FAIL The First:
Empire Magazine tried to recreate the iconic Shatner/Nimoy picture from the 1960s using the new actors from the upcoming Trek movie. The results? Meh.
 |
I have some experience with photography, but how much does it take to do things like get the angle and lighting right? The new shot is plastic looking and two-dimensional. I have been harboring deeply-hidden pessimistic thoughts about the new Trek movie, and this picture brings them to the surface.
The movie better be good. Unlike that picture.
FAIL the Second:
io9 reports that Doctor Who fans tend to support McCain over Obama.
What can I say there? Oh yeah: FAIL. I mean, c’mon, that must be wrong. McCain would have regenerated by now.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Why anyone expects a movie that is a remake of a classic franchise with all the parts recast to be anything but a train wreck is honestly beyond me.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
You just know that Spock is waiting to carve off Kirks scalp and stick his thumbs in his brain so he can find out how he gets all the babes.
As for the photo, I agree.. no personality in the new one. The movie; I have no problem with a fresh perspective in the Trek universe. Let’s face it, some hard core fans would think that the Enterprise should have vacuum tubes in the electronics. Making it more tangible, and less magic-y will go a long way to bringing back those scared away by Voyager and the last season of Enterprise.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
i already figured that wasn’t going to work when they cast Simon Pegg as Scotty. As much as i like him as an actor, i REALLY don’t think that’s gonna work
and what is it with Vulkans increasingly looking less vulkan-like…? (and yes, i judge vulkan-ness by the similarity to Spock and Sarek. the high cheekbones are a basic requirement!!)
[/nerdmode]
October 28th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
I don’t think he looks very Spock like. Kirk I’m iffy on. But I think they got a great actor for Scotty.
I’m a Who fan for the O.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
The Spock looks ok (the guys from Heros?) but the Kirk is all wrong. Hope he’s a good actor and not just a pretty-boy. And yeah, just getting that angle right would have made it better. Sigh.
Hope we’re wrong. Hope it’s awesome.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
The new guys look way too airbrushed…
October 28th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
oh, pegg is a great actor… well ok. he’s got thehumor to pull of scotty. i’m just bitter, that’s all :-p
but i HATE the treatment vulkans have gotten over the last few movies/series…. they’ve just started looking less vulkan-ish. how hard is it to find arrogant-looking actors with high cheekbones in hollywood…?
October 28th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
I am looking forward to the movie, but know going in it will not be the same. I will approach it with a fresh perspective, but I will not expect it to replace Shatner and Nimoy.
Speaking just on the picture, you can tell that the angle and lighting is wrong. Shatner and Nimoy are looking up much more, around a 45 degree angle, while the new guys are looking lower, I’ll say 20 degrees.
The left side of Shatner and Nimoy faces fade into darkness, with Nimoy’s total darkened, while the new guys can clearly be seen.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
See. I told you it was better for me not to watch Dr.Who. I could have become a Republican.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
How hard would it be to have a new series set in the same general time period as the first Trek and have it be about a completly different ship & crew? Then the crew could even reference the exploits of the Enterprise crew as they went about doing their thing.
Like I’ll ever live to see that…..
Also a Who fan for Obama.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Spock always looked like he had an “oh, really?” expression, which I like: the face of skepticism.
This new dude’s brows are way down on his face, making him all weird/angry.
I sure hope they spent more money on script writers and acting talent than make-up artists…
October 28th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
I’m not sure it it’s the actors themselves or the photoshoppery, but their faces have no character. Maybe we should give these two another fifteen years and then try again…
October 28th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
If I had to guess…
The original shot was wide-angle (35mm focal length) from above at about 70 degrees to parallel, probably 3-4 feet away. The new shot is about 30 degrees to parallel with a focal length of about 70-80mm, probably 5-6 feet away. And the lighting: one flash umbrella off to the left in the original, and in the new shot an umbrella nearly face-on.
What this means, of course, is that the photographer didn’t nail it. Boo.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
EPIC FAIL LOLOLOLOLULZ
Are you a 4chan user, Phil? If not, why do you write like one?
October 28th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
Hmm… the new Spock has that “uncanny valley” look to him…
October 28th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Well.I.Will.Watch the movie.But.Picture.Not.Good.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
FAIL… God, it just looks so bad, so photoshopped. It really looks like they weren’t shot at the same time. And the shadows, were are the shadows???
