Brontoforumus Archive

Discussion Boards => Media => Topic started by: Bongo Bill on February 23, 2008, 10:22:56 PM

Title: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bongo Bill on February 23, 2008, 10:22:56 PM
(http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/7198/doctorwhatnowky3.gif)

Anyway, Doctor Who is neat. I like to watch it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Detonator on February 23, 2008, 10:51:43 PM
I will keep posting in this thread so I can see the topic icon pop up over and over.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on February 29, 2008, 01:30:02 AM
#1 of the new comic is out.  It's so-so.  I'm still not crazy about Roche's art but it looks a lot better here than in Transformers.  It's actually a relief to see the characters drawn in a stylized way; few things annoy me as much as TV- and movie-based comics where the artists slavishly draw the actors.  (Serenity, I'm looking in your direction.)

Not much to the plot -- it's the old "alien collects the last survivor of each extinct race" bit.  Martha's dialogue seems off in a couple places; I don't recall her generally addressing people as "mate" on the show.  It also seems to lack the show's racial awareness -- while Martha's race has never been a major issue on the show before, it's never been ignored, either; here we see her sharing a milkshake with the Doctor in a 1958 diner without any kind of acknowledgement that this would be an unusual sight.

Really the setup was the best part; the premise was nicely explained in a few pages, complete with shots of the destruction of Gallifrey, and then on to whimsy, adventure, and suicidal insanity aboard the TARDIS.

All in all, it's like most of IDW's books: not a bad read, but damn that $4 cover price stings.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 06, 2008, 11:21:57 PM
Season 4 spoilers. (http://www.whatsontv.co.uk/news/2911)  (Remember, take everything the British press says, ever, with a grain of salt, but these sound plausible.)

Quote
[spoiler]PM Harriet Jones, played by Penelope Wilton, will pose a threat to the Time Lord - as the mother of all Daleks, according to The Sun.[/spoiler]

Oh good, another episode about Daleks becoming human, and vice-versa.  Haven't had NEARLY enough of THOSE.

Quote
[spoiler]Also in the show, classic enemy Davros, played by Julian Bleach, returns to build a new race of Daleks after just one, called Caan, was left alive last year.[/spoiler]

[...]

[spoiler]Catherine Tate and Billie Piper return as Donna Noble and Rose Tyler, and Elisabeth Sladen is back as Sarah Jane Smith.[/spoiler]

sylvestermccoy.com (http://www.sylvestermccoy.com/newdoctorwho/) (not an official site) has more, much of which is implausible (Robert Carlyle has already denied (http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/cult/a90284/robert-carlyle-denies-doctor-who-rumours.html) being in talks to replace Tennant).  It WOULD be cool to see a "Four Doctors" reunion ep for the 45th anniversary, though.

Also, there's been a game announced for PC, DS, and PS2.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 13, 2008, 11:08:39 AM
Issue #2 of the new comic series is far superior to #1.  A good story, tightly told, with a lot going on.  Dialogue's better, the story's much less derivative.  The "people getting turned into sand statues" plot is just silly enough, and the Ancient Egypt exposition just long enough, without either one becoming a distraction.

Of course, unlike issue #1, this isn't restricted by being a single-issue story; there are a lot of threads still to be picked up next month.  That's New Earth on the cover of #3; presumably it's set sometime between the two TV trips there.

Anyway.  #2's good.  Pick it up.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 22, 2008, 05:05:59 PM
Beeb (http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/) has a new Season 4 trailer up.  Picture quality is roughly shit so there wasn't much I could draw from it, but:

1. From the couple of lines she speaks, Donna DOES seem less obnoxious this time around;
2. Confirmation: Rose is back this season.  If the episode synopses I linked above are to be believed, she'll show up in Moffat's two-parter.

Still no for-sure premier date, but smart money says the 12th.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 29, 2008, 07:28:18 PM
Still no for-sure premier date, but smart money says the 12th.

Nope, one week sooner, ie next Saturday, the 5th.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on March 30, 2008, 06:49:17 PM
Yay. Something to look forward to.

Did I ever mention that I have a weird kind of personal identification with this fucking thing? Back when we finally got electricity and eventually a TV (never did stoop to plumbing. We retained an outhouse with a bunch of repurposed stained glass church windows on account of my parents' smartassery) I used to stay up until midnight watching these things on public TV with my father while getting a secondhand high on the couch.

Then, somehow, I grew up to be a peter-pannishly horrible non-aging thing going by an intentionally alienating epithet who picks up young girls, goes on whirlwind adventures to nowhere in particular, and spends ten minutes being crushed when they disembark. Then needily grabbing an new companion and going on with something different. I almost wish the fucker would just crash somewhere and settle the hell down so I could see how that would turn out. Beyond "the life I could have had with you" dream sequences, anyway.

So there's my excuse to be watching what amounts to goofball foreign children's television. What's yours?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 30, 2008, 07:43:26 PM
I don't think you're alone in this crowd in being an overgrown man-child in a state of arrested development (suggests the man in a Lorax T-shirt).

Suppose I've been attracted to the British cult scene since Dad rented Holy Grail and a friend loaned me a copy of The Hitchhiker's Guide, both of which happened around age 12.  My love of cheesy science fiction goes back farther still, at least to the live-action Masters of the Universe movie.

I suppose the most intriguing thing about Doctor Who is how much the tiny budget forced them to be creative.  The TARDIS, Daleks, regeneration...there are a lot of immensely clever ideas floating around before Tom Baker ever puts on a scarf.

All that and it's something to talk about with the other overgrown man-children (and women-children) in a state of arrested development.  Or British people.

Plus, the annual Moffat episode invariably proves to be some of the best TV I'll see in a year.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on March 31, 2008, 07:05:15 AM
Good answer.

Also, I tried to watch the first episode of this season of Torchwood, threw up a little, and shut it off.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 31, 2008, 03:39:08 PM
Yeah, like I said, they tricked me into watching the 3 episodes with Martha, which weren't any good beyond the five minutes they spent on what she'd been up to since we last saw her.  (Good recommendation on Out of Time, though; if you happen to stumble across any others that are actually decent, let me know.)

A friend of mine pointed out that there's really going to need to be a big payoff in that direction for Rose to justify bringing her back.  Rose was a decent enough companion but really didn't grow all that much past Father's Day; IMO by the end Jackie was a more interesting character.  (Their economic status was an interesting angle that wasn't developed a whole lot in Rose's case but was always readily apparent in Jackie's.  Also it made for a neat contrast when Martha came aboard.)

The good news is that
If the episode synopses I linked above are to be believed, she'll show up in Moffat's two-parter.

With any luck, Moffat's skill at characterization and simply good time-travel stories (a plausible explanation for how she comes back after all that "she can never come back" stuff would be a plus, whether any of us actually believed that for a second or not) will temper Davies's rather more simplistic desire to top himself every season and kitchen-sink his way through his swan song.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 02, 2008, 11:11:00 PM
Blink, Human Nature/Family of Blood, and Captain Jack Harkness nominated for Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form Hugo (http://www.thehugoawards.org/).  It should come as no surprise whatsoever that the last two have gone to Empty Child/Doctor Dances and Girl in the Fireplace.

Haven't seen the Torchwood ep; suppose it's in auspicious enough company for me to give it a look.  Though in the meantime I've got a DVD of Curse of Fenric, and of course Saturday's premier, to watch.  (And also, on an entirely unrelated note, a copy of Midnight Cowboy that's been sitting on my table for what I think is weeks now.  And tonight's and tomorrow's Stewart and Colbert, and Saturday's Spider-Man.)

And homework.

I guess what I'm saying is I'll download it, but it is low-priority.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 04, 2008, 09:35:53 PM
Incidentally, the season premier's the 18th on Sci-Fi for anyone who prefers to catch it there for whatever reason.  (I'm assuming that'll be the Christmas show, which AFAIK hasn't aired in the US yet.)  That's the closest yet to a season airing simultaneously in the UK and US.  (Obviously this would have been a poor weekend to premier it in the US, what with BSG.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 05, 2008, 06:07:00 PM
Not a bad episode.  Donna's way more tolerable this time around.  Ending was fantastic [spoiler]and shows they've at least put some thought into how Rose returns to Earth-1[/spoiler], aliens were suitably silly, villain was cool [spoiler]and killed off too early -- though I didn't see a body[/spoiler].  Not one of my favorites, but it usually takes a half-dozen episodes before a season gets off the ground, and this was at least good setup.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 06, 2008, 05:14:44 PM
Just watched the season premiere, and I didn't like it that much.  I most took issue with the [spoiler]cartoonish way the villain died, right down to a Wily E. Coyote scream[/spoiler].  But I think what bugged me the most was how much this episode could be categorized as "Doctor is a tool of the man". 

What, really, was the overall problem with the villain's plan?  From what I could tell, the entire thing was a win-win situation for everyone involved.  [spoiler]People get to lose weight while a dying civilization gets to rebuild its numbers.[/spoiler]  But instead of finding some peaceful resolution to this, the Doctor just steps in, declare how Intergalactic Law is being broken, and proceeds to act high and mighty about it.  The only time people were actually in danger was the result of [spoiler]Donna and the Doctor causing the nanny to act defensive and rashly[/spoiler].  It seems like the Doctor took a complete 180 on this sort of issue since "The Unquiet Dead".
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 06, 2008, 06:11:07 PM
I'm not inclined to think that incubating aliens inside of people without their knowledge or consent is a generally positive thing.

Neither is tying up your employees in an office while scary men point guns at them.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 06, 2008, 07:10:18 PM
See, that's the thing, the only reason the plan is evil is because the villain is so dastardly about it.  Had they sat down and hashed out a conversation for like 5 minutes the thing could have been resolved peacefully.  The Doctor, however, insisted on being all "THIS IS WRONG I MUST STOP YOU" throughout.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 06, 2008, 11:32:02 PM
The villain is psychotic and has already set up a "kill a million people" button.  The Doctor's sole attempt to reason with her -- which occurs significantly after she greets him by trying to plunge him to his death -- does not work out.

And if you REALLY want to violate the "it's just a show, I should really just relax" rule of thumb and totally overanalyze, it's probably fair to note that she wasn't helping those people.  You want to lose weight, you eat healthier and exercise more, period.  As soon as she hit her quota and took off [spoiler]-- or tried; remember it's not the Doctor who killed her for her criminal behavior --[/spoiler], all her guinea pigs would have started sliding back to where they started.

Anyway.  All that's rather beside the point, as the plot doesn't exactly hold up to basic scrutiny.  If all she had to do was harvest fat cells, well, the Wile E Coyote comparison works pretty well in that her plan was hilariously elaborate for such a simple purpose.

Lady's crazy.  Not much more to it really.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 13, 2008, 08:47:03 PM
Fires of Pompeii was pretty good.  I particularly liked the bit about speaking Latin and the TARDIS translating it into Gaelic.

Plot was formulaic and thoroughly predictable, but the Pyrovile were cool (though between them, the Family of Blood, Satan, and the sun in 42, we're getting a little heavy on the whole "demonic possession" thing) and Tate's overacting actually fit nicely.  Not as good a "don't change history" ep as Father's Day (though, over-the-top as it is, the explanation for why Pompeii can't be saved at least seems less arbitrary than "if you change history, scary monsters will start making people disappear"), but pretty to look at and does a good job of keeping Donna's role as conscience to an increasingly cold Doctor.

The prophecy thread was interesting, and I was disappointed that they Bad Wolfed it out at the end.  Would have been much better to have left it dangling for a future episode.

(Oh, and the TARDIS as modern art bit is a nod to John Cleese's cameo in City of Death, the best serial ever.)

Ood are back next week.  That should be fun.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 17, 2008, 12:03:38 AM
For those who can't wait until Saturday, Doctor Who #3 is available today at fine comic establishments everywhere.

This series is literally better with every issue.  This month, Nick Roche is off the interior art, replaced by someone named Stefano Martino.  I'm not familiar with the guy's work but I really like it.  His inks in particular stand out, and like most people I don't usually notice inks.  (I also must repeat my earlier praise on the fact that the characters are clearly, immediately recognizable as the Tenth Doctor and Martha, without being sore-thumb reproductions of David Tennant and Freema Agyeman, and to repeat my earlier criticism of the Serenity comic for the sin of populating a comic book with TV actors.)  Also, Kirby dots.

So all right, the writing's not quite as good by comparison; the pacing's good, the exposition is quick, and the premise is solid, but honestly not much happens to develop the story from where we left it last month, and the Doctor's rambling technobabble feels forced.

That said, it's still better than probably a dozen episodes of the current series I could name.  I'm enjoying it, and not feeling quite as bad about the cover price.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 19, 2008, 05:03:27 PM
Planet of the Ood had some pretty cool imagery and moved at a brisk pace.  The allegory was on the lazy side, and Donna's "I can't tell what's right or wrong anymore" comment seemed a bit of a non sequitur for an episode where good and evil are so clearly defined.

We've also got the prophecy du annee, and our first concrete indicator that [spoiler]the Tenth Doctor's days are numbered[/spoiler].  The "let's work some foreshadowing into the ending of an episode with an otherwise self-contained story" bit has been done before in both "Fear Her" and "Gridlock", but it's been employed much more effectively so far in this season.  (Fear Her wasn't nearly as good an ep as this was, and Gridlock is possibly the worst episode of the entire series IMO.)

Next week we've got Martha, UNIT, and Sontarans, so fan service all around.  (Would be just swell to see Nicholas Courtney put in an appearance; he's been quite active over the years doing radio serials and DVD commentaries.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 25, 2008, 01:48:40 PM
Thoughts on season 4 so far:

Donna is probably the worst companion in the history of the show. I'm all for having an older companion who's not obligated to worry about or even mention her parents, which happened way too much over the past three seasons, but good christ, what is the appeal of her character supposed to be? She's loud, she's as starry-eyed and exhaustingly celebratory as Rose or Martha, her sass goes only so far as is necessary to re-assert that she's got sass, her voice sounds like a million screaming british chavs (and this is intentional), she isn't funny, and she doesn't really seem to understand anything, no matter how many times it's explained to her. In short, she only barely fills the role of the ignorant audience while bringing absolutely nothing new to the table.

Fires of Pompeii would've worked a lot better without shoving the random race of psychic rock people bent on world domination into the last fifteen minutes of the episode. In fact, I think it would've been a pretty good episode if it had no bad guy but the inevitable destruction of Pompeii. At least then the decision to let it burn wouldn't have seemed so one-sided and, well, "easy".

Planet of the Ood is pretty much the most formulaic Doctor Who episode I've ever seen. There's a "oh how wonderful the universe and humanity is!" speech at the opening, there's a monster, there's a couple of murders as the Doctor figures out who the bad guy is, and then the bad guy is killed and everything in the entire tri-galaxy radius is solved in the space of a couple of minutes.

After re-watching The Impossible Planet/Satan Pit and Blink with my roommates, it's steadily becoming clear to me how huge the gap in quality is between writers like Moffat or Jones and writers like Davis or Moran. This is a show with nothing to fall back on but the (frankly, fascinating) character of the Doctor, and the story.

Next week we've got Martha, UNIT, and Sontarans, so fan service all around.  (Would be just swell to see Nicholas Courtney put in an appearance; he's been quite active over the years doing radio serials and DVD commentaries.)

Not to imply I didn't love the cult of Skaro, but the sooner we run out of fanservice and move on to something a little less black and white, the better. Getting pretty sick of monster of the week.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on April 25, 2008, 02:23:49 PM
planet of the ood was pretty lame. the "I do evil because I love money" villain is over-used and dull, and the ood's physiology was just nonsensical. donna is still terrible but I'm growing used to it.

I really did not like the implication of fires of pompeii, that the reason terrible events in history had to happen was that something even worse would happen instead. what next, hitler had to slaughter 6 million jews because those six million were actually aliens in disguise?

apart from the megacrabs, I actually liked gridlock
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 25, 2008, 07:59:08 PM
Jesus, Drethelin, you can't even keep from invoking Godwin's Law in a thread about fucking children's television.

Planet of the Ood is pretty much the most formulaic Doctor Who episode I've ever seen. There's a "oh how wonderful the universe and humanity is!" speech at the opening, there's a monster, there's a couple of murders as the Doctor figures out who the bad guy is, and then the bad guy is killed and everything in the entire tri-galaxy radius is solved in the space of a couple of minutes.

No, if the Doctor had been arrested for the murders and his name had only been cleared after the real murderer revealed himself, THEN it would be the most formulaic Doctor Who episode ever.

After re-watching The Impossible Planet/Satan Pit and Blink with my roommates, it's steadily becoming clear to me how huge the gap in quality is between writers like Moffat or Jones and writers like Davis or Moran. This is a show with nothing to fall back on but the (frankly, fascinating) character of the Doctor, and the story.

I liked Martha quite a bit.  And while I thoroughly loathed Donna in her first appearance, I find her tolerable in the current season.

Not to imply I didn't love the cult of Skaro, but the sooner we run out of fanservice and move on to something a little less black and white, the better. Getting pretty sick of monster of the week.

See, I liked the first appearance of the Cult of Skaro, but the Daleks in Manhattan arc was lame.  In fact, I think this season's off to a much better start than some -- End of the World, Aliens of London/World War Three, The Long Game, New Earth, the aforementioned Daleks in Manhattan two-parter, and oh sweet mercy Gridlock all fall into the "bumpy start" category.

Doctor Who's got a lot of history, so it's not the fan service I have a problem with.  I DO think the Daleks have been way, way overused (to repeat what I said earlier in the thread, they only showed up twice in Baker's entire 8-year run, and the second time wasn't very good), but the other nods to the original series -- Autons, Sarah Jane, K9, Cybermen, the Fifth Doctor, and yeah, much of the Daleks' first few appearances -- have been largely well done; the Master arc was great until the last part.  Bringing back Martha and UNIT is a perfectly good idea, and hey, if they can make the Sontarans interesting, I'm all for that too.  Davros isn't inherently a bad idea either, but I sure wish they'd give the Daleks a rest.  Bringing back Rose isn't something that really needed to be done either, obviously.

Continuity's not the problem -- it's Doctor Who, for chrissake.  A good story's a good story; there are plenty of bad eps that DON'T rely on references to earlier stories, and a handful of good ones that do.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 25, 2008, 09:07:11 PM
I've had a lot harder time than most enjoying Doctor Who fanservice. I can't get into the Cybermen because, while they certainly look pretty awesome, there is absolutely nothing to them aside from their desire to blow up the world. I can't get into the Daleks because, while they're sometimes funny, there is absolutely nothing to them aside from their desire to blow up the world. I like the old Doctor Who and all, but it's a lot like regular Doctor Who in that the best thing about it was whoever was writing. As characters, Devros, the Sontarans, the Autons, etc, are pretty one-dimensional villains who worked in their original episodes only due to the suspense of the leadup and the suprise of the resolution. Outside of that, they've really only been doled out whenever the current show needed some action, and large-scale action really is not this show's strong suit.

I liked Martha quite a bit.

Agreed. Aside from all the "oh no my familyy" stuff, I never minded having her around. She didn't really ADD all that much, but was she energetic, occasionally amusing, and pretty damn easy on the eyes. Still think Turlogh rocks the "best companion" cupcake, though.

the Master arc was great until the last part.

I really liked the new Master, and he had an interesting role to fill as the Doctor's evil twin, so I was pretty stoked when he showed up. Wish his arc had finished a little stronger instead of just throwing him back up into the role of Guy Who Wants To Rule The World, but I guess hoping for something a little sexier than WORLD INVASION for the season finale was asking a bit much.

I dunno, I just look back on all the worthwhile episodes in the past few seasons, and only the ones with completely original ideas and villains - The Satan Pit, Doctor Dances, Girl in the Fireplace, Idiot's Lantern, 42, Family of Blood, Blink - stand out as good ones. Utopia stands in my mind as one of the few instances where fantastic setting and premise was mixed with fanservice characters quite nicely. I've always had a hard gay for continuity, but I think it bogs down Doctor Who more than any other show I've seen.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 25, 2008, 09:19:00 PM
I've actually found the season is getting better since the beginning.   They haven't been terribly deep episodes, but by focusing on just being fantastical they hit a rather easy stride.  This may also be because I don't think Tenant can deliver the pathos like Eccleston could, but that's just me.

Fires of Pompeii was just an enjoyable little time travel episode.   The real fun of the episode comes in giant magma creatures attacking Rome.  The House Gods bit was a tad cute, but otherwise the episode was just popcorn entertainment for its own sake.

Planet of the Ood gets points for both not being set on Earth and for developing the only really interesting original creation in the shows newer run.  They still can't mix season long arcs with shorter episode arcs, but it still has a chance to beat out season 3's.

The show hasn't hit the low point of Fear Her or Gridlock yet, but it still has room to grow.  I'd like to see them develop their own characters and villians, but first they need some that are worth a damn.

And as far as companions go, I actually like they that develop them besides just being Mary Sues who ride around with the Doctor.  Technically speaking, the Doctor is a very static character who doesn't change much except when he nearly dies.  In order for them to have larger character arcs and more functional dimensions they need someone who can change and interact like a real person.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on April 25, 2008, 11:28:11 PM
I HAVE SCORED A TELLING BLOW AGAINST MY INTERNET ARGUMENT OPPONENT BY MAKING A REFERENCE TO GODWIN'S LAW. MARVEL AT MY WIT.

seriously thad, that wasn't any sort of actual response to the fact that I have a problem with "terrible shit has to happen in history otherwise other even more terrible shit will happen." while I'm willing to suspend disbelief about demons that appear to prevent paradoxes or whatever I'm unwilling to believe that history is the best way things could've happened and the only changes that can be made are for the worse.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 26, 2008, 12:42:53 AM
Starting with the tangent first:

I HAVE SCORED A TELLING BLOW AGAINST MY INTERNET ARGUMENT OPPONENT BY MAKING A REFERENCE TO GODWIN'S LAW. MARVEL AT MY WIT.

Don't flatter yourself, Drethelin; there's a big difference between "argument opponent" and "guy who says stupid shit all the time".

Moving on to the subject at hand:

I've had a lot harder time than most enjoying Doctor Who fanservice. I can't get into the Cybermen because, while they certainly look pretty awesome, there is absolutely nothing to them aside from their desire to blow up the world. I can't get into the Daleks because, while they're sometimes funny, there is absolutely nothing to them aside from their desire to blow up the world.

Depends.  I'm less impressed by the Cybermen than most, but there've been some good scary Dalek eps -- as well as some thoroughly stupid ones, and some that fall somewhere in the middle.

The Daleks, at their best, are something that you laugh at at first sight but, after spending enough time with the series, can gasp along when they slide into a room simply on the strength of the actors' reactions to them.  At their worst, of course, they ARE just another Freak of the Week.

I like the old Doctor Who and all, but it's a lot like regular Doctor Who in that the best thing about it was whoever was writing. As characters, Devros, the Sontarans, the Autons, etc, are pretty one-dimensional villains who worked in their original episodes only due to the suspense of the leadup and the suprise of the resolution.

Wow, I'm going to have to disagree with you on all counts.  The resolutions to ALL those villains' original appearances were really hackneyed.  Davros's in particular.

Outside of that, they've really only been doled out whenever the current show needed some action, and large-scale action really is not this show's strong suit.

I would say that the original "Dalek" ep and the first Cybermen arc were well-told stories and not just flash.  The second and third Dalek stories had their moments too, though the last was pretty lame.

I really liked the new Master, and he had an interesting role to fill as the Doctor's evil twin, so I was pretty stoked when he showed up. Wish his arc had finished a little stronger instead of just throwing him back up into the role of Guy Who Wants To Rule The World, but I guess hoping for something a little sexier than WORLD INVASION for the season finale was asking a bit much.

I didn't mind that so much -- it's the sort of thing the Master would do, and the fact that he did it more to hurt the Doctor than as an ends in and of itself was classic Master -- but the denouement was lousy.  As Shark said when it aired, it was "clap your hands" deus ex machina followed by a giant reset switch, and closing with the ring schtick from Flash Gordon.

I dunno, I just look back on all the worthwhile episodes in the past few seasons, and only the ones with completely original ideas and villains - The Satan Pit, Doctor Dances, Girl in the Fireplace, Idiot's Lantern, 42, Family of Blood, Blink - stand out as good ones.

See above for my thoughts on the initial Dalek and Cybermen eps; thought they were pretty good.

I liked Impossible Planet/Satan Pit, but it's hard to call it an original idea, much less an original villain.  Cool setting and good suspense, but demonic possession is hardly a new concept.

Idiot's Lantern was kind of cool because of its setting, but the "people get sucked into TV's" bit isn't new, and the "companion gets sucked into another world and Doctor has to save her"/"Doctor gets sucked into another world and companion has to save him" bit is plenty played.  Plus the showdown on the radio tower was straight out of Logopolis.  It was all right, but I certainly wouldn't count it as one of the best.

And as for 42...really?  You're going to call THAT one original?  It is the SAME FUCKING EPISODE as Impossible Planet/Satan Pit.  I mean, I liked it, but...well, the fact that I liked it despite it being largely redundant is sort of the point.

I don't think Tenant can deliver the pathos like Eccleston could, but that's just me.

[...]

Technically speaking, the Doctor is a very static character who doesn't change much except when he nearly dies.

Disagree.

While Tennant inherited Eccleston's "whatever the cost" inclinations (which weren't really new with the Ninth Doctor, either; the Ninth's agonizing over whether to destroy the Daleks at the cost of the Earth mirrored the Fourth's "Have I the right?" moment when faced with the opportunity to destroy the first Daleks before they had the opportunity to do any harm), he's expanded on them.  The saving grace of "Runaway Bride" was the moment with the flames, and since then we've seen him coldly mete out justice in "Family of Blood" (after his very well-played self-sacrifice scene as John Smith), and Fires of Pompeii was another one about making hard decisions.  Donna's most interesting attribute is that she grounds him, she pulls him back from the brink and keeps him human.  That's true of all the companions in the current series, but it's more overt in her case -- though I can understand how some might not see "more overt" as a good thing.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 26, 2008, 01:39:53 PM
The Daleks, at their best, are something that you laugh at at first sight but, after spending enough time with the series, can gasp along when they slide into a room simply on the strength of the actors' reactions to them.  At their worst, of course, they ARE just another Freak of the Week.

