Television Doctor Who

The reaction on the Doctor Who subreddit, where the actual whovian nerds congregate has been overwhelmingly positive. It's places like the daily mail comments sections where the most complaints are to be found. That's why the only plausible conclusion is that the criticism is born in bigotry, people who have previously shown feck all interest in anything doctor who getting their tiny balls in a twist because a woman took the role.
 
Last edited:
Silva said:
The reaction on the Doctor Who subreddit, where the actual whovian nerds congregate has been overwhelmingly positive. It's places like the daily mail comments sections where the most complaints are to be found.
Click to expand...

No surprise there. Mail readers exist to complain. Things are never as good as they used to be and all the things that remain and they hold beloved are under attack.

I'm afraid I'm old enough to count the third doctor, Jon Pertwee, as the Who of my childhood (when he died in 1996 it did genuinely feel as though the doctor was dead!) I haven't watched it recently but in my opinion having a female Dr Who is long overdue.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Just to counter your point slightly. You can't ignore the fact that most of the superhero canon is from an age where there was so little diversity we ended up in a situation where black, brown or female kids have almost nobody they can relate to when they watch/read superhero stories. So a bit more diversity is definitely a good thing. You're right about it being a problem when the changes are heavy-handed.

Plus, as I said, it should be perfectly allowable for anyone to say "In my opinion, I preferred this character/storyline before it was changed in this way" without being labelled assorted words ending in -ist.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Just to clarify, my problem isn't with Marvel or anyone else trying to increase diversity in their product, it's specifically the mass adaptation of existing characters (many of which are iconic) at the expense of existing fans of the series, some of which will almost certainly fall within these so-called minorities themselves. I'd like to think that most fans of these comics aren't thinking in terms of 'Iron Man is a womanising, rich, white, male', and more that 'Iron Man is cool, smart and attacks bad guys'.

As a few have commented, if people care deeply enough to want a character with a politically-correct background then new characters ought to be created for that purpose. Marvel have introduced a number of these as well (e.g. Ms Marvel) so I don't know why they still feel the need to modify existing characters. It's not just one or two of the traditional characters, either, it's practically all of them.

As you say, though, the more pertinent issue is people focusing too much on labelling one other instead of actually debating things properly (e.g. political issues more important than comic books and TV show castings, such as immigration and religion). People seem to bracket themselves in one group and dismiss the other side by default, it's just hugely unhelpful.

Silva said:
The bigotry labels are inevitable as these complaints only happen when a women does a traditionally mans job rather than the other way around. For example, was there such criticism when Dwayne Johnson played a tooth fairy? Not really. So why do such criticisms arise when a woman plays a traditionally male role? And the answer for the majority of detractors is that they're massive bigots.
Click to expand...

I've not seen the film, but based on the synopsis surely the point is that the Tooth Fairy is as counter-stereotype as possible? For maximum, ahem, comedic effect, he must appear unsuitable for the task at hand, much like Vin Diesel in The Pacifier. Then they can miraculously turn it around etc. etc. In either case they seem appropriately cast for the role, again albeit due to the stereotypes making that so.

The controversy seems to kick in most when political correctness alone is used as a justification/driver for change, rather than simply being in place to assure that the change can happen if needed. In such cases, it's Equality of Outcome instead of Equality of Opportunity. It's not obvious whether the BBC have made this decision because they have identified an opportunity to improve the show (in which case, great), or whether they have simply done it to appear more PC (not so great, in my opinion, and far more likely to annoy fans of the series). Obviously you'd get people complaining either way. I think most of the complaints I've seen have came from people who have perceived the decision to be made purely because of PC reasons. They're entitled to their complaint as a result.

For what it's worth I agree that it's a sad state of affairs when something like this is announced and instead of discussing the merits of the actress and potential storylines etc. the arguments become gender-based.
 
Problem-free Philosophy said:
As a few have commented, if people care deeply enough to want a character with a politically-correct background then new characters ought to be created for that purpose. Marvel have introduced a number of these as well (e.g. Ms Marvel) so I don't know why they still feel the need to modify existing characters. It's not just one or two of the traditional characters, either, it's practically all of them.
Click to expand...
There's no reason why both can't happen. More often than not iconic just means old thing that's still around and the opposition to change is merely that change is bad. Which is BS.

