Sorry for the interruption, but we'd really appreciate it if you watched some of our videos!
All videos are written, performed, and edited by the Agony Booth staff, so they're just like the
recaps you know and love, only without all that annoying reading!
7/6/2013 10:05:12 AM
Outdated post, but, well, you'll see.Disclaimer: I've only seen the episodes through Series Two + the first Donna/Christmas episode. I have a vague idea what's coming up in future seasons, but I'm generally moving slowly and avoiding spoilers when I can.General question (and raison de post): Am I, as the new (starting with "Rose") viewer, supposed to take the series seriously, or is it all supposed be of the "shut off your brain and just roll with it" school?There are a number of episodes of the first two series that I really liked (Dalek, Father's Day, the "are you my mummy?" two-parter, The Girl in the Fireplace), but also a lot that I just didn't care for one whit (every episode set 1. in the future, 2. in space). One thing that I'm still uncertain about is the mindset that I, the viewer, am expected to bring to the viewing. I've been a Star Trek fan since...back when it was still good...which means a LONG time ago, so I'm used to taking sci-fi shows seriously, critiquing everything in sight, and hurling perhaps-unreasonable abuse at them when they violate my standards for drama and continuity. But, that said, I'm still puzzled regarding the level of emotional attachment I feel I'm supposed to have towards the show's universe. Are the denizens of London supposed to be contemptibly dumb? Aliens attack them ever other week it seems, yet they maintain astonishing surprise and trust whenever anything supernatural emerges from their midst. Even Jackie Tyler seemed far too eager to accept supernatural occurrences at face value, despite all the grief such things have brought upon her and her daughter. Time and again, a UFO over London merely fascinates these folks, despite the bi-monthly genocides meted out upon their fair megalopolis. Are we supposed to accept that anyone who isn't The Doctor is at all times a complete moron? He seems to be the only person on the show with two brain cells to rub together (which he typically saves for the final ten minutes of an episode), the only character who has any idea what he's doing.Also, I've heard a lot about the changes the show went through with the Matt Smith transition, about it becoming more a fairy tale and such. Every Who fan I've spoken with about this has told me the show died for them at this time. Now, I gather from your posts that you love the Matt Smith era (big surprise, you love everything :p ), do you feel there is a significant difference between the current doctor and the Eccleston/Tennant years? Also, given my rather marked preference for the fantasy/historical/spooky episodes over the sci-fi/futurist/weirdness-in-spa-a-a-a-a-ace episodes, do you feel the Smith episodes bode well? I have yet to taste the Martha and Donna series, so I've a ways to go, but I already find myself looking ahead. Are these two series well worth wading through?
2/17/2013 9:47:20 AM
That's 1963, Sofie, not 1943. :P
2/17/2013 4:15:25 PM
I know, I miss-spoke -_-;
2/14/2013 3:57:57 PM
The Pathweb was the (unnaturally) shared intelligence of the Daleks, containing information on their history and experiences. It was more a telepathic link than it was a true hive mind.
2/14/2013 4:07:32 PM
here's the quote from the episode Oswin: The Daleks, they have a hive mind. Well they don't, but they have a sort of telepathic web.The Doctor: The pathweb, yes.
2/14/2013 8:16:41 PM
Ah... touche. A democratic Dalek Parliment still seemed very un-dalek to me, and there's lots of problems about the Daleks presented in the spaceship and how they handle their problems. Every-thing on the planet is cool.. every-thing not on the planet is sort of questionable.
2/14/2013 8:38:32 PM
yes i agree daleks don't do democracy, but after the whole imperial-renegade dalek civil war i could see them shifting to a more democratic mind set to prevent more in fighting but that's just one possible explanation.
2/13/2013 10:29:40 PM
For some reason I've never been able to get into the new DW series...am I weird because of that?
2/13/2013 10:41:36 PM
No, this series is not for every-one, I admit that freely. Some-times it feels like it's written and designed just for me, but then again, I have a peculiar taste some-times. the show is silly, dorky and requires for you to strecth your sense of disbelief to allow yourself to have fun with all this fantastic though pretty silly things that are happening. Doctor who is almost like a persons wild day-dream where any-thing could happen, withour any rime or reason, but just exists to have fun. It is not for every-one, if it's not for you, I will respect that, just spend time with what-ever you like! :)
2/13/2013 9:48:19 PM
I had questioned whether that was a Dalek poster during your traumatic childhood animation list. Anyhoo, overall excellent critique of the good and the muddled that this episode was, as well as breaking down the Sci-Fi Horror elements that made the remake and classic episodes so interesting!My favorite horror themed episode happens to be 'Horror of Fang Rock'. IMHO the 4th Doctor has always been the sexiest (if not a bit deranged). The 9th Doctor takes a close second ;)
2/13/2013 10:08:36 PM
Hehehe... Horror of Fang-rock, you want to keep a close eyes on the wall behind me in my videos, see my wall. See there is a Scrooge McDuck post? all-right, look beside the Scrooge Mcduck poster... A Doctor who print with an illustration of that episode AND.... Tom Bakers and Louis Jamesons autographs on it. Louis Jameson even drew a little heart that says. "For Sofie." and Tom Baker gave me a jellybean that day. My "Victory of the Daleks poster." (which looks exactly like the one Churchill had in that episode.) is from another day I spend in London, last May.. it got the autograph of Tom Baker, Ian McNeil and Mark Gatiss. All three of them, super people! here have a picture http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150944234614341&set=pb.670229340.-2207520000.1360793076&type=3&theater.... no i'm not showing off. I am just very enthusastic. Also, THANKS! very glad you liked the episode :) .... the fourth Doctor the sexiest.. erh i don't know, okay he is the one doctor that actually flirted with me. (he totally did, my good friend Christian will varify my statement.) I like him a lot, it feels like a great honour to having met him twice, and he can flirt at me all he likes! but sexy? no not really.. David Tennant and Matt Smith how-ever.. They are both adorable! :D Especially have I crushed so part on Matt Smith ever since he appearedin the eleventh hour, I never really crushed on David Tennant... but I am crushing on Smith, for some reason :/
2/13/2013 7:52:24 PM
Honest question, what if you were a casual viewer who didn't know much about the Daleks, let alone their backstory? (like me <.<) I'm pretty sure the scenes at the beggining wouldn't bother someone new into the series. Maybe they did mean to re-imagine the Daleks. If you take that issue away, does that make the episode even better? Or does it make it more confusing?
