|
|
|
|
#1
03-14-2010, 11:32 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Doctor Who was originally on-air between November 23rd 1963 and December 6th 1989, which makes 26 years for those of us who aren't maths whizzes.
 A television movie was co-produced with Fox and Universal in 1996. A range of novels covering continuing stories - the "New Adventures" was published by Virgin between 1991 (starting with Timewyrm: Genesis) and 1997 (last book published was So Vile A Sin, but, IIRC, the last in-sequence was The Dying Days). A range of BBC tie-in novels covering continuing stories for the Eighth Doctor of the TV Movie, Paul McGann, was produced between 1997 (The Eight Doctors by Terrance Dicks) and 2005 (The Gallifrey Chronicles, by Lance Parkin). Both book series were paired by a run of books chronicling stories for previous Doctors, often slotted in-between their on-screen serials. The New Adventures were paired with the Missing Adventures, and the Eighth Doctor Adventures with the Past Doctor Adventures. Big Finish Productions have been producing past- and Eighth Doctor audio plays since The Sirens of Time which came out in about 1999. There were also two stand alone Dalek films in the 1960s starring Peter Cushing as the human scientist, "Doctor Who". There was also a 1979 (?) TV spin-off pilot for a series called K9 and Company. Oh, and Telos Publishing, which was set up in 2001, have published some DW novellas; I think the only other spin-off matter worth mentioning from before the revival is BBV. So uh, does that answer your question?
__________________
O to be wafted away From this black aceldama of sorrow; Where the dust of an earthy today Is the earth of a dusty tomorrow! 
|
|
#2
03-17-2010, 02:14 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzDyh...eature=related
After watching sfdebris' review of "Tuvix" a number of times the following occurs to me... PNQ: Was it necessary to present the story such that Janeway had to execute Tuvix? That's exactly what that was. Tuvix had committed no crime, and she executed him! Being reminded that the alien symbiogenetic plant was still within Tuvix's body, I couldn't help but wonder why they couldn't have had the plant slowly kill him. After all, when the plant fuses other plants it never becomes part of the third species itself. And having a plant inside our bodies would sure cause trouble, right? If the plant was killing Tuvix anyway, the separation back into the component species would avoid the moral dilemma, right?
__________________
mudshark: Nate's just being...Nate. Zeke: It comes nateurally to him. mudshark: I don't expect Nate to make sense, really -- it's just a bad idea. Sa'ar Chasm on the 5M.net forum: Sit back, relax, and revel in the insanity. Adam Savage: I reject your reality and substitute my own! Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. Crow T. Robot: Oh, stop pretending there's a plot. Don't cheapen yourself further.
|
|
#3
03-19-2010, 04:19 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Well, but then people get annoyed that the writers went with the easy way out to avoid forcing their characters to come to a hard decision about the little dilemma that has been building through the episode. And given that there's already criticism that the show suffered from cop-outs in the form of endless shuttles and torpedoes and such, that would probably be a worse way to go.
__________________
My 5MV webpages My novel fivers list Yup “There must have been a point in early human history when it was actually advantageous to, when confronted with a difficult task, drop it altogether and go do something more fun, because I do that way too often for it to be anything but instinct.” -- Isto Combs
|
|
#4
03-29-2010, 03:13 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
So I'm in a chat and we're talking about pizza toppings. One person says they like ranch dressing on their pizza.
PNQ: Is this a common choice? Or is this person a few shuttles short of an Intrepid-class starship?
__________________
mudshark: Nate's just being...Nate. Zeke: It comes nateurally to him. mudshark: I don't expect Nate to make sense, really -- it's just a bad idea. Sa'ar Chasm on the 5M.net forum: Sit back, relax, and revel in the insanity. Adam Savage: I reject your reality and substitute my own! Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. Crow T. Robot: Oh, stop pretending there's a plot. Don't cheapen yourself further.
|
|
#5
03-29-2010, 05:27 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Talking from experience in the pizza industry, I can say that the practice is not unheard of. In fact, some of my co-workers have been known to eat pizza dipped in ranch dressing. It sounds bizarre to me, though.
__________________
“Allow me to show you the door!” (Points) “Look. The door. It’s the wooden thing with the knob.” –Pancho, The Asparagus of La Mancha , VeggieTales Candace: (gasp) The square root of 'soon' is 'never'! The Doctor: It was all in the job title: Head of human resources. Lance: This time, it's personnel. To God be the glory. ><>
|
|
#6
03-31-2010, 08:50 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
So I'm at the Wikipedia List of Superheroes and Villains Without Superpowers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ut_superpowers And a few of these entries don't really seem like "superheroes" per se. Just being a protagonist in a universe that defies the normal laws of physics doesn't seem like justification for the "superhero" moniker, if you ask me. Here is my list of those on that page that don't qualify for the title, in my opinion. Discuss. While we're at it... PNQ: How do you define "superhero?" James Bond. What, is he supposed to have superseduction powers or something? Lara Croft. Seriously? Just being an "adventure archaeologist" (as TV Tropes calls them) doesn't mean you're a "superhero." Ditto for Indiana Jones. Sherlock Holmes. Oh, come on. You could make arguments for Zorro (who is also on this list), but Sherlock Holmes? MacGyver. Awesome human being, but not a superhero. Kim Possible. Well, this is a sticky widget. Yes, she's basically James Bond crossed with Lara Croft, but she does have a bona fide "rogue's gallery" which is a necessary component for the title. In fact, if she had a "secret identity" I'd be a lot more in favor of granting her the title.
__________________
mudshark: Nate's just being...Nate. Zeke: It comes nateurally to him. mudshark: I don't expect Nate to make sense, really -- it's just a bad idea. Sa'ar Chasm on the 5M.net forum: Sit back, relax, and revel in the insanity. Adam Savage: I reject your reality and substitute my own! Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. Crow T. Robot: Oh, stop pretending there's a plot. Don't cheapen yourself further.
|
|
#7
04-03-2010, 03:48 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
A superhero should have one or more super qualities and should succeed, with super-high stakes, at heroic tasks where it would be ridiculous to expect a normal human being to succeed.
Roughly speaking. I wouldn't consider anyone on your list to be a superhero(ine), barring K. I. which I really don't know anything about.
__________________
My 5MV webpages My novel fivers list Yup “There must have been a point in early human history when it was actually advantageous to, when confronted with a difficult task, drop it altogether and go do something more fun, because I do that way too often for it to be anything but instinct.” -- Isto Combs
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
