Not lack of investment, lack of expenditure in favour of payouts to shareholders instead.
Understandable, Capaldi was outstanding as the Doctor, and Smith definitely has some weaker episodes. Purely on first episode alone though I do think nothing compares to Eleventh Hour
Gotta come to bat for my boy Matt Smith, imo his first episode is the best of any in the modern era
Surely at the server side it knows the premium status of the user it is supplying the video to, so just wouldn't insert the ads? I don't see why that would need to be client side.
Not sure we saw the same movie if you think it looked cheap. Some very specific shots had some iffy CGI, and for some reason those are in the trailer, so I'm wondering if that's all you've seen?
Get-Content <path> -wait
Or do you mean in cmd not powershell?
With the exception on Boom, every episode this season seems to have a huge pacing problem. To me every single one seems to drag with very little happening, until suddenly there is a massive climax that invariably is unsatisfying and makes no sense, before the episode abruptly ends. How is this the same show that gave us complex stories like Midnight or Heaven Sent in the same amount of time?
Quick rundown:
- Space Babies: Everyone is scared of the monster, until suddenly the monster was made by a computer error and needs to be saved
- The Devils Chord: Jinx Monsoon is stealing all the music, until suddenly they have a ridiculous music battle, which the Doctor somehow loses, but the beatles return to play a note and the day is saved
- 73 Yards: A great horror concept of Ruby being followed by a mysterious entity, that turns out to be herself as an old women making herself lonely for her entire life??
- Dot and Bubble: Turns out the Dot hates humanity and is killing them off, but instead of instantly braining them all, as it is clearly capable of, it creates giant slugs to eat them? And the people don't want to be saved?
I genuinely think a lot of the themes and concepts in this series are very good, but the scripts need to be tightened up, instead of juggling so many metaphors and societal commentaries in each episode.
I actually liked this one more than I thought I would from the trailer, but once again the resolution just leaves me confused and unsatisfied.
And notably, the odds for this happening were extremely low, because the vast majority of the time the team that catches the snitch wins
Yes. She didn't read it because he stopped her, why did that change?
Sorry what the fuck was this episode? Why did the Doctor disappear and the tardis lock? What was the resolution? Why 73 yards? What was she telling them? How did she go back? Why did the Doctor know not to read the notes in the second timeline but not the first?
The moments of tension were really good, and as a short story even independant of Doctor Who it was very compelling, but the end was so fast and made no sense to me.
Funny, I thought it was rather obvious, but I guess not for everyone.
For me sci-fi as commentary works best when it shows a better world, and laughs at the primitive ideas of the past (our present), rather than presenting a hot-topic issue from our time as being still relevant 20000 years in the future, as that just dates it to the current conversation.
Overall I enjoyed this one, felt like a return to a classic monster-of-the-week format, with a decent setup and good intrige, although the reason that the monster was created being 'the computer thinks babies needs monsters' fell a little flat for me.
The commentary on abortion and refugees was a tad shoehorned also, but not a deal breaker for me.
Really liking Ncuti's take on the Doctor and his chemistry with Millie Gibson, and definitely excited to see where the overarching story line for the season goes.
Not voting is still participating in the system because you live with the results, sorry mate. You don't get to opt out then absolve yourself of guilt from the result if its the worst case.
Your principles are sound, but not voting in any election is imo equivalent to voting for whoever wins. If that turns out to be Trump your moral high ground has no basis because you actively enabled that result.
Voting for a candidate doesn't have to mean endorsing their entire being, it can be for many reasons, most noteably tactical voting to ensure the least bad outcome.
Interesting to see it as being freed from a constraint rather than a crutch that viewers can be relied upon to watch all episodes. IMO writing satisfying one episode arc that also makes up part of a wider arc is much more difficult, and many shows now really have just a single arc that only gets good in the last third, making it essentially a 6-8 hour movie rather than an episodic show.
Fully anecdotal, but one of my 6th form rugby teammates went to watch a high school american football game, and said they were comparably as good as we were. Only difference is they filled a stadium and we'd get 3 dads on the sideline.
Junior teams for professional clubs do very much pay attention to school leagues and youth club rugby for players to 'scoop up'.
Seems like a purely cultural difference around going to watch lower level matches to me, rather than the player skill and career trajectory being different.
Unfortunately he's burning the governments money too so I wouldn't be too excited about his constant lawmongering.
I think often cases are won or settled based on who has the most money to keep them going.
Perhaps the OP intended this, but I have seen the snowflake version of this much more commonly than yours:
No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible.