Subject: Ghost Light

Posted on: April 16 2006 @ 11:23 AM
By: CalBruin

Content:

When I first saw the story "Ghost Light", the story made no sense to me.



I then saw it again. The story still made no sense to me.



I watched it a third time but still I could not decipher what the plot was.



A friend of mine, we both being die-hard James Bond fans, after a screening took time out and finally dissected and figured out the plot to the James Bond movie "The Living Daylights". After that, I figured nothing should be beyond me.



I just finished screening another viewing of "Ghost Light".

WFT!?!

The story was so bad that I felt sorry for the actors having to play at this.

I once thought "Survival" was the worst Doctor Who story ever written. I now think "Ghost Light" is by far the worse Doctor Who story ever written.

How in the name of all that is good and holy did this story ever make it past the idea stage, let alone actually being drafted and filmed?

What were they thinking?



No wonder Doctor Who began to decline. The BBC's depriving of sufficient budget and JNT's actions notwithstanding, with stories like "Ghost Light" and "Survival", there were definite signs of attempting to kill the Dcotor Who series.



I am still just aghasted at how so bad the story was.

The acting was bad.

Nothing made sense -- absolutely nothing.



According to Wikiapedia, Marc Platt is responsible for writing the story.

If true, then I must wonder if the Big Finish stories that he wrote: "Loups-Garoux", "Spare Parts", Auld Mortality", and "A Storm of Angels" are any good?



Also, I quote from the Wikiapedia

[QUOTE] His [Marc Platt] audio Doctor Who drama Spare Parts was the inspiration for the 2006 Doctor Who television story Rise of the Cybermen / The Age of Steel, for which Platt will receive screen credit and a fee.[/QUOTE]

Given "Ghost Light", this may not bode well for that anticipated Cybermen episode for the 2006 season.









By the way, I still can't make sense of what the story/plot is.



Replies:

Ghost Light

Posted on: April 16 2006 @ 11:36 AM
By: seanhuxter

Content:

.
I really liked Ghost Light. If you simply take the bizarre situation they were tossed in and understand that this was what was the cuase of Ace's teen angst, that she believes she burned down Perrivale out of sheer teenaged delinquence, but in reality it was because she sensed the true evil stored underneath, then this was a healing episode for her, and the Doctor brought her back specifically to force her to face her past and to show her it wasn't what she had thought it was - then it was a good episode.

You're trying to make sense out of a very David Lynch-like episode where there's not much to make sense of, past the fact that aliens have control of the mansion, and are killing people, but keeping them alive in a bizarre alien-perceived version of human behavior... yeah, it's a bit confusing.

And the few Big Finish episodes you mentioned, none stand out to me as very good except "Spare Parts", which was good, except the parallels from Mondas to Earth are so similar it's silly. The accents are the same, the - well, everything is the same. These aren't Mondasians, they're from Manchester!

However, once you get past that, the story is good.

If he was chosen to write a Cyberman story based on his work on "Spare Parts", then I think we're in for a bit of a treat, because while he didn't inspire me with "Loups Garoux" or the others, "Spare Parts" was actually a great characterization of the beginning of the Cybermen.

I hope that's what he's good at.

We'll see in coming weeks, I guess.

Sean.


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 16 2006 @ 11:54 AM
By: tarashnat

Content:


Ah, Ghost Light, easy. There is a being that is cataloging all life on Earth (Light). To aid him he uses Control, and Josiah. Control is the "control" of the experiment, unexposed to the environment, and Josiah is evolving with the rest of life on Earth. Light is upset that his catalog can never be finished because life on Earth is constantly evolving. Everybody else are just specimens for cataloging.

Marc Platt's Big Finish stories are above average, with Spare Parts being hailed by very many as the best Big Finish audio play. It is extremely good in my opinion. The problem with Ghost Light is that it was originally supposed to be Lungbarrow (the Doctor's return to his ancestral home), but the only thing kept from that story was the setting of a haunted house, as the production crew at the time was looking to reinject some mystery into the character of the Doctor, rather than resolving some of his origins. I could find no better story to base the Cyberman two parter on than Spare Parts. And last year's Dalek was based on another Big Finish audio, namely, Robert Shearman's Jubilee, and most feel that that was the best episode of the first half of series one, if not the whole series.