2/13/2013 8:09:21 PM
urhm well.. since this is season seven of the new re-launch, and a casual viewer probably have seen some of the Dalek episodes coming before this in the series, as they are a prominent villain. You might be slightly confused as well.. how-ever, probably not as annoyed as the hardcore Doctor who fans. And ones again, ones they arrive at the Dalek asylum planet, the episode turns really really good! just the atmopshere down there is amazing. So I would guess, while a hardcore who fan could be annoyed by the episode, a casual viewer would probably enjoy it a lot more for what it is, and have an way easier time liking it, as the stand-alone scenes are that very good. What is there to understand in this connection. "The Daleks is evil, this planet is insane, we need to escape the evil Daleks, not getting killed by this stuff down here and blow up the planet." simple as that really.. it's a very simple plot. "We are trapped here, try not to die while we find a way to blow up the planet." easy peacy
2/13/2013 10:48:20 AM
First off, I somehow managed to forget this episode was being aired until after it started, so apparently I missed all the crap and caught all the good stuff.Second, the coolest thing about the Daleks, for a long time, was that they were the only notable exception to the pre-CGI rule "Any aliens appearing in numbers more than two will be men in latex face makeup."Third, I do have one soft spot for "Daleks in Manhattan" (which I keep thinking of as "The Daleks Take Manhattan, which would have been an entirely different show), and that is when the noble black dude gets offed, not because he deserved it but because it's the first time the rebooted Daleks get to say "Ex-ter-min-ate!"Fourth, having a Dalek companion for a while would have been pretty damned cool. Finally, the one thing that I really, really miss about the old Doctor Who episodic stories is the cliffhanger being capped by the electronic scream leading into the end title music.
2/13/2013 1:24:47 PM
Well.. there's stil a chance to catch all the crap on DVD so don't worry! You're right, and that is pretty cool! Though Doctor who, actually is a show managing to make some different aliens whom really look alien. Just the other day I watched. "The three doctors." again, the episode of the bubble-wrap monsters! It was amazing XD That you like Daleks in Manhatten in fine.. it's a very flawed episode if you ask me, but have some interesting ideas and some interesting points. I have to admit fully guilty in enjoying the song sequence far more than I should, that sort of vaudville. "You put the devil in me." is just my kind of stuff. It would have been, I was sort of dissapointed when the Doctor didn't take her with, but just left her to die. Heh yeah, but well, no denying that form of story telling is out-dated now, it's a thing for the past. And the new Doctor who is faster and more modernised, since modern audiences has the attention span of a gold-fish with short-term memory loss. But maybe some-one can make a tribute one day making some-thing like that.
2/13/2013 5:43:44 AM
it Is possible that Doctor Whos current success (perhaps some the largest outside the UK ever) is actually bad for it, by getting it away from its core to make it more accessible.. OAY. Irony sucks.An old school 5 or 6 parter for this would have been really good for this, even a two parter.Personally I blame corporate studio excecs determine that episodes have to be one shots b/c 1) we the public are viewed as having the attention spans of a cat 2) only way to sindicate it for marketing and mroe money. There is backround of Daleks of altering humans as slaves (with 1980's and 1970's looking bluetooth ear pieces). And Davros had tried to get previous doctors to help him, though always deviously.If they had found Oswan somehow had her conscious got transer into the hive mind might have been better, somehow infecting the Daleks subconsciously. All they could do was contain it, they couldnt just exterminate it. This might have worked better. Sounds like a plot i've heard somewhere else besides a Star Trek Borg one, but I can't place it, ..but on tip of my brain, could have been an old Doctor Who one rattling in in my brain case for all I know. I think this why they made her physically become a Dalek though, at least a bit different from the norm, and not a well worn trope. Im just guessing here. We'll see, we may be too impaitent and answers are coming. Though the last second wiping the Dalek hive mind seemed more of a "you had your fill of Daleks for this era, now leave us alone" from the writers. Maybe Oswan needed to wipe our collective memory instead >_> As for Mary Sue Companions or annoying ones, there's been a few of them over the decades. Aldric...River Song...hmm wieghs options...well at least they killed Aldric off. I will miss Amy and Rory though, they grew on me. Though I still miss Ace alot too. she's still my fav. I have fan-story in my head where River turns out to be the Rani back from the dead, and just f'n w/ doctor for fun. We can call it "a River Rani through it".... I love souffle girl (I love this pet name, sorry it hooked me) did really good with what she had. Glad she'll be in the new one for sure; though its hard to say how mary sue she'll become; I hope they can find a balance. I predict she'll be kenny. She'll die at the end of every episode until the doctor can save her )_). Someone's got to take Rory's place... One really postive thing in this episdoe: the power ranger daleks stayed in the background most of the time.I'll leave my sad rant with thiseggsegggggssssseggsterminate .