I like the Daleks in the sense that they've clearly given no thought to appearances in the least, rather, have maintained their design simply because it works. Their outside reflects how devoid of concepts like fear or athetics they are, which itself is kind of eerie in that they're believably single-minded in their exterminatin'.

Outside of that, they're a little too damn goofy to take seriously unless you grew up with them.

Wow, I'm going to have to disagree with you on all counts.  The resolutions to ALL those villains' original appearances were really hackneyed.  Davros's in particular.

Well, I meant more the "what's going on here" of the buildup and the "oh it's an alien" reveal at the end, not so much how the conflict between the two played out.

I liked Impossible Planet/Satan Pit, but it's hard to call it an original idea, much less an original villain.  Cool setting and good suspense, but demonic possession is hardly a new concept.

I suppose as far as the villain goes, yeah, I'll give you that. I mostly just love that arc because it explores what kind of religion a five thousand year old immortal time traveler would have, and what he would want to believe in after seeing all that he's seen.

Idiot's Lantern was kind of cool because of its setting, but the "people get sucked into TV's" bit isn't new, and the "companion gets sucked into another world and Doctor has to save her"/"Doctor gets sucked into another world and companion has to save him" bit is plenty played.  Plus the showdown on the radio tower was straight out of Logopolis.  It was all right, but I certainly wouldn't count it as one of the best.

Never seen Logopolis, but I liked it mostly due to the time period, the whole radio tower bit, and the way the Doctor manages to throw together a hideously ugly alienmajigger out of a pile of vacuum tubes and transistors. Everything else was admittedly kind of gay.

And as for 42...really?  You're going to call THAT one original?  It is the SAME FUCKING EPISODE as Impossible Planet/Satan Pit.  I mean, I liked it, but...well, the fact that I liked it despite it being largely redundant is sort of the point.

It's the same exact setting and atmosphere, yeah, and there's even a good amount of demonic possesion flying around, but I guess I'm just a sucker for the "hurtling towards the sun" angle, even if it falls on its face (coughsunshinecough) almost every time it's doled out. Ephemeral energy sun monster was a pretty cool idea, too, if only because it was an entirely original and interesting monster for once.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 26, 2008, 06:46:02 PM
New ep pretty good, though obviously the big question is how it's going to play out.  As the Doctor noted, there's something not quite right here; Sontarans don't do subterfuge and infiltration.

Interesting to see a little more development on Martha, particularly the notion that her travel with the Doctor has made her a harder person.  The Doctor's distaste for UNIT is rather an interesting wrinkle and obviously a far cry from the Second and Third working there.  I never caught Robot, but skimming the last few paragraphs of the Wikipedia summary suggests he left UNIT on pleasant terms.

Hard to judge this one from the first half; lots of buildup and I need to see where they're going with it.

Of course, I DID note that the circular bumps around the middle of the Sontaran ship looked awfully familiar.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on April 28, 2008, 07:04:40 PM
Well, this is probably the first one of this season I've genuinely enjoyed, and the first one ever that I've so clearly enjoyed because of the direction rather than the writing. Seriously, dude yelling at the guys behind the camera (who was that? Thad can check IMDB by virtue of him giving much more of a fuck) made the difference between hamfisted "GPS and DHS am Evil" horseshit and just plain enjoyable action with a bit of a clever subtext. The whole Department of Homeworld Security bit was fucking cute, but the camerawork and editing was the difference between beating me about the head and neck with a stupid social metaphor and actually making this shit fun. Yeah, there's that whole bit about the militaristic nature of UNIT and the Sontarians (sp? Fuck you) being their respective strengths/weaknesses, but mostly I was just getting a kick out of the whole damn thing. Good show all around.

Also, there was some pretty damn snappy characterization with the underchallenged frat-brat that I sincerely hope to see explored a bit more. Sure, it'd be satisfying to see him make the bad choice and watch him get exploded for it or whatever, but hey, wouldn't it be fucking slick to see him made a companion with some actual depth and regret that we're familiar with through shit he pulled on camera? There was a chance to do that with the shithead from Dalek that was passed over that never happened. And, naturally, this will never happen, either. Count on it ending on a dumbass gag comparable to the fingersnapping head-opens gag.

But hey, Donna gets some development beyond being a shrieking harpy, so that's something.


Additionally, nice catch with the bumps on the spaceship. I'm sure it's a bit of astute observation that will go down with "Hey, the tocclafane-or-however-the-fuck-you-spell-em sound just exactly like the undead-thingamagigs-from-that-third-episode-that-sucked" in the category of Perfectly Reasonable Fan Speculation That Was Wrong But Would Have Been Awesome. I'm more prone to chalking it up to the BBC sucking a bit, personally.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 30, 2008, 01:01:38 PM
"GPS and DHS am Evil" horseshit

Yeah, what the hell's up with that, anyway?  This is the THIRD TIME they've done the "new technology that everyone uses is actually an insidious plot by a classic Doctor Who villain" bit.

EDIT/AFTERTHOUGHT:

Additionally, nice catch with the bumps on the spaceship. I'm sure it's a bit of astute observation that will go down with "Hey, the tocclafane-or-however-the-fuck-you-spell-em sound just exactly like the undead-thingamagigs-from-that-third-episode-that-sucked" in the category of Perfectly Reasonable Fan Speculation That Was Wrong But Would Have Been Awesome. I'm more prone to chalking it up to the BBC sucking a bit, personally.

Or my personal favorite, the fan theories after Matrix 2 that the reason Neo could use his powers in the "real" world was that it was just another Matrix and the multiple Matrices the Architect referred to were actually concentric...but then in the third movie it turned out that no, actually he was just Jesus.

Anyway.  I'll give this one a fifty-fifty.  I'm willing to bet that RTD starts dropping Davros hints early in the season to gear up for the big reveal in the final arc, just like he did with the Master last year.

(AFAIK Davros is still technically unconfirmed, but of the various rumors I'd say that one's basically a certainty.  He's the logical followup for Daleks, Cybermen, and Master in the first three seasons, and they just released a Davros box set in England.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on May 01, 2008, 12:41:53 PM
(http://www.joelconstantine.com/gallery/d/95-1/Dalek.jpg)

Now we're talking.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 03, 2008, 05:55:36 PM
Ohhhh mannnnn
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 03, 2008, 08:27:55 PM
Indeed.  What Shark said about the first ep being a good straight-up action story goes double for the second.

Also, the [spoiler]"Are you my mummy?"[/spoiler] ref was a good laugh.

Also, there was some pretty damn snappy characterization with the underchallenged frat-brat that I sincerely hope to see explored a bit more. Sure, it'd be satisfying to see him make the bad choice and watch him get exploded for it or whatever, but hey, wouldn't it be fucking slick to see him made a companion with some actual depth and regret that we're familiar with through shit he pulled on camera? There was a chance to do that with the shithead from Dalek that was passed over that never happened. And, naturally, this will never happen, either. Count on it ending on a dumbass gag comparable to the fingersnapping head-opens gag.

[spoiler]Nice to get something somewhere in-between.  Totally predictable, not to mention too visually similar to Pete saving Rose at the end of season 2, but hey, they did something good with him.[/spoiler]

And a nice setup with the ending -- would have been nice for them just to leave the significance of [spoiler]the hand[/spoiler] for next week rather than just spell it right out with the preview for next week's show, but then again, the premise of next week's show has been common knowledge for some time now.

The question is, who is she and where'd she come from?  Some of the less-reliable sources I've seen say clone, but two clone stories back-to-back seems a little odd.  Then again, if she's an honest-to-goodness Time Lady, that's going to require a convoluted explanation; there can't be THAT many Time Lords hiding their essences in fob watches across the universe.

One resolution would be to finally answer the "Are there Gallifreyans who aren't Time Lords?" question that Susan has made the frequent subject of fan speculation.

And really, if there's no reference to Susan at all in the ep, that's going to seem like a pretty odd move.  I expect at least a throwaway line like Brig got.

...Assuming the eps keep coming out weekly, we've got a Moffat 2-parter starting in 3 weeks.  Looking forward to that.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 04, 2008, 03:41:08 PM
I really did like the Sontarans as generic bad guys, if only because General Staal was just a straight-up, confident-as-balls gentleman about his genocidin'. They're a lot more enjoyable to listen to than most villains in this show, and I ended up liking most of U.N.I.T. for the same reason; don't really see why this show always has to choose between personality and competence.

That said, Poison Sky was pretty much exactly the same as every other world-invasion two-parter of the past four seasons. The brass ignore the Doctor, bunch of extras die, Doctor bullshits some super-science, deus ex machina. Awesome. I guess it just annoys me how pretty much every character introduced, like Colonel Mace, remain completely static until they're either killed for dramatic effect, or they load their guns with slightly different bullets and the original plan goes off without a hitch. I think the characterization of Battlestar has completely spoiled the time-honored B-movie sci-fi standard for me.

Also I mean I'm not a scientist but I get the feeling you can't just light the entire atmosphere on fire for a couple of minutes and not suffer some sort of negative consequence. I mean jesus christ.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 04, 2008, 05:12:05 PM
That said, Poison Sky was pretty much exactly the same as every other world-invasion two-parter of the past four seasons. The brass ignore the Doctor, bunch of extras die, Doctor bullshits some super-science, Doctor almost nobly sacrifices self, deus ex machina.

I guess by adding that step I eliminate Doomsday, but I think it holds for the rest.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 11, 2008, 12:06:59 AM
A thoroughly conventional episode.  Could have been a lot better, but could have been a lot worse.

The clone thing seemed a bit of a copout, but probably better than the backflips it would have required to have another Time Lord survive the Time War.  Plus, leaving the Doctor's children dead has a strong effect on his character in and of itself.

[spoiler]The Genesis Device copout was a bit lame, but I'll allow it given that it would have been lamer just to kill off such a potentially interesting character so soon.

The question is when she comes back; I would assume before the season's through.

It's already been established, several times, that the Doctor has the power to detect other Time Lords in the universe, so why can't he detect that she's still alive?  Best guess is the line early in the ep where he says there's more to being a Time Lord than just physiology, which would also explain why he was so ready to accept that she was really dead and wouldn't regenerate.  (I'm going to avoid any sort of analysis of the rules of regeneration, because it has been so fucking inconsistent over the course of the series that it's not worth trying to establish any.)[/spoiler]

Anyway.  My big takeaway from this is...I am still counting the weeks to the next Moffat arc.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 18, 2008, 02:35:41 PM
For a brief, terrifying moment, I thought that this crushingly mediocre, masturbatory episode of PBS' Mystery was the first part of Moffat's arc. Hoooooooo.

I will say, though, that this is probably the first time I haven't been annoyed with Donna being around. Progress!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 19, 2008, 10:43:06 PM
It wasn't a bad high-concept, and I've certainly seen much worse episodes (though probably not this season), but yeah, for an episode attempting to combine mystery and comedy, it failed badly at both.  The jokes fell flat, and the solution to the mystery was utterly nonsensical.

And it's not like you can't combine alien monsters with good mystery and a dash of humor -- Moffat's already done it twice (I'm excluding Girl in the Fireplace as it's not really a mystery), and seems set to do it again in two weeks.

On the plus side, at least this was a mediocre episode that stands alone rather than advance any continuing arcs.  As opposed to, say, my all-time least favorite, Gridlock, which had some pretty important stuff happen at the end.

They're taking Memorial Day weekend off, but that's fine by me as I'll be out of town anyway.  But definitely looking forward to the next two.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on May 20, 2008, 05:55:35 PM
It's official (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/may/20/bbc.television2)  :approve:

Now they just need to announce that James Nesbitt will be the eleventh Doctor and good times, they will roll.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 20, 2008, 08:09:14 PM
H O L Y   S H I T

(http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/3647/gmanspin0rymh9.gif)


YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES

Also:
My entire career has been a secret plan to get this job. I applied before but I got knocked back because the BBC wanted someone else. Also I was seven.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 20, 2008, 09:06:46 PM
FanTAStic.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 01, 2008, 05:53:29 PM
Okay.  I'm doing my best not to go all gushing fanboy here, but...seriously, how the HELL does he do it?  How does he manage to hit one out of the park every single time?  And dare we hope that, two years from now, every week will give us an episode this good?  (Or at least more than two a season?)

He just nails it pretty much everywhere.  The setting, the monster, the imagery, the mystery.  And of course, most compelling of all, at least for me and certainly from a long-term perspective, is River Song.  And honestly, the idea of the Doctor encountering [spoiler]a companion he hasn't met yet[/spoiler] seems so obvious that it's a wonder nobody seems to have thought of it before.

[spoiler]It seems to contradict the Ood's foreshadowing that the Tenth Doctor was nearing the end of his run; River Song clearly recognized him.  I suppose it's possible that she recognized him through some means other than his appearance and assumed he'd regenerated, but that seems a bit of a stretch.  The more plausible interpretation is that the Tenth Doctor continues on as he is and takes her on as a companion, some short while after Donna's departure.[/spoiler]

(EDIT: [spoiler]You know, it's not necessarily either-or.  It's quite possible that Tennant is still the Doctor by the end of Series Four but not by the beginning of Series Five.  There are still those movies they're putting out next year; it's quite possible that #10 and River Song could be in those, and even possible that a significant amount of time could pass between Series Four and the movies -- hell, if he could "one year later" over the course of a single WEEK, #10 and River Song could potentially have YEARS of implied adventures in-between movies.  So maybe Moffat gets his foreshadowed existing relationship between #10 and River Song, and RTD gets his foreshadowed regeneration into #11.  Actually, the more I think about it, the more plausible that sounds; RTD works with Tennant until the end of his run, which is the last movie, not the series four finale, and then the Eleventh Doctor is a new toy for Moffat to play with.[/spoiler]  Also, I am typing out "River Song", both names, an awful lot here.  Is it a first name/last name thing, or a dual name like I've been writing it?  I didn't really catch that.  But "Professor River Song" makes a lot more sense than "Professor Song".)

Any way you slice it, I think it's very clear that Moffat's already laying the groundwork for his run.

And perhaps the most compelling twist would be if [spoiler]she died in next week's episode[/spoiler].  A tad predictable, perhaps, but it would certainly make things interesting when [spoiler]she showed back up[/spoiler] during his run -- something which I think is all but inevitable now.

If I had a complaint at all, it's that he overplayed his hand with the "How can somebody be dead AND saved?" bit.  Think the solution to that one's fairly obvious.  And even if I'm wrong, it seems like somebody should have at least suggested the obvious solution by now.

Anyway.  Damn fine ep all around; looking forward to next week's.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 08, 2008, 01:52:20 PM
Part of me feels like I should complain that part 2 was so utterly predictable, but really I think that's because it was totally consistent with what he set up in part 1.  Moffat follows the rules, and he leaves breadcrumbs -- I knew who The Empty Child's mummy was, too, but that's not a bad thing.

RTD can bust out some Tinkerbell shit and a special effects extravaganza and I guess that's surprising after its own fashion.  So surprising the audience isn't always good.  Doing something obvious and still making the audience care enough to fist-pump and shout "fuck yeah" is a lot harder, and that's what Moffat did this time around.

If there WAS one false note, it's the one I already pointed out last week: that it took the Doctor so long to figure out what "saved" meant when I got it immediately.  I don't like stories where I'm smarter than the Doctor.  (This recalls a comment my uncle made a couple times about Superman's super-brain: the problem is that it only makes him as smart as the writer.)

And speaking of Superman, there was more than a whiff of For the Man Who Has Everything in Donna's story.  And maybe a little bit of the ending of Crisis on Infinite Earths in the ending.

And, praise Jebus, the sylvestermccoy.com fansite was wrong and [spoiler]Rose didn't appear anywhere in this arc[/spoiler].  I had a moment of panic when [spoiler]Hooded Figure first showed up[/spoiler], and was very relieved when [spoiler]I heard her speak[/spoiler].  Because seriously, that would have been awful.

Anyway.  Lots of really cool stuff at work here, and Moffat's clearly got some good ideas for his version of the Doctor.  2010 can't come soon enough.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 14, 2008, 01:40:25 PM
Expected this week's to be a bit of a letdown after the last two, but I actually thoroughly enjoyed it.

The structure is classic -- a single, confined space, filled with stock characters; something happens to generate conflict, tensions run high, and everyone's at everyone else's throats.

The comparison to Snakes on a Plane (and other, similar disaster movies) is unavoidable, but IMO it evokes Twelve Angry Men more than anything.

This is the only episode where I've been left thinking "I really want a behind-the-scenes look at how they did that one."  The bottle setting lends itself to the possibility of shooting in sequence, something that Twelve Angry Men famously did to build the actors' tension; I'm curious if anything similar happened here.

Sharkey mentioned that the Sontaran arc was the first to impress him with the direction rather than the writing; I would add that this is the first I've seen that impressed me entirely because of the acting.

All in all, a really impressive little bottle drama.

Trivia:
The First Doctor serial The Edge of Destruction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Edge_of_Destruction) featured a similar plot of the Doctor and his companions trapped on the TARDIS and becoming increasingly paranoid.
Professor Hobbes is played by David Troughton, son of Second Doctor Patrick Troughton.

Next week: RTD's big finale starts.  For episode one, expect lots of histrionics from Donna and Rose, and a big reveal with Caan and Davros at the end.  For episode two, expect that bit with Harriet Jones that all the tabloids were yakking about back in March.  For episode three, expect a deus ex machina to top all deus ex machinas that have come before.  Also, expect Donna not to actually die despite all foreshadowing to the contrary.

Other characters I expect to appear, in order of likelihood: Jenny, Martha, Jack, Jackie, Mickey, Pete, Sarah Jane, anyone else from either of the spinoffs.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 15, 2008, 08:57:52 PM
The 6/28 ep's title has been revealed as The Stolen Earth.  Gibes with the Harriet Jones rumors.

And, you know, every Dalek story, RTD season finale, or alien invasion of any kind.

They didn't keep the title under wraps because it gave too much away.  They kept it under wraps just to fuel fan speculation.  (The sylvestermccoy.com fan site I've mentioned several times as being repeatedly and hilariously wrong had it as "War on Skaro".)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on June 16, 2008, 07:42:16 PM
Wikipedia gives the plot of the finale away, and seriously..

 :facepalm:

Also, was reading the fan spoiler site and came across this little gem:

Quote
Message for RTD. PLEASE PLEASE don't make any of these stories a global warming story. While most people on Earth think it's carbon causing the increasing temperature the Doctor would KNOW it is just the sun's solar cycle. If there's anything about carbon/global warming, please let it be the other characters who say it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on June 17, 2008, 07:28:10 PM
Just watched "Midnight" today, and it was a really good episode.  In fact, it's RTD at his best, which seems rare these days.  It manages to practice fully the horror technique of keeping the audience in the dark.  We never understand what's fully going on, and the biggest tension comes from the characters themselves.

Also, as I watched it I was intensely reminded of the Satan Pit arc.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Cannon on June 17, 2008, 08:11:05 PM
...So what was the problem with the Satan Pit arc? I enjoyed the hell out of it, particularly the bits with Toby's imaginary friend.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on June 17, 2008, 08:38:33 PM
I was not refering to the quality of it, but the content.  Watch Midnight and you'll get the connection.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 18, 2008, 10:39:29 AM
Wikipedia gives the plot of the finale away, and seriously..

 :facepalm:

I kinda figured.  But I'm still staying off Wikipedia.  Continue to tag spoilers appropriately, blah blah blah.

Also, was reading the fan spoiler site and came across this little gem:

Oh yes, that's a big part of why I derive intense schadenfreude every time that site turns out to be wrong.

Its description of Silence/Forest still contains the following:

Quote
Donna starts receiving strange images of a girl with blond hair. The girl's name is Rose and she warns Donna of a plan by the Daleks and an old enemy of the Doctor's to destroy her universe.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 21, 2008, 01:39:52 PM
Well, could have been worse.  Rose was actually well-used, though as a magic all-knowing enigma.  (There's got to be a literary expression for that.)

The "What would happen if the Doctor hadn't been around?" angle was decent enough, although predictable, and of course it's amusing that RTD goes to great lengths to explain what happened with the hospital, the Titanic, the Adipose, and the Sontarans while completely ignoring Pompeii, Elizabethan England, and 1930's Manhattan.

Of course, there was an overwhelming feeling of "We've been here before, just two weeks ago" across the ep, but it was actually acknowledged in the ending.  There's going to be some payoff relating to Donna as a bridge between worlds, and I admit to finding it interesting that it looks like there's actually a REASON she first appeared right after the Doctor said goodbye to Rose.

Obvious weaknesses: Donna back to being unsympathetic and shrieky (forgivable since it's part of the "What would have happened without the Doctor around?" premise); complete physical impossibility of "The stars are going out" plot.

Checking the scoreboard:

Next week: RTD's big finale starts.  For episode one, expect lots of histrionics from Donna and Rose,

Confirmed.

and a big reveal with Caan and Davros at the end.

[spoiler]Nope, not yet.[/spoiler]

Other characters I expect to appear, in order of likelihood: Jenny,

[spoiler]Not yet.    [/spoiler]

Martha,

[spoiler]Confirmed.[/spoiler]

Jack,

[spoiler]Confirmed.[/spoiler]

Jackie,

[spoiler]Not yet.    [/spoiler]

Mickey,

[spoiler]Not yet.    [/spoiler]

Pete,

[spoiler]Not yet.    [/spoiler]

Sarah Jane,

[spoiler]Confirmed.[/spoiler]

anyone else from either of the spinoffs.

[spoiler]Confirmed.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on June 23, 2008, 11:01:57 PM
Yeah, that was hardly complete and utter shit. A bit funny with the picking and choosing of storylines to acknowledge, but otherwise pretty okayish. Kind of helps that by this point I expect any RTD season finale to be embarrassing horseshit that must be hidden from girlfriends who have otherwise enjoyed it, if only because they've only been exposed to the one or two episodes a season that fail to make me wish I didn't like this stuff.

Also, it can hardly be just me, but somehow Rose seems sinister as all fuck all of a sudden. I would really, really like it to death if she somehow turned out to be genuinely villainous at some point. Then again, I feel that way about a lot of blond exes. It'd make things easier, but rarely ever happens.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 24, 2008, 12:27:05 AM
Right, you set the bar low enough and you're bound to be entertained.

Did I mention I liked Get Smart?

I am easy to please when it is 110 out and I go into a darkened, air conditioned room for two hours.

Anyway.  Rose as a villain would be way cooler than whatever is bound to actually happen.

Also, Donna actually dying, and me feeling bad about it, would be a coup in and of itself.  I know I've made the comparison before, but I remember reading a post somewhere where someone suggested it would have been awesome if Lucas had spent Episodes 2 and 3 somehow making everyone like Jar-Jar and then killing him off at the end.

That's kinda what they did with Adric in the Fifth Doctor run.  He was still an annoying little shit, but his death had a sense of tragedy about it.

...Of course, I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop.  The first 2/3 of LAST season's finale were pretty good too.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on June 24, 2008, 09:57:31 AM
I can appreciate the attempt at a Donna story, because as annoying as I'm sure she's meant to be, Moffat proved that it isn't impossible to use her towards a sorta no-bullshit bitchy-mom angle that's more amusing and direct than grating. I get bored with how Rose and Martha are so damn fragile and sensitive all the time when the Doctor's more than able to, however briefly, play that role when needed.

So you'll understand my frustration when RTD goes and does the complete opposite of being direct in, once again, bringing in his companion's parents. I suppose I like Donna's maw'n'paw more than the last two we've been given, but it's still a continuous downer that jumps in to murder the momentum at least once every five minutes, with absolutely no payoff save for the ephemeral tension that we know doesn't matter on account of how fixing the timeline makes it all pretty meaningless. Why does he keep forcing in these characters which don't have any idea what's going on, no real role to play but "confused", nor any apparent impact on Donna or the story at hand?

Uhg.

Episodes like this remind me of watching Voyager, which last time I checked, was exactly what was wrong with science fiction. Really hoping this is just the crushingly retarded Last of the Time Lords of his pretty decent Utopia and Sound of Drums.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 24, 2008, 10:24:54 AM
Well, by the end of season 2, I liked Jackie better than Rose, but yeah, the family crap is definitely an angle that's hurt RTD's run.  I understand why it's there -- Lord knows most of the companions in the original series were interchangeable cardboard cutouts -- but trying to grant a character more depth by surrounding her by a family of stock characters hardly does the job.

That said, under the circumstances -- unemployed and eventually a refugee -- it was logical that Donna would be with her family, not on her own.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: LaserBeing on June 26, 2008, 07:51:10 PM
Finally got caught up. Apart from a really, really lame first episode they seem to have got a much better ratio of good (or at least watchable) episodes to complete drek than the last season. And even Donna isn't half as irritating as I was expecting she'd be. And the Sontarans were super, super great.

My wish list for Season 5:

-Lay off the full-scale alien invasions a bit. Between flying saucers destroying Big Ben, Cybermen, Daleks, retarded fat monsters, monsters made out of retarded fat, Sontarans nearly killing the entire world and whatever else I'm forgetting it's getting harder and harder to believe that the average Londoner STILL doesn't know aliens exist.

-No more aliens that are just giant earth animals or animal-people. Please. Even the mysterious invisible transdimensional time-eating parasites were just big stag beetles. That's unbelievably lame.

-On a similar note, I know the writers love being oh-so-very-clever but can we at least TRY to avoid the moronic Harry Potter quasi-Latin alien names like Pyrovalien and Vespifuckstick? Thanks.

-No more episodes where you travel back in time to shamelessly kiss the ass of some dead historical figure. You're just embarrassing yourself.

-Take it easy with the fucking sonic screwdriver already.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 26, 2008, 10:46:13 PM
it's getting harder and harder to believe that the average Londoner STILL doesn't know aliens exist.

