Nov. 26 09:58 pm JST
Now Doctor Who, like everything with the BBC, has become very woke and PC.
It was always a bit like that, in case you hadn't noticed.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
Elvis is here
Today 05:00 pm JST
I'd rather watch Star Wars IV; a new hope over the shenanigans of the time Lord any day.
Hm. A film I have seen so many times I've lost count, or a new episode of a TV series I have often liked a lot. I know what I would go for.
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
Shunryū SuzukiToday 04:06 pm JST
My brother is a big fan of Dr Why, I mean Who, but I never got into it.
Too poopy, pansy dodo for me
How so, if you don't mind offering us your razor-sharp analysis? What do you find more to your tastes?
0 ( +1 / -1 )
piskianToday 11:49 am JST
Noone represented the human,yet alien-thinking Doctor as much as Tom Baker.
After him,they became too relatable.
Colin Baker didn't, but he got blamed for everything else that was going wrong with the series at the time and fired by Michael Grade before he could really get to do his character justice.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
wallaceToday 11:02 am JST
yes, I lost interest after 1989, after watching every episode for 26 years. I actually don't care how you interpret my comment.
Why even bother to reply then?
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
wallaceToday 10:28 am JST
I can't understand how a list would provoke anything in you.
Neither can I, because it doesn't.
What is negative about it? Enlighten me.
It's not the list I was referrring to.
"I lost interest after that."
How do you think that comment is going to be interpreted?
-1 ( +2 / -3 )
wallaceToday 08:18 am JST
My comment is a reflection on nothing other the the Dr Who doctors I watched. Don't read anything into it.
It's impossible not to infer something about your views on what came afterwards. I certainly can't read anything positive into it.
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
wallaceNov. 25 06:56 pm JST
Watch the following doctors
William Hartnell (1963–1966)
Patrick Troughton (1966–1969)
Jon Pertwee (1970–1974)
Tom Baker (1974–1981)
Peter Davison (1982–1984)
Colin Baker (1984–1986)
Sylvester McCoy (1987–1989)
Sylvester McCoy lived a few doors away in Hampstead. London.
I lost interest after that.
I don't think that's a fair reflection on the revived series. There were huge variations in terms of theme, tone and quality over the course of the original series as a succession of producers, script editors and writers worked on it, it could be just as PC as the revived series can get and if it had just continued instead of getting axed they might well have moved to the current season format.
Furthermore, I definitely think they would have cast Peter Capaldi as the Doctor in the late 80s if they could have got him, and that Robert Holmes, Barry Letts or Verity Lambert would be feeling pretty pleased with themselves if they'd made a story like Father's Day, Blink, Vincent and the Doctor or Heaven Sent, to name but a few.
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
jeffyToday 01:39 am JST
From the article:
[H]e said it would remain true to the vision of the early programme makers.
You mean like showrunner Russell T. Davies’ decision to redesign the character of Davros to no longer utilize his characteristic mobile life-support chair for “better representation of disabled people”?
I was pretty interested in seeing a pre-life support version of Davros actually, but not for that reason.
And I do like how this article tries to anticipate criticisms with the “not everyone was immediately won over”
Actually that appears to refer more to what some viewers thought back in 1963. The article doesn't really seem to go into opinions about recent episodes or storylines.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
jeffyToday 03:51 pm JST
Instead what they do is completely obliterate the history of a character that has developed over more than 50 years.
Yes, it was ghastly. The all-time worst ever episode.
And so what is the message? Certainly not promoting women, “people of color,” or characters with alternative lifestyles. That they could have done and indeed had already been doing. No, the message is clearly replacing any positive role models who are white and male.
