Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Film, TV & Theatre >

Doctor Who Season 3 - SPOILERS

Page: 1(2)3 4 5 6 7... 8

miss wonderstarr

08:56 / 01.04.07

Oh, am I being thick and Saxon is The Master? I would put spoiler warnings but I imagine I've just been really slow and everyone else has clicked to that possibility.

Our Lady Has Left the Building

09:15 / 01.04.07

Well, the Saxons helped to supplant the Romans and have cultural themes, unfairly or not, of being uncultured barbarians and are one of the old cultures most commonly used by the Right when they try to decide what makes 'genuine English culture'. Considering the pro-Empire slant of Torchwood I wonder if Mr Saxon will turn out to have been involved with them.

Looked at from a certain point of view Harriet Jones's government could be seen as quite separatist (Guinevere 1, 'the U.S. President isn't my boss') so someone who was either right-wing or playing that card could inveigle themselves in there quite easily. What with the Slitheen attack on Downing Street and the Sycorax invasion I also suspect that there's a certain lack of generals at the top of the British military over the last few years.

Our Lady Has Left the Building

09:18 / 01.04.07

miss wonderstarr Oh, am I being thick and Saxon is The Master?

I was being circumspect purely for that reason. I've avoided spoilers so don't know or want to KNOW if the Master is/isn't Saxon, but he is seen grinning like a loon on loon juice in front of Parliament. Without knowing more about Saxon they could be separate incidents (in the same way that 1.1 took place partly under the London Eye which is but a hop and skip away from Parliament but had nothing to do with the Slitheen attack in 1.4 and 1.5).

09:41 / 01.04.07

I'm not sure what you are saying there Our lady - that you don't think it has yet been proven that Saxon is in politics? Cause there have been plenty of VOTE SAXON posters which are, I feel, pretty strong indicators of such a career.

Yeah I enjoyed this episode, but I'm the easiest audience in the world when it comes to Doctor Who.

Yeah I can see the whole radiation in the toe thing being annoying - I would have loved to see some sort of cgi spitting/exhalation sort of like the timelord essence stuff that came out of the Doctor in the Christmas Invasion.

Would the same scene be have been more poorly recieved if it had been in Torchwood? Probably - but they are two different shows. Doctor Who is a much more forgiving format, aimed at a family audience whereas we were told that Torchwood was supposed to be adult (rather than adolescent).

miss wonderstarr

10:15 / 01.04.07

POSSIBLE
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
Simm is only cast for the final two episodes, I think, and "Saxon" seems very clearly the arc-word for season three, equivalent to Torchwood and Bad Wolf, so it is hard to avoid the conclusion that Simm/Saxon will be the big bad climax. I'm pretty sure it was made public that he was cast as the Master, so... there you have it.

I haven't been seeking out spoilers at all and the evidence above is just stuff I've picked up patchily through the odd trailer or press release, so I hope I'm not leaking anything secret to spoil anyone's fun.

10:26 / 01.04.07

"Let's keep it spoiler free for those who prefer it that way please."

miss wonderstarr

10:33 / 01.04.07

Sure, but are those spoilers? It's just me guessing based on entirely mainstream public knowledge.

10:43 / 01.04.07

Is it really so bloody difficult just to discuss the episode/s broadcast?

miss wonderstarr

10:51 / 01.04.07

Anyway, if the above is truly problematic, please stick in more spoiler space, or delete, or perhaps we should have a spoiler/guesswork thread for this season. I do think there's a difference though between revealing privileged info you know in advance that not everyone will have heard, and speculation based on very widespread knowledge about casting (if it's in a BBC trailer, is it a spoiler?) coupled with some awareness of the previous series' logic.

However, here's something that isn't spoiler-related. It struck me just now what the Vote Saxon iconography reminded me of, perhaps erroneously: Norsefire, from V for Vendetta.

This is all just associations in my head, again, so I hope not spoileriffic, but "Saxon" plus rumours of "Master" does suggest fascism. And I think it's true that this first episode may have been introducing ideas of racial profiling, aliens and others.

Which makes me wonder if there could be any further resonance made out of the fact that this is (with some publicity fanfare) the "first Black companion". The actress is of Ghanaian and Iranian parentage, but her fictional family seemed to be all Black British (African-Caribbean origin? I'm really sorry but I can't guess their culture more specifically). That, plus the association of John Simm, whose Life on Mars has been consistently exploring racism in Britain, does prompt me to think there might be some further interrogation of racism and cultural identity in this season. I know there's no reason why his casting should affect the script or themes, but I'm just going through a series of associations.

