| There are no upcoming events |
|
|
|
  |
|
|
| I just wanted to say... |
Views: 1033 |
|
|
The Professor
Registered: 11/25/06
Posts: 24
|
 Sunday, December 17 2006 @ 02:16 AM EST |
|
I recently saw the film on YouTube, and I thought it was magnificent!! To quote a comment there,
"I thought the TV Movie was an enjoyable, exciting and magical experience with great moments. I don't get why people don't like it."
I couldn't agree more!! I thought it was Doctor Who amped up 700 notches, with TOTAL AWESOMENESS to the nth degree. I loved the cinematic quality of it, the surrealistic yet somehow very realistic feel of it, and the pure feeling of adventure that it conveyed. As a huge fan of Doctor Who, seeing it go from a oft-times silly video-recorded show (an aspect of Doctor Who that I do love) to a bonified film (albeit for television), the film did NOT disappoint. I was quite impressed with Paul McGann as the Doctor, and I enjoyed the Master's cinematic evilness (which somehow evoked the feeling of the first and second "Terminator" films). I was impressed with how "cool" the film was, and then when I remembered it was Doctor Who, the feeling of awe would just sweep over me again. I also LOVED the steampunked (Victorian, yet futuristic because TARDISes were obviously never built with Victorian technology) look of the TARDIS interior...it was VERY impressive and VERY cool. I thought that as a "character" (which the TARDIS certainly is), it finally was able to come out as such, in a subtle but intriguing way that didn't go overboard, and still allowed an element of mystery to remain with the TARDIS.
I really could just go on and on about what I LOVED about this film, but I should probably keep it reasonably short. Anyway, after seeing the film, I certainly plan on not only buying the DVD, but getting the soundtrack as well (if they have it...which I hope they do!!). It was an incredible film that surpassed all my expectations, and I hope there are others who feel the same way.
The only aspect of it I didn't like was Grace Holloway; her character was rather drab and...predictible?? I'm not sure how to express it. |
|
Long Live Romanadvoratrelundar the First
|
|
|
| |
hdutch007
Registered: 12/27/05
Posts: 340
|
| Sunday, December 17 2006 @ 10:01 AM EST |
|
The movie was quite good for what it was, but I think what hurt it was the American television market. The slapstick elements like the coroner doing the old "cross eyes and faint" bit when he sees the newly regenerated Doctor in the sheet intercut with scenes from Frankenstein (wasn' it?)...that hurt the movie a lot for me.
The only other thing that hurt the movie that I can remember was Eric Roberts. I don't have to explain that one. If you took those two elements out of it, I would have thought it to be wonderful. As it stands, I think it's a good concept that was flawed by American meddling. |
|
Heath Holland
|
|
|
| |
tarashnat
Registered: 08/17/05
Posts: 3062
|
| Sunday, December 17 2006 @ 11:13 AM EST |
|
The things that hurt the movie the most are
- being scheduled against a big Roseann episode
- in the New York market, having to compete with New York Yankees' Dwight Gooden pitching a no-hitter
- FOX never really wanting to do it as a series
- too many organizations having a say in the creative side
- FOX having its own sci-fi dimension travelling series in production (Sliders)
- the BBC having two licencees trying to put a project together at the same time
- Universal's disinterest in releasing the video/DVD
That said, I think the movie turned out well despite all these issues. It seems that American fans are more critical of it than British fans. The script could have been better, but given the circumstances, it wasn't horrible.
Taras |
|
Daleks don't accept apologies! YOU WILL BE EXTERMINATED!
|
|
|
| |
The Professor
Registered: 11/25/06
Posts: 24
|
| Sunday, December 17 2006 @ 02:11 PM EST |
|
| [Quote by: hdutch007] The movie was quite good for what it was, but I think what hurt it was the American television market. The slapstick elements like the coroner doing the old "cross eyes and faint" bit when he sees the newly regenerated Doctor in the sheet intercut with scenes from Frankenstein (wasn' it?)...that hurt the movie a lot for me. |
|
Yeah, but even the series tended to carry a bit of comedic nature to it, so the "faint" thing didn't bother me terribly. Besides, he's just seen someone walk out of a morgue...wouldn't YOU faint, too?!? I'm pretty sure I would do something similar... 
| [Quote by: hdutch007] The only other thing that hurt the movie that I can remember was Eric Roberts. I don't have to explain that one. |
|
I thought Eric Roberts was a really cool Master. Creepy and scary, he's really the one who conveyed the "Terminator-esque" feel of the film that I enjoyed a lot. |
|
Long Live Romanadvoratrelundar the First
|
|
|
| |
hdutch007
Registered: 12/27/05
Posts: 340
|
| Sunday, December 17 2006 @ 05:51 PM EST |
|
[Quote by: The Professor] | [Quote by: hdutch007] The movie was quite good for what it was, but I think what hurt it was the American television market. The slapstick elements like the coroner doing the old "cross eyes and faint" bit when he sees the newly regenerated Doctor in the sheet intercut with scenes from Frankenstein (wasn' it?)...that hurt the movie a lot for me. |
|
Yeah, but even the series tended to carry a bit of comedic nature to it, so the "faint" thing didn't bother me terribly. Besides, he's just seen someone walk out of a morgue...wouldn't YOU faint, too?!? I'm pretty sure I would do something similar...
| [Quote by: hdutch007] The only other thing that hurt the movie that I can remember was Eric Roberts. I don't have to explain that one. |
|
I thought Eric Roberts was a really cool Master. Creepy and scary, he's really the one who conveyed the "Terminator-esque" feel of the film that I enjoyed a lot. |
|
ok, that's cool. I won't take anything away from your appreciation of it. As for the first comment about fainting, it's not just the fainting, it's the slapsticky three stooges-esque way that he does it. very cheap comedy, to me.