October 28th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
“Spock always looked like he had an “oh, really?” expression, which I like: the face of skepticism”
yes, that’s what I was trying to get at. vulkans are supposed to be (and look) aloof and skeptical. this looks like an emo-vulkan.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
I’ve said it a million times. This movie looked like garbage from the start. Every picture I’ve seen has looked terrible. Not only the actors and the makeup, but just the presentation in general. I’ve always said that it looks like a sci-fi episode of Dawson’s Creek. Like seriously something that you’d see on UPN, it has that kind of low-budget, straight-to-network-television look to it. Instead of spending money to see this, I’m sure I’ll stay home and watch First Contact or something.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Left Spock looks inquisitive, right Spock looks suspicious. I see a skeptic turned into a cynic. Am I way off base here?
October 28th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
And I seem to be reiterating a point that was already made. Question answered!
October 28th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
I can’t wait to see this movie. It will be the most expensive Trek movie ever made, at over $180 Million. Abrams has said that there will be effects never seen before in a movie. Chill out. Relax, and give it a chance.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
If you’re a Democrat, you still watch the Sci Fi Channel, but your most favorite program is Tin Man, the twisted Wizard Of Oz retelling.
You gonna listen to a poll that posits that anyone liked that ill conceived piece of third-rate eel crap that was Tin Man?
October 28th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
“I’ve always said that it looks like a sci-fi episode of Dawson’s Creek”
pretty much everything with actors under 30 looks like dawson’s creek to me. Maybe i’m getting old (or hollywood/TV is getting even more formulaic)
October 28th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Well, I think it looks great and I’m looking forward to it. All the new Spock needs to do is cock an eyebrow and say “Indeed” and he’ll be golden.
Best thing about the new Kirk? Not Shatner.
Simon Pegg will out-Scotty Doohan.
You just wait and see. This is going to work.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
Skeptic FAIL
The fact that it’s the most popular show for Republicans surveyed does not mean that the viewers are mostly Republicans. That’s Statistics 101.
I’m reminded of those horrid “porn causes rape” “studies”. 90% of rapists view porn within 24 hours of committing their crime. So what? What’s important is what fraction of people view porn and then go on to commit rape, and that only matters relative to the population at large. A lot of us wonder if porn viewers are LESS likely to rape since they’ve, well, taken matters into their own hands and don’t have the same pressing needs as before. If so, shouldn’t we make sure that porn is freely available and socially acceptable?
Anyway, back to the original point. By the same logic we should ban food (99.9% of murderers ate something within 24 hours of committing their crime), or even breathing (100% of drunk drivers breathed within an hour of committing their crime!) Will nobody think of the children?
October 28th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Why does it look like Nimoy’s about to nibble sensuously on Shatner’s ear?
October 28th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Well, the picture has the right background color at least. The real test will be the first hand-to-hand fight Kirk gets into – if he doesn’t work in at least one throw and a good ol’ chop to the neck, then he’s a fail.
Who fan for McCain.
October 28th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Sili:
I’m guessing it’s to appeal to a large subset of Star Trek fanboys.
I keed! I keed!
October 28th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
It’s not just the lighting.
They look too young.
They need more facial lines. It adds character.
October 28th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Uh, Chris… the humor tag was checked. Note the joke I ended the post with.
October 28th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
I’m a Doctor Who fan, and I wholeheartedly supported John McCain. Unfortunately, the Master implanted a mind-control device in his face (in the anomalous lump on the left side) in an effort to totally wreck the US, following closely on the heels of his previous efforts in his latest incarnation going under the name of “Karl Rove”. The mind-control device is undoubtedly working, considering that McCain has completely lost touch with reality and “chosen” the utterly incompetent Sarah Palin for his running mate. I guess I’ll just have to vote for Obama and Biden…
October 28th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
PHOTOSHOP!
Sorry, couldn’t resist. Frankly, the photo on the right does look 2-dimensional, like what would happen if you took two separate photos and tried to merge them to look like the original.
I’m going with that premise — it’s just a bad photoshop job.
STAR TREK FTW.
October 28th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Some of us got the joke…a new Star Trek movie with younger actors….pfffthbt!
October 28th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
That really is just a bad photo, nothing more. Blame the photog and the producer that approved its use.