Now on worst Doctor Who stories ever written... Oh, have you seen/heard: The Twin Dilemma, Time Flight, Timelash, or The Underwater Menace? Compared to them, Ghost Light is a masterpiece. OK, so I'm using a bit of hyperbole here, but the story isn't all that bad and the production qualities are pretty good. And Sophie Aldread and Katharine Schlesinger both look great in a tux! And the primordial soup gag is just priceless.

Taras


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 16 2006 @ 12:17 PM
By: netamisakima

Content:

I also liked Ghost Light. That you can't understand everyone at once—much like Curse of Feneric, I think—is what makes it so intriguing. Ghost Light takes Doctor Who more in the direction of a drama program than a children's weekly adventure serial, which I respect, even though it turned out to be a direction that wasn't successful (as far as the BBC was concerned).

Plus, the DVD has extras that are top-notch, like the take where Silvester McCoy misses Sophie Aldred's eyes, and lands, well—a bit deeper on her body…

I guess that I'm a little biased; Silvestor McCoy is my favorite Doctor, even after having seen Eccleston and the first two Tennant episodes. I started watching Doctor Who during the Peter Davidson years, but I wasn't old enough to understand what was going on untill Silvestor McCoy's run. When I saw those episodes, I still didn't understand what was going on, but that had to do with the richness of the plot Wink and I liked that then, and still do today.

My favorite Doctor Who stories all star other Doctors, but I assign "blame" there to the McCoy production team, and not to his skills as an actor (or Sophie Aldred's, for that matter). I wish they would have gotten a class-act script, like the one written for Genesis of the Daleks or even the one written for The Empty Child…


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 17 2006 @ 11:06 AM
By: James Brown 1977

Content:

Ghostlight an excellant story like other fans I struggled to understand the story for many years, and it actually put me off watching it for a while.

The DVD is a godsend in that reguard. This was the last who story made by the beeb for 16 years. Which is sad however the show at least went out with a bang.


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 28 2006 @ 12:54 AM
By: DarthSkeptical

Content:

It's more than a little amazing to me that the same mind that delivered the pretentiously incomprehensible "Ghost Light" also gave us the finest Cyberman story of all time, "Spare Parts". Maybe he learned on "Ghost Light" that less is more—or, in "Ghost Light"-speak, that the Control is the most crucial part of the experiment.


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 28 2006 @ 07:36 AM
By: hdutch007

Content:

I liked Spare Parts a lot, but it isn't my favorite Cyberman story. that's Revenge of the Cybermen, for reasons I can't put my finger on. I will admit to falling asleep the first time I tried to watch Ghost Light, but after re-watching it and viewing the special features on the dvd, it made a bit more sense, and I definitely saw the general direction the writer was shooting in. It's not a favorite of mine, but it's not awful to me either.


Ghost Light

Posted on: May 03 2006 @ 01:35 PM
By: sunspot_mike

Content:

I read some of the Sylvester McCoy novelisations before I actually saw some of the stories. My PBS station stopped showing Doctor Who right before they were supposed to get to Trial of a Time Lord then rebooted and showed an episode every weeknight starting at the very beginning. Then stopped again right after Logopolis, which hurts because I love Castrovalva.

So, I only was able to see Sylvester McCoy when I finally traded some videotapes in the early 90's. I have to say that I didn't enjoy his episodes that much when I first saw them. Now, I can appreciate them a little more for some of their late-80's absurdist quality, but I never got into them that much. The books were much better and once they got into the New Adventures, it was a lot more fun. I love the idea that the Doctor is a manipulator of great events started eons ago and now he's seeing those plans come to fruition.

But it didn't feel the same, the stories were way too abstract and ridiculous. Ghost Light was probably the most egregious of these stories. Maybe I was just getting older and into the more intense sci-fi (fanboys usually like their science fiction deadly serious, especially if it's one of their "important" franchises like Star Trek, Doctor Who, or The Matrix.) What I couldn't believe was when I first logged on to rec.arts.drwho, how many people loved Andrew Cartmel and hated Eric Saward. I couldn't figure that out because I was exactly the opposite. I thought Sylvester McCoy was too jokey and his televised stories didn't have that "epic feeling". There was a lot of imagination, but it didn't hold together for me. If you read the episode guides on the BBC cult site, they really love the McCoy episodes and hate on Peter Davison and Colin Baker and I for the life of me can't figure out why.

"Survival" was going out on a high note? McCoy's delivery of the money line ("if we fight like animals, we'll die like animals") was cringe-worthy. I know that he's one of the most gracious ex-Doctors and I hate to say anything bad about my favorite show, but I just couldn't appreciate that last season and "Ghost Light" was my least favorite of all (even less than "Paradise Towers" which was cringe-inducing all the way through.)