See, despite Donna's misplaced skepticism in last week's ep, that's not the vibe I get at all.  I'm under the impression that, ever since the Big Ben attack, the existence of aliens is common knowledge.

Didn't Martha acknowledge, in her first appearance, that it wasn't the first time aliens had shown up in London?

-On a similar note, I know the writers love being oh-so-very-clever but can we at least TRY to avoid the moronic Harry Potter quasi-Latin alien names like Pyrovalien and Vespifuckstick? Thanks.

-No more episodes where you travel back in time to shamelessly kiss the ass of some dead historical figure. You're just embarrassing yourself.

In fairness, these were both commonplace in the original series.

-Take it easy with the fucking sonic screwdriver already.

This kinda was too, though they destroyed it in the Davison era for good reason.

EDIT: I would add that, for the most part, I think the current-series writers have kept the Sonic Screwdriver as, primarily, a tool for opening doors and generally restrained themselves in using it as a deus ex machina.

I think its rather more substantial use in Forest of the Dead is forgivable due to the rather extensive setup that this future Sonic Screwdriver had additional capabilities.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Dooly on June 26, 2008, 11:43:50 PM
I've seen a lot of commercials for the Sara Jane Smith spinoff, and I'm guessing it's just the Dr. Who producers attempting to snag the teenage girl market, isn't it?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 26, 2008, 11:52:44 PM
Haven't seen it.  I thought it was for the prepubescent crowd of both genders.

Can anyone who's actually seen it comment?

I am going to go out on a limb and assume it can't possibly be as bad as Torchwood.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 28, 2008, 03:39:46 PM
Okay.  Still better than expected, but there's still a part 3 that can blow everything.

The good:



The bad:



Scoreboard:

a big reveal with Caan and Davros at the end.

[spoiler]Happened in middle of second ep, not end of first as predicted.  End of first would have been better for dramatic pacing.  All the "Bad Wolf" shit which was immediately ignored in the beginning of this ep?  Sorta lame by comparison.[/spoiler]

For episode two, expect that bit with Harriet Jones that all the tabloids were yakking about back in March.

[spoiler]I am starting to believe that was deliberate misinformation fed to the tabloids, but it's still possible.  We don't actually see her get shot.[/spoiler]

Other characters I expect to appear, in order of likelihood: Jenny,

[spoiler]Haven't seen her yet, but the hand reappeared in the beginning of this ep.  Could have just been there to foreshadow regeneration.[/spoiler]

Jackie, Mickey, Pete

[spoiler]Could still happen, but looks like they went with Martha's family instead of Rose's.  Rose seems to be the only one hopping between universes.[/spoiler]

At any rate, there's SOMETHING up with the Supreme Dalek.

Other thoughts:

When Donna's sitting alone in the Shadow Proclamation, you can clearly hear the sound of drums.  I don't expect the Master to pop his head in in the finale, but that may be significant.

And of course the biggie: [spoiler]REGENERATION!  Either there's going to be a new Doctor next week, or it's going to be a dodge.  I still think River Song's dialogue implied she'd known the Tenth Doctor, and the Beeb originally said Tennant would stay on through the movies next year, but OTOH there was the foreshadowing from the Ood early in the season.  I'd say a cheat is unlikely but not impossible.

If there IS a new Doctor next week, and it's somebody who the tabloids HAVEN'T been suggesting, that'll be a coup in and of itself.

Rose's "You can't!  He can't!" bit was interesting.  Just personal attachment to the Tenth Doctor, or could it actually be something important?[/spoiler]

And have we seen the albino woman before?  She looks really familiar.

Anyway.  All in all, a fairly strong first two eps, but still plenty of time for the finale to fuck it up.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on June 29, 2008, 12:13:34 AM
Auughgghh!!

[spoiler]I am going to flip a complete shit if Tennant turns out to be done by this season. Guy is hands-down the best Doctor ever, in my book.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: LaserBeing on June 29, 2008, 12:22:55 AM
It may be too soon to say, but I think [spoiler]Mad Dalek Caan may have just swiped the award for Best Dalek Ever from sassy old Sec.[/spoiler]

Regarding The Biggie: [spoiler]Caan gibbered something about "the Threefold (or maybe Three-Formed?) Man", which makes me wonder if RTD isn't going to cap off his reign with a full-out Three Doctors type extravaganza. Bringing Eccleston back at least would be completely in keeping with the way this finale is going, and Tennant's death scene wasn't nearly overdrawn and sappy enough to be his real exit.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 29, 2008, 01:20:01 PM
That's something I considered too.  Lord knows [spoiler]McGann[/spoiler] never got enough screen time, and of course [spoiler]either he or Eccleston would be the last Doctor who saw Davros[/spoiler].  On the other hand, that would rather negate [spoiler]#10's surprise at seeing him again[/spoiler], but some technobabble about [spoiler]Caan overcoming the time lock[/spoiler] could probably smooth that continuity gap over.

Another possibility that I think is supremely unlikely but would be kinda cool: since we're dealing with parallel universes, what about [spoiler]parallel Doctors?  EG, the alternate Ninth Doctor from Scream of the Shalka.[/spoiler]

At any rate, [spoiler]#10 getting shot[/spoiler] was both totally abrupt AND totally cliche...but given that it's RTD we're talking about, neither of those things necessarily mean there's a better explanation coming.  (It also bears noting that there's precedent here -- [spoiler]the Fourth Doctor's death[/spoiler] was abrupt, and, while it was obvious that it was going to happen at some point in [spoiler]the movie, the Seventh Doctor's death was laughable in the unexpectedness of its execution: he stepped out of the TARDIS into the middle of a gang fight and just got shot.[/spoiler])

But one thing's certain: there's more parallel universe stuff coming from Rose and Donna next week.  As noted before, this week's did absolutely nothing to explain the shit that happened at the end of the previous week's; [spoiler]the Daleks moving Earth across the galaxy doesn't explain anything about why stars would start going out, the phrase "Bad Wolf" would start appearing everywhere, or the Doctor would proclaim it the end of the universe -- or in fact Rose would say EVERY universe is in danger.[/spoiler]

Anyway, they've certainly got a lot of questions to answer, and we're getting a 65-minute episode (http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/s4/news/latest/080628_news_01) as a result of that.

Trailer for next week's.  I guess technically the preview pic counts as a spoiler of the most recent ep, but fuck it; all it does is confirm the worst-kept secret of the season.

(The rest of it, of course, contains more significant spoilers of the most recent ep.)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=DTxWRZKHI6s
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on June 29, 2008, 07:46:58 PM
When Donna's sitting alone in the Shadow Proclamation, you can clearly hear the sound of drums.  I don't expect the Master to pop his head in in the finale, but that may be significant.

Possibility: Donna is a Time Lord.  People keep saying there's something important about her, and the general coincidence of her being with the Doctor can be attributed to the Time Lord's picking and choosing when they humanize themselves.  This might also tie in to the ending of season 3.  Just my theory, though.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 29, 2008, 09:58:22 PM
If we REALLY wanted to go far-out with it, we could suppose that [spoiler]Caan's reference to "the Doctor's most faithful companion"[/spoiler] could mean Donna is Romana.  But I really doubt it.  I don't see any more fob watch situations coming up.  Alternately, there's Jenny, or any other Time Lady really, given regeneration and all.

But I think all that would be needlessly convoluted.  My guess is she's something different, not a Time Lady but someone who has the natural affinity for the multiverse that Time Lords have for time.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: LaserBeing on June 30, 2008, 03:36:07 AM
Donna is the Master.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 30, 2008, 10:29:18 AM
 :ohshi~:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on July 01, 2008, 10:34:41 PM
Dispensing with spoiler tags. Nobody reads this fucking topic until they've seen the damn show. And by Tuesday? You've seen it. If not, fuck off.

Hum. Only a few years in and a reunion episode. Gotta be fun having a conference call with all your ex girlfriends and their families.

But yeah, the whole regeneration bit. Abrupt as hell, though slightly foreshadowed. Then again, pretty much everybody getting fucked has been foreshadowed at one point or another this season. Given that they really didn't drama the hell out of it my money is on a NONE OF IT HAPPENED bait-and-switch along the lines of last season. With some wackiness in between. Hell, we already had the whole deus-ex-global-cellphone bit again, and it ain't getting any less fucking stupid.

And way to make all the potentially interesting explanations for the bees bugging out just getting a couple lines of "yeah, dolphins" when it could have actually meant something a little more important and less predictable.

On one hand, I almost like seeing RTD going out on such a shit note. He did a great job of revitalizing the thing back, well, in the first season. Then got rutted pretty badly in very silly formula, and honestly, the best episodes of every season have been written by someone else. On the other, I like Tennant quite a damn bit and would be pretty damn annoyed if he weren't on for the rest of this thing.

Given his enthusiasm for the gig I have a hard time imagining a scenario where he'd want to leave. It's kind of too late to dodge typecasting, I think, and if he really minded that I don't think he would have stuck it out for three seasons already. And hell, don't I remember something about him being contracted for the little movie thingies next year? I figured he'd be on for at least that long.

Anyway, Daleks are nice. Shame this was so sketchy in every other way. And that there's actually enough spinoff media already that it feels like the more awkward bits of going home for Christmas and running into family you don't exactly hate, but haven't cared enough to keep up with for the last year. I don't know or care what Torchwood and Sarah Jane have been up to, and while I have a lingering fondness for them I neither want to hear an in depth explanation (actually watch those shows) or deal with the superficial "How're things?" "Eh, okay."
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 01, 2008, 11:58:27 PM
Given that they really didn't drama the hell out of it my money is on a NONE OF IT HAPPENED bait-and-switch along the lines of last season.

[...]

Given his enthusiasm for the gig I have a hard time imagining a scenario where he'd want to leave. It's kind of too late to dodge typecasting, I think, and if he really minded that I don't think he would have stuck it out for three seasons already. And hell, don't I remember something about him being contracted for the little movie thingies next year? I figured he'd be on for at least that long.

Plus, while I can't pull up the quote, I'm almost certain he said he wanted to keep people guessing as to how long he was staying on.  I also recall him being quoted as saying he wanted to do more eps than Pertwee, but the first Google result for that is my favorite always-hilariously-wrong fan site, so it's best to ignore it.

...But all right, fair.  While I stand by my citation of Baker and McCoy dying rather abruptly, I'll switch the "possible, but not likely" call from not-regenerating to regenerating.

Plus there's Ham's observation about "the threefold man" -- I didn't catch that line the first time, though I've gone back and watched the scene again.  Yeah, an appearance by two other incarnations of the Doctor would seem likely.  (I still like my "bring in the Shalka Doctor" idea, but it ranks south of "Donna is a Time Lady" and just north of "Donna is the Master" in terms of likelihood IMO.)

Though for all I like Tennant, I prefer the sudden, unexpected deaths to the big dramatic ones.  A new Doctor next week would make for a better story than a dodge.

With some wackiness in between. Hell, we already had the whole deus-ex-global-cellphone bit again, and it ain't getting any less fucking stupid.

I'd say mildly less.  It had nowhere to go but up.

On one hand, I almost like seeing RTD going out on such a shit note. He did a great job of revitalizing the thing back, well, in the first season.

Yeah, but even that was so hit-or-miss.  Pretty much everything after the Nestenes and before the Dalek could have been dumped.  After that, I'd say Father's Day, the Moffat twosie (of course), and the half of The Parting of the Ways that Rose wasn't in were pretty good.  Basically the rest were Eccleston propping up a bunch of mediocrity.

Anyway, Daleks are nice. Shame this was so sketchy in every other way.

I thought the Dalek bits were good enough to redeem the rest.  That and the soft bigotry of low expectations -- bear in mind I was expecting the red Dalek to open up and turn out to be Harriet Jones.  The mere fact that that didn't happen meant the episode was about a million times better than I expected.

Which is one more reason I now believe that was a fake plot point deliberately "leaked" to the tabloids.  But the fact that it was entirely believable says a lot.

And that there's actually enough spinoff media already that it feels like the more awkward bits of going home for Christmas and running into family you don't exactly hate, but haven't cared enough to keep up with for the last year. I don't know or care what Torchwood and Sarah Jane have been up to, and while I have a lingering fondness for them I neither want to hear an in depth explanation (actually watch those shows) or deal with the superficial "How're things?" "Eh, okay."

OTOH, as the universe gets bigger it gets silly to ignore the supporting cast.  One of the laughable things about the first episode of Justice League Unlimited where they did the pan across the 100 or so superheroes in the Watchtower was the sense of, "Okay, where the fuck were all these guys at the end of LAST season when the world was being invaded by Thanagarians?"  (There was a throwaway line in a later episode to the effect that they'd all been out fighting in some capacity, but still.)

That said, they were handled much better in the previous episode, where they didn't even show up and Rose just explained how they all died trying to do the Doctor's job.

But I can understand why they're there.  Sky full of alien planets, Jack's going to drop what he's doing to check it out; soon as he finds out it's Daleks he's going to go looking for the Doctor.

Sarah Jane is less of a plot necessity, but she's the only other character at this point who knows who the fuck Davros is, and two OH SHII~s are better than one.  (That said, while reaction shots are necessary to remind the audience that Daleks are scary, they're a lot less necessary for a guy with an exposed ribcage and organs.)

The problem isn't so much that they're there as that RTD seems much less interested in the why than the how.  It's not "Why are they here, what's their motivation?", it's "How can we fit them into the story because THIS IS MY LAST ARC AND IT HAS TO BE BIGGER AND BETTER THAN EVERYTHING I HAVE EVER DONE BEFORE!"  Their supporting casts stuck out even more (though I grant the "someone sent the rest of Torchwood on a wild goose chase, that's why they're not here" plot couldn't really be used again).

As for what's been happening on the shows, yeah, I've never caught Sarah Jane so I had to hit up Wikipedia to find out when the hell she had a kid (he's adopted) and what was up with Mr. Smith (he's an alien intelligence who is apparently yet another literal deus ex machina).  I'd read about the Torchwood finale previously and knew that they'd killed off half the cast.

I think the whole "kitchen sink" business is best summed up with Gwen calling her husband.  We've got the leading lady of a supporting character's spinoff appearing as a supporting character and calling a supporting character from her show (not seen).  How many characters I don't care about can be worked into this flow chart?  Well, then there's the bit where the Daleks come in and Dull and Annoying and Welsh promise that they will sell their lives dearly, just like those other two characters who I don't care died.

That said...that's all pretty much what I expected.  And I expected the Daleks to be as lame as they were last time.  And for one of them to be Harriet Jones.

So you can see how this episode exceeded my expectations.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on July 02, 2008, 11:59:19 AM
Well, when your low bar is "RTD coming to my house and shitting directly in my open mouth," yeah, I'd call this a resounding success.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on July 02, 2008, 12:11:21 PM
LAST OF THE TIME LORDS
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 02, 2008, 01:57:15 PM
Well, you know, it's the old chestnut about how pessimists are never disappointed.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 05, 2008, 03:00:19 PM
...So when I said this would be just like all the other finales, I didn't actually think he would literally take the first act from The Parting of the Ways, the climax from Last of the Time Lords, and the ending from Doomsday.

I was actually enjoying it for the first 40 minutes or so -- not because it was any good (the "Doctor is actually a total bastard" angle was promising, but of course relied on this season turning both Rose and Martha into Buffy for no adequately explained reason -- plus Batman Beyond did it better), but precisely because it was so wonderfully bad.  It was just utter sci-fi schlock: every single plot twist explained through increasingly absurd technobabble, with visuals cribbed straight from Star Wars.  I was laughing out loud by the time [spoiler]the TARDIS pulled the Earth back to the solar system[/spoiler].  In the end, it was enjoyable for the same reasons as MST3K, Masters of the Universe, Superfriends, and train wrecks.

And then the long, dragged-out goodbye sequence just sucked all the life out of it.  (I'm going to have to reference my favorite serial, City of Death, again -- there's a goodbye scene that was wonderfully short and to-the-point.  That was one of those things Douglas Adams excelled at.)

It DOES leave me with a sense of "Well, what now?"  And of course we all know the answer: six months of nothing, a year of periodic RTD movies, and then Moffat taking over in '10.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on July 05, 2008, 10:53:04 PM
Good lord, RTD, it's called restraint! Sometimes you just gotta, you know, hold off on a few things for the sake of coherence! Maybe narrow your focus here and there!

Just - next time - just sit yourself down, take a look at your script, and ask yourself: Do I need a Torchwood bullet-time scene? Do I need Germany? Do I need anything on Earth, at all? Is it completely, utterly necessary to bring in and focus large chunks of time on Martha and Donna's parents? Do we need minutely updates on the status of every secondary companion character in the show? Are those two jumps seriously worth the time you're going to spend re-explaining the dimension majiggers?! DO I REALLY, REALLY NEED ROSE'S MOM IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS EPIC FINALE TRULY COMPLETE?!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 05, 2008, 11:19:42 PM
Maybe he just wanted us to really, REALLY look forward to Moffat taking over.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 06, 2008, 01:24:49 AM
Just finished the latest ish of Doctor Who Classics.  Not much to say about it, but there WAS an interview at the end about an upcoming miniseries called The Forgotten, featuring all ten Doctors.

While such an ambitious story could easily be a mess, and Kabbage's comments on restraint apply in every medium, I think this could still turn out all right.  The way I see it, you play to the strengths of your medium; if you're doing a comic book, you'd damn well better do some things that they can't do on the TV or radio series -- otherwise, what's the point?  I mentioned a couple pages back that I quite liked a little fill-in story in Classics where the Fourth Doctor regressed back through his previous incarnations; while I think stories like those are best used sparingly, they CAN be used to great effect.

Further reading has brought me to a CBR interview with writer Tony Lee (http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=16967).  It sounds good -- oriented around short new stories for all the previous Doctors, though he hints they'll be meeting up at some point.

And the art's by Pia Guerra.  I've yet to get around to reading Y, but these pages are definitely pretty.  (And while I think Roche has his ups and downs, I'm really digging his covers.)

Anyway.  While I still hold out hope that we'll see a live-action Three-or-More Doctors story on the TV series one of these days (where the other two Doctors DON'T consist of [spoiler]an extra Tenth and Donna[/spoiler]) -- the forty-fifth anniversary IS coming up, after all -- comics is a medium where you don't have to worry about the casting logistics of such a story and you can just DO it.

I think it can come out pretty well, so long as it doesn't turn into too much of a fan wank and they don't bite off more than they can chew.  I think "restraint" is a good Word of the Day.

...Incidentally, while I'm up on the Classics series, I haven't read the latest two issues of the new Doctor Who series.  The printer fucked up my copy of #4 (put the pages together before the ink was dry, and they're all stuck together) and my shop hasn't been able to replace it as of yet.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on July 07, 2008, 11:07:44 PM
Hell if I don't wish I could solve all my girlfriend problems that easily. All I need are some clones and memory wipes and I can get back to the emo-in-the-rain bit.
:perfect:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 07, 2008, 11:50:17 PM
Good idea.  Even if your ex is trapped in an inescapable parallel universe, she'll just keep coming back until you set her up with a clone.

Similarly, the best way to destroy your species -- when you are, in fact, the last surviving member of same -- is to travel back in time to save your dead creator so he can clone a few million more of you first.

Really I think the whole thing had a whiff of Simon's Quest about it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on July 08, 2008, 03:33:23 AM
I especially loved the way that right after yet another "final" appearance of the daleks the trailer indicated that the cybermen would also be coming back. I understand that these are classic doctor who enemies, but either stop defeating them totally and forever or give it a fucking rest.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 08, 2008, 09:28:14 AM
The difference is that nobody's claimed the Cybermen were entirely wiped out -- we haven't even SEEN "our" universe's Cybermen in the new series, and it's been two years since we saw Cybermen of any description.

The Cybermen, the Sontarans, the Nestenes -- I never got a "they're gone forever" vibe from any of them.  The Daleks are the ones where the Doctor keeps swearing they're gone forever.  (Well, and the Time Lords, but the dodge they used for the Master was decent enough, even if the "I AM IN A RING NOW AND WILL BE BACK" ending wasn't.)

I definitely think the classic villains should all be given a rest, but the Daleks are the ones who have been really egregiously overused.  The Cybermen haven't quite hit that point yet.  And of course there are old monsters that haven't been used at all yet.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on July 08, 2008, 12:17:52 PM
Hopefully Moffat will find a better use for them, because seriously, Macra (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Doctor_Who_monsters_and_aliens#Macra).
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 14, 2008, 11:46:11 PM
Nrama (http://www.newsarama.com/comics/080714-DrWhoForgotten.html) interviews Tony Lee on The Forgotten.  Not a whole lot of info that wasn't already in that last interview I linked, but:

In answer to my rhetorical question on why nobody ever thought of a "Doctor meets companion from the future" story yet -- turns out somebody actually has: Lee, in an Eighth Doctor comic.

Also, he linked a fan comic called The 10 Doctors (http://www.shipsinker.com/wordpress/2007/03/11/doctor-who-comic-the-ten-doctors-page-1/) -- I don't ordinarily check out fanfic, but from the first dozen or so pages, this one actually seems pretty good (#3 chastising #9 for having an inappropriate relationship with Rose is worth the price of admission all by itself, and #5 giving #4 shit for "deciding to show up this time" is a fun reference).  Character proportions are wildly inconsistent, but the art's pretty charming other than that.

(Can't help but wonder about the legal ramifications of a guy reading a fan-made 10 Doctors comic and then writing an official, licensed 10 Doctors comic.  I remember from my old days as a member of Sonic fandom that the Archie Comics writers, while very good about interacting with the fans, stayed the fuck away from fanfic.  Though that might be more of an Archie/Sega paranoia thing.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 24, 2008, 11:07:58 PM
comingsoon (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/tvnews.php?id=47147) interviews Moffat, misspells Davison's name.

Highlight:

Quote
CS: But do you find yourself re-watching the old episodes and thinking, "Maybe we could use that?"
Moffat:
Oh sure, yeah! I think that when the show first came back, it was a question of raiding the old shows for the emblems or the icons. This really is Doctor Who! There's a Dalek! There's a TARDIS! There's a sonic screwdriver! There's the cybermen! But people no longer think of it as "New Doctor Who." They just think of it as "Doctor Who." Now it's one big thing. Now we're raiding the back catalogue not to validate ourselves but for really great ideas. There are some cracking ideas in "Doctor Who" through the course of the series. Brilliant monsters! Brilliant ideas! Sometimes thinking "it's time we took that idea or that monster or that trick and gave it all the modern tech that we have now." Give it another time around the block. That's good. That's right and proper but - at the same time -- fundamentally, the absolute paradigm of "Doctor Who" stories is -- right from the TARDIS -- is that everything you see is brand new. I always think there should be more new stuff than old stuff in "Doctor Who". You sit down to plan the series and think "I'm bringing back something new every single story." What's the use? You might as well call this "Doctor Who 2." It'd be a sequel and "Doctor Who" shouldn't be a sequel. Every year there are new eight-year olds watching it and those new eight year olds saw it at the most important age because they're going to live a lot longer than the rest of you. I want them to have their monsters so that in 40 years time they can grump to their children, "Oh, it's not as good as it used to be. I remember the episode. The very first time we saw the Weeping Angels. I remember the first time we saw that episode." You're not getting lost in nostalgia. You're creating nostalgia.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on July 25, 2008, 12:48:44 PM
Really, really wish more writers understood this. 2010 is just too damn far away.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: MadMAxJr on July 30, 2008, 11:17:19 AM
Hi.  I don't watch the show, but I bet you guys would like a Dalek Voice Changing Helmet (http://www.thinkgeek.com/geektoys/cubegoodies/A929%20/).  No?  How about an 18" one you can command (http://www.thinkgeek.com/geektoys/rc/A917%20/).
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on August 21, 2008, 01:46:01 AM
I was just watching Journey's End, and German Daleks are definitively more frightening than normal Daleks, due to the well documented "Everything is scarier in German" effect.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 21, 2008, 01:01:35 PM
Doctor Who: The Forgotten #1 is a deft mix of fan service and compelling premise, of compressed and decompressed storytelling.

It starts off in a museum full of artifacts from the Doctor's various adventures, rather like the first-season Dalek ep of the current series.  Then they find a room full of the Doctor's previous costumes and artifacts, and treat the Sixth Doctor's Coat of Many Colors with the derision it deserves.  (There's even a shoutout to Shalka, if I'm not mistaken -- when Martha points out #9's outfit, the Doctor responds, "You should have seen what I ALMOST wore.")

From there, the premise is compelling but shaky -- a mysterious shadowy figure turns a dial and somehow makes the Doctor forget everything prior to his most recent regeneration (except a few details like the Time War).  Martha gives him #1's walking stick, which helps him recover his memory by telling a black-and-white story-within-a-story set somewhere in the earliest days of the series, some time prior to The Aztecs.

And this is what I meant about compressed versus decompressed storytelling -- here's a book with a two-page spread that just shows the 9 previous Doctors' costumes and artifacts lined up, which then turns around and tells a complete, satisfying First Doctor story over the course of eight pages.

The end of the issue still has the Doctor mostly-amnesiac, and the Mysterious Shadowy Figure hints that he's a Time Lord and we can see he's got a goatee.  Maybe they'll try and throw a curveball and have it be somebody other than the obvious, but for now I'm going to safely assume it's exactly who it looks like.

Of course, the Master showing up here begs its own set of questions.  I'm going to reasonably assume that this is an earlier version of the Master (partly because the comics are non-canon and wouldn't bring him back after the end of season 3, and partly because this story chronologically takes place before the end of season 3 anyway), but that still requires some reconciliation with the whole "last of the Time Lords" bit -- are there other Time Lords still bouncing around time, "before" their deaths in the Time War?  Did the Doctor just never expect to meet any?  Or is this just made possible by the fact that the Master is still alive at the end of time, and is the story going to try to accomodate that by having him get away without the Doctor seeing him?

