• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Dr Who Xmas Special 2010 ....

Was the Xmas special good, bad, or indifferent

  • It rocked cause Amy Pond was in it

    Votes: 3 25.0%
  • Can't the Doctor regenerate to being David Tennant

    Votes: 7 58.3%
  • Sorry had a few too many sherbets and missed it

    Votes: 2 16.7%

  • Total voters
    12

Jethro

Well-known member
#1
Have to wonder about that one, complete pants imho. But if anyone from the ABC is reading, thanks for actually screening during Xmas :) Looking forward to the new season.
 

Jamie

Well-known member
#2
I missed it... it won't until I was on youtube and ran across the guy Charlie is so cool like and he had done some interviews while they were filming it that I heard about it...

Jamie
 
#3
Just view the stream... My cable subscription ran out at the end of Nov. 2010. I just might use stream to watch all my shows, as I can view them at anytime. (It gets to be a girl thing at the end.)

Not bad season final, but cheesy rips from other shows... You know what I mean once you watch this...
 

leftie

Active member
#4
I didn't like it.
With the older seasons it was written to be believable but the new writer has entered the realms of fantasy lol.
 

Caelum

Well-known member
#5
I'm with Leftie. Don't get me wrong, Amy Pond is enough to make me want to keep watching Dr Who, but other than that, not a huge fan of the latest season.

I'd say the Xmas special was mediocre. :p
 

anotheralias

Well-known member
#6
I'm probably less invested in the former Doctors than most, since I only started watching it this year and I caught up on the previous seasons in a short span of time, but what I've seen of this season feels off.

The Christmas special was just odd (a terminal illness on a Christmas special? REALLY?) and I missed it being set in the U.K. with all the usual jokes about the recurring Christmas invasions. It felt kind of claustrophobic as well - maybe because so many scenes were of someone opening a Cryogenics door. While standing inside some kind of a fortress, and on a foggy planet where everyone's hiding from fish. Just not the same crackle and pop as Christmas trees shooting ornaments at people, or Santas opening fire on the happy Christmas shoppers, you know?

I hate to be another person griping about poor Matt What's-his-name and the new writers and all, but I hope they find their feet soon.
 

leftie

Active member
#10
True, but they do have one important tool now that they didn't have before the season began, if they care to use it: viewer feedback. Which can probably be summed up as, "don't fix what ain't broke."
Not really. It is made by the BBC which is tax payer funded and is unaccountable, viewer feedback dosen't mean jack ****.
 

anotheralias

Well-known member
#11
Not really. It is made by the BBC which is tax payer funded and is unaccountable, viewer feedback dosen't mean jack ****.
Ah right, I forgot how different your system is. (I curse it regularly for all the short-season shows, I find something I love and it has 24 episodes in four seasons!) But there's always basic ego - maybe they won't want to be known as the people who destroyed Doctor Who, and they'll course-correct for that reason?
 

Fred Sherman

Well-known member
#12
Wow. You guys clearly havn't been Doctor Who fans for over 30 years! I thought it was awesome.

SPOILER ALERT - Continue reading at your own risk - color muted as an added precaution

Almost every show at some point gives in to the temptation to redo Dickens and the use the same formula. Someone shows you your past, your present and your possible future to change your future.

Doctor who turned that formula on its head.

The Doctor wants to change the present, not the future. So he doesn't show the target his past and future, he actual goes into his past and changes it to change the person's past and thus his present, which he seems to do with success until a critical point.

When this critical plot point is reached, the person in the present is still the same person, not because the past wasn't changed, but because it was. Where before he was hard of heart because of his past, not he is hard of heart because of the future that his new past has created.

SUPER SPOILER ALERT - REALLY STOP RIGHT NOW IF YOU HAVEN'T WATCHED AND PLAN TO

Whee before, the girl was nothing to him, now she is the love of his life who can only live for one more day. That is the future that makes his present unbearable.

That is an awesome twist to the classic Dickens story, one worthy of Doctor Who's long history.
 

DoctorWatsOn

Well-known member
#14
Not really. It is made by the BBC which is tax payer funded and is unaccountable, viewer feedback dosen't mean jack ****.
The BBC is not tax payer funded, it's funded by a universal TV licence fee that's very much separate from general tax revenues and ensures the BBC remains independent of direct government interference over editorial and programming policy.