2/13/2013 7:10:02 AM
No! the current success of Doctor who is not in any-way bad for the old show, it's good. The fact of life is that the old show is old and out-dated, only people whom grew up with it would have cared if it was not for new who, and then it would have died while no-body cared! Re-makes and re-interpretations is what makes franchises survive past their initial genneration, and makes new gennerations check out the older stuff. That new Doctor who is this succesful is a good thing! it's good for the genre, for this kind of fun story telling and for Doctor who. And i over-all like the new Doctor who, in fact I love it! so I would rather not want to be without it! I think this was Steven Moffat really trying to re-new the Daleks, and in a way, they are right, the Daleks needs to be some-how renewed for them to be interesting again, we have run dry with the Dalek stories, there seems to be nothing to do with them, other than re-hashing the same old stories again, and we don't want to do that. It's just a very very difficult task, and no one has succeeded probably yet, the Dalek Parliment was a bad idea that doesn't correspond with the Dalek mythology, but it did admittedly look cool.Oh yeah, there's been a few of them, it's certainly not all old companions whom are flawless, Joe Grant actually aren't as good a character as you guys think she is <_<But with new who they all seem to fall into this new modern category, where the old complaint was the women in tely were dumb and useless, they have now flipped that one over by making all women so competent and perfect that it seems unrealistic.. we need some kind of a middle ground here! unfortunately no one has found it yet. and yeah.. poor Rory you unfortunate sodd.
2/13/2013 8:08:06 AM
Lols I never watched for Joe Grant. I watched for the most bad ass doctor and car ever. The Doc and Joe really did have touching parting of ways, where he literally drives into the sunset and you know he buries the pain,. but is glad she is safe. Despite not really liking Joe all that much it was really touching from the Doc's point of view, . Though ....He didnt really get to do this with Rory and Amy..they left him...sort of....tearing....up.....As for writing sassy know it all-girlpower- girls balanced with sensativity and femenism and making them real, yet enertaining, I think we guys just sometimes have a hard time computing it. Its not impossible, but its hard not to get tropey and not overcompensate for portrails of women in the past. Some new guest writers would help I think, especially a few ladies for sure. And not just for an episode, for a story arch. Gail Simone for a Doctor Who season, someone give me a hell yay.<>>
2/13/2013 1:19:57 PM
I would kind of like to see Mark Gatiss write a female main character for an episode without any out-side interferences, just to see where it would all end up. I gotta admit, I am deeply curious about how he would go about it. I think just the fact he was the one saying. "Lets give Molly hooper a boy-friend whom is gay, and then Sherlock tells her it right to her face!" So if he had an entire doctor who episode, to write around a new original female he creates.. what kinds of stuff would he have her go throught, that intriques me. And well, that's one aspect where I would have to say Russel T Davies surpasses Moffat as a writer. Yeah RTD gave us Rose and Martha, whom falls into the usual categroy, but he also gave us Donna Noble, Harriet Jones, Margaret Blaine, Cassandre and don't forget the dorky Elton from "Love and monsters." originally was written as a girl.. that episode also had a dorky girl regardless, Ursula. So all-ready there, RTD's cast of women is MUCH more diversed, and he allows women to be selfish, fat, ordinary, dorky, out-side of the norm and all of that, he gave us a much more diversed cast of women. Moffat would never ever create a character like Cassandra. Moffat... it seems like he is only able to write the same woman but with a slight variation on her each time. The kick-ass bad-ass women, which is fine ones in a while, but when that's the only woman that ever appears, it looses its affect!Amy, Riversong, Ozwin, Madame Vastra, Madge Arwell, Nancy ext. They are all basically the same badass woman, just from different situations and time periods, always the leader, always the stronger one. "Men are weak, women are strong!" .... erh.. thanks.. you just sepperated us as if we are two different species and that women are just by default stronger than men. Pressure much? We make mistakes to, we have flaws, we are persons, that is what makes a character interesting, it means he or she has inner conflicts or flaws to over-come in order to succeed -_-;I don't think Moffat means any-thing by it, I think he genuinly looks up to women, and think of us as strong fascinating beings. But that is also sort of unhealthy, cause... we are just human beings dude. ... I want my own Rory. I just want one!
2/13/2013 9:31:09 PM
"I would kind of like to see Mark Gatiss write a female main character for an episode"Hey, here's thought: How about having an ACTUAL WOMAN write a female character?No, never mind, that would just be crazy.
