I hope all HPANWO readers had a merry Christmas and I hope
you're all having a great Boxing Day. I ended up watching the Doctor Who Christmas Day special
yesterday. This was not my intention. I have not watched Doctor Who seriously for many years, basically since the mid-David
Tennant era. The reason is because it went downhill very badly after
Christopher Eccleston's brief halcyon. Since then I've seen many trailers and
clips that have reinforced my opinion. The phrase "horribly woke" has
become a cliché and indeed I could talk for ages about this subject; and have
done, see: https://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2021/08/political-correctness-portal.html,
but it's true. I was at my daughter's boyfriend's house where I had been invited
to spend Christmas Day and it was their idea to watch the new Who after we'd finished dinner. I
settled down to join them. I was feeling very ill anyway and didn't really care
(Not because of dinner; I've had a bad cold or flu). In the end I was
surprised; the episode, called Joy to the
World, was, despite my underlying criticisms, actually quite good. It is
based around the common feature of hotel rooms, that they often have an extra
door that is always locked. This is actually so that they can be converted into
a suite with a neighbouring room, but the programme writers decided to have fun
with the idea. What results is a scenario similar to the children's TV cartoon Mr Benn. The Doctor turns up at this
timelords' hotel. He is played at the moment by Ncuti Gatwa, an ostentatiously
gay black man; trying too hard to be like Chris Tucker's character in The Fifth Element with embarrassing
failure. Yet he is supported by a likeable young woman who plays his one-time
companion really well. He also forms a close platonic bond with a member of the
hotel staff and that subplot is done really well. I also found it funny and
clever to have him enter into a blazing row with himself, when he comes from
the future to help his past self out. The script and storyline is really very
well done. I was surprised that it was penned by Steven Moffat and not Russell
T Davies. Although I thoroughly dislike the latter personally, I consider his screenplays
superior. The episode includes the Silurians again. These reptilian humanoids
date back to Jon Pertwee's first season; but in this episode they can disguise
themselves as humans by shape-shifting... Where have we heard that before?, see:
https://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2020/08/david-icke-portal.html.
To my amazement this episode has a distinct open-minded spiritual theme. This
is a first for Doctor Who, at least from
what I've seen of it; in fact the series has often contained a lot of atheo-skeptic
propaganda. The ending is even positive to Christianity. So, even if you agree
with me about its politically correct millstone, it might be worth giving this
one episode a chance. See here for the trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-wN7V4x5P0.
Does this mean I'll be eagerly tuning in to the upcoming 2025 season, I hear
you ask?... Don't push it!
4 comments:
There is no such thing as "atheo-skeptic propaganda". There is only Judeo-Christian propaganda for which you are well on your way to becoming a mouthpiece.
I disagree with you on both points. In my skeptic talks I explain exactly what atheo-skeptic propaganda is. As for "Judeo-Christian propaganda"? That is polarization. I do not find it hateful and repulsive; and I don't buy the materialist explanation for the Shroud of Turin. Apart from that, what have I said that counts as Judeo-Christian propaganda? Please let me know what you think it is.
I am commenting as someone who does not believe in god and who does believe in UFOs and aliens. Both positions have been reached as a result of research and reasoned deduction. So for me the term "atheo-skeptic" is an oxymoron and redundant since it implies a connection between atheism and skepticism or that the one somehow follows from the other. It remains an objectionable term even if most atheists (and I'm not even sure this is the case) are also skeptics. The deep state probably looks favourably on the term since it encourages atheists to consider the ufology community to be on a par with nutjobs who believe half of humanity is destined to burn forever in anguish and that salvation can only be achieved by ritual animal sacrifice and/or the crucifiction of an innocent man.
In your article you say the Dr Who episode has an open-minded spiritual theme, is positive to Christianity and for those reasons is worth giving a chance. That's Judeo-Christian propaganda and infers the episode would not be worth watching if it didn't have those qualities. Like any other community, ufology has people within it who play the "spirituality" card as a means of diverting attention away from evidence-based conclusions which cannot be made to fit their worldview, preferring instead to pander to popular assertions or prejudices which they themselves were inculcated with in childhood.
Hi GM. You misunderstand me. I'll try to clarify, but the details are in my skeptics talks. Try the one I did in Swansea; it's my best. By "atheo-skeptic" I'm referring to a community and culture within the Skeptisphere centred around characters like Richard Dawkins and Philip Pullman. The combine the ideas of humanistic atheism with scientific skepticism. The reasons I think it's worth giving this one episode a chance are not JUST because of the reasons you state. I also said it was clever, funny and well written. I di like the fact it's positive to spirituality, and even traditional forms of that at Christmas. Does that count as "propaganda"? If so then I plead guilty and do not apologize.
Post a Comment