Anyway.  A decent setup -- we've got a decent premise, we've got loads of fan service, we've got Martha being competent (and only briefly whining about Rose).  But #2 is going to have to ratchet things up some.  We're going to have to find out what the Master's plan actually is, how he managed to make the Doctor forget his previous nine selves just by turning a dial, and it would be awfully anticlimactic if the whole issue were just #10 sitting in the museum telling stories about #2 and #3.

All in all, good comic, good storytelling techniques, good art.  Pick this one up.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 24, 2008, 12:37:21 AM
Blink wins Hugo. (http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/08/doctor-whos-mof.html)  Try to look surprised.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on August 24, 2008, 12:45:29 AM
can't. Too busy not blinking.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 17, 2008, 11:21:51 AM
The Forgotten #2 is out.  Fun couple of stories; doesn't really move the main story forward any.  The best part, really, is that Lee really nails the characters' voices -- all three Doctors and the Brigadier are all spot-on.

It even does a decent job of making fun of Martha's annoying schoolgirl crush, with the Doctor showing more affection for his memory of Bessie than for her.

Baker's up next.  Looking forward to that.

Also, the first Grant Morrison Doctor Who reprint is out this week; I'll get to that when I read it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on October 17, 2008, 11:30:49 AM
Spoiler alert: It's awesome.  Although, I wasn't aware it was a reprint.  I just thought it was a new Doctor Who series by Grant Morrisson.  Guess that explains why Brian Hitch's art isn't the same as his Ultimate's stuff.  Still though, the writing is clever and enjoyable, and the stories are brief and entertaining.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 17, 2008, 11:41:53 AM
Guess that explains why Brian Hitch's art isn't the same as his Ultimate's stuff.

And why it features the Sixth and Seventh Doctors?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on October 17, 2008, 11:53:25 AM
It's not too crazy to think that a modern writer might go back and visit older Doctors for fun.

In fact, that sounded exactly like something Grant Morrison would do for fun.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 17, 2008, 01:13:38 PM
And it's also the premise of The Forgotten, though that of course features the Tenth Doctor as the hub for the stories of the other nine.

There are a few things I'm thinking here: first of all, I'm betting Grant Morrison's getting an extra kickback from having his name not only on the cover of the book but actually in the TITLE.  Even if IDW's not legally obligated to give him extra money for using his name as promotion (and they might be), they'd be wise to in order to keep him happy.

Which brings me to point two: I'm absolutely sure this is a sign that they're trying to convince him to do some new stories.  Now's the perfect time: he's taking a break from his superhero books (except Batman) and working on personal projects, and of course we're in a Who drought until 2010 (the three movies notwithstanding).  The rumors even have it that Moffat's going to leave a 1000-year gap in the Doctor's timeline between series 4 and 5; there's a whole lot Morrison could do with that.  (I read an interview with him awhile back where he mentioned he's a fan of the current series; he said he preferred Human Nature/Family of Blood to Blink because of its focus on the Doctor's characterization.)

And third, as I've mentioned before, there's one bigger name in the history of Doctor Who comics than Morrison's, and I'm damned sure IDW's champing at the bit to reprint Alan Moore's Doctor Who.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 21, 2008, 12:05:41 AM
Week-old news at this point, and hardly a surprise, but apparently Tennant confirmed through the 2010 series (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/celebritynews/3188684/Doctor-Who-David-Tennant-to-stay-till-2011.html).  I'd really like to see Moffat follow up on the Silence in the Library arc, but frankly I expect I'll be satisfied with anything Moffat does.

The most interesting part, though:

Quote
It was revealed last week that all seven surviving Doctor Who's are to feature together in a one-off television special for BBC charity Children in Need in a programme to be broadcast on November 14.

Always best to take anything the British press says with a grain of salt, but very very interesting if true.  Baker and Eccleston, in particular, would have been difficult to coax.

That said, it's not without precedent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimensions_in_Time).
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Detonator on October 21, 2008, 05:53:00 AM
Tennant confirmed through the 2010 series (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/celebritynews/3188684/Doctor-Who-David-Tennant-to-stay-till-2011.html)

Don't you mean Tenet?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 21, 2008, 11:04:21 AM
::(:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on October 29, 2008, 03:55:43 PM
Tennant confirms he was just joshing ya. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7698539.stm)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 29, 2008, 04:09:03 PM
Quote
Russell T Davies, executive producer, said: "I've been lucky and honoured to work with David over the past few years - and it's not over yet, the Tenth Doctor still has five spectacular hours left!

"After which, I might drop an anvil on his head. Or maybe a piano. A radioactive piano. But we're planning the most enormous and spectacular ending, so keep watching."

::(:

EDIT:
I'm absolutely sure this is a sign that they're trying to convince him to do some new stories.  Now's the perfect time: he's taking a break from his superhero books (except Batman) and working on personal projects, and of course we're in a Who drought until 2010 (the three movies notwithstanding).  The rumors even have it that Moffat's going to leave a 1000-year gap in the Doctor's timeline between series 4 and 5; there's a whole lot Morrison could do with that.  (I read an interview with him awhile back where he mentioned he's a fan of the current series; he said he preferred Human Nature/Family of Blood to Blink because of its focus on the Doctor's characterization.)

In an MTV interview (http://splashpage.mtv.com/2008/10/23/grant-morrison-talks-idw-doctor-who-reprints-possible-film-ideas/), Morrison dismisses the idea of doing more Who comics, but says he'd love to write some TV episodes and has a movie idea he'd like to pitch.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Brentai on October 29, 2008, 04:51:26 PM
Quote
"After which, I might drop an anvil on his head. Or maybe a piano. A radioactive piano. But we're planning the most enormous and spectacular ending, by dropping an entire bridge on him (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DroppedABridgeOnHim). "
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on October 29, 2008, 04:56:01 PM
Come on Nesbitt, come on Nesbitt.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 29, 2008, 08:01:09 PM
My second choice. (http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=189163&title=Obama-and-Palin-Rallies-of-Fear)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Brentai on October 29, 2008, 08:12:28 PM
Can you be typecast as the Doctor when you're already typecast as somebody else British?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 11, 2008, 12:27:08 PM
Digital Spy (http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/cult/a134943/cult-spy-the-next-doctor-contenders.html) has a good rundown of potential Eleventh Doctors.  Nesbitt's on the list, as are Jekyll antagonist Paterson Joseph, Serenity villain Chiwetel Ejiofor, and Jon Pertwee's son Sean.

Moffat allegedly said that the next Doctor should be "40-plus and weird-looking", which I take as a hint toward Nesbitt, but the source for that quote appears to be the Sun, so it could be bullshit.

I'm also seeing a lot of buzz about Colin Salmon (http://www.denofgeek.com/television/144439/doctor_who_is_colin_salmon_the_next_doctor.html) as a potential pick, but again, British tabloids, grain of salt, yadda yadda.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 20, 2008, 12:53:06 AM
Missed this when it happened, but Moffat did a panel at Comic Con:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7P_cT9Nt5ic

Audio's awful and I can't understand a word anyone says, but Whedonopolis has a summary (http://www.whedonopolis.com/articles/cc2008-drw-torchwood-panels-2008.html).

Highlights:

Quote
Another audience member had previously asked Neil Gaiman whether he was going to write for Doctor Who. Neil had replied that it would be nice and that she should ask Steven. Steven replied that Neil Gaiman writing for Doctor Who would in fact be "nice," but wouldn't confirm or deny whether it was happening.

I'd say "Signs point to yes"; people aren't usually this cagey when the answer is "no".

And some points on River Song (which were actually what I was looking for when I found this):

Quote
Another person wanted to know what it was like writing character with a future history like River Song in the "Silence in the Library" / "The Forest of the Dead" two-parter and whether there was pressure to bring her back. Steven thought she was interesting for throwing in references to untold stories like how Russel references the Time War every now and again. Since we know the Doctor will see River again, Steven thinks that the Doctor may "sneak out of the TARDIS late one night with champagne and a corsage and possibly his toothbrush." He then advised the audience to never accidentally drop your toothbrush on a first date because you just look way too hopeful and "there's no way out of that!"

[...]

The next guy wanted to know if River Song recognized the Tenth Doctor or if she could recognize the Doctor in a different regeneration. Steven said that the way he saw it, she has met the Tenth Doctor "but that's not the only Doctor she's met."

I like the "Time War" idea, that she might be alluded to mysteriously but that her story will never be fully told -- but that the door's still open for her to show up again.

Also, first two minutes of the Christmas special:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb1ilNJ2L7Q

That's this year's Children in Need Special.  (Yeah, that whole Seven Doctors thing definitely sounded too good to be true.)

Anyway, it's a good hook and I'm interested in seeing how it turns out.  My hunch is that there's going to be a twist and that's not the real Eleventh Doctor.  I think they're going to keep us guessing right up until the regeneration.

Smart money says we don't get a straight answer in this one and the Next Doctor turns out to be a Doctor from a potential future that may or may not come to pass.  Predictable as shit and keeps just yanking us along; sounds like an RTD plot to me.

If I were writing it, he'd turn out to be a robot.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 12, 2008, 02:31:04 PM
Comics: I finally decided, fuck it, I'm taking a pair of scissors to that Doctor Who #4 I've had sitting around with the stuck-together pages so I can at least read the damn thing.  Finished that and #5 and #6.  Not bad, not great; #2 and #3 were probably the high point of that mini.

The Forgotten is a couple issues farther along now.  #3 featured little Fourth and Fifth Doctor stories, centered around the subject of misdirection.  The Baker Doctor's story was suitably fun, and the Davison Doctor's story was interesting mostly for invoking current Doctor continuity (the antagonists are the Judoon, and the Doctor refers to the Shadow Proclamation).  Also, Turlough.

#4, titled Survival, features a story each about the Sixth and Seventh Doctor (and gets more self-referential with the timeline, with the Sixth quipping that he hopes he doesn't end up in a courtroom again anytime soon), but, beyond that, features a twist that finally establishes when this story takes place -- sort of.  [spoiler]Early on, the Doctor recognizes the phrase "You've got something on your back" and wonders where he's heard it before -- at first this led me to wonder if the bug in Turn Left was a ref to a classic ep, but no, the end of the issue makes it clear that this story actually takes place AFTER season 4 -- or, to be precise, in an alternate version of season 3 where the timeline's been altered because of something that happened after season 4.[/spoiler]  How the Master figures into this is still up in the air, but we'll know soon enough -- #5 will feature the Eighth and Ninth Doctor, and I believe #6 will be the last issue.

Anyway, it's been a decent miniseries but I get the feeling that, like its predecessor, it peaked early -- and IMO the art takes a hit every time someone else takes over from Pia Guerra.  Still, #4's ending had a satisfying twist, and I'm looking forward to seeing what they do in #5; the Eighth Doctor's practically a blank slate for me since I never listened to any of the radio shows, and I love the Ninth.  Not bad, and it's made for a good Doctor Who fix during the months the show's been off (and moreso now that [spoiler]we know it takes place sometime after last season's finale[/spoiler]).
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 17, 2008, 08:20:26 PM
Decided to check out the Sarah Jane season finale because it featured the return of Nicholas Courtney as Brigadier Lethbridge-Stewart.  It wasn't as bad as that time I watched Torchwood because Martha was in it!

The story was easy enough to follow; it was heavy on continuity but the backstory was explained quickly.  The plot was straightforward and predictable, and the characters mostly interchangeable.

Courtney was the highlight; he chewed the scenery in all the right ways, relishing every deadpan line and facial expression.  He's the reason I checked it out, and I wasn't disappointed.

Ep 2 ran out of gas in a hurry.  There was some good development on the UNIT/Sontaran arc from the latest season of Who, but from there it just went into standard trying-to-take-over-the-universe "You're not my mom, Sarah Jane is!" stuff.  It wasn't nearly the spectacular crash-and-burn that the Who finale was, though I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing; laughably bad is more fun than simply blah.

All in all, not bad.  Not good enough for me to watch the series on a regular basis, but good enough that I'll watch it if it gets any other interesting guest stars.  And while I'm definitely in the "don't just use continuity for its own sake" crowd, I'd really like to see Brig show up in the regular series at some point.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: on December 17, 2008, 08:58:12 PM
So I just found out that my mom's been a Dr Who fan for YEARS now.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on December 26, 2008, 12:55:29 AM
Bravo doctor, bravo
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 26, 2008, 06:12:34 PM
The good:
The visuals.  In particular, the [spoiler]Iron Giant Cyberking[/spoiler].

The bad:
More of the same from RTD.  Memory loss, big bad/human hybridization, Doctor warns bad guys before killing them, everybody thanks the Doctor, Doctor is sad and lonely and misses his companions.

The :?::
[spoiler]What were the Cybermen doing with records of all ten Doctors?  Unless I totally misunderstood all that Void/Time Vortex stuff, these are the parallel universe Cybermen, who shouldn't know anything about the first nine Doctors.  So where did that information come from?[/spoiler]

Could just be a plothole, but I'm guessing it's significant.  Possible answer: [spoiler]the Cyberapes were our universe's Cybermen.[/spoiler]

(EDIT 2: the Doctor Who Wiki (http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/The_Next_Doctor) conjectures that [spoiler]the Cybermen stole the data from the Daleks[/spoiler].)

EDIT: Looking back at my predictions:

My hunch is that there's going to be a twist and that's not the real Eleventh Doctor.  I think they're going to keep us guessing right up until the regeneration.

[spoiler]Right on the money.[/spoiler]

Smart money says we don't get a straight answer in this one and the Next Doctor turns out to be a Doctor from a potential future that may or may not come to pass.  Predictable as shit and keeps just yanking us along; sounds like an RTD plot to me.

[spoiler]Nope!  The story is clearly resolved and self-contained.  Score one for Rusty.[/spoiler]

If I were writing it, he'd turn out to be a robot.

[spoiler]I didn't, and he didn't.  But there WAS an awesome giant robot.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 27, 2008, 12:18:44 AM
...also, I missed this the other week -- Tony Lee posts an image of all ten Doctors from The Forgotten #6 (http://forum.idwpublishing.com/viewtopic.php?p=109924&sid=5546114a32acfccaa9796bb43109860b).

I'm not as excited about it as the forumgoers there, because 1) yeah, no shit that was going to happen, and 2) the art honestly leaves a lot to be desired.  I don't think that's Pia Guerra's work.  The faces all seem lopsided (which could be the inker's fault rather than the penciler's) and the proportions seem off -- most of them don't seem thick enough, #9 in particular, and #4 should be the tallest guy in the room (though sticking him next to #2 at least makes for good contrast).
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on January 02, 2009, 11:30:28 AM
New Doctor announced tomorrow. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/entertainment/7807742.stm)

Incidentally, I'm all caught up, working my way through Torchwood (not fantastic, but I don't think it's so terrible either), and considering rearranging some hard drive space to dig into some of the old stuff.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 02, 2009, 08:33:08 PM
The Forgotten #5 is pretty great.

Last week, I mentioned the latest Thunderbolts as a text book example of decompression.  This is just the opposite -- in the span of a few pages, this issue gives us damn near the same amount of information on the Time War that four years of the TV show have.  The Eighth Doctor's story is nicely self-contained, yet it expands the Time War story, uses the potential of a Doctor whose history is only partially written (by, for example, giving him a non-human companion), and throws in the necessary "half-human" joke (with a fairly clever retcon explaining it).  I imagine there are probably some nods to the radio series, too, since McGann spent a hell of a lot more time there than on TV, but Shada's the only one of those I've actually checked out.  And this story, by its nature, has to take place after McGann's run, because it's during the Time War.

The Ninth Doctor story is surprising for being so much the opposite of what's expected.  #9 was often a dark and brooding character, but this is a very lighthearted story.

I hate the colors in it, though -- feels like they've been slathered over Guerra's shading.  There are some bits near the end of the issue where they're pretty nasty, too, though I love them in the shot where #10 [spoiler]opens the fob watch[/spoiler].  Also a nice, if obvious, touch that that's #10's artifact.

So, rundown of the artifacts, then -- #1's is his cane, #2's is his recorder, #3's is his car keys, #4's is a bag of jelly babies, #5's is his cricket ball, #7's is his umbrella, #8's is, retroactively, the key he used to doom the Daleks and Time Lords and end the Time War, #9's is psychic paper, and #10's is [spoiler]the fob watch[/spoiler].  I must have missed #6's.  (EDIT: stopwatch.  Right.  Would have known that if I'd seen more #6 Who.)

And the last page reveal is very well-played -- as it's become increasingly hard to reconcile a goateed Master with the timeline we're working with here, the big question has, of course, been Who?  [spoiler]Who indeed -- it's the OTHER Tenth Doctor...but now he has a GOATEE.[/spoiler]  Or at least, so it would appear -- could be another red herring.  But really, all Martha's hinting throughout the issue at [spoiler]the Doctor's "other" regeneration[/spoiler] would seem to suggest he's the genuine article.  On the OTHER other hand, mucking with the latest series finale (and potentially making it better) -- does that sound like something the Beeb would allow?  Then again, I wouldn't have expected so much Time War stuff to pass.

Anyway, good issue, despite some color oddities.  For those who haven't been reading this series, it's probably worth checking out the trade.

Next month is the finale, the big throwdown with all ten Doctors.  [spoiler]Or is it 10.5?[/spoiler]  Part of me thinks, how can they wrap this story up in just one more issue?  But then I remember I'm thinking of the amount of story MOST writers cram into a single issue.  Again, this series PACKS it in there -- 8-page stories are practically a lost art.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: JDigital on January 03, 2009, 10:02:14 AM
BBC just announced the eleventh doctor as Matt Smith (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1741002/).

The new Doctor Who is my age  :ohshi~:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 03, 2009, 10:23:15 AM
...I DO appreciate the fact that absolutely nobody saw that one coming.  Disappointed it's nobody from Jekyll, but WTF, let's see how he does.  I expect him to have great material to work with.

The new Doctor Who is my age  :ohshi~:

October 1982, REPRESENT!  (<---- granfalloon)

The best clue that he'd be young was a Murdoch paper reporting he'd be over 40.

(http://www.corporate-sellout.com/img/nypost-gephardt.jpg)

The possibility of juxtaposing a young Doctor with the commanding personality as described by River Song is compelling, but of course I think at this point everybody's reading way too much into the River Song ep and Moffat's got a lot more to do than simply filling in the stuff he foreshadowed there.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on January 04, 2009, 10:03:25 PM
Ah, hell. And here I was really holding out for Nesbitt. Though, of course, that was mostly me hoping to see my own self further reflected in a fictional character. What better way than through a guy who acted his way through a crazy x-files version of a thin allegory for alcoholism?

But really, all props to the emo kid. At least he has my hair. Though the long face might be a bit much to get over. Guy looks like a goddamn horse. Just saying.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Arc on January 05, 2009, 11:30:48 AM
:8D: Maybe now he'll be able to afford eyebrows!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 24, 2009, 10:50:56 AM
The last issue of The Forgotten is pure fan-wank.  I mean, the whole series has had that element to it, but here the story actually takes a backseat to seeing how many different companions Lee can cycle through in just a few pages, and the materialization of the previous nine Doctors is underwhelming, largely because of the complaints about the art that I've previously noted.  (And I was right, Guerra didn't draw this issue.)  On the plus side, [spoiler]Adric dies again[/spoiler].

There's some foreshadowing near the end that things are going to get darker and the Doctor's going to have to face more fallout from the Time War.  I'm curious as to whether Tony Lee knows any inside scoops on the upcoming specials, or if he's just playing the odds.  (I think he must have known season 4's ending before he started writing The Forgotten, which must mean he knew it in advance since the finale was in June and Forgotten started in August.)

I DO quite like the ending.  There's a bit where the Doctor says there's one companion he really needs to see before he goes.  [spoiler]I was thinking, "aw, hell, more damn pining for Rose," but no, it turned out to be Susan.  Which of course makes sense given that it's a fanboy writing it -- of COURSE he'll be sick of Rose and more interested in seeing one of the original series' major dangling threads given some sort of resolution.[/spoiler]

All in all, The Forgotten is a pretty good series with a very silly ending that manages to come across as anticlimactic despite (or, really, BECAUSE OF) its kitchen-sink approach -- itself a pretty fair summary of any given season of the current TV series.

It's at its best when it's doing 8-page stories about each of the first 9 Doctors; the overarcing Tenth Doctor story is just window-dressing, and while it provides a couple neat twists it doesn't really stand up well to the smaller, self-contained stuff.

I'd love to see this idea expanded on with an ongoing series of new stories featuring classic Doctors, but of course they've already got Doctor Who Classics, and it's much cheaper to reprint old stuff than create new stuff.  (And with a $4 cover price, I've gotta figure they're turning a decent profit.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on February 15, 2009, 04:58:06 PM
Nrama (http://www.newsarama.com/comics/020907-NYCC-IDW.html): new monthly Who comic coming; will feature the Tenth Doctor with a new companion.  Tony Lee, who wrote The Forgotten, will be writing this one too, which could be a good thing or a bad thing.  Of course, as I've said before, I'd much rather see him continue with short stories about the previous Doctors, but the article says that's unlikely; The Forgotten was an exception and in general the Beeb's not likely to wade into the legal morass of contracts and likeness rights.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on February 16, 2009, 10:20:34 AM
...and apparently, prior to the ongoing series, there's going to be a one-shot called The Whispering Gallery, written by Leah Moore and John Reppion, who I am sure are ambivalent about being described as "Alan Moore's daughter and son-in-law".  Ben Templesmith of Fell is doing the art, which looks pretty neat (http://bentemplesmith.blogspot.com/2009/01/doctor-who-whispering-gallery-interiors.html).

The only Moore/Reppion book I've read is Albion, which I thought was solid but not outstanding, more interesting for its big ideas (relaunching obscure British comics characters) than its plot.

That said, I like the look of this one -- between the premise and Templesmith's art, I get a slightly surreal, distinctly Moffat-ish vibe.  And hey, a done-in-one story is always a pleasant surprise.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on February 16, 2009, 11:54:36 AM
The only Moore/Reppion book I've read is Albion, which I thought was solid but not outstanding, more interesting for its big ideas (relaunching obscure British comics characters) than its plot.

Of course, won't those big ideas by Alan Moore in the first place?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on February 16, 2009, 12:37:50 PM
...yes.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on February 28, 2009, 10:07:11 AM
It came out pretty well.  Story's decent; not particularly fantastic or original but it works.  But the art's what really makes the book.

I'm not sure how I feel about Templesmith's use of photos -- it's fairly jarring to see the Doctor go from a crude watercolor to a photo of Tennant's face in the span of one panel -- but really they complement the story pretty well.  And they're never really photorealistic -- that may be Tennant's eyes, nose, and mouth, but they don't sit quite right on the outline of his face, and his hair's clearly a comic drawing.  The contrast is interesting and fits the tone of the story well.

I love what he does with his colors -- as I've said before, I'm not an artist and don't really have the vocabulary here, but it's kind of a washed-out, muted watercolor.

Anyway.  Well worth picking up for the art, especially if you dig Fell.  And it's a good Doctor Who fix to hold you over until the Easter special.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 13, 2009, 04:33:27 PM
Lee on ongoing comic series. (http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=20400)  Basically, the first 18 issues are going to be structured as a "season" that takes place probably right before Tennant's last two specials, and then #19 will pick up with the Eleventh Doctor.

He talks in big paragraphs and in my head he is speaking very fast and enthusiastically in the Tenth Doctor's voice.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 21, 2009, 11:36:43 AM
This could go in a few different places, but: Hugo Award noms. (http://www.thehugoawards.org/?p=260)

Two Who eps are up; the obligatory Moffat arc and Turn Left.  (I thought Midnight was better than Turn Left, but Turn Left might be a better sci-fi story I guess.)

I love Moffat and I loved Silence/Forest, but I'm hoping Dr. Horrible gets it.  Moffat's gotten the last three and I'm sure he'll get more.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on March 21, 2009, 11:46:23 AM
I can't have been the only one to think Turn Left was incredibly, incredibly retarded. I mean as much as I love Doctor Who, RTD simply cannot write, and the mere fact that Left was slightly better than his usual drivel doesn't really mean it's suddenly Hugo material.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 21, 2009, 12:42:40 PM
Again, I thought Midnight was pretty good.  That was him too.

Turn Left...well, going back a few pages (http://brontoforum.us/index.php?topic=871.msg14723#msg14723), consensus seems to be it was perfectly decent if not fantastic.  Unquestionably better than the two that followed, though that's an awfully low bar.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Ted Belmont on March 22, 2009, 08:26:42 AM
Making my way through Season 2 via netflix. Is it just me, or was Rise of the Cybermen/Age of Steel really not very good?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on March 22, 2009, 08:46:06 AM
That is an agreed about consensus, yes.  It was remarkably dumb, with the true nadir of the episode coming as the Cybercontroller plummeted to his death in a remarkably cheesy scene.  Honestly, the use of Cybermen in the new Doctor Who series has been remarkably unterrifying, with the villains being sort of cheesy and harmless throughout most of the series.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on March 22, 2009, 09:27:06 AM
I still think the new Cybermen redesign is really well done, especially the emphasis on weight and power. Makes them seem a lot more of a legitimate threat when it looks and sounds like they could crush a man's skull in their cold, metal mitts.

But yeah, they are the epitome of the throw-away monster of the week. Their philosophy is one of the most overdone and tired in sci-fi, their grandiose plans have become steadily more and more retarded every time they show up, and I'm starting to get the feeling that it's next to impossible to do something interesting with a villian that's not scary, nor remotely complex. Honestly, Age of Steel did the best they could've done in running with the underground punk resistance bit, pulling a serviceable action episode out of the Cybermen invasion. It really would've worked a lot better without an entire episode of buildup before giving us some mindless alt-Earth robot shootin' fun.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 22, 2009, 10:31:01 AM
Honestly, the use of Cybermen in the new Doctor Who series has been remarkably unterrifying, with the villains being sort of cheesy and harmless throughout most of the series.

