Discussion:
S10E10 The Eaters of Light
(too old to reply)
Agamemnon
2017-06-17 20:10:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Yet another episode dictated by racist, sexist, heterophobic,
sentimentalist PC lunacy and based on magic, rather than one built on
plot, good story telling, and ideas, and based on science and reason.

So it starts off with some girl vanishing in some Scottish cairn who is
not seen again until the end.

The Doctor, the tin dog, and Polynesia turn up looking for the missing
Ninth Legion of the Roman Army, and Polynesia begins translating what
the crows are saying, to the Doctor. What did I say some time ago about
Nardole coming straight out of Doctor Doolittle?

The tin dog falls down a hole in the ground, just like she did last
week, and just like last week she meets a token black soldier, this time
fighting with the Roman army.

Just like last week the casting is historically inaccurate. While
African soldiers served on Hadrian's wall these were Northern Africans
from Mauretania all of which served in an all Moore platoon, not mixed
with Roman soldiers from other parts of the empire. The actor in
question did not look Moroccan. At the time in question Moroccans would
have looked like dark Arabs. Northern Africa in Roman times was white
with its population originating from Southern Europe, Asia Minor and the
Levant as recent DNA research has proven.

Not only did this actor not look Moroccan but the other actors who
played the other Roman soldiers did not look Italian or southern European.

Thanks to rampant anti-European racism in the BBC an opportunity was
missed to cast actors of Italian, Greek, or other southern European
origin in the parts of Romans.

Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with the Pictish
girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates and marauders when the
Romans were nothing of the kind. This racist and false depiction of the
Romans was not effectively challenged. It was the Picts who were the
pirates and marauders who raided the south and slaughtered innocent
Roman citizens and for which Hadrian's Wall was built to keep them out.
The Romans spread civilisation and order where they went. Piracy was a
crime in the Roman Empire punishable by crucifixion.

The entire story as acted as comedy by Capaldi and Lucas.

The scenes involving the tin dog were used once again to spread yet more
gay propaganda to a overwhelmingly heterosexual family audience. One of
the Roman soldiers was seen chatting up Mackie's character only for her
to reveal she was gay. Fuck any romance. After this the Romans started
revealing that they were all either gay or swung both ways.

This is a family TV show for fuck's sake!!!!

On top of that, once again the male characters were portrayed as feeble
weaklings subservient to a female leader.

No other purpose was served by this episode other than to promote this
racist, sexist, heterophobic, derogatory, PC loony propaganda.

There was no plot or reason whatsoever.

For some reason unbeknown to anyone some monster which was supposed to
feed on light was abducting people Why? What does it need people for
when it eats light? How can it eat light anyway? Don't trees eat light?
Why doesn't it look like a tree?

While this monster was supposed to feed on light, light was used to
weaken it. How?

For some other unknown reason wooden bats were used to focus light which
came out of nowhere onto the creature. What?

And pulled out of thin air by the Doctor, this monster first refereed to
as a locust and looking nothing like a locust, was supposed to be
capable of eating up the entire sun and every star in the sky. Do the
moronic writers know how big the sun actually is? How can a monster the
size of a large wolf consume something the size of a star? Do they
seriously think the sun is in reality the size of an orange held at
arm's length and the other stars just pin pricks?

So this monster is driven into some interdimensional gateway--where the
fuck this came from or what the monster was doing on Earth is not
explained--which has to be guarded for all eternity to stop it getting
back out. So the Doctor offers to do that as self appointed protector of
the Earth thought it's entire history. Then the Pictish wench says it's
her job to do that even though she would not live long enough to
complete the task and some of the other Picts and Roman soldiers of the
Ninth Legion decide to join her. Therefore Bill clubs the Doctor to stop
him joining then and that's that. Sentimentalist codswallop from start
to finish.

Finally Missy turns up in the TARDIS after being assigned by the Doctor
to fix the engines. Thankfully were were spaced the ridiculous sight of
them getting intimate.

Next week John Simm returns as the Master at the head of a Mondasian
Cyberman army.

7.5/10
Andrew M
2017-06-17 21:56:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Yet another episode dictated by racist, sexist, heterophobic,
sentimentalist PC lunacy and based on magic, rather than one built on
plot, good story telling, and ideas, and based on science and reason.
So it starts off with some girl vanishing in some Scottish cairn who is
not seen again until the end.
The Doctor, the tin dog, and Polynesia turn up looking for the missing
Ninth Legion of the Roman Army, and Polynesia begins translating what
the crows are saying, to the Doctor. What did I say some time ago about
Nardole coming straight out of Doctor Doolittle?
The tin dog falls down a hole in the ground, just like she did last
week, and just like last week she meets a token black soldier, this
time fighting with the Roman army.
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
Post by Agamemnon
Just like last week the casting is historically inaccurate. While
African soldiers served on Hadrian's wall these were Northern Africans
from Mauretania all of which served in an all Moore platoon, not mixed
with Roman soldiers from other parts of the empire. The actor in
question did not look Moroccan. At the time in question Moroccans would
have looked like dark Arabs. Northern Africa in Roman times was white
with its population originating from Southern Europe, Asia Minor and
the Levant as recent DNA research has proven.
Not only did this actor not look Moroccan but the other actors who
played the other Roman soldiers did not look Italian or southern European.
Thanks to rampant anti-European racism in the BBC an opportunity was
missed to cast actors of Italian, Greek, or other southern European
origin in the parts of Romans.
I don't entirely disagree with your point here - especially the bit
about casting southern Europeans in this context; indeed I agree
wholeheartedly with that. Technically you are right about Moroccans
too. Technicalities apart, though, the Roman Empire was ethnically
diverse and the inclusion of a black actor conveyed that in 21st
Century terms
Post by Agamemnon
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with the
Pictish girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates and marauders
when the Romans were nothing of the kind.
This is entirely a matter of perspective. Furth of the Antonine Wall
the Romans were not a 'civilising' force. They planted no settlements
and brought few civilians beyond those who serviced their armies. What
do you think they did? They brought war, and war from the perspective
of the invaded is the work of cut-thoats
Post by Agamemnon
This racist and false depiction of the Romans was not effectively
challenged. It was the Picts who were the pirates and marauders who
raided the south and slaughtered innocent Roman citizens and for which
Hadrian's Wall was built to keep them out.
Oh dear. Oh dear me. No. The lands beyond Hadrian's Wall, when it was
built, were largely pacified. The local tribes in the South of Scotland
were generally on good terms with their neighbours to the South and
trade was carried on fruitfully between Britanno-Roman settlements to
the South of the Wall and tribes to the North of it (who may. or may
not, have been Pictish. "Britons" is a far more useful term
historically). Hadrian's Wall - like the other walls built during his
time as Emperor - was not defensive. It was a mark of presence and
authority.
Post by Agamemnon
The Romans spread civilisation and order where they went. Piracy was a
crime in the Roman Empire punishable by crucifixion.
Ah. Crucifixion - that ultimate mark of "civilisation".
Post by Agamemnon
The entire story as acted as comedy by Capaldi and Lucas.
There were, certainly, elements of comedy. They did not constitute "the
entire story". If you are going to write decent reviews you really do
need to learn to avoid absolutes
Post by Agamemnon
The scenes involving the tin dog were used once again to spread yet
more gay propaganda to a overwhelmingly heterosexual family audience.
One of the Roman soldiers was seen chatting up Mackie's character only
for her to reveal she was gay. Fuck any romance. After this the Romans
started revealing that they were all either gay or swung both ways.
This is a family TV show for fuck's sake!!!!
On top of that, once again the male characters were portrayed as feeble
weaklings subservient to a female leader.
Again, that is not an unfair point and one which I have some sympathy
with. That subservience would not have been one that would have sat
well with Roman men. Had Bill been an older woman I might just have
gone with it and I was longing for the young soldier to step up to the
plate and be the leader
Post by Agamemnon
No other purpose was served by this episode other than to promote this
racist, sexist, heterophobic, derogatory, PC loony propaganda.
There was no plot or reason whatsoever.
For some reason unbeknown to anyone some monster which was supposed to
feed on light was abducting people Why? What does it need people for
when it eats light? How can it eat light anyway? Don't trees eat light?
Why doesn't it look like a tree?
The first points were (sort of) explained but not, I grant you, very
well. As to why it doesn't look like a tree, why should it?
Phytoplankton feed on light, but they don't look like trees
Post by Agamemnon
While this monster was supposed to feed on light, light was used to
weaken it. How?
Again, that was (sort of) explained. The material in the 'bats' you
refer to in the next question alter the light in a way that poisons the
creature.
Post by Agamemnon
For some other unknown reason wooden bats were used to focus light
which came out of nowhere onto the creature. What?
And pulled out of thin air by the Doctor, this monster first refereed
to as a locust and looking nothing like a locust, was supposed to be
capable of eating up the entire sun and every star in the sky. Do the
moronic writers know how big the sun actually is? How can a monster the
size of a large wolf consume something the size of a star? Do they
seriously think the sun is in reality the size of an orange held at
arm's length and the other stars just pin pricks?
No. They probably don't. But the people The Doctor is speaking to
might. Sorry, but your points here are just getting silly and petty.
These are beings from another reality. They feed on light. If the
gateway between the worlds is opened and stays open then thousands of
these things come into ours as a swarm (see 'locusts'). They consume
light and multiply. Eventually they become so numerous that they absorb
every photon that comes from the Sun and are strong enough to be not
weakened by the coming of night. Then they absorb every photon that
comes from every star. From the perspective of the Earth the Sun has
gone and the stars are gone and the world is dead.
Post by Agamemnon
So this monster is driven into some interdimensional gateway--where the
fuck this came from or what the monster was doing on Earth is not
explained--which has to be guarded for all eternity to stop it getting
back out. So the Doctor offers to do that as self appointed protector
of the Earth thought it's entire history. Then the Pictish wench says
it's her job to do that even though she would not live long enough to
complete the task and some of the other Picts and Roman soldiers of the
Ninth Legion decide to join her. Therefore Bill clubs the Doctor to
stop him joining then and that's that. Sentimentalist codswallop from
start to finish.
Finally Missy turns up in the TARDIS after being assigned by the Doctor
to fix the engines. Thankfully were were spaced the ridiculous sight of
them getting intimate.
Next week John Simm returns as the Master at the head of a Mondasian
Cyberman army.
7.5/10
Agamemnon
2017-06-17 23:17:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Yet another episode dictated by racist, sexist, heterophobic,
sentimentalist PC lunacy and based on magic, rather than one built on
plot, good story telling, and ideas, and based on science and reason.
So it starts off with some girl vanishing in some Scottish cairn who
is not seen again until the end.
The Doctor, the tin dog, and Polynesia turn up looking for the missing
Ninth Legion of the Roman Army, and Polynesia begins translating what
the crows are saying, to the Doctor. What did I say some time ago
about Nardole coming straight out of Doctor Doolittle?
The tin dog falls down a hole in the ground, just like she did last
week, and just like last week she meets a token black soldier, this
time fighting with the Roman army.
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
She did, then she lost contact with him, probably because he was gay.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Just like last week the casting is historically inaccurate. While
African soldiers served on Hadrian's wall these were Northern Africans
from Mauretania all of which served in an all Moore platoon, not mixed
with Roman soldiers from other parts of the empire. The actor in
question did not look Moroccan. At the time in question Moroccans
would have looked like dark Arabs. Northern Africa in Roman times was
white with its population originating from Southern Europe, Asia Minor
and the Levant as recent DNA research has proven.
Not only did this actor not look Moroccan but the other actors who
played the other Roman soldiers did not look Italian or southern European.
Thanks to rampant anti-European racism in the BBC an opportunity was
missed to cast actors of Italian, Greek, or other southern European
origin in the parts of Romans.
I don't entirely disagree with your point here - especially the bit
about casting southern Europeans in this context; indeed I agree
wholeheartedly with that. Technically you are right about Moroccans too.
Technicalities apart, though, the Roman Empire was ethnically diverse
and the inclusion of a black actor conveyed that in 21st Century terms
No it doesn't. It conveys completely the wrong message, that other
ethnic minorities do not exist or don't have the right to representation.

Roman Legions were recruited from Roman Citizens only. Therefore the
Ninth Legion would have not contained a single black African soldier let
alone any white northern Europeans.

Auxilia were recruited from existing city states that were part of the
empire and would have been completely homogeneous in ethnicity.

Black Africans if there were any, would have come under Numeri who were
mercenaries recruited from outside the empire, classified as barbarians
and under the command of their own aristocrats and officers.

A simple bit of research with have told the producers this.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with the
Pictish girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates and marauders
when the Romans were nothing of the kind.
This is entirely a matter of perspective. Furth of the Antonine Wall the
Romans were not a 'civilising' force. They planted no settlements and
brought few civilians beyond those who serviced their armies. What do
you think they did? They brought war, and war from the perspective of
the invaded is the work of cut-thoats
They did not bring war. They brought peace and civilisation. The Roman
army did behave like cut-throat pirates. The allied with local leaders
and put local leaders in charge of their own settlements. Along side
existing settlements the Romans built settlements of their own on empty
land to which people from surrounding villages came to trade with or
settle. The cut-throats were the Picts who raided these settlements.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
This racist and false depiction of the Romans was not effectively
challenged. It was the Picts who were the pirates and marauders who
raided the south and slaughtered innocent Roman citizens and for which
Hadrian's Wall was built to keep them out.
Oh dear. Oh dear me. No. The lands beyond Hadrian's Wall, when it was
built, were largely pacified. The local tribes in the South of Scotland
were generally on good terms with their neighbours to the South and
trade was carried on fruitfully between Britanno-Roman settlements to
the South of the Wall and tribes to the North of it (who may. or may
not, have been Pictish. "Britons" is a far more useful term
historically). Hadrian's Wall - like the other walls built during his
time as Emperor - was not defensive. It was a mark of presence and
authority.
Wrong. Hadrian built his wall because he no longer wanted to expand the
Empire but to consolidate it and thus the wall was built for defensive
purposes to protect Roman British settlements from attack by piratical
Picts. The tribes directly north of the wall were there as a buffer and
peacefully traded with the Romans. The impression given in this story is
a blatant clueless falsification of history.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
The Romans spread civilisation and order where they went. Piracy was a
crime in the Roman Empire punishable by crucifixion.
Ah. Crucifixion - that ultimate mark of "civilisation".
It was more humane than beheading.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
The entire story as acted as comedy by Capaldi and Lucas.
There were, certainly, elements of comedy. They did not constitute "the
entire story". If you are going to write decent reviews you really do
need to learn to avoid absolutes
In respect of Capaldi and Lucas everything that came out of their mouths
was one bad anachronistic joke and after another mocking the Picks for
not understanding any of it. He end comes out with ridiculous gay crap
about being a Vestal Virgin.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
The scenes involving the tin dog were used once again to spread yet
more gay propaganda to a overwhelmingly heterosexual family audience.
One of the Roman soldiers was seen chatting up Mackie's character only
for her to reveal she was gay. Fuck any romance. After this the Romans
started revealing that they were all either gay or swung both ways.
This is a family TV show for fuck's sake!!!!
On top of that, once again the male characters were portrayed as
feeble weaklings subservient to a female leader.
Again, that is not an unfair point and one which I have some sympathy
with. That subservience would not have been one that would have sat well
with Roman men. Had Bill been an older woman I might just have gone with
it and I was longing for the young soldier to step up to the plate and
be the leader
A Roman woman would have been kept at home under guard by her father or
husband's servants. Bill would have been taken for a whore by genuine
Romans. And the Pictish wench would have been kept indoors also.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
No other purpose was served by this episode other than to promote this
racist, sexist, heterophobic, derogatory, PC loony propaganda.
There was no plot or reason whatsoever.
For some reason unbeknown to anyone some monster which was supposed to
feed on light was abducting people Why? What does it need people for
when it eats light? How can it eat light anyway? Don't trees eat
light? Why doesn't it look like a tree?
The first points were (sort of) explained but not, I grant you, very
well. As to why it doesn't look like a tree, why should it?
Phytoplankton feed on light, but they don't look like trees
It didn't look like Phytoplankton either.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
While this monster was supposed to feed on light, light was used to
weaken it. How?
Again, that was (sort of) explained. The material in the 'bats' you
refer to in the next question alter the light in a way that poisons the
creature.
What? It was complete and utter nonsense. How was this light altered?
Why weren't experiments carried out to find out what needed altering and
why?
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
For some other unknown reason wooden bats were used to focus light
which came out of nowhere onto the creature. What?
And pulled out of thin air by the Doctor, this monster first refereed
to as a locust and looking nothing like a locust, was supposed to be
capable of eating up the entire sun and every star in the sky. Do the
moronic writers know how big the sun actually is? How can a monster
the size of a large wolf consume something the size of a star? Do they
seriously think the sun is in reality the size of an orange held at
arm's length and the other stars just pin pricks?
No. They probably don't. But the people The Doctor is speaking to might.
Sorry, but your points here are just getting silly and petty. These are
No they are not.
Post by Andrew M
beings from another reality. They feed on light. If the gateway between
the worlds is opened and stays open then thousands of these things come
into ours as a swarm (see 'locusts'). They consume light and multiply.
How? Where were they seen even once consuming any light.
Post by Andrew M
Eventually they become so numerous that they absorb every photon that
comes from the Sun and are strong enough to be not weakened by the
The sun is over 100 times the diameter of Earth and the distance between
the Earth and the sun is many times greater. How are these creatures
going to fill this entire area?
Post by Andrew M
coming of night. Then they absorb every photon that comes from every
star. From the perspective of the Earth the Sun has gone and the stars
are gone and the world is dead.
So this is equivalent to the earth being covered in trees and
phytoplankton. Where's the harm in that? Where was the evidence that
these creatures were going to flood the entire planet?

If these creatures are actually going to eat the sun, how are they going
to get there, and eating the sun would stop it shining and thus kill
them off anyway. It is totally ridiculous.