For me, the outstanding reason I want to see this film is that Shatner is not in it! That alone proves their interest in making it something new and interesting.
October 28th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
So…the new movie is all about how Kirk and Spock meet at Starfleet Academy, right? And all the wacky and fun goings-on with aliens and whatnot there, until they, say, *graduate*? And actually get out into the real world and start putting on weight and getting wrinkles?
And, yeah, where’s the tilted eyebrow? Where’s the arm-on-hip? Where are the crossed arms that say, “Whoa, dude, I’m Captain James Tiberius Kirk and I am The Man.”?
(Aside from the improper angle, improper lighting, etc.)
October 28th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
I have a bad feeling about this movie, but for different reasons: The authors/producers/directors don’t know much about science, and they appear to be proud of this fact. They are responsible for “Armageddon”, after all. They also produce and write the Fox show “Fringe”, which has the most horridly bad technobabble I have experienced in a loooong time (one of the latest episode had a guy running around frying people with microwaves, which originated from radioactive isotopes in his blood. Microwaves=radiation=radioactivity. I kid you not).
As the great Isaac Asimov once said, I am of the opinion that a science fiction author should know about science, so that (s)he knows when (s)he breaks the rules. So far, there were people on Star Trek who knew about science, and who knew when they needed fiction to make the story work (they knew an electron beam could not throw you back in time, so they came up with chronitons or somesuch). It doesn’t matter if the movie is total nonsense, as long as the makers are aware it is (and to what degree. Again, there’s Asimov’s rule about only breaking one Natural Law(tm) at a time). But Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman don’t know any of that. They don’t know science, and they think it doesn’t matter.
October 28th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
@elgarak:
Umm, it’s science FICTION. Fiction>not real…
October 28th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Trek or Brokeback Mountain?
I’m not so sure anymore …
October 28th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
@Michael L.
Science Fiction. Equal weight.
I love Star Trek, although it’s very much fiction, and not very real science.
The problem is that Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman do not write science fiction. What they do is fantasy sciency fiction AKA bad fiction that looks like science fiction but isn’t.
And they don’t know they do it.
I don’t mind if people do pure fiction. I even like fantasy. But if you want to do science fiction, do not ignore the science part. It ends up being just bad, in my experience.
October 28th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
The Kirk in the new movie looks like, uh, Lord Lackbeard. (Thanks William!)
Captain of a tugboat, maybe? Haven’t seen the movie, of course, but it looks dismal so far.
Rich
October 28th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
Wow… spock and kirk… That looks like BAD COSPLAY!
October 28th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
The first photo – I don’t know, reminds me of a rap video freeze-frame. Fun
(darn, now I’ve got to search for the Star Trekking song again…)
The second photo – boooring. And I guess despite that, there’s someone, somewhere, proudly boasting that “today, we know how to make sure the lighting isn’t so harsh on the faces – I mean, you can hardly see the whole face in the original – and who uses wide-angle any more?”
October 28th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
>McCain would have regenerated by now.
What? We saw him die in the Doctor’s arms when he was Prime Minister Saxon!
October 28th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Looks more like Raumschiff Edelweiss (look it up on YouTube).
October 28th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
lol, thomas i think you’re right…
October 28th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
It’s life, Jim. But not as we know it…
October 28th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
That pic kind of reminds me of a certain franchise that went back to explore the origin of a certain Skywalker…’sigh’ Ok forget it.
October 28th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
I would have preferred moving Trek-on-screen forward in time rather then redoing the first series. Maybe a few decades after Picard’s retirement as a captain. You could do new stories with new characters in a new environment, and still have a chance at bringing in TNG characters for cameos. If done with the savvy and punch of DS9, I’d buy tickets.
I was hoping that the new film would do to the Trek franchise what the two latest Bond films have done to that franchise. It may yet, but I fear coming-of-age movie with lots of Big Shiny Noisy Things. The best Trek is about fulfulling the promise of humanity. Let’s see what happens here.
Meanwhile, the world of Trek has been carrying on quite nicely in the Trek novels, which I freely admit I read. (A mixed bag in terms of quality, but some measure up to any top-line adventure paperbacks on the market.) In particular, Our Favorite Heroes have aged, been reassigned, married, died, etc., in the novels. And, right now, things are looking bad for the Federation.
