|
|
Post by mikef6 on Jul 17, 2017 14:07:49 GMT
FUCK THIS SHIT I AM DONE!!!! I have no problem with a female timelord,but I'm not ok taking AN ALREADY ESTABLISHED CHARACTER AND MAKING HIM FEMALE just to pander to SJW's. Capaldi was the best thing to happen to the show and they are already fucking it up again by making the Doctor female. I'm not a sexist in any means. I'll tell you why characters like Supergirl and Batgirl and other female iterations of those characters worked. Because they aren't the same character. The Doctor is the same character. He's an already established character. I'll never watch the show again because of this. It pains me to say this because I am a huge fan and even forgave them for the Paul Mcgann movie. Goom bye. Don't let the door, you know, hit you on the butt on your way out. Tootaloo. |
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Jul 17, 2017 16:13:48 GMT
To appease male fans, Doctor Who announces every Dalek will have visible penis. LONDON – After severe backlash from male fans following the casting of Jodie Whittaker as the first-ever female Doctor, the producers of Doctor Who have announced that every single Dalek in the new series will have a penis and testicles visible at all times. “We thought people would be excited by Jodie because she’s such an accomplished actress,” said showrunner Chris Chibnall. “But the fans have spoken: good sci-fi needs dicks and balls, apparently.” Daleks are one of the main villains of the Doctor Who universe, first appearing in 1963. While the show creators never explicitly stated the sex of the small mutants, the addition of male anatomy to their heads has been met with excitement. “I was angry because a female Doctor made no sense. I mean, how am I supposed to connect emotionally to a non-male character?” said longtime fan Curtis Mayflower. “But with this change, the belligerent creatures who display inexplicable fear of and rage towards the Doctor are now strangely relatable.” However, others see in these penises another push for unnecessary inclusiveness. “Oh sure, you think the show runners are standing up for tradition,” said longtime fan Kyle Marcus. “But one of those Daleks had a black penis. We all know Daleks are white. It’s canon!” This is reminiscent of male outrage over Ghostbusters, which lead to the release of an alternate cut where Slimer is fully erect for the entire film. Article |
|
|
|
Post by Catman on Jul 17, 2017 16:21:17 GMT
Maybe they could make the Dalek ball sacks function like those of the tanuki.
|
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Jul 17, 2017 17:42:48 GMT
I have to admit that I will miss the episode by episode dialogue about The Doctor's penis.
|
|
reelreviews2
Sophomore
Jon Stewart HIJACKED The Daily Show. We're taking it BACK.
@reelreviews2
Posts: 258
Likes: 105
 
|
Post by reelreviews2 on Jul 17, 2017 19:20:21 GMT
People also complained about Captain Janeway. Star Trek's ratings hadn't plummeted to rock bottom levels when Captain Janeway was introduced in 1995, and there had been female Captains on Star Trek before (just not as series regulars), so it didn't smack of desperation. I also thought Captain Janeway was much better than Captain Sisko (mainly because I thought Avery Brooks was a lousy actor and Sisko only had two personality traits: Brooding & Pissed-Off) but my views were in the minority. Kate Mulgrew doesn't get enough credit as Janeway, IMO. She made the episodes good even when the scripts were lousy and her character was written inconsistently. |
|
reelreviews2
Sophomore
Jon Stewart HIJACKED The Daily Show. We're taking it BACK.
@reelreviews2
Posts: 258
Likes: 105
|
Post by reelreviews2 on Jul 17, 2017 19:30:12 GMT
the total failure to do the one thing you would actually do if you really believed everything you said, which is to walk away from the show. I, and millions of other Whovians, have NOT watched a single episode of Doctor Who since the 2016 Christmas Special. Denying this fact all you want won't change it. You Moffat shills continuing to argue "If ReelReviews was REALLY boycotting Doctor Who, he'd go away and not talk about it anymore" seem to be very confused about what a BOYCOTT is. When Martin Luther King organized the Montgomery bus boycott in 1955, he was out there EVERY DAY in public, decrying the bus company's treatment of black people, and telling the media over and over again that he and his fellow boycotters would NOT ride the bus again until their demands were met. He didn't exit the bus one day and think to himself "Hmmm. I think I will quietly boycott this bus company now by staying home and avoiding bus trips, but I will never talk about that or tell others that I'm doing so". Those who BOYCOTT speak out ACTIVELY in public about WHY they are boycotting, and actively encourage OTHERS to do so, and keep up to date with whether the subject of their wrath has caved to their demands. The boycott WILL continue. You can ignore it all you want and deny its existence if it makes you feel better. But it's not going away because you refuse to acknowledge its happening. I look forward to the RECORD LOW audience numbers that the 2017 Christmas special will be getting. Perhaps you can start practicing your spin control now. |
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Jul 17, 2017 19:37:13 GMT
the total failure to do the one thing you would actually do if you really believed everything you said, which is to walk away from the show. I, and millions of other Whovians, have NOT watched a single episode of Doctor Who since the 2016 Christmas Special. Denying this fact all you want won't change it. You Moffat shills continuing to argue "If ReelReviews was REALLY boycotting Doctor Who, he'd go away and not talk about it anymore" seem to be very confused about what a BOYCOTT is. When Martin Luther King organized the Montgomery bus boycott in 1955, he was out there EVERY DAY in public, decrying the bus company's treatment of black people, and telling the media over and over again that he and his fellow boycotters would NOT ride the bus again until their demands were met. He didn't exit the bus one day and think to himself "Hmmm. I think I will quietly boycott this bus company now by staying home and avoiding bus trips, but I will never talk about that or tell others that I'm doing so". Those who BOYCOTT speak out ACTIVELY in public about WHY they are boycotting, and actively encourage OTHERS to do so, and keep up to date with whether