What were they doing abducting people and killing the majority of the
Ninth Legion anyway? What does them feeding on light have to do with that?
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
So this monster is driven into some interdimensional gateway--where
the fuck this came from or what the monster was doing on Earth is not
explained--which has to be guarded for all eternity to stop it getting
back out. So the Doctor offers to do that as self appointed protector
of the Earth thought it's entire history. Then the Pictish wench says
it's her job to do that even though she would not live long enough to
complete the task and some of the other Picts and Roman soldiers of
the Ninth Legion decide to join her. Therefore Bill clubs the Doctor
to stop him joining then and that's that. Sentimentalist codswallop
from start to finish.
Finally Missy turns up in the TARDIS after being assigned by the
Doctor to fix the engines. Thankfully were were spaced the ridiculous
sight of them getting intimate.
Next week John Simm returns as the Master at the head of a Mondasian
Cyberman army.
7.5/10
Andrew M
2017-06-18 13:48:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Yet another episode dictated by racist, sexist, heterophobic,
sentimentalist PC lunacy and based on magic, rather than one built on
plot, good story telling, and ideas, and based on science and reason.
So it starts off with some girl vanishing in some Scottish cairn who is
not seen again until the end.
The Doctor, the tin dog, and Polynesia turn up looking for the missing
Ninth Legion of the Roman Army, and Polynesia begins translating what
the crows are saying, to the Doctor. What did I say some time ago about
Nardole coming straight out of Doctor Doolittle?
The tin dog falls down a hole in the ground, just like she did last
week, and just like last week she meets a token black soldier, this
time fighting with the Roman army.
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
She did, then she lost contact with him, probably because he was gay.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Just like last week the casting is historically inaccurate. While
African soldiers served on Hadrian's wall these were Northern Africans
from Mauretania all of which served in an all Moore platoon, not mixed
with Roman soldiers from other parts of the empire. The actor in
question did not look Moroccan. At the time in question Moroccans would
have looked like dark Arabs. Northern Africa in Roman times was white
with its population originating from Southern Europe, Asia Minor and
the Levant as recent DNA research has proven.
Not only did this actor not look Moroccan but the other actors who
played the other Roman soldiers did not look Italian or southern European.
Thanks to rampant anti-European racism in the BBC an opportunity was
missed to cast actors of Italian, Greek, or other southern European
origin in the parts of Romans.
I don't entirely disagree with your point here - especially the bit
about casting southern Europeans in this context; indeed I agree
wholeheartedly with that. Technically you are right about Moroccans
too. Technicalities apart, though, the Roman Empire was ethnically
diverse and the inclusion of a black actor conveyed that in 21st
Century terms
No it doesn't. It conveys completely the wrong message, that other
ethnic minorities do not exist or don't have the right to
representation.
Roman Legions were recruited from Roman Citizens only. Therefore the
Ninth Legion would have not contained a single black African soldier
let alone any white northern Europeans.
Auxilia were recruited from existing city states that were part of the
empire and would have been completely homogeneous in ethnicity.
Black Africans if there were any, would have come under Numeri who were
mercenaries recruited from outside the empire, classified as barbarians
and under the command of their own aristocrats and officers.
A simple bit of research with have told the producers this.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with the
Pictish girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates and marauders
when the Romans were nothing of the kind.
This is entirely a matter of perspective. Furth of the Antonine Wall
the Romans were not a 'civilising' force. They planted no settlements
and brought few civilians beyond those who serviced their armies. What
do you think they did? They brought war, and war from the perspective
of the invaded is the work of cut-thoats
They did not bring war. They brought peace and civilisation. The Roman
army did behave like cut-throat pirates. The allied with local leaders
and put local leaders in charge of their own settlements. Along side
existing settlements the Romans built settlements of their own on empty
land to which people from surrounding villages came to trade with or
settle. The cut-throats were the Picts who raided these settlements.
That's all a bit "Decline And Fall", isn't it? I'm afraid what you have
there is a somewhat outdated parody of history that mirror's Gibbon's
rose-tinted view of the Classical period where the 'civilsation' of
Greece and Rome was thought to be in stark opposition to the
'barbarism' of the Picts, the Goths etc. It's a position few modern
historians would embrace
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
This racist and false depiction of the Romans was not effectively
challenged. It was the Picts who were the pirates and marauders who
raided the south and slaughtered innocent Roman citizens and for which
Hadrian's Wall was built to keep them out.
Oh dear. Oh dear me. No. The lands beyond Hadrian's Wall, when it was
built, were largely pacified. The local tribes in the South of Scotland
were generally on good terms with their neighbours to the South and
trade was carried on fruitfully between Britanno-Roman settlements to
the South of the Wall and tribes to the North of it (who may. or may
not, have been Pictish. "Britons" is a far more useful term
historically). Hadrian's Wall - like the other walls built during his
time as Emperor - was not defensive. It was a mark of presence and
authority.
Wrong. Hadrian built his wall because he no longer wanted to expand the
Empire but to consolidate it and thus the wall was built for defensive
purposes to protect Roman British settlements from attack by piratical
Picts. The tribes directly north of the wall were there as a buffer and
peacefully traded with the Romans. The impression given in this story
is a blatant clueless falsification of history.
If the tribes directly north of the wall were peaceable traders (and
they were), what did Romano-British settlements need defended from? And
what were these Roman soldiers doing so far into Pictish territory?
Bringing "peace and civilisation"? Piffle and poppycock, sir!
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
The Romans spread civilisation and order where they went. Piracy was a
crime in the Roman Empire punishable by crucifixion.
Ah. Crucifixion - that ultimate mark of "civilisation".
It was more humane than beheading.
Really? You really want to argue that? You really think that being
nailed to a cross to die slowly over several days is 'more humane' than
swift decapitation?
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
The entire story as acted as comedy by Capaldi and Lucas.
There were, certainly, elements of comedy. They did not constitute "the
entire story". If you are going to write decent reviews you really do
need to learn to avoid absolutes
In respect of Capaldi and Lucas everything that came out of their
mouths was one bad anachronistic joke and after another mocking the
Picks for not understanding any of it. He end comes out with ridiculous
gay crap about being a Vestal Virgin.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
The scenes involving the tin dog were used once again to spread yet
more gay propaganda to a overwhelmingly heterosexual family audience.
One of the Roman soldiers was seen chatting up Mackie's character only
for her to reveal she was gay. Fuck any romance. After this the Romans
started revealing that they were all either gay or swung both ways.
This is a family TV show for fuck's sake!!!!
On top of that, once again the male characters were portrayed as feeble
weaklings subservient to a female leader.
Again, that is not an unfair point and one which I have some sympathy
with. That subservience would not have been one that would have sat
well with Roman men. Had Bill been an older woman I might just have
gone with it and I was longing for the young soldier to step up to the
plate and be the leader
A Roman woman would have been kept at home under guard by her father or
husband's servants. Bill would have been taken for a whore by genuine
Romans. And the Pictish wench would have been kept indoors also.
Ah. So you're an expert in Pictish culture as well now. The truth is
that we know little about social structures at this time, but there is
strong evidence that women could, and did, hold positions of status,
especially in cultic practices.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
No other purpose was served by this episode other than to promote this
racist, sexist, heterophobic, derogatory, PC loony propaganda.
There was no plot or reason whatsoever.
For some reason unbeknown to anyone some monster which was supposed to
feed on light was abducting people Why? What does it need people for
when it eats light? How can it eat light anyway? Don't trees eat light?
Why doesn't it look like a tree?
The first points were (sort of) explained but not, I grant you, very
well. As to why it doesn't look like a tree, why should it?
Phytoplankton feed on light, but they don't look like trees
It didn't look like Phytoplankton either.
My point was that a creature from another dimension doesn't have to
look anything like organisms on this world.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
While this monster was supposed to feed on light, light was used to
weaken it. How?
Again, that was (sort of) explained. The material in the 'bats' you
refer to in the next question alter the light in a way that poisons the
creature.
What? It was complete and utter nonsense. How was this light altered?
Why weren't experiments carried out to find out what needed altering
and why?
Light is altered in many ways when passing through materials.
Experiments had been carried out - these materials had been
successfully used by the local Gatekeepers for generations to keep the
creatures at bay.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
For some other unknown reason wooden bats were used to focus light
which came out of nowhere onto the creature. What?
And pulled out of thin air by the Doctor, this monster first refereed
to as a locust and looking nothing like a locust, was supposed to be
capable of eating up the entire sun and every star in the sky. Do the
moronic writers know how big the sun actually is? How can a monster the
size of a large wolf consume something the size of a star? Do they
seriously think the sun is in reality the size of an orange held at
arm's length and the other stars just pin pricks?
No. They probably don't. But the people The Doctor is speaking to
might. Sorry, but your points here are just getting silly and petty.
These are
No they are not.
Post by Andrew M
beings from another reality. They feed on light. If the gateway between
the worlds is opened and stays open then thousands of these things come
into ours as a swarm (see 'locusts'). They consume light and multiply.
How? Where were they seen even once consuming any light.
Post by Andrew M
Eventually they become so numerous that they absorb every photon that
comes from the Sun and are strong enough to be not weakened by the
The sun is over 100 times the diameter of Earth and the distance
between the Earth and the sun is many times greater. How are these
creatures going to fill this entire area?
Post by Andrew M
coming of night. Then they absorb every photon that comes from every
star. From the perspective of the Earth the Sun has gone and the stars
are gone and the world is dead.
So this is equivalent to the earth being covered in trees and
phytoplankton. Where's the harm in that? Where was the evidence that
these creatures were going to flood the entire planet?
If these creatures are actually going to eat the sun, how are they
going to get there, and eating the sun would stop it shining and thus
kill them off anyway. It is totally ridiculous.
What were they doing abducting people and killing the majority of the
Ninth Legion anyway? What does them feeding on light have to do with that?
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
So this monster is driven into some interdimensional gateway--where the
fuck this came from or what the monster was doing on Earth is not
explained--which has to be guarded for all eternity to stop it getting
back out. So the Doctor offers to do that as self appointed protector
of the Earth thought it's entire history. Then the Pictish wench says
it's her job to do that even though she would not live long enough to
complete the task and some of the other Picts and Roman soldiers of the
Ninth Legion decide to join her. Therefore Bill clubs the Doctor to
stop him joining then and that's that. Sentimentalist codswallop from
start to finish.
Finally Missy turns up in the TARDIS after being assigned by the Doctor
to fix the engines. Thankfully were were spaced the ridiculous sight of
them getting intimate.
Next week John Simm returns as the Master at the head of a Mondasian
Cyberman army.
7.5/10
Siri Cruise
2017-06-18 14:28:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
She did, then she lost contact with him, probably because he was gay.
The centurion she was stuck with in the trap was eaten as she ran away in the
forest
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
Free the Amos Yee one. This post / \
Yeah, too bad about your so-called life. Ha-ha. insults Islam. Mohammed
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 16:06:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
She did, then she lost contact with him, probably because he was gay.
The centurion she was stuck with in the trap was eaten as she ran away in the
forest
And then he miraculously appears with the other centurions a few minutes
later. Or where there two black centurions?

This episode was totally laughable.

Why would creatures that eat light want to eat Roman centurions?

Not once in this entire series so far has there been an alien with any
kind of intelligence whatsoever. It's one moronic species driven but
primitive urges, feelings and emotions followed by another, along with
the entire main cast. When is their going to be some actual science
fiction instead of this sentimentalist codswallop?
solar penguin
2017-06-18 16:22:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 17:06:46 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
She did, then she lost contact with him, probably because he was gay.
The centurion she was stuck with in the trap was eaten as she ran away in the
forest
And then he miraculously appears with the other centurions a few minutes
later. Or where there two black centurions?
Yes, there were 2 black soldiers.

If you're going to complain about a show, you really should
pay attention to it first.
Post by Agamemnon
Why would creatures that eat light want to eat Roman centurions?
Why would a plant that eats light want to eat flies?
Siri Cruise
2017-06-18 16:54:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by solar penguin
Why would a plant that eats light want to eat flies?
The Doctor said the corpses looked like someones denied sunlight for years. So
the monster was sucking the light out of them, whatever that means. The children
on being able to communicate abandon the wars of their elders, make beautiful
music together, and defeat the darkness.

Or the episode was conceived solely to roger the historical virginal purity of
Rome and Sceata.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
Free the Amos Yee one. This post / \
Yeah, too bad about your so-called life. Ha-ha. insults Islam. Mohammed
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 17:14:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by solar penguin
Why would a plant that eats light want to eat flies?
The Doctor said the corpses looked like someones denied sunlight for
years. So the monster was sucking the light out of them, whatever
What? Once light has been absorbed it's converted to potential energy
inside atoms, or heat. You can't suck it out of them. The best you can
do is initiate combustion and transform the energy into something else.
Why don't these aliens just set the forests on fire?
Post by Siri Cruise
that means. The children on being able to communicate abandon the
wars of their elders, make beautiful music together, and defeat the
darkness.
Complete and utter nonsense and poppycock.
Post by Siri Cruise
Or the episode was conceived solely to roger the historical virginal
purity of Rome and Sceata.
That explanation seems the most likely. This episode was nothing more
than a vehicle to preach homosexuality and make converts while
falsifying Roman history.
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 17:06:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by solar penguin
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 17:06:46 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
She did, then she lost contact with him, probably because he was gay.
The centurion she was stuck with in the trap was eaten as she ran away in the
forest
And then he miraculously appears with the other centurions a few minutes
later. Or where there two black centurions?
Yes, there were 2 black soldiers.
Two of them? This is really confusing now. How can there be two
centurions. A century only needs one.
Post by solar penguin
If you're going to complain about a show, you really should
pay attention to it first.
Post by Agamemnon
Why would creatures that eat light want to eat Roman centurions?
Why would a plant that eats light want to eat flies?
Because it gets more energy out of the files than it does from light.

What is the reason d'etre of these aliens?
solar penguin
2017-06-18 17:18:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 18:06:34 UTC+1, Aggy argued...
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 17:06:46 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
She did, then she lost contact with him, probably because he was gay.
The centurion she was stuck with in the trap was eaten as she ran away in the
forest
And then he miraculously appears with the other centurions a few minutes
later. Or where there two black centurions?
Yes, there were 2 black soldiers.
Two of them? This is really confusing now. How can there be two
centurions. A century only needs one.
What makes you think the 2 black soldiers were both Centurions?
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
If you're going to complain about a show, you really should
pay attention to it first.
Post by Agamemnon
Why would creatures that eat light want to eat Roman centurions?
Why would a plant that eats light want to eat flies?
Because it gets more energy out of the files than it does from light.
No. Because it needs nutrients that it can't get from light alone.
Post by Agamemnon
What is the reason d'etre of these aliens?
Presumably they also need something they can't get from light alone.
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 18:49:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by solar penguin
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 18:06:34 UTC+1, Aggy argued...
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 17:06:46 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
She did, then she lost contact with him, probably because he was gay.
The centurion she was stuck with in the trap was eaten as she ran away in the
forest
And then he miraculously appears with the other centurions a few minutes
later. Or where there two black centurions?
Yes, there were 2 black soldiers.
Two of them? This is really confusing now. How can there be two
centurions. A century only needs one.
What makes you think the 2 black soldiers were both Centurions?
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
If you're going to complain about a show, you really should
pay attention to it first.
Post by Agamemnon
Why would creatures that eat light want to eat Roman centurions?
Why would a plant that eats light want to eat flies?
Because it gets more energy out of the files than it does from light.
No. Because it needs nutrients that it can't get from light alone.
Light doesn't provide nutrients. It provides energy for photosynthesis,
which once again begs the question why do they eat light if they need to
feed on humans or other life forms in order to survive and by eating
light they would be cutting off their own food supply?
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
What is the reason d'etre of these aliens?
Presumably they also need something they can't get from light alone.
So it would be in their interests not to swallow up the sun or any other
stars.
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 20:08:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 17:06:46 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
She did, then she lost contact with him, probably because he was gay.
The centurion she was stuck with in the trap was eaten as she ran away in the
forest
And then he miraculously appears with the other centurions a few minutes
later. Or where there two black centurions?
Yes, there were 2 black soldiers.
Two of them? This is really confusing now. How can there be two
centurions. A century only needs one.
Post by solar penguin
If you're going to complain about a show, you really should
pay attention to it first.
Post by Agamemnon
Why would creatures that eat light want to eat Roman centurions?
Why would a plant that eats light want to eat flies?
Because it gets more energy out of the files than it does from light.
What is the reason d'etre of these aliens?
What is the "reason d'etre" (I think you'll find it's raison d'etre) of
most living creatures? To eat when they're hungry and reproduce in order
to keep the race going.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 18:32:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
She did, then she lost contact with him, probably because he was gay.
The centurion she was stuck with in the trap was eaten as she ran away in the
forest
Andrew Siri has this corect.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 16:02:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with the
Pictish girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates and
marauders when the Romans were nothing of the kind.
This is entirely a matter of perspective. Furth of the Antonine Wall
the Romans were not a 'civilising' force. They planted no settlements
and brought few civilians beyond those who serviced their armies.
What do you think they did? They brought war, and war from the
perspective of the invaded is the work of cut-thoats
They did not bring war. They brought peace and civilisation. The Roman
army did behave like cut-throat pirates. The allied with local leaders
and put local leaders in charge of their own settlements. Along side
existing settlements the Romans built settlements of their own on
empty land to which people from surrounding villages came to trade
with or settle. The cut-throats were the Picts who raided these
settlements.
That's all a bit "Decline And Fall", isn't it? I'm afraid what you have
there is a somewhat outdated parody of history that mirror's Gibbon's
rose-tinted view of the Classical period where the 'civilsation' of
Greece and Rome was thought to be in stark opposition to the 'barbarism'
of the Picts, the Goths etc. It's a position few modern historians would
embrace
WRONG! Gibbon is the standard source for all genuine historians.

Asimov's highly successful Foundation series, a science fiction classic,
was entirely inspired by Gibbon, which Asimov had read twice. The
Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy was ripped off from Foundation.

Morden revisionists are not historians.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
This racist and false depiction of the Romans was not effectively
challenged. It was the Picts who were the pirates and marauders who
raided the south and slaughtered innocent Roman citizens and for
which Hadrian's Wall was built to keep them out.
Oh dear. Oh dear me. No. The lands beyond Hadrian's Wall, when it was
built, were largely pacified. The local tribes in the South of
Scotland were generally on good terms with their neighbours to the
South and trade was carried on fruitfully between Britanno-Roman
settlements to the South of the Wall and tribes to the North of it
(who may. or may not, have been Pictish. "Britons" is a far more
useful term historically). Hadrian's Wall - like the other walls
built during his time as Emperor - was not defensive. It was a mark
of presence and authority.
Wrong. Hadrian built his wall because he no longer wanted to expand
the Empire but to consolidate it and thus the wall was built for
defensive purposes to protect Roman British settlements from attack by
piratical Picts. The tribes directly north of the wall were there as a
buffer and peacefully traded with the Romans. The impression given in
this story is a blatant clueless falsification of history.
If the tribes directly north of the wall were peaceable traders (and
they were), what did Romano-British settlements need defended from? And
what were these Roman soldiers doing so far into Pictish territory?
Bringing "peace and civilisation"? Piffle and poppycock, sir!
Hadrian's wall was built to keep Pictish pirates, gangsters, raiders,
and marauders out and at a safe distance from Romano-British settlements
and protect them. That's why it was fully manned and guarded.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
The Romans spread civilisation and order where they went. Piracy was
a crime in the Roman Empire punishable by crucifixion.
Ah. Crucifixion - that ultimate mark of "civilisation".
It was more humane than beheading.
Really? You really want to argue that? You really think that being
nailed to a cross to die slowly over several days is 'more humane' than
swift decapitation?
The Roman soldiers who nailed the criminal to the cross could not be
blamed or feel guilty for their death like an executioner would. The
criminal on the cross always had a chance to be rescued, thus it was
more humane than beheading.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
The entire story as acted as comedy by Capaldi and Lucas.
There were, certainly, elements of comedy. They did not constitute
"the entire story". If you are going to write decent reviews you
really do need to learn to avoid absolutes
In respect of Capaldi and Lucas everything that came out of their
mouths was one bad anachronistic joke and after another mocking the
Picks for not understanding any of it. He end comes out with
ridiculous gay crap about being a Vestal Virgin.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
The scenes involving the tin dog were used once again to spread yet
more gay propaganda to a overwhelmingly heterosexual family
audience. One of the Roman soldiers was seen chatting up Mackie's
character only for her to reveal she was gay. Fuck any romance.
After this the Romans started revealing that they were all either
gay or swung both ways.
This is a family TV show for fuck's sake!!!!
On top of that, once again the male characters were portrayed as
feeble weaklings subservient to a female leader.
Again, that is not an unfair point and one which I have some sympathy
with. That subservience would not have been one that would have sat
well with Roman men. Had Bill been an older woman I might just have
gone with it and I was longing for the young soldier to step up to
the plate and be the leader
A Roman woman would have been kept at home under guard by her father
or husband's servants. Bill would have been taken for a whore by
genuine Romans. And the Pictish wench would have been kept indoors also.
Ah. So you're an expert in Pictish culture as well now. The truth is
that we know little about social structures at this time, but there is
strong evidence that women could, and did, hold positions of status,
especially in cultic practices.
There is not evidence for any such thing whatsoever. The White Goddess
was a work of fiction by Robert Graves and everything about these
so-called cultic practices ultimately derives from that. It's poppycock
just like the ridiculous claim the Doctor was a vestal virgin. Genuine
historical sources show nothing of the kind.

The Picts were ancestor worships. Women were kept in the home just like
in every other society. Priests and priestess were nothing more than
ceremonial positions held by elected members of the public to preside
over sacrifices, and changed every year. Sacrifices were considered
nothing more than bribing the gods with food to obtain favours and were
a tradition left over from when these gods lived as tribal warlords and
demanded tribute in the from a of tithe. That's ancient religion 101.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
No other purpose was served by this episode other than to promote
this racist, sexist, heterophobic, derogatory, PC loony propaganda.
There was no plot or reason whatsoever.
For some reason unbeknown to anyone some monster which was supposed
to feed on light was abducting people Why? What does it need people
for when it eats light? How can it eat light anyway? Don't trees eat
light? Why doesn't it look like a tree?
The first points were (sort of) explained but not, I grant you, very
well. As to why it doesn't look like a tree, why should it?
Phytoplankton feed on light, but they don't look like trees
It didn't look like Phytoplankton either.
My point was that a creature from another dimension doesn't have to look
anything like organisms on this world.
And yet this creature looked like some kind of giant wolf. A giant wolf
that eats stars? Totally Ridiculous!
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
While this monster was supposed to feed on light, light was used to
weaken it. How?
Again, that was (sort of) explained. The material in the 'bats' you
refer to in the next question alter the light in a way that poisons
the creature.
What? It was complete and utter nonsense. How was this light altered?
Why weren't experiments carried out to find out what needed altering
and why?
Light is altered in many ways when passing through materials.
Like how? A photon, is a photon, is a phonon.
Post by Andrew M
Experiments had been carried out - these materials had been successfully
used by the local Gatekeepers for generations to keep the creatures at bay.
The gatekeepers didn't even have a clue how to use them until the Doctor
told them how.

Magical bats. Totally Ridiculous!