I've said before that, of the classic Cybermen eps I've watched, I haven't seen what the big goddamn deal was.  Tomb of the Cybermen, which is generally regarded as the best original series Cybermen ep and one of the best original series eps period, just seemed thoroughly bland to me (though I can see the draw of the Lovecraftian "man opens tomb of things he never should have meddled with" angle, and the shot where they come out of their cocoons IS classic).  Likewise, the Davison-era Earthshock was a largely underwhelming exercise until its last episode or so.  (Let's give RTD props for one thing: psychic paper.  A way for avoiding the "Doctor is blamed for something he didn't do and thrown in jail" plot was long, LONG overdue.)

There was an awesome damn Cybermen story recently reprinted in Grant Morrison's Doctor Who, but...that was Grant Morrison.  He could make, I don't know, the Slitheen awesome.

I still think the new Cybermen redesign is really well done, especially the emphasis on weight and power. Makes them seem a lot more of a legitimate threat when it looks a sounds like they could crush a man's skull in their cold, metal mitts.

SHIT yes.  The knew Cybermen designs are one of the great visual decisions of the new series IMO.  They're distinctly recognizable as Cybermen, without being, well, fucking ridiculous-looking.

And again, the Iron Giant Cyberking in the Christmas special was :perfect:.

Of course it bears mentioning that style and presentation ARE vital to Doctor Who, that distinctive designs of alien peoples and settings ARE integral to what makes it Doctor Who.  Nobody'd accuse Moffat of prizing style over substance, but for all the complexity and cleverness of his plots, his episodes all feature some fucking stunning imagery.  And his monsters are the scariest.

That tangent aside, there IS a sense that the Cybermen are on the series simply because it's Doctor Who and they're obligatory.  (There's a quoted interview earlier in the thread where Moffat says, essentially, that things like Daleks and Cybermen were necessary in the first couple of seasons to reassure old fans, but now that the show's caught on they're not necessary anymore and he's not going to use them unless there's a good plot reason for it and would much rather create the new monsters that today's viewers tell THEIR kids about twenty years down the line.)  I haven't seen season 2 in awhile, but my recollection was that the first appearance of the Cybermen had a good premise but was ultimately a victim of RTD's over-the-top style.  My recollection of the season finale was that it worked pretty well, and of course I particularly liked the heckling between the Cybermen and the Daleks.  The ending was over-the-top but really the most logical and coherent of any of RTD's finales, and I commented the first time that I saw it that the episode would have been pretty much perfect if they'd hacked off the ten-minute goodbye scene at the end.

All that to say...I like the IDEA of the Cybermen.  And I think most of the eps, old series and new, that I've seen them in have had pretty good premises but gotten lost somewhere along the way.  Maybe we'll see them again in the next few years and maybe we won't.  I kinda hope they get a rest for a bit, but there's potential there too.

I'd rather see them again than the Daleks, at any rate.

...speaking of.  How big a reset switch do you guys figure RTD's going to pull at the end here?  You think he'll go so far as to undo the entire Time War and bring back Gallifrey and the Time Lords?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on March 22, 2009, 11:06:00 AM
Well it's going to be a super-happy ending, no doubt about that. Honestly, I love the idea of a time war enough that I'd be even more pissed about a reset than I already am about Tennant getting written off before Moffat can take a swing at him. They've admittedly been sketchy on the details how how the war was fought, but two time-travelling races altering and re-altering history in a conflict that literally effects the entire universe seems like an incredibly awesome backdrop for exploring the absurd power Time Lords wield, and how their own aims and politics could affect trillions.

From what we saw of them in the old series, I'd always felt like the Time Lords were way too uptight and passive to be all that interesting. I know they would really need to be, in order to be any sort of effective guardians of time, but I'll be damned if a race of perfect, level-headed demi-gods didn't bore the hell out of me. I like the implication that their own ambitions to craft a better, Dalekless present undid countless lives.

In sort, I'm doing a pretty awful job at getting myself all primed and set for RTD's final full-force kick to Doctor Who's balls here.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on March 22, 2009, 11:28:01 AM
The Sun is the unreliable paper, right?  Because they're claiming (http://entertainment.uk.msn.com/tv/galleries/gallery.aspx?cp-documentid=14412671&GT1=61503) Billie, Freema, Catherine, and John are all coming back for the big Tennant finale which I could totally see RTD doing.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Burrito Al Pastor on March 22, 2009, 11:37:42 AM
Ok, I need to get into Dr. Who. Where do I start?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 22, 2009, 01:47:42 PM
The Sun is the unreliable paper, right?  Because they're claiming (http://entertainment.uk.msn.com/tv/galleries/gallery.aspx?cp-documentid=14412671&GT1=61503) Billie, Freema, Catherine, and John are all coming back for the big Tennant finale which I could totally see RTD doing.

Every British paper is unreliable, but the Sun is the Murdoch-owned one that cooked up a Moffat quote about the next Doctor being over 40, so it should probably be especially suspect.

That said, it's totally plausible.

Ok, I need to get into Dr. Who. Where do I start?

For the current series, Blink is one of the best episodes and requires no context to enjoy.  Maybe start there and, if you like what you see, head on back to the beginning in '05.

For the original series, my personal favorite serial is City of Death, which is likewise standalone and requires no context.  Genesis of the Daleks is probably the best Dalek story, and while it's an important piece of series canon, it comes with enough explanation that you don't need to know much about what came before.

I've got some more original-series recommendations in the other thread (http://brontoforum.us/index.php?topic=119.msg39410#msg39410).
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Burrito Al Pastor on March 22, 2009, 10:34:52 PM
For the current series, Blink is one of the best episodes and requires no context to enjoy.  Maybe start there and, if you like what you see, head on back to the beginning in '05.

Good call, now I'm hooked. Nice of Netflix to put all the episodes online for my streaming convenience. (Torchwood isn't, though, so I'll have to wait for that to come before I can hit season 3.)

I was very happy to discover that the airdates for the two shows don't overlap, saving me the trouble of changing the disc every episode to preserve the original context. Because I would do that.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on March 22, 2009, 10:44:47 PM
torchwood is shit and also it barely interacts with doctor who. Ignore it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on March 22, 2009, 11:01:08 PM
Torchwood is decent.  Fuck the haters.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 23, 2009, 05:20:51 PM
I'm in the "Torchwood isn't very good but has some good episodes" camp.  I liked Out of Time and Captain Jack Harkness.  But it's not important to Doctor Who's continuity in any way that isn't explained in the first five minutes of Jack's appearance at the end of season 3.

MEANWHILE (minor spoilers of upcoming special follow):

Of all the various rumored guest stars, it would appear that Jessica Hynes is confirmed photographically (http://planetgallifrey.blogspot.com/2009/03/episode-17.html).  She's playing a character named Verity Newman this time, who's published a book called A Journal of Impossible Things with a picture of a fobwatch on the cover -- so presumably she's playing a descendant of her previous character.

This, I'm all right with -- it's perfectly fair for a regeneration ep to serve as a look back at the current Doctor's run (Tom Baker had a sequence where his life flashed before his eyes, with a few key villains and companions in there), and really, for my money, Human Nature/The Family of Blood is the quintessential Tenth Doctor story.  Despite the fact that it was originally written as a Seventh Doctor story.  And despite (or, actually, largely BECAUSE of) the fact that he spends most of it as a character who is very very different from the Doctor.

I'm not alone in that opinion -- as mentioned earlier in the thread, Tony Lee picked the fobwatch as #10's artifact in the museum in The Forgotten comic series.  Granted, it's not as iconic as #2's recorder or #4's jelly babies, but it WAS central to a couple of very good stories (I am counting the first episode of the Master arc as very good).

That and the fact that the journal itself is a retrospective of the Doctor's entire fantastic series of lives.

That could be an entire separate discussion -- Human Nature/Family of Blood as the quintessential Tenth Doctor story, y/n?  Girl in the Fireplace would be my second choice.  And The Runaway Bride has one of the most important Tenth Doctor moments; pity the rest of the episode is fucking awful.

Anyway.  You know, bringing back Rose or Donna could actually work if only RTD could exercise some restraint, which of course he can't.  Maybe just a quick shot of Donna waking up in bed, or Rose getting a sudden shiver and Clone Doctor saying "I'm sorry.  I'm so sorry."  In other words, if they're used briefly and not in a way that undoes the whole super-final, he-can-never-see-them-again, no, seriously ending that he spent twenty fucking minutes on in the finale.

Martha, Jack, and Sarah Jane could actually have story roles, but I kind of hope they don't.  (Maybe Martha.)  And I'm hoping the rumors of the Master are false too.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on March 23, 2009, 06:36:18 PM
As retarded as his resurrection would be, and it would be retarded, they've already set it up at the end of Last of the Time Lords, and frankly, I love the new Master. I'm willing forgive a lot to see him get more screen time.

alsotorchwoodsux
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on March 23, 2009, 07:48:04 PM
I'm in the "Torchwood isn't very good but has some good episodes" camp.  I liked Out of Time and Captain Jack Harkness. 

I'd recommend Adrift from season 2 as being pretty aces.  Not gonna lie, Torchwood has some godawful fucking episodes, but I like enough of what it does to give it a general thumbs up.  Owen's arc through season 2 (after the pointless Martha stint, anyway) is pretty good, and I would probably watch John Barrowman read from a phone book by this point.

for my money, Human Nature/The Family of Blood is the quintessential Tenth Doctor story. 

You know, does Empty Child/Doctor Dances win out for Nine by sheer virtue of being the best episodes?  I agree on the assessment for Ten, but I'm having a harder time for Eccleston.  I kinda keep going back to him when he meets the Dalek as what I think of for Nine, the whole "pent up over the Time War" thing.

As retarded as his resurrection would be, and it would be retarded, they've already set it up at the end of Last of the Time Lords, and frankly, I love the new Master. I'm willing forgive a lot to see him get more screen time.

thisthisthis.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 23, 2009, 08:00:24 PM
You know, does Empty Child/Doctor Dances win out for Nine by sheer virtue of being the best episodes?  I agree on the assessment for Ten, but I'm having a harder time for Eccleston.  I kinda keep going back to him when he meets the Dalek as what I think of for Nine, the whole "pent up over the Time War" thing.

Dalek is my call, yeah.  It gives more Time War exposition, and it shows the Doctor filled with genuine murderous rage.  It also shows him willing to sacrifice Rose to save the universe -- but once he finds out she's alive, he's not willing to risk it again.

Empty Child/Doctor Dances is pretty great, though.  Everybody lives!

I'd give a nod to Father's Day, too.  Because he calls Rose a stupid ape but then all he really wants is for her to say she's sorry.

And of course Parting of the Ways.

But yeah, Dalek would be the definitive Ninth Doctor ep, for my money.

(We could do this for the earlier ones, too, but I haven't seen enough of ANY other individual Doctor to really definitively say "Yeah, it's that one."  ...well, Eight.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 30, 2009, 05:51:31 PM
...so it's occurred to me to wonder just how the regeneration's going to play out.  Will Moffat do a regeneration ep that picks right up from the last special, or will he do like RTD did with #9 and leave a gap?

I'd say that, on the whole, regeneration eps are fun and give the writers, Doctor, and audience a chance to sort of get their bearings with the new status quo.

Of course, if the new show picks right up where the special leaves off, that leaves pesky questions.  What forces the Doctor to regenerate?  Where does it happen?  Who's with him?  None of those questions are particularly important if Moffat leaves a gap, but obviously there's got to be continuity if he doesn't.

I've seen half the regeneration eps (2-into-3, 4-into-5, 7-into-8, 9-into-10).  2-into-3 left a really easy transition, with the Doctor's companions removed from the story and the Doctor sent back to Earth -- you didn't even see Pertwee at the end of War Games.

9-into-10 was tidy too -- threat past, Doctor mortally wounded but back on the TARDIS.  If Rose hadn't been there, the whole thing would have been a perfect relaunching point with a totally clean slate.

The problem is you'd miss out on the goodbye scene.  And for all that's wrong with RTD, his goodbye scenes, Rose, and her role in that episode, #9's goodbye and #10's hello were pretty great.

I find it hard to believe RTD will have #10 die with nobody by his side.  Which would mean one of three things:

1. The new companion is revealed before the 2010 season.
2. The companion who's with the Doctor when he regenerates is promptly disposed of.
3. Gap between regeneration and new season.

Don't know; it'll be interesting to find out.  I like the idea of a regeneration episode.  #9 showing up post-regeneration had the advantage of relaunching the series without too much continuity right off the bat.  It also gave him plenty of potential backstory to potentially tap -- though it sounds like they're putting a huge gap in #10's life that Moffat can refer to any time he feels like it, too.

Anyway, just some rambling thoughts.  Would be interested to hear other people's, or thoughts on regeneration eps in general.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on March 30, 2009, 08:16:20 PM
If it follows the 9-10 transition, then it'll just be a smooth transition.  Thanks to a mini episode, The Parting of the Ways and the Christmas Invasion were literally right after each other:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3I-VwvkT4o

I see no reason this couldn't happen with the 10-11 switch.  You could try and argue that RTD wouldn't repeat the same regeneration scene, but that is a difficult story to tell.  There's also the question of whether his companion before he regenerates will be River Song or not.  It'd actually be really interesting, as she claimed she'd never seen him so young, even though Adam Smith will be the youngest Doctor on record.

There's also the possibility that the Doctor could change during the last special or even during the opening of the new season.  Not that likely considering Tenant's contracts, but not unprecedented.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on March 30, 2009, 08:17:24 PM
I don't know where it comes from, but a friend of mine says with some degree of certainty that River Song is supposed to be present during the 10-11 regeneration.  It could be hearsay, but I've honestly got no clue.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 30, 2009, 09:15:48 PM
There's also the question of whether his companion before he regenerates will be River Song or not.

I really kind of hope not.  I'd just as soon see her story left to Moffat to tell or not as he pleases.

It'd actually be really interesting, as she claimed she'd never seen him so young, even though Adam Smith will be the youngest Doctor on record.

I think she was pretty clearly referring to his actual age, not his body's physical appearance.  Wasn't she commenting on his eyes when she said it?  And she definitely spoke of his poise and bearing.

Which, I think I said earlier in the thread, could definitely make for a neat juxtaposition -- a young actor playing a supremely confident leader of men who opens the TARDIS with a snap of his fingers.

But I think I've also said I think people are reading a bit too much into the River Song foreshadowing and I expect it to come to pass only in bits and pieces -- Moffat said something about having it be something he occasionally alludes to, like the Time War.

There's also the possibility that the Doctor could change during the last special or even during the opening of the new season.  Not that likely considering Tenant's contracts, but not unprecedented.

Possible, but unlikely.  I foresee something very much like 9-to-10 (or for that matter 4-to-5) where we get a quick shot of the new Doctor at the end and that's it until the next season.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 01, 2009, 05:17:22 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-rUTlQPm4o&feature=player_embedded

Official airdate (for UK, of course) is Easter, but there's a preview showing in certain areas two days before that so it might be on the Internet as soon as then.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 01, 2009, 05:40:22 PM
Looks like it could be fun.  However, it reminds me both of the Langoliers miniseries and Jeepers Creepers 2, of all things.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 01, 2009, 07:41:01 PM
Shades of Pitch Black as well.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 04, 2009, 10:32:45 AM
Reminds me of Midnight.  Which isn't a bad thing; it was my favorite non-Moffat episode of last season.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 04, 2009, 05:37:17 PM
Interview w/ RTD and DT. (http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/tv_and_radio/article6022914.ece)  RTD assures us he won't be writing a single line of dialogue for #11.  Which doesn't rule out him having a line or two at the end of the last special, of course, but I think it rules out him having any more than that.  I also think it runs pretty strongly against the River Song rumors Constantine mentioned; I think Davies sees that as Moffat's story and something he shouldn't meddle with.  (Not impossible, though; Moffat could throw him a few ideas.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 12, 2009, 06:33:51 PM
A perfectly good standalone special.  Some great visuals, including the London skyline and the Dubai desert -- get it in HD.

Some neat new aliens, both in the CG and rubber-suit variety.

Malcolm's a fun character; I'd like to see him again.  (Captain Magambo's dialogue at the end hinted UNIT might be back.)

The foreshadowing at the end seems to corroborate [spoiler]Master[/spoiler] rumors, but is vague enough that it could be referring to anybody -- the fact that the next special is called The Waters of Mars would suggest Ice Warriors.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on April 17, 2009, 12:39:39 AM
Came off a bit bullshitty to me, though I liked a few moments. Most of the crap with Malcom was actually just about perfect. I think someone was channeling some of their own personal fan discomfort with that. Pretty much nailed the combination of pride and embarrassment. Also thought it was kind of a nice touch that the guy seemed to be doing a bit of halfassed Tom Baker dressup when he ran out of the trailer.

And "Guns work?!" was gold.

... and pretty much all of the rest of it can fuck off and die. Especially the bit where the notably earless bug people have bluetooth earpieces lying around their ship.

Mostly just reminded why I'm kind of glad RTD is getting off this thing, though I'll miss the Doctor having eyebrows.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 17, 2009, 11:08:28 PM
It certainly wasn't a standout, but I think it was a perfectly good fluff episode.  It had its share of annoying RTD stuff (a cast of cliches who we're supposed to give a crap about), but managed to avoid a lot of his usual excesses: it's self-contained with minimal references to other episodes ("Why do people on buses always blame me?" is worth a laugh even without context) and new alien races rather than more rehashes.  And the grim foreshadowing of impending doom is kept to a minimum; in fact the whole thing manages neither to venture too far into the absurd nor to take itself too seriously.

And the dialogue was pretty good too I thought.

Granted, it may just be a low bar.

Not sure if I like it or the Christmas special better.  Christmas special definitely falls under the "took itself too seriously" umbrella, and of course relied entirely on an obvious red herring.  But the Next Doctor made for a better companion than Lara Croft, and again, Iron Giant Cyberman.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 29, 2009, 06:14:32 AM
Wired (http://www.wired.com/underwire/2009/05/tennant-still-whos-who-in-sarah-jane-night-animated-series/): A little more Tennant still to come, in a guest spot on Sarah Jane and another series of six-minute animated shorts.

Beeb (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8073734.stm): new companion revealed.  21 years old; previously played Soothsayer in Fires of Pompeii.  (Apparently she's also in something called Outcast with James Nesbitt.)

The Beeb's story on the Sarah Jane appearance (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8068435.stm) also includes the following:

Quote
Meanwhile, Doctor Who may be heading for the big screen after a spokeswoman for BBC Films confirmed that "a script is in development".

BBC entertainment correspondent Lizo Mzimba said there were no guarantees a film would be made and that, if the project went into full production, a release would be a long time away.

I remember Grant Morrison said he had an idea for a Doctor Who movie.  Well, a man can dream.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Burrito Al Pastor on May 30, 2009, 01:45:29 AM
As it happens, I've only just watched "Silence in the Library" and "Forest of the Dead", and I couldn't help but noticing something...

The new companion is ginger. You know who else is ginger? River Song.

Steven Moffat wrote those two episodes. He's also the new lead writer.

I wonder.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on May 30, 2009, 03:57:19 AM
are you trying to imply donna is river or that moffat has a thing for redheads?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on May 30, 2009, 08:48:56 AM
He's talking about Karen Gillian, I think.  Not Catherine Tate.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 19, 2009, 04:55:50 PM
Photo (http://io9.com/5291509/your-first-look-at-doctor-whos-next-big-guest-stars) confirms John Simm...and Timothy Dalton dressed as a Time Lord.

I'd say the odds of "RTD pushes giant reset switch, brings back Gallifrey and the Time Lords (and presumably also Skaro and the Daleks)" just went way up.  And they weren't exactly low to begin with.

(Article's claim that the Master killed #7 is a bit of a stretch; he forced an emergency landing on Earth, but was hardly responsible for the Doctor opening the TARDIS door and immediately getting shot.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on June 19, 2009, 05:51:51 PM
I'd say the odds of "RTD pushes giant reset switch, brings back Gallifrey and the Time Lords (and presumably also Skaro and the Daleks)" just went way up.  And they weren't exactly low to begin with.

WOW that would piss me off. Wouldn't put it past RTD for a dang second, either  :painful:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 19, 2009, 09:34:18 PM
I'm on the fence.  I'm fairly confident that WHATEVER happens in the finale is going to make me want to punch babies.

I think the bottom line on undoing the Time War is the question of whether there's more potential for good stories with Gallifrey or without it, and I'm leaning toward "with".  The Time War, Last of the Time Lords angle was Davies's baby, and while it worked to great effect with both #9 and #10 (and, retroactively, #8 in The Forgotten comic), I don't know that I need any more of the "so lonely" Doctor after this.

That said, it would sure be great if the Daleks would stay the fuck away for awhile.

Anyway.  Whatever.  I'm confident that, whatever happens, RTD's finale will make me :MENDOZAAAAA: and Moffat's subsequent season will make me :dance:.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on June 19, 2009, 09:43:48 PM
I feel like there's a lot more with the Time War than without:

Honestly, I love the idea of a time war enough that I'd be even more pissed about a reset than I already am about Tennant getting written off before Moffat can take a swing at him. They've admittedly been sketchy on the details how how the war was fought, but two time-traveling races altering and re-altering history in a conflict that literally effects the entire universe seems like an incredibly awesome backdrop for exploring the absurd power Time Lords wield, and how their own aims and politics could affect trillions.

From what we saw of them in the old series, I'd always felt like the Time Lords were way too uptight and passive to be all that interesting. I know they would really need to be, in order to be any sort of effective guardians of time, but I'll be damned if a race of perfect, level-headed demi-gods didn't bore the hell out of me. I like the implication that their own ambitions to craft a better, Dalekless present undid countless lives.

I will say, though, that if anyone can write up a decent mystery on Gallifrey, it'd be Moffatt, and it's is a place and culture that would be great to explore more of. There's a heck of a history there, and if I remember my Five Doctors, not all of it is orange skies and lollipops.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 19, 2009, 10:21:31 PM
Deadly Assassin was another biggie.  Hell, they were pretty severe in their first appearance in The War Games, and the Time War wasn't the first time they tried to erase the Daleks from history.  (I don't know from the radio series and am not even going to try to get into what happened there and what is and isn't canon, but I watched the Eighth Doctor remake of Shada and Romana was President at that point.)

I think a post-Time War Gallifrey would be a whole lot different from the one we saw on the old series.  We've already had hints of how much the Time Lords (and the Doctor in particular) changed -- enlisting in the Master's aid is a nontrivial change.

And who's to say what role Dalton's playing?  He could simply be impersonating a Time Lord.  Or it could be that there's a NEW race attempting to assume the Time Lord mantle.  Hell, it could be some Wibbly-Wobbly Timey-Wimey business where they're meeting with a Time Lord who eventually dies in the Time War but hasn't yet when they encounter him.

But given that it's RTD we're talking about?  I'm going with "something over-the-top and ill-conceived that serves to completely undermine something much better that he did earlier in the series."  (Of course, it hardly even bears mentioning that the Time Lords' sacrifice has been pretty fucking-well trivialized by the fact that the Daleks keep showing back up every year on increasingly ludicrous pretenses -- the latest being "I am the last of my race and want to destroy my race, so I'm going to go back in time and save my creator so he can make a bunch more of us".  Bringing back the Time Lords and the Daleks in earnest would get rid of that dilemma -- and I'm not opposed to Dalek stories -- which is good, because they're pretty much inevitable --, I'm just opposed to seeing one every fucking year; I'd love for them to go back to the "one Dalek story per regeneration" rubric.  #4 had one good Dalek story and one mediocre one, #5 and #6 had a good one each, #10 had one good one and two bad ones.  #9 managed to buck the trend by actually having two pretty good ones, and I haven't seen Remembrance yet so I can't vouch for #7 but I hear it's good.)

...But I think of all the theories I've just pulled out of my ass, I like "new race attempts to assume the mantle of the Time Lords" the best.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 02, 2009, 06:42:37 AM
RTD interview. (http://www.nj.com/entertainment/tv/index.ssf/2009/06/russell_t_davies_talks_doctor.html)

Quote
Given what you said before about the lack of regrets, I'm guessing the answer's no, but are there any stories you wanted to tell with this series that you didn't get to?

Not really. Obviously, because I knew almost two years ago that I was leaving, I started thinking about stories. Other dramas I wanted to tell. Every now and then an idea will come into my head, though. I think there's a very good "Doctor Who" story to be told about Twitter, about the idea of communicating in 140 characters.

So, any time you're feeling down and need some cheering up, just think to yourself: Russell T Davies did not subject the human race to a Doctor Who episode about Twitter.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Saturn on July 02, 2009, 07:01:19 AM
RTD interview. (http://www.nj.com/entertainment/tv/index.ssf/2009/06/russell_t_davies_talks_doctor.html)

Quote
Given what you said before about the lack of regrets, I'm guessing the answer's no, but are there any stories you wanted to tell with this series that you didn't get to?

Not really. Obviously, because I knew almost two years ago that I was leaving, I started thinking about stories. Other dramas I wanted to tell. Every now and then an idea will come into my head, though. I think there's a very good "Doctor Who" story to be told about Twitter, about the idea of communicating in 140 characters.

So, any time you're feeling down and need some cheering up, just think to yourself: Russell T Davies did not subject the human race to a Doctor Who episode about Twitter.

For some reason i get the feeling that it would have involved the cybermen...somehow (and they'd end up getting USELESS INFORMATION'D to death)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on July 02, 2009, 10:48:44 AM
Unusual patterns are appearing in Twitter messages! What could it mean?

Oh, it's just Rose coming back again. And she's brought some daleks and cybermen with her again.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Burrito Al Pastor on July 02, 2009, 11:35:53 AM
Quote
RT @rose: " BADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFBADWOLFB"
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on July 20, 2009, 03:53:08 PM
CoE has pissed off so many of my friends I might just watch it.

Also where the hell is that next special?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on July 20, 2009, 03:55:20 PM
Coming "after Halloween".
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 20, 2009, 05:33:58 PM
Small news: Eleventh Doctor's costume revealed. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/tvandradioblog/2009/jul/20/doctor-who-new-look)

Bigger news: Alex Kingston return confirmed (http://io9.com/5318724/doctor-whos-first-guest-star--revealed).  So it would appear we WILL get more of the River Song story.