Problem-free Philosophy said:
The controversy seems to kick in most when political correctness alone is used as a justification/driver for change, rather than simply being in place to assure that the change can happen if needed. In such cases, it's Equality of Outcome instead of Equality of Opportunity. It's not obvious whether the BBC have made this decision because they have identified an opportunity to improve the show (in which case, great), or whether they have simply done it to appear more PC (not so great, in my opinion, and far more likely to annoy fans of the series). Obviously you'd get people complaining either way. I think most of the complaints I've seen have came from people who have perceived the decision to be made purely because of PC reasons. They're entitled to their complaint as a result.
Click to expand...
They cast a woman because the new showrunner wanted to. It makes little difference if he was thinking about political correctness or not. And as much as they're entitled to their complaints, I'm entitled to point out the bigotry.
 
I don't really agree that things shouldn't be changed for be sake of it, or that it's only acceptable if someone is "absolutely only the best person for the role" ... None of the people saying it have any idea if she's the best for the role or not yet, they're just saying it as an excuse to question it, for a start.

Sometimes people need to be shocked out of their comfort zone for no other reason than that. You only have to go back a couple of pages to see people complaining that the companion's lesbianism was being pushed too hard, when as far as I can remember, she's been the only companion in the modern run to not be in a significant relationship throughout the series, and to not have whole episodes or arcs dedicated to it. In fact I remember reading that the kiss as the end of the last episode was the very first time a lesbian kiss has been shown on the program (compared to presumably thousands of straight kissing scenes between acceptable straight companions) so if anything it was underplayed, surely? How else do you naturally and realistically depict a lesbian without showing her ever doing anything remotely lesbian? Especially when you wouldn't hold straight characters to the same standards? Is she supposed to be sexless? Isnt that basically saying "I'm fine with it as long as they don't rub it in my face"?

Now, I'm not for a second saying the posters in question are bigots, naturally, but it's quite possible that they've just fallen into the comfort trap. People tend to see anything that deviates from what they're used to as "standing out" whilst everything they are just blends into the background. The one unfunny female on a panel show for example, as opposed to the three unfunny males. For this reason alone people do need to be forcibly confronted with change for changes sake. Not all the time, of course, but at opportune moments where it's likely to have a positive impact...And personally, I can't see a moment more opportune than the casting of a new actor in the role of a shapeshifting alien, after years of deliberately establishing the canonical possibility of gender shifting.

Eventually people will get used to it, and move onto the next controversial show ruining change.
 
Last edited:
Silva said:
The reaction on the Doctor Who subreddit, where the actual whovian nerds congregate has been overwhelmingly positive. It's places like the daily mail comments sections where the most complaints are to be found. That's why the only plausible conclusion is that the criticism is born in bigotry, people who have previously shown feck all interest in anything doctor who getting their tiny balls in a twist because a woman took the role.
Click to expand...

Paradoxically, the only DM comments I've seen on this (posted by @Jippy further up) were being generally supportive and having a go at the DM for posting nudey shots of her. Which was a surprise.
 
Problem-free Philosophy said:
Absolutely. Just to clarify, my problem isn't with Marvel or anyone else trying to increase diversity in their product, it's specifically the mass adaptation of existing characters (many of which are iconic) at the expense of existing fans of the series, some of which will almost certainly fall within these so-called minorities themselves. I'd like to think that most fans of these comics aren't thinking in terms of 'Iron Man is a womanising, rich, white, male', and more that 'Iron Man is cool, smart and attacks bad guys'.

As a few have commented, if people care deeply enough to want a character with a politically-correct background then new characters ought to be created for that purpose. Marvel have introduced a number of these as well (e.g. Ms Marvel) so I don't know why they still feel the need to modify existing characters. It's not just one or two of the traditional characters, either, it's practically all of them.

As you say, though, the more pertinent issue is people focusing too much on labelling one other instead of actually debating things properly (e.g. political issues more important than comic books and TV show castings, such as immigration and religion). People seem to bracket themselves in one group and dismiss the other side by default, it's just hugely unhelpful.



I've not seen the film, but based on the synopsis surely the point is that the Tooth Fairy is as counter-stereotype as possible? For maximum, ahem, comedic effect, he must appear unsuitable for the task at hand, much like Vin Diesel in The Pacifier. Then they can miraculously turn it around etc. etc. In either case they seem appropriately cast for the role, again albeit due to the stereotypes making that so.