No wonder nobody's watching this series any more.
solar penguin
2017-06-18 17:13:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 17:02:11 UTC+1, Aggy argued...
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
They did not bring war. They brought peace and civilisation. The Roman
army did behave like cut-throat pirates. The allied with local leaders
and put local leaders in charge of their own settlements. Along side
existing settlements the Romans built settlements of their own on
empty land to which people from surrounding villages came to trade
with or settle. The cut-throats were the Picts who raided these
settlements.
That's all a bit "Decline And Fall", isn't it? I'm afraid what you have
there is a somewhat outdated parody of history that mirror's Gibbon's
rose-tinted view of the Classical period where the 'civilsation' of
Greece and Rome was thought to be in stark opposition to the 'barbarism'
of the Picts, the Goths etc. It's a position few modern historians would
embrace
WRONG! Gibbon is the standard source for all genuine historians.
Asimov's highly successful Foundation series, a science fiction classic,
was entirely inspired by Gibbon, which Asimov had read twice. The
Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy was ripped off from Foundation.
That doesn't necessarily mean his history was accurate.
Post by Agamemnon
Morden revisionists are not historians.
They keep asking, "What do you want?" ;)
Andrew M
2017-06-18 23:09:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with the
Pictish girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates and marauders
when the Romans were nothing of the kind.
This is entirely a matter of perspective. Furth of the Antonine Wall
the Romans were not a 'civilising' force. They planted no settlements
and brought few civilians beyond those who serviced their armies. What
do you think they did? They brought war, and war from the perspective
of the invaded is the work of cut-thoats
They did not bring war. They brought peace and civilisation. The Roman
army did behave like cut-throat pirates. The allied with local leaders
and put local leaders in charge of their own settlements. Along side
existing settlements the Romans built settlements of their own on empty
land to which people from surrounding villages came to trade with or
settle. The cut-throats were the Picts who raided these settlements.
That's all a bit "Decline And Fall", isn't it? I'm afraid what you have
there is a somewhat outdated parody of history that mirror's Gibbon's
rose-tinted view of the Classical period where the 'civilsation' of
Greece and Rome was thought to be in stark opposition to the
'barbarism' of the Picts, the Goths etc. It's a position few modern
historians would embrace
WRONG! Gibbon is the standard source for all genuine historians.
Asimov's highly successful Foundation series, a science fiction
classic, was entirely inspired by Gibbon, which Asimov had read twice.
The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy was ripped off from Foundation.
Morden revisionists are not historians.
Yeah. Sorry - you're right and the rest of modern scholarship is wrong.
Oh, and no historian would regard Gibbon as a "source". You may wish to
find out what real historians understand to be 'sources'.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
This racist and false depiction of the Romans was not effectively
challenged. It was the Picts who were the pirates and marauders who
raided the south and slaughtered innocent Roman citizens and for which
Hadrian's Wall was built to keep them out.
Oh dear. Oh dear me. No. The lands beyond Hadrian's Wall, when it was
built, were largely pacified. The local tribes in the South of Scotland
were generally on good terms with their neighbours to the South and
trade was carried on fruitfully between Britanno-Roman settlements to
the South of the Wall and tribes to the North of it (who may. or may
not, have been Pictish. "Britons" is a far more useful term
historically). Hadrian's Wall - like the other walls built during his
time as Emperor - was not defensive. It was a mark of presence and
authority.
Wrong. Hadrian built his wall because he no longer wanted to expand the
Empire but to consolidate it and thus the wall was built for defensive
purposes to protect Roman British settlements from attack by piratical
Picts. The tribes directly north of the wall were there as a buffer and
peacefully traded with the Romans. The impression given in this story
is a blatant clueless falsification of history.
If the tribes directly north of the wall were peaceable traders (and
they were), what did Romano-British settlements need defended from? And
what were these Roman soldiers doing so far into Pictish territory?
Bringing "peace and civilisation"? Piffle and poppycock, sir!
Hadrian's wall was built to keep Pictish pirates, gangsters, raiders,
and marauders out and at a safe distance from Romano-British
settlements and protect them. That's why it was fully manned and
guarded.
So were Norman castles, but they existed for the same reason Hadrian's
wall existed - to stamp the authority of the Normans on border
territory. They certainly didn't exist to protect local communities
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
The Romans spread civilisation and order where they went. Piracy was a
crime in the Roman Empire punishable by crucifixion.
Ah. Crucifixion - that ultimate mark of "civilisation".
It was more humane than beheading.
Really? You really want to argue that? You really think that being
nailed to a cross to die slowly over several days is 'more humane' than
swift decapitation?
The Roman soldiers who nailed the criminal to the cross could not be
blamed or feel guilty for their death like an executioner would.
Why not? Were Roman soldiers less able to feel guilt than an
executioner? Did they have some kind of moral flaw in their
personalities?
Post by Agamemnon
The criminal on the cross always had a chance to be rescued, thus it
was more humane than beheading.
Oh! I get it! The Roman soldiers could feel free from guilt because it
was somebody else's fault that their victim died after they'd nailed
him to a big bit of wood. That somebody ought to have rescued him! Keep
going! You're doing a fine job of showing us exactly what Roman
"civilisation" actually entailed
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
The entire story as acted as comedy by Capaldi and Lucas.
There were, certainly, elements of comedy. They did not constitute "the
entire story". If you are going to write decent reviews you really do
need to learn to avoid absolutes
In respect of Capaldi and Lucas everything that came out of their
mouths was one bad anachronistic joke and after another mocking the
Picks for not understanding any of it. He end comes out with ridiculous
gay crap about being a Vestal Virgin.
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
The scenes involving the tin dog were used once again to spread yet
more gay propaganda to a overwhelmingly heterosexual family audience.
One of the Roman soldiers was seen chatting up Mackie's character only
for her to reveal she was gay. Fuck any romance. After this the Romans
started revealing that they were all either gay or swung both ways.
This is a family TV show for fuck's sake!!!!
On top of that, once again the male characters were portrayed as feeble
weaklings subservient to a female leader.
Again, that is not an unfair point and one which I have some sympathy
with. That subservience would not have been one that would have sat
well with Roman men. Had Bill been an older woman I might just have
gone with it and I was longing for the young soldier to step up to the
plate and be the leader
A Roman woman would have been kept at home under guard by her father or
husband's servants. Bill would have been taken for a whore by genuine
Romans. And the Pictish wench would have been kept indoors also.
Ah. So you're an expert in Pictish culture as well now. The truth is
that we know little about social structures at this time, but there is
strong evidence that women could, and did, hold positions of status,
especially in cultic practices.
There is not evidence for any such thing whatsoever. The White Goddess
was a work of fiction by Robert Graves and everything about these
so-called cultic practices ultimately derives from that. It's poppycock
just like the ridiculous claim the Doctor was a vestal virgin. Genuine
historical sources show nothing of the kind.
I'm not talking about Robert Graves or any other work of fiction. I'm
talking about actual archeological finds and grave goods
Post by Agamemnon
The Picts were ancestor worships.
Probably not. The Picts were British Celts and therefore probably
worshipped a similar pantheon of gods to those found elsewhere in the
Celtic world of the time. It may well be that ancestor worship
continued as an undercurrent in folk belief but it's clear from
archeological evidence that by the early bronze age in the British
Isles 'mainstream' religious practices had moved far from ancestor
worship.
Post by Agamemnon
Women were kept in the home just like in every other society.
Your evidence for this is?
Post by Agamemnon
Priests and priestess were nothing more than ceremonial positions held
by elected members of the public to preside over sacrifices, and
changed every year.
Again, what archeological evidence we have (and I grant you that it's
limited) suggests otherwise. We have found the bodies of women adorned
with the robes and symbols of priestly office - often of great value
which would suggest that they were not 'elected annually'
Post by Agamemnon
Sacrifices were considered nothing more than bribing the gods with
food to obtain favours and were a tradition left over from when these
gods lived as tribal warlords and demanded tribute in the from a of
tithe. That's ancient religion 101.
No. It's a parody of the study of ancient religions. And I notice
you've moved from ancestor worship to the worship of gods.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
No other purpose was served by this episode other than to promote this
racist, sexist, heterophobic, derogatory, PC loony propaganda.
There was no plot or reason whatsoever.
For some reason unbeknown to anyone some monster which was supposed to
feed on light was abducting people Why? What does it need people for
when it eats light? How can it eat light anyway? Don't trees eat light?
Why doesn't it look like a tree?
The first points were (sort of) explained but not, I grant you, very
well. As to why it doesn't look like a tree, why should it?
Phytoplankton feed on light, but they don't look like trees
It didn't look like Phytoplankton either.
My point was that a creature from another dimension doesn't have to
look anything like organisms on this world.
And yet this creature looked like some kind of giant wolf. A giant wolf
that eats stars? Totally Ridiculous
Why are you so hung up on what it looked like? Actually I didn't think
it looked like a wolf, but there you go. But the key phrase in your
response is "looked like". Even if it id look (a bit like) a wolf, it
clearly wasn't a wolf so "a giant wolf that eats stars" is a false
argument
Post by Agamemnon
!
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Post by Agamemnon
While this monster was supposed to feed on light, light was used to
weaken it. How?
Again, that was (sort of) explained. The material in the 'bats' you
refer to in the next question alter the light in a way that poisons the
creature.
What? It was complete and utter nonsense. How was this light altered?
Why weren't experiments carried out to find out what needed altering
and why?
Light is altered in many ways when passing through materials.
Like how? A photon, is a photon, is a phonon.
Oh dear God. Do I have to teach you physics too? Photons have a number
of properties that can differentiate them. In particular they have
plane and rotational polarisation. They also have different energies. A
photon oif green light, for example, is measurably different from a
photon of red light. Your eyes will tell you that
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Andrew M
Experiments had been carried out - these materials had been
successfully used by the local Gatekeepers for generations to keep the
creatures at bay.
The gatekeepers didn't even have a clue how to use them until the
Doctor told them how.
Really? What makes you think that?
Post by Agamemnon
Magical bats. Totally Ridiculous!
No more magical than the sonic screwdriver became under Russell T Davies
Post by Agamemnon
No wonder nobody's watching this series any more.
Pudentame
2017-06-18 00:41:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR

I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 11:59:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 12:02:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
The Doctor
2017-06-18 12:18:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?

I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.

Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Last Doctor
2017-06-18 12:35:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.

Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.

That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.

I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
Tim Bruening
2017-06-18 14:43:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.
Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.
That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.
I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
Why didn't the outdoors fans watch on their smartphones, or haul their TVs outdoors (the TVs being much lighter than in earlier eras)?

Does viewership usually fall on warm sunny evenings?
The Last Doctor
2017-06-18 15:26:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.
Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.
That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.
I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
Why didn't the outdoors fans watch on their smartphones, or haul their
TVs outdoors (the TVs being much lighter than in earlier eras)?
Why would you watch a show on a phone when you can watch it on a 50" screen
later, or another day?

Why take a TV outside when you can be having a drink and chatting with
friends?

There's much more to life than Doctor Who.
Post by Tim Bruening
Does viewership usually fall on warm sunny evenings?
Yes! By 25% on average. More in the UK when it's a great weekend and we
knew about it in advance.
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 16:53:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.
Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.
That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.
I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
Why didn't the outdoors fans watch on their smartphones, or haul their
TVs outdoors (the TVs being much lighter than in earlier eras)?
Why would you watch a show on a phone when you can watch it on a 50" screen
later, or another day?
What difference would a 50 inch screen make when these days you can get
UHD on your phone or tablet?
Post by The Last Doctor
Why take a TV outside when you can be having a drink and chatting with
friends?
There's much more to life than Doctor Who.
There's more to life than rubbish Doctor Who. Why would anyone want to
watch it when they know the writing is totally clueless, feeble and
amateurish, and the producer doesn't give a fuck for the quality of
anything that written just as long as it promotes his racist, sexist,
loony left, homosexual, anti-British, anti-male, pan-European agenda.
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
Does viewership usually fall on warm sunny evenings?
Yes! By 25% on average. More in the UK when it's a great weekend and we
knew about it in advance.
Excuses, excuses, excuses... All you can come up with is excuses rather
than addressing the underlying issues.

The writing is crap.

The story telling is non-existent.

The plot is non-existent.

The primary companion is a black lesbian that looks like a dog and
behaves like a moron, with the characterisation of a card board cut-out,
that the majority of viewers including black ones cannot identify with.

The secondary companion is a fat pink squeeing pig, though better
characterised than the the lesbian is still gay, unattractive and offers
no opportunity for romance either. Who is going to identify with him?

The main protagonist is a man who is old enough to be both of the
companions' father yet fails to behave as a father figure, acts like a
stupid school boy, talking complete and utter incoherent, unscientific
nonsense in every breath, and solves everything by the wave of his magic
wand and other magical powers pulled out of thin air, while playing the
guitar, and also offers no opportunity for romance just like both of his
companions. People have stopped watching because of him.

The supporting cast are all cardboard cut outs with no characterisation,
so that they can lectured to with complete and utter nonsense by the
main protagonist.

The monsters and villains have no characterisation either, no reason for
existence, no credible motivation and are driven by nothing but
primitive feelings and emptions.

Instead of science, logic and reason every episode is driven by
sentiment, feelings and emoticons which is a complete anathema to
science fiction and good story writing.

Every episode is being used to promote a loony left agenda of homosexuality.

Token black actors are being inserted into almost every scene in
disproportionate numbers just so that there can be a black face even if
its completely historically inaccurate, and other ethnic minorities,
most of whom outnumber them are being treated as if they don't even exist.

Men are being made subservient to dominant women.

The producers don't give a stuff for anyone else's opinion.

And you wonder which this episodes got the lowest ratings ever.

Even when the consolidated figures come in the rations will still be
down just like The Lie of the Land, now the second lowest rating
episodes ever which could only manage 3.01m on the night and 4.82m
consolidated.

If Chris Chibanll caries on in the same manner as Moffat there will be
no series left. It will be cancelled before filming is even completed.

There needs to be an attractive actor which women will fancy to play the
Doctor.

The primary companion must be white, female, straight, and attractive to
the majority of male viewers.

There must be credible romance in the manner of Poldark's Dwight and
Caroline or Ross an Demelza.

The main characters should all be intelligent and think logically and
represent the middle class or those that want to aspire to it.

The plot must be based on classic science fiction, space opera, or
planetary romance, driven by ideas, adventure and romance, not
sentiment. Suggested styles should be those of Edgar Rice Burroughs, E.
E. Smith, Philip Nowlan and Frank Herbert.

There should be no more references to homosexuality in a way shape or form.

Casting should be historically accurate and not be influenced in any way
shape of form by racist quotas and token casting.

Each story should be at least 2, 45 minute episodes long or if there
have to be single episode stories each episode extended to 60 minutes.

There should be no series long story arc. All stories must be self
contained and independent of each other.

Lets see how much of this Chris Chibnall is willing to take in. If he
doesn't take it all then the series is doomed.
solar penguin
2017-06-18 17:03:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Aggy angrily asserted...
Post by Agamemnon
Excuses, excuses, excuses... All you can come up with is excuses rather
than addressing the underlying issues.
How do you explain "Eater of Light" being today's most watched programme
on iPlayer today? How does that fit with your underlying issues?
The Doctor
2017-06-18 18:36:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by solar penguin
Aggy angrily asserted...
Post by Agamemnon
Excuses, excuses, excuses... All you can come up with is excuses rather
than addressing the underlying issues.
How do you explain "Eater of Light" being today's most watched programme
on iPlayer today? How does that fit with your underlying issues?
Exactly, and those using IPTV to see DW live on screen on BBC1 ?
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 19:59:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Doctor
Post by solar penguin
Aggy angrily asserted...
Post by Agamemnon
Excuses, excuses, excuses... All you can come up with is excuses rather
than addressing the underlying issues.
How do you explain "Eater of Light" being today's most watched programme
on iPlayer today? How does that fit with your underlying issues?
Exactly, and those using IPTV to see DW live on screen on BBC1 ?
Those watching iPlayer are relevant. Those watching illegally (such as
yourself) are irrelevant. But you already know this.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 23:09:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by solar penguin
Aggy angrily asserted...
Post by Agamemnon
Excuses, excuses, excuses... All you can come up with is excuses rather
than addressing the underlying issues.
How do you explain "Eater of Light" being today's most watched programme
on iPlayer today? How does that fit with your underlying issues?
Exactly, and those using IPTV to see DW live on screen on BBC1 ?
Those watching iPlayer are relevant. Those watching illegally (such as
yourself) are irrelevant. But you already know this.
Characterise illegal.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 20:00:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Doctor
Post by solar penguin
Aggy angrily asserted...
Post by Agamemnon
Excuses, excuses, excuses... All you can come up with is excuses rather
than addressing the underlying issues.
How do you explain "Eater of Light" being today's most watched programme
on iPlayer today? How does that fit with your underlying issues?
Exactly, and those using IPTV to see DW live on screen on BBC1 ?
You're watching it illegal. Do you want the BBC to issue an arrest
warrant for you?
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 20:42:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by solar penguin
Aggy angrily asserted...
Post by Agamemnon
Excuses, excuses, excuses... All you can come up with is excuses rather
than addressing the underlying issues.
How do you explain "Eater of Light" being today's most watched programme
on iPlayer today? How does that fit with your underlying issues?
Exactly, and those using IPTV to see DW live on screen on BBC1 ?
You're watching it illegal. Do you want the BBC to issue an arrest
warrant for you?
He's a Christian. He knows he was tempted by Satan. He'll be off to Hell
to spend all eternity in a few years, if not sooner.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 23:19:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by solar penguin
Aggy angrily asserted...
Post by Agamemnon
Excuses, excuses, excuses... All you can come up with is excuses rather
than addressing the underlying issues.
How do you explain "Eater of Light" being today's most watched programme
on iPlayer today? How does that fit with your underlying issues?
Exactly, and those using IPTV to see DW live on screen on BBC1 ?
You're watching it illegal. Do you want the BBC to issue an arrest
warrant for you?
He's a Christian. He knows he was tempted by Satan. He'll be off to Hell
to spend all eternity in a few years, if not sooner.
Hey Wilson I said IPTV not Kodi.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Doctor
2017-06-18 23:10:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by solar penguin
Aggy angrily asserted...
Post by Agamemnon
Excuses, excuses, excuses... All you can come up with is excuses rather
than addressing the underlying issues.
How do you explain "Eater of Light" being today's most watched programme
on iPlayer today? How does that fit with your underlying issues?
Exactly, and those using IPTV to see DW live on screen on BBC1 ?
You're watching it illegal. Do you want the BBC to issue an arrest
warrant for you?
Excuse me. So I am purchasing my subscription from I pirate?

I don't think so.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
Tim Bruening
2017-06-18 18:29:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, June 18, 2017 at 9:53:31 AM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:

How are you going to squeeze the below sentiments onto protest signs and sound bites? (You sound like you are about to lead a protest movement!).
Post by Agamemnon
There needs to be an attractive actor which women will fancy to play the
Doctor.
The primary companion must be white, female, straight, and attractive to
the majority of male viewers.
There must be credible romance in the manner of Poldark's Dwight and
Caroline or Ross an Demelza.
The main characters should all be intelligent and think logically and
represent the middle class or those that want to aspire to it.
The plot must be based on classic science fiction, space opera, or
planetary romance, driven by ideas, adventure and romance, not
sentiment. Suggested styles should be those of Edgar Rice Burroughs, E.
E. Smith, Philip Nowlan and Frank Herbert.
There should be no more references to homosexuality in a way shape or form.
Casting should be historically accurate and not be influenced in any way
shape of form by racist quotas and token casting.
Each story should be at least 2, 45 minute episodes long or if there
have to be single episode stories each episode extended to 60 minutes.
There should be no series long story arc. All stories must be self
contained and independent of each other.
Lets see how much of this Chris Chibnall is willing to take in. If he
doesn't take it all then the series is doomed.
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 19:43:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
How are you going to squeeze the below sentiments onto protest signs and sound bites? (You sound like you are about to lead a protest movement!).
Chibnall is perfectly capable of coming her and reading them.

Considering that he's planning a writers' room it would be a good idea
if he planned out the plots and structure of each story in advance and
then gave the outline to the writers most capable of writing it
considering that most writers from the current series don't have the
remotest clue how to plot anything for science fiction. Writers who can
do dialogue should be given the dialogue to write, those who can do
action given the action to write, those who can do plot given the plot
to work on and those who can do characterisation and romance given
characterisation and romance to rewrite after the first draft is
submitted by the writer given the task of drafting it.
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by Agamemnon
There needs to be an attractive actor which women will fancy to play the
Doctor.
The primary companion must be white, female, straight, and attractive to
the majority of male viewers.
There must be credible romance in the manner of Poldark's Dwight and
Caroline or Ross an Demelza.
The main characters should all be intelligent and think logically and
represent the middle class or those that want to aspire to it.
The plot must be based on classic science fiction, space opera, or
planetary romance, driven by ideas, adventure and romance, not
sentiment. Suggested styles should be those of Edgar Rice Burroughs, E.
E. Smith, Philip Nowlan and Frank Herbert.
There should be no more references to homosexuality in a way shape or form.
Casting should be historically accurate and not be influenced in any way
shape of form by racist quotas and token casting.
Each story should be at least 2, 45 minute episodes long or if there
have to be single episode stories each episode extended to 60 minutes.
There should be no series long story arc. All stories must be self
contained and independent of each other.
Lets see how much of this Chris Chibnall is willing to take in. If he
doesn't take it all then the series is doomed.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 23:09:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by Tim Bruening
How are you going to squeeze the below sentiments onto protest signs
and sound bites? (You sound like you are about to lead a protest
movement!).
Chibnall is perfectly capable of coming her and reading them.
Considering that he's planning a writers' room it would be a good idea
if he planned out the plots and structure of each story in advance and
then gave the outline to the writers most capable of writing it
considering that most writers from the current series don't have the
remotest clue how to plot anything for science fiction. Writers who can
do dialogue should be given the dialogue to write, those who can do
action given the action to write, those who can do plot given the plot
to work on and those who can do characterisation and romance given
characterisation and romance to rewrite after the first draft is
submitted by the writer given the task of drafting it.
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by Agamemnon
There needs to be an attractive actor which women will fancy to play the
Doctor.
The primary companion must be white, female, straight, and attractive to
the majority of male viewers.
There must be credible romance in the manner of Poldark's Dwight and
Caroline or Ross an Demelza.
The main characters should all be intelligent and think logically and
represent the middle class or those that want to aspire to it.
The plot must be based on classic science fiction, space opera, or
planetary romance, driven by ideas, adventure and romance, not
sentiment. Suggested styles should be those of Edgar Rice Burroughs, E.
E. Smith, Philip Nowlan and Frank Herbert.
There should be no more references to homosexuality in a way shape or form.
Casting should be historically accurate and not be influenced in any way
shape of form by racist quotas and token casting.
Each story should be at least 2, 45 minute episodes long or if there
have to be single episode stories each episode extended to 60 minutes.
There should be no series long story arc. All stories must be self
contained and independent of each other.
Lets see how much of this Chris Chibnall is willing to take in. If he
doesn't take it all then the series is doomed.
We are hoping.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 20:03:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
How are you going to squeeze the below sentiments onto protest signs and sound bites? (You sound like you are about to lead a protest movement!).
He's a keyboard warrior. He makes a lot of noise in radw. Some people
here pay attention to him. Others ignore him. Outside of radw, it's
irrelevant.
Tim Bruening
2017-06-18 21:01:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
How are you going to squeeze the below sentiments onto protest signs and sound bites? (You sound like you are about to lead a protest movement!).
He's a keyboard warrior. He makes a lot of noise in radw. Some people
here pay attention to him. Others ignore him. Outside of radw, it's
irrelevant.
He could draft an on-line petition regarding the changes he wants made in Doctor Who, then post it in Doctor Who groups.

