The Hive

You are not connected. Please login or register

New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Go down  Message [Page 4 of 7]

76 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Wed May 09, 2018 8:56 pm

Where's the video where she rants about all the blatant anti-male remarks in Series 9 and 10?

Or does she only care about prejudice when it's directed towards women?

View user profile

77 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Wed May 09, 2018 9:12 pm

@DeadManRising wrote:Where's the video where she rants about all the blatant anti-male remarks in Series 9 and 10?

Or does she only care about prejudice when it's directed towards women?

We live in a world where you can't be sexist against men. They can freely use the word "mansplaining" and not get called up for it.

I see an anti-white and straight male type thing happening these days. White male privilege, they say. You must acknowledge it. I'm sure we'll get some of that in series 11.



Last edited by CommanderMaxil1983 on Wed May 09, 2018 10:04 pm; edited 1 time in total


_________________
Too lazy to appear in the fourth part of a story.
View user profile

78 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Wed May 09, 2018 9:59 pm

She's soooo pretty!

She's surpringly tolerable although I don't agree with many of points. I really don't like Moffat but I'd hardly smear him by labelling him as a sexist. I can understand to some extent her fustrations at the portrayal of the lesbian character in Sherlock but the rest of her complaints seem pretty thin. I could call Moffat many things but a misogynist isn't one of them.

Yeah Claudia is very easy on the eye. Nice voice too.

I've spoken to her many times on twitter and she's fine to talk to. I certainly don't begrudge her, her new job of course. Hope this is a step to much better things (well its hard to go down the way from DWM LOL.) Hope she goes far in life as she does seem like a nice person, is never nasty, and is a reasonably talented host and singer. Still her hiring does just go to show how in the thrall of SJWs the DW franchise is.

As for the points she makes in her videos, well Claudia is right about some things, but because she buys into feminist myths like the patriarchy, rape culture etc, then she often tends to see a wider anti women conspiracy behind everything, which can make her points seem a bit silly.

For instance Claudia is 100 percent right about Moff oversexualising the Doctor being cringey, out of character and also letting Matt Smith down. Can you imagine Jon Pertwee or William Hartnell miming getting an erection at Jenny with their screwdriver? Can you imagine McCoy going on about his companion being in a tight skirt, or Patrick Troughton going on about making women scream? Also compare "a dandy and a clown" remarks from 1 meeting 2 and 3, to 11 and 10 making dick jokes?

I mean its shit like that that makes New Who actually feel like a parody of the original.

Also even just for Matt Smith's Doctor it makes 0 sense. Matt's Doctor was meant to be the innocent, sweet, childlike Doctor. That's how he pitched his version, that's how he was played for the most part, like when he is horrified at Amy coming onto him, or when he doesn't know why Amy and Rory don't want bunk beds, and also the way he gets on with children so much because he is one of them.

Yet Moffat would have him slap his companions on the arse, and go on about all the bondagey sex he had? It was a sign of the actor and the writer not being on the same wavelength unlike say Jon Pertwee and Terrance Dicks or Tom Baker and Bob Holmes.

However Claudia again lets her point down by making out that by doing this Moffat is promoting rape culture or hatred of women, and that its because he is a misogynist.

If anything Moff loves making men seem stupid that way by showing them to all be drooling idiots around an attractive woman. Imagine him writing Jodie as being a giggling idiot around a big ripped guy for instance.

Not that I am saying those jokes were signs of his feminist agenda however (unlike other things such as Missy). I think with those things like Matt lusting after Jenna, Mofftwat's just a stuck in a 90s, lets write a cliched sitcom where all the men are blokish idiots for cheap laughs mindset.

View user profile

79 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Thu May 10, 2018 1:50 am

LLove how she starts out trying to be posh sounding, but get's angry and turns into a London chav.

View user profile

80 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Thu May 10, 2018 2:59 am

What's a 'London chav'?

View user profile

81 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Thu May 10, 2018 9:27 am

Chav is " council housed aggressive vandal" and a person who usually lacks any social graces. So a London chav would be one of those, but with a strong working class London accent.

View user profile

82 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Thu May 10, 2018 11:18 am

They are the worst kind of scum Mad

View user profile

83 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Thu May 10, 2018 11:46 am

Mr. Happy wrote:They are the worst kind of scum Mad

You mean chavs right, not the lower classes. While chavs belong to the lower class, saying all lower class are chavs or that being lower class is bad is not what I am saying.

