Religion and Ethics Forum

General Category => Literature, Music, Art & Entertainment => Topic started by: Anchorman on October 22, 2018, 02:35:57 PM

Title: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on October 22, 2018, 02:35:57 PM
Anyone else watch last night's episode, third in the new season? Entitled "Rosa", it was an encounter with Rosa Parks...and a"timey-wimey" villain. I though it dealt with 1950's American race issues pretty well. Most of the best 'Classic' Who stories were historical (far too many of them now lost); this should be ranked among them. Thoughtfully written and very well acted.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on October 22, 2018, 02:55:16 PM
Haven't seen it yet. Enjoyed the series so far. There seems to be a theme about racism/speciesism so far.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on October 22, 2018, 03:37:23 PM
Haven't seen it yet. Enjoyed the series so far. There seems to be a theme about racism/speciesism so far.


Last night's "Rosa" was probably the best one of the modern era, IMHO.
The writing was superb.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Aruntraveller on October 22, 2018, 03:51:52 PM
Definitely packed an emotional punch . I'd rank it up there with RTD's 1st world war episode, title escapes me.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on October 22, 2018, 03:58:01 PM
Definitely packed an emotional punch . I'd rank it up there with RTD's 1st world war episode, title escapes me.
   




"Family of blood"?



Can I help it if I'm a geek? ;)
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Aruntraveller on October 22, 2018, 04:02:10 PM
Thats the one. Two parter I think. 2nd part infinitely stronger than the first. The curse of RTD, one week brilliant, the next meh.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on October 22, 2018, 04:08:11 PM
Thats the one. Two parter I think. 2nd part infinitely stronger than the first. The curse of RTD, one week brilliant, the next meh.
It's not an RTD written episode. The first one is called Human Nature. Both written by Paul Cornell - geek too.


Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Aruntraveller on October 22, 2018, 06:21:36 PM
It's not an RTD written episode. The first one is called Human Nature. Both written by Paul Cornell - geek too.

Apologies. Still the curse though  ;)
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on October 22, 2018, 08:40:44 PM
So watched it. Certainly feels more like the original remit in terms of education. Accents were all over the place but good bit of acting. Third time in a row the 'villain' has disappeared/been disappeared.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Walt Zingmatilder on October 22, 2018, 09:31:08 PM
So watched it. Certainly feels more like the original remit in terms of education. Accents were all over the place but good bit of acting. Third time in a row the 'villain' has disappeared/been disappeared.
Maybe that's the story arc.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on October 22, 2018, 09:42:43 PM
Maybe that's the story arc.
Chibnall has said that there is no arc but show runners, like the Doctor, lie. Given the Timeless Child reference in episode  2 and these disappearing villains, and the sort of racism theme so far, so have to wonder.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on October 22, 2018, 10:41:24 PM
Woss RTD?
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on October 22, 2018, 10:58:44 PM
Woss RTD?
Russell T Davies
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on October 23, 2018, 08:04:06 AM
Ta.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on October 23, 2018, 08:14:46 AM
Just read about 'Family of Blood' on Wikipedia. Damn - wish I'd seen it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on October 23, 2018, 11:06:02 AM
Just read about 'Family of Blood' on Wikipedia. Damn - wish I'd seen it.
Might be on Iplayer. The earlier series of Doctor Who were on it in run up to launch of Jodie Whittaker as Doctor. You need to watch the start of the 2 parter Human Nature, which I think is better than Trentvoyager's estimate, as well. They are then followed by the rather magnificent Blink.

And apologies about the gnomic RTD stuff - I sometimes think that Doctor Who would fit better on the Faith Sharing Area for the geeks amongst us.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Stranger on October 23, 2018, 11:28:52 AM
Might be on Iplayer.

Human Nature (https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b007m0r9/doctor-who-series-3-8-human-nature)
The Family of Blood (https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b007n0d6/doctor-who-series-3-9-the-family-of-blood)
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on October 23, 2018, 12:30:27 PM
Might be on Iplayer. The earlier series of Doctor Who were on it in run up to launch of Jodie Whittaker as Doctor. You need to watch the start of the 2 parter Human Nature, which I think is better than Trentvoyager's estimate, as well. They are then followed by the rather magnificent Blink.

And apologies about the gnomic RTD stuff - I sometimes think that Doctor Who would fit better on the Faith Sharing Area for the geeks amongst us.
   



"blink" was, indeed, superb.
Mind you all the "Weeping Angels" eps were pretty good.
"Angels in Manhattan" was a winner as well.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on October 23, 2018, 12:38:34 PM
Human Nature (https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b007m0r9/doctor-who-series-3-8-human-nature)
The Family of Blood (https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b007n0d6/doctor-who-series-3-9-the-family-of-blood)
Great - thanks! I'll watch them tomorrow, when I've got time.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: trippymonkey on October 23, 2018, 10:56:48 PM
I think it's good when it's referred to as Time Lord-Lady stories but not totally convinced of it being THE Dr.

Nick
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on October 23, 2018, 11:05:12 PM
It'd be interesting if the Doctor met up with his/her granddaughter Susan from the earliest days, perhaps now a man after a number of regenerations, and a fully-fledged Time Lord/Lady (Time Lordy?).
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: SweetPea on October 24, 2018, 09:26:00 PM
I haven't watched Dr Who since the David Tennant/Billie Piper outing which was very enjoyable. I was curious to see Jodie Whittaker's take though and think she is doing a brilliant job.

