Doctor Who

Skip to: New Posts  Last Post
Page:  Next »
Posted by SolarSystem
September 17, 2015 8:31 pm
#841

Late to the party, but my two cents on this:
I think Liberty already explained it quite well. Time travel is complicated, but I think in this case it makes total sense. Those pics were taken in the 1960s and even further back, so basically anyone could have collected them one day after they were taken. Of course Clive needed to do some digging to find them, in archives, libraries, you name it. But it's definitely possible. And even if 8 had regenerated into 9 only one or two weeks before meeting Rose (and I'm indeed speaking of his personal time line here), he would have had enough time to travel through space and time a bit.
It would have been nice though to see some of the older Doctors in Clive's papers, but I agree with Liberty: He probably only concentrated on the Doctor with Eccleston's face. Simply because he doesn't have any idea about regeneration.


He could also have travelled to those same times and places in any of his other forms, the Doctor's timeline crisscrosses all over time and space.

But not his very own time line. He mentions this several times, that's why he can't go back to Gallifrey and change history. You can't travel back and forth on your personal time line. Or at least you shouldn't.
 


___________________________________________________
"Am I the current King of England?

"I see no shame in having an unhealthy obsession with something." - David Tennant
"We did observe." - David Tennant in "Richard II"

 
 
Posted by ukaunz
September 17, 2015 9:04 pm
#842

Well said. I was finding it too hard to explain, with my limited knowledge, so I gave up


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
Posted by ukaunz
September 17, 2015 9:07 pm
#843

I was trying to explain that different incarnations of the doctor can show up in the same time and place, and can even meet each other. However the same incarnation can show up in the same time and place as himself (like in "Father's Day") but they shouldn't interact with each other, is this right?


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
Posted by SolarSystem
September 17, 2015 9:20 pm
#844

ukaunz wrote:

I was trying to explain that different incarnations of the doctor can show up in the same time and place, and can even meet each other. However the same incarnation can show up in the same time and place as himself (like in "Father's Day") but they shouldn't interact with each other, is this right?

Mixed messages, I would say. In "The Day of the Doctor" we first see three incarnations of The Doctor interact and eventually all of them, if only via monitor. I'm not familiar with old Who, so I don't know how it was handled then. But with RTD's Who the philosophy seemed to be that The Doctor really shouldn't travel to the same place and time he'd been before, even if it was another incarnation. It's still the same Doctor, I mean...
The way I see it, Moffat just ignored this and did his own thing, and so we got 10, 12 and the War Doctor together in one room.
 


___________________________________________________
"Am I the current King of England?

"I see no shame in having an unhealthy obsession with something." - David Tennant
"We did observe." - David Tennant in "Richard II"

 
 
Posted by ukaunz
September 17, 2015 10:26 pm
#845

Yes it has been done several times since Moffatt took over, that I can recall


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
Posted by SolarSystem
September 18, 2015 10:03 pm
#846

Interesting...! Although during the first 30 seconds, another Sherlock moment... "Something or other"... reminds me of something...
http://veritypodcast.tumblr.com/post/129349295879/non-ukians-watch-the-doctors-meditation


___________________________________________________
"Am I the current King of England?

"I see no shame in having an unhealthy obsession with something." - David Tennant
"We did observe." - David Tennant in "Richard II"

 
 
Posted by Liberty
September 19, 2015 5:24 pm
#847

Yes, I liked that moment! 

This has been strongly hinted at, but now apparently confirmed:

Jenna Coleman is leaving Doctor Who.

I feel a bit mean saying that it's good news!  I think Jenna did a good job, and it was probably good to have some continuity with the new incarnation of the Doctor, but I'd be happy to see a different companion.

Anyway, Doctor Who about to start soon, here in the UK!
 

Last edited by Liberty (September 19, 2015 5:26 pm)

 
Posted by SolarSystem
September 19, 2015 9:19 pm
#848

I agree with everything you say in your spoiler. At the same time, I'm a bit worried about what may come next...