The controversy seems to kick in most when political correctness alone is used as a justification/driver for change, rather than simply being in place to assure that the change can happen if needed. In such cases, it's Equality of Outcome instead of Equality of Opportunity. It's not obvious whether the BBC have made this decision because they have identified an opportunity to improve the show (in which case, great), or whether they have simply done it to appear more PC (not so great, in my opinion, and far more likely to annoy fans of the series). Obviously you'd get people complaining either way. I think most of the complaints I've seen have came from people who have perceived the decision to be made purely because of PC reasons. They're entitled to their complaint as a result.

For what it's worth I agree that it's a sad state of affairs when something like this is announced and instead of discussing the merits of the actress and potential storylines etc. the arguments become gender-based.
Click to expand...

Marvel and other comic companies have always, throughout their long histories, made drastic changes to their main characters. Then they almost always revert to the original versions or near original. They need to do these things to enable them to change things up and tell new stories. It's not new and it's not about political correctness.

There was a Lois Lane comic in 1970 when she became a black woman for example. Captain/Ms Marvel was created in the 60s and has been male and female.

The idea that after 60 years and 13 regenerations/recasts an alien shape-shifter is to be played by a woman only as a nod to political correctness - rather than that it's fairly likely to have happened given women make up the majority of our population - show that too many people have a bee in their bonnet about this PC bogeyman rather than accepting change.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Paradoxically, the only DM comments I've seen on this (posted by @Jippy further up) were being generally supportive and having a go at the DM for posting nudey shots of her. Which was a surprise.
Click to expand...
Yeah that was a bit surprising, especially given mail online's fetish for that kind of article. I think they ran a similar one when Matt Smith did a nude scene.
 
Silva said:
Not really. The complaints started before the film even came out and the majority of the hate was aimed at the black one.
Click to expand...
really?

I was sure the hate started when the 1st teaser and trailer was released. Due to it being awful looking

Im sure there was a few idiots, but in the most it was because it was rubbish. Or nostalgic fans who just simply wanted to see the old cast again
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Paradoxically, the only DM comments I've seen on this (posted by @Jippy further up) were being generally supportive and having a go at the DM for posting nudey shots of her. Which was a surprise.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the vehemence with which they slated that piece was pleasantly surprising. This is the second worst rated comment. You'd almost think their readers are normal, if you read that one article in isolation.

Jignu, Jester, United Kingdom, 10 hours ago

Stupid b..tch
 
Randall Flagg said:
really?

I was sure the hate started when the 1st teaser and trailer was released. Due to it being awful looking

Im sure there was a few idiots, but in the most it was because it was rubbish. Or nostalgic fans who just simply wanted to see the old cast again
Click to expand...
Bad films are released every single day without a fraction of the backlash. More often than not they just fade to nothing without anyone caring. But, because it was women playing roles men have previously played there was a huge abusive campaign against it.
 
Silva said:
Bad films are released every single day without a fraction of the backlash. More often than not they just fade to nothing without anyone caring. But, because it was women playing roles men have previously played there was a huge abusive campaign against it.
Click to expand...
big difference between a hugely popular movie from the 80's like ghostbusters and just some random shit movie

You might have missed the backlash the Star Wars Prequels got. And Indiana Jones too. Fans still havent forgiven them for these
 
Silva said:
Bad films are released every single day without a fraction of the backlash. More often than not they just fade to nothing without anyone caring. But, because it was women playing roles men have previously played there was a huge abusive campaign against it.
Click to expand...
No, it's because they remade a classic movie and made it really really shit. There was some people moaning about the female parts, but the main reason there was a backlash was because it's a cult classic.
 
altodevil86 said:
No, it's because they remade a classic movie and made it really really shit. There was some people moaning about the female parts, but the main reason there was a backlash was because it's a cult classic.
Click to expand...
exactly

Its hilarious how people are desperate to find things that are not there

Off course you are always going to get idiots on twitter and forums. but in general it was because their favourite movie was getting ruined. And they turned out to be correct
 
Randall Flagg said:
big difference between a hugely popular movie from the 80's like ghostbusters and just some random shit movie

You might have missed the backlash the Star Wars Prequels got. And Indiana Jones too. Fans still havent forgiven them for these
Click to expand...
There wasn't a fraction of the backlash to those movies. And they certainly wasn't accompanied by racial epithets and rape threats.

altodevil86 said:
No, it's because they remade a classic movie and made it really really shit. There was some people moaning about the female parts, but the main reason there was a backlash was because it's a cult classic.
Click to expand...
Then why did the racial epithets and rape threats start before anyone saw the film?
 
Randall Flagg said:
really?