Finally, just musing: is Annalise, as a stupid, rude shopping-obsessed young woman, a sexist stereotype ~ more broadly, as a white woman manipulating an older Black man, a cultural stereotype? I'd be hesitant to suggest it's a racial stereotype; but is Martha's dad, as a Black British man under the thumb of a materialistic, younger white woman who insults his family, a cultural stereotype too?

miss wonderstarr

10:52 / 01.04.07

Is it really so bloody difficult just to discuss the episode/s broadcast?

I think it is quite difficult to not discuss how the themes and clues in this episode might pan out throughout the whole season, seeing as this is a serial rather than a one-off drama, and seeing as Doctor Who clearly works through narrative arcs, rather than entirely self-contained episodes.

What I suggest, before we all get rude to each other, is that we have a spoilers thread, and move my posts on this page to that thread. Could someone do that? I'd be very happy with that solution.

11:06 / 01.04.07

I think this is going to have to become the spoilers thread. It's not halfway down the first page that somebody starts talking about actors who've not yet appeared and the characters they're playing, and from that point in the whole exercise of trying to keep it spoiler-free was doomed.

I just don't understand why we're not capable of having a thread about this series in which people simply talk about the various aspects of the episodes we've seen. It's almost as if the individual episodes have absolutely no value as forty-five minute slices of television outside of being lead-up to the final episode.

Anyway, I've proposed that this thread has 'spoilers' added to the title and the abstract has the 'no spoilers' bit removed. It seems easier than trying to transplant 80% of the posts it already contains into a new one.

11:20 / 01.04.07

Miss Wonderstarr, what you are posting are spoilers in a non-spoiler thread. Is it really so difficult to say, "Oh, sorry!" or even NOT TO POST THEM? I don't want to hear whether you think they're proper spoilers or not or argue about whether you should be allowed to post them or not, I just don't want them to be there in the first place.

Tryphena Absent

11:33 / 01.04.07

My first intention isn't to defend MW but the first post in this thread is completely speculative so it should really have been a spoilers thread from the beginning.

miss wonderstarr

12:15 / 01.04.07

Miss Wonderstarr, what you are posting are spoilers in a non-spoiler thread. Is it really so difficult to say, "Oh, sorry!" or even NOT TO POST THEM? I don't want to hear whether you think they're proper spoilers or not or argue about whether you should be allowed to post them or not, I just do'nt want them to be there in the first place.

Rather than just "oh, sorry", I made what I think is a more useful comment, both here and to E. Randy in PM ~ where I asked for my posts to be moved to a new "spoiler and speculation" thread.

Anyway, if the above is truly problematic, please stick in more spoiler space, or delete, or perhaps we should have a spoiler/guesswork thread for this season

As I tried to explain, I didn't think I was posting spoilers. A discussion about what constitutes a spoiler is obviously pertinent here ~ I didn't see my comments (based on very public information from trailers, and my own speculation) as contravening a spoiler-free thread, so obviously I didn't think I was doing anything "wrong". If I'd seen them as unambiguous spoilers, I wouldn't have posted them.

I can't "NOT POST THEM" once they're posted. I can ask for them to be deleted and moved, which I did.

You're just saying what you want, Olulabelle, based on what you consider a spoiler to be. Your tone towards me seems aggressive. I understand it's frustrating to read spoilers, but telling me what you don't want to hear from me is very rude.

miss wonderstarr

12:19 / 01.04.07

And looking back at halfway down p1, why am I the one getting all this shit?

Speaking of Mr Simms that clip is the only thing I've seen of him and that smug simpering smile is enough to make me eat all doubts about a) the return of the master (i had no critical faculties regarding Who when I was 8 but the pantomime loser of Trial of a Time Lord* pawned by the valeyard really disapointed me) and b) the casting and make me think this is going to be a really interesting take on the character and their relationship.
first fanboy to moan about the lack of goatee gets a kicking.

12:46 / 01.04.07

So because someone else does it, that makes it alright?

Everyone who has posted spoilers shouldn't have MW, you're just the latest and most obvious culprit.

I'm just saying, this thread was supposed to be spoiler free. As usual, it has quickly become spoilerific. Every time this happes people have big debates about it but I think the people who frequent this board are supposed to be intelligent. That means not posting spoilers in a spoiler free thread. If people do post spoilers in a spoiler free thread we should not be responding to that by making a new spoiler free thread. We should be responding to that by, at the very least, deleting posts.

