Path: ...!news.misty.com!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: The Last Doctor <mike@xenocyte.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho
Subject: Re: From the Archives .....
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 06:26:24 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 163
Message-ID: <v0a8mg$261sh$1@dont-email.me>
References: <uvtn5t$30593$1@dont-email.me>
 <xn0okx4frgdf6pz002@post.eweka.nl>
 <v09f4a$1t3tk$1@dont-email.me>
 <v09lch$1ublm$1@dont-email.me>
 <v09tqp$2006$3@gallifrey.nk.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 08:26:25 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="373ee16e36529f4e8ecc2afec49db6b5";
	logging-data="2295697"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+V5LNN1TbXPQOpccgmMLVA"
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPhone/iPod Touch)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:X08v0KTspEGW4N1u3GvVPaeWmqo=
	sha1:iJ3Dhl53Yy50nhPF+J8cvr1hSPk=
Bytes: 8116

The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote:
> In article <v09lch$1ublm$1@dont-email.me>,
> The True Doctor  <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>> On 24/04/2024 00:10, The Last Doctor wrote:
>>> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>>>> The True Doctor wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 21/04/2024 19:59, Blueshirt wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Doctor Who 'fresh' back then in the 1970's, with no
>>>>>> repeat viewings, videos or internet.
>>>>>> A ten year old child in front of the televison in
>>>>>> 1976 isn't going to know or care about established
>>>>>> "facts" that you maintain existed.
>>>>> 
>>>>> A 6 year old child in front of the TV is going to figure out
>>>>> from the start that the person whose face is on the screen is
>>>>> the one who is winning. The Doctor lost and died. All the
>>>>> faces after Tom Baker may as well have been those of Morbius
>>>>> to the uninitiated.
>>>> 
>>>> Says you, because you know the story. I'm not sure a six year
>>>> old would actually care about whose faces they were, I was
>>>> around ten at the time and I didn't!
>>> 
>>> I was fourteen and it was completely obvious on-screen and from the in-show
>>> dialogue that the eleven faces shown going back in time were meant to be
>>> earlier faces of the Doctor in order. And it still is when the scene is
>>> rewatched.
>> 
>> No it isn't. Everything shown on screen is deliberately designed to 
>> indicate that the person who is winning the game is the one whose face 
>> is shown on screen and that is made to obvious even to a 6 year old. 

Contradiction is not an argument.

>> It's fully explained in that exact manner the original script writer 
>> himself in his own novelization of his own script.

Aggie needs to make up his mind. 

Does he want to include all off screen material by the writers directly
relating to the show? If not, then no elaboration or additional fan fic
added in novelisations counts. If it was in the scripts but cut or changed
on screen then it is also no longer relevant. And on screen it’s clear
those are pre-Hartnell Doctors and it’s so no matter how many times Aggie
screams “IS NOT!”

But if so, then the material excised from the original writer’s scripts
counts, and Whitaker’s take on renewal for the Power of the Daleks counts.
And as that is earlier than Morbius then it takes precedence according to
Aggie, and there are pre-Hartnell Doctors.

>> To anyone watching the episode who has never watched Doctor Who before, 
>> and doesn't recognize Pertwee let along Hartnell it's made obvious from 
>> the start that when Tom Baker's face is not on the screen then he's 
>> losing to Morbius 
>> and the intention of the director 

Unless, you know, you believe the director. And the producer. And the
actual scriptwriter, Robert Holmes (Terrance Dicks’ original script was a
true subversion of Frankenstein where the Monster is creating a Man, and
disliked the total rewrite so much that he refused to be credited and the
story is credited to “Robin Bland”).

>> and original script 
>> writer is that all the faces the viewer does not recognize are those 
>> generated by Morbius of himself as he appeared in the past and in 
>> disguise, since it's clearly not Tom Baker.

Aggie thinks Morbius was Tom Baker and the faces are meant to be Tom Baker
in disguise? Is that in Terrance Dicks novelisation too (or attempted total
rewrite of the story, as it would seem)?

>>>> 
>>>>>> Or care that the producers of a TV show can change things to
>>>>>> suit themselves if they want to, like our friend Mr Chibnall
>>>>>> chose to do with Doctor Ruth!
>>>>> 
>>>>> Stop insulting the intelligence of the audience. Even a 6 year
>>>>> old child knows more about story writing and can write better
>>>>> Doctor Who episodes than Chris Chibnall.
>>>> 
>>>> Hmmm... I'm not sure that's actually correct.
>>> 
>>> I’m sure it’s not. Chris Chibnall was never the best writer for Who but
>>> he’s far from the worst, and ridiculous hyperbole about 6 year old children
>>> really doesn’t help the debate.
>> 
>> You think Chibnall can write better than a 6 year old child? Don't make 
>> me laugh. Chibnall writes like a child with autism which has never read 
>> a book before in its entire life. He doesn't understand characters, he 
>> doesn't understand interpersonal relationships, he doesn't understand 
>> social interaction, and he doesn't understand romance. Oh, and he 
>> doesn't understand science in any way, shape, or form, whatsoever.

Sounds like Aggie thinks he and Chris Chibnall are soulmates! He certainly
seems to be describing himself (well, to be fair, Aggie does know a bit of
science. But as he’s rejected logic and rationality, it doesn’t do him any
good).
>> 
>>> 
>>>> But I say, right or wrong Chris Chibnall was the showrunner of
>>>> Doctor Who so they were his calls to make. A female 13th Doctor
>>>> and the Fugitive Doctor are part of the show.
>>>> 
>>>> RTD is the Doctor Who showrunner now and what happens with the
>>>> 15th Doctor (and his companions) are his calls to make. Just as
>>>> bigeneration is part of the show now.
>>>> 
>>>> We don't have to like it, but that's the way it is. Doctor Who
>>>> evolves...
>>>> 
>>>>> Doctor Who ended in 2017 since the character of the main
>>>>> protagonist stopped being that of the Doctor.
>>>> 
>>>> You missed out the word "for me"!
>>>> 
>>>> As in... "Doctor Who ended for me in 2017 since the character of
>>>> the main protagonist stopped being that of the Doctor."
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Er … it should have been
>>> 
>>> “Doctor Who ended for me in 2017 since, in my opinion, the character of the
>> 
>> Doctor Who ended for everyone.
>> 
>>> main protagonist stopped being one that I personally was prepared to
>>> recognise as that of the Doctor."
>> 
>> The character of the main protagonist stop being that of the Doctor period.
>> 
>>> 
>>> Not that Aggie has ever been capable of distinguishing between his opinions
>>> and facts - like many people with mental health issues, he thinks they are
>>> one and the same thing.
>>> 
>> 
>> The fact that the viewership of the show and merchandise sales have 
>> totally collapsed demonstrates that I am correct. 10 million viewers 
>> down to only 4 million at best is terminal disaster. Only someone that 
>> has been brainwashed by the woke propaganda of far left which emanates 
>> the same hate filled bigotry as that of Adolf Hilter written in Mein 
>> Kampf would think differently.
>> 
> 
> MM does get clueless.
> 
>> -- 
>> The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
>> 
>> "To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it 
>> stands for." -William Shatner
>> 
> 
> 



-- 
“The timelines and … canon … are rupturing” - the Doctor