2/13/2013 9:58:30 PM
It's just that I now know Mark Gatiss as a writer, I like his writing, I like how he handles women, so I am intrigued. How-ever.. I can't mention any female screen-writers I know off, where I can say. "That lady there, I like her work!" I would sure like more female screen-writers! I would love to write a screen-play for ya!... though my resume of only ever having written for minor stage productions and amatour short movies, I guess is hardly material enough to go to a tely company.There is one female writer on staff for current Doctor who. "Helen Raynor." she wrote... Daleks of Manhattan and the Sonataran stratagam. Not exactly the most beloved episodes of all of Doctor Who, she gave us the amazing female protagonist of Tallulah.. yay, so well.. you don't become an amazing writer just because you are a woman, you don't automaticly write good women just because you are a woman. (Hallo Stephanie Meyer.)And don't forget, this show is currently produced by a woman! Julie Gardner! and she also has a say in the process and final product, she is the one over-seeing every-thing! Would I like more female writers on Doctor who? Sure I would! But... i would want writers to be hired because of talent more than gender.I don't think they deliberately excluded women to write episodes, it's just that there are more men wanting to write in sci-fi and so on, like if you go on a directors school, there are more men, because it's mostly men interested in these jobs. In fact, when I have been out there as a woman, working on some sort of a slug film as a writer, my genneral experience is that I am welcomed with more than open arms and the guys often says. "Gosh it's nice having a woman to work with, it's different." I have never ever in my life, talked to a man working behind the camera, whom in any way expressed he didn't want to work with me because I am in woman, in fact the opposit is true, as soon as they hear I am a woman willing to write sluggish core, they become intriqued.
2/13/2013 5:17:58 AM
i love doctor who and when i first saw this epsiode me and my friends got together to celebrate the return of doctor who we were a bit let down by this episode it wasn't what was promised and there is a lot of dalek inconsistenty in this episode but i have ot correct you on a few things the daleks have always had a higherarcy usually and emporor on top but i guess with the new paridim they changed it and with the conversion and prison camps i have one episode to menton The dalek invasion of earth if it's for there gain they take prisoners and if they need to they convert people to there cause orignally it was the robot men but it still counts and i call the dalek humans an update of that a very silly looking one that could have been much better but still an update
2/13/2013 7:21:08 AM
Well, there's been a couple of prison camps but they always served an immediate need, such as the Daleks just taking the work forces all-ready present to archieve a goal. They didn't ship people to the other end of the galaxy, and when there were no longer a need for slaves, they would exsterminate them, simple as that. And yeah the Daleks used to have a higherarcy, but as their usual higherarcy seems to be military based, probably to make it as efficient as possible, which also means it's dictator based.. a parliment is based on democracy and.. erh, democratic daleks is just to big a stretch for me. What would they be discussing among all of the daleks? why wouldn't they just exsterminate the Dalek that dares to speak up? or.. urh.. send him to their asylum planet apparently. Well.. there's a difference between turning human into robots or into new daleks (All though, I do find the idea of Daleks turning human into robots silly, when we know they can just build a human looking robot from scratch, like in Victory of the Daleks.)Turning humans into Daleks seems to go against their nature, and their idea of wanting a pure perfect Dalek race. I know why it's there, it's to set-up Ozwin and her story. We show some humans whom suffered kind of this fate, so it'll look plausible when she arrives. I don't know, it just seems odd... and hey the Daleks are fifty years old, there are inconsistencies, never said there wasn't.
2/13/2013 5:00:09 AM
Sophie, I llike your work, but there are several problems with your knowledge of the Daleks, which seems to be based almost entirely on the new series. Asylum heavily mines the classic series and many of your complaints don't apply.First, the Daleks are not emotionless. They were purged of emotions like pity, mercy and compassion. But hatred, xenophobia and agression were specifically selected by Davros. A subtlety, but an important one.Second, the Dalek prison camp. The Daleks have used prison camps repeatedly. The enslaved most of humanity to mine the Earth's core in "Dalek Invasion of Earth". They had human and movellan slaves in "Destiny of the Daleks" and "Resurrection of the Daleks". It probably depends on what their needs are. (In fact, one of your clips is from "Day of the Daleks" which introduced their Ogron slave race).Third, Dalek conversion is not new either. It shows up in "Revelation of the Daleks" as they convert human cadavers to Daleks. They also mined human material in the first season finale to rebuild their race.Fourth, the Daleks have asked for help in "Destiny of the Daleks" when they were in an eternal stalemate with the Movellans.Keep up the good work!