I get the idea that given that the Doctor could literally look like anyone, it was a bit embarassing for all the right-on bourgeois types running the BBC that he'd always been white and male and that wouldn't suit their inclusivity and diversity agenda at all. Steven Moffat had established in Hell Bent that Time Lords tended to stick to one gender, but it wouldn't do to imply that gender switching was in any way odd for the main character of the series. So - concoct this new backstory with literally thousands of past incarnations who could have been any sort of colour and gender you could think of, and do a huge retcon kludge.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
Today 09:17 am JST
I don’t think it is popular in Japan.
It's not well-known in Japan. It can't be popular if it doesn't get much promotion or media coverage. It was on NHK-E when the revived series started but I don't think they ever told anyone.
There are much better quality sci-fi shows in Japan, which is famous for it around the world.
Oh really? Such as? You don't mean any of those extended toy commercials with actor-singer wannabes prancing about in silly costumes on office block rooftops and outside factories in Kanto, do you?
8 ( +8 / -0 )
Personally I think it has lost its way recently, the scripts and storylines have not been very good and while I like Jodie Whittaker and much of her work she was not right for the part, though she wasn’t given much of a chance with the dire scripts she was given to work with.
There have been lots of Doctor Who stories over the years with iffy scripts, for me the big problem was the overarching idea in the Jodie Whittaker era. To my mind it's the single worst thing anyone has ever come up with for a TV series.
3 ( +3 / -0 )
Although the BBC shelved "Doctor Who" in 1989, it was revived in 2005 under the stewardship of screenwriter and producer Russell T. Davies.
Doctor Who was deliberately run-down by the BBC in the years prior to 1989 by executives who hated sci-fi and wanted the BBC to make more high-brow literary adaptations and tacky soap operas. It was scheduled against ITV's top soap opera, a producer they deemed useless was kept on the programme and not allowed to quit, actors who were mainly known for light entertainment rather than drama were cast in lead roles and writers such as Russell T Davies were advised to steer clear. They deliberately threw away license fee payers' money on a programme they believed to be sub-standard, rather than just cancelling it straight away or trying to make it better.
4 ( +4 / -0 )
bass4funkToday 01:55 pm JST
*"While frequently making disparaging comments about non-Americans who make comments about *US politics."
If I am being personally attacked...
How is a comment about US politics a personal attack on you?
4 ( +5 / -1 )
JimizoToday 12:50 pm JST
I’d like to see this unpleasant man out of power but is it r democratic to form a government without the party which won the most seats?
I think so, if they didn't also get a majority of the popular vote.
I remember there was talk of Labour and the LibDems trying that in 2010 in the UK.
I don't think that together they'd won enough seats to form a majority government, whereas the LibDems and the Conservatives together did have the numbers. Otherwise I think the LibDems would have gone with Labour.
2 ( +3 / -1 )
JimizoToday 12:28 pm JST
"All the leaders of the three other top parties have said they would not serve in a PVV-led coalition.
Kate Parker, from the Economist Intelligence Unit, said it would lead to "constitutional stalemate" in the EU's fifth-largest economy"
This doesn’t sound like a positive thing.
I bet together they'll have a bigger share of the vote than the PVV and therefore represent the wider views of the electorate as opposed to the swivel-eyed right-wing anti-immigration crowd. Why not form a coaltion by themselves?
1 ( +1 / -0 )
bass4funkToday 08:06 am JST
No, but he puts country and his people first and I can’t look down on that, that’s what a strong leader does.
A strong leader gets other people to follow him, and there's every indication that he won't.
All the leaders of the three other top parties have said they would not serve in a PVV-led coalition.
Kate Parker, from the Economist Intelligence Unit, said it would lead to "constitutional stalemate" in the EU's fifth-largest economy.
-1 ( +3 / -4 )
plasticmonkeyToday 08:18 am JST
"the influx of migrants, it’s just ruining a once beautiful country."
The Netherlands needs labor, just as the U.S. does. This ain’t the 1950s.
The far-right in every country love to bang on about that because they don't have a clue what to do about anything else.