October 28th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Also logic fail.
“Many Republicans like Doctor Who” does not imply “Most Doctor Who fans are Republican”.
October 28th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Chris:
That’s io9 fail. Phil accurately represented the content of the io9 article, which as you note inaccurately represents the content of the Nielsen report.
elgarak: The other problem is that they don’t know Trek. Abrams in particular seems to lack respect for the source material. I’m really pessimistic about this film.
And what’s with Kirk’s black shirt?
October 28th, 2008 at 6:16 pm
The lighting difference is surely intentional. They didn’t want to hide the pretty new boys in the shadows. They’re also building on the homoerotic vibe of the original.
This is marketing, not art.
October 28th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
What homoerotic vibe?
October 28th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Sorry, but that pic is a little too sausagey for Star Trek.
October 28th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
I don’t think they’re trying to recreate the original image for the original audience (who would want it identical), they’re trying to recreate it for the current audience (who want pretty boys with flawless faces that are illuminated to show them off to best effect).
October 28th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
And also the current audience likely wouldn’t want the womanizing and racism of the original series. Or so I can hope.
October 28th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
@zandperl
I would agree with you if this were the press release for Anal Rampage VIII, but not Star Trek.
October 28th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
I’ve said it a million times. This movie looked like garbage from the start. Every picture I’ve seen has looked terrible. Not only the actors and the makeup, but just the presentation in general. I’ve always said that it looks like a sci-fi episode of Dawson’s Creek. Like seriously something that you’d see on UPN, it has that kind of low-budget, straight-to-network-television look to it.
Cap’n! The readings! They’re off the scale!
BOOOOOOOM!
Oh, thanks! That’s another hyperbole meter blown to bits.
October 28th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
Kirk and no women in every port.
NNNNOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
October 28th, 2008 at 7:02 pm
And also the current audience likely wouldn’t want the womanizing and racism of the original series.
Dude, are you high? TOS was a groundbreaking series on the racial front. Martin Luther King *personally* encouraged Nichelle Nichols to remain with the show when she was thinking of leaving. They had a Russian navigator at the height of the Cold War. The whole point of the Starfleet was to meet new races! Seriously, weed, H or blow before you posted?
October 28th, 2008 at 7:02 pm
Maybe instead running into on his exes this time he can be actuall picking them up so they can be on his exes in the future.
October 28th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Here is on his pick up lines “your nacelle or mine”
October 28th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
@Chris.
Agreed. Look at “M:I III” (or, as I called it “Alias – The movie”).
October 28th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Down fanboi! Down!
I like what I see so far. Why? Because it’s not he same old sh*t we’ve seen for decades.
October 28th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
RL Says:
“Well, the picture has the right background color at least. The real test will be the first hand-to-hand fight Kirk gets into – if he doesn’t work in at least one throw and a good ol’ chop to the neck, then he’s a fail.”
Don’t forget the ripping off of the shirt. Gotta have his shirt ripped off in that fight. hehe
October 28th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Geez, you guys seem pretty harsh. I personally think Zachary Quinto (the new Spock) looks so much like a young Leonard Nemoy it’s creepy.
I wouldn’t base an opinion on the quality of the film from a promotional photo taken by a magazine not affiliated with the movie.
October 28th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
Nemo said: “And what’s with Kirk’s black shirt?”
Abrams has stated that this will be an integral part of the plot of the movie.
October 28th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
The expectations are so high that the likelihood is that most people are bound to be disappointed. Then again, if anyone’s like me, their expectations are low because 1) I’m really not interested in rebooting this, 2) I, unlike most people, don’t think J.J. Abrams is the second coming. I could think of about 15 other people I would rather have seen write/direct this.
October 28th, 2008 at 9:14 pm
Why are they wearing long johns? If we pan down will we see the underoos? It would be pretty cool if they slid around the ship in those pajamas with the feet on them.
Dude, are you high? TOS was a groundbreaking series on the racial front.< /i>
The original show may have been groundbreaking on earth. But if you watch closely, you can see clear anti-Klingite overtones.
October 28th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
I can’t credit that Doctor Who= McCain supporter. I’m a regular at http://www.doctorwhoforum.com and the people there who post in the Tenth Planet’s political threads overwhelmingly support Obama.