There is a big difference between simply being lower/working class and a chav.

View user profile

84 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Thu May 10, 2018 12:03 pm

Actually, it was supposed to be a ridiculously hyperbolic statement like "hanging is too good for them", "I blame the parents" or "It's political correctness gone mad".

View user profile

85 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Thu May 10, 2018 1:17 pm

@Genkimonk wrote:Chav is " council housed aggressive vandal" and a person who usually lacks any social graces. So a London chav would be one of those, but with a strong working class London accent.


One, that isn't the origin of the word 'Chav'. Two, you're conflating social class, accent and a type of abode with an apparent 'lack of social graces'.

There are rude, uncultured antisocial people from all walks of like, and their accent and where they live is irrelevant, yet you've chosen to use a guilt by association fallacy to attack them based upon these arbitrary, unrelated characteristics.

A tosser is a tosser. There's no need to bring class, accent or place of upbringing into it.

I wonder why you do...

View user profile

86 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Thu May 10, 2018 1:19 pm

@Genkimonk wrote:You mean chavs right, not the lower classes. While chavs belong to the lower class, saying all lower class are chavs or that being lower class is bad is not what I am saying.

There is a big difference between simply being lower/working class and a chav.

Your initial post didn't give that impression though, Monk.

But at least you're walking it back a bit.

View user profile

87 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Fri May 11, 2018 10:57 am

View user profile

88 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Fri May 11, 2018 3:22 pm

"A little lacking in age though? Where is the mature contribution coming from?"

Benjamin's response:
"Incorrect. Their combined age is 264- more than any other "Time Team."

He doesn't have an actual answer as to why the team is lacking diversity in the age department. I'd rather spend my money on something sharp and shiny to shove up my ass than buy their shitty magazine. How the actual fuck can there be this many smug twats associated with one show? Was it always like this, back in the day?


_________________
Too lazy to appear in the fourth part of a story.
View user profile

89 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Fri May 11, 2018 6:09 pm

Mr. Happy wrote:https://twitter.com/benjamin_cook/status/991967468603265024

Now we know who to blame for that mess Wink

I recognise him. He was one of those idiots giving Peter Davison a hard time on Twitter for not jumping up and down for joy over Jodie's casting. Guess that explains why DWM's new "Time Team" are such useless, inept cunts.

View user profile

90 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Fri May 11, 2018 6:39 pm

What a parade of cunts.

View user profile

91 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Fri May 11, 2018 7:47 pm

Mr. Happy wrote:https://twitter.com/benjamin_cook/status/991967468603265024

Now we know who to blame for that mess Wink

UGH usual crap I see there of all change is good. Why do people still trot out that lame ass argument.

View user profile

92 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Fri May 11, 2018 10:26 pm

From now on I'll be calling them the 'Tard Team'.

After the TARDIS, of course. Very Happy

View user profile

93 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Fri May 11, 2018 10:36 pm

The Turd Team. Big Grin

These "professional" fans are a shameless cornucopia of cuntery. I guess it's inevitable when you wholly sell out something you supposedly love to keep getting a paycheck.
I want nothing more to do with any of them.

View user profile

94 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Fri May 11, 2018 11:09 pm

@iank wrote:The Turd Team. Big Grin

These "professional" fans are a shameless cornucopia of cuntery. I guess it's inevitable when you wholly sell out something you supposedly love to keep getting a paycheck.
I want nothing more to do with any of them.

Indeed, the only good thing is those paychecks are not going to keep coming in. These cunts have run the franchise into the ground so badly that honestly who the fuck is going to bother with it anymore.

Its headed for another wilderness years, but this time its not going to command such a following while away.

Yeah you see for all these cunts like Mofftwat, and RTD like to make out that the show was forgotten about in the 90s that was not true. Every story was released on video, many of them were best sellers, it gained new fans all over the world (I was one of them, I was born in 1991 and came to DW on video and there were so many of my friends who were the same.)

In 2002 DW was voted the show most people wanted to see come back, and it was by people under 20.

