DR Who Oct 7th

[Dazzle1]

Here is the trailer, hoping Whittaker is better than Calpadi and Smith

http://www.bbcamerica.com/shows/doctor- ... al-trailer

[Visitor]

It was different from previous Dr. Who seasons and the change to a female Doctor allows for lots of jokes that wouldn't have been possible with other regenerations. Overall it was better than some of the Calpadi and Smith season episodes although that wasn't a high bar to pass and they had plenty of time to write a decent first episode. Major shift in adding more characters of different ethnic backgrounds as the companions that they had been slowly doing the last few seasons since Calpadi became the Doctor.

Best parts were all the empty pocket jokes and what was missing from them.

[Dazzle1]

I saw it this afternoon

I think Whittaker could become the best Doctor of New Who after Tenant. She is already better than Calpaldi Echelston. She has the ecentricity down.

The story was so so but First New Doctor show with the exception of Pewtree are never that great.

I am not a fan of the way they are doing the companions. they are all from the same area and know each other. One of the things that was interesting when you had more than one was a different background. So you have two who went to the same school with the same ethnic type and one old guy who is not that interesting

I would have prefered Gracie if you were going to have an older companion

[Femina]

I saw it this afternoon

I think Whittaker could become the best Doctor of New Who after Tenant. She is already better than Calpaldi Echelston. She has the ecentricity down.

The story was so so but First New Doctor show with the exception of Pewtree are never that great.

I am not a fan of the way they are doing the companions. they are all from the same area and know each other. One of the things that was interesting when you had more than one was a different background. So you have two who went to the same school with the same ethnic type and one old guy who is not that interesting

I would have prefered Gracie if you were going to have an older companion

Nah I see what they did. They have a black guy, a darker skinned lady (though I'm unsure what her ethnicity is), an older white man and a young(looking) white woman as the Dr herself. It's a pretty well rounded cast balancing all things ethnicity/age/sex etc. with no demographic actively left out, they're being careful, which is good since they've already got to deal with the stygma that comes with such an enormous change as Who's gender. I really liked just the visual of an old black lady teaching her kid to ride with her white husband. Shows where the writers head space is in as per who is and is not an antagonist.

She behaves and solves puzzles like any other doctor, the biggest change here besides she being a she, is the lack of a Tardis (so far) which I'm curious how long they can go without.

They make no big hullabaloo about her being a woman, which is perfectly great. If you have to make a big ruckus that your show staring a female lead is staring a female lead, you're doing gender politics wrong anyway. Not that a joke about it here and there would be unbearable so long as it arrives and passes naturally (it wouldn't make sense here for instance since none of her new companions would even know she was ever a he... but should we stumble across any long standing who characters in the future who would remember her as a him, it would be weird if they DIDN'T notice afterall) Good start, not AMAZEBALLS, not terrible, a perfectly average episode of Dr. Who, indicating that not a lot has changed outside of the Dr. Herself. I liked best that these companions seemed sharper to the revelation (and in fact call her on) that the Doctor never actually has as much of a plan as she says she has. The sarcastic 'Really?' to her 'Don't worry I've got a plan' is something most Companions don't reach till much later on.

[Dazzle1]

I saw it this afternoon

I think Whittaker could become the best Doctor of New Who after Tenant. She is already better than Calpaldi Echelston. She has the ecentricity down.

The story was so so but First New Doctor show with the exception of Pewtree are never that great.

I am not a fan of the way they are doing the companions. they are all from the same area and know each other. One of the things that was interesting when you had more than one was a different background. So you have two who went to the same school with the same ethnic type and one old guy who is not that interesting

I would have prefered Gracie if you were going to have an older companion

Nah I see what they did. They have a black guy, a darker skinned lady (though I'm unsure what her ethnicity is), an older white man and a young(looking) white woman as the Dr herself. It's a pretty well rounded cast balancing all things ethnicity/age/sex etc. with no demographic actively left out, they're being careful, which is good since they've already got to deal with the stygma that comes with such an enormous change as Who's gender. I really liked just the visual of an old black lady teaching her kid to ride with her white husband. Shows where the writers head space is in as per who is and is not an antagonist.

She behaves and solves puzzles like any other doctor, the biggest change here besides she being a she, is the lack of a Tardis (so far) which I'm curious how long they can go without.