Ghost Light

Posted on: May 03 2006 @ 04:26 PM
By: tarashnat

Content:

[QUOTE BY= sunspot_mike] What I couldn't believe was when I first logged on to rec.arts.drwho, how many people loved Andrew Cartmel and hated Eric Saward. I couldn't figure that out because I was exactly the opposite. [/QUOTE]
I think the bad feelings towards Saward stem as much from his part in the drama that prevented the original Robert Holmes' idea for the ending of Trial of a Timlord as people's perception of his work as writer and script editor. One thing that Cartmel succeeded in (for better or worse) was injecting some mystery into the program.

If the cleaners and the "monster" in Paradise Towers were better realized, this could have looked much better on screen. The script was good. Survival is another story let down by poor costumes. The cheetah people looked like teddy bears. At least we didn't get to see the previous take on their costumes, which allegedly were much "cuter". The cat flap concept (Cat Flap was the original title of the story) is interesting, but I think the contractual obligation inclusion of the Master was too much.

Taras


Ghost Light

Posted on: June 25 2006 @ 08:26 PM
By: DarthSkeptical

Content:

[QUOTE BY= tarashnat] One thing that Cartmel succeeded in (for better or worse) was injecting some mystery into the program.

Taras[/QUOTE]I've read this position in a lot of places, but, try as I might, I don't see added "mystery" during the Cartmel era. Unless we mistake "confusion" for "mystery". When it's gotten to the point that actors, actively trying to understand the basic plot of a script, can't make heads nor tails of it, it's not a mystery but pretense. This was clearly what happend with "Ghost Light", according to the commentary. Even the author himself seems a bit confused over what he was trying to say.

In a real mystery, you take a linear story that makes perfectly straightforward sense on its own, then you displace the sequence of events in such a way that the linear story you started with gradually reveals itself. The problem with "Ghost Light" is that the the linear story makes no real sense, so the mystery is "faked" with directorial mood and style.

Interestingly, I think the much-maligned "Love and Monsters" is actually a structurally perfect mystery. Even if you don't like where it takes you, that is the "reveal" at the end, as a matter of simple narrative structure, you don't get much better than LAM.


Ghost Light

Posted on: July 08 2007 @ 04:51 AM
By: Justice

Content:

i found out theres a game publishing company in the u.k. called ghostlight

they must be fans.


Ghost Light

Posted on: July 11 2007 @ 11:35 AM
By: Tom Hagen

Content:

Marc Platt didn't invent the term "Ghost Light", though. The games company could have taken it from the same source he did.

IMO Ghost Light is one good script edit job short of being a great story.


Ghost Light

Posted on: February 06 2008 @ 10:58 AM
By: cybercolin

Content:

20 years on and I still don't get it!


Ghost Light

Posted on: February 08 2008 @ 01:50 AM
By: ExtermaKnitter

Content:

I have just finished my chronological run of watching all the classic Who with my last McCoy episode yesterday (it only took me 6 months-OK my head is spinning). I am a new Who fan, who only started watching with the 9th doctor.

Anyway, um...I saw this thread...I didn't get "Ghost Light" either. I felt like I missed an episode in the middle and things didn't connect. Not one of the best stories ever...but not the worst, I thought the worst McCoy was The Greatest Show...

Let's discuss...


Ghost Light

Posted on: March 10 2008 @ 04:31 PM
By: backintheussr6

Content:

Like many Doctor Who stories I first came to this one through the target novel. Admittedly I found it hard going (for a Target novel i.e. I didn't finish it in a couple of hours) but it was perfectly comprehensible. I guess this made it slightly easier to watch first time round but I can't see what all the fuss is about, I don't think it's complicated at all.
I don't really like this story either and would much rather that we'd had Battlefield or even Paradise Towers appear on DVD before Ghost Light.


Ghost Light

Posted on: March 10 2008 @ 05:18 PM
By: MikeD

Content:

For me the thing about Ghostlight is that ti's actually a pretty simple story but it has lots and lots of added texture and that's what seems to cause the confusion.

I've never quite understood those who thought it would make more sense with all the extra footage put back in. Whenever a lot of extra footage is shot and not used for a show like Doctor Who it's a good sign the script editor was not doing their job.

Ghostlight didn't need more it needed less.

