Separated at birth..?

zoiddalek.jpg

18 Responses to “Separated at birth..?”

  1. Thad Ritchards Says:

    Phew. Just as well you didn’t SPOIL anything…

  2. parkypants Says:

    This is Zeus Blog/Plug you’re talking about here… Are you really that surprised?

  3. Thad Ritchards Says:

    Well, I suppose they are able a lot more speedy than a print issue now. :)

  4. the_other_dave Says:

    ArrrgggghhHHHHH!

    My eyes! My eyes!

    My poor spoiler defiled eyes! And to think I haven’t opened my TSV yet to avoid that sort of thing!

  5. Alden Says:

    And there I was thinking of ol’ bug eyes from This Island Earth!

  6. Peter A Says:

    Hmm.. yeah, maybe not something I’d have done upfront Jono :)

    But then it’s not something I’d have done upfront on the Radio Times either. And they have. From where I’m looking at it, it’s an ugly ugly piece of makeup on a cover that may well be memorable for the wrong reasons. That thing would give the nightmares if I was a kid (although I’d love it jst the same) and might have seen the turning point in whether I’d be watching the series or not with the permission of my folks. Ah, memories.

    I’m not liking the direction this is going actually, but my Daleks vs Cybermen ripping off war opinions are by now well published!

  7. Paul Scoones Says:

    Surely it’s the Ood who were separated from Zoidberg at birth…?

    And Dave – you can open TSV 74 with impunity. There’s reviews of The Runaway Bride and the Sarah Jane Smith pilot, but there’s no coverage of Series 3.

    Paul

  8. Paul Scoones Says:

    But… skip the editorial page if you consider the title of an upcoming episode (and nothing more) as a spoiler. Other than that, you’ll be fine.

  9. Peter A Says:

    But there is some WhoView-tastic interior artwork! I like the retro look. Paul – who are the cartoon people on the editorial and inside back pages supposed to be – seriously? I wondered if it was Adam & Sandra but I haven’t met Sandra and don’t see the likeness with Adam…

    If you’re out there Adam – good call on ditching the news page, btw!

  10. Thad Ritchards Says:

    And #74 with extra bonus sampler pointing to the out-dated url! :)

  11. the_other_dave Says:

    “…skip the editorial page if you consider the title of an upcoming episode (and nothing more) as a spoiler…”

    Yes, I understand David Lawrence is absolutely livid at that one.

  12. Thad Ritchards Says:

    That’s an incrediably bad title from non-spoiler point of view, but I think we can attribute that to the RTD “Promote every aspect so people will watch” PR machine.

    (Frankly, he should have just called it “The Return of the Master” and be done with it.(*))

    (*) Note, I have no idea if this is indeed what is going to happen or not. The end of Gridlock makes me think this is the obvious place to go.

  13. Paul Scoones Says:

    “who are the cartoon people on the editorial and inside back pages supposed to be – seriously?”

    The Chumbley isn’t enough of a clue?? Oh alright then, it’s Steven and Vicki from Galaxy 4.

    “Yes, I understand David Lawrence is absolutely livid at that one.”

    Given how spoiler-lite TSV 74 is, I shudder to think how David Lawrence must have reacted to reading previous issues. But then again, perhaps its the title itself – which as Thad points out is none too subtle – rather than its namecheck in the editorial which is the root of the problem.

    Paul

  14. parkypants Says:

    On the back page sure, but given its placement at the front, I presumed the editorial cartoon was Adam and the new illustrator!!

  15. the_other_dave Says:

    “… Given how spoiler-lite TSV 74 is, I shudder to think how David Lawrence must have reacted to reading previous issues…”

    Well, we did try to mention it… about a year or so ago… amongst other things… let us not start that madness again.

  16. Paul Scoones Says:

    I rather hope that the dramatic reduction in spoiler-laden information in the latest issue of TSV indicates that readers’ opinions – including your own, David – are indeed being listened to and acted upon.

    I’m sure that any concerns David Lawrence has over the latest issue of TSV he can communicate directly to Adam.

  17. the_other_dave Says:

    “I rather hope that the dramatic reduction in spoiler-laden information in the latest issue of TSV indicates that readers’ opinions – including your own, David – are indeed being listened to and acted upon. “

    Paul, I’m afraid not only do I not believe that, but I find the blithe way in which you suggest it rather offensive. After having my letter re-titled provocatively despite having communicated directly with Adam (as you suggest David does) explaining why I didn’t think TSV sucked prior to its publication, and the following series of convoluted and painful discussions on the boards last year, having had all the joy I used to feel in contributing to TSV turn into a process akin to teeth pulling, and having my actions described as “vitriolic outbursts” that you still “not entirely sure that you understand” on your own personal blog, I do not believe that any dissent or discussion is really encouraged or listened to.

    I might be more convinced if the concerns we had raised during that turbulent period were acknowledged along with any action taken, but I suspect the real reason for the lack of spoilers is, as Adam states, because of the distinct lack of information released by the BBC. Similarly there is no mention of the board discussions which predated Zeus Plugs arrival about the irrelevance of the news pages, and I find it rather patronising to find my arguments to Adam about it rehashed back to me in the editorial after feeling pilloried for mentioning over a year ago. Also I would be more convinced if the volume of reviews/review type articles was less.

    But I find the most interesting thing about this whole thread is how both you and Adam (in his editorial) are now noting the “spoiler laiden information” that has been reduced. Now, when we complained about these over a year ago we ended up being stonewalled by statements like “it’s not a spoiler – it’s a BBC release” or “it’s not really a spoiler – it’s a reveal”, and to now be extolled how good it is not to know what’s going to happen, almost deliberately obtuse.

    “I’m sure that any concerns David Lawrence has over the latest issue of TSV he can communicate directly to Adam.”

    As someone who has tried, and still bitterly regrets communicating both directly and publicly with the TSV management I’m afraid I found it a frustrating, pointless, and emotionally draining experience, and wonder, (and I do not speak for David here, I was simply repeating his comments to me), would you be surprised that no one actually bothers contacting Adam directly? Would anyone here try to seriously complain after the fiasco that was the TSV sucks debate?

    These questions are rhetorical – please feel free to reply, but personally I cannot put myself through the rehash again. Ultimately perhaps you and Adam were right. TSV does suck – what else have you got?

  18. Paul Scoones Says:

    David, I’ve no wish to argue with you at all. It was not my intention at all to be ‘blithe’ or offensive in my reply, so I’m sorry if it came across that way.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.