The first episode I thought very good; was not so keen on the second episode; the third, Rosa Parks, episode, as others have already mentioned, I too found excellent. Well done to all involved.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Aruntraveller on October 28, 2018, 11:34:23 PM
So more standard fare this evening with giant spiders, but picking up on NS's observation last week yet another villain left without any proper conclusion; so is Chibnall up to something?

Also did anyone else notice a nod to "The Shining" in the opening shots of the hotel or was that just me?
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on October 29, 2018, 08:59:14 AM
So more standard fare this evening with giant spiders, but picking up on NS's observation last week yet another villain left without any proper conclusion; so is Chibnall up to something?

Also did anyone else notice a nod to "The Shining" in the opening shots of the hotel or was that just me?


Last night was good - again.
I was reminded of the Jon Pertwee story "The Green Death", qhich marked Katy Manning's last outing as Jo Grant.
The premis was pretty similar, in that the 'baddies' were all too human.
I agree that there's a loose end here.
I note from other sites that many Americans are banging on about the 'politicisation' of the show.
Their memories do not appear to stretch back to the classic era, then.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on October 29, 2018, 09:11:03 AM

Last night was good - again.
I was reminded of the Jon Pertwee story "The Green Death", qhich marked Katy Manning's last outing as Jo Grant.
The premis was pretty similar, in that the 'baddies' were all too human.
I agree that there's a loose end here.
I note from other sites that many Americans are banging on about the 'politicisation' of the show.
Their memories do not appear to stretch back to the classic era, then.
Yes, The Green Death was much more politicised than last night's. Some good bits on character development but felt the resolution was a bit rushed. To an extent, I thought Chris Noth was wasted a bit but am hoping that there is something behind these series of non resolutions.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on October 29, 2018, 09:18:17 AM
It didn't occur to me while watching, but the nasty businessman is clearly a parody of Trump - e.g. "You're fired!", Trump being the former host of American '"The Apprentice".
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on December 08, 2018, 01:30:38 PM
Will see how it finished but despite not having anything I thought was awful, it has felt less than a sum of its parts. Good things: Jodie Whittaker, individual stories, Mandip Gill, historicals, and definitely Bradley Walsh. Bad things: lack of threat, a waste of Chris Noth, too much sonic screwdriver, the design of the Tardis.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Aruntraveller on December 08, 2018, 01:38:06 PM
Well we do have Daleks for the New Year. Be interesting to see what new perspective they manage to put on them.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on December 08, 2018, 02:23:51 PM
Nothing really objectionable in the series so far; most of the stories have been pretty good, though possibly a few were over  heads of younger viewers.
I note from the FB groups that folk are moaning about the lack of an arc- but personally, I find that a refreshing change.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on December 08, 2018, 02:26:11 PM
The inclusiveness and anti-violence messages have been a bit clunky at times.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Aruntraveller on December 08, 2018, 02:39:18 PM
Nothing really objectionable in the series so far; most of the stories have been pretty good, though possibly a few were over  heads of younger viewers.
I note from the FB groups that folk are moaning about the lack of an arc- but personally, I find that a refreshing change.

With you on the lack of arc. Also with NS, although I've enjoyed it, there seems to me to be a lack of a gelling agent.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Walt Zingmatilder on December 08, 2018, 02:47:46 PM
Doctor Who is back to what it was. A show for the family with Reithian tradition to educate and convey
Values.

No wonder people of the same stripe as K Hopkins oppose it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on December 08, 2018, 03:18:01 PM
Doctor Who is back to what it was. A show for the family with Reithian tradition to educate and convey
Values.

No wonder people of the same stripe as K Hopkins oppose it.
If that foul harridan Hopkins opposes it, that's yet another reason to like it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: SweetPea on December 08, 2018, 05:37:41 PM
I'm really enjoying Jodie Whittaker's portrayal of the doctor, reckon she's slipped into it really well. Love the Yorkshire accent that comes with it, too.

Yes, Bradley Walsh has always been a favourite of mine - his unassuming personality showing through in this series.

This is the only series where I've watched every episode since the David Tennant outings.

Interesting too, that the doc seems to be gaining more companions with each new incarnation.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Aruntraveller on December 08, 2018, 05:55:03 PM
Quote
This is the only series where I've watched every episode since the David Tennant outings

Me too. I think this perhaps says more about the show runner than it does about either Matt Smith, who I loved; or Peter Capaldi whose performance I also enjoyed.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on December 08, 2018, 06:09:26 PM
I'm really enjoying Jodie Whittaker's portrayal of the doctor, reckon she's slipped into it really well. Love the Yorkshire accent that comes with it, too.

Yes, Bradley Walsh has always been a favourite of mine - his unassuming personality showing through in this series.

This is the only series where I've watched every episode since the David Tennant outings.

Interesting too, that the doc seems to be gaining more companions with each new incarnation.
The first Doctor had three.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Aruntraveller on December 08, 2018, 06:12:01 PM
The first Doctor had three.

That's right. Susan (grand-daughter) Ian and Barbara (teachers, I think).

Did we ever find out if Susan was a Time Lady?
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on December 08, 2018, 06:13:38 PM
That's right. Susan (grand-daughter) Ian and Barbara (teachers, I think).

Did we ever find out if Susan was a Time Lady?
I've often thought it would be interesting to have a later regeneration of Susan sppear in the modern DW.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on December 08, 2018, 09:53:29 PM
I'm really enjoying Jodie Whittaker's portrayal of the doctor, reckon she's slipped into it really well. Love the Yorkshire accent that comes with it, too. Yes, Bradley Walsh has always been a favourite of mine - his unassuming personality showing through in this series. This is the only series where I've watched every episode since the David Tennant outings. Interesting too, that the doc seems to be gaining more companions with each new incarnation.
Geek alert..... There were three companions in part of the Hartnell era, some of Troughton...and four during several Davison era stories.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Aruntraveller on December 08, 2018, 09:56:17 PM
Geek alert..... There were three companions in part of the Hartnell era, some of Troughton...and four during several Davison era stories.

Never apologise for being a geek about Dr Who. Or for that matter Star Trek. Star Wars however, a different story.....
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on December 08, 2018, 10:26:02 PM
I've often thought it would be interesting to have a later regeneration of Susan sppear in the modern DW.
       



Some of the eight Doctor (audio adventures, Big Finish) have the Doctor reunited with Susan...and Susan's son.
At one point, Susan is left flying the TARDIS while the Doctot tries to save the young man and his current assistant ,Lucie Millar (played, incidentally, by Sheridan Smith)
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on December 09, 2018, 07:25:45 AM
Some of the eight Doctor (audio adventures, Big Finish) have the Doctor reunited with Susan...and Susan's son.
At one point, Susan is left flying the TARDIS while the Doctot tries to save the young man and his current assistant ,Lucie Millar (played, incidentally, by Sheridan Smith)
Inneresting - thanks for the info. I love Dr Who, but am not familiar with the audio adventures. I'm not an out-and-out Whovian.
Re. companions: I would also like to see a companion from a different time than the present, like Jamie (Frazer Hines), a companion of (I think) the second Doctor, who was an early 18th-Century Jacobite soldier. How about two companions from the Civil War, one a royalist and the other a parliamentarian, who have to learn to get on and sink their differences?
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Walt Zingmatilder on December 09, 2018, 08:02:58 AM
Inneresting - thanks for the info. I love Dr Who, but am not familiar with the audio adventures. I'm not an out-and-out Whovian.
Re. companions: I would also like to see a companion from a different time than the present, like Jamie (Frazer Hines), a companion of (I think) the second Doctor, who was an early 18th-Century Jacobite soldier. How about two companions from the Civil War, one a royalist and the other a parliamentarian, who have to learn to get on and sink their differences?
Alan Cummings James 1 would make a good companion as someone who is well meaning but doesnt get the space travel, 21st century ethics and aliens thing at all.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on December 09, 2018, 08:17:29 AM
Oh - and there was also Victoria Waterfield, from the 1860s.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on December 09, 2018, 09:38:36 AM
Inneresting - thanks for the info. I love Dr Who, but am not familiar with the audio adventures. I'm not an out-and-out Whovian.
Re. companions: I would also like to see a companion from a different time than the present, like Jamie (Frazer Hines), a companion of (I think) the second Doctor, who was an early 18th-Century Jacobite soldier. How about two companions from the Civil War, one a royalist and the other a parliamentarian, who have to learn to get on and sink their differences?
   



The second Doctor had a habit of picking up folk from the past.
Jamie was encountered in "The Highlanders"....one of the stories the BBC wiped from their archives; luckily the audio survived. Jamie was joined by Victoria, plucked from nineteenth century Victorian England in "The evil of the Daleks"...another almost entrirely lost story arcv. Both work well in "Tomb of the Cybemrmen", though.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Robbie on December 09, 2018, 09:42:05 AM
I haven't watched Dr Who since David Tennant. Not for any particular reason.
This thread makes me want to see it all.  So many people have commended Matt Smith and Peter Capaldi, whom I've never seen as Doc Who (& Jodi of course(.

I think when I am retired I will watch ALL!  Lying on sofa.  I'll get square eyes but who cares?  It will be worth it.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on December 09, 2018, 10:02:15 AM
I haven't watched Dr Who since David Tennant. Not for any particular reason.
This thread makes me want to see it all.  So many people have commended Matt Smith and Peter Capaldi, whom I've never seen as Doc Who (& Jodi of course(.

I think when I am retired I will watch ALL!  Lying on sofa.  I'll get square eyes but who cares?  It will be worth it.



All?
OK, you may aswell start with "An Unearthly Child" (November 1963)......
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on December 14, 2018, 01:56:16 PM
Quotation from the Tardis instruction manual, which I've just bought:
Quote
Each time the TARDIS materialises in a new location, within the first nanosecond of it landing, it analyses its surroundings, calcuates a 12-dimensional data map of everything within a thousand-mile radius,  and determines which outer shell would blend in best with its environment, and then it disguises itself as a police telephone box.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: BeRational on December 14, 2018, 02:42:03 PM
Quotation from the Tardis instruction manual, which I've just bought:

I think the story is that some of it does not work properly and it is stuck.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on December 14, 2018, 02:55:25 PM
I think the story is that some of it does not work properly and it is stuck.




The Doctor did try to correct the chamelion circuit occasionally....the most memorable result was the TARDIS  turning into a pipe organ in the scrapyard at Totters Lane during Colin Baker's time.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: ad_orientem on December 16, 2018, 12:22:15 PM
Haven't watched Dr Who since Christopher Eccleston. He was good. Loved watching Dr Who as a kid. Tom Baker was my favourite.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Roses on December 16, 2018, 12:26:13 PM
Haven't watched Dr Who since Christopher Eccleston. He was good. Loved watching Dr Who as a kid. Tom Baker was my favourite.


Patrick Troughton and Tom Baker were mine, I haven't watched it in years, the rest were a disappointment to say the least.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on December 16, 2018, 01:33:51 PM
I'm another Tom Baker fan. I think the Doctors got less and less impressive as it drew towards the 16-year hiatus, but they've been much better since it was revived.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Roses on December 16, 2018, 01:53:51 PM
Our DS son is a great fan of Dr Who. :)
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Aruntraveller on January 01, 2019, 08:06:50 PM
Well, just watched the New Years Special. Daleks are back, all is right in the Whoniverse.