13:22 / 01.04.07

Hey Miss Wonderstarr
yep, that was me. Again apologies if I've injected spoilerisms into the thread and feel free to throw some ire my way.
as one of the posters above mentioned i don't like spoiling Who and try to avoid anything that gives stuff away. But Simms casting/role and the overarching narrative thread seemed to me to be pretty much in the public domain (ie i took it from the trailer and Barbelith as this is the only place I read)

the thread abstract also calls for 'speculatron to power' and i thought that i was speculing rather than spoilering. i have no knowledege of anything that happens...

keeping the discussion to the actual episode is cool but when the episode is clearly setting up future narrative arcs what do you do?

for me a spoiler is 'hey next week will shakespeare is really the Rani!'
(which i don't want to know-i didn't look at the internet at all for weeks before bad wolf/parting of the ways JUST IN CASE pop up ads revealed details)

rather than 'maybe the x is going to be y?'
(which is natural when you watch something surely?)

having said all that...whatever the board decides, i'll delete, move, shut the fark up as the people decree

13:24 / 01.04.07

I grapple with a similar spoiler issues here. Note the discussion continues on the following page.

Not sure if my thoughts will be of any use, but I thought I'd flag up the fact that someone's wrestled with just this kind of stuff before.

miss wonderstarr

13:24 / 01.04.07

So because someone else does it, that makes it alright?

Everyone who has posted spoilers shouldn't have MW, you're just the latest and most obvious culprit.

As should be clear, I was objecting to what I still see as an unacceptably rude tone in your last post to me. A friendly reminder is fine. Being told "I don't want to hear whether you think they're proper spoilers or not or argue about whether you should be allowed to post them or not" seems to suggest a relationship where you're the authority and I'm some kind of subordinate, and I don't think that's an appropriate way to talk to somebody on here.

Obviously, I was also noting an inconsistency in the response to my post as opposed to the ones on the previous page. The posts on the first page may not make my comments "alright" in your eyes. They do, however, set a scope and precedent and an apparent set of guidelines for the thread. They suggest "this kind of thing is OK, because nobody's criticised it above." Which is why I didn't feel I was doing anything clearly wrong. I hope you can understand that if something seemed acceptable (ie. it went uncriticised) on page 1, someone might think it's also acceptable on page 2.

Thinking about it, I'm pretty sure, ironically, that all my information about this season of Doctor Who was prompted by page 1 of this thread. It was page 1 of this thread that pointed out John Simm's casting, and mentioned the Master, and speculated about Saxon. That's why (you'll note) I felt that my comment at the top of this page made me look slow and out of the loop. Because I felt the connections were already being made, on this thread.

If I'm speculating based on material I read on this thread, I think it's understandable I thought those comments were acceptable. I do apologise for posting things people didn't want to read, but I feel I can honestly say it was all speculation rather than privileged material or outside knowledge, which is what I'd call a spoiler. I also feel I wasn't saying anything that hadn't already been put on the table, on page 1 of this thread. And finally, as noted above, I think your tone was needlessly rude, and feel I was being singled out given that no such comments were made about anyone previously speculating about Simms, Saxon or the Master.

miss wonderstarr

13:29 / 01.04.07

I think the people who frequent this board are supposed to be intelligent. That means not posting spoilers in a spoiler free thread. If people do post spoilers in a spoiler free thread we should not be responding to that by making a new spoiler free thread. We should be responding to that by, at the very least, deleting posts.

I don't much like the way you're implying that I'm not intelligent for not agreeing with your definition of spoilers, either. I hope I've made it clear that I feel I was speculating based largely if not entirely on material from page 1 of this thread.

I don't see it as unintelligent to draw some distinction between speculation and spoiler; or to judge the thread's inherent rules and guidelines from the behaviour that had already been apparently accepted on the thread ~ ie. talk about character roles in future episodes wasn't criticised.

If your response is "at the very least" to delete posts, what's your extreme sanction? Deleting people?

Tryphena Absent

14:06 / 01.04.07

Can we wind it down please? There's absolutely no need for this level of irate, no one wants to see spoilers so let's just change the nature of the thread, agree with MW's context (because she is right, other people had clearly already fallen down) and start another thread. Frankly MW was the only person here with the courtesy to mark speculation with a warning. Yes, it's angry making that spoiler rules are consistently ignored but there's a difference between guessing and saying I read in Dr Who magazine that the Dr is regenerating in episode 5 of this season.

