A Christmas Carol. Pre-transmission discussion

Well that's still slightly more than me - so take heart.

Saw it yesterday at the BFI showing, and thought it brilliant. Very unlike Davies' Christmas specials, this is equally funny, very sentimental and incredibly christmassy, and very un-Doctor Who-ish in many ways. If Runaway Bride was Doctor Who's attempt at screwball comedy, then A Christmas Carol is the same programme's take on Frank Capra-- for all there are happy endings and proof of the goodness in all people, at the heart of things there is still a huge well of darkness.

Standout moments are the wee of the latest Star Trek film in how the starship's control room is shot (complete with far too much lens flare); the Doctor's proof that he knows Santa; and his total inability to understand romantic human relationships in marriage to Marilyn Munroe...

Dr Who and sci-fi purists are going to hate this, but I loved it and as a result will probably steer well clear of any message boards once this has transmitted.

Excellent! Sounds right up my street.

Thanks for the utterly unexpected and enticing mini review, Lee. Christmas evening now can't come soon enough.

Actually, should I wrap part of it in spoilers? There's nothing important in there, but you never know.

Further to the review, Smith is brilliant, Gambon as ever is one of the countries leading actors and this wouldn't have been nearly as good without him, Kathryn Jenkins, while not called upon to do too much, can actually act, and Arthur Darville gets his names in the opening titles (and if you look carefully they're covered in glitter-- have a feeling that'll only be obvious to those watching in HD on rather large tv screens though).

Darville and Gillan get relatively little to do, however, and much of the screen time is taken up wih Smith and Gambon.

Great additional info. I don't particularly see anything in what you've written that would justify spoiler tags myself - so I think you're safe.

I can certainly understand the focus being firmly on the Smith/Gambon dynamic. If you're lucky enough to have Gambon: utilise him to the full potential that the story allows.











I

The Co=Ordinator wrote:A Christmas Carol - Exclusive Inside Look.

Lee Carey wrote:Saw it yesterday at the BFI showing, and thought it brilliant.

Well, I'm glad I got a Wrinkly forum reminder email. I got a promo video and a review all in one convenient thread. Hurrah!

Now the question is whether I should attempt to acquire higher-quality video through the magic of internet pixies or watch it on BBCA in standard def with commercials.

When does that international iPlayer thing happen?

When we're all 6 feet under?

Nice to see you Mike.

Hi Hacky, great to hear from you. If I recall correctly the international version of the iPlayer is due very shortly indeed. I think it's just a case of finalising the payment details or the like.

Last I saw, they were going to roll out a for-pay version on the iPad first, but no details on the subscription fee. Personally, I think I might be willing to pay somewhere around $10 per month.

For comparison, the Netflix streaming-only service goes for $9/month and the HBO for-pay channel goes for something like $15-$20 depending on your cable system.

Comparing it to the license fee, the current colour license runs £ 145.50 which is $230 US or about $19/month, but that covers all of the BBC services like regional programming, etc., so I wouldn't expect to pay the equivalent of the full license for iPlayer access.

BTW, I had no idea you could pay a lower black and white fee.

I'd have thought that anomaly must surely be due for abolition at some stage!

I'm incline3d to think $10 per month sounds like a pretty reasonable guess. Certainly I see them opting for some sort of subscription based service rather than than the payment pre show viewed method. I suspect we'll have a much better idea much sooner rather than later.

And yes, the licence fee for viewing on a black and white set is, I think, £49.00 at present. Which at much less than half price is not a bad deal at all for those who either don't want or can't afford a colour set.

Sid Seadevil wrote:I'm incline3d to think $10 per month sounds like a pretty reasonable guess. Certainly I see them opting for some sort of subscription based service rather than than the payment pre show viewed method. I suspect we'll have a much better idea much sooner rather than later.

And yes, the licence fee for viewing on a black and white set is, I think, £49.00 at present. Which at much less than half price is not a bad deal at all for those who either don't want or can't afford a colour set.

So all you need to do is subscribe to the B&W signal and then use some of that fancy Restoration Team wizardry to colorize* it and you get a big discount.

*Colourise

Hacky wrote:So all you need to do is subscribe to the B&W signal and then use some of that fancy Restoration Team wizardry to colorize* it and you get a big discount.