They make no big hullabaloo about her being a woman, which is perfectly great. If you have to make a big ruckus that your show staring a female lead is staring a female lead, you're doing gender politics wrong anyway. Not that a joke about it here and there would be unbearable so long as it arrives and passes naturally (it wouldn't make sense here for instance since none of her new companions would even know she was ever a he... but should we stumble across any long standing who characters in the future who would remember her as a him, it would be weird if they DIDN'T notice afterall) Good start, not AMAZEBALLS, not terrible, a perfectly average episode of Dr. Who, indicating that not a lot has changed outside of the Dr. Herself. I liked best that these companions seemed sharper to the revelation (and in fact call her on) that the Doctor never actually has as much of a plan as she says she has. The sarcastic 'Really?' to her 'Don't worry I've got a plan' is something most Companions don't reach till much later on.

Regarding the companions if you look at when they have multiple companions :

Adric, Nyssa and Tegan 2 Aliens from different cultures one an aristocrat one an orphan and a flight attendent

2nd doctor Zoe and Jamie from very different times and culture

But these companions know each other already and come from the same town

The female Doctor had to concerns

1. Chinalbi did it for social justice or political reasons( he admitted ) not for artistic ones

2. Could Wittaker(and she did) makes see her as the Doctor and not a female time lord. I don;t think Eccelston, Capaldi and Colin Baker made me think they were the Doctor

[Femina]

Regarding the companions if you look at when they have multiple companions :

Adric, Nyssa and Tegan 2 Aliens from different cultures one an aristocrat one an orphan and a flight attendent

2nd doctor Zoe and Jamie from very different times and culture

But these companions know each other already and come from the same town

To be fair, I just meant I saw what they were going for right this here and now, not necessarily that Dr. Who had never been more/less diverse in seasons past.

The female Doctor had to concerns

1. Chinalbi did it for social justice or political reasons( he admitted ) not for artistic ones

Firstly, Source? (I haven't seen this particular statement by him, just wondering where he said it)

Secondly............. does it matter? (In all curiousness not in a 'FUCK YOU SO WHAT' sense) Does anyone really think that the overwhelmingly male centric media over the past hundred years (In a medium and industry that I might add was originally very lady centric until it became financially lucrative) exists entirely for artistic purposes? After a point once things are just part of the culture to enormous extremes politics becomes ingrained with art... politics can exist in art even when an artist doesn't realize it. I don't necessarily think a political choice in ones artwork is any more or less an artistic choice than a decision made on a complete whim... they're all just choices made for different reasons. If, in the end, those choices resonate with the work is all that really matters.

2. Could Wittaker(and she did) makes see her as the Doctor and not a female time lord. I don't think Eccelston, Capaldi and Colin Baker made me think they were the Doctor

Makes sense, Eccelston didn't even want to be there most of the time and Capaldi was a very differently 'tempered' Doctor (Baker sadly was before my time) Whittaker so far is giving me Matt Smith vibes... but we need to get a littler farther out of 'Regeneration confusion' before we'll really know just who this Doctor is.

[Dazzle1]

Regarding the companions if you look at when they have multiple companions :

Adric, Nyssa and Tegan 2 Aliens from different cultures one an aristocrat one an orphan and a flight attendent

2nd doctor Zoe and Jamie from very different times and culture

But these companions know each other already and come from the same town

To be fair, I just meant I saw what they were going for right this here and now, not necessarily that Dr. Who had never been more/less diverse in seasons past.
(( And I think it is an error)

The female Doctor had to concerns

1. Chinalbi did it for social justice or political reasons( he admitted ) not for artistic ones

Firstly, Source? (I haven't seen this particular statement by him, just wondering where he said it)
((Several pundits have and he admitted he would not have the position unless her could do it))

Secondly............. does it matter? (In all curiousness not in a 'FUCK YOU SO WHAT' sense) Does anyone really think that the overwhelmingly male centric media over the past hundred years (In a medium and industry that I might add was originally very lady centric until it became financially lucrative) exists entirely for artistic purposes? After a point once things are just part of the culture to enormous extremes politics becomes ingrained with art... politics can exist in art even when an artist doesn't realize it. I don't necessarily think a political choice in ones artwork is any more or less an artistic choice than a decision made on a complete whim... they're all just choices made for different reasons. If, in the end, those choices resonate with the work is all that really matters.

2. Could Wittaker(and she did) makes see her as the Doctor and not a female time lord. I don't think Eccelston, Capaldi and Colin Baker made me think they were the Doctor

Makes sense, Eccelston didn't even want to be there most of the time and Capaldi was a very differently 'tempered' Doctor (Baker sadly was before my time) Whittaker so far is giving me Matt Smith vibes... but we need to get a littler farther out of 'Regeneration confusion' before we'll really know just who this Doctor is.

