Strangers in Space
@strangerscast.bsky.social
280 followers 250 following 940 posts
Podcasting about films and TV, music and politics - and of course, Doctor Who - so you don't have to https://strangersinspace.weebly.com/links.html
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Pinned
strangerscast.bsky.social
A constantly evolving group of Doctor Who friends talking film and TV, occasionally music, sometimes politics - and of course Doctor Who itself - so you don't have to

strangersinspace.weebly.com/links.html
strangerscast.bsky.social
Danny Dyer's back (as the mascot for our reimagined history of Doctor Who) and this time he's left the city for the countryside - but will he last long among the quaint villages and devil worshipping?

strangersinspace.libsyn.com/blue-box-189...
strangerscast.bsky.social
Those people were never interested in art in the first place and AI isn't going to make them less interested. It's just a toy, something to pass the time. Like short reels of them reimagined with rabbit noses or the kind of junk food entertainment you find on ITV2.
strangerscast.bsky.social
Yeah, that was my point. Creative people will continue to be actively creative. AI is for people who aren't creative and don't care about creativity. Nobody who enjoys or values art will pass it a second thought. It's for people who put filler in their lips or wear their trousers below their bum.
strangerscast.bsky.social
Happy birthday to Thom Yorke, Luke Haines, Sam Brown, Simon Cowell, Yo-Yo Ma, Gabriel Yared, Kevin Godley, Oliver North, Clive James, Desmond Tutu, Heinrich Himmler and Vladimir Putin.

Quite the list.
strangerscast.bsky.social
I suspect creative people will continue to be creative in most of the same ways though? (And people who appreciate that will continue to do so.) AI is creativity by and for non-creative people. Or else it's the modern day equivalent of the printing press (or indeed the internet).
strangerscast.bsky.social
You're telling me that the director of The Sword and the Sorcerer is also the guy who made the 1990 version of Captain America? Damn' right we're going back for another look!

strangersinspace.libsyn.com/film-club-du...
strangerscast.bsky.social
It's funny that when Robinson and Reform supporters protest, the police make as few arrests as possible on the spot, for fear of stirring up a violent reaction. Yet when it's Palestine Action, they have no such concerns. Says all you need to know about the proscribed "terrorists".
strangerscast.bsky.social
Are there any three words more terrifying than "conservative think tank"?
strangerscast.bsky.social
And that's what I think we're talking about. Something along the lines of "We know some people who have some Who, but they were reluctant to make a deal for fear of tax implications. And now we have a promise in writing instead. A promise in writing! More news in 2030! (or thereabouts)"
strangerscast.bsky.social
Now I don't know the ins and outs of gift tax and inheritance tax and all the rest, so I've no idea who'd be required to pay what. But I suspect the same is true of the collectors. The charitable status puts the tax issue to bed and brings a load more people to the table.
strangerscast.bsky.social
For sure. But probably they've been scratching at the tip of an iceberg that the charitable status now allows them to dig into much more deeply.

Put it this way: if you took some clothes to a charity shop and they said "We'll take them off your hands if you give us a fiver", you'd go elsewhere.
strangerscast.bsky.social
Yes anyone can draw up a contract, but before the charitable status was given any deals would have had to take tax payments into account. Now that's no longer an issue, it makes the drawing up of contracts with potentially reluctant partners more likely.
strangerscast.bsky.social
That's true - but the post was about their charitable status, and the reply was given in that context. When the reply talks about more details to come, it's more likely it means details about how the two things relate (Dr Who developments and charitable status) than specifics about episode titles.
strangerscast.bsky.social
The post you're posting a reply from, talks about "their estates" and "the next 5 years will be critical as, sadly, elderly private collectors and former industry professionals die, and their films become vulnerable." That's important context that isn't contained in the screengrab.
strangerscast.bsky.social
2/2 But that doesn't mean anything will actually be handed over any time soon. And Film is Fabulous isn't going to say "We've been promised X" if X isn't likely to appear for an unknown number of years. So I don't think we're getting an announcement of episode titles for probably years.
strangerscast.bsky.social
That's what I'm saying. The charitable status allows for the drawing up of contracts with regards to how to deal with people's collections *when the time comes*. It doesn't bring that time forwards. So people have made promises, and now those promises have been clarified in writing. 1/2
strangerscast.bsky.social
It could still be years before any collections are returned. The charitable status allows for legal clarity over promises to return, rather than the imminence of any actual returns. The "more details" most likely refers to "we have been promised in writing" rather than details about what's promised.
strangerscast.bsky.social
We took a trip back into the early career of Steven Moffat, to look at some of the one-offs he wrote - an episode of Stay Lucky, three of Murder Most Horrid, The Office (not that one) and extraordinarily a half-hour silent - before he wrote any Doctor Who

strangersinspace.libsyn.com/tv-club-85-s...
strangerscast.bsky.social
Trump's robot replacement out on patrol I see
strangerscast.bsky.social
The only story in Season 5 without a returning monster (even Patrick Troughton would become one again in The Two Doctors) is actually Fury from the Deep, but is animated seaweed enough to save the day from the man who gave us The Pescatons?

strangersinspace.libsyn.com/who-review-e...
strangerscast.bsky.social
If you've seen the new Sydney Sweeney/Jude Law/Ron Howard/Ana de Armas movie Eden and you're curious to know more, here's a copy of The Empress of Floreana, the short silent which the film's real-life counterparts made themselves, shortly before reality began its own imitation.

youtu.be/dQTK0bmky_I
The Empress of Floreana (1934)
YouTube video by JR Southall
youtu.be
strangerscast.bsky.social
Well it wasn't Moffat's twist to be fair, he was just laying some groundwork for somebody's else's decision - and oh boy, yes, the audience very much did need their hands held throughout. The reaction from some quarters was appalling.
strangerscast.bsky.social
Basically it boils down to the fact that a storyteller is there to tell stories, not to present a fantasy without substance or relevance to the audience. You wouldn't go see an adaptation of for example Dracula in 2025, and expect it to adopt the tone and themes of the 1931 adaptation.
strangerscast.bsky.social
Also, how many of the 8.28m (at the last count, in January 2018) people who watched Twice Upon a Time, would have been conversant with the William Hartnell portrayal? Better to tell a story that makes sense and is relevant to them, than to dwell upon the wishes of a relative handful of fans.