If you like Eric Roberts, that's awesome. |
|
Heath Holland
|
|
|
| |
whodovoodoo
Registered: 10/30/06
Posts: 120
|
| Sunday, December 17 2006 @ 06:26 PM EST |
|
| [Quote by: The Professor]I thought the TV Movie was an enjoyable, exciting and magical experience with great moments. I don't get why people don't like it. |
|
For the record....you are not alone.
|
|
***********************************************************
"Rubber Soles - Swear by them!"
|
|
|
| |
tarashnat
Registered: 08/17/05
Posts: 3062
|
| Sunday, December 17 2006 @ 10:09 PM EST |
|
[Quote by: whodovoodoo] | [Quote by: The Professor]I thought the TV Movie was an enjoyable, exciting and magical experience with great moments. I don't get why people don't like it. |
|
For the record....you are not alone. |
|
For some reason American fans are harsher on the TV movie than British fans. I thought the pacing, visuals and tone were very good. Both Doctors were very good, actually, McGann's portrayal of the Doctor was excellent. Though I probably wouldn't have cast Eric Roberts as the Master, he did a good job in the role, not on par with Delgado, but approaching Ainley's portrayal. Grace was a good companion like character and Daphne Ashbrook did the role justice. Yee Jee Tso was wooden, but didn't really hurt the show much. The plot had some major holes, but the biggest complaints from most are regarding perceivedcontradictions to some of the classic series' canon.
My first viewing of the movie was very piecemeal, as I was visiting with my dad at the time, and he wanted to watch the baseball game (that no-hitter) and switching to it during commercials. I had recorded it on a VHS tape, though, and watched the movie after getting home.
Taras |
|
Daleks don't accept apologies! YOU WILL BE EXTERMINATED!
|
|
|
| |
The Professor
Registered: 11/25/06
Posts: 24
|
| Sunday, December 17 2006 @ 10:22 PM EST |
|
| [Quote by: hdutch007]As for the first comment about fainting, it's not just the fainting, it's the slapsticky three stooges-esque way that he does it. very cheap comedy, to me. |
|
Yeah, because I was watching it on YouTube, where all the videos carry a certain level of graininess that makes it almost impossible to see features such as eyes, I didn't catch the level of "cheap" comedy that it was, which might explain why I didn't have much of a problem with it...lol!! As it is, I still don't know why everyone made such a big deal about the Master's eyes...they looked normal to me...and thanks for your tolerance of my opinion.
Tarashnat brought up EXACTLY what I was thinking when he said that Eric Robert's portrayal of the Master was much like Ainley's. I was thinking the same thing!! Anthony Ainley's Master is the one I saw inside Roberts; I think he gave a good portrayal of the Master, in that I didn't just see the Master, I saw the Master inside another body, speaking through it. I think Eric Roberts was very good at conveying that idea, as I certainly got that impression. |
|
Long Live Romanadvoratrelundar the First
|
|
|
| |
Ersby
Registered: 04/16/06
Posts: 20
|
| Monday, December 18 2006 @ 06:21 AM EST |
|
| [Quote by: tarashnat]For some reason American fans are harsher on the TV movie than British fans. |
|
I've heard US fans on the internet complain that it wasn't British enough. That could be an aspect of why theyre not so keen on it. |
|
|
|
|
| |
hdutch007
Registered: 12/27/05
Posts: 340
|
| Monday, December 18 2006 @ 08:35 AM EST |
|
[Quote by: Ersby] | [Quote by: tarashnat]For some reason American fans are harsher on the TV movie than British fans. |
|
I've heard US fans on the internet complain that it wasn't British enough. That could be an aspect of why theyre not so keen on it. |
|
I think there's a lot to that. I don't care to see Doctor Who set in America, personally. They replaced the Master with an American. The companion, or love interest, is American. That just doesn't seem right to me.
But McGann's Doctor was fantastic, and his Big Finish audios give him his due. |
|
Heath Holland
|
|
|
| |
The Professor
Registered: 11/25/06
Posts: 24
|
| Monday, December 18 2006 @ 08:53 AM EST |
|
[Quote by: hdutch007] [Quote by: Ersby] | [Quote by: tarashnat]For some reason American fans are harsher on the TV movie than British fans. |
|
I've heard US fans on the internet complain that it wasn't British enough. That could be an aspect of why theyre not so keen on it. |
|
I think there's a lot to that. I don't care to see Doctor Who set in America, personally. They replaced the Master with an American. The companion, or love interest, is American. That just doesn't seem right to me. |
|
That's very true, and it's probably the main reason that American fans weren't all that keen on it, either. Part of the appeal of Doctor Who is the very British nature of it; I generally dislike when European things are "Americanised," but I didn't really feel like they did that in the film, so it didn't bother me. To me, it was just taking place in 1999 America, so having everything be American didn't bother me any more than a Doctor Who adventure set on Mars with everyone as a Martian would bother me.
Now, had they gone on with an American-made TV show of Doctor Who, that would have been too much. For a single adventure, I don't see a problem, but as a continuing story, it has to be British-made. |
|
Long Live Romanadvoratrelundar the First
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Topic Legend: |
 |
Normal Topic |
 |
Locked Topic |
 |
Sticky Topic |
|
 |
New Post |
 |
Sticky Topic W/ New Post |
 |
Locked Topic W/ New Post |
|
|
|
 |
Subscribe to this topic |
|
|
|
|
|
You may not post messages
|
|
Full HTML is allowed
|
|
Words are censored
|
|
|