2/13/2013 7:27:38 AM
Still.. then they shouldn't feel "Fear." nor.. erh... beauty..In fact it was made out to be such a big point in "Parting of ways." that woah, the Doctor is the one force in the univers, so damn strong, that he is able to envoke fear in the daleks, and that's a huge deal!In comes this episode where the Daleks are scared enough to ask for help.. urhm.. why? you aren't afraid of death yourself, shoot the doctor right away and then go down to blow up your own damn art gallery. Well, yeah, if the Daleks have an immediate need for work forces and don't have daleks enough to do it themselves. Then yes!The point of "Daleks in Manhatten." are that they are only three Daleks present, so they need to go through other means to have things done, that was their only reason to have slaves. In the other things you mentioned, they had a need at the moment in time, it seemed pretty clear that when the need was gone, they would exsterminate the humans.Here it is indicated that they ship humans from one part of the univers, to another, to get them to their prison camps, which doesn't do any-thing and doesn't have a function, it's just there.. it seems odd. Again, there they had no choice, here, they could blown up their own art gallery.. yes I am calling it the dalek art gallery from now on, cause that is the best reasoning Moffat could come up with to justify the excistence of that Planet.It's not some exsperimental lab for development of future glorius Daleks, it's not a crashed Dalek ship, it's a Dalek art gallery.
2/13/2013 12:49:06 PM
Regarding slave labor camps. Keep in mind that Terry Nation consciously modeled the Daleks on fascism; they were known to staff prison labor camps with people they intended (and in most cases did) exterminate. This was seen more forcefully in "Dalek Invasion of Earth" were the intention was to wipe out humanity, but use them temporarily as the labor force in their own destruction. If the Daleks occupied a planet for decades (as they did Earth at one point), long term labor camps are a definite possibility.
2/13/2013 1:02:55 PM
Good point! and absolutely could see that happen. But still in the case of this episode, they clearly shipped humans from one part of the univers to another part of the univers, for no seemingly reason other than imprison them instead of just.. exsterminate them. So it still makes no sense to me!
2/14/2013 3:53:21 PM
ok you get that the daleks on occasion have a use for humanoid slaves, so why wouldn't they have prison camps. the way i see it, is to them it's like having a supply closet.
2/14/2013 8:15:09 PM
because they can build robot androids that has no emotion do they wish. (Victory of the Daleks.)
2/14/2013 8:52:38 PM
yeah thats true, there is just one problem with the androids and that is they require metal and other materials to be built, so humans would still be needed to get the raw materials to make the androids in the first place seeing as daleks weren't built for mining so while androids would be the better choice to compensate for the daleks short comings. humans/humanoids are the slightly more efficient choice.
2/15/2013 8:31:51 AM
then on the other hand a human needs constant nutriciment, in form of food and water you have to ship there. a human needs eight hours of sleep a day, and are broken down very easily, we are a fragile species. You have to keep Dalek guards around to guard them, which is also a resource waste. Humans can't carry as much as android, and works probably tenth percent slower than any android.And most importantly, having a large group of humans around collected at one place, you will also face the possibilitiy of them revolting. Some-thing that happened every single time the Doctor stumbled on a prison camp, oh surprise, the humans were secretly revolvting trying to escabe and sabotage the Daleks on the same time.. the Daleks ought to have learned from that by now. When they have a way to use machines to do labour work, (And why not just steal the metal from any planet they exsterminate or.. any unhabited planet with metal in it, they got space-ships and scanners don't they?) There seems to be little use for humans, there are few things humans can do which maschines can't... one of them is thinking creatively, and the Daleks don't want that, so erh.. :/
2/15/2013 3:47:56 PM
well i guess my best argument would be this number 7,000,000,000 that is the earths current population and that's ignoring all the other planets with humanoid life. so why make androids when you have access to literally billions of slightly less efficient humanoidsas to the guards i'd like to point out that one of the cult of skaro stated that they could exterminate 5 million cybermen with just one dalek. so i have to wonder just how many daleks would they really need to use as guards the only other argument i can make is that daleks are evil. lets just say that maybe they forgo logic in this regard merely for the twisted pleasure they get out of forcing what they consider a lesser being to do their grunt work.
2/15/2013 4:08:34 PM
they are evil! works for me, always a good argument!
2/13/2013 4:20:19 AM
Doctor Who + Sofie = happiness :)I, um, I... I have a confession to make. I am way behind on my Doctor Who watching. I am only up to the end of Season 4 ("Journey's End") and still have the last of Ten's movies/specials to get through before I get to Eleven. Please don't take away my geek card, I promise to do better, I'll have a marathon session this weekend!Yeah, Daleks and the Doctor are permanently linked, both in the story and in real life. I think the show would not have become a success without the Daleks. Sure, the Master is fascinating as the Doctor's intellectual equal, the Cybermen bring the whole "body horror" fear of being assimilated, and there are various other memorable villains, but nothing can really compare to the Daleks. In England, when they issued a set of postage stamps to commemorate the millennium in 1999, one of the stamps featured a Dalek- that is how iconic they are. I agree that the idea of a Dalek-run prison camp seems to conflict with what we understand of Dalek tactics, but I will reserve final judgment until I've actually seen this episode. Anyway, thanks for the review, Sofie, and while I'll understand it if you don't do much more Doctor Who, I would be super-happy if you managed a few more reviews.
2/13/2013 7:33:00 AM
Oh that's all-right, it's neat that you are even watching it!And look forward to when Matt Smith appears, he has my favourite run of this series thus far, it's really just great stuff I adore. yeah, the Daleks were the first villain, and remains the most prominent one, the Master didn't appear before the third doctor and well.. the yetis havn't even appeared again in the new series. They are cool, but difficult to pull off without a big war plot to go with them, due to their military nature and so on. Perhaps our modern just doesn't fit to well with the Daleks any-more, perhaps we should let it go and be appreciative for what they gave us. I dunno.
