Yes, but Adams made the destruction of the human race into an event of Pythonesque silliness, which is the same approach he brought to Doctor Who as writer and script editor. There's some horrific stuff going down in The Pirate Planet, but what everyone remembers is that it's one of the funniest episodes in all of Who.
Adams made the destruction of the human race into an event of Pythonesque silliness, which is the same approach he brought to Doctor Who as writer and script editor.
So you're saying that, to you, style is more important than substance? And you have a personal preference for grimdark family entertainment over the light-hearted or comedic*? That's fair enough, for you, but Doctor Who is reasonably popular as it is.
There's some horrific stuff going down in The Pirate Planet, but what everyone remembers is that it's one of the funniest episodes in all of Who.
Also, I think you might have mixed up the serial titles? Possibly you meant City of Death, although I don't know anyone who thinks of it as a barrel of laughs the way you describe either.
* I separate light-hearted from comedic because pointed satire, such as Adams and Python were capable of producing, is generally not "silliness".
So you're saying that, to you, style is more important than substance?
No, I'm saying that when you assess the tone of a story, you look at the tone of the story and not the content. The Life of Brian, H2G2 and Blackadder are all light comedies no matter how many bloodbaths the stories involve because the bloodbaths are treated as a source of humor and not horror. Arthur Dent spends all of one line grieving the destruction of the Earth before we get on with the jokes -- that's not grimdark.
And you have a personal preference for grimdark family entertainment over the light-hearted or comedic*?
I made no such claim.
That's fair enough, for you, but Doctor Who is reasonably popular as it is.
There is no unitary "Doctor Who". The series has changed constantly. I'm making a historical point that one such change occurred in 1978 when the BBC received high profile complaints about the series becoming too grimdark for children, and shifted the tone in a lighter direction.
Also, I think you might have mixed up the serial titles? Possibly you meant City of Death, although I don't know anyone who thinks of it as a barrel of laughs the way you describe either.
No, I mean The Pirate Planet, the story about a planet-turned-space ship that goes around gobbling up other worlds regardless of whether they're inhabited or not. Prior to the Time War, this was the story with the highest death count in all of Doctor Who. But you don't even remember that part in favor of the comedy.
Life of Brian, H2G2 and Blackadder are all light comedies no matter how many bloodbaths the stories involve because the bloodbaths are treated as a source of humor and not horror
I guess they don't have graveyard humour where you come from then?
Arthur Dent spends all of one line grieving the destruction of the Earth before we get on with the jokes -- that's not grimdark.
Yes? Was there a point you were intending to make beyond the obvious?
I made no such claim.
OK. You didn't claim you like or dislike grimdark even though you seem to think it's preferable to other styles despite their substance... so it's not a claimed liking but merely a regularly expressed preference on your part.
I'm making a historical point that one such change occurred in 1978 when the BBC received high profile complaints about the series becoming too grimdark for children, and shifted the tone in a lighter direction.
What point were you making about that supposed history (which was actually Doctor Who returning to its more usual form after veering to an extreme)?
Prior to the Time War, this was the story with the highest death count in all of Doctor Who.
I honestly don't know how anyone would count that but I expect the fanboys have a league table somewhere for people who think comparing fictional genocides by body count is a useful or interesting thing to do.
But you don't even remember that part in favor of the comedy.
Don't I? o_O Bearing in mind that I already actively disclaimed this in my previous comment, and pointed out that it's not a common point of view amongst my acquaintance, there doesn't seem to be much use in saying it again even though it's still true.
OK. You didn't claim you like or dislike grimdark even though you seem to think it's preferable to other styles despite their substance... so it's not a claimed liking but merely a regularly expressed preference on your part.
I never said anything remotely like that. I never expressed a preference for one mode of Who over another. You are reading words that I did not write.
What point were you making about that supposed history (which was actually Doctor Who returning to its more usual form after veering to an extreme)?