October 28th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
I like Zachary Quinto for Spock, as well as Simon Pegg. But Abrams, bleh. And yeah, I’m not really keen on the whole reboot concept, either.
Let me quote from Abrams’ quote in the linked article: “For me, the costumes were a microcosm of the entire project, which was how to take something that’s kind of silly and make it feel real. But how do you make legitimate those near-primary colour costumes?”
This I think betrays a lack of both imagination and historic perspective. He says the costumes are silly, because he’s looking at them with turn-of-the-21st century eyes. But Trek is set hundreds of years from now. Look back at what people were wearing several hundred years ago, and tell me, honestly, that those outfits weren’t ten times as ridiculous. Then look at what we’re wearing now — ties, non-functional lapels, high heels — and tell me that’s not silly. That’s fashion. If anything, costume design for SF ought to get more outrageous, not less.
Of course I realize as I say this that the brightly-colored shirts were just chosen to show up nicely on then-new color TVs. But there’s no reason you can’t also accept them (not explain, because they don’t require explanation or justification) in an in-story way.
October 28th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
I don’t mind the actor from Heroes, but if they get the science consultant from Heroes, I’ll kill myself. I like Heroes very much, but it would be much better had they explained away everyone’s special powers as given to them by a magic roll of toilet paper, rather than trying to tell us that all these people just happened to instantly “evolve” powers like flying, time travel, and anger induced thermonuclear reactions. The science in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles is compelling in comparison.
October 28th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
Sorry, I’m watching Heroes right now, if you couldn’t tell.
October 28th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Well, it could be worse… George Lucas could be directing it…
October 28th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Or Michael Bay could directing it.
October 28th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
BTW… those that think TOS was anything more than cheese seriously need to “Get a Life! (TM)”
Now, if you’ll excuse, I’m going to watch “Fringe”.
October 28th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
Sylar doing a mind-meld? That could work.
October 28th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
the wide angle in the original shot intensified the subjects’ stance and enlarged their faces with respect to their bodies, giving an unusual emotional impact. the lighting exaggerated their features, deliberately showcasing the contours and imperfections of their expressions, instead of smoothing out the skin.
the actors have adopted their respective personas — shatner has a wild, mischievous look, especially in the eyess, that he often used when depicting alter egos or loss of control in episodes like ‘mirror, mirror’. nimoy is again using his eyebrows to underscore an a look that is both incredulous and aggressive. shatner’s folded arms and nimoy’s hands on his waist both say they’re defiant and looking for trouble.
the new image is indifferent in setup and emotion, plastic in execution and post processing. it’s not just wrong — it displays an unforgiveable ignorance of a huge portion of star trek’s character development and meaning.
October 29th, 2008 at 12:11 am
Second photo looks like the cover of a low-rent gay porn movie. Entertaining, perhaps, but not confidence-inspiring.
October 29th, 2008 at 1:11 am
Speaking of Mr. Spock:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1081211/X-marks-Spock-scientists-claim-Earth-like-planets-hidden-solar-Vulcans-lived.html
October 29th, 2008 at 1:51 am
You are going to destroy it for yourself if you keep comparing it to the old stuff. Forget the old stuff. It is old for a reason. The reason being, it is old. It is easy to hate any movie if you go in looking for what you hate. Just keep an open mind, and take it as it is. Yes it is a cheesy picture, because you are making a comparison. Come to think of it the old photo is cheesy too.
I mean, has anyone watched any of the re-runs of the old series ? The sets are bad, the costumes are bad, the acting is bad. I liked it when I was a kid, because there was nothing to compare it to. Now we just compare every little thing and it spoils everything. I am going in to this film with an open mind and zero expectation, that way I might actually enjoy it.
October 29th, 2008 at 4:53 am
Oh, I don’t know. I think it’s still a faithful recreation of the first photo, though the new Kirk ought to have a gold shirt. I’m very curious what the black shirt is about.
October 29th, 2008 at 4:55 am
“I mean, has anyone watched any of the re-runs of the old series ? The sets are bad, the costumes are bad, the acting is bad. I liked it when I was a kid, because there was nothing to compare it to”
The ACTING bad? I beg to differ!
Sure, there was over the top moments, especially Shatner’s overexaggerated pauses (a big example are his remarks on resting on a lovely planet in “The Immunity Syndrome).
But many times, the acting is very well done. Often, it was the redeeming factor.