Mike


Ghost Light

Posted on: March 10 2008 @ 05:57 PM
By: tarashnat

Content:

[QUOTE BY= DarthSkeptical] [QUOTE BY= tarashnat] One thing that Cartmel succeeded in (for better or worse) was injecting some mystery into the program.

Taras[/QUOTE]I've read this position in a lot of places, but, try as I might, I don't see added "mystery" during the Cartmel era. Unless we mistake "confusion" for "mystery". When it's gotten to the point that actors, actively trying to understand the basic plot of a script, can't make heads nor tails of it, it's not a mystery but pretense. [/QUOTE]

Mystery not in the individual plots or stories, but mystery around the nature the title character. I am not going to argue that there were great stories during this era, as that is clearly not the case. There was some potential, but it was mostly unrealized. But during the McCoy era, we are being fed hints that the Doctor may not be exactly what we suspect him to be. One of the main mysteries of the earliest Doctor Who stories was the character of the Doctor himself. By The Trial of a Timelord we think we pretty much know all about the Doctor, Gallifrey, and his status amongst his people. The Cartmel era tried to get us to question whether we knew everything there was to know about the character. This era has us start questioning who the Doctor is and what his actual motives are.


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 24 2008 @ 10:28 AM
By: Gabriel Chase

Content:

given my avatar and my forum name you can GUESS how much I love Ghostlight.

but you are right. its a four part story that never made it past 3.

it needed more exposition.. but like hitchcock said. the audiance would rather be confused than bored.


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 24 2008 @ 01:36 PM
By: Dalzo

Content:

[QUOTE BY= tarashnat] [QUOTE BY= DarthSkeptical] [QUOTE BY= tarashnat] One thing that Cartmel succeeded in (for better or worse) was injecting some mystery into the program.

Taras[/QUOTE]I've read this position in a lot of places, but, try as I might, I don't see added "mystery" during the Cartmel era. Unless we mistake "confusion" for "mystery". When it's gotten to the point that actors, actively trying to understand the basic plot of a script, can't make heads nor tails of it, it's not a mystery but pretense. [/QUOTE]

Mystery not in the individual plots or stories, but mystery around the nature the title character. I am not going to argue that there were great stories during this era, as that is clearly not the case. There was some potential, but it was mostly unrealized. But during the McCoy era, we are being fed hints that the Doctor may not be exactly what we suspect him to be. One of the main mysteries of the earliest Doctor Who stories was the character of the Doctor himself. By The Trial of a Timelord we think we pretty much know all about the Doctor, Gallifrey, and his status amongst his people. The Cartmel era tried to get us to question whether we knew everything there was to know about the character. This era has us start questioning who the Doctor is and what his actual motives are.[/QUOTE]

Whereas I completely agree that the character of The Doctor was made more mysterious during the Cartmel era as script Editor (to the shows benefit, I might add) I completely disgree that there were no great stories during McCoys tenure as The Doctor. "Rememberance of the Daleks", "Ghost Light" and "The Curse Of Fenric" (ESPECIALLY "The Curse of Fenric") are absolute classics in my opinion and I have yet to understand as to why people would think they are not (please enlighten me someone). Even "Survival" is good once you get passed the awful design of the cats.
During this time the Character of Ace was fleshed out in a way that no other companion has before (and it could be argued, since) with the final "classic" season being practically devoted to finding out what makes her tick (and then explode like a can of Nitro Nine) whilst making you wonder who exactly The Doctor is, what his history is and exactly how powerful he actually is.

On a side note regarding "Ghost Light" (since this thread is devoted to it), the story does make sense if the viewer is happy to work at understanding it. This is actually what makes it so good as it requires a level of viewer participation not seen in any other Doctor Who story save, possibly, "Warriors Gate" and requires the viewer to watch it several times to "get it". Add to that the great performances (McCoy and Aldred are rarely better), the creepy atmosphere and the sense that The Doctor is manipulating Ace for his own purposes yet again and you have a belter of a story... Easily 5 TARDIS groans out of 5 for me!!!


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 24 2008 @ 03:52 PM
By: tarashnat

Content:

[QUOTE BY= Dalzo] I completely disgree that there were no great stories during McCoys tenure as The Doctor. "Rememberance of the Daleks", "Ghost Light" and "The Curse Of Fenric" (ESPECIALLY "The Curse of Fenric") are absolute classics in my opinion and I have yet to understand as to why people would think they are not (please enlighten me someone). Even "Survival" is good once you get passed the awful design of the cats. [/QUOTE]
I like all these stories, and they are the cream of the crop of this era, but all of these have major flaws (in my opinion).