Julesjones said that, given the things Doctor Who was getting away with at the time, it wasn't surprising Watership Down received a U. I'm pointing out that Watership Down came out the same year that Doctor Who stopped being able to get away with stuff like that.
I honestly don't know how anyone would count that but I expect the fanboys have a league table somewhere for people who think comparing fictional genocides by body count is a useful or interesting thing to do.
There are very few Doctor Who episodes in which whole planets are wiped out, let alone the dozens of planets that are destroyed as a background detail in The Pirate Planet.
no subject
Date: 2016-04-04 02:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-04-04 04:06 pm (UTC)So you're saying that, to you, style is more important than substance? And you have a personal preference for grimdark family entertainment over the light-hearted or comedic*? That's fair enough, for you, but Doctor Who is reasonably popular as it is.
There's some horrific stuff going down in The Pirate Planet, but what everyone remembers is that it's one of the funniest episodes in all of Who.
Also, I think you might have mixed up the serial titles? Possibly you meant City of Death, although I don't know anyone who thinks of it as a barrel of laughs the way you describe either.
* I separate light-hearted from comedic because pointed satire, such as Adams and Python were capable of producing, is generally not "silliness".
no subject
Date: 2016-04-04 05:54 pm (UTC)No, I'm saying that when you assess the tone of a story, you look at the tone of the story and not the content. The Life of Brian, H2G2 and Blackadder are all light comedies no matter how many bloodbaths the stories involve because the bloodbaths are treated as a source of humor and not horror. Arthur Dent spends all of one line grieving the destruction of the Earth before we get on with the jokes -- that's not grimdark.
I made no such claim.
There is no unitary "Doctor Who". The series has changed constantly. I'm making a historical point that one such change occurred in 1978 when the BBC received high profile complaints about the series becoming too grimdark for children, and shifted the tone in a lighter direction.
No, I mean The Pirate Planet, the story about a planet-turned-space ship that goes around gobbling up other worlds regardless of whether they're inhabited or not. Prior to the Time War, this was the story with the highest death count in all of Doctor Who. But you don't even remember that part in favor of the comedy.
no subject
Date: 2016-04-04 07:18 pm (UTC)I guess they don't have graveyard humour where you come from then?
Arthur Dent spends all of one line grieving the destruction of the Earth before we get on with the jokes -- that's not grimdark.
Yes? Was there a point you were intending to make beyond the obvious?
I made no such claim.
OK. You didn't claim you like or dislike grimdark even though you seem to think it's preferable to other styles despite their substance... so it's not a claimed liking but merely a regularly expressed preference on your part.
I'm making a historical point that one such change occurred in 1978 when the BBC received high profile complaints about the series becoming too grimdark for children, and shifted the tone in a lighter direction.
What point were you making about that supposed history (which was actually Doctor Who returning to its more usual form after veering to an extreme)?
Prior to the Time War, this was the story with the highest death count in all of Doctor Who.
I honestly don't know how anyone would count that but I expect the fanboys have a league table somewhere for people who think comparing fictional genocides by body count is a useful or interesting thing to do.
But you don't even remember that part in favor of the comedy.
Don't I? o_O Bearing in mind that I already actively disclaimed this in my previous comment, and pointed out that it's not a common point of view amongst my acquaintance, there doesn't seem to be much use in saying it again even though it's still true.
no subject
Date: 2016-04-04 09:34 pm (UTC)I never said anything remotely like that. I never expressed a preference for one mode of Who over another. You are reading words that I did not write.
Julesjones said that, given the things Doctor Who was getting away with at the time, it wasn't surprising Watership Down received a U. I'm pointing out that Watership Down came out the same year that Doctor Who stopped being able to get away with stuff like that.
There are very few Doctor Who episodes in which whole planets are wiped out, let alone the dozens of planets that are destroyed as a background detail in The Pirate Planet.
no subject
Date: 2016-04-04 07:51 pm (UTC)Really? Didn't the Master destroy something like a third of the entire visible universe in Logopolis?