He seems to have a much better idea of what needs to be done than I do!
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 21:06:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
How are you going to squeeze the below sentiments onto protest signs and sound bites? (You sound like you are about to lead a protest movement!).
He's a keyboard warrior. He makes a lot of noise in radw. Some people
here pay attention to him. Others ignore him. Outside of radw, it's
irrelevant.
He could draft an on-line petition regarding the changes he wants made in Doctor Who, then post it in Doctor Who groups.
He seems to have a much better idea of what needs to be done than I do!
Um, no Tim - he's not got a clue. He could draft a petition. It might
get 2 signatures - one from you and one from Yads.
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 21:24:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
How are you going to squeeze the below sentiments onto protest signs
and sound bites? (You sound like you are about to lead a protest
movement!).
He's a keyboard warrior. He makes a lot of noise in radw. Some people
here pay attention to him. Others ignore him. Outside of radw, it's
irrelevant.
He could draft an on-line petition regarding the changes he wants made
in Doctor Who, then post it in Doctor Who groups.
He seems to have a much better idea of what needs to be done than I do!
Um, no Tim - he's not got a clue. He could draft a petition. It might
get 2 signatures - one from you and one from Yads.
I've got a better clue than than either you or Moffat.
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 21:32:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
How are you going to squeeze the below sentiments onto protest
signs and sound bites? (You sound like you are about to lead a
protest movement!).
He's a keyboard warrior. He makes a lot of noise in radw. Some people
here pay attention to him. Others ignore him. Outside of radw, it's
irrelevant.
He could draft an on-line petition regarding the changes he wants
made in Doctor Who, then post it in Doctor Who groups.
He seems to have a much better idea of what needs to be done than I do!
Um, no Tim - he's not got a clue. He could draft a petition. It might
get 2 signatures - one from you and one from Yads.
I've got a better clue than than either you or Moffat.
That's the difference between us, Aggy. I don't work in the television
industry. I don't pretend to know it all. You're like football fans who
all think they know better than the managers. You think you're an expert
in areas you have no qualifications or experience in.

You're just a fanboy who claims to hate the show but watches it without
fail regardless.
The Last Doctor
2017-06-18 21:36:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
How are you going to squeeze the below sentiments onto protest signs
and sound bites? (You sound like you are about to lead a protest
movement!).
He's a keyboard warrior. He makes a lot of noise in radw. Some people
here pay attention to him. Others ignore him. Outside of radw, it's
irrelevant.
He could draft an on-line petition regarding the changes he wants made
in Doctor Who, then post it in Doctor Who groups.
He seems to have a much better idea of what needs to be done than I do!
Um, no Tim - he's not got a clue. He could draft a petition. It might
get 2 signatures - one from you and one from Yads.
I've got a better clue than than either you or Moffat.
Really? Perhaps you could let us know what it is then, and why if you had
such a clue you've been feeding us all this crap that would get the show
cancelled before the first of your episodes screened, not to mention that
your ideas on social matters would be illegal due to their prejudicial and
equality violating nature.
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 23:42:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
How are you going to squeeze the below sentiments onto protest signs
and sound bites? (You sound like you are about to lead a protest
movement!).
He's a keyboard warrior. He makes a lot of noise in radw. Some people
here pay attention to him. Others ignore him. Outside of radw, it's
irrelevant.
He could draft an on-line petition regarding the changes he wants made
in Doctor Who, then post it in Doctor Who groups.
He seems to have a much better idea of what needs to be done than I do!
Um, no Tim - he's not got a clue. He could draft a petition. It might
get 2 signatures - one from you and one from Yads.
I've got a better clue than than either you or Moffat.
Really? Perhaps you could let us know what it is then, and why if you had
I refer you to my treatment for AGA Series 11.
Post by The Last Doctor
such a clue you've been feeding us all this crap that would get the show
cancelled before the first of your episodes screened, not to mention that
your ideas on social matters would be illegal due to their prejudicial and
equality violating nature.
You are deranged. I am the one advocating Mediterranean looking actors
playing Romans so they look like Romans. You one the other hand want
depictions of Roman legionnaires that don't look like Romans and are
both racist and historically inaccurate. I am the one advocating
depicting Britain as it is with all ethnic minorities given equal
treatment. You on the other hand are demanding disproportionate racist
quotas that exclude the majority of ethnic minorities. I am the one
advocating Doctor Who catering for the majority of viewers and ethnic
minorities being allowed to write, produce and act in their own
programmes funded by their share of the BBC licence fee.
The Doctor
2017-06-19 00:28:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
How are you going to squeeze the below sentiments onto protest signs
and sound bites? (You sound like you are about to lead a protest
movement!).
He's a keyboard warrior. He makes a lot of noise in radw. Some people
here pay attention to him. Others ignore him. Outside of radw, it's
irrelevant.
He could draft an on-line petition regarding the changes he wants made
in Doctor Who, then post it in Doctor Who groups.
He seems to have a much better idea of what needs to be done than I do!
Um, no Tim - he's not got a clue. He could draft a petition. It might
get 2 signatures - one from you and one from Yads.
I've got a better clue than than either you or Moffat.
Really? Perhaps you could let us know what it is then, and why if you had
I refer you to my treatment for AGA Series 11.
Post by The Last Doctor
such a clue you've been feeding us all this crap that would get the show
cancelled before the first of your episodes screened, not to mention that
your ideas on social matters would be illegal due to their prejudicial and
equality violating nature.
You are deranged. I am the one advocating Mediterranean looking actors
playing Romans so they look like Romans. You one the other hand want
depictions of Roman legionnaires that don't look like Romans and are
both racist and historically inaccurate. I am the one advocating
depicting Britain as it is with all ethnic minorities given equal
treatment. You on the other hand are demanding disproportionate racist
quotas that exclude the majority of ethnic minorities. I am the one
advocating Doctor Who catering for the majority of viewers and ethnic
minorities being allowed to write, produce and act in their own
programmes funded by their share of the BBC licence fee.
Chibnall for variety and not the RTD/SM agenda.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Doctor
2017-06-18 23:20:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
How are you going to squeeze the below sentiments onto protest signs
and sound bites? (You sound like you are about to lead a protest
movement!).
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Other Doctor
He's a keyboard warrior. He makes a lot of noise in radw. Some people
here pay attention to him. Others ignore him. Outside of radw, it's
irrelevant.
He could draft an on-line petition regarding the changes he wants made
in Doctor Who, then post it in Doctor Who groups.
Post by Tim Bruening
He seems to have a much better idea of what needs to be done than I do!
Um, no Tim - he's not got a clue. He could draft a petition. It might
get 2 signatures - one from you and one from Yads.
You mean Just Tim and Ag.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Doctor
2017-06-18 23:11:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by Tim Bruening
How are you going to squeeze the below sentiments onto protest signs
and sound bites? (You sound like you are about to lead a protest
movement!).
He's a keyboard warrior. He makes a lot of noise in radw. Some people
here pay attention to him. Others ignore him. Outside of radw, it's
irrelevant.
Said the noisiest DW rebel in the subscription.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Doctor
2017-06-18 18:36:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.
Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.
That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.
I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
Why didn't the outdoors fans watch on their smartphones, or haul their
TVs outdoors (the TVs being much lighter than in earlier eras)?
Why would you watch a show on a phone when you can watch it on a 50" screen
later, or another day?
What difference would a 50 inch screen make when these days you can get
UHD on your phone or tablet?
Post by The Last Doctor
Why take a TV outside when you can be having a drink and chatting with
friends?
There's much more to life than Doctor Who.
There's more to life than rubbish Doctor Who. Why would anyone want to
watch it when they know the writing is totally clueless, feeble and
amateurish, and the producer doesn't give a fuck for the quality of
anything that written just as long as it promotes his racist, sexist,
loony left, homosexual, anti-British, anti-male, pan-European agenda.
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
Does viewership usually fall on warm sunny evenings?
Yes! By 25% on average. More in the UK when it's a great weekend and we
knew about it in advance.
Excuses, excuses, excuses... All you can come up with is excuses rather
than addressing the underlying issues.
The writing is crap.
The story telling is non-existent.
The plot is non-existent.
The primary companion is a black lesbian that looks like a dog and
behaves like a moron, with the characterisation of a card board cut-out,
that the majority of viewers including black ones cannot identify with.
The secondary companion is a fat pink squeeing pig, though better
characterised than the the lesbian is still gay, unattractive and offers
no opportunity for romance either. Who is going to identify with him?
The main protagonist is a man who is old enough to be both of the
companions' father yet fails to behave as a father figure, acts like a
stupid school boy, talking complete and utter incoherent, unscientific
nonsense in every breath, and solves everything by the wave of his magic
wand and other magical powers pulled out of thin air, while playing the
guitar, and also offers no opportunity for romance just like both of his
companions. People have stopped watching because of him.
The supporting cast are all cardboard cut outs with no characterisation,
so that they can lectured to with complete and utter nonsense by the
main protagonist.
The monsters and villains have no characterisation either, no reason for
existence, no credible motivation and are driven by nothing but
primitive feelings and emptions.
Instead of science, logic and reason every episode is driven by
sentiment, feelings and emoticons which is a complete anathema to
science fiction and good story writing.
Every episode is being used to promote a loony left agenda of homosexuality.
Token black actors are being inserted into almost every scene in
disproportionate numbers just so that there can be a black face even if
its completely historically inaccurate, and other ethnic minorities,
most of whom outnumber them are being treated as if they don't even exist.
Men are being made subservient to dominant women.
The producers don't give a stuff for anyone else's opinion.
And you wonder which this episodes got the lowest ratings ever.
Even when the consolidated figures come in the rations will still be
down just like The Lie of the Land, now the second lowest rating
episodes ever which could only manage 3.01m on the night and 4.82m
consolidated.
If Chris Chibanll caries on in the same manner as Moffat there will be
no series left. It will be cancelled before filming is even completed.
There needs to be an attractive actor which women will fancy to play the
Doctor.
The primary companion must be white, female, straight, and attractive to
the majority of male viewers.
There must be credible romance in the manner of Poldark's Dwight and
Caroline or Ross an Demelza.
The main characters should all be intelligent and think logically and
represent the middle class or those that want to aspire to it.
The plot must be based on classic science fiction, space opera, or
planetary romance, driven by ideas, adventure and romance, not
sentiment. Suggested styles should be those of Edgar Rice Burroughs, E.
E. Smith, Philip Nowlan and Frank Herbert.
There should be no more references to homosexuality in a way shape or form.
Casting should be historically accurate and not be influenced in any way
shape of form by racist quotas and token casting.
Each story should be at least 2, 45 minute episodes long or if there
have to be single episode stories each episode extended to 60 minutes.
There should be no series long story arc. All stories must be self
contained and independent of each other.
Lets see how much of this Chris Chibnall is willing to take in. If he
doesn't take it all then the series is doomed.
Well Chibnall is a RTD spinoff like Moffat.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 20:11:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Lets see how much of this Chris Chibnall is willing to take in. If he
doesn't take it all then the series is doomed.
He'll take none of it in. He doesn't bother with the crap that gets
posted to radw. He'll never read any of your rants. If he ever came
across them by chance, he'd ignore them completely.

I think you'll find Chibnall's experience is infinitely greater than
yours. He'll do it his way. If it works, great. If not, well at least
he'll have tried.

You trying to give him advice would be like Yads trying to explain
relativity to Einstein.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 23:12:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Lets see how much of this Chris Chibnall is willing to take in. If he
doesn't take it all then the series is doomed.
He'll take none of it in. He doesn't bother with the crap that gets
posted to radw. He'll never read any of your rants. If he ever came
across them by chance, he'd ignore them completely.
I think you'll find Chibnall's experience is infinitely greater than
yours. He'll do it his way. If it works, great. If not, well at least
he'll have tried.
You trying to give him advice would be like Yads trying to explain
relativity to Einstein.
Sorry wrong time epoch you lunatic Wilson.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 20:17:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.
Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.
That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.
I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
Why didn't the outdoors fans watch on their smartphones, or haul their
TVs outdoors (the TVs being much lighter than in earlier eras)?
Why would you watch a show on a phone when you can watch it on a 50" screen
later, or another day?
Why take a TV outside when you can be having a drink and chatting with
friends?
There's much more to life than Doctor Who.
Post by Tim Bruening
Does viewership usually fall on warm sunny evenings?
Yes! By 25% on average. More in the UK when it's a great weekend and we
knew about it in advance.
I certainly had better things to do on Saturday evening than sit at home
watching the box.

These days I watch a programme when it suits me. I'm not a slave to
channel schedulers.

Actually I watch very little television at all these days. The box is
never on in my house - I watched Doctor Who on my laptop, using a
bluetooth speaker. The only time I see what's on TV is when I'm visiting
other people who have the TV on all the time as little more than moving
wallpaper.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 23:14:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.
Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.
That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.
I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
Why didn't the outdoors fans watch on their smartphones, or haul their
TVs outdoors (the TVs being much lighter than in earlier eras)?
Why would you watch a show on a phone when you can watch it on a 50" screen
later, or another day?
Why take a TV outside when you can be having a drink and chatting with
friends?
There's much more to life than Doctor Who.
Post by Tim Bruening
Does viewership usually fall on warm sunny evenings?
Yes! By 25% on average. More in the UK when it's a great weekend and we
knew about it in advance.
I certainly had better things to do on Saturday evening than sit at home
watching the box.
These days I watch a programme when it suits me. I'm not a slave to
channel schedulers.
Actually I watch very little television at all these days. The box is
never on in my house - I watched Doctor Who on my laptop, using a
bluetooth speaker. The only time I see what's on TV is when I'm visiting
other people who have the TV on all the time as little more than moving
wallpaper.
Therfore you do not count as well.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Doctor
2017-06-18 18:33:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.
Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.
That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.
I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
Why didn't the outdoors fans watch on their smartphones, or haul their
TVs outdoors (the TVs being much lighter than in earlier eras)?
Does viewership usually fall on warm sunny evenings?
Will you get with the real world?
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 20:01:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.
Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.
That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.
I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
Why didn't the outdoors fans watch on their smartphones, or haul their
TVs outdoors (the TVs being much lighter than in earlier eras)?
Does viewership usually fall on warm sunny evenings?
Will you get with the real world?
Sound advice there - from the person who has never even visited the real
world, let alone tried living in it...
The Doctor
2017-06-18 23:10:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.
Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.
That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.
I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
Why didn't the outdoors fans watch on their smartphones, or haul their
TVs outdoors (the TVs being much lighter than in earlier eras)?
Does viewership usually fall on warm sunny evenings?
Will you get with the real world?
Sound advice there - from the person who has never even visited the real
world, let alone tried living in it...
You need to improve on your irony.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 20:19:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.
Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.
That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.
I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
Why didn't the outdoors fans watch on their smartphones, or haul their TVs outdoors (the TVs being much lighter than in earlier eras)?
Does viewership usually fall on warm sunny evenings?
Because there are better things to do on a warm sunny evening than watch
television - either inside or out. Or at least, there are better things
to do for most people.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 23:14:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.
Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.
That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.
I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
Why didn't the outdoors fans watch on their smartphones, or haul their
TVs outdoors (the TVs being much lighter than in earlier eras)?
Post by Tim Bruening
Does viewership usually fall on warm sunny evenings?
Because there are better things to do on a warm sunny evening than watch
television - either inside or out. Or at least, there are better things
to do for most people.
Summer solstice is coming.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Doctor
2017-06-18 18:29:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
I told Tim to order on.
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.
Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.
That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.
I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
There you go. IPTV will eventually take over.

What does that mean to viewing stats?
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 20:05:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Doctor
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
I told Tim to order on.
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.
Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.
That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.
I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
There you go. IPTV will eventually take over.
What does that mean to viewing stats?
There's no problem with viewing stats. They take account of people
watching as the show is broadcast (overnight figures) and they take
account of people (such as myself) watching via iPlayer (consolidated
figures).

You're watching in Canada. And illegally. You don't count. You're
irrelevant.
Idlehands
2017-06-18 21:30:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
I told Tim to order on.
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.
Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.
That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.
I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
There you go. IPTV will eventually take over.
What does that mean to viewing stats?
There's no problem with viewing stats. They take account of people
watching as the show is broadcast (overnight figures) and they take
account of people (such as myself) watching via iPlayer (consolidated
figures).
You're watching in Canada. And illegally. You don't count. You're
irrelevant.
Even more so since eternal-september appears to be blocking his posts to
RADW. Could his cross-posting antics finally caught up to binky?
--
"Fairness is a concept that was invented so kids and
idiots could participate in debates"
- Dilbert

"Careful, to bkinky to pouund someone's crutch into power."
binky gibberish
The Doctor
2017-06-18 23:11:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 22:56:19 +0100, Andrew M
TL;DR
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
How accurate are the stats?
I saw the live broadcast via subscried IPTV.
Not a legal feed though or you'd tell us.
I told Tim to order on.
Post by The Last Doctor
Post by The Doctor
Mind you, I? found Pointless Celebrities interesting before that.
The surprising thing about yesterday's audience isn't how LOW it is.
Yesterday at 7:30pm, across the UK, it was a beautiful sunny early evening,
28C (83F). Sensible people were in their gardens having a barbecue or a
social gathering, or sat at tables outside their local pub.
That almost 2.9 million viewers chose to waste the beautiful weather
opportunity and sit inside to watch a programme that that could watch any
time in the next month - is an astonishingly HIGH number.
I know I wasn't among the viewers last night.
There you go. IPTV will eventually take over.
What does that mean to viewing stats?
There's no problem with viewing stats. They take account of people
watching as the show is broadcast (overnight figures) and they take
account of people (such as myself) watching via iPlayer (consolidated
figures).
You're watching in Canada. And illegally. You don't count. You're
irrelevant.
I do not do illegal stuff.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
Tim Bruening
2017-06-18 14:37:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
It looks like the Doctor Who base is revolting, like the Democratic base revolted last year.

Is it time for Doctor Who fans to march on the BBC to demand that the casting be more ethnically accurate and that there be a ban on unnecessary sex and ugly actors?
The Doctor
2017-06-18 18:32:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
It looks like the Doctor Who base is revolting, like the Democratic base revolted last year.
Is it time for Doctor Who fans to march on the BBC to demand that the
casting be more ethnically accurate and that there be a ban on
unnecessary sex and ugly actors?
What makes you come to such a conclusion?
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 20:20:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
It looks like the Doctor Who base is revolting, like the Democratic base revolted last year.
Is it time for Doctor Who fans to march on the BBC to demand that the casting be more ethnically accurate and that there be a ban on unnecessary sex and ugly actors?
You can organise a march if it will make you feel better. You could go
arm in arm with Aggy and Yads. I doubt anyone else will be joining you.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 23:15:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by Agamemnon
Post by The Doctor
Post by Pudentame
I thought it was another good story. It entertained me.
Many will say that.
No they will not. Only 2.89 million people watched it. The worst ratings
for the series ever in its entire history!
It looks like the Doctor Who base is revolting, like the Democratic
base revolted last year.
Post by Tim Bruening
Is it time for Doctor Who fans to march on the BBC to demand that the
casting be more ethnically accurate and that there be a ban on
unnecessary sex and ugly actors?
You can organise a march if it will make you feel better. You could go
arm in arm with Aggy and Yads. I doubt anyone else will be joining you.
Nice suggestion coming from the /dev/null gallery.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
Siri Cruise
2017-06-18 03:34:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
Yes, but everyone knows Santa Claus is white.
Post by Andrew M
I don't entirely disagree with your point here - especially the bit
about casting southern Europeans in this context; indeed I agree
Cast whoever can best play the part at the salary you're going to offer.
Post by Andrew M
This is entirely a matter of perspective. Furth of the Antonine Wall
the Romans were not a 'civilising' force. They planted no settlements
I noted a long bit in the middle where Bill works she can understand latin. Then
the celts and romans confront each other and discover they can understand each
other's speech. That's when they put aside their conflict and work together
against the common threat.

Also the Romans and Celts were children. They were going to kill each because
that's what the adults, now dead, had taught them to do. Then they were taught
another way.