___________________________________________________
"Am I the current King of England?

"I see no shame in having an unhealthy obsession with something." - David Tennant
"We did observe." - David Tennant in "Richard II"

 
 
Posted by Russell
September 19, 2015 10:22 pm
#849

Oooh…. are you guys talking about something in the premiere?  *avoids the link for the moment*  I can't wait for tonight!  *claps*      Couple more hours!  And think I'll watch the Christmas re-run that's before it, if not for the funny, sad, sweetness of.  Did you guys hear Jenna actually is quitting this time?  To star in a new drama about Queen Victoria.  Interesting… combined with the way their relationship has grown and talk of 'consequences' of the Doctor's (and traveling with him), wonder what the ending arc will be like.


_________________________________________________________________________

We solve crimes, I blog about it, and he forgets his pants.  I wouldn't hold out too much hope!

Just this morning you were all tiny and small and made of clay!

I'm working my way up the greasy pole.  It's… very greasy.  And…  pole-shaped.
 
Posted by SolarSystem
September 19, 2015 10:39 pm
#850

Russell, the spoiler is not really about the first episode, it mainly has to do with... Jenna.
Anyway, I just finished watching the premiere and oh my... I don't I like it very much.

I liked the fact that we saw The Shadow Proclamation once again - I think it even was the same actress as in S4 - and the Ood. For a moment it felt a bit like RTD's Who again there. But apart from that... once again, not enough of the Doctor - and when he finally appeared (apart from the beginning of the episode) it just felt totally wrong to me. Even considering the fact that Clara actually states that he normally doesn't behave like this... it felt wrong. Very cool and all that, yes, but I just couldn't connect to it at all. And this basically goes for the whole episode, I'm afraid. Once again Moffat is giving us some huge revelation (about Davros and the Doctor), and once again it just feels to me like he's showing off.
Nevertheless, and this might sound absurd, I like Capaldi's Doctor very, very much. At this point Capaldi might be the only reason why I'm still watching DW, to be honest...

Last edited by SolarSystem (September 19, 2015 10:39 pm)


___________________________________________________
"Am I the current King of England?

"I see no shame in having an unhealthy obsession with something." - David Tennant
"We did observe." - David Tennant in "Richard II"

 
 
Posted by Liberty
September 20, 2015 6:50 am
#851

Yes, that was all the spoiler was, but I put it in spoiler tags because I suppose if you know it, you're going to be waiting for it to happen in the series.  I posted another spoiler link a page back, to the episode guide in the Radio Times.   Now that does have some spoilers and there's been a bit of a fuss about whether too much has been revealed: just a warning if you really don't want spoilers (I don't mind one or two).

Anyway, I loved the new episode (even though I agree with what you say about it, Solar!).  I'll post everything in spoilers I know it  hasn't been broadcast everywhere yet.

Capaldi is confirmed as my favourite Doctor, even though he didn't come in till late in the show.  I did think his entrance was silly, but it still made me laugh, particularly after the comment about looking for an anachronism.    Missy/Michelle Gomez was just fantastic.  I loved her delivery of every line.   Although she's basically evil and the Doctor is basically good, they do seem to echo each other - both have that combination of childishness and something darker.  You can imagine them playing together as children.  Loved the Tom Baker clip  and the way it was used.  I thought Davros was great too. 

Clearly this is not the last time we're going to see Missy, Clara and the Tardis despite how it seems. 

So ... we know Davros survives in this timeline.  What is the Doctor ashamed of?  Threatening a child, abandoing a child, killing a child or allowing an evil warmongering dictator to live?  Did he save Davros, and start him on his path to evil?  Did he leave him in the minefield, but Davros found his own way out and the experience of being abandoned by the Doctor was what turned him evil?   Is Davros a common name, and the child was a completely different Davros?  Kidding about the last one. 

More of the Doctor's dilemma in the Tom Baker clip:



I do like that Moffat is a fan and I think that comes across.  However, I do think he maybe does a bit too much of rewriting the classic stuff, putting his own mark on it.  Now, if anybody watches any of the original Dalek episodes, they'll have to bear in mind this episode and the choice the Doctor had with Davros.  And that kind of thing seems to happen a lot.   Maybe it's a good thing: I don't know.  It makes me a bit uncomfortable.   One of the reasons I wasn't so keen on Clara is that Moffat seemed to be making her too important to the Doctor - all incarnations of the Doctor. 