*Colourise

Hey, that's a great idea! I think I'll steal it.

Pah, my man just told me he went to the screening at TV Centre on Tuesday - fancy not inviting me!

The bounder! I'd 'ave for that if I were you, gov'nor!

The one thing that gives me hope is Lee mentioning that Amy doesn't appear much in the episode...it's amazing how much better Eleven is without her around.

I can partially agree with this. But certainly I personally feel the problem I have with Amy is much more due to how the character was written for much of the last series, rather any any problem with Karen's performance.

For me, it's both - I think she's written badly, and I don't think Gillan's anywhere near as good an actress as any of her recent predecessors.

Well I certainly agree she's certainly not on a par with Billie or Catherine. Freema's level - probably.

Sid Seadevil wrote:Freeman's level - probably.

Wow, high praise indeed!

And that's what I get for not posting while wearing my specs.*

*although I might have been referring to her acting being on the level of Alan "Fluff" Freeman's.

Nick Barlow wrote:The one thing that gives me hope is Lee mentioning that Amy doesn't appear much in the episode...it's amazing how much better Eleven is without her around.

Hmm, now statements such as this are partly the reason I left the board in the first place.

Nick Barlow wrote:For me, it's both - I think she's written badly, and I don't think Gillan's anywhere near as good an actress as any of her recent predecessors.

Everyone keeps saying she's badly written, but then never actually backs up any proof of this statement beyond her inappropriate humour at inopportune moments-- which is actually characterisation, not bad writing.

Sid Seadevil wrote:Well I certainly agree she's certainly not on a par with Billie or Catherine. Freema's level - probably.

Having rewatched the entire new series over the course of the last couple of years, I'd disagree with that-- I now think Billie to be the worst actress playing a companion over the last few years, and much of her success in retrospect was acting opposite an actor as good as Christopher Eccleston-- her acting in series two was nowhere near as good as that in series one, and I find her unwatchable outside Dr Who. Freema, meanwhile, gets a lot of unnecessary criticism, in part due to following Billie. She's actually a really good actress, and while there are one or two scenes from early in series three where she comes across as a tad overwhelmed by her surroundings, I rate her now as better than Billie, and feel she's improving all the time now in Law & Order: UK. Catherine Tate, meanwhile, wins respect through sheer force of personality, and again, I'd hesitate before saying she was either better written or a better actress than Amy/Karen Gillan.

I'm basing at least part of my views upon watching her without dialogue from the Proms, where she's able to express a hell of a lot through body language and eye movement, and have more than a suspicion that part of what people term 'bad acting' is simply disliking her accent and voice.

But then, I'm a what some from GallifreyBase would call a Moffat Apologist, so what would I know?*

I found Amy difficult to take quite a bit of the time but I think she may be different in series 6. Presumably her life has been different given she has had her parents back, so to speak, and also she is presumably settled about her feelings for Rory and happy with him now. So, while she is the same person I have high hopes that what grated with me will have gone.

Lee Carey wrote:I now think Billie to be the worst actress playing a companion over the last few years, and much of her success in retrospect was acting opposite an actor as good as Christopher Eccleston-- her acting in series two was nowhere near as good as that in series one

I agree. Eccleston's towering performance brought out the best in Piper. I feel that one of the problems she had in series 2 was the way both her and Tennant's characters were drawn. At times they were nigh on unlikeable. For me that series is the weakest of the 5 we have had.

The Co=Ordinator wrote:

Lee Carey wrote:I now think Billie to be the worst actress playing a companion over the last few years, and much of her success in retrospect was acting opposite an actor as good as Christopher Eccleston-- her acting in series two was nowhere near as good as that in series one

I agree. Eccleston's towering performance brought out the best in Piper. I feel that one of the problems she had in series 2 was the way both her and Tennant's characters were drawn. At times they were nigh on unlikeable. For me that series is the weakest of the 5 we have had.

I'd very much agree with that, which is odd because individually there are a lot of stories I like in series 2 (New Earth, Tooth and Claw, School Reunion, Girl In The Fireplace, The Impossible Planet/Satan Pit)-- it's just that it doesn't seem to hold together very well as a season.