Okay, so I watched the second episode now (well, I already watched it on Sunday, but I just couldn't really bring myself to write anything about it...).
To be honest, I'm a bit underwhelmed. Well, I have been underwhelmed for quite some time now, but the fact that it seems to stay this way almost makes me cry.
What those first two episodes come down to for me is:
1. "Where did he get the cup of tea? Answer: I'm the Doctor, just accept it!"
and
2. Sonic Sunglasses.

Oh boy. So this is "Doctor Who" now? Anything goes? Just because he is the Doctor anything goes...?
This is far too arbitrary for my taste. Time Lord or not, things shouldn't get arbitrary. I want this universe to make sense, and I don't want - as you've already mentioned, Liberty - Moffat to stamp his mark on almost everything we knew as canon and change it around. Sonic sunglasses, really...? What's next? The Tardis turns from a blue police box into a red phone box...?
All that being said, I almost can't believe it myself, but the scene with Clara inside the Dalek, trying to make clear to the Doctor that she is Clara and not a Dalek... actually made me cry. Looking into her face, into her eyes, seeing her desperation... wow, I think I never felt so close to her ever before. Seeing to two of them being reunited was quite wonderful.

Yes, there is, but the idea isn't really grabbing me.   I suppose it might be more appealing to children (and also I might be proved wrong and it might be fantastic!). 

I didn't watch last night because I was on my own and it looked like a scary episode!   I'm hoping to catch up later today. 

Solar, I agree that the scene with Clara in the Dalek was moving.  I did feel frustrated that she didn't think to give him a message in a way a Dalek could say (something simple like "Clara is inside", for instance).   But I suppose the point was that she was so emotional, she couldn't, and the emotion was working against her - a bit of a parallel with the Doctor's compassion (even if he was faking it!). 

Sonic sunglasses, I can accept, as I was never a big fan of the sonic screwdriver anyway.  I suppose it's meant to be funny and cool, a bit like the guitar.  I'm wondering if there's some doubt about Capaldi connecting with children/young adults due to his age, and they're trying to make him more appealling to them?  If tha's the case, I don't agree that there's a problem.   I think he's capable of showing a childlike side (as is Missy, to the extreme!) that chlidren can identify with, and they should rely on the acting rather than gimmicks.   But I might be wrong about their intentions (guitars and shades are probably more like to appeal to the middle-aged group than the kids). 

SolarSystem wrote:

Oh boy. So this is "Doctor Who" now? Anything goes? Just because he is the Doctor anything goes...?

Liberty wrote:

Solar, I agree that the scene with Clara in the Dalek was moving.  I did feel frustrated that she didn't think to give him a message in a way a Dalek could say (something simple like "Clara is inside", for instance).   But I suppose the point was that she was so emotional, she couldn't, and the emotion was working against her - a bit of a parallel with the Doctor's compassion (even if he was faking it!). 

 
This, and this.
Missed last week's ep and didn't get around to it til the beginning of the weekend, so thought reserve thoughts until saw the newest one, too.  And just...  Wow. The second episode did make me feel better with what they did with it (despite still initial 'wth, why are you changing the history to your liking, again?' feelings), and still get a huge kick out of watching Missy! Clara was incredibly moving in the Dalek, but ha, I had the exact same thought Liberty - 'say something about where Clara is!!' 
Kind of impressive having Davros and Doctor be two sides of the coin like that... but yeah, the only thing that still bugs me is the 'anything goes' like Solar mentioned.  Sunglasses?  A cup of tea?  Seriously?  And good point up there with the 'mercy' thing.
Also, a simultaneous 'stupid forehead-slapping moment' and 'superly bemused dance' at only realizing (the next morning!) what exactly Missy's 'very clever idea' at the end was. Did any of you catch that quicker than me, or realize what they hinted to us? 

And third episode... (which not sure if you've watched).  Also wow... getting back to what I've heard of the 'classics' in a different way, it seems, with how the old ones were often described as 'a proper creeper!'  Definitely cleverly mixing elements of the story, clues, and scariness, with Capaldi still doing a great job making the Doctor 'his'. Props to neatly creative, different situation/place again, and the usage of a deaf character (leading to the lip-reading!)  Although while it's great for expanding the story, these habitual two-parters may be the death of me.   

I was reading an essay by Michael Chabon about Sherlockian fan fiction, and this bit struck me as perhaps an explanation for Moffat's need to rewrite Doctor Who history (emphasis is mine):

"Through parody and pastiche, allusion and homage, retelling and reimagining the stories that were told before us and that we have come of age loving—amateurs—we proceed, seeking out the blank places in the map that our favorite writers, in their greatness and negligence, have left for us, hoping to pass on to our own readers—should we be lucky enough to find any—some of the pleasure that we ourselves have taken in the stuff we love: to get in on the game.” -- Michael Chabon, "Fan Fictions: On Sherlock Holmes", from the book Maps and Legends

So Moffat likes to find the spaces in DW history that he can expand on to make new stories. I'm not sure how I feel about it myself, since I've only been watching new DW for a couple of months at most. It seems that a lot of fans find Moffat's writing almost sacrilegious?

Last edited by ukaunz (October 5, 2015 11:34 pm)

No, Russell, I still don't know what Missy's clever idea is!  (Vortex manipulator? Timelord/Dalek alliance/hybrid? Making them all fire at each other?  Poking them in the eye with her pointy stick?).  Do give a clue, in spoilers if necessary!

I really liked the third episode.  The enclosed setting and ghost/horror theme reminded me a little of Mummy on the Orient Express (one of my favourites from last series).   I thought the use of the deaf character was great: she came across very strongly, despite not speaking.  It was kind of obvious from the beginning that she was gong to be used to interpret the ghosts, but that was fine.  I thought the "co-ordinates" seemed vague - a bit of a jump from sword to forsaken - how would anyone know which abandoned town to look for in the whole of earth?   Or did I miss something? 

The Doctor was on top form.  It seemed a bit soon for an "OMG the doctor is dead/dying" cliffhanger yet again, even though we know that he's not. 

(My current guess is a hologram, given that we've already seen a hologram being used in the episode).  Edit: after watching the trailer, I don't think it can be that simple.  Don't laugh, but I was watching on an old TV and it looked as if the Doctor was wearing his shades, rather than having empty eyes!  It seems that the Doctor has to somehow "die" and project a message.  My son pointed out something I'd missed: that the translator doesn't see the runes, so there's no point in the ghosts killing him (he can't send a message).   I suppose that will be important later.  Also, who's in the pod?  The Doctor?  The baddie? 

Last edited by Liberty (October 6, 2015 8:23 pm)

Oh, I see, yes, about Missy - yes, I did think about that story and wondered if that's what she was referring to as a very clever idea.  It's nice that they set it up like that - not that we'd have believed that she would die there anyway!  She's got to come back before the end of the series, hasn't she, as she has that last will and testament to reveal.   I have a feeling that's an ongoing story arc and that's (maybe) why we don't know why the doctor thought he was dying yet. 

.  Yes, I feel a complete fool now for thinking those were sunglasses.  I also didn't know that you couldn't project holograms underwater.   On the other hand ... the ghosts aren't actual corpses, but radio waves, so a sort of hologram - does the person actually need to be dead?   Would suspended animation work?  In which case, has the Doctor gone back and put himself in the pod in suspended animation?  However, it would make more sense for an alien to be in the pod, and for it to be behind the sending of signals.

About the translator not seeing the runes.   I think the Doctor was saying the runes were an "earworm" so the ghosts who had broadcast them would have to have seen the runes to do that ... and they were kiling other people who had seen the runes so that they could add strength to the broadcast.   No point in killing people who hadn't seen the runes, as they couldn't send the message.   My son pointed out that the translator was the only one who hadn't seen the runes, and that was why the ghosts didn't harm him in the corridor.  (It was him, wasn't it?  I haven't got him mixed up with the other guy?).  Why knowing the words that the runes stood for wasn't enough to be an earworm, I don't know.   And maybe I'm talking rubbish here anyway!  I just enjoy speculating wildly and being proved wrong . 

Yes, and they did say that it doesn't seem to be the pilot who's in the pod.   This isn't just a crashed spaceship sending messages home

I don't really have an answer to your question, Liberty, I'm afraid. Did you google the bootstrap paradox? I did and it brought me here:
http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2015-10-10/doctor-who-what-is-the-bootstrap-paradox

I still don't fully get it. And furthermore, I don't think it explains how the hologram was able to open the Faraday cage, I don't think that's really related to the paradox but probably... sloppy writing.
I guess I'll have to watch the episode again in order to really understand how all of it worked and to verify that the paradox stuff really made sense. I never had any problems with the paradoxes in the "Back to the Future"-films, maybe they were a bit less complicated and well, the idea there was to avoid creating paradoxes altogether. "Before the Flood" however loved creating them... and I actually enjoyed most of it.

By the way: I can't shake the feeling that the writer of this episode knew that this whole paradox business is so complicated (thanks to the way the episode is written, of course), that the audience would have trouble to fully understand what's going on. So the Doctor had to tell the audience to google the term "bootstrap paradox" and wow, what a surprise, this wonderfully arranged website appears and the whole thing is explained at great length. Which is kind of neat, but which also makes me suspect that the whole paradox idea became far too complicated to be dealt with properly in 45 minutes - which in my opinion wouldn't be decent writing.

Liberty wrote:

The only explanation I can think of to satisfy myself about O'Donnell's ghost appearing so late (surely she would have been there all along, having died in the past?)  is that the Doctor had to see O'Donnell die without previously seeing her ghost to "test" the words from his hologram - the hologram has to accurately "predict" it, rather than just recite the names of the people we'd already seen as ghosts.   That was how he knew he had to programme the hologram and why.   So it becomes another paradox - in a timeline where O'Donnell's ghost was there, the Doctor wouldn't have known what to do.  So O'Donnell's ghost only appears in the present when there is a Doctor in the past that knows to programme the hologram to say her name in that order, and that can't happen until what the hologram says has been sent back from the future, i.e. it's part of the paradox..  But maybe there's a better explanation.   (Or maybe it really is a minor plot hole?).

I think you're onto something here, and I also think it might be a plot hole. The actions in the past change the present, and there also is the question: Would anybody in the present even know O'Donnell if she had died in the past? It certainly is some kind of paradox. Also, why did her ghost appear at the exact moment in the present it did, and not six hours sooner or two days later...? For some reason it appeared in 'the right order', according to the Doctor's list. But why?

About the hologram entering the Faraday cage: I'm not sure, but thinking about the holographic doctor in "Star Trek Voyager" it does at least make sense that a hologram can touch and move things (and people). I'm not sure about the Faraday cage though, because it is used to block electric fields. Could a hologram even be projected into the cage?