In an era where programs were rarely repeated, requiring repeated viewing to comprehend is not a workable concept.


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 24 2008 @ 06:34 PM
By: Dalzo

Content:

[QUOTE BY= tarashnat] [QUOTE BY= Dalzo] I completely disgree that there were no great stories during McCoys tenure as The Doctor. "Rememberance of the Daleks", "Ghost Light" and "The Curse Of Fenric" (ESPECIALLY "The Curse of Fenric") are absolute classics in my opinion and I have yet to understand as to why people would think they are not (please enlighten me someone). Even "Survival" is good once you get passed the awful design of the cats. [/QUOTE]
I like all these stories, and they are the cream of the crop of this era, but all of these have major flaws (in my opinion).

In an era where programs were rarely repeated, requiring repeated viewing to comprehend is not a workable concept. [/QUOTE]

I wouldn't mind hearing some of those flaws (at least with Curse Of Fenric and Rememberance Of The Daleks) as with those stories I feel they are as close to perfect as Doctor Who ever got... Go on... Change my mind Big Grin

And as for making a story requiring repeated viewings being a mistake, Doctor Who was getting regular video releases at this point and home video recorders were commonplace... I still have my original recording of this story!!!


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 24 2008 @ 07:09 PM
By: tarashnat

Content:

[QUOTE BY= Dalzo] I wouldn't mind hearing some of those flaws (at least with Curse Of Fenric and Rememberance Of The Daleks) as with those stories I feel they are as close to perfect as Doctor Who ever got... Go on... Change my mind Big Grin [/QUOTE]
Rememberance Of The Daleks is not a Dalek story, just like most post Genesis stories with "Dalek" in the title. It is a Davros story. We have a bit of his continued transition towards being a Dalek, but little else. I see this as a retread of Destiny, but with two sets of Daleks. Other than blowing each other up or getting beat by a bat, the Daleks are mostly useless here. Why do the half Daleks need a little girl to be their battle computer? They used to be the scourge of the galaxy. Once Davros is on the scene, they are useless. They either blindly obey Davros or little girls!?!

The flaws in Fenric are more subtle, and I am not in the mood to trash this story.

Now, there are many good things in these stories as well, but I wouldn't classify them in with the best of the best of best of Doctor Who

[QUOTE BY= Dalzo] And as for making a story requiring repeated viewings being a mistake, Doctor Who was getting regular video releases at this point and home video recorders were commonplace... I still have my original recording of this story!!![/QUOTE]
Unless someone was a fan, they would not buy a video of a story that they didn't "get". There is a difference between a story being so textured that you pick up new touches with a repeat viewing, and one that requires you to watch it again to truly understand what is going on. This is one sure way to alienate the casual viewer.


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 25 2008 @ 06:44 AM
By: cybercolin

Content:

Can I just say, Ace in that suit. WOOF! Razz


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 25 2008 @ 06:51 AM
By: Dalzo

Content:

[QUOTE BY= tarashnat]
Rememberance Of The Daleks is not a Dalek story, just like most post Genesis stories with "Dalek" in the title. It is a Davros story. We have a bit of his continued transition towards being a Dalek, but little else. I see this as a retread of Destiny, but with two sets of Daleks. Other than blowing each other up or getting beat by a bat, the Daleks are mostly useless here. Why do the half Daleks need a little girl to be their battle computer? They used to be the scourge of the galaxy. Once Davros is on the scene, they are useless. They either blindly obey Davros or little girls!?!

The flaws in Fenric are more subtle, and I am not in the mood to trash this story.

Now, there are many good things in these stories as well, but I wouldn't classify them in with the best of the best of best of Doctor Who

[QUOTE BY= Dalzo] And as for making a story requiring repeated viewings being a mistake, Doctor Who was getting regular video releases at this point and home video recorders were commonplace... I still have my original recording of this story!!![/QUOTE]
Unless someone was a fan, they would not buy a video of a story that they didn't "get". There is a difference between a story being so textured that you pick up new touches with a repeat viewing, and one that requires you to watch it again to truly understand what is going on. This is one sure way to alienate the casual viewer.[/QUOTE]