[Damselbinder]

A bit of a clunky and awkward script. There were some moments where I winced. But these all feel like kinks that are going to be ironed out as it goes on.

My only REAL concern is Bradley Walsh. He is a truly terrible actor, and every second of screentime he has is a second wasted. He could drag the whole thing down.

[Femina]

(( And I think it is an error)

I don't, but fair enough.

((Several pundits have and he admitted he would not have the position unless her could do it))

Several pundits claim Donald Trump needs to wear diapers, I don't like the guy but I'd never imagine they were speaking factually or with any intent further than to draw a cheap laugh via absurdities. I asked for a source?

[Dazzle1]

Here you go

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live- ... le-1144867

[Dazzle1]

oh to Femina one other point

If you have not seen the Classic you may wish to.

It is far better than New Who and the female companions are superior in what they can do

[Femina]

I very much do not read that article as saying he did it for politcal reasons instead of artistic ones... it sounds like he was offered to do it and said up front 'I'll only do it if I can make the Doctor female' and they agreed... which means (regardless of politics) he DID have an artistic desire to do it that way and wanted to make his intentions known rather than wait to see if studio heads were going to give him trouble with it. By and large, caving to political pressure in artwork is something that occurs DUE to production pressure NOT as an artists demands. Make absolutely no mistake, there's essentially no such thing as art without expression, i.e. politics. You can draw up something with no soul and say 'hey its got no politics in it at all!' but that probably also means its artistic merit is next to useless.

[Dazzle1]

We will have to agree to disagree

The important issues are

1. Whittaker is believilbe as the Doctor

2. They produce better product than the last three years

3. These companions develop because right now they continue the run of bad companions

[Dazzle1]

My feelings after the third episode

They need to get new companions or at least dump Yaz and Graham.

I am in the minority in that I don't want the Doctor interacting with actual historic characters like Rosa Parks. Its just me, but the best historic ones were jaunts into the eras, but not with famous people. Talons of Weng Chiang, The Aztects or Family of Blood.

[Femina]

My feelings after the third episode

They need to get new companions or at least dump Yaz and Graham.

I am in the minority in that I don't want the Doctor interacting with actual historic characters like Rosa Parks. Its just me, but the best historic ones were jaunts into the eras, but not with famous people. Talons of Weng Chiang, The Aztects or Family of Blood.

Historical figures are what 'visiting the past' is all about. If you go back in time, the first thing anyone is going to want to do is meet a historical figure and if you just never ever do that, what's the point? I agree it shouldn't ALWAYS be that... but there's no reason to presume that will be the case just cause there was one in the third episode. Trends not been set yet. Next week looks like a classic spider who episode.

Whats wrong with Yaz or Graham. Yaz only just got a chance to really DO anything for the first time this episode, and Graham has useful knowledge... if not a photographic memory outright.

My only issue with this episode is it felt like a child's idea of of where to go to change the course of racism in America... it actually makes sense if you look at it from the racist future man's perspective, he's not terribly bright and might assume he could change things so that he can be openly racist in the future by stopping a woman from sitting on the bus... but the issue I have is that everyone treats it with equal gravitas EVEN the Doctor who should know you'd need to go back a HELL of a lot farther to stop the social trends of America if you wanted to change things so that racism was even openly tolerated TODAY (much less EMBRACED in the even further future)

Not that they shouldn't have helped Rosa parks make her impact... I just think it'd have made it a little more impactful if they'd helped out regardless of the greater issue just because its the right thing to do. Other than that, I thought it was Who's most direct social commentary probably ever... which I think is cool, but I'm VERY pleased to see by the episode preview for next episode they don't mean to make social commentary the crux of every episode. Dr. Who needs whimsy to thrive.

P.S. I don't like this thing they occasionally do with camera angles in some conversations where they frame people on the wrong side of the camera or WAY up close, there was less of it in this episode than last weeks, but it was still there for a scene or two. It gives the impression that there's something WRONG with the moment... if there's an explanation for it in the future It's fine, if its just a directors decision though, they need to rethink it because camera angles mean things.

[Dazzle1]

The three companion may again just me, too many in the TARDIS

It never worked except with Hartnell. And they did not have them from the same era or place

I find Yaz boring.

If they want to have someone different, as I stated have a Jewish or an American companion

[Dazzle1]

One other point for me on companions

I know pretty quick if I am going to like"

I knew Mel, Peri Donna, Bill Potts were horrible

[Femina]

I think it'll be fine, three's not to many if you know how to balance them right. They've only gone through three episodes, and while it seemed to have trouble balancing them in the first couple, I felt like they were all doing things in this one.