October 29th, 2008 at 5:37 am
pcarini Says:
“I’m not sure it it’s the actors themselves or the photoshoppery, buttheir faces have no character. Maybe we should give these two another fifteen years and then try again…”
That was my first thought as well… from the looks of the age of the actors, it will probably look more like a series on a kid’s channel… the “High School Musical” for nerdy 12 year olds. Seriously, those guys don’t look any more than 19. It goes back to Hollywood favoring the young, no matter how badly they portray a character.
This is going to be so cheesy… I know I shouldn’t judge a movie by ONE plastic looking picture with overly pretty faces, but Kirk’s voice will probably still be changing in it.
October 29th, 2008 at 5:46 am
Ok… looks like Eric Bana and Simon Pegg are in it…. can’t be that bad then. I just can’t figure out the choice for Kirk.
October 29th, 2008 at 7:11 am
I suspect a lot of Daleks watch Dr. Who to gather intell for their next invasion. I could understand why they would support McCain.
EXTERMINATE in Oh-Eight
October 29th, 2008 at 7:39 am
That picture looks like a couple of Trekkies who wanted to do a mockup – the uniforms don’t look real, and those eyebrows are ridiculous.
Wasn’t this a photo booth at DragonCon?
October 29th, 2008 at 7:56 am
I’ll admit, I’m no fan of Star Trek, but at least give the proper deference to a series that popularized sci-fi television in America! If you’re going to have the hubris to try to copycat a classic photo, at least spend the time and effort to get it right!
October 29th, 2008 at 8:14 am
DON’T PANIC! (Doctor Who fans) If you go to the website ( http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/media_entertainment/do-dems-and-gopers-respond-to-tv-shows-differently/ ) – it’s actually a measurement of *engagement* “…the amount of attention paid to a television program by the average viewer” AND more importantly:
“…the cable programs that received the highest overall engagement scores…also received the most bipartisan support, drawing high engagement scores from viewers of both parties, as well as from viewers who identify as political “Independents.”
So actually Doctor Who appeals to the masses, including Republicans (maybe they’re learning something
)
So I say FIE to FAIL and Long(er) Live the Doctor!
October 29th, 2008 at 8:43 am
>>So actually Doctor Who appeals to the masses, including Republicans (maybe they’re learning something
)
Sweet! Slightly less fail now – makes more sense. Seriously though? Conservatives enjoy the show that brought the world Captain Jack Harkness?
XP
October 29th, 2008 at 10:05 am
@IR, I can’t speak for all conservatives but the answer is yes.
October 29th, 2008 at 10:13 am
I wonder if the original is somewhat of a standard composition, and if the cover artists were honoring it. They did several variations of this one, and I always liked it.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/101/279565165_fbdc3120db.jpg
October 29th, 2008 at 10:43 am
I get the impression this movie is going to be like that awful Batman film where he goes off to Tibet and gets all zenny and stuff. Seems like all these remakes do is load up old characters with the latest hip teenage angst and pop psychology, a few gazillion bucks worth of crappy CGI effects, and a whopping great marketing blitz.
Pffft! Rotten kids, get off my lawn!
October 29th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
The worst news of all is David Tennent quitting as Dr Who tonight at the British Television Awards.
Only 5 hours of him left if you believe RTD.
Mind you, the BBC have done such a job with his PR that we won’t really know until someone else regenerates.
October 30th, 2008 at 8:41 am
Phil if you think that’s bad, wait until you see the pics of the bridge. It looks like a freaking Apple store–lots of obnoxious white plastic, garish spotlights, pretentious architecture and needless panels of glass. Yeechhhh.
October 31st, 2008 at 2:48 am
Huh! This picture is clearly a FAKE. The shadows aren’t parallel and I don’t see any stars at all and how can the breathe without space suits if they are really in outer space?
October 31st, 2008 at 10:23 pm
kuhnigget ….. mate all that ‘zenny’ stuff in the last Batman (before current) … is all ripped straight out of the comics. It is not added to appease kids, its there to appease fans. As far as I am concerned (being a rabid fan of Batman …. and comics in general ) the last two Batman films were the closest to the true Batman stories. Fair enough if you didn’t like it, but compared to the rest of the Batman stuff, it is A-grade. CGI is good. Story is good. Mum liked it. pwned.