind-blowing if you like Daleks. At all. Quoth the Moffat:
    We’re going to have the most Daleks we’ve had on screen ever – but they will be from every era, quite deliberately. We’re calling them in from everywhere! All of them! Even the Special Weapons Dalek. They'll all be there…

    Well Davies probably just died of a giant erection.

    My issue is Daleks are super racist against all other variations but their own. If they all team up they should be shooting each other constantly

  • Mr_RoseMr_Rose Registered User regular
    Nah, they can totally put it aside temporarily if there's something even less Dalek-y around to EXTERMINATE! first. Like the Doctor. Especially the Doctor.
    And hey, they managed to form an alliance with a whole bunch of non-Dalek inferiors that managed to end the universe, right? What could be more powerful than that except the same principal but with no inferior non-Dalek minions?

    Besides, it could totally be a temporal inversion in the space time matrix and they all turned up at once unexpectedly instead of "they formed a grand alliance of all Daleks ever."

    ...because dragons are AWESOME! That's why.
    Nintendo Network ID: AzraelRose
    DropBox invite link - get 500MB extra free.
  • The Fourth EstateThe Fourth Estate Registered User regular
    The Daleks have a pretty long history of using 'inferior' species to their own ends before destroying them.

    An episode with several Dalek factions all wondering when to stab the others would be quite fun.

    steam_sig.png
  • King RiptorKing Riptor Registered User regular
    Really if it doesn't devolve into a mass of explosions because the doctor pointed their dome sizes were different it'll be a disappointment.

  • KrathoonKrathoon Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    I am fine with a Dalek episode as long as it really digs into their lore. It looks like this one will deal with that. That is typically the problem, most Dalek stories are too light.

    Post edited by Krathoon on
  • KrathoonKrathoon Registered User regular
    Independent sellers are selling the sixth season for about $23 on Amazon US. It is weird.

  • PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    I'm glad that they are bringing back the idea of Daleks having an army and an empire. The thing that has always made them stand out from other Who monsters - and completes the Nazi analogue - is that they are damned effective at conquering.

    They're scary because, without the Doctor, they really would roll over everyone else. Even with him around, the stories are usually holding actions to prevent them from expanding their empire.

  • Vangu VegroVangu Vegro Registered User regular
    Richy wrote: »
    Pop-quiz: without google or wikipedia, who was the last Roman Emperor?

    Do you count the Byzantines as Romans or not? If not, the answer's rather easy because the name Romulus Augustulus stands out because it's so ironic that the last emperor was named after the founders of Rome the city and Rome the empire, respectively.
    (But yes, if you include the Byzantines, I don't recall that name off the top of my head.)

    Ahem. Please excuse the off-topicness.

    In my PC: Ryzom, Rayman Legends, Civilization V, The Old Republic
    In my 3DS: Mario & Luigi DTB, AC New Leaf
    Last game completed: Steamworld Dig
  • The Fourth EstateThe Fourth Estate Registered User regular
    Richy wrote: »
    Pop-quiz: without google or wikipedia, who was the last Roman Emperor?

    Do you count the Byzantines as Romans or not? If not, the answer's rather easy because the name Romulus Augustulus stands out because it's so ironic that the last emperor was named after the founders of Rome the city and Rome the empire, respectively.
    (But yes, if you include the Byzantines, I don't recall that name off the top of my head.)

    Ahem. Please excuse the off-topicness.

    Similar irony, the last byzzie emperor was called Constantine Palaiologos. Couldn't tell which number Constantine though.

    steam_sig.png
  • SanderJKSanderJK Crocodylus Pontifex Sinterklasicus Madrid, 3000 ADRegistered User regular
    If you do count the Byzantines (and they certainly did themselves) the last Roman emperor died in 1452.

    Then again even the Holy Roman Empire claimed dominion on Roman lineage and that only truely died at the end of the 30 year war... 1650ish?

    Steam: SanderJK Origin: SanderJK
  • The Fourth EstateThe Fourth Estate Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    1803.

    EDIT: BONUS: The Ottoman Sultan also held the title of Kaiser-i-Rum amongst his many others. So the Roman Empire died in 1919.