I'm sure that was irrelevant detail.
Post by Andrew M
These are beings from another reality. They feed on light. If the
gateway between the worlds is opened and stays open then thousands of
The monster is explained well enough for the plot, and plot isn't driven by
stupidity. It gives diverse people an opportunity to work together and make
beautiful music.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
Free the Amos Yee one. This post / \
Yeah, too bad about your so-called life. Ha-ha. insults Islam. Mohammed
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 10:11:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
Yes, but everyone knows Santa Claus is white.
Which is a proven historical fact since Saint Nicholas was a Greek
Orthodox priest from Asia-Minor.
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Andrew M
I don't entirely disagree with your point here - especially the bit
about casting southern Europeans in this context; indeed I agree
Cast whoever can best play the part at the salary you're going to offer.
That's Peal Mackie who should never have been cast then.
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Andrew M
This is entirely a matter of perspective. Furth of the Antonine Wall
the Romans were not a 'civilising' force. They planted no settlements
I noted a long bit in the middle where Bill works she can understand latin. Then
the celts and romans confront each other and discover they can understand each
other's speech. That's when they put aside their conflict and work together
against the common threat.
It was a complete farce.
Post by Siri Cruise
Also the Romans and Celts were children. They were going to kill each because
that's what the adults, now dead, had taught them to do. Then they were taught
another way.
More farcical writing which bares no relation to reality or how the
military operates.
Post by Siri Cruise
I'm sure that was irrelevant detail.
Post by Andrew M
These are beings from another reality. They feed on light. If the
gateway between the worlds is opened and stays open then thousands of
The monster is explained well enough for the plot, and plot isn't driven by
What plot? What explanation? None of it made any sense at all.
Post by Siri Cruise
stupidity. It gives diverse people an opportunity to work together and make
beautiful music.
What? Why weren't southern European actors given the chance to play
Roman legionnaires considering that Roman legions were recruited solely
from Roman citizens? The casting was totally racist.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 12:13:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
Yes, but everyone knows Santa Claus is white.
Which is a proven historical fact since Saint Nicholas was a Greek
Orthodox priest from Asia-Minor.
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Andrew M
I don't entirely disagree with your point here - especially the bit
about casting southern Europeans in this context; indeed I agree
Cast whoever can best play the part at the salary you're going to offer.
That's Peal Mackie who should never have been cast then.
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Andrew M
This is entirely a matter of perspective. Furth of the Antonine Wall
the Romans were not a 'civilising' force. They planted no settlements
I noted a long bit in the middle where Bill works she can understand
latin. Then
Post by Siri Cruise
the celts and romans confront each other and discover they can understand each
other's speech. That's when they put aside their conflict and work together
against the common threat.
It was a complete farce.
Post by Siri Cruise
Also the Romans and Celts were children. They were going to kill each because
that's what the adults, now dead, had taught them to do. Then they were taught
another way.
More farcical writing which bares no relation to reality or how the
military operates.
Post by Siri Cruise
I'm sure that was irrelevant detail.
Post by Andrew M
These are beings from another reality. They feed on light. If the
gateway between the worlds is opened and stays open then thousands of
The monster is explained well enough for the plot, and plot isn't driven by
What plot? What explanation? None of it made any sense at all.
Post by Siri Cruise
stupidity. It gives diverse people an opportunity to work together and make
beautiful music.
What? Why weren't southern European actors given the chance to play
Roman legionnaires considering that Roman legions were recruited solely
from Roman citizens? The casting was totally racist.
Racist or a case of 'affirmative action'?
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 15:26:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
Yes, but everyone knows Santa Claus is white.
Which is a proven historical fact since Saint Nicholas was a Greek
Orthodox priest from Asia-Minor.
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Andrew M
I don't entirely disagree with your point here - especially the bit
about casting southern Europeans in this context; indeed I agree
Cast whoever can best play the part at the salary you're going to offer.
That's Peal Mackie who should never have been cast then.
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Andrew M
This is entirely a matter of perspective. Furth of the Antonine Wall
the Romans were not a 'civilising' force. They planted no settlements
I noted a long bit in the middle where Bill works she can understand
latin. Then
Post by Siri Cruise
the celts and romans confront each other and discover they can understand each
other's speech. That's when they put aside their conflict and work together
against the common threat.
It was a complete farce.
Post by Siri Cruise
Also the Romans and Celts were children. They were going to kill each because
that's what the adults, now dead, had taught them to do. Then they were taught
another way.
More farcical writing which bares no relation to reality or how the
military operates.
Post by Siri Cruise
I'm sure that was irrelevant detail.
Post by Andrew M
These are beings from another reality. They feed on light. If the
gateway between the worlds is opened and stays open then thousands of
The monster is explained well enough for the plot, and plot isn't driven by
What plot? What explanation? None of it made any sense at all.
Post by Siri Cruise
stupidity. It gives diverse people an opportunity to work together and make
beautiful music.
What? Why weren't southern European actors given the chance to play
Roman legionnaires considering that Roman legions were recruited solely
from Roman citizens? The casting was totally racist.
Racist or a case of 'affirmative action'?
Racist, and no doubt about it. There was nothing affirmative about it as
regards depicting non-Mediterranean looking Romans.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 18:34:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
Yes, but everyone knows Santa Claus is white.
Which is a proven historical fact since Saint Nicholas was a Greek
Orthodox priest from Asia-Minor.
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Andrew M
I don't entirely disagree with your point here - especially the bit
about casting southern Europeans in this context; indeed I agree
Cast whoever can best play the part at the salary you're going to offer.
That's Peal Mackie who should never have been cast then.
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Andrew M
This is entirely a matter of perspective. Furth of the Antonine Wall
the Romans were not a 'civilising' force. They planted no settlements
I noted a long bit in the middle where Bill works she can understand
latin. Then
Post by Siri Cruise
the celts and romans confront each other and discover they can
understand each
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Siri Cruise
other's speech. That's when they put aside their conflict and work together
against the common threat.
It was a complete farce.
Post by Siri Cruise
Also the Romans and Celts were children. They were going to kill
each because
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Siri Cruise
that's what the adults, now dead, had taught them to do. Then they
were taught
Post by The Doctor
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Siri Cruise
another way.
More farcical writing which bares no relation to reality or how the
military operates.
Post by Siri Cruise
I'm sure that was irrelevant detail.
Post by Andrew M
These are beings from another reality. They feed on light. If the
gateway between the worlds is opened and stays open then thousands of
The monster is explained well enough for the plot, and plot isn't driven by
What plot? What explanation? None of it made any sense at all.
Post by Siri Cruise
stupidity. It gives diverse people an opportunity to work together and make
beautiful music.
What? Why weren't southern European actors given the chance to play
Roman legionnaires considering that Roman legions were recruited solely
from Roman citizens? The casting was totally racist.
Racist or a case of 'affirmative action'?
Racist, and no doubt about it. There was nothing affirmative about it as
regards depicting non-Mediterranean looking Romans.
As I was saying about affirmative Action.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Doctor
2017-06-18 12:10:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
Yes, but everyone knows Santa Claus is white.
Post by Andrew M
I don't entirely disagree with your point here - especially the bit
about casting southern Europeans in this context; indeed I agree
Cast whoever can best play the part at the salary you're going to offer.
Post by Andrew M
This is entirely a matter of perspective. Furth of the Antonine Wall
the Romans were not a 'civilising' force. They planted no settlements
I noted a long bit in the middle where Bill works she can understand latin. Then
the celts and romans confront each other and discover they can understand each
other's speech. That's when they put aside their conflict and work together
against the common threat.
Also the Romans and Celts were children. They were going to kill each because
that's what the adults, now dead, had taught them to do. Then they were taught
another way.
I'm sure that was irrelevant detail.
Post by Andrew M
These are beings from another reality. They feed on light. If the
gateway between the worlds is opened and stays open then thousands of
The monster is explained well enough for the plot, and plot isn't driven by
stupidity. It gives diverse people an opportunity to work together and make
beautiful music.
Send that to IMDB.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 20:31:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Doctor
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
Yes, but everyone knows Santa Claus is white.
Post by Andrew M
I don't entirely disagree with your point here - especially the bit
about casting southern Europeans in this context; indeed I agree
Cast whoever can best play the part at the salary you're going to offer.
Post by Andrew M
This is entirely a matter of perspective. Furth of the Antonine Wall
the Romans were not a 'civilising' force. They planted no settlements
I noted a long bit in the middle where Bill works she can understand latin. Then
the celts and romans confront each other and discover they can understand each
other's speech. That's when they put aside their conflict and work together
against the common threat.
Also the Romans and Celts were children. They were going to kill each because
that's what the adults, now dead, had taught them to do. Then they were taught
another way.
I'm sure that was irrelevant detail.
Post by Andrew M
These are beings from another reality. They feed on light. If the
gateway between the worlds is opened and stays open then thousands of
The monster is explained well enough for the plot, and plot isn't driven by
stupidity. It gives diverse people an opportunity to work together and make
beautiful music.
Send that to IMDB.
If you're that obsessed with IMDB, do it yourself.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 23:17:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by The Doctor
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Andrew M
I don't think she met the black soldier when she fell down the hole.
Picky point I know.
Yes, but everyone knows Santa Claus is white.
Post by Andrew M
I don't entirely disagree with your point here - especially the bit
about casting southern Europeans in this context; indeed I agree
Cast whoever can best play the part at the salary you're going to offer.
Post by Andrew M
This is entirely a matter of perspective. Furth of the Antonine Wall
the Romans were not a 'civilising' force. They planted no settlements
I noted a long bit in the middle where Bill works she can understand latin. Then
the celts and romans confront each other and discover they can
understand each
Post by The Doctor
Post by Siri Cruise
other's speech. That's when they put aside their conflict and work together
against the common threat.
Also the Romans and Celts were children. They were going to kill each because
that's what the adults, now dead, had taught them to do. Then they
were taught
Post by The Doctor
Post by Siri Cruise
another way.
I'm sure that was irrelevant detail.
Post by Andrew M
These are beings from another reality. They feed on light. If the
gateway between the worlds is opened and stays open then thousands of
The monster is explained well enough for the plot, and plot isn't driven by
stupidity. It gives diverse people an opportunity to work together and make
beautiful music.
Send that to IMDB.
If you're that obsessed with IMDB, do it yourself.
I post my own posts there thank you.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Doctor
2017-06-17 22:18:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Agamemnon
Yet another episode dictated by racist, sexist, heterophobic,
sentimentalist PC lunacy and based on magic, rather than one built on
plot, good story telling, and ideas, and based on science and reason.
So it starts off with some girl vanishing in some Scottish cairn who is
not seen again until the end.
The Doctor, the tin dog, and Polynesia turn up looking for the missing
Ninth Legion of the Roman Army, and Polynesia begins translating what
the crows are saying, to the Doctor. What did I say some time ago about
Nardole coming straight out of Doctor Doolittle?
The tin dog falls down a hole in the ground, just like she did last
week, and just like last week she meets a token black soldier, this time
fighting with the Roman army.
Just like last week the casting is historically inaccurate. While
African soldiers served on Hadrian's wall these were Northern Africans
from Mauretania all of which served in an all Moore platoon, not mixed
with Roman soldiers from other parts of the empire. The actor in
question did not look Moroccan. At the time in question Moroccans would
have looked like dark Arabs. Northern Africa in Roman times was white
with its population originating from Southern Europe, Asia Minor and the
Levant as recent DNA research has proven.
Not only did this actor not look Moroccan but the other actors who
played the other Roman soldiers did not look Italian or southern European.
Thanks to rampant anti-European racism in the BBC an opportunity was
missed to cast actors of Italian, Greek, or other southern European
origin in the parts of Romans.
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with the Pictish
girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates and marauders when the
Romans were nothing of the kind. This racist and false depiction of the
Romans was not effectively challenged. It was the Picts who were the
pirates and marauders who raided the south and slaughtered innocent
Roman citizens and for which Hadrian's Wall was built to keep them out.
The Romans spread civilisation and order where they went. Piracy was a
crime in the Roman Empire punishable by crucifixion.
The entire story as acted as comedy by Capaldi and Lucas.
The scenes involving the tin dog were used once again to spread yet more
gay propaganda to a overwhelmingly heterosexual family audience. One of
the Roman soldiers was seen chatting up Mackie's character only for her
to reveal she was gay. Fuck any romance. After this the Romans started
revealing that they were all either gay or swung both ways.
This is a family TV show for fuck's sake!!!!
On top of that, once again the male characters were portrayed as feeble
weaklings subservient to a female leader.
No other purpose was served by this episode other than to promote this
racist, sexist, heterophobic, derogatory, PC loony propaganda.
There was no plot or reason whatsoever.
For some reason unbeknown to anyone some monster which was supposed to
feed on light was abducting people Why? What does it need people for
when it eats light? How can it eat light anyway? Don't trees eat light?
Why doesn't it look like a tree?
While this monster was supposed to feed on light, light was used to
weaken it. How?
For some other unknown reason wooden bats were used to focus light which
came out of nowhere onto the creature. What?
And pulled out of thin air by the Doctor, this monster first refereed to
as a locust and looking nothing like a locust, was supposed to be
capable of eating up the entire sun and every star in the sky. Do the
moronic writers know how big the sun actually is? How can a monster the
size of a large wolf consume something the size of a star? Do they
seriously think the sun is in reality the size of an orange held at
arm's length and the other stars just pin pricks?
So this monster is driven into some interdimensional gateway--where the
fuck this came from or what the monster was doing on Earth is not
explained--which has to be guarded for all eternity to stop it getting
back out. So the Doctor offers to do that as self appointed protector of
the Earth thought it's entire history. Then the Pictish wench says it's
her job to do that even though she would not live long enough to
complete the task and some of the other Picts and Roman soldiers of the
Ninth Legion decide to join her. Therefore Bill clubs the Doctor to stop
him joining then and that's that. Sentimentalist codswallop from start
to finish.
Finally Missy turns up in the TARDIS after being assigned by the Doctor
to fix the engines. Thankfully were were spaced the ridiculous sight of
them getting intimate.
Next week John Simm returns as the Master at the head of a Mondasian
Cyberman army.
7.5/10
We both agree on the rating.

Please deaf tone the harsh rheotric.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
Tim Bruening
2017-06-18 02:51:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Saturday, June 17, 2017 at 1:10:41 PM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Post by Agamemnon
For some other unknown reason wooden bats were used to focus light which
came out of nowhere onto the creature. What?
I think that the light was coming from the torches.
Post by Agamemnon
And pulled out of thin air by the Doctor, this monster first refereed to
as a locust and looking nothing like a locust, was supposed to be
capable of eating up the entire sun and every star in the sky. Do the
moronic writers know how big the sun actually is? How can a monster the
size of a large wolf consume something the size of a star? Do they
seriously think the sun is in reality the size of an orange held at
arm's length and the other stars just pin pricks?
I am assuming that the monsters will reproduce in such great numbers that they will consume the stars!
Post by Agamemnon
So this monster is driven into some interdimensional gateway--where the
fuck this came from or what the monster was doing on Earth is not
explained--which has to be guarded for all eternity to stop it getting
back out. So the Doctor offers to do that as self appointed protector of
the Earth thought it's entire history. Then the Pictish wench says it's
her job to do that even though she would not live long enough to
complete the task and some of the other Picts and Roman soldiers of the
Ninth Legion decide to join her. Therefore Bill clubs the Doctor to stop
him joining then and that's that. Sentimentalist codswallop from start
to finish.
Will those Romans and Picts still be there in 5 billion years when the sun expands to consume Earth (The End Of The World)?
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 10:15:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Post by Agamemnon
For some other unknown reason wooden bats were used to focus light which
came out of nowhere onto the creature. What?
I think that the light was coming from the torches.
Light from torches suddenly becoming pure white and focused in beams
though opaque wooden bats? In fact it was already collimated before it
even hit the bats WHAT THE FUCK WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HAPPENING?
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by Agamemnon
And pulled out of thin air by the Doctor, this monster first refereed to
as a locust and looking nothing like a locust, was supposed to be
capable of eating up the entire sun and every star in the sky. Do the
moronic writers know how big the sun actually is? How can a monster the
size of a large wolf consume something the size of a star? Do they
seriously think the sun is in reality the size of an orange held at
arm's length and the other stars just pin pricks?
I am assuming that the monsters will reproduce in such great numbers that they will consume the stars!
How? Do you realise how big a star is? The sun is 1,000,000 times the
volume of the Earth. How are these monsters supposed to get there? How
are they able to resists the sun's gravity? How can the resist the
radiation?
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by Agamemnon
So this monster is driven into some interdimensional gateway--where the
fuck this came from or what the monster was doing on Earth is not
explained--which has to be guarded for all eternity to stop it getting
back out. So the Doctor offers to do that as self appointed protector of
the Earth thought it's entire history. Then the Pictish wench says it's
her job to do that even though she would not live long enough to
complete the task and some of the other Picts and Roman soldiers of the
Ninth Legion decide to join her. Therefore Bill clubs the Doctor to stop
him joining then and that's that. Sentimentalist codswallop from start
to finish.
Will those Romans and Picts still be there in 5 billion years when the sun expands to consume Earth (The End Of The World)?
Very unlikely. This story was totally moronic.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 12:07:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Post by Agamemnon
For some other unknown reason wooden bats were used to focus light which
came out of nowhere onto the creature. What?
I think that the light was coming from the torches.
Post by Agamemnon
And pulled out of thin air by the Doctor, this monster first refereed to
as a locust and looking nothing like a locust, was supposed to be
capable of eating up the entire sun and every star in the sky. Do the
moronic writers know how big the sun actually is? How can a monster the
size of a large wolf consume something the size of a star? Do they
seriously think the sun is in reality the size of an orange held at
arm's length and the other stars just pin pricks?
I am assuming that the monsters will reproduce in such great numbers
that they will consume the stars!
Depending on the fight.
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by Agamemnon
So this monster is driven into some interdimensional gateway--where the
fuck this came from or what the monster was doing on Earth is not
explained--which has to be guarded for all eternity to stop it getting
back out. So the Doctor offers to do that as self appointed protector of
the Earth thought it's entire history. Then the Pictish wench says it's
her job to do that even though she would not live long enough to
complete the task and some of the other Picts and Roman soldiers of the
Ninth Legion decide to join her. Therefore Bill clubs the Doctor to stop
him joining then and that's that. Sentimentalist codswallop from start
to finish.
Will those Romans and Picts still be there in 5 billion years when the
sun expands to consume Earth (The End Of The World)?
Maybe they fought a battle to the death.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
Tim Bruening
2017-06-18 09:35:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Saturday, June 17, 2017 at 1:10:41 PM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Post by Agamemnon
So this monster is driven into some interdimensional gateway--where the
fuck this came from or what the monster was doing on Earth is not
explained--which has to be guarded for all eternity to stop it getting
back out. So the Doctor offers to do that as self appointed protector of
the Earth thought it's entire history. Then the Pictish wench says it's
her job to do that even though she would not live long enough to
complete the task and some of the other Picts and Roman soldiers of the
Ninth Legion decide to join her.
What in God's name are the Picts and the Romans who are fighting the monster in the portal going to EAT AND DRINK? It seems unlikely that they would have time to do any food gathering while fighting the monster!
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 10:16:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Post by Agamemnon
So this monster is driven into some interdimensional gateway--where the
fuck this came from or what the monster was doing on Earth is not
explained--which has to be guarded for all eternity to stop it getting
back out. So the Doctor offers to do that as self appointed protector of
the Earth thought it's entire history. Then the Pictish wench says it's
her job to do that even though she would not live long enough to
complete the task and some of the other Picts and Roman soldiers of the
Ninth Legion decide to join her.
What in God's name are the Picts and the Romans who are fighting the monster in the portal going to EAT AND DRINK? It seems unlikely that they would have time to do any food gathering while fighting the monster!
And that too. It's a complete and utter joke.
solar penguin
2017-06-18 11:18:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 10:35:14 UTC+1, Tim typed...
Post by Tim Bruening
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
What in God's name are the Picts and the Romans who are fighting the
monster in the portal going to EAT AND DRINK? It seems unlikely that
they would have time to do any food gathering while fighting the
monster!
Following established DW continuity, people in time warps don't need to
eat or drink.

e.g See Amy in "The Girl Who Waited", the chicken in "City of Death",
and many other examples.
Tim Bruening
2017-06-18 14:23:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by solar penguin
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 10:35:14 UTC+1, Tim typed...
Post by Tim Bruening
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
What in God's name are the Picts and the Romans who are fighting the
monster in the portal going to EAT AND DRINK? It seems unlikely that
they would have time to do any food gathering while fighting the
monster!
Following established DW continuity, people in time warps don't need to
eat or drink.
e.g See Amy in "The Girl Who Waited", the chicken in "City of Death",
and many other examples.
This begs the question of WHY time warped people don't need any nourishment! This might be a meta-nit.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 18:31:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by solar penguin
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 10:35:14 UTC+1, Tim typed...
Post by Tim Bruening
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
What in God's name are the Picts and the Romans who are fighting the
monster in the portal going to EAT AND DRINK? It seems unlikely that
they would have time to do any food gathering while fighting the
monster!
Following established DW continuity, people in time warps don't need to
eat or drink.
e.g See Amy in "The Girl Who Waited", the chicken in "City of Death",
and many other examples.
This begs the question of WHY time warped people don't need any
nourishment! This might be a meta-nit.
Explain.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
The Doctor
2017-06-18 12:12:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Post by Agamemnon
So this monster is driven into some interdimensional gateway--where the
fuck this came from or what the monster was doing on Earth is not
explained--which has to be guarded for all eternity to stop it getting
back out. So the Doctor offers to do that as self appointed protector of
the Earth thought it's entire history. Then the Pictish wench says it's
her job to do that even though she would not live long enough to
complete the task and some of the other Picts and Roman soldiers of the
Ninth Legion decide to join her.
What in God's name are the Picts and the Romans who are fighting the
monster in the portal going to EAT AND DRINK? It seems unlikely that
they would have time to do any food gathering while fighting the
monster!
Well the Doctor is a successful negotiator.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
Tim Bruening
2017-06-18 14:39:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
111
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Post by The Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
What in God's name are the Picts and the Romans who are fighting the
monster in the portal going to EAT AND DRINK? It seems unlikely that
they would have time to do any food gathering while fighting the
monster!
Well the Doctor is a successful negotiator.
The Doctor didn't go into the portal, so can't possibly negotiate supplies of food for the warriors!
The Doctor
2017-06-18 18:33:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
111
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Post by The Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
What in God's name are the Picts and the Romans who are fighting the
monster in the portal going to EAT AND DRINK? It seems unlikely that
they would have time to do any food gathering while fighting the
monster!
Well the Doctor is a successful negotiator.
The Doctor didn't go into the portal, so can't possibly negotiate
supplies of food for the warriors!
He did initally and then was blocked.

