No, sorry. Sean's right and you're wrong, Dickey. The Ghostbusters thing was a reboot/relaunch with new characters. The Doctor Who thing is a continuation of an ongoing series with canon precedent for the main character changing thru the "regeneration" McGuffin. Not equivalent at all. Besides, that GB movie sucks ass.
Incorrect, as I will very easily demonstrate. Did I say otherwise? Did I say otherwise? If that's the comparison I was making, but I wasn't. You fellas keep doing this. You're in such a rush to feed your egos on "I'll show him! ", that you don't bother to get the path of the argument straight.
The argument was "it's not the same thing, because it's not the same exact kind of movie/show down the line, down to the teensy little details!! This matters! ". My case is, no, the teensy details don't fucking matter, what matters is it's a female recasting, and the same yahoos are having the same reaction about it. And that's the case the article I linked makes. It's not rocket science. No one anywhere said "it's a female recasting, therefore all the teensy details are the same, and/or need to be". No one. Sean being anal, and nitpicky, is just him being Dayton-y. And anal, and nitpicky, and Dayton-y only deserves a facepalm, because it's picking a fight just for the sake of it. That should be obvious, and something anyone with even a room temperature IQ could suss out in a fraction of a second without any strain whatsoever. That it seems to be running you amiss makes me sad.
Sean's the one that has to live with the guilt and shame of acting like a Dayton clone for the rest of his life. You're the one who has to carry the guilt of rooting for a Dayton clone for the rest of his life. I'm going to sleep like a baby tonight.
I'm sorry you can't see the significantly large difference between making a new thing, with new lead characters, who just happen to have the opposite gender of the lead characters of the original thing, and taking an old thing and swapping the gender of the established lead character just because.
Yes, I do see that difference. But it's not the difference being discussed, so you've wasted everyone' s time. Again, you'll have to carry that shame for the rest of your life.
No. Radically changing their bodies isn't a part of any of those characters, but it is for the Doctor.
No. Radically changing their bodies isn't a part of any of those characters, but it is for the Doctor.
Dude, I've seen it. The cast are mostly not ready to move past the not ready for primetime players. The script was uninspired The comedy was pedestrian The "feminism" of said comedy was childish... Compare Chris Hemsworth to Annie Potts...
These last couple of pages are such a mess that I can't even tell if anyone has a problem with this or not.
I'm cool with it. Think it has potential. Like I said, I just don't want to see Daleks for a few episodes.
I kinda want to see her cross paths with a former companion (top choices Martha Jones or Jack Harkness) for an episode or three just for the reactions/re-framing
To be fair, he'd react like that if he'd met Capaldi, Smith or probably even Colin Baker. He's had Rose's mum, and everyone's mum. And dad. And your hamster. But not THE Hamster - goatees are evil.
I stand vindicated. http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2017...jodie-whittaker-sit-down-and-give-it-a-chance
somewhere there's a deleted scene where he pops in on the Master and Missy and feels out the potential of a threesome...