    Post edited by The Fourth Estate on
    steam_sig.png
  • PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    1803.

    EDIT: BONUS: The Ottoman Sultan also held the title of Kaiser-i-Rum amongst his many others. So the Roman Empire died in 1919.

    Makes sense. The Muslim world was as much a child of the Roman Empire as Europe.

  • TofystedethTofystedeth veni, veneri, vamoosi Registered User regular
    So. I noticed they'd finally gotten the most recent season up on Netflix. I just watched episode 7.

    Holy shit.

    steam_sig.png
  • azith28azith28 Registered User regular
    I'm glad that they are bringing back the idea of Daleks having an army and an empire. The thing that has always made them stand out from other Who monsters - and completes the Nazi analogue - is that they are damned effective at conquering.

    They're scary because, without the Doctor, they really would roll over everyone else. Even with him around, the stories are usually holding actions to prevent them from expanding their empire.

    ? There are lots of who monsters that had armies. Sontarans, Cybermen, Daleks, Rutons. Pretty much all of the old series's major enemies did except the master and hes not the type to need armies (Unless its an army of himself).

    steam_sig.png

  • PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    azith28 wrote: »
    I'm glad that they are bringing back the idea of Daleks having an army and an empire. The thing that has always made them stand out from other Who monsters - and completes the Nazi analogue - is that they are damned effective at conquering.

    They're scary because, without the Doctor, they really would roll over everyone else. Even with him around, the stories are usually holding actions to prevent them from expanding their empire.

    ? There are lots of who monsters that had armies. Sontarans, Cybermen, Daleks, Rutons. Pretty much all of the old series's major enemies did except the master and hes not the type to need armies (Unless its an army of himself).

    They all have armies and empires and wars, but what makes the Daleks distinct from them is that the Daleks are unstoppable. They aren't just another race of bad guys. They're out to conquer all life, then exterminate everything but the Daleks - the whole Nazi "master race" trip taken to the next level. The Doctor - and the entire Time Lord race eventually - were the only check on the Daleks taking over all time and space.

    The others are all localized threats. The Daleks are meant to be a threat to everything and everyone.

  • azith28azith28 Registered User regular
    It was kind of nebulous in the old series.
    Some episodes referred to the time lords as people who did not interfere in the universe anymore, but episodes like "The deadly assassin" suggested that they were constantly monitoring and putting time bubbles around entire worlds that were potential threats to the galaxy. "The genesis of the Daleks" established really the first time the time lords were actually worried about the Daleks (Outside the Doctors independant involvement). They tried to avert there creation or alter their path. Which if you think about it was a drastic step as it would have sent a massive shockwave through history. As it was the doctor only accomplished delaying there growth, but even that would have had a damaging effect through history, but its assumed that the time lords had the power to control that.

    The new series has taken this idea and turned it into the daleks vs time lords war...its not a bad change, and in a way its an evolution of the old series. I'm not particularly happy that they turned virtually all time lords evil and removed them from potential future stories. I think the best of the old episodes were those that took place on gallefrey. It might be interesting with moffett as showrunner if he decides to bring the master back or maybe even other time lords somehow. I think he would return them as proper to the series without making them yet another enemy. The Doctor doesnt have to be the last of his kind, i think thats another plot direction i find annoying. It was enough that he was the only one that seemed to care enough to want to experience the galaxy and use his abilities as opposed to the tired demigods of his race.

    steam_sig.png

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Well the Time Lords in Genesis were a special ops branch iirc.

    Most Time Lords probably did just hover around looking somber at the universe, while the Celestial Intervention Agency went around fucking with things, at least to the point where the time war started.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • azith28azith28 Registered User regular
    I dont think the CIA was intended to be a consistant piece of lore, it seemed more a jab at the American CIA given the time period when those episodes came out. (First introduced in the second doctor i think)

    steam_sig.png

  • Custom SpecialCustom Special Registered User regular
    So. I noticed they'd finally gotten the most recent season up on Netflix. I just watched episode 7.

    Holy shit.