[lionbadger]

My only REAL concern is Bradley Walsh. He is a truly terrible actor, and every second of screentime he has is a second wasted. He could drag the whole thing down.

You can almost feel the BBC producer that read the script and said "yeah but what old BBC viewers need is a friendly face so shove in Bradley Walsh, he must be sick of that gameshow on 3 by now, we can get him cheap"

[Dazzle1]

My only REAL concern is Bradley Walsh. He is a truly terrible actor, and every second of screentime he has is a second wasted. He could drag the whole thing down.

You can almost feel the BBC producer that read the script and said "yeah but what old BBC viewers need is a friendly face so shove in Bradley Walsh, he must be sick of that gameshow on 3 by now, we can get him cheap"

I don't object to an older companion, but not a boring Lorry driver

Lightfoot from Talons of Weng Chiang

Ameila Rutherfood from Stones of Blood

both would have been great companions

[Damselbinder]

My feelings after the third episode

They need to get new companions or at least dump Yaz and Graham.

I am in the minority in that I don't want the Doctor interacting with actual historic characters like Rosa Parks. Its just me, but the best historic ones were jaunts into the eras, but not with famous people. Talons of Weng Chiang, The Aztects or Family of Blood.

Historical figures are what 'visiting the past' is all about. If you go back in time, the first thing anyone is going to want to do is meet a historical figure and if you just never ever do that, what's the point? I agree it shouldn't ALWAYS be that... but there's no reason to presume that will be the case just cause there was one in the third episode. Trends not been set yet. Next week looks like a classic spider who episode.

I agree to a certain extent. I think part of the problem is that when they do meet actual historical figures, that's what makes it start to feel a bit "child's version of history". The Shakespeare episode suffered from a faintly similar problem, though mostly the problem there was simply that its concept was relatively pants.

I think there was the possibility for a good concept here. The humans have a history-class idea of the Civil Rights Movement, and so does the bad guy. They don't understand the reality of the situation, that the civil rights movement had been gathering steam since World War II, that history isn't as simple as they think it is. But it was all as simple as it seemed: it really felt like children's television.

[Visitor]

Unlike past episodes with historical figures like Vincent van Gogh or Shakespear, this one was pretty much like a Civil Rights lesson and less of an adventure that used someone famous. For a while you have two sides manipulating past events to nudge time, but it makes the incident take on greater significance than the whole movement. Trying to make it a fixed point in time rather than previous episodes where major changes can be made and still get time to resume its natural course.

As for three companions, it's too early to tell how they will balance out a larger regular cast.

[Femina]

I agree to a certain extent. I think part of the problem is that when they do meet actual historical figures, that's what makes it start to feel a bit "child's version of history". The Shakespeare episode suffered from a faintly similar problem, though mostly the problem there was simply that its concept was relatively pants.

I think there was the possibility for a good concept here. The humans have a history-class idea of the Civil Rights Movement, and so does the bad guy. They don't understand the reality of the situation, that the civil rights movement had been gathering steam since World War II, that history isn't as simple as they think it is. But it was all as simple as it seemed: it really felt like children's television.

I don't remember the Shakespeare stuff... but that's probably not surprising since I personally I sort of really REALLY....

Anyway, the really weird part about the episode is that, aside from the child's view of hindering civil rights... it otherwise didn't pull its punches. There's not enough time to deep delve into all this stuff in a single Who episode obviously, but its fair to say that, had the Doctor and Rose arrived there, they'd likely have wandered around town and everybody would have been nice, polite and interacting with them would have been normal as pie but since two of their companions were NOT white we got to see the less pleasant side of southerners of the time. They did something similar back in the day with that Sleepy Hallow show where the main lady went back to the revolutionary war. If you're going to do it... you might as well do it earnestly and all in or else its just going to be both offputting for the people who oppose your views and not 'true' enough for the people who share your views so in that regard It's nice to see an episode of Who that seems like it was willing to go all in on a theme.

Just its also good to see from the clip that next weeks episode is going to be a lot lighter subject matter.

Dr. Who IS somewhat of a family show. So I guess in that way a childs metaphor for civil rights can be okay from the silly Companions and villains... I just really wish Dr. Who herself had said something at the end like 'oh this all would have happened anyway eventually... just no reason to deprive Mrs. Parks her mark.' Dr. Who doesn't just look out for the larger universe after all, been known to waste a lot of time saving individuals from time to time.