They are very much accountable by the fact that they have to deliver both decent audience shares and specialist programming, both on TV & radio, which the commercial sector doesn't deliver in the UK, in order to justify their continued existence.

As far as the Dr Who Xmas special is concerned, it was very cheesy, which these specials tend to be, overall it was OK, but nothing special and could have done with a lot more exposure (ooh, err, madam
) of Amy – she only had a ‘bit’ part.
 

leftie

Active member
#15
The BBC is not tax payer funded, it's funded by a universal TV licence fee that's very much separate from general tax revenues and ensures the BBC remains independent of direct government interference over editorial and programming policy.

They are very much accountable by the fact that they have to deliver both decent audience shares and specialist programming, both on TV & radio, which the commercial sector doesn't deliver in the UK, in order to justify their continued existence.

As far as the Dr Who Xmas special is concerned, it was very cheesy, which these specials tend to be, overall it was OK, but nothing special and could have done with a lot more exposure (ooh, err, madam :D) of Amy – she only had a ‘bit’ part. :(
C'mon, give everyone in the UK a break. The licence fee is has to be paid no matter what, it is a tax. You tell me how i can't pay it, if i want to watch non bbc progs i still have to pay. There is very much an opionion within the UK that the bbc is biased towards the left, the popular opionion supports this.
 

DoctorWatsOn

Well-known member
#16
Aye, everyone has to pay it if they want to watch any TV [legally] as it is actually broadcast*, my point was more to do with the TV licence fee being ring-fenced from general taxation and therefore the BBC is free from direct government meddling.

* you can watch or download programmes after transmission from, for example the BBC i-player or Channel 4-on demand services, without the need for a locencce.

I am unconvinced regarding any political bias, although with most of our press being bias towards the right I guess anything else, such as the BBC, can seem to be bias to 'the left'. What I find amusing is that ‘the right’ always claims it’s bias to 'the left', whilst ‘the left’ claims it's bias to 'the right', so I reckon they have got it about right myself.

A poll earlier this year by the UK’s Press Gazette showed that the BBC is still the most trusted source for news coming in at 50.3%, with Sky News coming second at a mere 6.5%.

More than 50 per cent (503 people) of the 1,000 British adults quizzed by polling firm iCD Research - on behalf of Press Gazette – said they favoured the BBC’s political reporting over other radio, TV, print and online sources.

Sky News was considered the second most trustworthy source of political reporting, named as such by seven per cent of respondents, followed by ITV national news which was named by 5.3 per cent of those surveyed.
NB - for overseas readers information UK broadcast media is required by law to be unbias, which for the BBC is covered by the 'Royal Charter' under which they operate and for the commercial sector it's covered by their broadcast licences issued by OFCOM (The Office of Communications - the independent telecommunications regulator).

I am happy to pay under £3 per week, one of the lowest rates in Europe, for 6+ national TV services and regional news, 8+ national radio services plus the nations, regional & local stations and their web services. :)
 

Jethro

Well-known member
#17
And why no love for Amy Pond and her short skirt?
<PC mode>
That would be sexist
</PC mode>

Sorry have been watching Dr Who for decades and still thought the 2010 Xmas Special sucked in comparison to previous ones.

For any Aussie Supernatural fans, the show is kicking off on channel 12 (yeah I didn't know about that one either) sometime in the New Year with season 6.
 

Kim

Well-known member
#19
[outsider viewpoint] given how Right Wing everything is in the USA, anything not the same looks left wing ;) [/outsider viewpoint]

Our Public broadcaster is meant to be unbiased, they are also required by law to be so.. and they by and largely are - but in all honestly such a position is not truly possible, they try god love em, but the individuals involved are inherently lefties and the organisation is thus flavoured. However News, Current Affairs, Editorial is not, I have seen them rip shreds off Left wing Politicians as well as Right Wing ones. I have no problem with it, it is completely balanced by the Murdoch press all Commercial TV stations and other right wing News organisations.

Truth is what matters, and in that they are totally 100% transparent, the Media Watch show will just as happily rip into the ABC as into any other organisation.


Back on topic though.... I thought the Christmas special was a little on the sucky side too... and the old "A Christmas Carol" model, I think that has been done to death frankly.
 

Kier

XenForo Developer
Staff member
#20
Personally, I thought that this was the first Dr Who christmas special that hasn't made me want to gouge my own eyes out with the TV remote. I'm not saying it was great, but I am saying that the previous ones have been almost cataclysmic in their diabolical awfulness.