One of the strongest of the series, and the first one that felt as if it had settled into being Who.

Loved the throwaway scene with the family deprived of its wifi.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on January 01, 2019, 08:22:58 PM
I thought the melding of slow paced dialogue with the exciting fast paced stuff was well done. The whole story was a great bit of scripting. Did you note the casual bit about questions about U.NI.T and cuts in funding? Still manages to be topical!
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Aruntraveller on January 01, 2019, 08:40:05 PM
I thought the melding of slow paced dialogue with the exciting fast paced stuff was well done. The whole story was a great bit of scripting. Did you note the casual bit about questions about U.NI.T and cuts in funding? Still manages to be topical!

I did notice it yes, Chris Chibnall through and through. Plus he has brought his considerable skills at writing about family situations (see Broadchurch)  to bear with great effect here; with Ryan, Graham and Ryan's father's relationships playing out rather touchingly.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Aruntraveller on November 21, 2019, 09:58:23 AM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2019/dw-fry-henry

News about the new series.

Always interesting when they have biggish stars in the series. Does it upset the balance and become a vehicle for the guests, or does the casting blend properly? We will see.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on November 23, 2019, 06:50:40 PM
 Just a wee reminder...and I've just watched it again.
Today, in 1963, two teachers noticed a police box in a scrap yard......
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Unearthly_Child
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on January 02, 2020, 09:04:52 PM
First episode of new series was good and old Whos doing rather well on Britbox


https://www.radiotimes.com/news/2019-12-28/classic-doctor-who-britbox-viewers/
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on January 02, 2020, 10:36:06 PM
First episode of new series was good and old Whos doing rather well on Britbox


https://www.radiotimes.com/news/2019-12-28/classic-doctor-who-britbox-viewers/
   
I thought it was a bit flat, TBH.
As for classic 'Who'?
I spent much of last night and this afternoon re-visiting "The Invasion" (Troughton)
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Aruntraveller on January 02, 2020, 11:08:28 PM
   
I thought it was a bit flat, TBH.
As for classic 'Who'?
I spent much of last night and this afternoon re-visiting "The Invasion" (Troughton)

Not watched it yet, so no spoilers please.

As to Troughton, not the original but very definitely the best. I know, I'm old.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on January 03, 2020, 12:21:23 AM
Who was everyone's favourite Doctor?
Me - Tom Baker.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on January 03, 2020, 12:31:02 AM
Ideal adventure: the Tardis materialises on the bridge of the USS Enterprise. Captain Picard (for it is he) orders security to the bridge. The Doctor steps out, along with her companions, and says that she's there to help the Federation repel a combined Dalek/Borg invasion force. The captain is understandably cautious: he knows of the Doctor, and knows that she is basically on the side of good, but also that she is mercurial, and doesn't take orders from anyone. Take it from there. The Master and Q are involved somehow, as well. And maybe a few previous doctors.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on January 03, 2020, 09:03:31 AM
Not watched it yet, so no spoilers please. As to Troughton, not the original but very definitely the best. I know, I'm old.
I remember Hartnall, but Troughton was my first Doctor. I'm glad thet are animating more of the lost episodes. 'IInvasion' was one of the first to have animated episodes replacing the ones that are still lost. Being a geek, I like the notes on the DVD.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on January 03, 2020, 09:06:48 AM
Who was everyone's favourite Doctor?
Me - Tom Baker.
   

Depends on who was writing the scripts.
The Troughton and Pertwee scripts were edgy for their time, and many of the 'Gothic' Tom Naker ones were superb. Mind you, several of the Colin Baker and the last two McCoy season scripts were spot on.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on January 03, 2020, 09:09:10 AM
Ideal adventure: the Tardis materialises on the bridge of the USS Enterprise. Captain Picard (for it is he) orders security to the bridge. The Doctor steps out, along with her companions, and says that she's there to help the Federation repel a combined Dalek/Borg invasion force. The captain is understandably cautious: he knows of the Doctor, and knows that she is basically on the side of good, but also that she is mercurial, and doesn't take orders from anyone. Take it from there. The Master and Q are involved somehow, as well. And maybe a few previous doctors.
   


I think there's a comic novel on that very theme - with the David Tennent Doctor.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on January 03, 2020, 10:01:46 AM
   


I think there's a comic novel on that very theme - with the David Tennent Doctor.
The idea of a Doctor / Startrek joint adventure isn't new. Each show references the other from time to time, in various ways.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on January 03, 2020, 10:13:48 AM
The idea of a Doctor / Startrek joint adventure isn't new. Each show references the other from time to time, in various ways.

   



Yes.
I think the earliest might have been the Pertwee alternative universe  story 'Infewrno', when the earthbound Doctor kicks the TARDIS console in frustration and says "What we need is an Enterprise!"
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on January 03, 2020, 10:20:17 AM
   



Yes.
I think the earliest might have been the Pertwee alternative universe  story 'Infewrno', when the earthbound Doctor kicks the TARDIS console in frustration and says "What we need is an Enterprise!"

Some of the connections

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Doctor_Who


And the crossover

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_The_Next_Generation/Doctor_Who:_Assimilation2
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Harrowby Hall on January 13, 2020, 09:22:22 AM
Last night's episode of Dr Who presented some interesting situations - one was a planet Earth, sometime in the future, suffering from cataclismic effects of climate change. Most of this appeared - in a Gallifreyan way - to be logical.