Last edited by Liberty (September 20, 2015 8:08 am)

 
Posted by SolarSystem
September 20, 2015 11:23 am
#852

Capaldi is confirmed as my favourite Doctor, even though he didn't come in till late in the show.  I did think his entrance was silly, but it still made me laugh, particularly after the comment about looking for an anachronism.
 
I agree, that anachronism-moment made me laugh, too. It just dragged on for too long.

 

I do like that Moffat is a fan and I think that comes across.  However, I do think he maybe does a bit too much of rewriting the classic stuff, putting his own mark on it.  Now, if anybody watches any of the original Dalek episodes, they'll have to bear in mind this episode and the choice the Doctor had with Davros.  And that kind of thing seems to happen a lot.   Maybe it's a good thing: I don't know.  It makes me a bit uncomfortable.   One of the reasons I wasn't so keen on Clara is that Moffat seemed to be making her too important to the Doctor - all incarnations of the Doctor.

I totally agree with everything you're saying here. There is nothing wrong with a fanboy imprinting his own ideas onto something, after all that's what Mofftiss are doing with "Sherlock" very convincingly.
With DW however I can't help but feel that it's not just about imprinting your own ideas onto a show that has been in existence for over 50 years anymore. To me it feels more and more as if Moffat is usurping everything that is the universe of "Doctor Who" in order to turn it into something like "Doctor Who according to Steven Moffat". Almost everything he does is having consequences for what we've known about DW up until now - and I'm not sure I like that. Everything has to be more important, more awesome, charged with more meaning than ever before. It feels a bit self-important to me, to tell the truth.
And yes, Clara is one of the 'things' that is charged with meaning to the extreme. Not just meaning to the Doctor, but meaning to the whole show. She is not a 'normal' companion, I think that has been obvious from the get-go, and I'm not too happy with it. Like I said when we were talking about S8, it sometimes feels like the "Clara Oswald Show". It's certainly nice to have a clever companion and a companion that means a lot to the Doctor - and I mean, we've had this before, Rose certainly meant a lot to Ten, but on a completely different level. A more natural level, if you know what I mean. With Clara everything is so... heavy with meaning.

 

Last edited by SolarSystem (September 20, 2015 5:09 pm)


___________________________________________________
"Am I the current King of England?

"I see no shame in having an unhealthy obsession with something." - David Tennant
"We did observe." - David Tennant in "Richard II"

 
 
Posted by Liberty
September 20, 2015 3:08 pm
#853

Yes, you've explained it much better than I could, Solar.  I still love the show but this aspect does bother me.

 
Posted by Russell
September 21, 2015 6:21 pm
#854

Oh.  My.  Goodness.  That ep!  And just nodding at everything you guys said about!  Very well put, already. 

At first I was super excited... I think that's partly the feeling you get with just seeing a favorite again, live on the screen, and just taking it all in without too much criticism.  Add in the wide-eyed 'whoah' moments with Davros and Missy at first (and how delightful she is to watch!) and how they were nicely integrating canon stuff, and... yeah, was excited. 

But yes, I agree with Solar... it's fun to give us fan-loving nods to the Classics... it's fun to creatively play with the Doctor's story (and sometimes it works super)...  It's also getting a little tiring sometimes feeling like Moffat is going 'hee hee hee! they'll never see THIS [revelation/change in history] coming!' and showing off tweaking as much of "what really happened" as he can get away with.  And yes, how much 'Meaning' is attached to things.  As utterly fascinating as it was to indulge the idea that the Doctor was to blame for such 'huge' things in his past, I'm not sure how that sits with the overall canon, or feeling thrown off by his character with the anachronism bit dragging on (as fun as it was to get a moment like that!!).  So many capital-W 'why's? this time around for me.  ;P  In particular, with him 'dying'.  Really, what?  How, why... how does he know he's Dying-dying to the point of sending Missy his confession?  River gave him extra regenerations, no?!  Not to mention, like Clara said, that it felt 'wrong'.
Just getting that off chest... we'll see.  Despite his harsher regard for some things, still loving Capaldi's Doctor, though, and watching for him.

Also, take a look at the list of episode titles we're getting this season... anyone else find it interesting they seem to be all paired up?


