Dan's Media Digest - Latest Comments

Re: No DOCTOR WHO Series 10 until 2017, and Moffat's successor chosen! ~ Dan's Media Digest

chris dree — Mon, 16 May 2016 05:19:50 -0000

Man, they have really managed to destroy this series. This show has spent more time on hiatus the last 4 years, then it has been on. Honestly, it's truly ridiculous how it takes so damn long for them to throw together 10 episodes, when they used to do between 20-30 for an average season for most every TV Series. It seems that season to season they have no clue whose going to be around, so they take a year to figure out the cast, before even starting to write, or tape. As bad as Moffat has become, it's about to get even worse. I predict this show will end with Capaldi.

Re: Dan's "Medium" Digest ~ Dan's Media Digest

Dan Owen — Wed, 27 Apr 2016 12:53:46 -0000

I may investigate a workaround for the index page thing, if that becomes an obvious drawback and I start to agree. Won't be too hard to create an index page as a 'featured' post.

Re: Dan's "Medium" Digest ~ Dan's Media Digest

Dan Owen — Wed, 27 Apr 2016 12:52:07 -0000

No, sorry. Medium doesn't work like that. It's not a blog in the normal sense. But it has a powerful search facility, so you should be able to find anything you want by using that.

Over time, the homepage will also evolve, so particular things are highlighted - like, for example, all the Buffy/Angel reviews that will resume shortly. But it's more like a social/community platform than what Blogger offers. Sorry if a few things you like about Blogger has vanished or can't be replicated, but the pros outweigh the cons for me as writer who wants to reach a wider audience who are engaged with content they read.

Medium is evolving day by day, so maybe in the future they'll come up with something that works better for finding archival stuff. It's certainly improved enormously since when it launched in 2012.

Re: Dan's "Medium" Digest ~ Dan's Media Digest

Suhas — Wed, 27 Apr 2016 12:44:50 -0000

Could you include the "Labels" section and make the "Reviews" section an indexed one in the new site? Makes it easier to access older material that way.

Re: The 9 Best Superhero Shows on TV ~ Dan's Media Digest

Laura_2 — Wed, 20 Apr 2016 17:33:30 -0000

I watched the preair pilot and fully intended to watch more but when the next episode came out I was already working and struggeling to keep up with everything I already watched so it just kind of fell away. Maybe I'll catch up once it's on Netflix or Amazon but that Flash episode hasn't filled me with too much confidence.

and Gotham I gave up during season 1, if I remember correctly episode 13 is the last one I watched...it's also just not quite my style. I never was too invested in any of the characters or Gotham.

PS: I'm even terribly behind on Agents of SHIELD...stupid timconsuming job.

Re: The 9 Best Superhero Shows on TV ~ Dan's Media Digest

Dan Owen — Wed, 20 Apr 2016 17:20:20 -0000

The pilot was great, why didn't you watch more? It's a bright and fun show, which is such a tonic these days - like Flash. It has its problems, sure, but I can see it really turning into something very good.

Gotham is such a unique case. I placed it bottom of my list, but there are weeks when I feel that's too harsh - because it's beginning to embrace its craziness and sometimes that really works in its favour. I'm watching it every week, so it's doing SOMETHING right. It's just such a very weird approach and full of nonsense.

Re: The 9 Best Superhero Shows on TV ~ Dan's Media Digest

Laura_2 — Wed, 20 Apr 2016 16:08:42 -0000

it might be a bit unfair from me to judge Supergirl on just the pilot and the Flash crossover episode but I didn't like it too much. Somehow it just felt to stylized.

And I'm kind of glad I gave up on Gotham, especially reading your paragraph on it. Some people keep telling me that it's really good but then again those also watch The Blacklist. Not sure I trust their judgement too much when it comes to TV shows.

Re: Dan's Media Digest is 10 Years Old ~ Dan's Media Digest

Laura_2 — Sat, 02 Apr 2016 16:18:04 -0000

well, I know that I had been "lurking in the shadows" for quite a bit before I finally started commenting - and that was commenting for a while before I finally signed up to Disqus (and to this day this is the only site I use it for). So it probably was 2010 or even 2009 when I started visiting regularly, which was because I found an old bookmark to a review of yours while I was decluttering my browser...no idea when I first put it there.