Big fucking news: Motherfucking Tom Baker doing some radio shows. (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5gvLgbdqdnLCOCikCOhng5UhKAS7w)  Yeah, just radio, but seriously -- new Fourth Doctor shit.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 23, 2009, 06:09:45 AM
"Crash of the Byzantium (http://blogtorwho.blogspot.com/2009/07/crash-of-byzantium.html), have we done that yet?"

...seems like she would have known the answer to that if that was the ELEVENTH Doctor.  Bet Moffatt has an explanation in mind.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 28, 2009, 06:48:37 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJBsW78keRQ&feature=player_embedded

So...

Season 1: "Bad wolf."
Season 2: "Torchwood."
Season 3: "You are not alone"; the sound of drums.
Season 4: "Doctor Donna"; the sound of a heartbeat.
Specials: "He will knock four times."  And, presumably, the sound of knocking.

There was apparently another trailer at Comic-Con, featuring the Master, but I can't find it immediately and I have to dash.

(EDIT: There are bootlegs up but they look roughly like hell.  Punch up "Doctor Who The End of Time" on YouTube if you're desperate to see it, but you're probably better off waiting for an official Beeb version.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 06, 2009, 08:46:51 PM
...so I've worked out what the big shocking tear-jerker twist they keep alluding to is.

They're going to kill off Wilf.

Which makes me realize I DO quite like the guy -- he's one of the few understated characters in the whole thing, and has some real charm.  I think his death could be quite effective.  Except, of course, for RTD's obsessive need to overdo everything; he'll probably spout an absurd soliloquy on his way out.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on October 06, 2009, 12:38:02 PM
New logo (http://io9.com/5375331/new-doctor-new-branding)!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wQPm1cN65w

I love it.  :victory:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on October 06, 2009, 03:20:31 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8uqKLA6ObU

 ::(:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Esperath on October 06, 2009, 03:47:31 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8uqKLA6ObU

 ::(:


(http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitter_production/profile_images/61008358/picard-facepalm_normal.jpg) :facepalm: (http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitter_production/profile_images/61008358/picard-facepalm_normal.jpg)
 
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on October 06, 2009, 07:51:40 PM
::(:
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitter_production/profile_images/61008358/picard-facepalm_normal.jpg) :facepalm: (http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitter_production/profile_images/61008358/picard-facepalm_normal.jpg)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mongrel on October 06, 2009, 08:02:13 PM
The enemies are Mycons?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 07, 2009, 09:45:39 PM
New logo (http://io9.com/5375331/new-doctor-new-branding)!

I love it.  :victory:

Yeah, the DW/TARDIS design is neat, and I love the retro-futuristic font on the main title.  Could do without the lens flare, though.

::(:

As I understand it, it's not BBC -- apparently K-9 is (at least partially) creator-owned.  (The Daleks, similarly, are owned by the Nation estate; when the '05 series started there was some hand-wringing about whether they would be allowed to appear in the new show.)  But the Beeb owns the likeness, which is why he had to be redesigned.  Complicating things further, there's more than one K-9; #4 left one with Sarah Jane, but kept another with him.

So whether any of this series is canon is something I'd just as soon leave up to people who care more about that kind of nonsense than I do.  The question is whether it's any good.  From the trailer, the answer appears to be "No."
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 01, 2009, 03:39:05 PM
Drought's over, boys and girls!

Waters of Mars airs in 2 weeks.  After that, it's 6 weeks until Christmas, but somewhere in there we're getting an animated special.

And the Doctor just appeared in a 2-parter called The Wedding of Sarah Jane Smith on her eponymous series.

Don't watch part one.  Seriously.  It's not very good, the Doctor doesn't show up until the last minute (though the TARDIS materialization sound taunts you several times prior), and everything you need to know about it is covered in the recap at the beginning of part 2.  (Basically it's just a bunch of mundane crap.  And I LOVE stories that juxtapose the fantastic with the mundane, but it just really falls flat here; it's a series of very boring cliches.)

Part 2 is actually pretty good!  It's got a decent premise, a good monster, and Tennant being Tennant.  There's a certain amount of overlap with both Runaway Bride and Father's Day, but the twists on those plots are enough to make this story stand out.

All in all, worth watching part 2, especially knowing that #10's days are numbered.  And the child actors aren't bad, either; I quite like Clyde.

As far as canon, there's been some hinting that this leads into the finale in some way.  Best guess is that the Pantheon of Discord will crop up again.  (There's also a magic ring, and we know the Master is coming back, but I think I may be reaching just a bit there.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on November 15, 2009, 08:03:41 PM
someone give me a goddamn working waters of mars torrent
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 16, 2009, 10:03:19 PM
Got the NZB from tvnzb.com .

"How to use NZB's" is something of a tangent, but sabnzbd (http://www.sabnzbd.org/) is nicely automated, and you can roll your own RSS feed for it to monitor at mytvnzb.foechoer.be (http://mytvnzb.foechoer.be).  The only thing I had to do with Waters of Mars was file and rename it after it was done, and if it were a numbered episode I wouldn't even have had to do that.

Anyhow:

I liked it.  Overblown, maudlin, and longer than it needed to be, but by RTD's standards it was downright subtle and concise.  #10 at his bipolar best.  As an examination of the rules of time travel, it was a lot less forced than Fires of Pompeii (which it shamelessly references); it is of course no City on the Edge of Forever, but that's its most obvious inspiration.

The ending brings the return of the Scary Doctor; it's a return to the theme that's been prevalent in Rusty's work since Runaway Bride that the Doctor needs someone to ground him or he'll fucking lose it.  And yeah, there's fire and water to bring that all back.

It manages a neat little balance of a self-contained plot that represents the culmination of four years of character development.

In the end, a perfectly decent little drama, and better than anything we've seen since...probably Midnight?  And as I have little hope for The End of Time, this may very well be the last good Tenth Doctor story.  (On the other hand, knowing RTD's history, it's entirely possible that it will have a very good first part.)

Meantime, the animated Doctor Who: Dreamland runs Saturday the 21st through Friday the 27th.  It's apparently showing on some goddamn thing called Red Button, which is either PPV or Internet TV, I can't really tell which.  Either way, we filthy colonials will have to find other means to get it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: LaserBeing on November 16, 2009, 11:22:01 PM
It is pretty much constantly skirting the line between "ridiculously overblown" and "just exactly overblown enough" that is RTD's signature. But on the whole, I quite liked it. I don't know if it was an accident or cleverly done on purpose but the way [spoiler]the Doctor's helmet light illuminates his face as he is walking away makes him look almost skull like.[/spoiler] The bit in the airlock is also quite well directed to give the normally adorable Tennant a colder, more alien aura. I can't help but be reminded that, as he gets closer and closer to his 12th and final regeneration, he may eventually have to deal with the possibility of becoming or manifesting the Valeyard in some way.

Then again I am always a fan of more or less infallible heroes flirting with villainy (see also: Sisko is the best captain).
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on November 17, 2009, 09:45:43 AM
Doctor Who: Dreamland

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWL0L8IttFs
i don't think i can watch this.  seriously.

Found a working torrent before bed last night finally!  And .. yeah, I really liked it.  But then, I even actually like overblown RTD Melodrama despite how dumb and silly he can get, so I'm not entirely objective.  I am going to miss Tennant something fierce.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on November 17, 2009, 10:44:30 AM
HAHAHAHAHAHA

Ahh the things done in the name of PROFIT!!!

Ours is truly the age of wonders.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 19, 2009, 09:50:53 PM
i don't think i can watch this.  seriously.

Eeeeyeah, looks pretty bad.  But

Quote from: Niku link=topic=871.msg117813#msg117813
I am going to miss Tennant something fierce.

so I might have some beers and watch it.

Pity they abandoned the animation style they were using before -- it was 2D CG and didn't look any more expensive than this, and was a whole lot more pleasing to the eye.  The one with #10 and Martha was forgettable but I remember it being all right, and I quite liked the two missing #2 episodes that they animated and was hoping we'd see more like that.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on November 20, 2009, 07:43:44 AM
Thad please don't tell me you are actually going to watch this
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Classic on November 20, 2009, 01:35:54 PM
If he can watch it without drinking himself into a coma... I'd probably try watching it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 21, 2009, 01:59:24 PM
I couldn't actually make it through the whole preview, so it's questionable.

However, I have been known to watch badly-written but prettily-animated cartoons with the sound off, so perhaps I will do the opposite here and see if I can make sense of the audio without having to look at it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 30, 2009, 05:17:39 PM
Isn't as bad as it looks.  Not great, either, but a perfectly serviceable, middling Tennant ep.  And bear in mind we only have two hours left of Tennant after this and should enjoy it while it lasts.

On the CG: the humans and humanoids look awful, with the Doctor looking the best and Cassie looking the worst.  The monsters look pretty good.  Some of the vehicles, like the underused fighter jets, look good; others, like the alien spaceship, not so much.  (I'm assuming the opening sequence with the ship being shot down over Earth is a deliberate homage to Beast Wars, which is really not a very good idea seeing as it's a reminder that BW did better CG fourteen fucking years ago.  And then they KEEP SHOWING IT in case you forget.)  Some of the sets (like the TARDIS -- they spent a lot of time on it for only showing it for 30 seconds -- this would make me fear a sequel, except the TARDIS interior is being redesigned next season anyway) look pretty great, others made me think of Goldeneye.

All in all, not a complete waste of time.  If The Waters of Mars is possibly the last good Tennant ep, this is possibly the last one that isn't terrible.  (Although again, knowing RTD, it is entirely possible that the first half of the finale will be good.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on December 26, 2009, 08:40:10 AM
[spoiler]FUCK YEAH THE MASTER IS SADAKO.

also the first time the tv flickered i was like "seriously he's bringing back the goddamn wire?" so you know, thank god that didn't happen.

also it wasn't very good, but eh, THE MASTER IS SADAKO.  And the scene in the cafe worked for me because I am a big fool for obvious sentimentality.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on December 26, 2009, 08:44:26 AM
what you saw it what

??????????????
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on December 26, 2009, 12:09:18 PM
merry christmas B)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 26, 2009, 02:56:13 PM
also it wasn't very good

I thought it was pretty neat.  Predictable, sure (though I didn't really see the Master's plan coming), but did a pretty good job of looking back at where we've been, both in the current series and the original.  (Master as the desperate, dying version from Deadly Assassin/Keeper of Traken, with a reference to his master-of-disguise career and a resurrection scene that recalled the TV movie.)

I do not like the "there is something special about you" bit with Wilf, no I do not.  It recalls the very very silly finale to last season.  I was briefly worried during that conversation that he might own a fob watch, but fortunately that appears not to be the case.  Which is not to say it won't turn out to be something even dumber!

A few references to Moffat taking the reins sprinkled throughout, too; a woman named Sally on a bus that says Sparrow, and the roach coach saying "Steven's Point" on it.

Simm kicked ass; the storytelling was hamhanded but overall enjoyable IMO.

Of course, I expect next week's to completely blow it, because RTD.

Scene we still haven't seen: the Doctor in the bookstore with Jessica Hynes.  Hard to see where exactly that's supposed to fit in the second half of this story.  What, he defeats the Master, the world calms down, he goes to have a quiet moment in a bookstore, and then gets hit by a bus as he walks out?  Frankly that's a better ending than what we're actually liable to see.

Anyway.  I liked this one!  I dread the next one.  Which is about what I expected.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on December 26, 2009, 03:13:17 PM
[spoiler]I just didn't care for the pacing of the episode;  the narration from the Time Lords didn't really work for me, I thought the new famous dude with the book and the alien machine felt weirdly out of left field, and it just generally didn't feel like it was building to a proper head.

Also while I like crazy ravenous Master, did he really need to shoot lightning too?  Or was that just so the Doctor could walk around with explosions behind him?  I did like that the Master's plan was basically corrupting the one jubilant success that Nine had in another Moffat nod though, intentional or not (on both RTD and the Master's part).[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on December 26, 2009, 05:11:40 PM
[spoiler]In this new world of people all the Master, all economy and industry was halted for 2 hours as people laughed maniacally at the absurdity of their own victory[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 26, 2009, 10:34:12 PM
I just didn't care for the pacing of the episode;

I thought it was decent, actually.  Action scene, then pull back for something quiet; repeat.  And the quiet scenes weren't nearly as cloying as RTD's usual fare.

the narration from [spoiler]the Time Lords[/spoiler] didn't really work for me,

It was hokey but I thought it worked as a framing device, especially given how it built to the twist ending.

I thought [spoiler]the new famous dude with the book and the alien machine[/spoiler] felt weirdly out of left field

Yes; no argument here.

and it just generally didn't feel like it was building to a proper head.

Yeah, while the Master's resurrection was adequately (if not completely) explained, the other major events in the episode came out of nowhere.  I mean, we knew Dalton was coming back as a Time Lord, and extrapolated certain other hypotheses from that, but...yeah, it's twist ending at the cost of having to spend ten minutes of exposition explaining it next week.  And while I find it hard to believe it could possibly be as lame as the explanation for Davros's return (which, as noted earlier, was explained by "Caan wanted to destroy the Daleks, of which he was the last, and so for some reason he went back in time and saved several thousand of them"), it's still likely to be very awkward.

[spoiler]Also while I like crazy ravenous Master, did he really need to shoot lightning too?  Or was that just so the Doctor could walk around with explosions behind him?[/spoiler]

Of course it was.

Yeah, that was pretty dumb too.  Master was a straight-up supervillain in this one.  He got some good mad scientist-y bits, though.

[spoiler]I did like that the Master's plan was basically corrupting the one jubilant success that Nine had in another Moffat nod though, intentional or not (on both RTD and the Master's part).[/spoiler]

Took me a minute to realize what you meant, but yeah, you're dead on.  [spoiler]The Immortality Gate is pretty much the same thing as the nanogenes from The Doctor Dances.[/spoiler]  I hadn't thought of that; good noticing.

[spoiler]In this new world of people all the Master, all economy and industry was halted for 2 hours as people laughed maniacally at the absurdity of their own victory[/spoiler]

It does perhaps bear repeating that this guy used to go around turning people into dolls.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on December 27, 2009, 07:04:45 AM
The Master being a fucking loon isn't anything new, but he usually has it, if only barely, repressed. I like this bold, new, totally out of the batshit crazy closet Master. I also like that the tie in to the drums, and that they turn out to be the not just the knocking, but possibly a contributing factor to his madness all along, just getting worse and worse over the years as he approached the actual events to which they are related.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: JDigital on December 27, 2009, 09:01:21 AM
 :itsmagic:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 27, 2009, 11:15:38 AM
Also: [spoiler]the drums from season 3 and the heartbeat from season 4 ARE the same thing.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on December 27, 2009, 06:49:31 PM
I felt like there was way too much random shit going on. [spoiler]An out of the blue Saxon cult? Some ridiculous rich man and his caricature spoiled daughter randomly have alien super tech, also there's green aliens there for some reason and the old man has visions and is special and also has a bunch of old sidekicks. there was also the ood and the time lords thing, which I can forgive because of the whole 10th doctor finale that's been all foreshadowed up until now, but it still served to make me feel like they just crammed as many different things into one episode as they could. [/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on December 27, 2009, 08:04:53 PM
Exaaaactly.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 29, 2009, 05:45:26 AM
Rich Johnston has some fan art (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2009/12/28/lying-in-the-gutters-december-28th/) related to the ending of the episode.  (Which of course means spoilers, but I expect by now everyone reading the thread has seen it.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 30, 2009, 04:11:37 PM
io9 has Bingo cards (http://io9.com/5436831/play-along-at-home-doctor-who-end-of-time-bingo-cards).
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 02, 2010, 11:43:42 AM
Weeeeeelllll that was probably the best-case episode, under the circumstances.  Yeah, it was over-the-top Rusty spectacle followed by maudlin, too-long, cameo-heavy Rusty goodbye sequence, but it could have been a damn sight worse.  Think of all the zany theories floating around over the last week: [spoiler]Wilf's a Time Lord, Timothy Dalton is the Master's father and Claire Bloom is the Doctor's mother...[/spoiler]  Yeah, we got off light.  I didn't get a bingo (I got [spoiler]"Memory wipes, all around!", "Grandiose name for regular object", "Allons-y", "Previously unseen Time Lord powers", "Weepy Doctor", "Deus Ex Machina", "Gay agenda", and "Timothy Dalton is a classic series Time Lord"[/spoiler], and probably could have checked off "I'm sorry...I'm so sorry" even though he just said "I'm sorry" once).  Hell, he didn't even [spoiler]bring back Gallifrey permanently or find some new way to breach the barrier to Rose's parallel universe[/spoiler], both of which I would have put good money on.  Even [spoiler]Donna was a red herring and didn't really do anything[/spoiler].  By RTD's standards, this was downright restrained.  And yes, I am referring to the Doctor [spoiler]jumping out of a spaceship with a gun and crashing through a skylight[/spoiler] as "restrained".  It's all relative.

I suppose the big nagging question is [spoiler]Who is The Woman?  All she says is that she was lost long ago, and then when they ask the Doctor about her, he looks at Donna.  So uh okay is she actually Donna and how is that possible?  Of course "lost long ago" could be a reference to Romana, too; per the radio series, she was President during the Eighth Doctor era, which would mean Rassilon defeated her.  She could even be Susan, though I think that's a stretch -- she wasn't lost; the Doctor left her behind intentionally.[/spoiler]

Anyway, pretty much a fitting end to the RTD run, warts and all.

And the closing moments, [spoiler]the birth of the new Doctor,[/spoiler] were lovely and left me cheering.  But of course that's because [spoiler]Moffat wrote them[/spoiler].

Series 5 trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=299Q6HF7NlA&feature=player_embedded

Weeping Angels AND fencing vampires?  I'm there.  Allons-y GERONIMOOOOOOOOO!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: LaserBeing on January 02, 2010, 08:48:18 PM
Just saw it. Better than I had dared to hope! Even [spoiler]the obligatory farewell scene with Rose, which I was dreading,[/spoiler] was handled with uncharacteristic restraint. Then again I am sort of a big sap and I eat that maudlin shit up with a spoon.

I suppose the big nagging question is [spoiler]Who is The Woman?  All she says is that she was lost long ago, and then when they ask the Doctor about her, he looks at Donna.  So uh okay is she actually Donna and how is that possible?  Of course "lost long ago" could be a reference to Romana, too; per the radio series, she was President during the Eighth Doctor era, which would mean Rassilon defeated her.  She could even be Susan, though I think that's a stretch -- she wasn't lost; the Doctor left her behind intentionally.[/spoiler]

[spoiler]The first thing I thought was Susan, or possibly her mother who I don't think we've ever actually seen (Romana would probably make more sense, but I don't give a shit about Romana). Then the bit at the end with Donna sort of threw me off; could it be that Donna at some point remembers everything, but instead of dying becomes part Time Lord again and gains access to a regeneration cycle of her own? But then why would she be hanging out with Rassilon? And for that matter, what is Rassilon doing as Lord President? Shouldn't he be dead or inside a black hole or wherever the fuck he buggered off to? Stupid wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey stuff. Also there were two dissenters to the "kill everything" plan, The Woman and someone else, who I'm sure isn't inconsequential either.[/spoiler] ARGH I HATE WAITING I WANT TO KNOW NOW

At any rate, this certainly isn't the last we've seen of Tennant, or at least heard of him. Radio series, allons-y!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on January 02, 2010, 11:11:20 PM
I liked it a lot better than last week's episode!

and am basically now chomping at the damn bit.  :(
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on January 03, 2010, 01:00:10 AM
Overall liked it. Loved the Master's [spoiler]rage at discovering that the drumming that has tortured him his entire life was intentionally caused by the future Time Lords[/spoiler].

Final impression, very sad to be losing David Tennent just as Moffat is taking over. I say with no reservation that Tennent is my favorite Doctor, even surpassing Tom Baker at this point.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 04, 2010, 06:46:31 PM
io9 (http://io9.com/5439138/figuring-out-doctor-whos-lingering-mysteries) has a neat little rundown of the mysteries the finale left open (spoilers of course).  The writer, by his own admission, reads WAY too much Key to Time into the whole affair, but there are some interesting theories along the way.

[spoiler]Prevailing theory is that the Woman is the Doctor's mother, and that he looked from Donna's mother to her to indicate the relationship between them.  The Susan theory is also represented, suggesting that he looked from WILF to Donna.[/spoiler]

I also quite like the idea that the Ood are evolving into a new race of Time Lords.

At any rate, Davies left Moffat a lot of toys to play with, and I expect he'll pick a few up yet.  At any rate, Silence in the Library/Forest of the Dead made more hints at the Doctor's pre-Doctor personal life than pretty much anything else ever has, so he'd be a reasonable pick if we're going to find out more about [spoiler]the Doctor's mother[/spoiler].

Onward and upward: Bleeding Cool (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2010/01/02/that-matt-smith-doctor-who-trailer-cut-and-diced/) takes a look at a few key frames from the trailer for season 5.  And makes an observation about Smith (http://www.bleedingcool.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/notfrankcolourcut1.jpg).

At any rate, this certainly isn't the last we've seen of Tennant, or at least heard of him. Radio series, allons-y!

Tennant already pointed out at Comic-Con that the 50th Anniversary is in '13 and would be a logical point for him to return.  He quickly backpedaled and said there were no plans to that effect, but I'd really give it pretty good odds.  In fact I wouldn't be surprised if all the surviving Doctors were onboard for a return, given that Tom Baker's finally started doing radio shows, making Eccleston the last holdout and for God's sake he appeared in The Dark is Rising and GI Joe so it's not as if he's really particular about his roles.

I read a Moffat interview awhile back where he said he wasn't going to bring back previous Doctors unless there was a good plot reason to do so, but I'm sure he could cook one up.  Time Crash made for a good, what, eight minutes with one previous Doctor; I'm sure he could cook up a good 90 minutes with 7 of them.

Plus, certain things are just obligatory.  He's already doing a Dalek episode, after all.

I say with no reservation that Tennent is my favorite Doctor, even surpassing Tom Baker at this point.

Hm.  I'd say mine probably goes Baker > Tennant > Eccleston > Pertwee > McCoy > Troughton > Davison > Hartnell > other Baker.  (Can't really make a call on McGann from his one appearance; I haven't checked out his radio serials, aside from the Shada remake.)  But there's wiggle room.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on January 04, 2010, 10:17:05 PM
I think Baker is only surpassed because Tennant's writers were so much better. I love both their personalities, but Tennant really got the opportunity to shine whereas Baker only had a few standout episodes, with the rest being monster of the week affairs.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 06, 2010, 04:41:24 PM
Probably true; I've seen some pretty poor and by-the-numbers Baker (detailed in the Old Who thread).  Then again, Tennant had that goddamn traffic jam one.

To wit: Den of Geek gives us Who's writing Doctor Who series 5? (http://www.denofgeek.com/television/391464/whos_writing_doctor_who_series_5.html)

Quote
Firstly, Steven Moffat has already revealed that he'll be writing six episodes of the new series, which will include, we'd wager, the series opener and the final two or three episodes.

:perfect:

Quote
One of those at least is being taken by Gareth Roberts (Planet Of The Dead, The Unicorn & The Wasp).

:nyoro~n:

Quote
And Blogtor Who has picked up the story that Mark Gatiss, who previously wrote The Idiot's Lantern and The Unquiet Dead, has been signed up for a story too.

 :MENDOZAAAAA:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on January 06, 2010, 06:31:36 PM
Need to get Paul Cornell to do more.  He's the guy who wrote Father's Day.  He also does novels and some of the comics.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on January 06, 2010, 09:30:04 PM
HUNGRYYYYYYYYYYYYY
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 07, 2010, 05:01:24 PM
Bleeding Cool has the final list (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2010/01/07/more-doctor-who-stuff-writers-pics-all-that/) -- Moffat's doing twice as much as Den of Geek figured; just about half the season.

Quote
Steven Moffat, showrunner, grabs six of the episodes, including the two part with Weeping Angels and the return of the Doctor’s possible future wife, River Song.

Mark Gatiss, who wrote The Idiot’s Lantern brings us the World War II Daleks episode, mainstay Gareth Roberts writes one, Richard Curtis does the Vincent Van Gogh one, Toby Whithouse does the Venice vampire one, Chris Chibnall, I know I know, calm down, calm down, writes two, including the Silurian/Sea Devils episode, and creator of Men Behaving Badly and So How Do You Want Me writes one.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on January 07, 2010, 05:03:58 PM
AND THEN RUSSEL T. DAVIES DOES THE FINALE!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 07, 2010, 05:18:56 PM
Okay, since I don't know most of these people by name:

Richard Curtis (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0193485/): Blackadder, Mr. Bean, Four Weddings and a Funeral
Toby Whithouse (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0925980/): School Reunion
Chris Chibnall (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1163823/): 42, co-producer of Torchwood (and writer of some not-very-good episodes)
Simon Nye (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0638586/) is the creator of Men Behaving Badly and How Do You Want Me, whose name Johnston seems to have forgotten to include in his sentence.

I am totally cool with going for a more comedic approach to Doctor Who.  Except that the last time they pitched that idea we wound up with The Unicorn and the Wasp.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on January 07, 2010, 07:25:33 PM
*huff huff*

Okay! Finally saw this! Was waiting till I was back for Christmas and my dad had some time off so we could nerd out over our favorite show togeths.

I am shocked, but I loved it. Echoing everyone's thoughts on all the random-ass [spoiler]lightning-shooting and cult business and super-rich immortality guy[/spoiler], but it's important to note that none of this made it any less enjoyable to watch. It carried all of RTD's baggage, yeah, but thankfully he knew how to keep things moving, and play up the best bits.

I'm the biggest Simm's fag this side of the Mississippi and the whole sequence where [spoiler]he's giving himself a standing ovation and running out to balconies to This Guyyy the breakdancing hims in the courtyard below[/spoiler] was absolutely magnificent. I was literally laughing out loud, and can't remember the last time something on TV's delighted me so dang much.

