Actually, it's a Police Public Call Box.
See the diff?
Posted on 07/24/2008 11:36:08 AM PDT by nickcarraway
Fans of Doctor Who and Star Trek have been told to lay off autograph hunting at the stage door of the Courtyard Theatre in Stratford, where David Tennant and Patrick Stewart are thesping it up in a Royal Shakespeare Company production of Hamlet.
The ban comes after fans apparently started turning up at the venue with "bags" of Who goodies, hoping to get Tennant's mark on their memorabilia.
The RSC declared: "Due to the huge amount of interest in the RSC's current production of Hamlet, only Royal Shakespeare Company or production related memorabilia will be signed by members of the company.
"It is very flattering that there is so much interest in this production, but the sheer volume of requests means that we need to set some limits which will be as fair as possible for everyone. We apologise if this causes any disappointment."
Following the usual previews, Hamlet opens its door to the public on 5 August, the BBC notes. Tennant takes the lead while Stewart tackles Claudius and the Ghost.
Ping
Doctor Who: I imagine you're surprised. You see, the TARDIS is dimensionally transcendental.
Woman: And it's bigger on the inside than it is on the outside!!
Doctor Who: That's what I said.
Somehow that really struck me. I love dry British wit.
so instead of trying to get people into the WS plays, they are chasing away people who could become fans.
Whoever is the marketing head is stuck on stupid.
If they don’t fill the seats nobody will care about the play.
I’ve not seen much of the new Dr. Who. I grew up a Tom Baker fan and have even gotten the wife to watch a few of the old episodes (gotta love Netflix). Incredibly campy in retrospect, but still fun.
You’ve heard me rail against the recent iterations of Star Trek, haven’t you? Socialist utopianism gone wild and boring to boot.
"those seeking autographs have your ticket stubs available for insepction..."
I've watched all the Doctor Who episodes from Jon Pertwee through Sylvester McCoy. David Tennant is cast in the same mold as the earlier Doctors. The stories, which are the only reason I watch a show, are as good as the earlier series.
If you liked Tom Baker, you'll also like David Tennant.
Trekkies and Doctor Who fans will never get into WS plays and become fans.
a favourite from Douglas Adams; "Author reeled, then he reeled again"
You haven’t seen much of Trekies, I expect. Probably dozens of people with large numbers of stuff wanting it autographed.
Now I don’t think it is too much to sign autographs for fans but Trekies are the worst and I am a big fan of the original and Next Generation. I went to one Star Trek show and that convinced me to never again go to another one. Too many fans are complete freaks without lives.
You’re right. See my post 10
Doesn’t seem like that great an idea to tell most of your customers to get lost.
H
Actually, it's a Police Public Call Box.
See the diff?
actually I remember a few commentaries on how the Picard character’s interest in WS generated an interest in the plays. (and TOS episode too)
I would never say never. You will always have the “no life” crowd. But you may have a person who will see a WS play just because a WHO or ST actor or actress is in that play.
Well, Star Trek really went downhill after Roddenberry died and Rick Berman took control of the franchise in the mid 90s to early 2000s, but that's going to change with the new movie in 2009. Berman is gone and they're going back to Star Trek's roots with a film about the original crew when they were fresh out of the academy. Should be fun (unfortunately it took Star Trek: Enterprise's cancelation in 2005 for Paramount to see the writing was on the wall and get rid of Berman)
If there was interest generated it was only a passing fad. LOL!
I would never say never. You will always have the “no life” crowd. But you may have a person who will see a WS play just because a WHO or ST actor or actress is in that play.
The crowd that shows up at the RSS doors with bags of Who/ST junk are a part of the 'no life' crowd.
IMO, while they may see the play to catch their fav actor, in all likelihood, they'll never become fans of WS or go see his plays unless their fav sci-fi actor is in it.
Keeping this on point, (and you are correct by the way. Enterprise was SUPPOSED to be the back to the UN-PC glory that kept trek alive.) with the French(?) Picard character’s obsession with WS it almost made it mandatory for a true trek fan to have some appreciation for WS.
(see also “Conscience of the King” in TOS)
I disagree with one aspect. The LESS Roddenberry was involved in trek, the better it was. In TOS, it got worse as Roddenberry became more involved, in TNG the first and second seasons hold the same pattern. But still, PC has always been bad news for trek no matter where it came from. (getting rid of DC Fontana was a plus too)
showing up with bags-o-stuff for sale on ebay is always tacky and it is correct to shun them. HOWEVER, if a fan of one is brought to the other then ONE item is just harmless.
Of course what you suggest is that these actors have a following that transcends to WHATEVER they are doing.
I can’t for a second take seriously the limited notion of one thing spuring an interest in the other. If you don’t get them to the theater they will never have the opportunity.
(how many Peter Weller fans take his history classes and end up genuinly interested in history. I would comfortably venture more than a few.)
You can’t discover the “brave new world” unless you GO to there for WHATEVER reason.
Except for the time it became unstuck in the Colin Baker era. The only problem was that he couldn't control it. Pipe organ in the alley,anyone?
ping
I was really excited about Enterprise when I first saw the trailers and promos, and I think alot of people were. But the actual show was a total disappointment. The problem was the show was supposed to be a "prequel" to the original series but was run by people who had never seen TOS. As a result, there was alot of lazy writing and alot of "Picard era" stuff making apperences like a Ferangi episode and a Borg episode, pure lazy writing. I think it went downhill from day one when the "Klingons" Archer encountered for the "first time" looked and acted just like the 24th century "honorable caste system warriors" than the Kirk era trecherous Gengagus Khan-type Klingons (more advanced alien makeup aside, they shouldn't have acted like Klingons from 200 years in the future)
Ironically, the show didn't actually START to follow its premise until the final year it was on the air, and that was became Berman was burnt out and let some people who had watched TOS write episodes, like Mike Sussman, Manny Coto, and Reeve-Stevens husband and wife writing duo. There were a handful of great episodes in the final season. Unfortunately, it was too little, too late.