the subject of their wrath has caved to their demands. The boycott WILL continue. You can ignore it all you want and deny its existence if it makes you feel better. But it's not going away because you refuse to acknowledge its happening. I look forward to the RECORD LOW audience numbers that the 2017 Christmas special will be getting. Perhaps you can start practicing your spin control now. Then I must ask... Why not move on? Why not just watch your beloved Troughton episodes and be done with it? Thousands of TV shows get worse and worse as time goes on, and the viewership drops, the show is cancelled, and everyone gets to watch the old episodes all they want on Netflix. Why mount a boycott? Why organize to replace everyone involved with it? You hate it, so don't watch it and be done with it. Want more Who, but not THIS Who? Read the comics, or the novels, or focus on the Big Finish productions. You can get TONS of new Doctor Who content year round without ever even THINKING about the TV version. So why not do that? |
|
|
|
Post by johnblutarsky on Jul 17, 2017 20:04:02 GMT
I, and millions of other Whovians, have NOT watched a single episode of Doctor Who since the 2016 Christmas Special. Denying this fact all you want won't change it. You Moffat shills continuing to argue "If ReelReviews was REALLY boycotting Doctor Who, he'd go away and not talk about it anymore" seem to be very confused about what a BOYCOTT is. When Martin Luther King organized the Montgomery bus boycott in 1955, he was out there EVERY DAY in public, decrying the bus company's treatment of black people, and telling the media over and over again that he and his fellow boycotters would NOT ride the bus again until their demands were met. He didn't exit the bus one day and think to himself "Hmmm. I think I will quietly boycott this bus company now by staying home and avoiding bus trips, but I will never talk about that or tell others that I'm doing so". Those who BOYCOTT speak out ACTIVELY in public about WHY they are boycotting, and actively encourage OTHERS to do so, and keep up to date with whether the subject of their wrath has caved to their demands. The boycott WILL continue. You can ignore it all you want and deny its existence if it makes you feel better. But it's not going away because you refuse to acknowledge its happening. I look forward to the RECORD LOW audience numbers that the 2017 Christmas special will be getting. Perhaps you can start practicing your spin control now. Then I must ask... Why not move on? Why not just watch your beloved Troughton episodes and be done with it? Thousands of TV shows get worse and worse as time goes on, and the viewership drops, the show is cancelled, and everyone gets to watch the old episodes all they want on Netflix. Why mount a boycott? Why organize to replace everyone involved with it? You hate it, so don't watch it and be done with it. Want more Who, but not THIS Who? Read the comics, or the novels, or focus on the Big Finish productions. You can get TONS of new Doctor Who content year round without ever even THINKING about the TV version. So why not do that?Then there wouldn't be anything for him to ramble on about on these boards. |
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Jul 17, 2017 20:08:09 GMT
Then I must ask... Why not move on? Why not just watch your beloved Troughton episodes and be done with it? Thousands of TV shows get worse and worse as time goes on, and the viewership drops, the show is cancelled, and everyone gets to watch the old episodes all they want on Netflix. Why mount a boycott? Why organize to replace everyone involved with it? You hate it, so don't watch it and be done with it. Want more Who, but not THIS Who? Read the comics, or the novels, or focus on the Big Finish productions. You can get TONS of new Doctor Who content year round without ever even THINKING about the TV version. So why not do that?Then there wouldn't be anything for him to ramble on about on these boards. Silly me. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 20:18:56 GMT
the total failure to do the one thing you would actually do if you really believed everything you said, which is to walk away from the show. I, and millions of other Whovians, have NOT watched a single episode of Doctor Who since the 2016 Christmas Special. Denying this fact all you want won't change it. That's not actually a boycott. Denying this fact all you want won't change it. |
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Jul 17, 2017 20:28:46 GMT
I, and millions of other Whovians, have NOT watched a single episode of Doctor Who since the 2016 Christmas Special. Denying this fact all you want won't change it. That's not actually a boycott. Denying this fact all you want won't change it. I mean, it pretty much is...at least in the general coloquial meaning. Now is it a basically pointless, ineffective boycott? Probably yeah, but a boycott nonetheless. |
|
|
|
Post by Jep Gambardella on Jul 17, 2017 20:29:08 GMT
Would like a third option, no so much a believer in binary options This puzzles me going forward, will they now alternative between male & female doctors, or will it be female doctors from now on? If they find a good actor each time I'd be fine with a second female Doctor - or a run of thirteen female Doctors, for that matter. Why not? They shouldn't deliberately set out to do an affirmative action hire of a male actor for the part though. If a man can't be the best then a man shouldn't get the role. If you truly believe that the decision on whether to cast an actor or an actress for the next doctor (or the race of the actor/actress, for that matter) will hinge on the quality of the auditions of the candidates, I have a bridge to sell you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 20:59:16 GMT
If you truly believe that the decision on whether to cast an actor or an actress for the next doctor (or the race of the actor/actress, for that matter) will hinge on the quality of the auditions of the candidates, I have a bridge to sell you. If you truly believe that the decision on whether to cast an actor or an actress for the next doctor (or the race of the actor/actress, for that matter) will not hinge on the quality of the auditions of the candidates, I have a bridge to sell you. See how easy that is? |
|
|
|
Post by Catman on Jul 17, 2017 22:14:58 GMT
What everyone seems to be overlooking in this whole brouhaha is the fact at least they didn't cast Elijah Wood.