Best supervillain plan I can think of, and watching him [spoiler]running every major country and staffing every position in the world[/spoiler] while grinning like a hyena just never stopped being awesome.

Liked Wilfred way more than I expected, too. This is probably the only RTD episode I can think of wherein I enjoyed every character they had in the mix. That scene with the two of them in the diner, and later, on the cactiship, is legitimately good. The man wrote good scenes. I am delighted.

Deus Ex Machina of shooting a machine with a gun was hells of retarded, as it basically presented the Doctor with a harmless catch-all third option that solved everything. I thought the point was to make him choose between taking a life/fixing everything and sticking to his pacifism?

My dad swears that [spoiler]the mystery Time Lord[/spoiler] is the Doctor's mother, but my money's on his wife. I remember him saying something off-hand to Donna about being married once, and it would be in keeping with his glance over at Donna in a wedding gown.

Wish we'd had a little more insight into how the time war worked, but like everyone already said, the whole [spoiler]Time Lord[/spoiler] part of the plot seemed rushed as hell.

Regardless, an all-around enjoyable watch, something I'd be happy to catch again on a rerun. [spoiler]Glad to see Simm didn't die on-screen and will probably be around again. Even if that's it, at least he got a satisfactory death[/spoiler]. He became less cartoonishly evil after he sorta fixed his powers, and I feel like they got their act together on the Master front pretty well after that.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 07, 2010, 08:18:35 PM
Deus Ex Machina of shooting a machine with a gun was hells of retarded, as it basically presented the Doctor with a harmless catch-all third option that solved everything. I thought the point was to make him choose between taking a life/fixing everything and sticking to his pacifism?

First time Doctor Who's ever (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_%28Doctor_Who%29) done (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Parting_of_the_Ways) that (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_of_the_Time_Lords).

...I'm sure I could slap a link to an episode or serial with a convenient "neither" resolution to a moral quandary on every word in that sentence, but those were the three I thought of offhand.  ...hm.  All season finales, too.

Then again, I'm a superhero comics fan; the notion of presenting the deep philosophical question of "Can a hero kill?" and then conveniently sidestepping it by having the Green Goblin accidentally impale himself/Joe Chill fall off a scaffolding/somebody else shoot Joe Chill before Bruce gets the chance is old hat to me.

My dad swears that [spoiler]the mystery Time Lord[/spoiler] is the Doctor's mother, but my money's on his wife. I remember him saying something off-hand to Donna about being married once, and it would be in keeping with his glance over at Donna in a wedding gown.

Bear in mind the Doctor's original companion was his granddaughter, Susan, so it's been implicit all along that he had a wife and children at some point in his life (unless she wasn't his literal granddaughter).  Yeah, the thought of his (estranged?) wife crossed my mind, too.

And of course the thing about Time Lords is that her age doesn't mean anything.  The actress's relative age to Tennant, Ward, Ford, etc. is irrelevant to the character's age, because of the various regenerations everybody's experienced over the past 46 years.

Wish we'd had a little more insight into how the time war worked, but like everyone already said, the whole [spoiler]Time Lord[/spoiler] part of the plot seemed rushed as hell.

I'm relieved we DIDN'T get more than we did.  The Time War has always worked best as a mystery with an occasional clue thrown our way.  Spelling it all out would be a mistake.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on January 07, 2010, 10:12:43 PM
Wish we'd had a little more insight into how the time war worked, but like everyone already said, the whole [spoiler]Time Lord[/spoiler] part of the plot seemed rushed as hell.

I'm relieved we DIDN'T get more than we did.  The Time War has always worked best as a mystery with an occasional clue thrown our way.  Spelling it all out would be a mistake.

Yeahhh, you've got a point there. If anyone's going to take it on, I'd like it to be Moffatt, but even then, why not leave a celestial trans-temporal struggle over our heads?

First time Doctor Who's ever (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_%28Doctor_Who%29) done (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Parting_of_the_Ways) that (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_of_the_Time_Lords).

...I'm sure I could slap a link to an episode or serial with a convenient "neither" resolution to a moral quandary on every word in that sentence, but those were the three I thought of offhand.  ...hm.  All season finales, too.

Then again, I'm a superhero comics fan; the notion of presenting the deep philosophical question of "Can a hero kill?" and then conveniently sidestepping it by having the Green Goblin accidentally impale himself/Joe Chill fall off a scaffolding/somebody else shoot Joe Chill before Bruce gets the chance is old hat to me.

A lot of anime does this too. I guess it's just generally weak writing, and a paranoia about taking chances with the property. One of the things I really liked about Battlestar was how characters had to choose something, every time. You gained a way deeper understanding of them by what they'd chosen to do when the chips were down - you could never go back to how things were. CONSEQUENCES. We need more of them in entertainment.

I'm not the biggest fan of Torchwood (I mostly just caught the finale), but one thing I liked was that there didn't seem to be many Deus Ex Machina tossed around until AFTER everyone had made their true colors shown.

My dad swears that [spoiler]the mystery Time Lord[/spoiler] is the Doctor's mother, but my money's on his wife. I remember him saying something off-hand to Donna about being married once, and it would be in keeping with his glance over at Donna in a wedding gown.

And of course the thing about Time Lords is that her age doesn't mean anything.  The actress's relative age to Tennant, Ward, Ford, etc. is irrelevant to the character's age, because of the various regenerations everybody's experienced over the past 46 years.

I was always hazy on this, but we've been following the Doctor since his first regeneration, right? So the first Doctor, that old, grumpy bastard, would likely be the man she'd married.

The relative ages of Time Lords in general aside, it's not too far-fetched. He literally became a different person than the man she'd fallen in love with.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on January 08, 2010, 05:04:59 AM
It took a second viewing before I realised the implications of a time-traveler giving someone [spoiler]a lottery ticket[/spoiler].  :derp: In my defence, that happened towards the end of a half-hour or so of goodbyes, when my mind had already switched over to "Please just get Tennant the fuck out of here and show me the Series 5 trailer" mode. Also, it took my partner's squeals of laughter to hammer home how absurd [spoiler]an Ood singing the Doctor to sleep[/spoiler] must seem to people who aren't regular viewers.

All in all, it was a satisfying final episode for Tennant/RTD. The cop-out deus-ex machina solution was more than balanced by [spoiler]Wilf knocking four times and the Doctor's reaction[/spoiler], and the scene on the spaceship showed RTD's strengths at writing dialogue. It's really just a shame that the moment he has to write something actually happening it immediately becomes overblown and self-indulgent.

Wilf was a wonderful choice for the Doctor's companion this episode, and John Simm was amazing as usual. I'm glad they [spoiler]left the door open for the Master to return[/spoiler], but I hope it doesn't happen too soon.

RE the trailer: I'd much rather they leave Blink as a stand-alone episode and not try to squeeze a Dalek into the new series, but I'm still wishing my life away for Spring. Bring on Matt Smith Steven Moffat!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 09, 2010, 11:45:49 PM
A lot of anime does this too. I guess it's just generally weak writing, and a paranoia about taking chances with the property. One of the things I really liked about Battlestar was how characters had to choose something, every time. You gained a way deeper understanding of them by what they'd chosen to do when the chips were down - you could never go back to how things were. CONSEQUENCES. We need more of them in entertainment.

I'm not the biggest fan of Torchwood (I mostly just caught the finale), but one thing I liked was that there didn't seem to be many Deus Ex Machina tossed around until AFTER everyone had made their true colors shown.

Children of Earth did it two or three times too many, in increasingly contrived situations, but yeah, at least it did it.

Course, RTD's Doctor DID make the call on more than one occasion, it's just that he'd get saved immediately afterward.  (Letting Rose die to stop the Dalek, then turning around and letting the Dalek escape to save Rose -- yeah, in the end Rose lived and the Dalek died, but you saw his anguish in making the decision both times.  Ditto with letting the Dalek Emperor win in order to save Earth -- in comes Literal Deus ex Machina to fix everything, but he DID make the decision.  The Time War is pretty much the only no-win situation where he made the tough choice and it stuck.)

Tangentially, one of the reasons City on the Edge of Forever is the best episode of Star Trek is that it gives Kirk that exact dilemma: let an innocent person die for the sake of the future of human civilization.  And it doesn't cop out; he has to make that choice.

(Actually, in the end, the Doctor DOES make a choice like that -- [spoiler]himself for Wilf[/spoiler] -- in a scene that bears a more-than-slight resemblance to [spoiler]Spock's death[/spoiler] in Wrath of Khan.)

I was always hazy on this, but we've been following the Doctor since his first regeneration, right?

Well, technically the Second Doctor would be the first regeneration, but yeah, the First Doctor is supposed to be THE First Doctor.  That was ambiguous early in the series (I think there's an earlier episode that shows multiple faces, implying they're all the Doctor, including some that aren't actually the ones that had been shown on the series), but at this point, yeah, all the incarnations that have been on the TV series are all the incarnations the Doctor has ever had.

So the first Doctor, that old, grumpy bastard, would likely be the man she'd married.

The relative ages of Time Lords in general aside, it's not too far-fetched. He literally became a different person than the man she'd fallen in love with.

But she wasn't around even when the series started.  The Doctor's reasons for leaving Gallifrey have never been concrete, but they've always had to do with a kind of wanderlust that doesn't really lend itself to home life.  (In the Time Lords' first appearance in War Games, #2's explanation for leaving Gallifrey is a simply and wonderfully stated, "I was BORED!"; #10 explained that every Time Lord has a different reaction to the Total Perspective Vortex, and while the Master's was madness, "I ran.  I've never stopped running.")

Quick thought: this regeneration is a pretty clean sweep, but they often aren't.  I haven't seen all of them, but quick review:

#1-to-#2 (haven't seen, of course, seeing as it's lost): companions are present and have to adapt to the Doctor's regeneration.
#2-to-#3: pretty clean sweep, but not entirely.  Companions are removed and we don't even SEE #2 turn into #3, but the new status quo IS laid out: #3 will be trapped on present-day Earth.
#3-to-#4 (haven't seen): Sarah Jane present; status quo resets over the next few serials.
#4-to-#5: Happens in the middle of a major serial arc, but on the other hand, 2 of the Doctor's 3 companions show up for the first time in those serials.  Davison comes in with continuity baggage, but it's very recent continuity baggage.
#5-to-#6 (haven't seen): Peri is present, but has only just joined up.  A pretty quick change to the new status quo.
#6-to-#7 (haven't seen): Well, this was a FORCIBLE change into a new status quo.  Baker's removed without even being invited to do his own regeneration scene; Mel's present but is a relative newcomer and only lasts about a season.
#7-to-#8: well of course this is a clean-slate one because it was the series relaunch.  We see a pretty solitary #7; he picks up a couple companions just as he's regenerating, but they're both new characters.  (This is also, I think, the second-longest regeneration sequence, after Tennant's very long goodbye, of course; while the Doctor's fatal shooting is wonderfully abrupt, his slow death on the operating table and eventual resurrection in the meat locker take up a good chunk of the movie.)
#8-to-#9 (haven't seen because it doesn't actually exist): up to the imagination, of course.  At what point in the Time War did the Doctor regenerate?  Was it right as he threw the switch that wiped out the Daleks and the Time Lords, or sometime before?  In practice, of course, the '05 series was the most sweeping, clean-slate relaunch the series has ever seen (the non-canon Peter Cushing movies notwithstanding); RTD had a completely free playing field to set things up however he chose.
#9-to-#10: Rose is there, goes through the requisite disbelief as the Doctor regenerates, status quo is restored in pretty short order.
#10-to-#11: companions are dismissed (very slowly); Doctor is left alone on the TARDIS.  It's totally Moffat's to do whatever he wishes with it at this point.  That said, he's already set up a few beats he's coming back to, in the Weeping Angels and River Song.

I'm sure if I hit up Wikipedia for an hour or so and studied the different creative teams that worked on the original series, I'd gain more insight into why some regenerations were more clean-sweep than others.  If I had to guess, I'd say the same writers stayed on as Hartnell transitioned to Troughton but not as Troughton transitioned to Pertwee, that there was a creative transition about a year before (Tom) Baker left...things like that.  And obviously the reason the status quo stayed much the same between #9 and #10 was that the same people were writing the show.

Going to bed now, but I think this is a good topic; please share your thoughts.  Gnight!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on January 10, 2010, 01:49:37 PM
It'd certainly be something to find out that the Doctor's entire reason for travel is a century-old husband's mid-life crisis. Was it ever explained why he stole the Tardis in the first place?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: EvaKisu on January 10, 2010, 09:24:16 PM
Wasn't it Eccleston's Doctor who mentioned about once having a wife and child? It's been a while..so I maybe getting things mixed up. 

I enjoyed the last one with Tennant.  I'm kinda on the I think it's his mother, but I would be good with either way. I like to think that he's making sure nothing goes wrong at Donna's wedding this time...after what happened last time..   

It kinda felt like they were just trying to add time when we went and checked up on everyone. Other then that very good show!

Me being the girl that I am, is excited that the new Doctor is eye candy as well.   :perfect:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on January 11, 2010, 02:17:54 PM
The first Doctor traveled with his Granddaughter.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 12, 2010, 09:37:53 PM
Wasn't it Eccleston's Doctor who mentioned about once having a wife and child?

Maybe, but IIRC Tennant mentioned it to Martha when she asked him if he had a family, and it DEFINITELY came up in The Doctor's Daughter.

I'm kinda on the I think it's his mother, but I would be good with either way. I like to think that he's making sure nothing goes wrong at Donna's wedding this time...after what happened last time..

Hrm.  Looking at Donna in her wedding dress COULD be a "wife" clue.

Course, general consensus is that River Song probably marries him at some point, and two wife reveals would get a little crowded.  (I'm sure the River Song story has some twists coming, though; she may not be his wife at all.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on January 14, 2010, 02:50:40 PM
Hey, somebody read (http://www.sfx.co.uk/page/sfx?entry=20_things_we_learnt_from) Russel T. Davis' hilariously self-centered book on writing Doctor Who:

Quote
These emails don’t just describe the process of writing the Specials, they are part of the process – at one point, Davies actually decides that Wilf should be the one who causes the Doctor’s regeneration in the middle of an email.

It's not unreasonable to say the the guy just makes up shit he wants to see in a Doctor Who episode and figures out the actual plot later on. I think what tends to go horribly, horribly wrong is that every story becomes a paper-thin vehicle to bring the cast from this zany situation to that one so the Doctor can drive the Titanic or make a Douglas Adams reference or inject cameos or get a certain line out. Nothing comes naturally, it's all just point A to point B to point C.

Quote
There’s also a very interesting entry where Davies discusses the way he writes Doctor Who, which answers a recurring criticism. Discussing rewatching a repeat of “The Sound Of Drums”, he ponders the fact that you suddenly learn about things like the Archangel network, the Valiant, and the TARDIS becoming a Paradox Machine out of nowhere, with no advance seeding or foreshadowing in the script:

“I can see how annoying that looks. I can see how maddening it must be, for some people. Especially if you’re imposing really classical script structures and templates on that episode, even unconsciously. I must look like a vandal, a kid or an amateur… The simple fact is, all those things were planned. All of them were my choice. They’re not lazy, clumsy or desperate. They’re chosen. I can see more traditional ways of telling those stories, but I’m not interested. I think the stuff that you gain from writing in this way – the shock, the whirlwind, the freedom, the exhilaration – is worth the world. I’ve got this sort of tumbling, freewheeling style that somersaults along, with everything happening now - not later, not before, but now, now, now. I’ve made a Doctor Who that exists in the present tense. It’s happening now, right in front of your eyes! If you don’t like it, if you don’t join in with it then… blimey, these episodes must be nonsensical. But those classical structures can be seen in Primeval, in Demons, in Merlin, in all of them – and yet we stand with millions more viewers. And I think that’s partly why.”

I'm all about casually dropping hints or backstory reveals without losing momentum, but Davis seems to want to reap the surprise and "oh wow" of backstory without actually building one. He just makes shit up on the spot and barely revisits it, making it all essentially meaningless. You don't pay attention to Davis' Doctor's backstory because you know it doesn't really mean anything, it's not some juicy hidden detail you'd find in Lost, they're just words he's sputtering to sound traveled and exotic.

His style of backstory exposition isn't exciting because it's all fluff and no substance. All that's obvious, I guess, but it's good to at least hear that there wasn't anything more to a lot of what he put out beyond the flash.

Another one Thad might like:

Quote
A line was cut from the scene where the Doctor talks to Wilf on the Vinvocci spaceship. He would have explained that he “was half-human back in 1999 for a couple of days” (a reference to the Paul McGann movie)

uhhh:

Quote
Another [possible episode] was a kind of Star Trek pastiche - essentially “the Doctor on board the Enterprise, puncturing all that Starfleet pomposity with this sheer Doctor-ness”.

...a Doctor Who/Star Trek crossover was seriously on their list of plans, until Enterprise was axed.

Some spoilers on the latest ep:

Quote
Who’s that mysterious woman in “The End Of Time”? Here it is from the horse’s mouth: “I like leaving it open, because then you can imagine what you want. I think the fans will say it's Romana. Or even the Rani. Some might say that it's Susan's mother, I suppose. But of course it’s meant to be the Doctor’s mother”.

Oh god, this could've so easily been yet another Stolen Earth:

Quote
For two or three days, Russell was planning to bring back the Daleks for “The End Of Time” too. They would have been in an alliance with the Time Lords, and there would have been a Dalek Parliament and a Dalek Minister. He eventually changed his mind after learning that Steven Moffat is using the pepperpots in season five.

Quote
Both Martha and Mickey were originally planned to feature in Children Of Earth. Freema Agyeman became unavailable when she was cast in Law And Order: London. Mickey was only written out a week before the read-through, when Noel Clarke was offered a role in a Michael Winterbottom film.

So, I dunno, I like that Davis was trying to bring in some level of swashbuckling and adventure to Doctor Who. Lord knows the old show needed a bit more life beyond each episode's concept. But I look at a Davis episode like Stolen Earth and a Moffat on like Library and the latter is thrilling because you're engaged, you're interested in the mystery, you know what's at stake, and you're on the same page as the Doctor. You learn as he does, and sometimes fear as he does. That didn't happen with Stolen Earth, we were just strung along, following someone who seemed to fear something we didn't know, seemed to have a solution we weren't queued into until the very end. It was just fanservice and flashy lights until the triumphant magic solution dropped down and we are left to apparently stand in awe at how he pulled it off through effort alone.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on January 14, 2010, 05:05:09 PM
Quote
As you’ve probably seen reported elsewhere, there was, incredibly, talk of a Torchwood musical, with the blokes from Abba involved!

I think at this point, the term "musical episode" should be code for "jumped the shark".

Quote
Other ideas were considered for the Easter special. One was very space opera, all dogfights and spaceships, with the Doctor arriving in the midst of a war in space. One of the races involved might have been the Chelonians - man-sized tortoises from Gareth Roberts’s Who novel The Highest Science.

Another centred around a deserted hotel, and would have seen weird, spindly-legged alien creatures like centaurs, with singsong voices, freezing Earth in time for a bizarre carnival procession.

Instead we got "Planet of the Dead"   ::(:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on January 14, 2010, 09:38:44 PM
Quote
As you’ve probably seen reported elsewhere, there was, incredibly, talk of a Torchwood musical, with the blokes from Abba involved!

I think at this point, the term "musical episode" should be code for "jumped the shark".

can we say UNLESS john barrowman is involved

please
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on January 14, 2010, 09:44:33 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpAQLH0P_qY

4:30
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on January 14, 2010, 09:52:38 PM
exactly

also
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7Q3zBLgqsI
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 14, 2010, 09:59:01 PM
It's not unreasonable to say the the guy just makes up shit he wants to see in a Doctor Who episode and figures out the actual plot later on. I think what tends to go horribly, horribly wrong is that every story becomes a paper-thin vehicle to bring the cast from this zany situation to that one so the Doctor can drive the Titanic or make a Douglas Adams reference or inject cameos or get a certain line out. Nothing comes naturally, it's all just point A to point B to point C.

In fairness, this is pretty common in spectacle-based science fiction.  This pretty much describes most of Spielberg's work and all of Lucas's to a T.

BTW, from here on in I'm dispensing with spoiler tags; I really don't think anyone's reading this thread who hasn't watched the finale at this point.

I'm all about casually dropping hints or backstory reveals without losing momentum, but Davis seems to want to reap the surprise and "oh wow" of backstory without actually building one. He just makes shit up on the spot and barely revisits it, making it all essentially meaningless.

Or worse.

The Martha/Mickey marriage makes for a nice twist if you don't put any thought whatsoever into it, but if you actually do...it says pretty terrible things about Martha.  At this point she's bounced from a schoolgirl crush to a broken-off engagement to an abrupt marriage to somebody else.  It pretty much undoes all the healthy growing-up vibe we got when she left and makes her one of those terrifyingly needy people who bounce from one relationship to another without ever taking a moment to get centered.

Again, the natural response to this is "It's just a show, I should really just relax."  Martha is, after all, not real, and whatever tampering RTD's done with her in her last couple appearances we can choose to ignore and still like her character from Season 3.  I'm just saying that if you take a moment to actually scratch past the surface of the "Ooh, neat twist!" you get some things that are not only unsatisfying but downright unsettling.  And he doesn't think about these things.

...anyway.  Looking at the GOOD of the too-long regeneration goodbye sequence, I liked the total inappropriateness of the "save Martha's life -> save Luke's life -> get Jack laid" progression.  The scene was getting maudlin and needed a touch of levity.

(Also, IIRC where Martha and Mickey had been upset by the Doctor's appearance and the sense of impending doom, Sarah Jane actually smiled.  Great little touch -- she was there for #3's regeneration into #4, of course, and knows this is a birth as much as a death.  She can really do a lot with just a facial expression and fans' knowledge of continuity; her reaction to Davros's reappearance was pretty much perfect too, as the only character who'd ever encountered him before.)

I think at this point, the term "musical episode" should be code for "jumped the shark".



...maybe those are what were in the last two posts; my Flash isn't working.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on January 14, 2010, 10:01:42 PM
nah, they're john barrowman singing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qdn4YBwIPo
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on January 15, 2010, 09:00:44 AM
We don't really have any idea when the Martha/Mickey thing took place. He's a god damned time traveler.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 16, 2010, 10:07:26 AM
In Torchwood: Children of Earth, they say Martha's on her honeymoon.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on January 16, 2010, 11:14:40 AM
Fair enough I guess. I don't watch Torchwood, due to it being bad.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Burrito Al Pastor on January 16, 2010, 12:13:43 PM
As of Children of Earth, that's not longer a good reason.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on January 16, 2010, 06:04:34 PM
So one special (that happened to be the intended series ender) out of the whole series was good. Forgive me for not giving it a chance.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 17, 2010, 12:04:40 AM
I watched Children of Earth because I heard good things.  I was not misled, though I think the last 20% of it was godawful (see earlier in thread).

Anyway, I think it's pretty clear that all the goodbyes (except the one set in '05, obviously) took place in the present.

Wonder if the Doctor's going to be back in '10 when he lands, still in '05, or when.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on February 09, 2010, 05:37:21 AM
Gaiman confirms long-rumored episode. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8503737.stm)

Makes sense given that he spent '09 giving non-denials, up until the very end where he firmly denied he had written an episode for the 2010 season.

Because he wrote an episode for the 2011 season.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on February 20, 2010, 05:41:27 PM
New trailer. (http://www.bbcamerica.com/content/123/doctor-who-video.jsp?bclid=59272646001&bctid=67519180001)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on February 20, 2010, 06:10:10 PM
I want to see this show get good again SO HARD
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 13, 2010, 11:51:22 AM
The Telegraph has a shitload of new info about the coming season (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/doctor-who/7421880/Doctor-Who-star-Matt-Smith-on-sonic-screwdrivers-Steven-Moffat-and-following-David-Tennant.html).

Highlights:

Quote
The race to save the planet that’s unfolding on the village green will, Gillan says, help to show viewers what bonds the Doctor and Amy together. 'They’re two of a kind. They’re both a bit lost,’ she says. 'Because Amy has no parents

:8D:

Quote
Both Moffat and Wenger seem eager to address one rumour that persistently dogs the current Doctor Who production: budget cuts.

[...]

Moffat has a spikier retort. 'This is going to sound pious,’ he says, 'but the original Tardis was a budget cut. It was. They couldn’t afford to make a spaceship. They couldn’t afford even to do a magic door. They couldn’t afford to do a sphere. So someone came up with, Why don’t we do a police box? And it’s bigger on the inside. That’s the single best idea, I think – though I am a bit prejudiced – in all of fiction.’

:goodnews:

Quote
This new Tardis – not an obligatory accessory for each new Doctor, but required by the damage done to it in Tennant’s last episode – is big. It must be three times the size of Tennant’s, on multiple levels with staircases in between. Less grubby than its predecessor, with a transparent plastic floor on the main level, its walls are resplendent with polished copper and its central column features a blown glass decoration that could be straight from Tales of the Unexpected. There are old car seats and downstairs – downstairs! – a swing. With a nod to Paul McGann’s Tardis, the central column features an old TV screen on an extendable trellis. It also has a 1980s-style computer keyboard, and a His-Master’s-Voice style trumpet speaker.

:hi5:

Quote
Most importantly, from the moment he stumbles out of his crashed Tardis, Smith is certainly his own Doctor. Less prickly than Eccleston and without the slapstick of Tennant, he brings an air of muddled intensity that’s a bit reminiscent of, say, Tom Baker (though without the stripy scarf).

:glee:

Read the whole thing; it's quite good!

Also, my Flash is not working at the moment, but Digital Spy has an interview snippet with Moffat (http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/s7/doctor-who/tubetalk/a207870/moffat-talks-smiths-first-who-scene.html) where he discusses the regeneration scene from January.  It is apparently part of a larger, forthcoming interview.

EDIT: Got Flash working.  Turns out it's only a minute long and doesn't really tell us anything.  Sorry!  But when they post the rest of the interview, that should be fun.