2/13/2013 3:02:05 AM
I'm not bothered with the Daleks modifying humans as slaves, it seems a logical step up from the Robo Men they had way back in the 60's. They used other species as servants all the time, in Day of the Daleks they had Ogrons and allowed a human to act as "controller: of a conquered Earth. So that aspect didn't bother me. The main thing about the episode I was disappointed in was that after the build up, I wanted to see crazy Daleks that even the Daleks were afraid of, but they were just broken down, there didn't seem to be anything different about them except they were old.
2/13/2013 1:28:35 PM
yeah... that does seem like an oppertunity wasted. I don't know, even when Daleks did use slaves back in the past, there always seemed to be a clear goal behind it, and a larger picture in it. When they used other races, the Daleks usually just manipulated that other race into doing their dirty work, clearly intending to just exsterminate them later. It just seemed so odd to me, also I kept thinking about Cybermen, it's the cybermen thing to do, not the Dalek thing, and if that was the only thing wrong, I wouldn't complain so much, but it's like these daleks never ever behaves as I would exspect a dalek to. Bringing the doctor there and not shoot him on the spot, proclaim they have their own private art gallery.. have a parliment of Daleks.. not shoot the time-lord in their parliment. Apparently all of this time the Daleks had a way to track down the doctor and lure him in, so why isn't he dead? there's just so many flaws here.
2/12/2013 10:58:51 PM
Asylum is an alright episode but a dreadful Dalek story. The first season of New Who is the only one to get the Daleks right. In those episodes they killed or tried to kill everyone who got in their path and they were a believable threat. As much as I like Moffat as a writer he can't write the Daleks, they're pretty much a joke now.
2/13/2013 3:18:33 AM
They're pretty much being neutered the same way the Borg got neutered on Voyager.
2/13/2013 7:01:57 AM
Honestly the episode. "Dalek." is the best Dalek episode of new doctor who, and the one where one single dalek looked like the biggest threat, as well as it really went into the doctors psyke in some scenes, which was interesting.
2/13/2013 1:43:42 PM
Totally agree it introduced the Daleks perfectly and Ecclestones performance in that episode is one of the reasons he's my favourite Doctor Up until The Stolen Earth Russell T Davies did a okay job at making them feel like a threat it's just a shame the writing wasn't that great though.
2/12/2013 9:50:44 PM
EVEN IF YOU DO HAVE A HIVE MIND, THIER IS ROOM FOR DISSAGREEMENT! sorry fo yelling anyway love the review, dalek zek and kahn from Daleks in Manhattan, which is canon now, it shows that daleks can disagree, alos hate is an emotion, if your cabaple of that othercan come around. The Doctor from my understanding tries to find value in al life, in all it's forms, even the Daleks.In "the partng of the ways" the doctor refused to kill daleks, knwing he would harm humans too yes but even then he couldnt pull the trigger, i also thanks to Sfdebris, know that Tom Baker as doctor once had a similar chance and didnt do it. rory and amy's divorce s justto have one moment when they get back together, it probrably was something stupid or maye repressed emotions from losing thier kid or the fact that amy cannot have anudder kid which i am like, What? Rory is much like, mickey, a very put upon man who really hasa hard time on the show and endures somehow. i have an idea, maybe instead of all doctor who episodes you should do a retrospective of your FAV dalek episodes! :)
2/12/2013 10:13:40 PM
The point of a "hive mind." is that you are a group thinking as only one being, so that would kind of be the only situation in the world where there would be no disagreement. The Daleks are not human, but aliens, so that is why it would work. Daleks of Manhatten aint a good episodes.. unfortunately. But lets say i've decided to make that one count in cannon (though I rather forget it.) In the context of "Daleks of Manhatten." there are only three daleks present, and they are all three led to believe they are the last survivors of their race. That would force them to break free of their hive mind to search creative solutions for their survival. Further more, these three daleks were not ordinary daleks, but were some sort of "Special high council." daleks, created specifically to think up new creative war stragegies, as normal daleks don't really own any creatism. But that's also why they only have very few, meaning three, of these special daleks, if they ever went roug, I guess the plan was that the normal daleks could just exsterminate them. Unfortunately, in the context of "Daleks in Manhatten." the rest of the Daleks were dead, and these daleks as the special creative daleks, sought new ways for the daleks race to survive. Yes, the Doctor had on multiple times through history, the chance to end the Daleks, but elected not to, and mostly he decided not to as he knew that killing an all-ready defeated enemy, would turn him into the same kind of monster that the Daleks are, the same kind of menace that he is fighting against. So he has to keep the moral high-ground, even when he is tempted to do some-thing else. Other-wise he is in a constant threat of being the very thing he is fighting against, a menace to the univers, he is the only one left of his race, and powerful enough. Tom Baker how-ever, never managed to make the actual choice, he hesitated, and then was interupted, being relieved that he didn't have to choose any-more. What he would have ended up with is up to the imagination. I will not be making a run down of my favourite dalek episodes, as there are other aspects of Doctor who I would rather talk about if I am going to talk more Doctor who.