Basically you're squabbling over nothing except your own aggression towards each other. It sucks. Stop threadrotting, take it to Policy, some of us want to read about Dr Who, not spoiler rules.

P.S. don't make me shout.

miss wonderstarr

14:11 / 01.04.07

Thanks, Nina ~ and again, I'm sorry if I did spoil for anyone. I remain kind of surprised and dismayed by what I see as your hostility towards me on this thread, Olulabelle, but to a great extent that's because I've generally seen you as someone I respect and whose posts I appreciate. If it was just a short-term burst of anger because my posts above annoyed you, then I'm very happy to forget it. If it's anything bigger, then sure we can talk about it on Policy, but I'll have trouble getting online for the next 2 weeks so I'd rather just offer further apologies and drop it. It's not a huge deal, I hope. Anything harsh I said above, I'm happy to take back in the interests of general peace.

15:16 / 01.04.07

Are we cool?

Hi-five?

ONLY NICE THINGS

15:38 / 01.04.07

Thanks, Nina ~ and again, I'm sorry if I did spoil for anyone.

Just FYI, you spoiled for me which episodes John Simm was going to appear in, which was information I could not possibly have gained from watching the series so far. It's not a huge deal for me, but then that is partly because I've largely given up on being spoiler-free if I want to talk about this TV series on Barbelith.

So, what's the plan? Turn this into the SPOILER thread, and start a new spoiler-free one?

16:28 / 01.04.07

I was going to pick up on The Doctor not having a brother any more and Saxon-as-Norsefire angle but my wild master theory was a bit gazumped by being told not only that it was right, but indeed who would be playing him and when. Ah well.

16:29 / 01.04.07

Unless it was an April Fool's gag I missed?

16:55 / 01.04.07

For the record, my post wasn't specifically aimed at W's, but the entire thread from about halfway down the first page. Seeing a moderation request from another poster that actually wanted to put one of the spoilers in bold was the final straw.

Tryphena Absent

18:23 / 01.04.07

Haus, I think that has to be the plan, it's the only logical conclusion. I would do it myself/pass it as a request but I'm not an FTV mod.

Our Lady Has Left the Building

18:51 / 01.04.07

This is probably my fault, I mentioned John Simms while trying to pretend that I hadn't been spoiled in the other thread as to who he was playing, it then encouraged others to go further.

LET ME DIE THAT BARBELITH'S SINS BE WIPED CLEAN!

20:21 / 01.04.07

I didn't know anything about John Sims being in Dr Who until I came here.

Being upset about spoilers in a non-spoiler thread is not squabbling or even anything to do with aggression towards people. It's mainly about being gutted tohave something...er...spoiled.

20:34 / 01.04.07

I thought we'd managed to reach an accomodation and had moved on.

We already have a thread for discussing the poltics of spoilers in the policy - can we get back to talking about Doctor Who here, please?

And in that spirit Has anyone else downloaded the podcast commentary? Its a lot more luvvie and a lot less insightful than the Battlestar podcasts but still quite fun.

Tryphena Absent

20:52 / 01.04.07

Olulabelle, neither did I but it seems a little absurd to put the emphasis on MW's post when the first in this thread links to a trailer and then suggest the possibility of a Life on Mars/Torchwood/Doctor Who crossover. If you know anything about those shows and read the thread title then the suggestion that certain actors are appearing is apparent. In fact the summary of this thread was pretty misleading from the get go, any trailer is nothing but a spoiler.

Tryphena Absent

20:56 / 01.04.07

By the way, I really like the new assistant, far more than Rose. I thought she came across as bright and adventurous, more realistic than overawed. She seemed like a companion rather than a love interest and I'm really looking forward to seeing more of her.

So who's up for taping the rest of the series for me? I have no TV aerial and no intention to get one but I'm damned if I'm missing this, that episode was my favourite of the Tennant Doctor.

22:12 / 01.04.07

I'm going to err on the side of caution and post this here.

It seems that season three is going to adhere to certain conventions established in the first two seasons. One episode set in entirely in a historical period, one set around the time the sun expands (and, thus far, also featuring the Face of Boe). There are three two-parters and an episode that the main stars barely appear in.

I'm gratefied that Stephen Moffat is going to be doing the doctorless episode this time because, on the strength of his past efforts, if anyone is going to pull off an interesting and engaging story here, it's going to be him.

22:52 / 01.04.07

I wish you'd go into a comma, sleaze.

Page: 1(2)3 4 5 6 7... 8