_________________________________________________________________________

We solve crimes, I blog about it, and he forgets his pants.  I wouldn't hold out too much hope!

Just this morning you were all tiny and small and made of clay!

I'm working my way up the greasy pole.  It's… very greasy.  And…  pole-shaped.
 
Posted by Liberty
September 21, 2015 8:58 pm
#855

Yes, have you looked at the episode guide?  And this (spoiler warning again!)?  I wasn't sure if the episodes were paired, or of it they were double episodes (one story over two weeks - I'm not sure what the correct term is).   Steven Moffat has said “We’re doing more two-parters – and not just conventional two-parters. We’re doing linked stories where you might not be sure how they’re going to be connected until you see them. We’re pushing the storytelling that way, to give us more scale of adventure.” This first one

is obviousy the first of a two-parter, but the others might be "linked stories".  The paired episodes don't always have the same writers. 

Oh, did you notice that Reece Shearsmith is appearing in the Mark Gatiss episode?  League of Gentlemen reunited!  And Rebecca Front from The Thick of It is appearing in another episode!  Episode 11 looks really interesting.

Yes, there are two many "why"s (and too many "how"s too).  I'm hoping some will get explained in the next episode (why the Doctor is dying, how Missy survived, etc.).  Obviously the Doctor isn't going to die - actually getting a bit fed up of people dying or being about to die, and then being alive (Sherlock is just as bad sometimes!). 

Is it safe to stop spoiling yet, do you think?  Now that Ep1 has been broadcast.  I'm still aware that the episode descriptions are kind of spoilery. 

 

Last edited by Liberty (September 21, 2015 8:59 pm)

 
Posted by Russell
September 24, 2015 4:04 am
#856

No, I didn't Liberty, but thanks!  I don't mind little stuff here and there, but passed it over for the time being because I wasn't sure how much it gave away about the season.  Just thought the shift in storytelling was interesting, but yeah… really not sure about some of the things they're throwing at us again!


_________________________________________________________________________

We solve crimes, I blog about it, and he forgets his pants.  I wouldn't hold out too much hope!

Just this morning you were all tiny and small and made of clay!

I'm working my way up the greasy pole.  It's… very greasy.  And…  pole-shaped.
 
Posted by Liberty
September 24, 2015 6:27 am
#857

I've half looked at the links, but reading thefirst episode guide (now safe to read!) it is surprisingly spoilery.   I think they do spoil certain aspects, and they give hints about the cliffhangers at the ends of the episodes.   Even being told that there are going to be

Daleks

, means

the child's name

wouldn't be such a shock (great moment!). 

 
Posted by Liberty
September 27, 2015 8:30 am
#858

How long do you like to have spoiler tags for after the episode has aired?  I can't remember how long we waited last time?  Anyway, I'll put this in spoilers for now:

So the Doctor had to go back in time to give Davros the concept of mercy to give to the Daleks, but the reason he knew he had to go back in time to do that was because the Daleks already had the concept of mercy, and so he worked out that he must have given them it, and therefore that he had to go back in time to do that, so that they'd have it, so that he could know that he'd gone back in time to give them it, so that .... and what if he'd accidently stepped on a butterfly?  Ah!  Time travel - best not to think too much about it. 

Anyway, I loved this episode!  Top notch performances all round.   There seemed to be quite a bit of flagging up so that you could guess what was going to happen next (oh, the Doctor's going to be in the Davros "seat", Missy's going to lie to the Doctor about Clara being in the Dalek, the Doctor's going to find out that it was he who gave the Daleks the concept of mercy and that's going to explain what he does with Davros the child), but, I quite like that - it's meant to be for children, after all, and I can be a bit slow on the uptake, so I get some satisfaction about guessing ahead of time, etc.). 

Loved the whole Davros/Doctor interaction, especially when Davros turned out to be as evil as ever (it would have been so disappointing if he hadn't been!) and the Doctor turned out to be manipulating him too (but how far ahead was the Doctor?  Had he guessed Clara was alive, etc?  Was it all an act?  He obviously seemed to know from the beginning that the Tardis would survive.  He knew about the sewers - was he planning to do what he did all along?   But then it did seem as if Missy "saved" him - what was his plan if she hadn't arrived at that moment?   I'm going to have to watch it again). 