Re: Dan's Media Digest is 10 Years Old ~ Dan's Media Digest

Dan Owen — Sat, 02 Apr 2016 13:57:27 -0000

Thanks, Laura. Well, you joined Disqus in 2011, I can see that - so presumably you missed the majority of DMD's heyday (or weren't commenting during pre-2011), so it means even more that you take the time to visit and comment.

Re: Dan's Media Digest is 10 Years Old ~ Dan's Media Digest

Laura_2 — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 18:14:03 -0000

another year gone by, wow. Happy birthday DMD. Ten years is indeed quite the mile stone. I only wish I knew when I came here first but it's been a few years for sure.
DMD has been putting out less content and I've been commenting less but that's just because the real world finally got me last September when I got a job and moved to the UK. Due to the new time restrictions my TV show consumption has considerately gone down and I'm way behind of quite a few shows (not to mention all the things I stopped watching alltogether), which makes it hard to keep up with your posts or reply to something in an acceptable time frame.
But I'm still here at least once a week to read the TV picks :)

Re: TV Picks: 22-28 February 2016 • The BRIT Awards • Cuckoo • Fresh Meat • Girls • The Shannara Chronicles • Stag ~ Dan's Media Digest

bob — Wed, 24 Feb 2016 01:59:07 -0000

Fresh Meat! Yay.

Re: Frame Rated: THE X-FILES event series (2016) ~ Dan's Media Digest

Dan Owen — Fri, 29 Jan 2016 05:56:34 -0000

I've been watching some favourite episodes as a bit of prep and they still stand up. It was a great show that lost itself after season 6, for me. Nothing since ever lived up to S1-5.

Re: Frame Rated: THE X-FILES event series (2016) ~ Dan's Media Digest

bob — Fri, 29 Jan 2016 01:00:47 -0000

Maybe it was just the time of my life. X-Files was pretty much my first adult show. I maybe didn't have a good frame of reference... regardless, this return is embarrassing and I now doubt it was ever as good as I remembered...

Re: Review: The CW's LEGENDS OF TOMORROW ~ Dan's Media Digest

Laura_2 — Mon, 25 Jan 2016 02:40:05 -0000

although I did find it strange that Sara asked for help in a lousy 1970's bar fight. She's used to much worse oponents.

But yes, I do hope they keep the insanity...and like I said, I hope they keep it fun. We've got enough "the weight of the world is on my shoulders" in Arrow and The Flash.

Re: Review: The CW's LEGENDS OF TOMORROW ~ Dan's Media Digest

Dan Owen — Sun, 24 Jan 2016 05:37:32 -0000

I find it so weird you don't like The Flash, if you like Arrow. Beyond Oliver and Felicity, I find the "core team" on Arrow quite irritating these days. Flash's are much more engaging (maybe with the exception of Snow), and the stories more imaginative because it's less "real world". Telling that Arrow S4 has been improved by adding a villain who's more of a "meta-human" type?

Re: Review: The CW's LEGENDS OF TOMORROW ~ Dan's Media Digest

Dan Owen — Sun, 24 Jan 2016 05:35:47 -0000

Fair one. I didn't know about Rip Hunter's backstory -- so now Doctor Who's the plagiarist? Oh dear. I still have a feeling DW was on the writers' minds, to have cast Darvill -- which leads people to assume it's been done in "homage".

Re: Review: The CW's LEGENDS OF TOMORROW ~ Dan's Media Digest

Seth — Sun, 24 Jan 2016 03:42:04 -0000

Rip Hunter and the Time Masters debuted in 1959, pre-dating Doctor Who and the Time Lords by four years. I see Darvill's casting being a fan nod no different than John Wesley Shipp, Mark Hamill, and Amanda Pays being on the current Flash after starring in the 90's version. Or the tip of the hat to Prison Break by re-teaming Wentworth Miller and Dominic Purcell as actual criminals.

What is strange is that the pilot worked on it's own, introducing characters fairly well. It shows that their introductions in The Flash and Arrow only served to grind those shows' main plot lines to a halt.

The time traveling team aspect allows for more DC comics guest stars, like the upcoming Jonah Hex. The structure allows for more variations on long standing but lesser known characters and potentially a space for more natural spin-off shows.

What I am also looking forward to is the seeming lack of romantic melodrama and the Scooby Gang aspect of The Flash and Arrow's supplementary exposition characters. There are no identities to hide and no romances to support. Hopefully this team will stay relatively in costume and on the higher end of the adventure and action scale.