    OH YES.
    Now I'm watching it on my phone while I work just because it's so amazing.

    Seriously, this has got to be one of the most amazing TV series ever. And this is one of the greatest episodes (although there are many equally good).

    XBL: F4ll0ut Wolfoid | LoL: F4ll0ut | STEAM
    3DS FC : 4270-0980-2372 | PSN : CustomSpecial
  • KrathoonKrathoon Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    I really hope the story does not abruptly add new elements like last season. It made the resolution feel the like it was squeezed in at the last minute. Season 5 had a much smoother story arc.

    Still, none of the episodes in the last season felt like stinkers. I really disliked the fish people and Dalek ones in season 5. Also, I was not too keen on them humanizing the Silurians. If they made them look like their masks, it would have been cool.

    Post edited by Krathoon on
  • Dark Raven XDark Raven X When you speak I hear muffinsRegistered User regular
    Series 5 is my favourite, and while Victory of the Daleks and Vampires in Venice were both weak, they were still above average from Series 1-4. Series 6 felt far weaker imo, due to the nature of the plot arc. Series 5's is the mysterious time crack, the buildup to how that happens, how they're gonna prevent it, what the hell the Pandorica is. It was so refreshing to have an actual running story thread for a whole series, rather than name dropping something before it pops up in the finale. :P

    Series 6 went the other way by laying it out in the opening and letting people speculate over the resolution all series. And that just didn't work for me, because it was something everyone knew would be undone. I know some people didn't like how the time crack story sort of 'invaded' the Angels and the Silurian episodes, providing a resolution to them out of nowhere, but that worked for me. ;D

    Still, Series 6 did have a couple standout episodes. Maybe more than a couple, actually. It's really only the story arc I had a problem with. The Doctor's Wife was fantastic, and I loved the endings to Day Of The Moon, The Girl Who Waited and The God Complex

    So yeah, to me, Series 5 is excellent overall with a couple weak points. Series 6 is weak overall with a couple excellent points.

    camo_sig2.png
  • BobCescaBobCesca Registered User regular
    article-2150278-134D7B76000005DC-704_634x819.jpg

    Matt Smith, starting off the Olympic Torch thing in Cardiff yesterday.

  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    Cool. I guess the torch had some hidden device in it!

    sc.jpgsc.jpg
  • InkSplatInkSplat 100%ed Bad Rats. Registered User regular
    Who failed to give him number 11 as his tag? Total failure!

    PSN for Destiny Shenanigans: SAW776
    steam_sig.png
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    I think it'd be great if they integrated the actual torch running into a Who episode

    XBLIVE: Biggestoverride
    League of Legends: override367
  • EmperorSethEmperorSeth Registered User regular
    Look on the bright side. The worst episode of the new series just happened and we didn't even notice!

    EmperorSeth.png
  • KrathoonKrathoon Registered User regular
    They really should have got Tennant to do it in his old getup. They kind of missed the point.

  • IgortIgort Registered User regular
    I know some people didn't like how the time crack story sort of 'invaded' the Angels and the Silurian episodes, providing a resolution to them out of nowhere, but that worked for me. ;D

    Me too, I felt it added more weight to them.
    I think it'd be great if they integrated the actual torch running into a Who episode

    It's been done.

    worldorder_zpse336707a.jpg
  • KrathoonKrathoon Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    Igort wrote: »
    I know some people didn't like how the time crack story sort of 'invaded' the Angels and the Silurian episodes, providing a resolution to them out of nowhere, but that worked for me. ;D

    Me too, I felt it added more weight to them.
    I think it'd be great if they integrated the actual torch running into a Who episode

    It's been done.

    Yeah. I just wished they did it with the right Doctor. Maybe Tennant could not do it.

    Edit:

    Ah. I see there was a mini episode that ties into it. Way to step on continuity though.

    Post edited by Krathoon on
  • HounHoun Registered User regular
    Didn't Tennant finish the torch run? That said Smith is starting it. There's still time!

    Steam: DigitalArcanist | PSN: DigitalArcanist | NNID: DigitalArcanist | Backloggery: Houn
This discussion has been closed.