djm4.bsky.social
Sheffield,-UK-based liberal leftie geek, into SFF generally and Dr Who specifically. Likes cycling and birdwatching, but very much playing both on easy mode. LOFC fan in exile. Pronouns he/him/himself
Also on Mastodon as @[email protected]
381 posts
203 followers
125 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
If you want to write heroes in the year 2025, you have to decide what they stand for, and then stand for it. The mealy-mouthed, offend-no-one approach no longer works. People respond to the Walter Whites bc you can put truth in their mouths. So put truth in the mouths of the good guys.
comment in response to
post
But can you stand the confusion in your mind?
comment in response to
post
It's the first in set of too many stories where Peri's plot function is as a lust object for one of the other characters.
comment in response to
post
I adore Caves, and I love the structure where almost the whole plot happens because The Doctor turns up where he's not supposed to be and people draw to wrong conclusions, to tragic effect. And Graeme Harper's direction is stunning. But it has issues, mostly around the depiction of Sharaz Jek.
comment in response to
post
"Tractators". Curse you, autocarrot, although I do see why you did that!
comment in response to
post
Plantagenet? Been a while since I watched it, but I remember Jeff Rawle's performance of a young leader out of his depth to be good but a bit mannered.
I'll be interested to know what you think of the next few, especially Resurrection and Caves.
comment in response to
post
The Tractors are a bit lumbering, and infamously far less flexible than the director wanted, as they were supposed to be able to curl round people so he cast dancers to play them. But I found their first appearance a genuine surprise in episode 2.
The novelisation's great, though.
comment in response to
post
Oh, I'm sorry. I think I get why people don't like it, but it's one of my guilty pleasures. I'm a sucker for Bidmead's dialogue, and especially how he writes for Davison, and I always like it when he gets his glasses out.
comment in response to
post
57, and yes. It's not my usual default, but I'd certainly reply with it if someone used it first, and there are probably groups of friends where I'd use it as standard.
comment in response to
post
There's an episode coming up in which he gets to shine a bit.
comment in response to
post
He's got strong chaotic energy, but I can't yet tell if he's good, evil or neutral.
comment in response to
post
Yes, he's great value for his facial expressions - I can see why they keep cutting to him. One thing I like about him is that he's much less polished than most of the other players. His lack of guile is refreshing, and makes him seem almost normal in a castle full of seasoned reality TV stars.
comment in response to
post
I don't think he's Sheen levels of dickhead (yet, still plenty of episodes to go). It was Tom's nervous energy combined with the totally unwarranted confidence in his own abilities that made me think of Sheen. Also he looks a bit like him? My facial matching algorithms are known to be a bit odd.
comment in response to
post
Oh, I see that! For me, he has Charlie Sheen 'tiger blood' energy.
comment in response to
post
Sorry for your loss.
comment in response to
post
I remember my group of friends discussing it afterwards. We could see that it _could_ be satire, and that it was certainly best to hope it was. We decided that the only way it made sense was if the whole thing was a (future space) military propaganda film designed to get people to enlist.
comment in response to
post
I think I took the general bad taste I had from the book into the movie, and that didn't do it any favours.
comment in response to
post
I'm not sure it worked for me as satire, although it clearly does for many other people. Maybe I do need to watch it again.
comment in response to
post
When I saw it when it came out, I had to be told it was satire although in my defence I had recently read the book, which _isn't_ satire, or at least not straightforwardly so. I thought it was a clunky and OTT adaptation of an unpleasantly militaristic book.
comment in response to
post
Update: yes, Ortega knocked it in.
comment in response to
post
To clarify, this happens even when I know that the walkway I'm stepping onto isn't moving. It's unconscious muscle memory, and my brain can't override it.