[Visitor]

I thought we were finally getting an old fashion monster of the week episode with the spiders. So sad it turned into a commentary on Trump as president and evil businessmen. Too bad because that part could have been better if they hadn't combined the plots.

I did love the scheduled bathroom breaks.

[Femina]

I thought we were finally getting an old fashion monster of the week episode with the spiders. So sad it turned into a commentary on Trump as president and evil businessmen. Too bad because that part could have been better if they hadn't combined the plots.

I did love the scheduled bathroom breaks.

In its defense, Trump is an awful president (though far less dangerous than anyone who feared him thought he'd be on account of he's to stupid to do anything effective) and buisiness is, for the most part, more trouble for the average human being than it is beneficial to society as a whole... but It's not like Doctor Who hasn't always done stuff like this... just they aren't as fancy and 'dance around the details' with these creators as previous ones I suppose?

[Dazzle1]

I thought we were finally getting an old fashion monster of the week episode with the spiders. So sad it turned into a commentary on Trump as president and evil businessmen. Too bad because that part could have been better if they hadn't combined the plots.

I did love the scheduled bathroom breaks.

In its defense, Trump is an awful president (though far less dangerous than anyone who feared him thought he'd be on account of he's to stupid to do anything effective) and buisiness is, for the most part, more trouble for the average human being than it is beneficial to society as a whole... but It's not like Doctor Who hasn't always done stuff like this... just they aren't as fancy and 'dance around the details' with these creators as previous ones I suppose?

I gave it about a half way through. Sorry I don't need DR Who trashing the President. Who btw is far better than Obama.
The economy and our standing in the world is far better
Bet the SJW Chibnel would never have done this to Hillary or Obama


Although DR Who has never potrayed anyone in the business field in a positive manner
But in this case make the parody a coward, evil with no reeedming characteristics.

Has anyone notice that Whittaker's Doctor is becoming more scatterbrained in how she interacts from episode 2 to episode 4. i am refering how she went off on multiple tangents when they enter Yaz's building

[Femina]

The economy and our standing in the world is far better

Somehow, a British made show taking enough interest in American politics enough to criticize the president of the United States for basically the first time in its forty year run time doesn't make me feel like our standing in the world is better than it used to be.

[Dazzle1]

The economy and our standing in the world is far better

Somehow, a British made show taking enough interest in American politics enough to criticize the president of the United States for basically the first time in its forty year run time doesn't make me feel like our standing in the world is better than it used to be.

This is the BBC which is extreme leftwing, anti Trump anti Israel, pro leftist

I would say Israel the gulf States, Japan, the non socialist countries in Latin america prefer Trump over Obama.

What do you think about Whittaker's Doctor acting more erratic?

[Dazzle1]

I can not hold off on this anymore

DR Who's showrunner seems to be on a white male bashing vendetta. Yes I know he is a white male himself.

But lets look at the white males in the first 4 episodes

Episode 1
The prize a spoiled kid who gets where he is because dad own the company, he is coward
Yaz supervisor superficial man patronizing and only concerned about doing his 8 hours

Episode 2
Enzo selfish greedyly man only in it for himself
The arbiter uncaring and rude

Episode 3 White male villian who is a racist

Episode 4 Trump parody (Trump who is not homophobic,or racist) who does not take responsibility and is unethical and an enviro polluter.)

How about some positive white males for Doctor Who.

I think the last one may be Rory Williams

[Femina]

This is the BBC which is extreme leftwing, anti Trump anti Israel, pro leftist

This has been the case for longer than just this year and Dr. Who wasn't bashing the US then? So I'll just reiterate my previous statement with greater detail. Dr. Who taking the time out of their day to bash the president of the united states, a show made by and from the perspectives of a viewpoint OUTSIDE the united states does not instill in me confidence that our standing OUTSIDE the united states has improved. It seems to indicate that our standing outside the united states has become the but of a joke.

I would say Israel the gulf States, Japan, the non socialist countries in Latin America prefer Trump over Obama.

Who cares? They haven't been making TV shows and airing them in other countries singing his praises have they? They haven't felt that safe about their idolitry of His glory President Trump... and for that matter in response to another thing you said a ways up, I don't care if 'they never would have done this to Hillary or Obama' either? Hillary isn't our president and never will be, Obama is gone. People should get over it, stop getting defensive about it, and start looking at who IS president, and all of his supporters should scream in one voice 'get off f'king twitter and do your job!' The only thing DR. Who not picking on Obama or Hillary would mean to ME is that America was not yet the but of Brittan's joke, indicating America was in 'better standing' with them.

