Makes a lot of sense to me. It’s a remake of A New Hope, and I don’t think the identity of Luke’s father or the emperor were all that important to the story.

But Johnson didn’t *contradict* anything in the Abrams movie. So I don’t think there’s any indication the series is fine with just retconning at will. And I’m honestly a lot more excited about talented filmmakers playing a game of Exquisite Corpse than some blueprinted glorified TV series of a trilogy.

But Abrams clearly cared about Rey’s birth

It is odd that people seem to think Abrams had a masterplan, when literally nothing in his career suggests he thinks that far ahead. He’s always been the guy who just throws shit at the screen to get the ball rolling, with little regard of how or why or what anything means in terms of story or character, if its shiny…

Yeah, my feelings about Snoke after TFA echoed my feelings about the Emperor after TESB: “Why should I care about this old evil dude who just barely appeared in the movie?” They may still turn Snoke into a compelling villain if they revisit the character for prequels, but he served his purpose in the current trilogy…

I might as well assume that nothing that was revealed in this one is necessarily going to stay true.

I’m not 10 so it has to be the latter.

If it turns out that that’s NOT who Rey’s parent’s were, I’ll eat MY hat.

I will die with you on that hill, especially with regard to Snoke. With Rey, there is at least a question implied by TFA, but it was a question that was of far greater significance to the character than to the plot. With Snoke, the writing didn’t even bother to make it a question.

The dumb internet hill I choose to die on is arguing that Abrams and Kasdan didn’t even set up Snoke or Rey’s family as big mysteries — they were there to explore if the next guy wanted to, and he obviously had mixed feelings about what was and wasn’t worth pursuing.

The highest rated episode of The Thick of It had 1.5 million in the UK, the lowest rated episode of Broadchurch had 8.8 million viewers in the UK.

From memory Tennant got a substantial pay increase for the specials year- and Smith made less than that.

There has never been an iteration of Doctor Who that was played by the same person for ten plus years. Capaldi and Smith where there for three each, Tennant was there for five, and Eccleston was there for one.

So much this. When dealing with a hot button issue like this you need to be sure of your facts and careful in your reporting. Otherwise you just give ammunition to the opposition to attack you with.

someone who had been there for ten plus years

yeah, I was thinking the same thing. This post is worded poorly. Based on her words and no follow-ups beyond that, it sounds like as you stated - she went in and told them point blank at the start she wanted as much as Capaldi... which, good for her! But I think if she had to put up a fight, her quotes would’ve been a…

Tom Baker was paid in scarves and kidney pies, as was the custom at the time.

This article completely misconstrues Digital Spy’s reporting in a dangerous way. She demanded that up front — we have no reason to believe that there was pushback, and even less reason to think there was an altercation. Please edit/retract this, it’s both lazy and inaccurate. The BBC wouldn’t be out of line to call…

There is nothing in this article or the linked article that says she had to fight. The linked article says “she made sure that she got paid the same as her Doctor Who predecessor Peter Capaldi” and clearly she did. Maybe she had to negotiate or maybe she just opened with “whatever you paid him, I want the same” and…

What is there in the prequels that could possibly have any relevance to the new movies? They themselves only existed to serve the original trilogy.