Comments on: Enough Bang for our Buck?

By: Chris Alpha

Chris Alpha — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 22:19:12 +0000

Nope, the Fez thing was definitely not from reading costume reports or anything – I have no idea if they’d even filmed the episode then! I don’t think any of us read the rumours etc that appear on forums. I don’t even watch the Confidentials – and I think I talked about that in our last review… I really don’t care how they make the effects, just that it’s great on the screen…

By: Roger

Roger — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:05:46 +0000

Thanks for this Chris. I found the series story-wise wasn’t quite what I expected (loved Girl in the Fireplace) and I was sure I wasn’t going to like Matt Smith. But the quality of the writing and the quality of his acting in particular made this much more “Who” than anything in the last couple of series. I grew up on the end of Pertwee (Spiders from Mars/Green Death etc) and so was introduced to Tom Baker who could be mad, serious and fun. The Moff and Matt have made this a similar mixture. I hope that the response of the audience and getting past this intro series gives them the confidence to write more careful narratives instead of lots of running and shouting. My favourite episode from this series was probably Vincent (despite the silly monster) or the first part of the finale. I look forward to further reflections. Well done with the Fez. Interesting to see what you predict for the next run.

By: pompeygeorge

pompeygeorge — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 20:30:51 +0000

I discovered and listened to the casts *after* the series had ended. Very amusing to hear how many “wild guesses” ) were correct. Especially the fez. Was that something you’d seen in a costume report?

PS discovered you via your Two-minute time lord two minutes. See it *was* worth the effort.

By: Chris Alpha

Chris Alpha — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 08:26:55 +0000

It’ll be weekly – maybe more if I can find the time (and if others are able to join in).

It’ll never be observational arquebus… more of an aquabus – sort large, slow and clumsy if you know what I mean!

By: Draculasaurus

Draculasaurus — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 00:26:57 +0000

Could be.
Is this going to be a sort of weekly blog, or more of a scatter-shot type of observational arquebus?
-

By: Chris Alpha

Chris Alpha — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 09:44:25 +0000

I saw it this morning. I’m sure we’ll discuss this when the cast are back in a studio come the autumn, but my initial thoughts were: Michael Gambon, great! Oh no, Katherine Jenkins…

But have to trust the Moff… It’s not like either Katherine Jenkins is an instantly recognisable celebrity or that the show needs celebrity appearances to boost ratings, so she must be able to do something worth casting her.

And also, I suppose she’s not altogether horrible to look at, is she?

Draculasaurus: Thanks! I hope you’ll stick around for the summer too…

By: Martin

Martin — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 09:24:49 +0000

Have you seen the casting for the Christmas special yet? Sir Michael Gambon and Katherine Jenkins.
See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/dw/news/bulletin_100712_01/Doctor_Who_Christmas_Special_Guest_Stars_Revealed

By: Draculasaurus

Draculasaurus — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 03:01:53 +0000

well.. it’s not a podcast.
-but I guess it’ still pretty good.
D

By: Martin

Martin — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 15:16:16 +0000

As a Patrick O’Brian fan I’d like to thank you & Mr Ian Smith for the Mastaba and Commander joke. I wondered if that last part might have been a joke about the Christmas teasers RTS used to produce – maybe as a cross between “Voyage of the Damned” and “The Unicorn and the Wasp”.

I like time paradoxes and I think Moffatt missed an opportunity to reference a classic one. The post-it note from the Pandorica. He took the original then wrote a copy to take back and put into place. He should have saved paper and reused the original! This paradox of a note looping through time and apparently never actually written was used by Harry Harrison in his “Technicolor Time Machine”.

Great podcast series everybody. I’m looking forward to your future projects.