Hmmm, I see where you are coming from but I still disagree. I think this story is the least about Davros then any story since Genesis. He isn't even revealed until midway through the final episode (although admittedly, you are led to believe that the girl is Davros). This story is far more about the Dalek civil war that is obviously raging. As for The Daleks being useless, it is the renegade Daleks (ie, not Davros' Daleks) who manipulates Radcliffes men (including Mike) into betraying his own kind and, of course, Ace.
Now, as for the girl being used "for her imagination" in the Battle computer, I agree that it was wrong in "Destiny" for the Daleks to have developed the faults of a machine and lose their imagination when it comes to warfare, but this had been established by Rememberance so kidnapping a human girl for her imagination to outwit Davros is consistant. You could also argue that they are not obeying "a little girl", but following The Battle Computer (which may have been developed in order to break the deadlock against The Movellans) which is using and abusing the girl in order to enhance it's programme! You can even look at "Daleks In Manhatten" for further evidence. A Dalek (I forget it's name) mentions how humans always survive, how there has been many New Yorks. You could argue that the reason Humans always survive the Daleks is because of their imagination, and children are the most imaginative humans there are!
Either way, even if using the girl is a flaw in the story, it allows for some quite creepy scenes (possessed children always freak me out) so I just don't have a problem with it!

As for your point regarding home videos, I take your point that Ghost Light could well have alienated some viewers (although by this point the damage was done), but it could also have enticed viewers who thought of Doctor Who as a childrens show, or as a show which had run out of steam. For you can call Ghost Light confusing if you like (which it is) but you cannot accuse it of being childish or unimaginative, for it has this in abundance!

Ahhh, I love a good debate!!! Big Grin


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 25 2008 @ 06:57 AM
By: Dalzo

Content:

[QUOTE BY= cybercolin] Can I just say, Ace in that suit. WOOF! Razz [/QUOTE]

And rolling around on the floor with Gwendoline (also in a suit)... Double WOOF Razz


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 25 2008 @ 07:54 AM
By: DarthSkeptical

Content:

[QUOTE BY= Dalzo]
As for your point regarding home videos, I take your point that Ghost Light could well have alienated some viewers (although by this point the damage was done), but it could also have enticed viewers who thought of Doctor Who as a childrens show, or as a show which had run out of steam. For you can call Ghost Light confusing if you like (which it is) but you cannot accuse it of being childish or unimaginative, for it has this in abundance!

Ahhh, I love a good debate!!! Big Grin [/QUOTE]How can a story, about which you know next to nothing, change your impression that the series isn't a kid show? On initial viewing, an episode succeeds or fails on the basis of the previous weeks. So "Ghost Light" would have depended on "Battlefield" most immediately, and the previous season. Not much there to dispel the notion of the program as a kids' show, really. And it didn't work. The last season of Doctor Who featured the very worst audience shares of the entire original series. Some weeks were watched by such a tiny sliver of the British viewing public that they completely dropped out of the rankings.

And not to be facetious, but if you only suspected Doctor Who was childish, it only took a viewing of the opening credits to wholly convince you that it was for kids. Doesn't help "Ghost Light", particularly, that the opening shots of the Doctor and Ace are them mucking around with a carousel horse.


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 25 2008 @ 07:56 AM
By: DarthSkeptical

Content:

[QUOTE BY= cybercolin] Can I just say, Ace in that suit. WOOF! Razz [/QUOTE]Um, no, you can't. I mean, of course you can, but that ain't stoppin' me from hurling just thinking about anyone finding that remotely attractive. Potato, potahto, freedom of speech, freedom to vomit.

No, seriously. Worst attire for a companion ever. And that's saying summat.


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 25 2008 @ 08:22 AM
By: Gabriel Chase

Content:

[QUOTE BY= DarthSkeptical] [QUOTE BY= cybercolin] Can I just say, Ace in that suit. WOOF! Razz [/QUOTE]Um, no, you can't. I mean, of course you can, but that ain't stoppin' me from hurling just thinking about anyone finding that remotely attractive. Potato, potahto, freedom of speech, freedom to vomit.

No, seriously. Worst attire for a companion ever. And that's saying summat.[/QUOTE]

if you really wanted to go down that road you could combine them with the Victorian Touching the velvet Torchwood Galls.


I suspect thats a website on its own .lol

anyway. Getting back to the actual subject of the thread.

reading the scriptbook for GL gives even more insite into the evolution from Lungbarrow inot GL and its interesting to note that JNT said NO to Lungbarrow as it gave away too much of the Doctors Backstory.