What do you think about Whittaker's Doctor acting more erratic?

She's seemed pretty scatter brained since episode 1, but no more or less so than Matt Smith's doctor was early on. She's possibly a little TO energetic right now and might need to dial it down... but every doctor has to work out the kinks of their performance when they first turn up, gotta imagine that's doubled with new show runners on top of it all. She also seems more combative and quicker to tell someone to shut up and get in line than previous doctors.

As for positive white males... what about the companion? He's not portrayed as a bad dude, in fact, they keep making apoint of making the stepsons dislike of him to be pretty rude cause he seems perfectly decent...

Anyhow, aside from a little president bashing which is basically everywhere on TV these days cause our standing in the world is so high everyone has taken notice, it really felt like a pretty typical monster of the week Dr. Who episode by my perspective.

[Dazzle1]

As for positive white males... what about the companion? He's not portrayed as a bad dude, in fact, they keep making a point of making the stepsons dislike of him to be pretty rude cause he seems perfectly decent...

---------

He is the male equivilent of a Donna Noble, Bill Potts, Mel or Peri. Fairly useless and standing by while the Doctor does everything

I also could do without the family entaglements: I did not care about Rose's mother, Wilfred Mott or Martha's family.

[Femina]

He is the male equivilent of a Donna Noble, Bill Potts, Mel or Peri. Fairly useless and standing by while the Doctor does everything

I also could do without the family entaglements: I did not care about Rose's mother, Wilfred Mott or Martha's family.

It feels like every solid idea that the Doctor herself doesn't come up with is a result of his memory, so I'm not sure what you mean... but in that same vein... MOST companions do very little while the Doctor does most of the stuff... they help a little, but its usually in service to the Doctor's grand scheme. It IS the Doctor's show afterall.

[Dazzle1]

He is the male equivilent of a Donna Noble, Bill Potts, Mel or Peri. Fairly useless and standing by while the Doctor does everything

I also could do without the family entaglements: I did not care about Rose's mother, Wilfred Mott or Martha's family.

It feels like every solid idea that the Doctor herself doesn't come up with is a result of his memory, so I'm not sure what you mean... but in that same vein... MOST companions do very little while the Doctor does most of the stuff... they help a little, but its usually in service to the Doctor's grand scheme. It IS the Doctor's show afterall.

I don't know if you have watched Classic.

But although the doctor is the lead, he had useful companions who I could see he or associating with. Wether the very adapatable Sarah Jane, the scienctist Liz Shaw, the men from Unit, his fellow Gallifreyan Romana or youngsters like Adric; these people could do things.

[Femina]

He is the male equivilent of a Donna Noble, Bill Potts, Mel or Peri. Fairly useless and standing by while the Doctor does everything

I also could do without the family entaglements: I did not care about Rose's mother, Wilfred Mott or Martha's family.

It feels like every solid idea that the Doctor herself doesn't come up with is a result of his memory, so I'm not sure what you mean... but in that same vein... MOST companions do very little while the Doctor does most of the stuff... they help a little, but its usually in service to the Doctor's grand scheme. It IS the Doctor's show afterall.

I don't know if you have watched Classic.

But although the doctor is the lead, he had useful companions who I could see he or associating with. Wether the very adapatable Sarah Jane, the scienctist Liz Shaw, the men from Unit, his fellow Gallifreyan Romana or youngsters like Adric; these people could do things.

I suppose I do mean in comparison to modern companions... seems a little late to harp on the show for not following 'classic Who' trends.

[Dazzle1]

I did skip to them asking to join the Doctor, that part I liked.

And I can see why Yaz wanted to go. If I had her family, I might too

[Dazzle1]

Another disjointed episode. No background to what they are doing or why.

Are they ever going to have a white male protrayed in a positive manner?

[cannonfodder]

The Head doctor was great until he got spaced.

[Dazzle1]

The Head doctor was great until he got spaced.

and that s the point. Everyone else who does something heroic or helpful is a non white male, and no the android does not count.

Graham is a male Mel or Victoria

[Femina]

Graham is a male Mel or Victoria

This isn't an argument? You can't omit an item of obvious evidence just because you don't necessarily like that item enough to find any enjoyment out of it yourself. It'd be like saying (flipped around) African Americans have never contributed to the entertainment industry, Denzel Washngton Doesn't count cause I like him!

Graham being a male Mel or Victoria in your opinion, while certainly an issue with you're appreciation of him (or lack there of) which is is fine, doesn't make him NOT WHITE? He's a white dude whose constantly providing useful information and ideas.