As for the food ...
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
solar penguin
2017-06-18 11:03:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Saturday, 17 June 2017 21:10:41 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
So it starts off with some girl vanishing in some Scottish cairn who is
not seen again until the end.
She _didn't_ vanish. The hook in the teaser was the mention of music, the
crow saying "Doctor," and the carving of the TARDIS.
Post by Agamemnon
The Doctor, the tin dog, and Polynesia turn up looking for the missing
Ninth Legion of the Roman Army, and Polynesia begins translating what
the crows are saying, to the Doctor. What did I say some time ago about
Nardole coming straight out of Doctor Doolittle?
Nardole _didn't_ translate anything. He repeated the crow's words because
he was surprised it was talking in English. (Or at least in Pictish which
we heard as English because of the TARDIS translation. But there was no
need for Nardole to translate it any further, that's the point.)

(*SNIP*)
Post by Agamemnon
Just like last week the casting is historically inaccurate. While
African soldiers served on Hadrian's wall these were Northern Africans
from Mauretania all of which served in an all Moore platoon, not mixed
with Roman soldiers from other parts of the empire. The actor in
question did not look Moroccan. At the time in question Moroccans would
have looked like dark Arabs. Northern Africa in Roman times was white
with its population originating from Southern Europe, Asia Minor and the
Levant as recent DNA research has proven.
Not only did this actor not look Moroccan but the other actors who
played the other Roman soldiers did not look Italian or southern European.
You're once again interpreting what you see on screen literally, rather
than symbolically or metaphorically. The Romans were ethnically different
from the Picts, and the casting symbolises this.

Nowadays, when far too much TV drama is based on literal visual depictions,
it's quite refreshing to see DW going for a retro stylised look.

(*SNIP*)
Post by Agamemnon
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with the Pictish
girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates and marauders when the
Romans were nothing of the kind.
Whether they were or not, the tribes who fought the Romans _believed_ them
to be cut-throat pirates and marauders. The script directly plagiarised
the famous "make a desert and call it peace" speech by Calagus, word for
word.

(Towards the end, I was literally joining in with the speech as it was
delivered, like Roald in "The Nightmare Begins".)
Post by Agamemnon
This racist and false depiction of the
Romans was not effectively challenged.
It was challenged twice. First, by the depiction of the Romans that
Bill met as open-minded, tolerant types. Then, when the Picts and
Romans finally met and found they weren't so different after all.
Post by Agamemnon
For some other unknown reason wooden bats were used to focus light which
came out of nowhere onto the creature. What?
The bats, containing crystal lenses to focus the light, were part of the
Gatekeeper's gatekeeping equipment. The light came from a fire.
Post by Agamemnon
And pulled out of thin air by the Doctor, this monster first refereed to
as a locust and looking nothing like a locust, was supposed to be
capable of eating up the entire sun and every star in the sky.
Once again, you're interpretting everything too literally. The locust
comparison was to the destructive, ravaging appetite.

(*SNIP*)
Post by Agamemnon
Next week John Simm returns as the Master at the head of a Mondasian
Cyberman army.
Please don't post spoilers for those of us who don't watch the trailers.
Thanks.
solar penguin
2017-06-18 11:14:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 12:03:11 UTC+1, solar penguin spewed...
Post by solar penguin
(*SNIP*)
Post by Agamemnon
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with the Pictish
girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates and marauders when the
Romans were nothing of the kind.
Whether they were or not, the tribes who fought the Romans _believed_ them
to be cut-throat pirates and marauders. The script directly plagiarised
the famous "make a desert and call it peace" speech by Calagus, word for
word.
I meant Calgacus, of course. Sorry for that typo. Hope it didn't cause
too much confusion.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 12:15:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by solar penguin
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 12:03:11 UTC+1, solar penguin spewed...
Post by solar penguin
(*SNIP*)
Post by Agamemnon
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with the Pictish
girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates and marauders when the
Romans were nothing of the kind.
Whether they were or not, the tribes who fought the Romans _believed_ them
to be cut-throat pirates and marauders. The script directly plagiarised
the famous "make a desert and call it peace" speech by Calagus, word for
word.
I meant Calgacus, of course. Sorry for that typo. Hope it didn't cause
too much confusion.
Do you mean Caligula?
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
solar penguin
2017-06-18 13:46:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Doctor
Post by solar penguin
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 12:03:11 UTC+1, solar penguin spewed...
Post by solar penguin
(*SNIP*)
Post by Agamemnon
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with the Pictish
girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates and marauders when the
Romans were nothing of the kind.
Whether they were or not, the tribes who fought the Romans _believed_ them
to be cut-throat pirates and marauders. The script directly plagiarised
the famous "make a desert and call it peace" speech by Calagus, word for
word.
I meant Calgacus, of course. Sorry for that typo. Hope it didn't cause
too much confusion.
Do you mean Caligula?
--
No. I mean Calgacus.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 18:30:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by solar penguin
Post by The Doctor
Post by solar penguin
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 12:03:11 UTC+1, solar penguin spewed...
Post by solar penguin
(*SNIP*)
Post by Agamemnon
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with the Pictish
girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates and marauders when the
Romans were nothing of the kind.
Whether they were or not, the tribes who fought the Romans _believed_ them
to be cut-throat pirates and marauders. The script directly plagiarised
the famous "make a desert and call it peace" speech by Calagus, word for
word.
I meant Calgacus, of course. Sorry for that typo. Hope it didn't cause
too much confusion.
Do you mean Caligula?
--
No. I mean Calgacus.
Got you. Just checking.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 11:59:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by solar penguin
On Saturday, 17 June 2017 21:10:41 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
So it starts off with some girl vanishing in some Scottish cairn who is
not seen again until the end.
She _didn't_ vanish. The hook in the teaser was the mention of music, the
crow saying "Doctor," and the carving of the TARDIS.
She looked like she vanished to me. It made no sense at all.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
The Doctor, the tin dog, and Polynesia turn up looking for the missing
Ninth Legion of the Roman Army, and Polynesia begins translating what
the crows are saying, to the Doctor. What did I say some time ago about
Nardole coming straight out of Doctor Doolittle?
Nardole _didn't_ translate anything. He repeated the crow's words because
he was surprised it was talking in English. (Or at least in Pictish which
The Doctor didn't seem to hear it speaking in English. Nordole
translated the squawks.
Post by solar penguin
we heard as English because of the TARDIS translation. But there was no
need for Nardole to translate it any further, that's the point.)
Nardole was making insinuations about the crows calling the Pictish
girl's name.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Just like last week the casting is historically inaccurate. While
African soldiers served on Hadrian's wall these were Northern Africans
from Mauretania all of which served in an all Moore platoon, not mixed
with Roman soldiers from other parts of the empire. The actor in
question did not look Moroccan. At the time in question Moroccans would
have looked like dark Arabs. Northern Africa in Roman times was white
with its population originating from Southern Europe, Asia Minor and the
Levant as recent DNA research has proven.
Not only did this actor not look Moroccan but the other actors who
played the other Roman soldiers did not look Italian or southern European.
You're once again interpreting what you see on screen literally, rather
than symbolically or metaphorically. The Romans were ethnically different
from the Picts, and the casting symbolises this.
Only a fool would not see that the emperor is naked and would listen to
someone telling him otherwise.

The casting was racist. The Romans should have looked Italian and they
looked nothing of the kind. They looked northern European just like the
Picts apart from the black solider who should not have even been there
since Roman Legions were recruited from Roman Citizens and there were no
Roman provinces in sub-Saharan Africa so no possibility of any
sub-Saharan African being granted Roman Citizenship.

To suggest that blacks are the only ethnic minority living in the UK and
ignore all others when there were southern European and Mediterranean
actors who should have been cast to play the Romans instead of inserting
a token black character into the Roman legion who doesn't represent the
ethnic make up of Rome in any way--Romans were mainly olive skinned--is
completely racist and deplorable.
Post by solar penguin
Nowadays, when far too much TV drama is based on literal visual depictions,
it's quite refreshing to see DW going for a retro stylised look.
Refreshing?

This episode was a racist travesty of history and the Roman empire and
the ratings show that it was far from refreshing. Only 2.89 million
people watched it.

THESE ARE THE WORST RATINGS OF THE SERIES IN ITS ENTIRE HISTORY!

Rona Munro now has the dubious honour of having written crap for both
the Classic and New Series as well as for the two worst incarnations of
the Doctor in each series, Sylvester McCoy and Peter Capaldi.

Peter Capaldi's incarnation is now the worst Doctor ever by a long stretch!

Did the producers seriously think that parents would allow their
children to watch this crap attempting to brainwash them, after Bill and
the Roman soldiers started ranting on about how good it was to be gay?
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with the Pictish
girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates and marauders when the
Romans were nothing of the kind.
Whether they were or not, the tribes who fought the Romans _believed_ them
to be cut-throat pirates and marauders.
The tribes the Romans fought were the cut-throat pirates and marauders
and the Romans were specifically brought in by their neighbours to stop
them raping, pillaging and marauding them.
Post by solar penguin
The script directly plagiarised
the famous "make a desert and call it peace" speech by Calagus, word for
word.
The speech was an invention of Tacitus to have a go at Domitian.
Post by solar penguin
(Towards the end, I was literally joining in with the speech as it was
delivered, like Roald in "The Nightmare Begins".)
Post by Agamemnon
This racist and false depiction of the
Romans was not effectively challenged.
It was challenged twice. First, by the depiction of the Romans that
Bill met as open-minded, tolerant types. Then, when the Picts and
Romans finally met and found they weren't so different after all.
That was not a challenge.

The true facts should have been related which was that the Pics were
attacking Briton and Roman settlements in the south and the Romans were
there to stop these raids, which is why Hadrian's Wall was built. The
benefits of Roman civilisation should have also been expounded on. Even
Monty Python managed to do that. The Romans were not stopping anyone
from being governed by their own tribal leaders.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
For some other unknown reason wooden bats were used to focus light which
came out of nowhere onto the creature. What?
The bats, containing crystal lenses to focus the light, were part of the
Gatekeeper's gatekeeping equipment. The light came from a fire.
Collimated white light coming from a fire? Lenses made of random,
unground, unpolished crystals, of no determinable focal length? It was a
complete farce.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
And pulled out of thin air by the Doctor, this monster first refereed to
as a locust and looking nothing like a locust, was supposed to be
capable of eating up the entire sun and every star in the sky.
Once again, you're interpretting everything too literally. The locust
comparison was to the destructive, ravaging appetite.
How the hell did they eat light? How could they reach the sun? What the
hell were the doing on Earth. Why not Mercury? Why did they abduct
people and massacre most of the Ninth Legion if they only ate light? How
do they eat light again? Do you realise how big a star is and that it
produces light as a result of nuclear fusion? If you eat the star, which
is completely ridiculous, then you have no more light.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Next week John Simm returns as the Master at the head of a Mondasian
Cyberman army.
Please don't post spoilers for those of us who don't watch the trailers.
Thanks.
Both facts were already well known.
solar penguin
2017-06-18 13:44:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 12:59:40 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
On Saturday, 17 June 2017 21:10:41 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
So it starts off with some girl vanishing in some Scottish cairn who is
not seen again until the end.
She _didn't_ vanish. The hook in the teaser was the mention of music, the
crow saying "Doctor," and the carving of the TARDIS.
She looked like she vanished to me. It made no sense at all.
Maybe you should've paid more attention.

I've just re-watched the beginning to make sure. She does _not_ vanish.

She hears music and stars to run up the hill, but then the picture cuts
away from her to show a crow calling "Doc-tor! Doc-tor! Doc-tor!" then
we see the TARDIS carving in the stone.

Even if the girl had vanished, we wouldn't've seen it because we
we looking at the talking crow and the carving.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
The Doctor, the tin dog, and Polynesia turn up looking for the missing
Ninth Legion of the Roman Army, and Polynesia begins translating what
the crows are saying, to the Doctor. What did I say some time ago about
Nardole coming straight out of Doctor Doolittle?
Nardole _didn't_ translate anything. He repeated the crow's words because
he was surprised it was talking in English. (Or at least in Pictish which
The Doctor didn't seem to hear it speaking in English.
He did, same as we did. He just didn't think it was interesting enough
to comment on.
Post by Agamemnon
Nordole translated the squawks.
Maybe you should've paid more attention.

They weren't squawks. They were English words. They didn't need
translating. We could hear and understand them just fine.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
we heard as English because of the TARDIS translation. But there was no
need for Nardole to translate it any further, that's the point.)
Nardole was making insinuations about the crows calling the Pictish
girl's name.
That was at the end, when the crows stopped talking and just repeated
the name "Kar." Before that they were saying recognisable English
words.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Just like last week the casting is historically inaccurate. While
African soldiers served on Hadrian's wall these were Northern Africans
from Mauretania all of which served in an all Moore platoon, not mixed
with Roman soldiers from other parts of the empire. The actor in
question did not look Moroccan. At the time in question Moroccans would
have looked like dark Arabs. Northern Africa in Roman times was white
with its population originating from Southern Europe, Asia Minor and the
Levant as recent DNA research has proven.
Not only did this actor not look Moroccan but the other actors who
played the other Roman soldiers did not look Italian or southern European.
You're once again interpreting what you see on screen literally, rather
than symbolically or metaphorically. The Romans were ethnically different
from the Picts, and the casting symbolises this.
Only a fool would not see that the emperor is naked and would listen to
someone telling him otherwise.
We've been telling you that your bigotry is naked, and you haven't
listened. What does that make you?
Post by Agamemnon
The casting was racist. The Romans should have looked Italian and they
looked nothing of the kind.
Italians and other foreign Europeans are, unfortunately, so common on our
streets these days that we wouldn't've noticed anything odd about them
if they had been cast.
Post by Agamemnon
They looked northern European just like the
Picts apart from the black solider
The two black soldiers: the one who was killed and the gay one.

You really didn't pay attention, did you?
Post by Agamemnon
who should not have even been there
since Roman Legions were recruited from Roman Citizens and there were no
Roman provinces in sub-Saharan Africa so no possibility of any
sub-Saharan African being granted Roman Citizenship.
The sub-Saharan appearance wasn't to be taken literally. Like the black
soldier on Mars, it was as a visual clue to stop us thinking "Which one
is he again?" We can see which one he is: the black one! (That's why
the second black Roman wasn't introduced until after the first one was
killed. Can't confuse the audience by having two black ones at once!)
Post by Agamemnon
To suggest that blacks are the only ethnic minority living in the UK and
ignore all others when there were southern European and Mediterranean
actors who should have been cast to play the Romans instead of inserting
a token black character into the Roman legion who doesn't represent the
ethnic make up of Rome in any way--Romans were mainly olive skinned--is
completely racist and deplorable.
The southern European and Mediterranean actors wouldn't be as noticeable.
We're so used to them nowadays that we wouldn't even notice.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Nowadays, when far too much TV drama is based on literal visual depictions,
it's quite refreshing to see DW going for a retro stylised look.
Refreshing?
Yes. As I've mentioned many times over the years, I prefer abstract
stylised storytelling, rather than realism. What makes you think I
would've changed my mind now.
Post by Agamemnon
This episode was a racist travesty of history and the Roman empire and
the ratings show that it was far from refreshing. Only 2.89 million
people watched it.
THESE ARE THE WORST RATINGS OF THE SERIES IN ITS ENTIRE HISTORY!
OTOH it's number one on the iPlayer viewing figures for today.
Post by Agamemnon
Rona Munro now has the dubious honour of having written crap for both
the Classic and New Series as well as for the two worst incarnations of
the Doctor in each series, Sylvester McCoy and Peter Capaldi.
Be fair, Survival was one of the least-worst McCoy scripts. If it had
been made at a time when more love could've been given to it, it would've
been pretty good.
Post by Agamemnon
Peter Capaldi's incarnation is now the worst Doctor ever by a long stretch!
No, that's still Matt Smith.
Post by Agamemnon
Did the producers seriously think that parents would allow their
children to watch this crap attempting to brainwash them,
My parents would've done. It's exactly the sort of things that
they taught me when I was growing up. If I had kids, I'd tell them
the same and actively encourage them to watch.
Post by Agamemnon
after Bill and
the Roman soldiers started ranting on about how good it was to be gay?
They didn't. You really should've paid more attention.

The Roman leader talked about how good it was to be bisexual. None of the
others mentioned how good it was to be anything.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with the Pictish
girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates and marauders when the
Romans were nothing of the kind.
Whether they were or not, the tribes who fought the Romans _believed_ them
to be cut-throat pirates and marauders.
The tribes the Romans fought were the cut-throat pirates and marauders
and the Romans were specifically brought in by their neighbours to stop
them raping, pillaging and marauding them.
That's what the Romans believed. Why would you expect the Picts
to believe it too?
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
The script directly plagiarised
the famous "make a desert and call it peace" speech by Calagus, word for
word.
The speech was an invention of Tacitus to have a go at Domitian.
Saying a classical authority isn't the consensus...!?! Who are you, and
what have you done with the real Aggy!?!
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
(Towards the end, I was literally joining in with the speech as it was
delivered, like Roald in "The Nightmare Begins".)
Post by Agamemnon
This racist and false depiction of the
Romans was not effectively challenged.
It was challenged twice. First, by the depiction of the Romans that
Bill met as open-minded, tolerant types. Then, when the Picts and
Romans finally met and found they weren't so different after all.
That was not a challenge.
The true facts should have been related which was that the Pics were
attacking Briton and Roman settlements in the south and the Romans were
there to stop these raids, which is why Hadrian's Wall was built.
No. Hadrian's wall was built as a costly publicity stunt. It served
no real purpose beyond that. (c.f. Trumps proposed Mexican wall.)
Post by Agamemnon
The
benefits of Roman civilisation should have also been expounded on. Even
Monty Python managed to do that. The Romans were not stopping anyone
from being governed by their own tribal leaders.
Nobody in the episode said they were stopping people being ruled by their
tribal leaders. (Although in the case of Boudicca, that's effectively
what _did_ happen.)
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
For some other unknown reason wooden bats were used to focus light which
came out of nowhere onto the creature. What?
The bats, containing crystal lenses to focus the light, were part of the
Gatekeeper's gatekeeping equipment. The light came from a fire.
Collimated white light coming from a fire? Lenses made of random,
unground, unpolished crystals, of no determinable focal length? It was a
complete farce.
Who said they were unground and unpolished? Who said there was no
determinable focal length?

Now you're not only missing what did happen, you're imagining things that
didn't.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
And pulled out of thin air by the Doctor, this monster first refereed to
as a locust and looking nothing like a locust, was supposed to be
capable of eating up the entire sun and every star in the sky.
Once again, you're interpretting everything too literally. The locust
comparison was to the destructive, ravaging appetite.
How the hell did they eat light?
Alien biology. And I mean, really alien, since they aren't even from
this dimension. So completly alien that mere humans like us have no
chance of understanding. You might as well complain that we aren't
old how Cthulhu make impossible angles.
Post by Agamemnon
How could they reach the sun?
The Doctor might not have been talking literally. And even if he
was, it doesn't matter. The aliens _didn't_ reach the sun, so it
doesn't make any difference how they would've reached it.
Post by Agamemnon
What the hell were the doing on Earth. Why not Mercury?
True, Earth does seem to be more vulnerable to interdimensional
rifts than other planets. (If I were to allow myself a little
fanwanky speculation, I might suggest that all the visits from a
certain Timelord's TARDIS has weakened our space-time continuum
a bit.)
Post by Agamemnon
Why did they abduct
people and massacre most of the Ninth Legion if they only ate light?
Nobody said they _only_ eat light. (e.g. Plants eat light but venus
fly traps also eat flies as well.)
Post by Agamemnon
How do they eat light again?
See above.
Post by Agamemnon
Do you realise how big a star is and that it
produces light as a result of nuclear fusion? If you eat the star, which
is completely ridiculous, then you have no more light.
See above.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Next week John Simm returns as the Master at the head of a Mondasian
Cyberman army.
Please don't post spoilers for those of us who don't watch the trailers.
Thanks.
Both facts were already well known.
I didn't know they were both in the _same_ episode, or that it was
next week's one. I had assumed either Simm or the Cybermen would've
been held back for the final episode.
Agamemnon
2017-06-18 18:44:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by solar penguin
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 12:59:40 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
On Saturday, 17 June 2017 21:10:41 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
So it starts off with some girl vanishing in some Scottish
cairn who is not seen again until the end.
She _didn't_ vanish. The hook in the teaser was the mention of
music, the crow saying "Doctor," and the carving of the TARDIS.
She looked like she vanished to me. It made no sense at all.
Maybe you should've paid more attention.
Maybe the story should have been better written.
Post by solar penguin
I've just re-watched the beginning to make sure. She does _not_ vanish.
So you had to re-watch it.
Post by solar penguin
She hears music and stars to run up the hill, but then the picture
cuts away from her to show a crow calling "Doc-tor! Doc-tor!
Doc-tor!" then we see the TARDIS carving in the stone.
Even if the girl had vanished, we wouldn't've seen it because we we
looking at the talking crow and the carving.
Total pointless waste of time. If you're going to start the episode off
featuring the fate of a specific protagonist you can't just leave the
audience waiting to the end wondering what happened to them.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
The Doctor, the tin dog, and Polynesia turn up looking for the
missing Ninth Legion of the Roman Army, and Polynesia begins
translating what the crows are saying, to the Doctor. What did
I say some time ago about Nardole coming straight out of Doctor
Doolittle?
Nardole _didn't_ translate anything. He repeated the crow's
words because he was surprised it was talking in English. (Or at
least in Pictish which
The Doctor didn't seem to hear it speaking in English.
He did, same as we did. He just didn't think it was interesting
enough to comment on.
Nardole asked him if he heard it and he said no.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Nordole translated the squawks.
Maybe you should've paid more attention.
They weren't squawks. They were English words. They didn't need
translating. We could hear and understand them just fine.
They were squawks that resembled English words which Nardole was
attempting to communicate to the Doctor.