>> I disagree with one aspect. The LESS Roddenberry was involved in trek, the better it was. In TOS, it got worse as Roddenberry became more involved, in TNG the first and second seasons hold the same pattern. <<
I don't know if that really makes sense. Most fans would say the first and second seasons of TOS were better than the third, and those were the two Roddenberry oversaw day-to-day. By the third season he was kicked upstairs to executive producer and only wrote one episode, and the series suffered as a result. Most people will agree that the originally Roddenbery-written pilot "The Cage" was superior to the episode that eventually aired as the replacement pilot "Where No Man Has Gone Before", On the other hand, you could make a good case that the later Star Trek movies (2-6) were better than "Star Trek: The Motion Picture", which Roddenberry had complete creative control over.
Roddenberry was a mixed bag, IMO. Alot of conservatives didn't like him because he was an avowed athetist, but Roddenberry was a very creative guy who filled Star Trek with HUMAN sitautions and lively characthers, as compared to the technobabble soap opera garbage that Rick Berman did in the 90s era Star Trek. Roddenberry was totally against that and always said Star Trek was about people and not about gizmos and space battles and starfleet regulations. He was 100% right on that point and Berman NEVER "got it"
I think Roddenberry did take too much credit for TOS's success, and much of what made TOS work was Gene Coon's contribution. He died in 1973 so Roddenberry just took credit for Coon's stuff. The two Genes probably contributed equally to TOS and Roddenberry on his own was never as good as he was when Coon was working on the show.
<< But still, PC has always been bad news for trek no matter where it came from. (getting rid of DC Fontana was a plus too) <<
As for Berman, he did a fine job when he stayed OUT of the creative process and just oversaw the production aspects of the show. As you noted, TNG improved over its first two seasons when Berman got the show back on track in the third season and hired some excellent writers, art designers, etc. to overhaul the show. Berman was good at running things and coordinating the staff to get Trek episodes to come out polished and professional looking. There is no doubt the "later" TNG episodes looked more realistic than the campy earlier ones that Roddenberry producered.
That being said, Star Trek started to fall apart when Berman decided he could be a writer. The early Deep Space Nine stuff was terrible, and when Berman finally decided he should personally do the day-to-day writing on Enterprise, it became completely unwatchable. The PC characthers he created on Enterprise were some of the worst in Trek's history (southern hillbilly engineer, making a Vulcan a walking sex toy, token black guy, etc.), and clearly the only stories he was comfortable with was TNG era stuff, so all the ship's technology and culture actually functioned better the "prequel" than they would 100 years "later" in Kirk's era, like the "brand new" transporters. Completely unbeliveable and stale writing.
“...only Royal Shakespeare Company or production related memorabilia will be signed by members of the company....the sheer volume of requests means that we need to set some limits which will be as fair as possible for everyone.”
Follow the money.
Ees et too late, gov’ner, fer Mister Dick Van Dyke to play the good Doctor?
Why listen to the bard when they can be their own filksingers?
I can see all your points.
I think these actors are suffering from “I am not Spock” syndrome in trying to get away from their most popular characters.
I also think the company is a tiny bit jealous that BUT FOR the ST and Dr.Who connection they would not be getting the same response.
(of course would fans pay money to see Britany Spears, Lindsay Lohan, or even paris hilton play juliet? [who ends up dead]?)
Roddenberry had an ENTIRE Timeline History laid out that Enterprise could have followed, but the producers chose to go the other way instead.
It’s very clear from later explanations that the “Klingons” of the early ST were half-breeds and subject classes, thus probably accounting for the Agressiveness. Contact with “True” klingons in the beginning would have been rare.
The 1st Earth-Romulan War would have been a MUCH better premise than the stupid time-crossing bs they chose.
Although Enterprise’s “EMPIRE” episode was great!
I forgot that one. Hysterical. Once you get the Doctor you will never go back!!!
Heh. He really didn’t like his companion (Peri at the time) laughing at his ride.
Well they aren’t going into the play, they’re waiting outside the stage door with bags of stuff to get signed. I can see the complaint, especially when you’re talking bags of stuff. Polite autograph seekers know no more than 1 or 2 things for stand up stage door sessions, guys just finished a days work and are looking for some food and shut eye and here comes the dork with the plastic ears and an hours worth of crap they want signed.
Good one. I had to look up the word, 'filk' to grasp the full meaning of what you're saying.
Yes, there is a lot of that going on at the sci-fi conventions. Not to mention cabaret shows, costume balls, ice cream socials, etc.
I thought the first seaon of STTNG was the worst myself. By the third season, it improved greatly. I gave up on it early in the second year and didn’t start watching again regularly until it was on in reruns daily.
I then discovered it had improved.
You nailed it. These are not “fans” of the actors but fans and dealers of past shows. They aren’t seeing the current show at all.
i grew up watching TNG,i liked DS9 (altough i hated VOY-there were only maybe 3 or 4 eps that i can watch),when i went to college i discovered TOS.
now ENT,is really hit or miss:i liked the Romulan eps,but i hated the xindi storyline.i really wished they would have gone into the Earth-Rom conflict
I gave up on Star Trek after 2 seasons of DS9. People told me it got better but I had moved on. Tried to watch Voyager and Enterprise a couple of times but the magic was gone for me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.