I was sure the hate started when the 1st teaser and trailer was released. Due to it being awful looking

Im sure there was a few idiots, but in the most it was because it was rubbish. Or nostalgic fans who just simply wanted to see the old cast again
Click to expand...

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/jul/10/paul-feig-twitter-ghostbusters-remake-haters

A week before the trailer came out.

https://m.facebook.com/ghostbusters...d=854407224599872&offset=0&total_comments=360

2 years before it did

Randall Flagg said:
I dont think a woman has ever made me laugh unless its one of those fail clips when the fall over or hurt themselves

I will be giving this a miss
Click to expand...

Or how about your post from the Caf announcement thread?
 
Last edited:
Silva said:
There wasn't a fraction of the backlash to those movies. And they certainly wasn't accompanied by racial epithets and rape threats.


Then why did the racial epithets and rape threats start before anyone saw the film?
Click to expand...


the backlash to star wars prequels was way, way bigger than ghostbusters

And it still is ffs
 
Silva said:
The original Ghostbusters are shit too though. It's not like they remade the fecking godfather using a flipphone camera.
Click to expand...
never underestimate super fans of older franchises

The 1st Ghostbusters was one of the most popular movies ever made
 
Silva said:
Never underestimate how many hundreds of millions of people are massive, massive bigots.

It's still a shit film though.
Click to expand...

there always has been and there always will be.

But most people were just butthurt that their favourite movie as a kid was going to be shit.
 
I've not watched the show for a few years, after it disappeared completely up its own arse. Hopefully this will give it a shot in the arm. She's a good actress, hope she does well.
 
Silva said:
There wasn't a fraction of the backlash to those movies. And they certainly wasn't accompanied by racial epithets and rape threats.
Click to expand...
The Star Wars prequels did cause a bit of a race storm. Remember in China they made the black character really small in the movie poster, whereas in the UK and US ones he was much bigger and clearly a lead character?
 
Randall Flagg said:
because the fans wanted the old cast

Keep up
Click to expand...
That's extraordinarily stupid. The complaints were that they cast women, not they wanted a bunch of 60-70 year olds running around new york.

The film itself turnout to be no worse than the majority of the shitty blockbusters we've seen over the past decade and a half - with one difference.
 
The Ghostbusters remake was a completely average, but decently enjoyable remake, no worse than Ghostbusters 2. People overstate how bad it was in an attempt to justify how nasty the backlash was from the moment the film was announced. A trailer doesn't become the 9th most disliked video on Youtube because of superfans. Come on.
 
When it comes to online backlashes I always think there's a reservoir of misogynist assholes created by the whole "ethics in video game journalism" kerfuffle who spent almost every waking hour online and are ready and waiting to be unleashed whenever a suitable cause can be found. The Ghostbusters and Dr Who stuff is right up their alley, so it's no surprise they piled on in both scenarios.

Conversely, there's a whole bunch of people from the opposite extreme, politically, just waiting to kick the shit out of anyone who dares to criticise the decision to feck with a format they know and love. Which creates an environment where people will get afraid to post certain opinions, for fear of being piled on and labelled as a bigot.

Of course, the type of person mentioned in my first paragraph aren't afraid to post an opinion at all. They live for that shit. So the whole thing quickly descends into a ridiculous bickerathon, from everyone from both political extremes comes out of the various exchanges looking like assholes. Which is ironic, because the reason they get involved in the first place is because they care desperately about how they are perceived online. In fact, they clearly care far too much.
 
Based on the IMDb reviews, a lot of men on the internet (who may or may not have actually seen the film) really hate the new “Ghostbusters.” A lot of women on the internet (who may or may not have actually seen the film) seem pretty into it. Based on the Metacritic score and the average Rotten Tomatoes scores, “Ghostbusters,” like most summer movies, is merely a mediocre-to-good film, critically speaking. And based on the Rotten Tomatoes scores for top critics, professional critics are split on whether it’s worth seeing. But based on the larger pool of critics, three out of four of them think it’s worth a ticket.
Click to expand...

That's what 538 wrote about ghostbusters before it was actually released anywhere (based on user reviews on aggregate sites like IMDB).
 
Randall Flagg said:
didnt most people complain about ghostbusters because it was a pile of shit?
Click to expand...
To be fair, a lot of people wrote it off as shit when the cast was announced. They even acknowledged that in the film when one of them read a YouTube comment saying something like "ain't no bitches gonna catch no ghosts".

I think the shitness was more due to the script personally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.