Re: Review: The CW's LEGENDS OF TOMORROW ~ Dan's Media Digest

bob — Sat, 23 Jan 2016 13:50:03 -0000

I loved it and was disappointed when those end credits rolled. Let's carefully note though that I don't like the Flash, contrary to just about every other person that seems to comment on such things... So I admit to being somewhat of an outlier with a different set of criteria than most.

I enjoyed the brazenness of it. The way the pace just kept going and the insanity never ceased. The pastiche of Doctor Who was entirely to my liking and I'm going to push this on my UK friends who are wanting a fix to compensate for no DW this year.

I really liked the Canary's fight in the bar- Arrow's been very disappointing this year with its fight sequences, usually the highlight of the show. So this was a nice treat.

Re: Review: The CW's LEGENDS OF TOMORROW ~ Dan's Media Digest

bob — Sat, 23 Jan 2016 13:45:46 -0000

I reckon audience figures are comparable for DW and CW shows. There will be considerable overlap since they are both scifi. The similarities have to be on purpose- Arrow and the Flash have always shown that they understand the genre and put in little Easter Eggs for scifi fans to enjoy. This is no exception (eggception?).

Re: Review: The CW's LEGENDS OF TOMORROW ~ Dan's Media Digest

Laura_2 — Sat, 23 Jan 2016 07:29:47 -0000

yes, the pilot had a lot of "speed force" but that is a common problem for pilots. I'll give it some time to find itself and then it hopefully becomes something fun with all those different characters travelling around in time.

and yes, it had strong vibes of Doctor Who but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad thing. Correct me if I'm wrong but Doctor Who isn't the most well-known show in the US but has some loyal fans. Those who don't know DW won't be bothered by the similarity and those who do might like it because it reminds them of something they like. Or that's just me and I'm the only one who likes to see different variations of the same thing.

Re: No DOCTOR WHO Series 10 until 2017, and Moffat's successor chosen! ~ Dan's Media Digest

Dan Owen — Sat, 23 Jan 2016 06:04:27 -0000

How I wish 2016 had three specials (Easter, summer, Christmas) - that would be ideal. Hmm, the Class spin-off? I'm not sure where that stands, but suppose it could be ready by autumn as a stopgap for fans.

Re: No DOCTOR WHO Series 10 until 2017, and Moffat's successor chosen! ~ Dan's Media Digest

Dan Owen — Sat, 23 Jan 2016 06:03:19 -0000

I'm just hoping he's not one of those writers, slightly like RTD, who isn't entirely comfortable in the sci-fi genre (as much as they love it). RTD's best episode were always the human-level ones, whereas Moffat's have been the Big Idea ones. It would be great to bridge that gap more (not that RTD/Moffat never managed it), but I don't know if Chibnall's the man for the job. But maybe we'll be proven wrong -- it's been years since he last wrote for DW (it'll be six by the time Series 11 starts), and I have no doubt that Broadchurch has been a HUGE learning experience for him.

Re: No DOCTOR WHO Series 10 until 2017, and Moffat's successor chosen! ~ Dan's Media Digest

Laura_2 — Sat, 23 Jan 2016 04:34:38 -0000

I liked Torchwood's second series (it was much better than the first) so I'm clinging to that but I can't help but feel disappointed that there won't be more than a Christmas Special this year. It feels very similar to what they did with the end of the RTD era when they said "you're not gonna get a full season but don't worry, there'll be specials" and the specials turned out to be quite meh (for me at least).
But I am glad Moffat realised he's running out of timey-whimey and has the time to go out with a big bang but it's not very fan-friendly. Maybe that's were the spin-off will come in?

Re: No DOCTOR WHO Series 10 until 2017, and Moffat's successor chosen! ~ Dan's Media Digest

bob — Sat, 23 Jan 2016 00:11:16 -0000

Huge news... I am really surprised we don't get any new Who this year until Christmas. That's somewhat extreme. The show was really on top of its game too with Capaldi confident as this rock'n'roll Doctor. I am not at all happy with the prospect of a year without the Doctor.

I don't dislike Chibnall as much as most- he wrote some blindingly good Torchwood episodes in my opinion but yes, also some terrible ones... Broadchurch showed his talent in series one but he's not demonstrated that he has vision.

Re: HEROES: REBORN, episode 11 - 'Send in the Clones' ~ Dan's Media Digest

Phearran — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 02:58:37 -0000

Interesting review. I especially like when you talked about what you liked in the episode.