|
|
|
|
Post by mszanadu on Jul 17, 2017 22:57:44 GMT
Jodie Whittaker Although I'm not familiar with this actress I will still check out the new season of this show when it becomes available to me on TV  . Thanks so much graham for your subject post  .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2017 2:12:10 GMT
Jodie Whittaker Although I'm not familiar with this actress I will still check out the new season of this show when it becomes available to me on TV . Thanks so much graham for your subject post . Most welcome! |
|
|
|
Post by azzajones on Jul 18, 2017 7:32:19 GMT
I can't get past the feeling it's too late in the game for this - if they wanted to make this change, they should've done it 40 years ago. Before people respond, it's not so much the years as it's the number of regenerations, with the Doctor have already gone through a complete regeneration cycle but never turned female.
To that effect I've voted nay, but I'll will reserve final judgement until I've watched Jodie in the role.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jep Gambardella on Jul 18, 2017 14:29:49 GMT
If you truly believe that the decision on whether to cast an actor or an actress for the next doctor (or the race of the actor/actress, for that matter) will hinge on the quality of the auditions of the candidates, I have a bridge to sell you. If you truly believe that the decision on whether to cast an actor or an actress for the next doctor (or the race of the actor/actress, for that matter) will not hinge on the quality of the auditions of the candidates, I have a bridge to sell you. See how easy that is? I will be considerate and polite and use the word "naïve" to describe you (instead of a different word that starts with a "g" and ends with "-ullible") if you believe it when directors/producers/studios use the "best person for the role" line when explaining why a character who was previously male is now female, or why a character who was white is now black. Nine times out of ten (and I am being generous here), such casting decisions are taken at the highest level, long before any auditions. There is no way in hell that the decision to cast a woman as the new Doctor was made solely (or even primarily) because this particular actress had by far the best audition. If and when a black actor is chosen to play James Bond, there is no way in hell that it will have been because he knocked the audition out of the park - it will have been because the PRODUCERS will have made the decision that the new James Bond should be black. Just to be clear, in the case of Doctor Who I would have no issue if the producers had decided to cast a midget albino Australian Aboriginal woman. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2017 16:24:14 GMT
People also complained about Captain Janeway. Star Trek's ratings hadn't plummeted to rock bottom levels when Captain Janeway was introduced in 1995, and there had been female Captains on Star Trek before (just not as series regulars), so it didn't smack of desperation. I also thought Captain Janeway was much better than Captain Sisko (mainly because I thought Avery Brooks was a lousy actor and Sisko only had two personality traits: Brooding & Pissed-Off) but my views were in the minority. Kate Mulgrew doesn't get enough credit as Janeway, IMO. She made the episodes good even when the scripts were lousy and her character was written inconsistently. Mulgrew did a very good job, but I still dislike Voyager, a lot. The stories were boring, and as repetitive as it could get. It's the main reason I prefer DS-9 myself, even with a broody Captain Sisko. (that did get annoying at times, but other times it worked quite well, he always felt like a real person.) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2017 16:32:03 GMT
I don't understand the dislike myself. She's a good actress, odds are that she's going to do well. As long as the stories are good, that is.
I doubt the show can withstand another season like the one we just had. It was by far the weakest season of the revived show. No memorable episodes, no memorable lines, events, ... The finale barely made sense, got spoiled beforehand. (not due to the BBC, if I'm not mistaken, but the damage was done) Utterly forgettable.
The issue here should not be the gender of the Doctor, which is irrelevant (and can be explained perfectly, despite canon), but rather the storytelling, wich was quite meager this season.
Fresh minds can only do good. Perhaps finally leave Earth alone, how many times can there be an earth threatening emergency only the Doctor can resolve? How many trips to the past can he make? How many first time colonies can he visit? Good god, do something else for a change.
|
|
.