One thing did puzzle me however: in a world of desolation so much was being destroyed by fire.

How, on a planet where oxygen had been displaced by carbon dioxide, could something burn and there be flames?
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Udayana on January 13, 2020, 12:22:10 PM
It was bunkum ... though I did enjoy the little environmental lecture at the end.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Christine on January 14, 2020, 01:42:43 PM
I'm a fan of classic Doctor Who.  My favourite Doctors are Troughton, Pertwee and Baker.  I've not been over-keen on most of the reboot.  It started well with Ecclestone, especially commencing bang in the middle of an Auton story, which was inspired.  But the romance with Rose spoiled it for me.  I didn't like it when Hartnell had a dalliance with a Roman woman, but at least it was only one story.  Tennant, a really good actor in my opinion, hammed it up unforgivably and at that point I stopped watching regularly.  My favourite stories would include The Empty Child, but not much else from the new era.

Whittaker has been quite good, I think, I like the self-contained stories, but she needs to calm down now she's over the regeneration trauma.  I enjoyed this series opener, it reminded me of classic stories, with greedy CEOs being used by bad aliens.

Among my favourite stories, on the spot and without reminding myself of anything, are Spearhead from Space, The Daemons, The Pyramids of Mars (and the other gothic Bakers, but that's my favourite), The Green Death, Remembrance of the Daleks, The Abominable Snowmen (book and audio  :'( ), The Tomb of the Cybermen, City of Death...  OK, too many to list.

I think the animations are excellent, I wish they'd do all the missing episodes, and quick, while I'm here to enjoy them.


Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on January 14, 2020, 01:59:04 PM
Geek alert - wasn't it an Aztec woman (Cameca) rather than a Roman one that Hartnell's Doctor dallied with?
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on January 14, 2020, 02:09:34 PM
I realise I hadn't answered Steve's question about favourite Dr. It's a difficult one since it depends on the stories. Tom Baker was probably the Doctor I watched most but in later years it was a parody of acting. I think he should have finished ealier. I loved Matt Smith in part because of the seeming echo of Troughton. In the end though, despite a lack of great stories, perhaps only the one in my top ten, my favourite is often Davison.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on January 14, 2020, 02:12:38 PM
I watched the latest episode having read lots of stuff about how awful it was and how it was a rip off of Midnight. In the end it seemed ok, far from great, a bit overly packed with stuff, and a rip off of almost too many things to count (which I quite like in science fantasy).
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Christine on January 14, 2020, 05:21:07 PM
Geek alert - wasn't it an Aztec woman (Cameca) rather than a Roman one that Hartnell's Doctor dallied with?

 :-[ I wish I was a geek. I've not revisited the Hartnell historicals for about 25 years...
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on January 14, 2020, 06:28:49 PM
:-[ I wish I was a geek. I've not revisited the Hartnell historicals for about 25 years...
In most senses I wouldn't think I was. Just now and again
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on January 14, 2020, 07:39:01 PM
Some of the Hartnell scripts stand the test of time pretty well.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on January 16, 2020, 10:32:43 PM
I finally got round to watching part 2 of 'Spyfall' and the latest episode, set in the holiday resort, over the last two days, on iplayer. 'Spyfall' was great. I love them bringing historical characters into it, and here we got two: Ada Gordon, later Lovelace, and Noor Inayat Khan. I'd heard of Khan, but looked her up on Wikipedia afterwards for details. What a woman!
Didn't think much of the resort story: one of the weaker ones, I think.
I also discovered that every episode since the revival in 2005 is available on iplayer, so I'll be doing some catching up of ones I've heard about but not seen, especially the one with Churchill during the war, with Daleks on our side for their own purposes.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on January 16, 2020, 11:10:18 PM
I finally got round to watching part 2 of 'Spyfall' and the latest episode, set in the holiday resort, over the last two days, on iplayer. 'Spyfall' was great. I love them bringing historical characters into it, and here we got two: Ada Gordon, later Lovelace, and Noor Inayat Khan. I'd heard of Khan, but looked her up on Wikipedia afterwards for details. What a woman!
Didn't think much of the resort story: one of the weaker ones, I think.
I also discovered that every episode since the revival in 2005 is available on iplayer, so I'll be doing some catching up of ones I've heard about but not seen, especially the one with Churchill during the war, with Daleks on our side for their own purposes.

The Churchill episode is pretty crap. Some good ideas and references but an atrocious simplistic deus ex machina solution.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on January 17, 2020, 09:21:00 AM
The Churchill episode is pretty crap. Some good ideas and references but an atrocious simplistic deus ex machina solution.
   


Pluss jammy dodgers were not as cool as jelly babies.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Aruntraveller on January 18, 2020, 09:41:21 PM
I, like Oliphant, have just caught up with Spyfall (part 2). Thoroughly satisfying and enjoyable for me.

Only one other thing to add, Lenny Henry can act really well. It surprised me for some reason.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Christine on January 28, 2020, 05:11:26 PM
I watched the last two Billie Piper episodes at the weekend, having had them recommended not for the story, but for the entertaining exchanges between Dalek and Cyberman.  It's the start of the second episode and as far as I'm concerned there should have been a lot more of the sarcastic Dalek and a lot less of the Tylers.  And a LOT less romance.  And a lot less pointless shooting.  Why do soldiers in Doctor Who continue shooting after it's become entirely obvious the bullets don't work?  I know it's traditional but it's always bothered me.  Very dangerous.