People wanted it back, because it ended on a high, and it had a great legacy. Now? Who the fuck is going to want to see it back. The Fitzroy Tavern cucks, Russell T Davies, Steven Moffat, Paul Cornell, Gary Russell, Robert Shearman, Chris Chibnall were parasites who couldn't think up anything of their own so they latched onto this franchise, played on sci fi fans self loathing to bully them into going along with their changes, and because they were so inept, they ran it into the ground.

They shot the goose that laid the golden egg for them.

View user profile

95 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Fri May 11, 2018 11:53 pm

Commander Maxil wrote: How the actual fuck can there be this many smug twats associated with one show? Was it always like this, back in the day?

I only started watching properly with Remembrance, when I was 9, so wasn't really aware of the fan politics. I think it was analogous in the '80s with people JVR and Andrew Beech, then the Restoration Team gained a hegemony over the restoration of DW material, but that has concretized since the show came back. Today's Professional Fan/Uber is a far smugger and more self-righteous type of cunt.

DWM is a training camp for some of them, in the way fanzines and Virgin NAs were in the '80s and '90s. I wonder if the Time Team go down the Fitzroy? Fuck, I doubt they even know where it is.

View user profile

96 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Fri May 11, 2018 11:55 pm

@iank wrote:

These "professional" fans are a shameless cornucopia of cuntery.

Indeed, a veritable smorgasbord of twattery, fuckwitted cuntery of the highest meekrob

View user profile

97 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Fri May 11, 2018 11:58 pm

@burrunjor wrote:
People wanted it back, because it ended on a high, and it had a great legacy. Now? Who the fuck is going to want to see it back. The Fitzroy Tavern cucks, Russell T Davies, Steven Moffat, Paul Cornell, Gary Russell, Robert Shearman, Chris Chibnall were parasites who couldn't think up anything of their own so they latched onto this franchise, played on sci fi fans self loathing to bully them into going along with their changes, and because they were so inept, they ran it into the ground.

They shot the goose that laid the golden egg for them.

Not sure why you lump Rob Shearman in there, he seems a very nice guy and has written some brilliant non-Who stuff and some of BF's best work, and besides, he has only written Dalek for Nu-Who and that was one the better eps of Nu-Who - although far from perfect.

View user profile

98 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Sat May 12, 2018 8:34 am

Mr. Happy wrote:
@burrunjor wrote:
People wanted it back, because it ended on a high, and it had a great legacy. Now? Who the fuck is going to want to see it back. The Fitzroy Tavern cucks, Russell T Davies, Steven Moffat, Paul Cornell, Gary Russell, Robert Shearman, Chris Chibnall were parasites who couldn't think up anything of their own so they latched onto this franchise, played on sci fi fans self loathing to bully them into going along with their changes, and because they were so inept, they ran it into the ground.

They shot the goose that laid the golden egg for them.

Not sure why you lump Rob Shearman in there, he seems a very nice guy and has written some brilliant non-Who stuff and some of BF's best work, and besides, he has only written Dalek for Nu-Who and that was one the better eps of Nu-Who - although far from perfect.

Well I lumped him in because even though his work on DW was far from the worst, he still nevertheless has a bad habit of jumping down the throat of anybody who disagrees with New Who's marvellous changes as an anorak.

View user profile

99 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Wed May 16, 2018 12:39 am

The level of analysis offered by these chumps is just juvenile. "Ooh, it's a bit slow." You could phrase that in a positive manner by saying the episodes could be improved by being edited down, which introduces the topic of re-editing the stories to attract modern viewers. It's not something I would be in favour of but that and colourising episodes is a contentious area that is extremely discursive.

Have a colourised clip https://twitter.com/StuartHumphryes/status/996532358273740800

View user profile

100 Re: New [old] Editor For Doctor Who Magazine on Wed May 16, 2018 1:17 am

As processing power increases, my guess is that within the next decade or so we will begin to see AI technologies which can autocolourise and upscale old video while adding fine, realistic detail that is indiscernible from real footage.

Also, the potential for adding new sfx had been there for some time. Otaking (who produced an excellent anime version of Who) once added some very subtle effects to classic stories which were not in the the least bit obtrusive. Sadly, those clips disappeared into the ether of the Internet long ago.

I really don't have much of an objection to edits and refixes these days. There's always the original if you don't like them. Quite frankly I'd kill to see some of the original stories edited of some of their guff and filler, scaled-up, colourised and spruced up with new effects true to the spirit of the original shows.

View user profile

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 4 of 7]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum