I was prepared to come in with a half-assed gag about how this is one of the episodes of all time…but I disliked it even more than I remembered.

It’s not silly enough to be a romp, and it’s not scary enough to be a horror (despite seeming like a Halloween episode, this one apparently aired in April). It doesn’t really engage with the time period or Shakespeare himself in a meaningful way. It’s just blandly there, for the most part.

It’s not very kind to Martha. The Doctor dismisses her concerns about being a Black woman in Elizabethan London. She doesn’t get to do any meaningful doctoring, which would have given her some agency in the story. They didn’t even make her a theatre nerd - she seems to have about as much familiarity with Shakespeare as the average person. But hey, she got to feel sad about the Doctor being hung up on Rose. Character development.

Shakespeare himself doesn’t get much, either - I actually think his initial “rock star” introduction is pretty fun, but he’s little more than a series of gags after that. Much is made about his genius, and his grief over losing Hamnet, but neither comes through in the writing or performance.

Sprinkle in too many references to Rowling that have aged like milk, and we’ve got an episode that I have no desire to revisit again any time soon.

Seven dead as of current reporting, with an unknown number of injuries.

Let’s hope those numbers don’t grow too much.

Edit: Revised down to four (for now), which was a nice adjustment to see.

I don’t think I can agree with that - plenty of Lower Decks episodes seemed reverse-engineered around whatever legacy actors they were able to book, and other legacy actors were just sort of…stuffed in there.

I would agree that they always crafted meaningful stories around that stuff, but that stuff is still pretty foundational - moreso than perhaps any show besides the third season of Picard, which I would enthusiastically hold up as an example of “fan service” (I don’t love the term, but whatever, it fits) done very poorly.

I don’t recall saying I liked the idea. That has no bearing on my interest in discerning what the hell you were talking about.

That interest has reached its limit, though.

Where’s the comparison?

You seem to be taking the fact that they rejected a pitch for a show that you think is a bad idea as evidence that they don’t know what they’re doing, which is…truly dizzying.

Edit: Holy autocorrect.

That’s an awfully strong reaction to a rejected pitch…

It’s very unclear when, exactly, this pitch was made.

But heck, Jean-Luc Picard was 59 to Stewart’s 47, so I’m not sure it matters.

I don’t think the CBC can say “fraudulently” because fraud is a crime and he hasn’t been charged, let alone convicted.

“Allegedly” doesn’t work, because the facts aren’t in dispute.

But I agree, “erroneously” also seems wrong. They probably should have just left the adverb out of it.

But they love conspiracy theories! What a conundrum!

Voyager: “Nemesis”

This is actually a very interesting pick - I tend to think it’s a mistake to try to start someone on an episode that would be considered among “the best,” since after that there’s nowhere to go but down. “Nemesis” fits the bill of something that’s reasonably interesting without being spectacular.

I’m very bad at answering the core question, but I think the beauty of the franchise is that it has a little of everything to offer, and you can tailor recommendations to the person’s tastes.

Do they like medical dramas? Procedural mysteries? Musicals? Gritty war stories? There’s something in there for everyone.