The question is why was nothing made of the Ice Warrior queen on Mars
being instantaneously able to speak English in Empress of Mars?
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
we heard as English because of the TARDIS translation. But there
was no need for Nardole to translate it any further, that's the
point.)
Nardole was making insinuations about the crows calling the
Pictish girl's name.
That was at the end, when the crows stopped talking and just
repeated the name "Kar." Before that they were saying recognisable
English words.
Kar was also recognisable English.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Just like last week the casting is historically inaccurate.
While African soldiers served on Hadrian's wall these were
Northern Africans from Mauretania all of which served in an all
Moore platoon, not mixed with Roman soldiers from other parts
of the empire. The actor in question did not look Moroccan. At
the time in question Moroccans would have looked like dark
Arabs. Northern Africa in Roman times was white with its
population originating from Southern Europe, Asia Minor and
the Levant as recent DNA research has proven.
Not only did this actor not look Moroccan but the other actors
who played the other Roman soldiers did not look Italian or
southern European.
You're once again interpreting what you see on screen literally,
rather than symbolically or metaphorically. The Romans were
ethnically different from the Picts, and the casting symbolises
this.
Only a fool would not see that the emperor is naked and would
listen to someone telling him otherwise.
We've been telling you that your bigotry is naked, and you haven't
listened. What does that make you?
You are the bigot here not me. Why weren't Mediterranean looking actors
cast to play the Romans?
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
The casting was racist. The Romans should have looked Italian and
they looked nothing of the kind.
Italians and other foreign Europeans are, unfortunately, so common on
our streets these days that we wouldn't've noticed anything odd about
them if they had been cast.
POPPYCOCK!

The Romans would have looked Mediterranean in appearance not black and
the difference between Mediterranean olive skin and northern European
white skin is clearly recognisable.

Casting black actors to play parts which should have gone to
Mediterranean ones was racist and demeaning, in the same way as casting
white actors to play Chinese, Japanese and other east Asian characters.
You saw the furore that occurred when Tilda Swinton was cast to play a
part which should have gone to an east Asian actor in Doctor Strange.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
They looked northern European just like the Picts apart from the
black solider
The two black soldiers: the one who was killed and the gay one.
You really didn't pay attention, did you?
How is a viewer supposed to know they're different characters when it's
already extremely highly unlikely to see even one sub-Saharan African in
the Roman army?
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
who should not have even been there since Roman Legions were
recruited from Roman Citizens and there were no Roman provinces in
sub-Saharan Africa so no possibility of any sub-Saharan African
being granted Roman Citizenship.
The sub-Saharan appearance wasn't to be taken literally. Like the
Poppycock. The casting was completely racist just like casting a white
actor to play someone who is Japanese. No one from the Mediterranean
would have identified with them just like no one from Japan will
identify with a white actor playing a Japanese. You only have to ask
George Takai.
Post by solar penguin
black soldier on Mars, it was as a visual clue to stop us thinking
"Which one is he again?" We can see which one he is: the black one!
(That's why the second black Roman wasn't introduced until after the
first one was killed. Can't confuse the audience by having two black
ones at once!)
Showing that there were two at the start would have not confused the
audience. Showing one and then another did since the most logical though
is that they are both the same person.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
To suggest that blacks are the only ethnic minority living in the
UK and ignore all others when there were southern European and
Mediterranean actors who should have been cast to play the Romans
instead of inserting a token black character into the Roman legion
who doesn't represent the ethnic make up of Rome in any way--Romans
were mainly olive skinned--is completely racist and deplorable.
The southern European and Mediterranean actors wouldn't be as
noticeable. We're so used to them nowadays that we wouldn't even
notice.
Poppycock. They would have been olive skinned and have had different
facial shapes. Sub-Saharan Africa was not part of any Roman province so
no sub-Saharan's would have served in a Roman legion. The casting was
completely racist.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Nowadays, when far too much TV drama is based on literal visual
depictions, it's quite refreshing to see DW going for a retro
stylised look.
Refreshing?
Yes. As I've mentioned many times over the years, I prefer abstract
stylised storytelling, rather than realism. What makes you think I
would've changed my mind now.
Post by Agamemnon
This episode was a racist travesty of history and the Roman empire
and the ratings show that it was far from refreshing. Only 2.89
million people watched it.
THESE ARE THE WORST RATINGS OF THE SERIES IN ITS ENTIRE HISTORY!
OTOH it's number one on the iPlayer viewing figures for today.
So what? It's still going to be the lowest rating episode of the new
series the way things are going.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Rona Munro now has the dubious honour of having written crap for
both the Classic and New Series as well as for the two worst
incarnations of the Doctor in each series, Sylvester McCoy and
Peter Capaldi.
Be fair, Survival was one of the least-worst McCoy scripts. If it
You must be joking. It even included Hale and Pace!
Post by solar penguin
had been made at a time when more love could've been given to it, it
would've been pretty good.
No it would not. It just goes to show that the standard of writing in
this series has descended to below the depths of even the Sylvesater
McCoy era.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Peter Capaldi's incarnation is now the worst Doctor ever by a long stretch!
No, that's still Matt Smith.
No it isn't.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Did the producers seriously think that parents would allow their
children to watch this crap attempting to brainwash them,
My parents would've done. It's exactly the sort of things that they
taught me when I was growing up. If I had kids, I'd tell them the
same and actively encourage them to watch.
He are talking about the parents of ordinary heterosexual children, not
hermaphrodites.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
after Bill and the Roman soldiers started ranting on about how good
it was to be gay?
They didn't. You really should've paid more attention.
They did.
Post by solar penguin
The Roman leader talked about how good it was to be bisexual. None
of the others mentioned how good it was to be anything.
Wrong.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with
the Pictish girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates
and marauders when the Romans were nothing of the kind.
Whether they were or not, the tribes who fought the Romans
_believed_ them to be cut-throat pirates and marauders.
The tribes the Romans fought were the cut-throat pirates and
marauders and the Romans were specifically brought in by their
neighbours to stop them raping, pillaging and marauding them.
That's what the Romans believed. Why would you expect the Picts to
believe it too?
The Picts were barbarian pirates and marauders that despised civilisation.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
The script directly plagiarised the famous "make a desert and
call it peace" speech by Calagus, word for word.
The speech was an invention of Tacitus to have a go at Domitian.
Saying a classical authority isn't the consensus...!?! Who are you,
and what have you done with the real Aggy!?!
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
(Towards the end, I was literally joining in with the speech as
it was delivered, like Roald in "The Nightmare Begins".)
Post by Agamemnon
This racist and false depiction of the Romans was not
effectively challenged.
It was challenged twice. First, by the depiction of the Romans
that Bill met as open-minded, tolerant types. Then, when the
Picts and Romans finally met and found they weren't so different
after all.
That was not a challenge.
The true facts should have been related which was that the Pics
were attacking Briton and Roman settlements in the south and the
Romans were there to stop these raids, which is why Hadrian's Wall
was built.
No. Hadrian's wall was built as a costly publicity stunt. It
served no real purpose beyond that. (c.f. Trumps proposed Mexican
wall.)
POPPYCOCK! Hadrian's Wall was built to consolidate the empire and to
keep the Picts out, which is why it was constantly manned at great
expense to the Romans. If Hadrian wanted publicity he would have built
and arch or erected a column.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
The benefits of Roman civilisation should have also been expounded
on. Even Monty Python managed to do that. The Romans were not
stopping anyone from being governed by their own tribal leaders.
Nobody in the episode said they were stopping people being ruled by
their tribal leaders. (Although in the case of Boudicca, that's
effectively what _did_ happen.)
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
For some other unknown reason wooden bats were used to focus
light which came out of nowhere onto the creature. What?
The bats, containing crystal lenses to focus the light, were part
of the Gatekeeper's gatekeeping equipment. The light came from a
fire.
Collimated white light coming from a fire? Lenses made of random,
unground, unpolished crystals, of no determinable focal length? It
was a complete farce.
Who said they were unground and unpolished? Who said there was no
determinable focal length?
There was not evidence that they were and the technology did not even
exist at the time.
Post by solar penguin
Now you're not only missing what did happen, you're imagining things
that didn't.
You are the one doing that.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
And pulled out of thin air by the Doctor, this monster first
refereed to as a locust and looking nothing like a locust, was
supposed to be capable of eating up the entire sun and every
star in the sky.
Once again, you're interpretting everything too literally. The
locust comparison was to the destructive, ravaging appetite.
How the hell did they eat light?
Alien biology. And I mean, really alien, since they aren't even
from this dimension. So completly alien that mere humans like us
have no chance of understanding. You might as well complain that we
aren't old how Cthulhu make impossible angles.
Since this was important it should have been explained.

How the hell did they eat light?
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
How could they reach the sun?
The Doctor might not have been talking literally. And even if he
was, it doesn't matter. The aliens _didn't_ reach the sun, so it
doesn't make any difference how they would've reached it.
It was completely incomprehensible nonsense. No wonder hardly anyone
watched it.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
What the hell were the doing on Earth. Why not Mercury?
True, Earth does seem to be more vulnerable to interdimensional rifts
than other planets. (If I were to allow myself a little fanwanky
speculation, I might suggest that all the visits from a certain
Timelord's TARDIS has weakened our space-time continuum a bit.)
Post by Agamemnon
Why did they abduct people and massacre most of the Ninth Legion if
they only ate light?
Nobody said they _only_ eat light. (e.g. Plants eat light but venus
fly traps also eat flies as well.)
If the could eat humans why did they need light?
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
How do they eat light again?
See above.
The question was not answered above.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Do you realise how big a star is and that it produces light as a
result of nuclear fusion? If you eat the star, which is completely
ridiculous, then you have no more light.
See above.
The question was not answered above.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Next week John Simm returns as the Master at the head of a
Mondasian Cyberman army.
Please don't post spoilers for those of us who don't watch the
trailers. Thanks.
Both facts were already well known.
I didn't know they were both in the _same_ episode, or that it was
next week's one. I had assumed either Simm or the Cybermen would've
been held back for the final episode.
You should watch the trailer then.
solar penguin
2017-06-18 20:25:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 19:44:48 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 12:59:40 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
On Saturday, 17 June 2017 21:10:41 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
So it starts off with some girl vanishing in some Scottish
cairn who is not seen again until the end.
She _didn't_ vanish. The hook in the teaser was the mention of
music, the crow saying "Doctor," and the carving of the TARDIS.
She looked like she vanished to me. It made no sense at all.
Maybe you should've paid more attention.
Maybe the story should have been better written.
Post by solar penguin
I've just re-watched the beginning to make sure. She does _not_ vanish.
So you had to re-watch it.
No. I chose to re-watch it. I know this seems strange to you, Aggy,
but some people actually like to check facts before posting.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
She hears music and stars to run up the hill, but then the picture
cuts away from her to show a crow calling "Doc-tor! Doc-tor!
Doc-tor!" then we see the TARDIS carving in the stone.
Even if the girl had vanished, we wouldn't've seen it because we we
looking at the talking crow and the carving.
Total pointless waste of time. If you're going to start the episode off
featuring the fate of a specific protagonist you can't just leave the
audience waiting to the end wondering what happened to them.
_Nothing_ happened to her. You're the only one who thought that
something did, and that was only because you weren't paying attention.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
The Doctor, the tin dog, and Polynesia turn up looking for the
missing Ninth Legion of the Roman Army, and Polynesia begins
translating what the crows are saying, to the Doctor. What did
I say some time ago about Nardole coming straight out of Doctor
Doolittle?
Nardole _didn't_ translate anything. He repeated the crow's
words because he was surprised it was talking in English. (Or at
least in Pictish which
The Doctor didn't seem to hear it speaking in English.
He did, same as we did. He just didn't think it was interesting
enough to comment on.
Nardole asked him if he heard it and he said no.
I've just re-watched that scene now, and you're wrong again.

CROW: "Dark! Dark!"

NARDOLE (* pointing at the crow *): "Doctor!"

CROW: "Dark! Doctor!"

DOCTOR (* ignoring Nardole *): "Look, a stone cairn - Pictish
civilisation."

NARDOLE (* running after the Doctor *): "The bird!"

DOCTOR: "What about it?"

NARDOLE: "It said 'dark'."

DOCTOR: "Yes, well that's why we're hurrying, because there's not
much light at this time of day."

NARDOLE: "But it talked."

DOCTOR: "Well, of course it did. It's a crow. All crows talk."

NARDOLE: "They don't talk in the future."

DOCTOR: "Of course they do. Human beings just stopped having
intelligent conversations with them, and they all took a bit of
a huff."

NARDOLE: "Crows in the future are all in a huff?"

DOCTOR: "Of course they are. Haven't you noticed that noise they
make? It's like a mass sulk. Come on..."

At no point does the Doctor say he didn't hear the crow.
Post by Agamemnon
The question is why was nothing made of the Ice Warrior queen on Mars
being instantaneously able to speak English in Empress of Mars?
BILL: "Ah! It's the Doctor! Or the TARDIS, or both. Something, a
telepathic link. Auto-translate. That's why everyone in space
speaks English."

I think "everyone in space" would include the Martian Empress.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Nardole was making insinuations about the crows calling the
Pictish girl's name.
That was at the end, when the crows stopped talking and just
repeated the name "Kar." Before that they were saying recognisable
English words.
Kar was also recognisable English.
It's a name, not an English word.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Only a fool would not see that the emperor is naked and would
listen to someone telling him otherwise.
We've been telling you that your bigotry is naked, and you haven't
listened. What does that make you?
You are the bigot here not me. Why weren't Mediterranean looking actors
cast to play the Romans?
I've given you my opinion why. If you don't like it, that's
your problem.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
The casting was racist. The Romans should have looked Italian and
they looked nothing of the kind.
Italians and other foreign Europeans are, unfortunately, so common on
our streets these days that we wouldn't've noticed anything odd about
them if they had been cast.
POPPYCOCK!
The Romans would have looked Mediterranean in appearance not black and
the difference between Mediterranean olive skin and northern European
white skin is clearly recognisable.
Recognisable, but not necessarily noticeable. There's a difference.
Post by Agamemnon
Casting black actors to play parts which should have gone to
Mediterranean ones was racist and demeaning, in the same way as casting
white actors to play Chinese, Japanese and other east Asian characters.
You saw the furore that occurred when Tilda Swinton was cast to play a
part which should have gone to an east Asian actor in Doctor Strange.
Actually, I didn't see the furore. I don't follow celebrity gossip so
I've no idea what you're going on about.

But personally I have no problem with any cross-racial casting, not
even whites playing Asians. (I like Talons Of Weng-Chiang, for
goodness sake!)
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
They looked northern European just like the Picts apart from the
black solider
The two black soldiers: the one who was killed and the gay one.
You really didn't pay attention, did you?
How is a viewer supposed to know they're different characters when it's
already extremely highly unlikely to see even one sub-Saharan African in
the Roman army?
So all blacks look the same to you, do they?

But ignoring the fact that they were two very different actors, one
of them was killed and the other wasn't. That's a pretty big clue
that we're dealing with two different characters.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
who should not have even been there since Roman Legions were
recruited from Roman Citizens and there were no Roman provinces in
sub-Saharan Africa so no possibility of any sub-Saharan African
being granted Roman Citizenship.
The sub-Saharan appearance wasn't to be taken literally. Like the
Poppycock. The casting was completely racist just like casting a white
actor to play someone who is Japanese. No one from the Mediterranean
would have identified with them just like no one from Japan will
identify with a white actor playing a Japanese. You only have to ask
George Takai.
Like I said, I have no problem with any cross-racial casting at all.
If George Takei does, that's his problem. I hope he sees sense one
day soon.
Post by Agamemnon
Showing that there were two at the start would have not confused the
audience. Showing one and then another did since the most logical though
is that they are both the same person.
You're the only one here confused by it, because you weren't paying
attention.
Post by Agamemnon
Poppycock. They would have been olive skinned and have had different
facial shapes. Sub-Saharan Africa was not part of any Roman province so
no sub-Saharan's would have served in a Roman legion. The casting was
completely racist.
It's only racist if you believe that cross-racial casting is racist.
I don't, and you haven't shown me any evidence to change my mind.

Seriously, what reason is there for thinking that cross-racial casting
is racist? And I mean a _real_ reason, not just, "Some random Asian
guy says so."
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
THESE ARE THE WORST RATINGS OF THE SERIES IN ITS ENTIRE HISTORY!
OTOH it's number one on the iPlayer viewing figures for today.
So what?
So it proves the programme is popular, just not with old farts like
us who still watch proper TV. That's what.
Post by Agamemnon
It's still going to be the lowest rating episode of the new
series the way things are going.On Sunday, 18 June 2017 19:44:48 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by solar penguin
On Sunday, 18 June 2017 12:59:40 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
On Saturday, 17 June 2017 21:10:41 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
So it starts off with some girl vanishing in some Scottish
cairn who is not seen again until the end.
She _didn't_ vanish. The hook in the teaser was the mention of
music, the crow saying "Doctor," and the carving of the TARDIS.
She looked like she vanished to me. It made no sense at all.
Maybe you should've paid more attention.
Maybe the story should have been better written.
Post by solar penguin
I've just re-watched the beginning to make sure. She does _not_ vanish.
So you had to re-watch it.
No. I chose to re-watch it. I know this seems strange to you, Aggy,
but some people actually like to check facts before posting.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
She hears music and stars to run up the hill, but then the picture
cuts away from her to show a crow calling "Doc-tor! Doc-tor!
Doc-tor!" then we see the TARDIS carving in the stone.
Even if the girl had vanished, we wouldn't've seen it because we we
looking at the talking crow and the carving.
Total pointless waste of time. If you're going to start the episode off
featuring the fate of a specific protagonist you can't just leave the
audience waiting to the end wondering what happened to them.
_Nothing_ happened to her. You're the only one who thought that
something did, and that was only because you weren't paying attention.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
The Doctor, the tin dog, and Polynesia turn up looking for the
missing Ninth Legion of the Roman Army, and Polynesia begins
translating what the crows are saying, to the Doctor. What did
I say some time ago about Nardole coming straight out of Doctor
Doolittle?
Nardole _didn't_ translate anything. He repeated the crow's
words because he was surprised it was talking in English. (Or at
least in Pictish which
The Doctor didn't seem to hear it speaking in English.
He did, same as we did. He just didn't think it was interesting
enough to comment on.
Nardole asked him if he heard it and he said no.
I've just re-watched that scene now, and you're wrong again.

CROW: "Dark! Dark!"

NARDOLE (* pointing at the crow *): "Doctor!"

CROW: "Dark! Doctor!"

DOCTOR (* ignoring Nardole *): "Look, a stone cairn - Pictish
civilisation."

NARDOLE (* running after the Doctor *): "The bird!"

DOCTOR: "What about it?"

NARDOLE: "It said 'dark'."

DOCTOR: "Yes, well that's why we're hurrying, because there's not
much light at this time of day."

NARDOLE: "But it talked."

DOCTOR: "Well, of course it did. It's a crow. All crows talk."

NARDOLE: "They don't talk in the future."

DOCTOR: "Of course they do. Human beings just stopped having
intelligent conversations with them, and they all took a bit of
a huff."

NARDOLE: "Crows in the future are all in a huff?"

DOCTOR: "Of course they are. Haven't you noticed that noise they
make? It's like a mass sulk. Come on..."

At no point does the Doctor say he didn't hear the crow.
Post by Agamemnon
The question is why was nothing made of the Ice Warrior queen on Mars
being instantaneously able to speak English in Empress of Mars?
BILL: "Ah! It's the Doctor! Or the TARDIS, or both. Something, a
telepathic link. Auto-translate. That's why everyone in space
speaks English."