 :) 
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on January 30, 2020, 10:15:32 AM
       The dedicated genius of the Whovian mind knows no bounds. Or, alternatively....this guy had nothing better to do. A Hitchiker looks at the Daleks. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWn_1yOFpfU&fbclid=IwAR1-YYELQuwMR3fdZtX_EPouXtyO2pUNSWInv6P_9h69oWVYdyNH652rZ_I
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on February 09, 2020, 12:55:58 PM
Just watched 'Dr Who' on iplayer, and spotted two verbal anachronisms.It was set in 1900 New York, and featured Nikola Tesla and Thomas Edison. At one point, Tesla says to his assistant "We need to get out of here", but that's a modern construction. In 1900, he'd've said "We must get out of here". Later, the Doctor refers to Aliens, and Edison immediately understands her to mean extra-terrestrials, but in 1900 "aliens" only meant "foreigners".
Apart from that, excellent - though Tesla scrawling furiously on his diagram and talking fast was a bit of a cinematic cliche - the dedicated, driven scientist. I googled Tesla and Edison later - both the actors looked remarkably like them.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Udayana on February 09, 2020, 08:47:01 PM
Just watched 'Dr Who' on iplayer, and spotted two verbal anachronisms.It was set in 1900 New York, and featured Nikola Tesla and Thomas Edison. At one point, Tesla says to his assistant "We need to get out of here", but that's a modern construction. In 1900, he'd've said "We must get out of here". Later, the Doctor refers to Aliens, and Edison immediately understands her to mean extra-terrestrials, but in 1900 "aliens" only meant "foreigners".
Apart from that, excellent - though Tesla scrawling furiously on his diagram and talking fast was a bit of a cinematic cliche - the dedicated, driven scientist. I googled Tesla and Edison later - both the actors looked remarkably like them.
Oh dear :( The Tardis' translation circuits must have got set to "Modern" English instead of "Grandad's"  !
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on February 10, 2020, 08:34:58 AM
Just watched 'Fugitive of the Judoon'. Apart from the fact that the Judoon (who have appeared before, of course) are blatant rip-offs of Douglas Adams's Vogons, I thought it was pretty good. I look forward to an explanation of the other doctor.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on February 10, 2020, 08:45:00 AM
Just watched 'Fugitive of the Judoon'. Apart from the fact that the Judoon (who have appeared before, of course) are blatant rip-offs of Douglas Adams's Vogons, I thought it was pretty good. I look forward to an explanation of the other doctor.
     





Not goona spoil it, but I think a couple of clues came from last night's episode.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on February 10, 2020, 08:53:31 AM
The most obvious explanation - too obvious, really; it'd be disappointing if it was really this simple - is that the other Doctor is a furure incarnation, and doesn't remember the Doctor because her memory wasn't fully restored when she broke the glass.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on February 11, 2020, 12:03:46 AM
The inside of the other Doctor's Tardis looked like a very early version, and she addressed the Tardis as "old girl", which was a habit, if memory serves, of the third Doctor, Jon Pertwee. Could she be an alternative third Doctor, maybe from a different timeline in which he/she regenerated differently, and then slipped into our timeline without realising it?
Just watched 'Praxeus' on iplayer. Not bad, but not great. I'll watch the latest episode tomorrow, and watch out for the possible clues Anchorman mentions.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on February 11, 2020, 09:03:08 AM
 Mentioning 'The Toymaker' (Hartnall0), 'celestial beings' (Baker), and the 'two guardians' (Baker/Davison) opens up all sorts of avenues for speculation regarding this 'alternate' Doctor. Another alternative is the 'Valeyard', a kind of doppleganger encapsulating the Doctor's dark side, which is due an airing again.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on February 11, 2020, 09:08:15 AM
Online speculation mentions "the Timeless Child". I'm afrad I'm not enough of a Whovian to keep up with all these overarching plots.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on February 11, 2020, 09:23:56 AM
Online speculation mentions "the Timeless Child". I'm afrad I'm not enough of a Whovian to keep up with all these overarching plots.
   



That was a phrase thrown out by the Master in the second episode of the series this year.
The other speculation involves Whittaker's Doctor.
In the first two parter, she wheechs the TARDIS off to Gallifrey to verify whether or not the Master as destroyed it. She gets there as easily as going to Tesco.
However in 'the Day of the Doctor' - the 50th anniversary show which introduced John Hurt as the 'War Doctor', Gallifrey was supposed to have been locked away in a 'pocket universe' outside time to save it from destruction.
There's no explanation as to how Jodie's TARDIS made it so easy to get there; suggesting that the 'real' Doctor might actually be the alternative one!
Webs, eh?
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on February 17, 2020, 07:48:32 AM
Enjoyed last night's episode, but Byron should have had a limp: he was lame due to a club foot. Shelley was too heroic and generally likeable: he was a great poet, but a selfish bar steward as a person. Hope the mystery of the alternative Doctor is solved soon.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Walter on February 25, 2020, 12:01:30 PM
Enjoyed last night's episode, but Byron should have had a limp: he was lame due to a club foot. Shelley was too heroic and generally likeable: he was a great poet, but a selfish bar steward as a person. Hope the mystery of the alternative Doctor is solved soon.
my granny had a club foot, she got all her shoes from Littlewoods catalogue