[Dazzle1]

Graham is a male Mel or Victoria

This isn't an argument? You can't omit an item of obvious evidence just because you don't necessarily like that item enough to find any enjoyment out of it yourself. It'd be like saying (flipped around) African Americans have never contributed to the entertainment industry, Denzel Washngton Doesn't count cause I like him!

Graham being a male Mel or Victoria in your opinion, while certainly an issue with you're appreciation of him (or lack there of) which is is fine, doesn't make him NOT WHITE? He's a white dude whose constantly providing useful information and ideas.

It is an accurate description of his useleness.

DW has gone overboard in denigratng white males. sorry but I personally I am sick of it. The last halfway decent white male in the show was Rory

[Dogfish]

Wow. It's almost like not being represented in a positive light by the people in TV shows and movies is significant.

[Femina]

Graham is a male Mel or Victoria

This isn't an argument? You can't omit an item of obvious evidence just because you don't necessarily like that item enough to find any enjoyment out of it yourself. It'd be like saying (flipped around) African Americans have never contributed to the entertainment industry, Denzel Washngton Doesn't count cause I like him!

Graham being a male Mel or Victoria in your opinion, while certainly an issue with you're appreciation of him (or lack there of) which is is fine, doesn't make him NOT WHITE? He's a white dude whose constantly providing useful information and ideas.

It is an accurate description of his useleness.

DW has gone overboard in denigratng white males. sorry but I personally I am sick of it. The last halfway decent white male in the show was Rory

You're just being selective. Graham does lots, he posits more ideas and plans than either of the other two companions. You don't like him, that's fine, but it doesn't make him not a white man and it doesn't mean he's been useless it just means you don't like him.

and there hasn't been a halfway decent what male since Rory? What was Capaldi? A skidmark demon?

[Dazzle1]

Graham is a male Mel or Victoria

This isn't an argument? You can't omit an item of obvious evidence just because you don't necessarily like that item enough to find any enjoyment out of it yourself. It'd be like saying (flipped around) African Americans have never contributed to the entertainment industry, Denzel Washngton Doesn't count cause I like him!

Graham being a male Mel or Victoria in your opinion, while certainly an issue with you're appreciation of him (or lack there of) which is is fine, doesn't make him NOT WHITE? He's a white dude whose constantly providing useful information and ideas.

It is an accurate description of his useleness.

DW has gone overboard in denigratng white males. sorry but I personally I am sick of it. The last halfway decent white male in the show was Rory

You're just being selective. Graham does lots, he posits more ideas and plans than either of the other two companions. You don't like him, that's fine, but it doesn't make him not a white man and it doesn't mean he's been useless it just means you don't like him.

and there hasn't been a halfway decent what male since Rory? What was Capaldi? A skidmark demon?

Calpadi was the worst Doctor in the history of the show, who seem less aware of things than his dim witted companion Bill Potts.

[Femina]

Calpadi was the worst Doctor in the history of the show, who seem less aware of things than his dim witted companion Bill Potts.

Alright so again, you didn't like him so he doesn't count. Good to know.

[Dazzle1]

Calpadi was the worst Doctor in the history of the show, who seem less aware of things than his dim witted companion Bill Potts.

Alright so again, you didn't like him so he doesn't count. Good to know.

Again you are ignoring how DW over the last few years are running down and minimizing white males.

Stop ignoring the SJW poison permanating Sci fi and other mediums

[Dogfish]

Calpadi was the worst Doctor in the history of the show, who seem less aware of things than his dim witted companion Bill Potts.

Alright so again, you didn't like him so he doesn't count. Good to know.

Again you are ignoring how DW over the last few years are running down and minimizing white males.

Stop ignoring the SJW poison permanating Sci fi and other mediums

This 'SJW poison' as you call it is not permeating scifi and other mediums, it is the life blood of scifi and other mediums. It was here long, long ago. It was there in Frankenstein, it was there in The War of the Worlds, it's there in Star Wars, it's there in Alien, it's there in Aliens, it's there in Predator, it's there in Robocop, it's there in Starship Troopers, it's in the Matrix, and it's sure as shit been a staple part of Dr Who going back years. The only reason it doesn't look like it is is because what once was ahead of its time now looks comfortably conservative.

We've had this conversation about comic books too, like Superman hasn't always been explitly against racism, like Captain America didn't punch Hitler months before the US entered the war, and like the X-Men weren't an overt metaphor for marginalised groups in modern society.

[Dazzle1]

Calpadi was the worst Doctor in the history of the show, who seem less aware of things than his dim witted companion Bill Potts.