I love that Badger in Lungbarrow is in the Alt first Doc story also by the same writer


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 25 2008 @ 11:52 AM
By: Idiom

Content:

Watching the documentaries on the DVD it would seem that even many of those involved in this story have no clue what it was about.
Personally, I don't mind incomprehensible so long as it is enjoyable or funny or both (this explains my love of Twin Peaks). Boring it wasn't! And that also gives it points in my eyes. The same can be said for most doctor who. It divides us: we love some, we hate some. But it's rarely boring. How many other TV programmes can the same be said of?

[QUOTE BY= DarthSkeptical]
No, seriously. Worst attire for a companion ever. And that's saying summat.[/QUOTE]

So I'd like to know what rates as the best (barring Zoe in the cat suit of course cos that's a given and would be cheating!)


Ghost Light

Posted on: April 25 2008 @ 10:10 AM
By: Dalzo

Content:

[QUOTE BY= DarthSkeptical] [QUOTE BY= Dalzo]
As for your point regarding home videos, I take your point that Ghost Light could well have alienated some viewers (although by this point the damage was done), but it could also have enticed viewers who thought of Doctor Who as a childrens show, or as a show which had run out of steam. For you can call Ghost Light confusing if you like (which it is) but you cannot accuse it of being childish or unimaginative, for it has this in abundance!

Ahhh, I love a good debate!!! Big Grin [/QUOTE]How can a story, about which you know next to nothing, change your impression that the series isn't a kid show? On initial viewing, an episode succeeds or fails on the basis of the previous weeks. So "Ghost Light" would have depended on "Battlefield" most immediately, and the previous season. Not much there to dispel the notion of the program as a kids' show, really. And it didn't work. The last season of Doctor Who featured the very worst audience shares of the entire original series. Some weeks were watched by such a tiny sliver of the British viewing public that they completely dropped out of the rankings.
[/QUOTE]

As I said... by this time the damage had already been done with regards to the ratings and the perception of the show!


Ghost Light

Posted on: May 07 2009 @ 12:34 PM
By: Aurelius76

Content:

As I am nearing the end of watching the McCoy Era I have finally reached one of the most complex and engaging of any of the episodes of Doctor Who, “Ghost Light,” which should be hailed as a classic, but isn’t. Here’s why.

First, the confusing story. The story is actually quite simple (see the early above post by Tarashnat; it’s actually pretty cut and dry.) Most can’t see this because of Part 3. Parts 1 and 2 are brilliant, structured and textured and Part 3 is a complete nightmare that derails and confuses everything. Nothing in Part 3 makes any sense, other than the rather muddled explanation of who each character is:
- Light (appearing in the form of an “angel,” and portrayed horribly by the actor with an even more horrible outfit) is on a mission to catalogue all life in the Universe
- Josiah Smith is his survey agent, capable of evolving to mimic the native forms of life in any environment
- Control is linked to the Survey agent to prevent it from evolving too far and breaking free of Light’s control
The rest—Fenn-Cooper planning to assassinate the Queen; Smith trying to take over the British Empire; what exactly “Light” is; dead things coming back to life; the muttered gibberish of Control; the Pritchards being turned to stone, none, I mean absolutely, none of these things make any sense, and all of them happen in rapid fire succession. If one isn’t paying attention, it seems like a garbled nightmare.

Second, the telling of the confusing story. Contrary to previous posts, the story is neither David Lynch-like (it seems so upon first viewing but that’s giving too much credit; where each character here would symbolically represent something, it doesn’t; but you do get that weird David Lynch vibe, like Mackenzie preserved in the collection drawer) or a mystery (or, more accurately a Who-done-it), but rather told in the tradition of a ghost-story; a mystery and a ghost story are not the same things. This is more in the lines of Henry James’ Turn of the Screw (meaning, what exactly are we witnessing and can we trust what we are witnessing?) than anything by Agatha Christie. Doubt, rather than deception, plays a key role in this story along with a heavy dose of ambiguity. This muddles the main story of an alien come to earth to catalogue its life and its servants get out of hand while it sleeps.

Third, actually story being told. This story is not about Light or ghosts or haunted mansions. This is a story about Ace. On the worst day of her life, when she is 13, Ace climbs the wall surrounding Gabriel Chase, senses a primordial evil and burns the house down. This action, coinciding the same day her friend Manisha’s flat was burnt down by racist white kids, has made Ace hard and rough. The Doctor knows this and this is why he has “tricked” her by not telling her that they are in Perivale, knowing that she must face this terror. Only by confronting this terror, can Ace move on, mentally, emotionally and I’d even venture, spiritually.