I loved Missy/the Master in this. I liked her in the last series, but she has really come into her own in this one.   Michelle Gomez seems to play her as a scarily intelligent and amoral school bully.   Some brilliant moments, like pushing Clara into the sewer to see how deep it was, the very thinly veiled deception of the Doctor over Clara in the dalek (didn't it look as if she wanted to be caught out?), poking Davros in the eye! 

Our questions from the first episode were (mostly) answered.  It looks like the Doctor's "confession" is going to be part of the story arc for the series.  Interesting to see Clara back as a Dalek after the way we were first introduced to her (hazy as that memory is).  I wonder if Daleks will be somehow involved in her exit?

Did I glimpse Hartnell and Baker running between the pillars? 

Minor quibble: is it necessary for Steven Moffat to go back and make everything his own - to the extent that his Doctor has changed the nature of the Davros and the Daleks right from their creation?   Come to think of it, was it the Doctor using the Dalek gun and saying "exterminate" that gave Davros/them that word too?  Or did he just do it to associate exterminate/Dalek/mercy in the young Davros? 

The next episode looks interesting too ... but a bit scary, judging by the trailer!

 
Posted by SolarSystem
September 27, 2015 10:31 am
#859

Haven't seen the new episode yet, just wanted to give my two cents to the spoiler tag question:
As far as I'm concerned we can just skip the spoiler tag completely at this point. I think everyone who comes to this thread is a Whovian (more or less) and knows that new episodes are the topic of discussion here right now. We could start our posts with something like "This is about Episode 9.2" or something like that, but other than that... I think it's fine to continue this discussion without using spoiler tags.

Oh, and since I saw your question, Liberty:

Liberty wrote:

Minor quibble: is it necessary for Steven Moffat to go back and make everything his own

I would say the answer is: Yes. I think that he thinks that it's necessary to make as much of Doctor Who his own as possible, to claim as much for himself as possible. I don't know why that is, but I think it can't be overlooked anymore and has been obvious for quite some time now - even to someone like me who isn't very familiar with classic Who. Don't get me wrong, I love it when things from the past (haha, yeah, I know, time travel, the past... what is the past anyway... but you know what I mean) get interwoven with present things, when it's apparent that the show knows where it's coming from, when we get nods to earlier Doctors and earlier stories. Still, I am convinced that you can do this without continuously changing the past - "Star Trek" is a great example for this, from "The Next Generation" to "Enterprise" we got lots of nods to TOS, but it were nods and not changes that rewrote history. (The movies by JJ Abrams are something completely different of course, he clearly IS rewriting history.)

 


___________________________________________________
"Am I the current King of England?

"I see no shame in having an unhealthy obsession with something." - David Tennant
"We did observe." - David Tennant in "Richard II"

 
 
Posted by Liberty
September 27, 2015 3:45 pm
#860

The history rewriting in the JJ Abrams Star Trek movies annoys me too!  I think they're great to watch, but a lot feels wrong, particularly Spock (just about everybody's favourite character in TOS) and his relationship with other characters.   But I'm OT.  Thanks for your answer.  We've just started a new series and already the creation of the Daleks has been altered.   Goodness knows how much will have changed forever by the end of the series!  Although I watched the original episodes and loved them as a child, they ended up sometimes boring me (what a confession!) as an adult.  I like Steven Moffat's writing and I think he's improving on the old versions, while still paying homage to them.   But this aspect of stamping his mark on them (and it's just him, isn't it?  Not the other writers so much?) starts to cross a line by changing how we have to view those old episodes, and by setting things up in a certain way for future writers. 

Spoilers for The Witch's Familiar follow!
One issue I have with the "mercy" thing, is why didn't the Doctor think of it earlier?   The Daleks had always been aware of mercy and able to say the word - why didn't he wonder about that before the Clara Dalek said it?   Years ago?  Maybe he just didn't think about it?   But if they'd always had that concept, then he'd have thought of the Daleks as beings who had that concept and wouldn't have felt it was inconsistent when ClaraDalek said it?   River doesn't seem to think it is in this clip.

Last edited by Liberty (September 27, 2015 3:46 pm)

 


Page:  Next »

 
Main page
Login
Desktop format