Alright so again, you didn't like him so he doesn't count. Good to know.

Again you are ignoring how DW over the last few years are running down and minimizing white males.

Stop ignoring the SJW poison permanating Sci fi and other mediums

This 'SJW poison' as you call it is not permeating scifi and other mediums, it is the life blood of scifi and other mediums. It was here long, long ago. It was there in Frankenstein, it was there in The War of the Worlds, it's there in Star Wars, it's there in Alien, it's there in Aliens, it's there in Predator, it's there in Robocop, it's there in Starship Troopers, it's in the Matrix, and it's sure as shit been a staple part of Dr Who going back years. The only reason it doesn't look like it is is because what once was ahead of its time now looks comfortably conservative.

We've had this conversation about comic books too, like Superman hasn't always been explitly against racism, like Captain America didn't punch Hitler months before the US entered the war, and like the X-Men weren't an overt metaphor for marginalised groups in modern society.

SJW by the definition of 2018 is an anti white male or antio christian or
Jews or anti capitalism facism

Star Wars until the Mary sue version was not. Star Trek never was . D.C comics hardly is that is why Marvel has not been SJW in the movies only in the comics

[Dogfish]

Star Trek is space communism. Also Star Trek smashed the taboos of the age by featuring a prominantly diverse cast and the first interracial kiss on US TV. They had a Russian on the bridge at the height of the cold war and one of the main themes of the show was peacefully working with other cultures.

Star Wars is about space antifa. The Galactic Empire is a bunch of white dudes thinking they know what's best and killing everybody who doesn't like it and the Rebels are a bunch of scruffy nerfherders, wookies, ewoks and probably gay droids led by a woman. They got even more diverse over time but even back in the day it was Lando who blew up the second Death Star.

Superman is anticapitalist, the clue being the fact his arch enemy Lex Luthor is, y'know, a Giant Capitalist. He's also, in the literal sense, an illegal alien, an outsider.

Batman is a rich guy who spends all his free time and a significant chunk of his personal fortune helping people. He pretty much embodies the Karl Marx quote "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" Meanwhile both Batman and Superman share a commitment to justice and the rule of law which is why neither of them kills anybody. Except in movies that miss the point. You can have Batman vs Superman.

Marvel's comics have been socially justicey forever and the movies took a while to catch up but they're getting there. People were still upset of course twenty years ago that Blade was played by Wesley Snipes.

This stuff has always been progressive. And clearly you enjoy the shit out of it anyway, in fact you enjoyed it so much you didn't even notice. So there's clearly no need to worry about it. I mean if it really is propaganda warping young minds it clearly doesn't work very well.

[Femina]

Actually Social Justice Warrior by its actual DEFINITION is

'a person who expresses or promotes socially progressive views.'

... probably should stop defining things that you don't know the definitions for, its REALLY easy for that sort of thing to get thrown back in your face. Not that everyone doesn't do this from time to time either, just ordinarily if you're opting to express what you BELIEVE to be the definition of something... but aren't sure of the verbatim definition or even in disagreement with it you should probably still avoid 'definitive' qualifiers since it takes about three seconds to google the definition of something to tell if someone's definitions are fact or opinion.

In any case, I'm sorry you feel Dr. Who is marginalizing you, I hope one day that you realize that's basically how African Americans and other minorities often feel every time they turn on a Television or watch an action film but it doesn't invalidate how you feel either. Marginalization is marginalization.

Again you are ignoring how DW over the last few years are running down and minimizing white males.

I'm not ignoring anything? I'm specifically NOT ignoring characters that you're telling me to ignore what I see as possessive white men in the Dr. Who universe 'don't count' because you don't like them. YOU'RE ignoring that they exist because you don't like them and therefore relegate them to 'modern Mels' and what not as if that means they don't count or exist.

Stop ignoring the SJW poison permanating Sci fi and other mediums

As opposed to what? The SIW buffet of greatness that's been around since times past? Sorry, I don't feel that Sci Fi is any better or worse today than it ever was just because a woman has been the star of a few Star Wars films. Star Wars isn't failing because of Rey, it's failing because of a MALE director who made a terrible film and the douche creative head who wishes she was as good as Kevin Feige. It's unisex, but somehow its ALL THE FEMINISTS FAULT!!!

[Dazzle1]

Feminia

You fail to realize how white male bashing is becoming the norm for many in the leftist media

Social justice mantea is just as bigoted White Supermacist

There have been minority representation in science fiction for years.
Uhura, Sisko, Martha Jones, Sulu