2/13/2013 1:29:09 AM
Yes however, hive is telepathy, being telepathic doesnt always means one agrees with another, there would still be factions and voting, if it remains somewhat democratic. the two remaining Dlkes in Daleks in manhattan were talking to each other, if hey were linked they wouldnt not have to talk. yeah that epi was bad too, in fact, a lot of who is bad throughout it's run, it seems to be a regular staple of the show no matter the era. the two daleks argued and disagreed and the new multi colored daleks seem to have a different plan all thier own, i think the Doctor is seeing that they might have more in them than hate; also when River Song was about to fire an alpha messon burst down the Eyestalk of the last dalek in the big bang, he seemed genuinely frightened, again fear, hate, anger, are the opposities of the more flowerly kind, the truth is i need to find the origin story of the dalek fo free, i like food so i cannot by movies, luckily netflix is there. i labsolutely do look forward to the next Who review.
2/13/2013 2:15:45 AM
"Hive mind" is not the same as telepathy. Telepathy means you can communicate via thoughts. A hive mind means you share thoughts.
2/13/2013 7:29:50 AM
^what he said
2/12/2013 9:37:07 PM
"Ninteen fohty freee"? Doctor Who aired in 1963... Because 63 was 50 years ago... Math is hard.
2/13/2013 7:34:32 AM
and you are a troll good sir.
2/12/2013 8:38:48 PM
So You didn't like the episode? Dr. Who is a Fairy tale? I always thought it was supposed to be children's education, maybe that's the reason why I never understood it.Oh well, I learned something.
2/12/2013 8:46:26 PM
I said I over-all liked the episode by the end of the video, that the good out-weighed the bad, it's just bad the episode had to compromise the Daleks that much by the beginning to get to the actually really good middle. The direction is beautiful, the individual scenes very effectful, Ozwins story touching and disturbing, there's lots of good in there.. it's just along-side some pretty unfortunate compromises
2/12/2013 8:51:38 PM
Okay, It sounded like you were all over the place in your opinion of it, so I wasn't sure.But seriously, I always thought Dr Who was supposed to be for children's education and entertainment; and thought it was a little odd when it took some rather mature turns.
2/12/2013 8:53:33 PM
it was originaly for children, now it's family entertainment, though still "Family." And well, I don't see why childrens material shouldn't have a dark edge.. how-ever, yeah, keep it fun and enjoyable. My opinion about the episode is a bit all over the place, because there is genuinly very good and very bad in the episode. The genuinly good doesn't undo the bad, but neither does the bad undo the genuinly good, which makes it an interesting episode for me, I just think the good is really really good, and is compleately sepperated from the bad.
2/13/2013 2:16:44 AM
It was originally conceived to be edutainment, but they quickly scrapped that idea.
2/12/2013 8:37:31 PM
Just think....an Dalek Arkham Asylum. The Joker's conscience merged with a Dalek's ruthlessness....oh the possibilities
2/12/2013 8:56:34 PM
:/ ..... scary thought.
2/12/2013 9:02:40 PM
"TELL ME...DOCTOR. WHAT ARE...YOU...REALLY...SCARED...OF? FAILING....TO SAVE THIS....CESSPOOL....OF....A....CITY? NOT...FINDING....THE COMMISSIONER....IN....TIME? ME....IN A....THONG?"
2/12/2013 10:11:27 PM
I just read that in the Daleks voice.....it is glorious!
2/12/2013 8:35:32 PM
Well, Sofie I thought the Dalek prison camp notion was crap myself, but in a way it does make sense. They've proven in the past that they WILL kill you outright unless they consider you an asset. It's hard to open doors if you only have a plunger and a paint roller for arms after all, and the paint roller's only used for going Pew Pew Pew! :) The Daleks may be genocidal but they're not wasteful.But yeah, the idea of Dalek conversion is absolute, total, complete horseshit. They're not the bloody Cybermen. Although converting people into Dalek sleeper agents is IMO a really great idea strategy-wise. They could be used to prepare planets for Dalek conquest literally decades in advance (and it's a concept that deserved its own episode. You'd never know who was human and who was an agent of the Daleks), but really, for the Daleks pleading with the Doctor to help them with the Asylum issue wasn't an entirely bad idea. They were planning on blowing up the planet anyway and the Doctor never turns down a plea for help, so why waste an opportunity to destroy their most hated enemy with it? (though they should have just Alderaan'ed that bitch soon as the Doctor, Amy and Rory hit the surface, but that would have robbed us of meeting the next Mary Sue--I mean Companion).The biggest problem with Nu-Who is one that's been plaguing it ever since Davies brought the show back, and that it's about what beautiful and special snowflakes the companions are, not the character the show is actually named for. Rose was probably the worst offender but each season has in some way been about the Companions....and don't even get me started on River Sue--and that is not a typo. River Song is a Mary Sue like Rose was, hence the name River Sue. She deserves a rant especially dedicated to her.Though I do hate that they've turned an old running gag into an actual story arc. *facepalm*What I do love is the idea that there are Daleks that even the Daleks think are batshit insane. Wish they would have expanded on it. Huge wasted opportunity. Imagine the Doctor and the Daleks actually teaming up against this new common threat as a season-long story arc.