The obsession they have with immigration is stupid anyway. It's been going on all throughout history, it always will and it's continually changing countries and cultures, for better or for worse. I'm pretty sure the far-right in Japan also look at foreign residents in Japan and think their once beautiful country is also being ruined.
1 ( +5 / -4 )
Today 09:51 am JST
"Really? How would you know?"
How would history make you sure of what people might be thinking right now?
"According to.. the IDF."
As well as other reports of the growing Hamas body count.
The Germans killed a lot of Soviet soldiers in 1941. Didn't help much in the end.
"Unlike the British and the Americans, Israel lives next door to these people, they know every conceivable way as to how these murderers think,"
Apparently not, as October 7th indicates.
in the west we prefer to take them in alive if possible, the IDF on the other hand prefers to send off to early retirement, which I’m all for.
That sounds like dialogue from a straight to DVD action movie.
3 ( +5 / -2 )
Today 07:45 am JST
"I suppose they must have an amazing PR operation going on though, if anyone actually takes this "totally eradicate Hamas" stuff seriously."
Hamas sure does, and if we’re them, I would as well.
Really? How would you know?
"As if it's ever worked before."
The IDF is doing a great job so far.
According to.. the IDF.
More needs to be done.
That's probably what the Americans and the British were thinking after they overthrew the Taliban the first time.
6 ( +9 / -3 )
Today 07:05 am JST
"Yes Netanyahu we know your announcement of first priority is to eradicate all Hamas and your second priority is to save the hostages."
I think the IDF can do both.
Why? They couldn't stop the October 7th attacks. I suppose they must have an amazing PR operation going on though, if anyone actually takes this "totally eradicate Hamas" stuff seriously. As if it's ever worked before.
7 ( +13 / -6 )
JimizoToday 01:32 pm JST
Sunak better play a blinder here.
That would be a first.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
wolfshineToday 06:09 pm JST
I am sure that he is either being taken out of context, or being misquoted. Outright fabrication is another possibility.
Taken in the context of everything else that was disclosed, it seems quite plausible to me. From The Independent:
*"In a damning assessment, Sir Patrick told the inquiry the health messages had been “very clear”, that mixing with people you weren’t living with in an enclosed environment was a *“high-risk activity”.
“That policy [Eat Out to Help Out] completely reversed it to saying we will pay you to go into an environment with people from other households and mix in an indoor environment for periods extended over a couple of hours or more.”
*Asked whether Mr Sunak knew the policy would push up Covid infections before rolling it out, Sir Patrick said he would be “very surprised” if not, directly contradicting a claim in the now prime minister’s own witness statement.*
Mr Sunak said he “did not recall” any concerns about the scheme, including from Sir Chris and Sir Patrick.
*In another embarrassing diary entry, Sir Patrick revealed that the ex-chancellor said Covid was “all about handling scientists, not handling the virus”, in a push to open up the economy after the first lockdown."*
I think someone who was prepared to go ahead with the Eat Out To Help Out scheme, possibly knowing the dangers, would be quite relaxed about letting people die.
*"The diary entries also detailed the October 2020 meeting with Mr Johnson in which he argued that said most people who die “have reached their time anyway”. The then prime minister said: “I really don’t want to do another national lockdown,” according to Sir Patrick’s diaries.*
*In one entry, Mr Vallance said Britain had “a weak, indecisive PM”. The chief scientist that Mr Johnson found it “a real struggle” to understand some Covid graphs and was “bamboozled” by scientific modelling.*
*In an entry from May 2020, Sir Patrick wrote: “PM still confused on different types of test. He holds it in his head for a session and then it goes.” In another humiliating passage for Mr Johnson, Sir Patrick wrote: *“Watching the PM get his head around stats is awful.”
In recent years, there is no group more self-righteous, embellishing, opportunistic, and downright morally vacuous than the quarantine warriors. Their philosophy ravaged a generation of culture, economic stability, and the notion of individual rights."
If you're prepared to give any credence to what else he has to say about Boris Johnson and how the COVID crisis was managed in the UK, he and his administration do not emerge with much more credit.