(recycling is all the rage now. That one is from the 1970s)
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on March 02, 2020, 11:01:16 AM
If I've got this right, the Doctor is SPOILER ALERT!
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
the original Time Lord, the first to regenerate before the ability was given to the other time lords with a limit of 12, which is why s/he can regenerate any number of times; the first doctor wasn't in fact the first, but only the first she can remember, and the other doctor from the lighthouse is an earlier one. I think I've got that all correct, but I still don't understand where the Irish copper fits in, or how his father and the sergeant re-appear on his retirement day no older, or what the business with him being strapped into a chair was. Was he the doctor, having his earlier memory wiped, before regenerating into the "first" (Hartnell) Doctor? we did seem to be in the 60s, so that'd fit, and it explains the police box - assuming that Ireland had them as well. Were his father and the sergeant two other time lords? I'm not much good at keeping up with the over-arching story arcs.
An online review of the episode had a photo-csption asking "Will the Doctor escape from the Judoon prison cell?" Ooh - tough questions first, eh? Maybe the lighthouse Doctor will arrive in her Tardis and rescue her.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on March 02, 2020, 11:15:28 AM
If I've got this right, the Doctor is SPOILER ALERT!
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
the original Time Lord, the first to regenerate before the ability was given to the other time lords with a limit of 12, which is why s/he can regenerate any number of times; the first doctor wasn't in fact the first, but only the first she can remember, and the other doctor from the lighthouse is an earlier one. I think I've got that all correct, but I still don't understand where the Irish copper fits in, or how his father and the sergeant re-appear on his retirement day no older, or what the business with him being strapped into a chair was. Was he the doctor, having his earlier memory wiped, before regenerating into the "first" (Hartnell) Doctor? we did seem to be in the 60s, so that'd fit, and it explains the police box - assuming that Ireland had them as well. Were his father and the sergeant two other time lords? I'm not much good at keeping up with the over-arching story arcs.
An online review of the episode had a photo-csption asking "Will the Doctor escape from the Judoon prison cell?" Ooh - tough questions first, eh? Maybe the lighthouse Doctor will arrive in her Tardis and rescue her.
   


I know the 'canon' of classic Who is flexible; but last night's story stretched it to breaking point.
In 'the Three Doctors', Omega is stated to be the first Time Lord, whose experiments led to a black hole, creating the first TARDIS.
In "Invasion of Time", Rassilon is stated to be the founder of the Matrix and first President of the Time Lords, and in 'The Five Doctors', he is seen to be still 'alive' in a way we don't understand.
Even under Capaldi's time, Clara is shown listening in as a young child Doctor is told firmly by his parents that he was destined for the
Academy....and in 'Demon's run', the Doctor shows Amy his cradle.
Unless he has regenerated umpteen times as a baby, then last night was nonsense.
Oh, and making the Master look and feel like the Joker wasn't a great move either.
The Cybermen were good, though.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on March 02, 2020, 11:34:07 AM
If I've got this right, the Doctor is SPOILER ALERT!
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
the original Time Lord, the first to regenerate before the ability was given to the other time lords with a limit of 12, which is why s/he can regenerate any number of times; the first doctor wasn't in fact the first, but only the first she can remember, and the other doctor from the lighthouse is an earlier one. I think I've got that all correct, but I still don't understand where the Irish copper fits in, or how his father and the sergeant re-appear on his retirement day no older, or what the business with him being strapped into a chair was. Was he the doctor, having his earlier memory wiped, before regenerating into the "first" (Hartnell) Doctor? we did seem to be in the 60s, so that'd fit, and it explains the police box - assuming that Ireland had them as well. Were his father and the sergeant two other time lords? I'm not much good at keeping up with the over-arching story arcs.
An online review of the episode had a photo-csption asking "Will the Doctor escape from the Judoon prison cell?" Ooh - tough questions first, eh? Maybe the lighthouse Doctor will arrive in her Tardis and rescue her.

On the Irish policeman from elsewhere 'However, Tecteun hid some of the truth in the Matrix in the form of the story of Brendan, an immortal Irish policeman. The Master suggested that this was an attempt by Tecteun to apologize or possibly a gift meant to help her child one day decode the truth of their existence'
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on March 02, 2020, 11:40:30 AM
   


I know the 'canon' of classic Who is flexible; but last night's story stretched it to breaking point.
In 'the Three Doctors', Omega is stated to be the first Time Lord, whose experiments led to a black hole, creating the first TARDIS.
In "Invasion of Time", Rassilon is stated to be the founder of the Matrix and first President of the Time Lords, and in 'The Five Doctors', he is seen to be still 'alive' in a way we don't understand.
Even under Capaldi's time, Clara is shown listening in as a young child Doctor is told firmly by his parents that he was destined for the
Academy....and in 'Demon's run', the Doctor shows Amy his cradle.
Unless he has regenerated umpteen times as a baby, then last night was nonsense.
Oh, and making the Master look and feel like the Joker wasn't a great move either.
The Cybermen were good, though.

TBH canon has never been something  that I'm that  bothered by but aren't we dealing with The Other here

https://tardis.fandom.com/wiki/The_Other
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Harrowby Hall on March 02, 2020, 01:45:58 PM
But what I don't understand is ... why is she running Holby City Hospital?
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on March 02, 2020, 01:53:49 PM
But what I don't understand is ... why is she running Holby City Hospital?
Coronavirus
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Harrowby Hall on March 02, 2020, 07:27:04 PM
Coronavirus

Yes - it is beginning to make sense.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on March 02, 2020, 07:46:13 PM
Yes - it is beginning to make sense.
It's all connected. We will survive by becoming cyborgs
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Outrider on March 03, 2020, 03:16:01 PM
I know the 'canon' of classic Who is flexible; but last night's story stretched it to breaking point.
In 'the Three Doctors', Omega is stated to be the first Time Lord, whose experiments led to a black hole, creating the first TARDIS.
In "Invasion of Time", Rassilon is stated to be the founder of the Matrix and first President of the Time Lords, and in 'The Five Doctors', he is seen to be still 'alive' in a way we don't understand.
Even under Capaldi's time, Clara is shown listening in as a young child Doctor is told firmly by his parents that he was destined for the
Academy....and in 'Demon's run', the Doctor shows Amy his cradle.
Unless he has regenerated umpteen times as a baby, then last night was nonsense.
Oh, and making the Master look and feel like the Joker wasn't a great move either.
The Cybermen were good, though.

