It also looks like Rey is missing an arm. I’m assuming that’s intentional…
A Doctor Who film series should probably go the prequel route, and tell stories with a young Hartnell Doctor. There’s a lot of potential there: Gallifrey and the Time Lords at the height of their society, the Doctor’s friendship with a young Master, the Corsair, the Deca.
There’s really no need to tie it to whatever is going on in the tv series. In fact, it’s probably better if the movies go the prequel route, which would provide a soft reboot for the general audience.
Yes, I would assume that a film would take it’s own path, but it could tie into the existing continuity, such as it is.
I’d hate them to get bogged down in establishing things on Galifrey too much though. I’d rather the Doctor was already travelling when the film starts. I don’t need ‘Doctor Begins’.
Ha, I missed that.
I agree. I think the Timelords/Gallifrey stuff is often some of the dullest stuff in the show (and often the least original and most naff-looking), verging on prequel-trilogy-politics at times.
I’d much rather a big wild imaginative adventure with the Doctor as a more unique and enigmatic figure, keeping the Timelords and Gallifrey very much a background/backstory element.
I know exactly what you mean.
Another Eighth Doctor movie. Seconded.
It’s a pity Moffat wasn’t interested in a big movie, he wrote a lot of huge scale scenes that would’ve benefited from a blockbuster budget, but he knew full well that Sony would’ve run the feature film, not him.
They’d have hired a “visionary” and the Doctor would’ve become whatever that person wanted him to be.
Fox coproduced the first one so this fits perfectly with the Disney acquisition. All the Disney Who movies will be about the Eighth Doctor.
I’m glad that’s settled.
I wouldn’t mind something out of continuity even. A bit like a broad strokes movie-only canon sort of thing.
Or, if that’s gauche, then just another time lord having adventures away from anything else.
It’s there. You can see a sliver of forearm parallel to the line of her skirt, with a hand next to the chicken.
Don’t knock it til you try it!
The philosophy of The Matrix, along with the cool action scenes, was what made it popular to begin with. To try and do one but not the other in the sequels would’ve been a huge disservice to the fans of the first one. I suspect the sequels picked up people who were playing catch-up.
The philosophy was subtext, not text, in the first one.
That’s the difference.
The first one played it through the overtext of, say, a really inventive training sequence, or a dramatic plot beat.
The second two have nothing but dragged out dialogue sessions.
I think a big part of the difference was that the story and action were so well-integrated in the first Matrix movie: every fight or action sequence carried some weight and moved things forward, as a major story element always depended on them.
In the sequels, it felt like the story stopped every quarter of an hour for a 10-minute action setpiece.
It was dinner with the Merovingian that got me. They go to his restaurant, sit down and then listen while he spouts on and on and on. A minute or so would’ve been fine, but he just carried on and the THREE MAIN CHARACTERS IN THE MOVIE sat there like shop window dummies with half a dozen lines of dialogue between them.
That scene actually brought the house down the first time I watched it, because I was in a cinema in France, and, well…
I assume the orgasmic cake went down well too… so to speak?
A lot of the film’s weirdest moments have stuck with me, but not because I thought they worked. They were just so weird?!
But he’s literally a character who’s supposed to be a blowhard. That’s why you’re paying attention to his wife more than him. The Architect at the end of the movie is the same way. The whole point of Reloaded is to drive home how insidious the whole setup is, even among the citizens of Zion, why you have Anthony Zerbe remind you that even though they’re fighting for their lives against machines, they still depend on them.
But again, the whole point of a sequel is to contrast the first experience, and to give you more, obviously, of what you presumably enjoyed with the first one. Reloaded delivers plenty of action, but if you don’t understand why any of it’s happening, why the action in the first one was happening, of course all the talking is going to be lost on you. You can’t just describe it as “philosophy.” The irony Zerbe is pointing out isn’t that humans are still depending on machines, but that they have free will. That’s not just “philosophy,” but the whole point of everything.
It’s like saying Star Wars is just a fight against the forces of evil with flashy lightsaber scenes tossed in. It’s about a struggle for identity, first and foremost, and it always was.