2/12/2013 8:56:09 PM
It will have to be one damn good asset before the Daleks will keep you around. Remember, the Daleks themselves are genius's unlike any-thing we earthlings can ever imagine, so erh.. entire prison camps? wtf? and for that matter, if there are prison camps where are they and why havn't the Doctor stopped them yet????Well, if they have the Doctor right there in the middle of them, why not just shoot him right away and be done with it, then send one of their willing soldiers down to the Dalek planet? if they have ways to lure the doctor out, let alone actually track him, their number one enemy.. why isn't he dead? Oh unless their hatred is so beautiful they can't bring themselves to end it (bull-shit.) Well, quite honestly, Doctor who should be about the companions. The doctor himself is not relateable, he is alien.. litterately. So the companions serves a very important function of being the relateable ones!It's just unfortunate that the only two in the new run actually filling out that part well is Donna and Rory, and Rory is alway shuffled to the side for the oh so perfect Amy -_-;But yeah, I to am very tired at the. "Oh look at me and how special I am." attitude with the companions just.. When they looked for a John Watson, they looked for the perfect opposite to Sherlock, the person whom made Sherlock look more Sherlock, by himself looking so normal next to him, and Freeman got the part cause he has that normal quality to him, and serves the function of being the relateable one. Why is that any different when you are casting women to serve the exact same function? Again, it seems to be the trouble that people think. "Good strong female characters." has to be special, strong, clever and smart, without any flaws. When really that is not what we need, we just need them to be likeable. In fact, a more awkward silent counter-part to the Doctor would be nice, it would be new... sigh..
2/12/2013 9:47:54 PM
"River Song is a Mary Sue like Rose was"At least Rose started OUT normal and it was her time with the Doctor that made her special. All of Moffat's companions start out SUPER SPECIAL OMG.
2/12/2013 10:30:16 PM
I have to say though, Rose is my least favourite companion of the new series. Cause.. as annoyed I get at the. "Oh look at how kick-ass I am." attitude from the women. At least in the case of Martha Jones, Donna, Amy, Riversong and Ozwin. I get the feeling that they are good persons, whom cares for the people around them. Rose particularly in season two, just seems like such a selfish, despisable person, whom ever-body loves regardless. So you are willing to let people die so you can make out with the doctor rose?You know, a good person would sacrifice her own happiness to keep the people safe -_-;get angry at the ex, you broke up with, for finding a new girlfriend while you cruze around the galaxy with a man you clearly are crushing on, oh and hitting on two other people as well within the first series. Sir Jack Hakness and that idiot boy that only lasted as companion for one single episode. She started out fine, but by god she ended up a despisable person. Say what you will about Amy, at least she cares for people and get emotionally disturbed by what she sees. Say what you will about Riversong, at least she freely admits that she is slightly crazy, and also cares for people in genneral.
2/13/2013 3:49:26 AM
river is not a mary sue, she is far from perfect.
2/13/2013 5:51:00 AM
Oh? She's constantly outsmarting the Doctor as well as being depicted on various occasions as more competent and proactive than The Doctor, plus she's the only human who can fly the TARDIS and need I mention she MARRIED the Doctor? And don't even get me started on that hand brake thing.What about these qualities are not the qualities of a Mary Sue? I generally like River. I think she's an interesting character when she isn't being written as LIttle Miss Uber-Badass and out-Doctoring the Doctor, but Series 6 felt like one long-ass fanfic.
2/13/2013 7:00:56 AM
All though, a trademark of the Mary Sue is that she just gets every-thing she wants without ever needing to actually do stuff and always end up having a happy ending. Riversong does stuff, Riversong gets called out on stuff, the doc gets angry at her, Riversong has to go through future hard stuff and faces actual dilemmas, and not every-thing turns out good for Riversong. Her heart is slowly broken until the doctor can't recognise her any-longer and she dies. The ultimate Mary sue would be Bella Swan, and thankfully River is nothing like her. I am even willing to go so far to say that... the Doctor didn't marry her out of love, oh he thinks she's sexy and so on, but loves her? I think he married her out of guilt, and gave her all those amazing nights out of guilt, because he is directly or indirectly connected to every-single bad thing that ever happened to Riversong and ever will happen to her, and the Doctor knows it. It is his fault she got abducted as a babie and was raised to become a killer, it's his fault that she was locked away as a murderer later, and he elects not to come out himself saying. "Oh btw, not dead." so she can go. So he needs to take her out. And it's his fault that she is going to die in her future. The Doctor is guilty, and he lets her believe that he loves her, just to try and make up for all the damage he did. Which is sort of messed up, but that's how I see it.
2/13/2013 9:15:29 PM
"And don't even get me started on that hand brake thing."Oh,God, that was stupid as shit. EVERY TARDIS we've ever heard makes that sound. Seriously, had Moffat actually watched the old show? Honestly, I'm not sure he has.
Popular Right Now
All articles posted to the agony booth are the sole property of the author(s). Please do not copy/reproduce entire articles without permission. Screencaps from movies and TV shows are used for non-profit, fair use purposes of parody and commentary.
Star Trek and all related images and trademarks are the property of CBS Studios, Inc.
Reviewer icon artwork provided by Tai Porto, Aaron “McKnackus” Rivera, and Magdalen O’Reilly.