Throughout the story continual references are made to evolution, natural selection and metamorphosis and things “changing” (and we are witness to a few literally happening), as well as light returning, both figuratively and literally, as well as life. All of this applies to Ace: by confronting this terror (the feeling of evil in the house) and understanding it, both life and light return to her life, and the Doctor knows this. This episode is really a drawn-out, textured character study of Ace and I don’t believe we’ve ever had something like this before for any of the companions—perhaps Rose, where the majority of Season 1 deals with her, her family and her “relationship” with the Doctor.

To a lesser degree, this episode also expands the magnitude and mystery of the Doctor—him manipulating events so Ace can confront her terror and by and large, commanding and directly taking on Light, who for all purposes shown in the episode is a presumed “superior” being, and basically “defeating” him, causing him to disperse and fill the house with evil energy that 100 years from now Ace will sense. So, viewing it this way, we have a circular construction—the Doctor by helping Ace face her terror, helps create that same terror. Or vice versa, timey-wimey, wibbley-wobbley, right?

In the end, what are we to make of “Ghost Light?” Muddled mess or misunderstood classic? Somewhere in between. “Ghost Light” should be on par with “Blink,” but isn’t. This is a 4 part story told in 3 parts, where the events of the third part are a jumbled nightmare that needs a better editor and more cohesive thought. The story at its heart is simple, but the layers surrounding it are too convoluted vague for us to care, and at some points understand and even watch. But, looking past this, we can feel the brilliance that is strived for—the creativity and the idea that an episode doesn’t need to follow a pre-designed mold. If done correctly, we have “Blink;” if you fall short, even by a foot or two, you have “Ghost Light.” In the end, this episode’s ambitions outweigh talent and most of us are left scratching are heads.
Rating: 8 / 10 or 4 ½ TARDIS groans out of 5


Ghost Light

Posted on: May 07 2009 @ 04:58 PM
By: Chase

Content:

When I first watched GHOSTLIGHT I thought DW would soon be cancelled. It was trash. It was junk. It had more Ace angst. It made no sense, at least what was up there on the screen. Then Ace goes to sleep in a haunted house with danger all around. A lot of strange people were paraded out and the Doctor wasn't speaking loud enough to be understand. He mumbled through it all. I hated this story for a long long time. And IT was the mold for most other New Adventures, not all but most. The Doctor was manipulating Ace.

I've yet to rewatch this but the time is coming.

Then I read all about it in books, in fan commentary, in more books, in the magazines and on line...etc. The story does make sense but unfortunately it really doesn't without all the extra reading and figuring out. DW at that time was throwing in everything but the kitchen sink. On CURSE OF FENRIC, one fan, and he's somewhat correct, said being back in time should be enough of a story but they have to throw everything in but the kitchen sink: vampires, Nazies, Vikings, Russians, Russian pretenders, priests, a lost relic, a curse, etc etc etc, Ace's mum, Ace as a baby, a thing frm the beginning or end of time from probably an alt universe time line. Any one of these would be fit for a story but throw them all in together and you have a mess. GHOSTLIGHT is similar. If you have to figure out what is happening by all this extra stuff, is it a good drama? A good show? I used to say no but...

CURSE like GHOST suffers from being slightly ahead of its time although to be honest 2001: A SPACE ODSSESY was like this, Space: 1999 was like this. In many ways MILLENIUM was like this. All three of the later ones I mentioned were better than GHOST and FENRIC. To some extent THE PRISONER was like this, too.

I had rewatched CURSE and FENRIC with all the knowledge of the fan/production team etc behind it. That way, the pair of them are a much better pair of stories and one can appreciate what they are doing, however, again, without the explanations and/or some kind of sense/logic somewhat linear storytelling is it good? Is it good to need others to explain your story? Or is it just bad storytelling to not have what viewers need to figure out wtf is going on?

I'm not sure there are easy answers to that. I do know I'm going to rewatch these. I also know that I much prefer THE TWIN DILEMMA to both of those. I much prefer almost any Tom Baker story to both of those. Ace and the 7th Doctor are in way my fav team.


The Gallifreyan Embassy - Forum
http://gallifreyanembassy.org/portal/forum/viewtopic.php?showtopic=3164