Except, of course, that it's all happened in a matrix that the Master has been active in for an extended period of time - can it be trusted?

O.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Udayana on March 03, 2020, 09:59:31 PM
How do we know the Master isn't another regeneration of the Doctor, another one that she has forgotten about - or hasn't got to yet?
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on March 03, 2020, 10:58:46 PM
How do we know the Master isn't another regeneration of the Doctor, another one that she has forgotten about - or hasn't got to yet?
Because the Master has also regenerated many times.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on March 04, 2020, 08:52:57 AM
Because the Master has also regenerated many times.
   


.....Aye, and none of them ...with the exception of Ainsley....a parch on Rogerr Delgado.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on March 04, 2020, 09:01:27 AM
   


.....Aye, and none of them ...with the exception of Ainsley....a parch on Rogerr Delgado.
For the single best piece of acting I've seen - Derek Jacobi's very brief Master is great. The later masters are a product of the writing - I liked Michelle Gomez in the role.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on March 04, 2020, 09:05:05 AM
I may have mentioned this before but the American sitcom Community had a rather loving pastiche of Doctor Who called Inspector Spacetime which popped up now and again through the series. There's a great wiki on it - link below which is a work of love.


https://madmanwithabooth.fandom.com/wiki/Inspector_SpaceTime_Wiki
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Udayana on March 04, 2020, 11:15:41 AM
Because the Master has also regenerated many times.
Of-course. Explains everything :)
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on March 14, 2020, 10:55:21 PM
The Churchill episode is pretty crap. Some good ideas and references but an atrocious simplistic deus ex machina solution.
Just finally watched it. I thought it was pretty good. Also watched two Tennant-era episodes, one with Rose on Coronation dsay in 1953, defeating a face-stealing alien, and one with Donna in Pompeii on eruption day, in which they defesat more aliens and rescue a Pompeiian family from the disaster, the father, a wealthy merchant, played by a young-looking, pre-doctor Peter Capaldi.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on April 18, 2021, 12:58:42 PM
But what I don't understand is ... why is she running Holby City Hospital?
Well, she is a Doctor!
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on October 24, 2022, 10:40:19 AM
Well, last night's episode was a blast.
A great swan song for Jodie, with nostalgia by the bucket load thrown in (great to see Ace, Tegan, 6, 7 & 8, not to forget a nod to the decrepit Whovians like myself with Ian Chesterton), and a brilliant ending.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on October 24, 2022, 10:54:38 AM
I'm rather cross that once again we are not getting a full series next year, just three specials in November. When are we going to get a full, 12-episode series again?
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on October 24, 2022, 11:20:21 AM
I'm rather cross that once again we are not getting a full series next year, just three specials in November. When are we going to get a full, 12-episode series again?
 



The Beeb's running short of cash....the Doctor is cut.....t'was ever thus....
Signed: disgruntled Colin Baker and Sylvester McCoy fan.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Nearly Sane on October 24, 2022, 11:21:36 AM
Guessing that there was no chance of that happening with Tennant, as far too busy and expensive, and then you have to factor in it being the 60th!!! anniversary.

To be honest, the return of RTD and DT seems more marketing than anything else. Had Johnson returend from stasis (a holiday resort in the Carribean) on the same day, then the desperation would have been underlined.

No doubt I will watch last night's at some point but it feels far from must see TV at the moment.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: SqueakyVoice on October 24, 2022, 08:58:52 PM
For the single best piece of acting I've seen - Derek Jacobi's very brief Master is great. The later masters are a product of the writing - I liked Michelle Gomez in the role.
I've  made the kids watch a lot of Steve Moffat/ Peter Capadli's episodes.
MG was as close to brilliant as all those other episodes.
CC's still seem quite pedestrian IMO.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Steve H on October 24, 2022, 10:45:09 PM
 



The Beeb's running short of cash....the Doctor is cut.....t'was ever thus....
Signed: disgruntled Colin Baker and Sylvester McCoy fan.
I'd be happy for them to do simpler, cheaper, less FX-heavy stories, if it meant we got a full series again.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Anchorman on October 25, 2022, 08:56:55 AM
I'd be happy for them to do simpler, cheaper, less FX-heavy stories, if it meant we got a full series again.
   



Yes.
Some of the McCoy stories, whilst the SFX were even worse than normal, were, for their time, really pretty good and stood up to the Troughton/Pertwee era quite well.
Title: Re: Doctor Who.
Post by: Aruntraveller on October 31, 2022, 11:25:22 PM
Well, last night's episode was a blast.
A great swan song for Jodie, with nostalgia by the bucket load thrown in (great to see Ace, Tegan, 6, 7 & 8, not to forget a nod to the decrepit Whovians like myself with Ian Chesterton), and a brilliant ending.

Finally watched this tonight. Enjoyed it. Certainly at the upper end of Jodie's time in the blue box in terms of entertainment. Slightly underwhelmed with the whole chance to destroy the Daleks, AGAIN. The ending was very good, even more so for me having visited Durdle Door last month. It was almost spooky what with it being Halloween tonight!