3 ( +3 / -0 )
BertieWoosterToday 05:54 pm JST
This "quote" is a) out of context and b) what Vallance said that Sunak said. As many have pointed out, it's hearsay and as such, I wonder why it gets reported here.
It was disclosed in an official public inquiry in the UK, this is the World News section, and other media outlets are carrying the story. Why wouldn't it get reported here?
9 ( +9 / -0 )
Harry_GattoToday 03:04 pm JST
All of you hitting on Sunak with no evidence to confirm that that was what he actually said, after all, none of you were there to hear it for yourselves.
It all comes down to who you think has more integrity then. If Sir Patrick Vallance believed what Dominic Cummings said, wrote it down and didn't try to stop it coming out in the inquiry, I'm a bit inclined to believe Sunak did actually say it.
4 ( +5 / -1 )
bass4funkToday 09:12 am JST
"Check out who else used words like “vermin”, “scum”, and “thugs” to describe political opponents. I don’t see Biden using such rhetoric."
Well, the Dems are doing it to conservatives,
You hold up your lot as so superior to "Dems" and "the left" and here you are admitting that you're actually just as bad.
8 ( +8 / -0 )
Today 10:30 am JST
The LDP is like that too.
Just look at Kishida himself. Can’t make up his mind whether he wants to hike taxes or cut them. Grow the economic pie, or slice the economic pie differently.
With the LDP alone you can get lefty policies and righty policies.
Policy doesn't really matter to the LDP. Their winning formula means they don't have to stand for anything and being seen to work hard is more important than any actual results.
And that has worked in Japan because people vote for their team, irrespective of the policies in favour at the time.
They vote for whoever the local bigwig is in their area irrespective of parties. That's how LDP heavyweights like Ozawa and Hatoyama could get reelected after they left the party.
The problem with Japanese politics and democracy (a western introduction adapted to Japan) is the voters don’t get how it is supposed to work - vote for the party whose policies you like most.
Actually it's supposed to be constituency first, country second and party third so voters should really opt for the candidate who represents their particular interests best, regardless of party affiliation.
Support the local lord or his son, because that is Japanese culture.
I know. Two of the LDP Diet members where I live are from political families.
But at least the alternatives have to offer something better than the “well organized” mishmash of the LDP. A well organized party with coherent policies that are better than the status quo.
Not if it doesn't also offer candidates to vote for.
That’s why I am more an Ishin fan, because they represent a smaller , decentralized approach to government (in my eyes).
They are not worth any attention until they are in a position to beat the LDP in a general election and win an outright majority.
-1 ( +3 / -4 )
Today 08:31 am JST
This country is not a democracy, and I personally don't think the average Japanese person cares.
They might if they could do something about it. There needs to be a two -party system but for that there needs to be one more party that is as well-funded and well-known as the LDP, like Labour in the UK. Like them or not they have been around for more than a century, everyone knows what they stand for, more or less, and they have a candidate in every constituency.
Japan did have something like that when the DPJ were still around but they were too much of a mishmash of conflicting ideologies to survive for very long, and sure enough they've disintegrated.
I thought the CDPJ looked promising for a short time because they weren't going to collaborate with other parties with radically different policies, but they suffered from uninspiring leadership, and the same old tactics of submitting pointless no-confidence motions and threatening to boycott Diet debates.
I think I know what the answer is but I don't see it happening.
2 ( +4 / -2 )
Today 07:11 am JST
New at 11 for about how long Kishida has been in office, doubt it fazes and of these LDP bigwigs one bit.
Of course not. Their seats are safe no matter what happens to the government.
Unimpressed with good reason; the electorate is not blind to the accelerating corporate welfare gravy train, a tiny fraction of rich working families see.
They don't seem to see though, that Kishida and the PMs who came before him and will come after him are just a symptom of the real problem - the LDP.
0 ( +12 / -12 )