I think "everyone in space" would include the Martian Empress.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Nardole was making insinuations about the crows calling the
Pictish girl's name.
That was at the end, when the crows stopped talking and just
repeated the name "Kar." Before that they were saying recognisable
English words.
Kar was also recognisable English.
It's a name, not an English word.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Only a fool would not see that the emperor is naked and would
listen to someone telling him otherwise.
We've been telling you that your bigotry is naked, and you haven't
listened. What does that make you?
You are the bigot here not me. Why weren't Mediterranean looking actors
cast to play the Romans?
I've given you my opinion why. If you don't like it, that's
your problem.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
The casting was racist. The Romans should have looked Italian and
they looked nothing of the kind.
Italians and other foreign Europeans are, unfortunately, so common on
our streets these days that we wouldn't've noticed anything odd about
them if they had been cast.
POPPYCOCK!
The Romans would have looked Mediterranean in appearance not black and
the difference between Mediterranean olive skin and northern European
white skin is clearly recognisable.
Recognisable, but not necessarily noticeable. There's a difference.
Post by Agamemnon
Casting black actors to play parts which should have gone to
Mediterranean ones was racist and demeaning, in the same way as casting
white actors to play Chinese, Japanese and other east Asian characters.
You saw the furore that occurred when Tilda Swinton was cast to play a
part which should have gone to an east Asian actor in Doctor Strange.
Actually, I didn't see the furore. I don't follow celebrity gossip so
I've no idea what you're going on about.

But personally I have no problem with any cross-racial casting, not
even whites playing Asians. (I like Talons Of Weng-Chiang, for
goodness sake!)
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
They looked northern European just like the Picts apart from the
black solider
The two black soldiers: the one who was killed and the gay one.
You really didn't pay attention, did you?
How is a viewer supposed to know they're different characters when it's
already extremely highly unlikely to see even one sub-Saharan African in
the Roman army?
So all blacks look the same to you, do they?

But ignoring the fact that they were two very different actors, one
of them was killed and the other wasn't. That's a pretty big clue
that we're dealing with two different characters.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
who should not have even been there since Roman Legions were
recruited from Roman Citizens and there were no Roman provinces in
sub-Saharan Africa so no possibility of any sub-Saharan African
being granted Roman Citizenship.
The sub-Saharan appearance wasn't to be taken literally. Like the
Poppycock. The casting was completely racist just like casting a white
actor to play someone who is Japanese. No one from the Mediterranean
would have identified with them just like no one from Japan will
identify with a white actor playing a Japanese. You only have to ask
George Takai.
Like I said, I have no problem with any cross-racial casting at all.
If George Takei does, that's his problem. I hope he sees sense one
day soon.
Post by Agamemnon
Showing that there were two at the start would have not confused the
audience. Showing one and then another did since the most logical though
is that they are both the same person.
You're the only one here confused by it, because you weren't paying
attention.
Post by Agamemnon
Poppycock. They would have been olive skinned and have had different
facial shapes. Sub-Saharan Africa was not part of any Roman province so
no sub-Saharan's would have served in a Roman legion. The casting was
completely racist.
It's only racist if you believe that cross-racial casting is racist.
I don't, and you haven't shown me any evidence to change my mind.

Seriously, what reason is there for thinking that cross-racial casting
is racist? And I mean a _real_ reason, not just, "Some random Asian
guy says so."
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
THESE ARE THE WORST RATINGS OF THE SERIES IN ITS ENTIRE HISTORY!
OTOH it's number one on the iPlayer viewing figures for today.
So what?
So it proves the programme is popular, just not with old farts like
us who still watch proper TV. That's what.
Post by Agamemnon
It's still going to be the lowest rating episode of the new
series the way things are going.
There's always one that's going to be lowest. That's how numbers
work. They can't all be highest. It's just not possible.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Rona Munro now has the dubious honour of having written crap for
both the Classic and New Series as well as for the two worst
incarnations of the Doctor in each series, Sylvester McCoy and
Peter Capaldi.
Be fair, Survival was one of the least-worst McCoy scripts. If it
You must be joking. It even included Hale and Pace!
The terrible casting is hardly the script-writer's fault.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
had been made at a time when more love could've been given to it, it
would've been pretty good.
No it would not.
Why not?
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Peter Capaldi's incarnation is now the worst Doctor ever by a long stretch!
No, that's still Matt Smith.
No it isn't.
If you're allowed to post unsupported opinions as fact, then so am I.
Smith, worst. McCoy, second worst. Pertwee, third worst. Deal with it!
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Did the producers seriously think that parents would allow their
children to watch this crap attempting to brainwash them,
My parents would've done. It's exactly the sort of things that they
taught me when I was growing up. If I had kids, I'd tell them the
same and actively encourage them to watch.
He are talking about the parents of ordinary heterosexual children,
How can anyone know what orientation pre-pubescent children will eventually
turn out to be?
Post by Agamemnon
not hermaphrodites.
Who said anything about hermaphrodites? What do they have to do with
it? You're delusional again. (Better get back in your straitjacket
before you hurt yourself.)
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
after Bill and the Roman soldiers started ranting on about how good
it was to be gay?
They didn't. You really should've paid more attention.
They did.
Do you need me to quote dialogue again?
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
The Roman leader talked about how good it was to be bisexual. None
of the others mentioned how good it was to be anything.
Wrong.
Or maybe you should quote the dialogue to prove your claim this time?
Oh, wait, you can't because it doesn't.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
The tribes the Romans fought were the cut-throat pirates and
marauders and the Romans were specifically brought in by their
neighbours to stop them raping, pillaging and marauding them.
That's what the Romans believed. Why would you expect the Picts to
believe it too?
The Picts were barbarian pirates and marauders that despised civilisation.
Would the Picts have described themselves that way? Would they have
even thought of themselves that way?
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
The true facts should have been related which was that the Pics
were attacking Briton and Roman settlements in the south and the
Romans were there to stop these raids, which is why Hadrian's Wall
was built.
No. Hadrian's wall was built as a costly publicity stunt. It
served no real purpose beyond that. (c.f. Trumps proposed Mexican
wall.)
POPPYCOCK! Hadrian's Wall was built to consolidate the empire and to
keep the Picts out, which is why it was constantly manned at great
expense to the Romans. If Hadrian wanted publicity he would have built
and arch or erected a column.
And maybe it would've been better if he had. But instead he built a
symbolic but ulimately useless wall.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
For some other unknown reason wooden bats were used to focus
light which came out of nowhere onto the creature. What?
The bats, containing crystal lenses to focus the light, were part
of the Gatekeeper's gatekeeping equipment. The light came from a
fire.
Collimated white light coming from a fire? Lenses made of random,
unground, unpolished crystals, of no determinable focal length? It
was a complete farce.
Who said they were unground and unpolished? Who said there was no
determinable focal length?
There was not evidence that they were and the technology did not even
exist at the time.
But gateways to other dimensions _did_ exist at the time...? Riiight...
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Now you're not only missing what did happen, you're imagining things
that didn't.
You are the one doing that.
What have I imagined?
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
How the hell did they eat light?
Alien biology. And I mean, really alien, since they aren't even
from this dimension. So completly alien that mere humans like us
have no chance of understanding. You might as well complain that we
aren't old how Cthulhu make impossible angles.
Since this was important it should have been explained.
It was never explained how Cthulhu has that weird effect on angles.
Post by Agamemnon
How the hell did they eat light?
by absorbing it somehow.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
How could they reach the sun?
The Doctor might not have been talking literally. And even if he
was, it doesn't matter. The aliens _didn't_ reach the sun, so it
doesn't make any difference how they would've reached it.
It was completely incomprehensible nonsense. No wonder hardly anyone
watched it.
Because everyone except us is clairvoyant and knows _exactly_ what's
going to be in an episode before seeing it.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
What the hell were the doing on Earth. Why not Mercury?
True, Earth does seem to be more vulnerable to interdimensional rifts
than other planets. (If I were to allow myself a little fanwanky
speculation, I might suggest that all the visits from a certain
Timelord's TARDIS has weakened our space-time continuum a bit.)
Post by Agamemnon
Why did they abduct people and massacre most of the Ninth Legion if
they only ate light?
Nobody said they _only_ eat light. (e.g. Plants eat light but venus
fly traps also eat flies as well.)
If the could eat humans why did they need light?
Venus fly traps eat flies for nutrients and sunlight for energy.
Maybe there's something similar going on here.

It is possible to eat more than one thing, you know!
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
How do they eat light again?
See above.
The question was not answered above.
It was. The answer was, "alien biology." If you don't like the answer,
that's your problem but it _was_ answered.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Do you realise how big a star is and that it produces light as a
result of nuclear fusion? If you eat the star, which is completely
ridiculous, then you have no more light.
See above.
The question was not answered above.
It was. The answer was, "The Doctor might not have been talking literally.
And even if he was, it doesn't matter. The aliens _didn't_ [do it], so it
doesn't make any difference how they would've [done it]." If you don't like
the answear, that's your problem, but it _was_ answered.
Post by Agamemnon
You should watch the trailer then.
No thanks. I'd rather be surprised.
There's always one that's going to be lowest. That's how numbers
work. They can't all be highest. It's just not possible.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Rona Munro now has the dubious honour of having written crap for
both the Classic and New Series as well as for the two worst
incarnations of the Doctor in each series, Sylvester McCoy and
Peter Capaldi.
Be fair, Survival was one of the least-worst McCoy scripts. If it
You must be joking. It even included Hale and Pace!
Post by solar penguin
had been made at a time when more love could've been given to it, it
would've been pretty good.
No it would not. It just goes to show that the standard of writing in
this series has descended to below the depths of even the Sylvesater
McCoy era.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Peter Capaldi's incarnation is now the worst Doctor ever by a long stretch!
No, that's still Matt Smith.
No it isn't.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Did the producers seriously think that parents would allow their
children to watch this crap attempting to brainwash them,
My parents would've done. It's exactly the sort of things that they
taught me when I was growing up. If I had kids, I'd tell them the
same and actively encourage them to watch.
He are talking about the parents of ordinary heterosexual children, not
hermaphrodites.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
after Bill and the Roman soldiers started ranting on about how good
it was to be gay?
They didn't. You really should've paid more attention.
They did.
Post by solar penguin
The Roman leader talked about how good it was to be bisexual. None
of the others mentioned how good it was to be anything.
Wrong.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with
the Pictish girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates
and marauders when the Romans were nothing of the kind.
Whether they were or not, the tribes who fought the Romans
_believed_ them to be cut-throat pirates and marauders.
The tribes the Romans fought were the cut-throat pirates and
marauders and the Romans were specifically brought in by their
neighbours to stop them raping, pillaging and marauding them.
That's what the Romans believed. Why would you expect the Picts to
believe it too?
The Picts were barbarian pirates and marauders that despised civilisation.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
The script directly plagiarised the famous "make a desert and
call it peace" speech by Calagus, word for word.
The speech was an invention of Tacitus to have a go at Domitian.
Saying a classical authority isn't the consensus...!?! Who are you,
and what have you done with the real Aggy!?!
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
(Towards the end, I was literally joining in with the speech as
it was delivered, like Roald in "The Nightmare Begins".)
Post by Agamemnon
This racist and false depiction of the Romans was not
effectively challenged.
It was challenged twice. First, by the depiction of the Romans
that Bill met as open-minded, tolerant types. Then, when the
Picts and Romans finally met and found they weren't so different
after all.
That was not a challenge.
The true facts should have been related which was that the Pics
were attacking Briton and Roman settlements in the south and the
Romans were there to stop these raids, which is why Hadrian's Wall
was built.
No. Hadrian's wall was built as a costly publicity stunt. It
served no real purpose beyond that. (c.f. Trumps proposed Mexican
wall.)
POPPYCOCK! Hadrian's Wall was built to consolidate the empire and to
keep the Picts out, which is why it was constantly manned at great
expense to the Romans. If Hadrian wanted publicity he would have built
and arch or erected a column.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
The benefits of Roman civilisation should have also been expounded
on. Even Monty Python managed to do that. The Romans were not
stopping anyone from being governed by their own tribal leaders.
Nobody in the episode said they were stopping people being ruled by
their tribal leaders. (Although in the case of Boudicca, that's
effectively what _did_ happen.)
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
For some other unknown reason wooden bats were used to focus
light which came out of nowhere onto the creature. What?
The bats, containing crystal lenses to focus the light, were part
of the Gatekeeper's gatekeeping equipment. The light came from a
fire.
Collimated white light coming from a fire? Lenses made of random,
unground, unpolished crystals, of no determinable focal length? It
was a complete farce.
Who said they were unground and unpolished? Who said there was no
determinable focal length?
There was not evidence that they were and the technology did not even
exist at the time.
Post by solar penguin
Now you're not only missing what did happen, you're imagining things
that didn't.
You are the one doing that.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
And pulled out of thin air by the Doctor, this monster first
refereed to as a locust and looking nothing like a locust, was
supposed to be capable of eating up the entire sun and every
star in the sky.
Once again, you're interpretting everything too literally. The
locust comparison was to the destructive, ravaging appetite.
How the hell did they eat light?
Alien biology. And I mean, really alien, since they aren't even
from this dimension. So completly alien that mere humans like us
have no chance of understanding. You might as well complain that we
aren't old how Cthulhu make impossible angles.
Since this was important it should have been explained.
How the hell did they eat light?
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
How could they reach the sun?
The Doctor might not have been talking literally. And even if he
was, it doesn't matter. The aliens _didn't_ reach the sun, so it
doesn't make any difference how they would've reached it.
It was completely incomprehensible nonsense. No wonder hardly anyone
watched it.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
What the hell were the doing on Earth. Why not Mercury?
True, Earth does seem to be more vulnerable to interdimensional rifts
than other planets. (If I were to allow myself a little fanwanky
speculation, I might suggest that all the visits from a certain
Timelord's TARDIS has weakened our space-time continuum a bit.)
Post by Agamemnon
Why did they abduct people and massacre most of the Ninth Legion if
they only ate light?
Nobody said they _only_ eat light. (e.g. Plants eat light but venus
fly traps also eat flies as well.)
If the could eat humans why did they need light?
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
How do they eat light again?
See above.
The question was not answered above.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Do you realise how big a star is and that it produces light as a
result of nuclear fusion? If you eat the star, which is completely
ridiculous, then you have no more light.
See above.
The question was not answered above.
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Post by solar penguin
Post by Agamemnon
Next week John Simm returns as the Master at the head of a
Mondasian Cyberman army.
Please don't post spoilers for those of us who don't watch the
trailers. Thanks.
Both facts were already well known.
I didn't know they were both in the _same_ episode, or that it was
next week's one. I had assumed either Simm or the Cybermen would've
been held back for the final episode.
You should watch the trailer then.
Tim Bruening
2017-06-18 14:28:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, June 18, 2017 at 4:59:40 AM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Post by Agamemnon
The casting was racist. The Romans should have looked Italian and they
looked nothing of the kind. They looked northern European just like the
Picts apart from the black solider who should not have even been there
since Roman Legions were recruited from Roman Citizens and there were no
Roman provinces in sub-Saharan Africa so no possibility of any
sub-Saharan African being granted Roman Citizenship.
To suggest that blacks are the only ethnic minority living in the UK and
ignore all others when there were southern European and Mediterranean
actors who should have been cast to play the Romans instead of inserting
a token black character into the Roman legion who doesn't represent the
ethnic make up of Rome in any way--Romans were mainly olive skinned--is
completely racist and deplorable.
Will the Southern and Mediterranean actors sue the BBC for failing to consider them to play Roman soldiers?
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 20:21:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Post by Agamemnon
The casting was racist. The Romans should have looked Italian and they
looked nothing of the kind. They looked northern European just like the
Picts apart from the black solider who should not have even been there
since Roman Legions were recruited from Roman Citizens and there were no
Roman provinces in sub-Saharan Africa so no possibility of any
sub-Saharan African being granted Roman Citizenship.
To suggest that blacks are the only ethnic minority living in the UK and
ignore all others when there were southern European and Mediterranean
actors who should have been cast to play the Romans instead of inserting
a token black character into the Roman legion who doesn't represent the
ethnic make up of Rome in any way--Romans were mainly olive skinned--is
completely racist and deplorable.
Will the Southern and Mediterranean actors sue the BBC for failing to consider them to play Roman soldiers?
No.
Tim Bruening
2017-06-18 14:30:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, June 18, 2017 at 4:59:40 AM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:


1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Post by Agamemnon
The true facts should have been related which was that the Pics were
attacking Briton and Roman settlements in the south and the Romans were
there to stop these raids, which is why Hadrian's Wall was built. The
benefits of Roman civilisation should have also been expounded on. Even
Monty Python managed to do that. The Romans were not stopping anyone
from being governed by their own tribal leaders.
So the Romans are like today's Israelis and/or Donald Trump!
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 20:21:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Post by Agamemnon
The true facts should have been related which was that the Pics were
attacking Briton and Roman settlements in the south and the Romans were
there to stop these raids, which is why Hadrian's Wall was built. The
benefits of Roman civilisation should have also been expounded on. Even
Monty Python managed to do that. The Romans were not stopping anyone
from being governed by their own tribal leaders.
So the Romans are like today's Israelis and/or Donald Trump!
In a word: no.
Tim Bruening
2017-06-18 21:05:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Post by Agamemnon
The true facts should have been related which was that the Pics were
attacking Briton and Roman settlements in the south and the Romans were
there to stop these raids, which is why Hadrian's Wall was built. The
benefits of Roman civilisation should have also been expounded on. Even
Monty Python managed to do that. The Romans were not stopping anyone
from being governed by their own tribal leaders.
So the Romans are like today's Israelis and/or Donald Trump!
In a word: no.
The Romans built a Wall to keep out raiders. The Israelis have built walls to keep out Palestinian terrorists. Trump wants to build a Wall to keep out illegal aliens. Therefore, the three are alike!
The Other Doctor
2017-06-18 21:16:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Bruening
Post by The Other Doctor
Post by Tim Bruening
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Post by Agamemnon
The true facts should have been related which was that the Pics were
attacking Briton and Roman settlements in the south and the Romans were
there to stop these raids, which is why Hadrian's Wall was built. The
benefits of Roman civilisation should have also been expounded on. Even
Monty Python managed to do that. The Romans were not stopping anyone
from being governed by their own tribal leaders.
So the Romans are like today's Israelis and/or Donald Trump!
In a word: no.
The Romans built a Wall to keep out raiders. The Israelis have built walls to keep out Palestinian terrorists. Trump wants to build a Wall to keep out illegal aliens. Therefore, the three are alike!
No, Tim. Lots of people have built walls over the years for protection.
The Great Wall of China. The Berlin Wall in Germany. Hadrian's Wall in
England. The Great Zimbabwe Walls. The Wall of Ston in Croatia. Etc.

The fact that different people over history have built walls for
security doesn't make them all the same as each other.
The Doctor
2017-06-18 12:15:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by solar penguin
On Saturday, 17 June 2017 21:10:41 UTC+1, Aggy angrily argued...
Post by Agamemnon
So it starts off with some girl vanishing in some Scottish cairn who is
not seen again until the end.
She _didn't_ vanish. The hook in the teaser was the mention of music, the
crow saying "Doctor," and the carving of the TARDIS.
Post by Agamemnon
The Doctor, the tin dog, and Polynesia turn up looking for the missing
Ninth Legion of the Roman Army, and Polynesia begins translating what
the crows are saying, to the Doctor. What did I say some time ago about
Nardole coming straight out of Doctor Doolittle?
Nardole _didn't_ translate anything. He repeated the crow's words because
he was surprised it was talking in English. (Or at least in Pictish which
we heard as English because of the TARDIS translation. But there was no
need for Nardole to translate it any further, that's the point.)
(*SNIP*)
Post by Agamemnon
Just like last week the casting is historically inaccurate. While
African soldiers served on Hadrian's wall these were Northern Africans
from Mauretania all of which served in an all Moore platoon, not mixed
with Roman soldiers from other parts of the empire. The actor in
question did not look Moroccan. At the time in question Moroccans would
have looked like dark Arabs. Northern Africa in Roman times was white
with its population originating from Southern Europe, Asia Minor and the
Levant as recent DNA research has proven.
Not only did this actor not look Moroccan but the other actors who
played the other Roman soldiers did not look Italian or southern European.
You're once again interpreting what you see on screen literally, rather
than symbolically or metaphorically. The Romans were ethnically different
from the Picts, and the casting symbolises this.
Nowadays, when far too much TV drama is based on literal visual depictions,
it's quite refreshing to see DW going for a retro stylised look.
(*SNIP*)
Post by Agamemnon
Further anti-European racism was expressed in the story with the Pictish
girl portraying the Romans as cut-throat pirates and marauders when the
Romans were nothing of the kind.
Whether they were or not, the tribes who fought the Romans _believed_ them
to be cut-throat pirates and marauders. The script directly plagiarised
the famous "make a desert and call it peace" speech by Calagus, word for
word.
(Towards the end, I was literally joining in with the speech as it was
delivered, like Roald in "The Nightmare Begins".)
Post by Agamemnon
This racist and false depiction of the
Romans was not effectively challenged.
It was challenged twice. First, by the depiction of the Romans that
Bill met as open-minded, tolerant types. Then, when the Picts and
Romans finally met and found they weren't so different after all.
Post by Agamemnon
For some other unknown reason wooden bats were used to focus light which
came out of nowhere onto the creature. What?
The bats, containing crystal lenses to focus the light, were part of the
Gatekeeper's gatekeeping equipment. The light came from a fire.
Post by Agamemnon
And pulled out of thin air by the Doctor, this monster first refereed to
as a locust and looking nothing like a locust, was supposed to be
capable of eating up the entire sun and every star in the sky.
Once again, you're interpretting everything too literally. The locust
comparison was to the destructive, ravaging appetite.
(*SNIP*)
Post by Agamemnon
Next week John Simm returns as the Master at the head of a Mondasian
Cyberman army.
Please don't post spoilers for those of us who don't watch the trailers.
Thanks.
Well Spoilers inthe header would help.

Still we do not know the role of Missy / The Master and do that
collide ?
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
Loading...