I don't think there's an official (British) premier date yet; as far as I know it's still "probably Easter."  Still, that's just another month.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on March 13, 2010, 02:08:58 PM
:omg:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on March 13, 2010, 02:13:21 PM
The trailer from BBC just says Easter 2010

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpbmMhNe6aA
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on March 16, 2010, 04:01:33 AM
I don't think there's an official (British) premier date yet; as far as I know it's still "probably Easter."  Still, that's just another month.
From the article you linked:
Quote
'Doctor Who’ returns to BBC One on April 3
:glee:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 16, 2010, 08:48:12 PM
:whoops:  Guess I managed to lose it somewhere in that massive information dump they gave us.  Thanks for pointing it out.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 22, 2010, 05:44:14 PM
IT.  BEGINS.

US trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teBw2IWuOA0&feature=player_embedded

UK trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK_7S_EpnBk&feature=player_embedded

Johnston (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2010/03/21/how-america-sees-the-doctor-and-how-the-brits-do-too/) comments that the chief difference is that the UK version focuses on the point-of-view character and the US version focuses on the godlike hero.

Main thing that struck me: his voice is deeper and stronger than I expected.  Definitely a plus; the Doctor needs to be able to alternate between whimsy and gravitas.  And as I've said before, I love the idea of the much older Doctor who River Song described being the youngest of all in body.

There's plenty of other news to go 'round.  I quite like the one from The Scotsman (http://www.scotsman.com/features/Interview-Steven-Moffat-Doctor-Who.6169021.jp).

Quote from: The Moff
Maybe this isn't new but it is my view: Doctor Who is a fairy tale – not sci-fi, not fantasy but properly a fairy tale. And I don't mean Disney-style where the endings are changed and everyone lives. Doctor Who is how we warn our children that there are people in the world who want to eat them.

And more of that interview from Digital Spy: main snippet (http://www.digitalspy.com/cult/s7/doctor-who/interviews/a207948/steven-moffat-doctor-who.html), bonus cut (http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/s7/doctor-who/tubetalk/a210033/video-steven-moffat-bonus-cut.html).

(I quite like his comments on what he'd do if there were a multi-Doctor story for the fiftieth anniversary: he mostly dismisses it, but notes that it would be interesting to focus on the fact that it's the same man experiencing the same events from different perspectives.  He went for a straight causality loop in Time Crash, but I'm confident he could make a damned complex and layered time-travel story stretched out over a couple hours.  Plus I'd love to see 4, 9, and 10 share a stage, but I'm just daydreaming as far as that goes.)

He also rather strongly implies that River Song's relationship to the Doctor is NOT what everybody expects.  What everybody expects is, of course, the Doctor's wife.

Meantime: there's a Wii game (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2010/03/12/doctor_who_game_wii/) coming (and a DS release as well), the Beeb's released one last Tennant adventure (http://www.seenit.co.uk/bbc-audiobooks-release-tennants-final-doctor-who-story/035167/) as an audiobook, and the comic's still running.  Lee DOES spend a bit too much time on fanwank for my tastes (though I quite like Martha telling Magombo that UNIT has a long history of science advisors giving orders to their superiors), but it's a solid enough story.  I'm just not sure how satisfying it'd be to people who don't recognize namedrops like Adric, Turlough, or even Malcolm.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on March 22, 2010, 07:22:43 PM
I'm not watching a single god damn snippet or spoiling a dang thing for myself, but ffffffffffffff I want it to be April already
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 29, 2010, 08:53:21 PM
FIRST 35 SECONDS OF THE NEW SEASON!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNvUCYxIQM8&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on April 03, 2010, 02:01:31 PM
Well, I had high expectations and the first episode more than matched them. I can't think of a single way that the Tennant era Doctor Who was better than what I just witnessed; even the gurning was better.

Instead of talking to myself until you guys have had a chance to catch up, I'll just dump this short article called Doctor Who and the homosexuals of doom (http://liberalconspiracy.org/2010/04/03/doctor-who-and-the-homosexuals-of-doom/) from a (thankfully ironically titled) website called Liberal Conspiracy. Mostly because I read it this morning and it managed to whet my appetite without so much as a synopsis of the first episode.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 03, 2010, 03:12:08 PM
Oh wow, that episode was amazing.  Moffat hits the ground running, no doubt about that.  Also, it looks like the Doctor is going to team up with Van Gogh.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on April 03, 2010, 04:03:12 PM
GOD

FUCKING

DAMNIT

WHY DO I HAVE TO BE CAUGHT UP ON DOCTOR WHO SO I CAN'T JUST POUND THROUGH THE ENTIRE SEASON IN TWO DAYS
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 03, 2010, 09:18:17 PM
Loved it
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Joxam on April 03, 2010, 11:02:54 PM
Saw the ep, cheered a lot, thought it was great. Would buy again.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 03, 2010, 11:20:55 PM
Yeah, fucking great.  In both Moffat's case and the Doctor's, there were shades of what had come before, but a definite sense of the new.  Great script; laugh-out-loud lines AND serious drama, culminating in a FUCK YEAH moment.

Yeah, the kid's got chops.  He can pull off the full range, from the "I AM a madman with a box" to "Hello.  I'm the Doctor.  Basically: RUN."

I've been on the Internet long enough to know that some people will still be screeching about how terrible this was.  Those people are idiots, and fortunately I think they will now be in the extreme minority.


Moving forward: we've seen some hints of things to come.  The fact that the old lady (Jeff's mom?) recognized him is certain to come back.  And of course the now-standard prophesying.

Geronimo indeed.



EDIT on further thought: I think the best way to describe this episode is Davies-style spectacle and pacing combined with Moffat's wit and cleverness.  Best example would probably be that he pulled out the cell-phones-across-the-world trick again, except he managed to make it actually make logical and story sense instead of just pulling it out of his ass.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on April 04, 2010, 12:58:57 AM
I love how Moffat plays with time. First in The Girl in the Fireplace, then in Blink, then with River Song in the library episodes. And of course, in this episode too, where [spoiler]five minutes for the Doctor turns out of be "twelve years and four psychiatrists" for Amy Pond.[/spoiler]

I think for RTD time was just a destination, but it's clear that Moffat is treating time-travel as an integral part of the show rather than just a reason for ladies to wear Victorian bonnets.

Also like that it took place in the present without ever mentioning when "the present" was. After all, the plot [spoiler]spans fourteen years and starts with the Doctor flying over the Millenium Dome - meaning we're at the very least four years into the future by the end of the episode.[/spoiler] Could RTD have done that without some kind of "who's the Prime Minister now" gag? I very much appreciate that the new team respects us enough to not have the characters constantly allude to the audience watching the show in 2010.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 04, 2010, 05:44:07 AM
Hold on let me connect to the OVERMIND THROUGH MY HOLOBAND EVERYBODY DOES IT IT'S THE FUTURE SEE THE BLIMPS
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 04, 2010, 06:24:06 AM
Moving forward: we've seen some hints of things to come.  The fact that the old lady (Jeff's mom?) recognized him is certain to come back.  And of course the now-standard prophesying.

I attribute her recognize him not as some kind of foreshadowing, but as her dimly trying to remember [spoiler]the man that Amy had been drawing since she was a little girl[/spoiler].


What I loved about the episode is how Moffat literally makes the Doctor his own, top down.  New Doctor, new TARDIS, new companion, even [spoiler]new sonic screwdriver[/spoiler].  I liked this regeneration episode better than the Christmas Invasion because we're introduced to the new Doctor as he hits the ground running, rather than left in a haze as the characters don't understands what's going on.  Basically it gives the new Doctor a chance to prove himself, rather than sidelining him the entire episode.

It's a wonderful episode, and if Moffat can keep the momentum going, he'll be a good successor to Tenant.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mongrel on April 04, 2010, 07:21:44 PM
I figure some of you guys might appreciate this (http://rohanelf.deviantart.com/art/Tenth-Doctor-Doll-150832394)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 04, 2010, 07:53:38 PM
I love how Moffat plays with time. First in The Girl in the Fireplace, then in Blink, then with River Song in the library episodes. And of course, in this episode too, where [spoiler]five minutes for the Doctor turns out of be "twelve years and four psychiatrists" for Amy Pond.[/spoiler]

He even does it on shows that AREN'T about time travel.  Coupling had a couple episodes like that.  The Girl with Two Breasts (http://thetvdb.com/?tab=episode&seriesid=78131&seasonid=14340&id=272773&lid=7) told the story of two characters with a language barrier between them; the scene played out once from each character's perspective.  Split (http://thetvdb.com/?tab=episode&seriesid=78131&seasonid=14342&id=272784&lid=7) featured a splitscreen showing the story from two different characters' perspectives; in the final scene the events taking place were an hour apart, so you'd see Susan trip over something on the floor on the bottom screen and then Steve knock it over on the top screen.  Episode 3 of Jekyll (http://thetvdb.com/?tab=episode&seriesid=80222&seasonid=27678&id=330969&lid=7) starts with Tom waking up with blood on his hands and slowly pieces together how he got there.

I think for RTD time was just a destination, but it's clear that Moffat is treating time-travel as an integral part of the show rather than just a reason for ladies to wear Victorian bonnets.

In fairness, the Ninth Doctor brought Rose back a year later than he was supposed to.

I liked this regeneration episode better than the Christmas Invasion

I think I like it better than ANY regeneration episode I've seen.  Castrovalva is probably #2, as it dropped the new Doctor straight into an already-in-progress battle with the Master.  And because it was the only serial where the Fifth Doctor had a good excuse for standing around looking helpless and bewildered.

(Still haven't seen the #4, #6, or #7 regeneration, and of course #2's lost and #9 doesn't exist.  But I already know the #7 one is pretty much "We fired Baker and stuck a wig on McCoy" bullshit.  And Romana regenerates just for the fuck of it.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 05, 2010, 01:32:59 AM
I enjoyed it. I just hope the "keeps being late" thing isn't a theme, because I'm already over it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 05, 2010, 05:57:09 PM
...you can't POSSIBLY believe he's going to get her back on time.

...anyway.  I see it as less "he's always late" and more "he has a lot less control over the TARDIS than he pretends to".  Which is not a new theme.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 05, 2010, 06:17:19 PM
In fact Russel T. Davies gave the exact reason why he's so poor at controlling the TARDIS.



For better or worse.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 06, 2010, 09:10:03 AM
...you can't POSSIBLY believe he's going to get her back on time.

...anyway.  I see it as less "he's always late" and more "he has a lot less control over the TARDIS than he pretends to".  Which is not a new theme.

I do, actually, but only because of the episode preview where she's married.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on April 06, 2010, 02:29:19 PM
GOD

FUCKING

DAMNIT

WHY DO I HAVE TO BE CAUGHT UP ON DOCTOR WHO SO I CAN'T JUST POUND THROUGH THE ENTIRE SEASON IN TWO DAYS

THIS THIS THIS. I want to be watching more of this right the fuck now
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 06, 2010, 08:01:09 PM
...you can't POSSIBLY believe he's going to get her back on time.

...anyway.  I see it as less "he's always late" and more "he has a lot less control over the TARDIS than he pretends to".  Which is not a new theme.

I do, actually, but only because of the episode preview where she's married.

Doesn't mean he gets her back on time.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Joxam on April 07, 2010, 01:02:16 PM
Yeah, honestly, the whole "got back late to her wedding and then the boyfriends is mad and teetering on not going through with it" as a problem they have to solve, is like, half a season worth of real time character side plot right there.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 07, 2010, 02:14:09 PM
Goddd I hope not.

RTD give me all the whiny domestic family bullshit I could ever want out of my freewheeling scifi adventure.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Joxam on April 07, 2010, 02:35:58 PM
Pleeeeeeeeease. Its an english drama. There's going to be more domestic issues than most broken American homes.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 07, 2010, 03:48:37 PM
:bam:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 08, 2010, 08:50:44 PM
I am sure Moffat has a plan, guys.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 09, 2010, 11:07:11 PM
4 Doctor Who adventure games coming. (http://io9.com/5512741/doctor-who-adventure-games-will-be-like-four-extra-episodes-of-the-season--and-theyll-be-free/gallery/)  And they'll be free.  And available in both PC and Mac flavors.

Quote
"There aren't 13 episodes of Doctor Who this year," adds Piers Wenger, Head of Drama, BBC Wales and Executive Producer, Doctor Who. "There are 17 - four of which are interactive.["]

I'm sure they're overselling it -- I doubt anything vitally important to the overarching plot will happen in the games -- but it WOULD be interesting if these were a little less throwaway than the animated specials they've done over the past few years.  Like, if they stuck it somewhere between seasons five and six.  (Given that Amy's in the games, that would mean she'd be hanging around for season six.  It WOULD be nice to see a companion last more than one season again.)

Those last two screenshots look like a Dalek city.  Wonder if that's Skaro -- doesn't look anything like it did on the series, but it seems like they must have had an advanced civilization at SOME point in their history.  Maybe after Genesis of the Daleks but before The Daleks?



Moving on: just watched Girl in the Fireplace with my girlfriend.  There IS an interesting throughline in Moffat's stories -- not just the elements of this one and Blink that he brought back in last week's episode, but Madame de Pompadour asking the Doctor to dance.  And her "Doctor Who?" -- yes, it's the title of the show, and a phrase that characters have used in dialogue all the way back to the first episode in '63 -- but I think it bears pointing out that River Song actually knows the answer to that question.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on April 10, 2010, 03:43:46 PM
GOD

FUCKING

DAMNIT

WHY DO I HAVE TO BE CAUGHT UP ON DOCTOR WHO SO I CAN'T JUST POUND THROUGH THE ENTIRE SEASON IN TWO DAYS

judging from today and from what next week's episode is going to be about i am just going to quote this every week until the last episode of the season airs
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on April 11, 2010, 12:03:42 AM
Yeah. I don't know how he does it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: LaserBeing on April 11, 2010, 01:34:15 AM
I'm excited about how good this show will be once Moffat gets over how chuffed he is to be in charge of Doctor Who and starts focusing less on grandstanding soliloquys and more on telling a coherent damn story.

Yes, we get it, he is the Doctor. Let's move along, shall we?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 11, 2010, 08:12:40 AM
Good "Angry Doctor" moment toward the end, and nice establishment for Amy Pond as a legitimate Companion. Quite enjoyed the whole thing.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 11, 2010, 08:28:38 AM
Seconding

Loved the "THIS ISN'T GOING TO BE HIGH ON DIGNITY" bit, too.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 11, 2010, 08:37:19 AM
I laughed loud enough to disturb the cat for that scene.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 11, 2010, 10:16:11 AM
Little heavy on the election-year moralizing, but pretty good overall I thought.  Nice job at providing a solution that should have been obvious but wasn't, at least not immediately.

Observation: the Eleventh Doctor is a pathological liar.  At the end of the first ep, he promises Amy that he has no other reason to ask for a companion besides the company (and whatever meter he's standing next to spikes and then goes off) -- that comes back in this one when she shows exactly why the Doctor needs companions by preventing him from doing something horrifying.  And then that whole bit about how he never interferes with anything, which of course is all he EVER does.

Next week's: well, we'll see; it's not a Moffat episode.  Premise is interesting enough -- one of those that seems obvious until they put a twist on it.

One of the lines in the preview for next week's suggested they may finally be bringing back the Daleks for good.  Of course, there's a dilemma there -- the Doctor reassures himself with the knowledge that the Time Lords' sacrifice was worth it to wipe out the Daleks; if you bring the Daleks back permanently then you mess that up.  On the other hand, you can do Doctor Who with only two Time Lords, but (much as I'd love them to appear less frequently) you can't do Doctor Who without Daleks.  And each time they come back when they're supposed to be wiped out is increasingly more absurd and contrived.  So that needs to be taken care of somehow.

I've seen a lot of griping about the new opening titles but I've decided I like them.  It's a nice contrast to the ostentatious horns of the previous version.  I was disappointed that they didn't include the bridge in the credits version of the theme in the first ep, but they did in the second and it sounds quite good!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 11, 2010, 10:29:35 AM
I like the new theme well enough and I do like the opening as a whole, but I will say I liked the time vortex in the RTD run more than the current portal to hell. Really though, what's important in my book is that they kept the tumbling, barely-in-control angle of the Tardis' travel there.

I've honestly never really seen a particularly good Dalek episode so I'm not eager to see them back. I guess they have to be there because it's Doctor Who, but again, I find them utterly uninteresting. The only thing I really like about the buggers is that they have that charming Skeletor quality of only getting excited ever when they're being total assholes.

They just love their job with a passion.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 11, 2010, 11:45:23 AM
See, I think Dalek, The Parting of the Ways, and Doomsday were all perfectly serviceable Dalek stories.

When the season's over and you're jonesing for a fix, maybe grab Genesis of the Daleks from Netflix.  (Or buy it.  I think it's worth it.)  It's pretty much the best Dalek story.  I also like the original Dalek story from the First Doctor's run and the Sixth and Seventh Doctor Dalek stories.  (I probably wrote more about them in the Old Doctor Who thread.)

I really do think they had the right idea back then, when each Doctor would have ONE Dalek serial.  There's been speculation that this would be Moffat's "Let's get 'em out of the way early" take and then they'd finally get a rest for a few years, but that sure looks like a Dalek city in the adventure game.  Of course, games are rather a different thing than TV; the show could get away with a few years without Daleks, but releasing a game without them would tend to limit your audience.

ALSO:

Loved the "THIS ISN'T GOING TO BE HIGH ON DIGNITY" bit, too.

I loved the bait-and-switch.  Because all the news coverage in the British press was "OMG TIGHT WET CLOTHES THEY ARE SEXING UP THE SHOW THINK OF THE CHILDREN" and in context it really could not have been any less sexy.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 11, 2010, 11:58:11 AM
I like that observation about being a pathological liar. He also lied when he said he forgot why he put the water on the floor, which he immediately followed up upon by checking on the result of that experiment while he sent Amy off in what he said was a mission to find out what the creepy faces were all about, but in all likelihood was purposely to get her arrested. His apparently absent minded behavior seems to be a guise in general. He's used it to explain away some of his smaller lies, but moreover, in both episodes so far, he's absent minded until he puts on his serious face. Seems like, underneath, he's more pissed off than absent minded.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 11, 2010, 12:08:41 PM
Yeah, forgot to mention the glasses but I noticed that too.  He doesn't have the air of actual malevolence about him that #7 did, largely due to the (seeming) absentmindedness you mentioned, but he DOES have the same sense that he's playing a very elaborate game of chess and his companion is a piece in it.

I think Smith's said otherwise -- basically that the eccentric behavior is the Doctor acting on instinct and then he only realizes the significance of what he's seen at the end -- which is plausible (it certainly describes Amy's behavior in this episode) but doesn't quite fit with the water example.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 11, 2010, 02:04:24 PM
I don't think it's malevolent at all, just misleading. Sort of how the previous Doctor used nonchalance and a clever attitude to put people people at their ease, or distract them from his actual intent, this one does the absent minded act. He also doesn't bother to explain as much to people, he just acts on whatever conclusions he's come to.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on April 11, 2010, 10:27:08 PM
I basically hated this episode. [spoiler]Ok the churchill bit at the end was neat, and certain of the small bits, but every major element was basically nonsensical and annoying. I get the whole "humans are evil" message people always like to put in scifi but I just find it ridiculous that when the whale is already offering to do exactly what we want people would hide and torture it forever for no explained reason. Even worse, who the fuck would POSSIBLY think it's ok to try and feed kids who fail a test to it? The whole "let each citizen decide on their own whether to perpetuate the evil" thing was pretty cool but was pretty much spoiled by the massive secrecy and devouring. The reasonable-seeming approach of the rulers of a society choosing to perpetuate horror in exchange for society's survival is made totally unreasonable by the ridiculous means by which they go about it. Finally, why was the doctor's first thought not "let's make contact with other humans and find a NON spacewhale powersource" instead of let's kill the spacewhale. Clearly all the OTHER nations found some way to exist without being on the back of a tortured creature. You can make the transition off the spacewhale's back. Your options do not need to be either kill the whale or kill humanity.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on April 11, 2010, 10:41:09 PM
http://www.flickfilosopher.com/blog/2010/04/041110matt_smith_in_new_york.html
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 12, 2010, 06:13:21 AM
Nah, #11's not malevolent; I was saying #7 was.  Maybe "malevolent" is too strong a word -- "sinister" would be better.

Moffat's repeatedly emphasized that there's only one Doctor and he's not (as yet) writing the Doctor specifically for Smith, that it's up to Smith to make the character his own.  So it's perfectly reasonable that he would do similar things to the previous incarnations but with a completely different tone.

Drethelin's right, on the whole, about the lack of narrative coherence in this one -- it's the least logically consistent ep Moffat's done, and if it were a Davies episode we'd probably all be howling about the overbearing moralizing, lack of subtlety, and the fact that the Smilers don't really make sense as monsters.  (Purely a hypothetical, of course, as no other writer but Moffat would have created the Smilers.)  That said, he also highlights the episode's strengths.  I think it wins on tone and a couple of very clever ideas even though the story is pretty illogical.  It actually highlight's Moffat's "fairytale" approach pretty well; the story doesn't have to make sense so much as give children nightmares.

The more I think about it, the more important the Doctor's lying is.  Basically this ENTIRE EPISODE was about how secrets and lies are destructive.  In fact, the Doctor is absolutely outraged that Amy tried to hide something from him -- he's not only a liar, he's a hypocrite, too.

It's been pointed out elsewhere that the spike in the meter when the Doctor first lies to Amy resembles one of the cracks in spacetime that the season arc appears to revolve around.  And [spoiler]we see another one on New Britain[/spoiler].  Could there be a connection between lying and the appearance of the cracks?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 12, 2010, 06:46:43 AM
RE: Finding another nation's ship. The whole ship was built around the whale. If there was a "release the whale with no consequences" button, the Doctor surely would have pushed it.  Finding a new power source would be rather pointless, given that there was nowhere to install it, and no means of removing the whale without dismantling the ship.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 12, 2010, 03:11:47 PM
Huh, I hadn't noticed the crack thing, but you're right. I'm sure it's just the season finale big bad, but I'd love if it was somehow the Doctor's doing.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 12, 2010, 03:25:50 PM
It can be both. It often is.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on April 13, 2010, 01:33:35 AM
Little heavy on the election-year moralizing, but pretty good overall I thought.
The day after this episode aired, the incumbent Labour Party released this party political broadcast (http://bit.ly/cEsysU) starring Pertwee Jr and with David Tennant doing the voiceover. Seems Dr Who is doing the election and the election is doing Dr Who. Or maybe we've just become so obsessed with Dr Who as a nation that we need a Time Lord to tell us who we should vote for.

Re: All of this stuff
[spoiler]Lots of words behind a spoiler tag.[/spoiler]
I agree the whole thing about building a country around a whale flying around in space was incredibly dumb, but an energy source that comes at the cost of the lives of innocent people and children, as well as the larger theme of whether torture can be necessary, may not be entirely nonsensical in an episode where elections are a constant theme and that aired just three weeks before the UK goes to the polls to decide whether we want to keep the government that took us to Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm glad it wasn't 45 minutes of posturing over Iraq, but let's not pretend there isn't a less-fantastical real world parallel going on right this very second.

I basically think this would've been a pretty throwaway episode were it not for the fact that there was just enough Moffat in there to save it. Nightmare fuel for kids, spot on pacing, a couple of laugh out loud moments, check. Rather more apprehensive about the next ep., what with it being Daleks and not written by Moffat, but we'll see.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 15, 2010, 07:33:19 AM
"Beast Below" is beginning to become one of those episodes that as I reflect on it, I begin to dislike it more and more.

The illogical plot and haphazard pacing aside - the episode moves a little too quickly, with barely any time to really absorb and process what's going on - the biggest flaw comes near the end as the Doctor is preparing to zap the star whale into a coma.  Coming on the heels of the Doctor moralizing to Amy about how she doesn't get to make decision for him, he then proceeds to begin making a massive, torturous decision for the rest of the society.  It's blatant hypocrisy that weakens the character.

But that's only part of the problem.  While he's doing this, the Doctor shoots off a quick line about how after he's done, he'll have to pick a new name because, "I sure as hell won't be the Doctor anymore."  This implies that he knows full well the horrors of what he's about to do, and is willing to go through with it.  In effect, the Doctor openly admits that what he is doing violates his own moral code, but still considers himself to be the only one who can make that decision.

Then after that, nothing.  The only reason he stops is because Amy discovers that the star whale wants to help children, and the incident is practically washed away with a hug and a "Well, better not do that next time" mentality that makes the Doctor look like a psychopath.  It might have gone better if Amy could have helped the Doctor realize the other option for himself, instead of simply being a check on a cold-blooded killer.  It's similar to "The Parting of the Ways" in that regard, but without the transparency of a literal deus ex machina.

I dislike the episodes that imply that deep down, the Doctor is a controlling murderer who is only kept in check because other people have the foresight and determination to stop him.  This takes the character from being a thoughtful, morally ambiguous yet ultimately benevolent being to just being an irrational psychopath who follows his base urges.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 15, 2010, 11:11:49 AM
It's a pretty long standing theme that one of the reasons he keeps a companion around is to help him keep some perspective. He certainly lost it over the course of last year's specials.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 15, 2010, 03:00:02 PM
Yeah. I'm generally behind anything that paints the Doctor as just a really old man and not some all-knowing supergenius taking the best possible action in any given situation. He'd murder the star whale to save the city, yes, but given what he knew and what he had seen, what other choice did he have? Given the circumstances, putting it into a coma was the only way to end its suffering without dooming the entire civilization.

I like that given no other choice, the Doctor decided on the best action he had available. In other situations like this - the season finale with Eccelson, or in The End - he just decided to do nothing until a deus ex machina solved it for him. Letting the Daleks destroy all of humanity because it would go against his moral code to start droppin' genocidez isn't really the right thing to do.

That said, this episode definitely did try to do a bit too much in too little a time.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 15, 2010, 05:09:28 PM
Coming on the heels of the Doctor moralizing to Amy about how she doesn't get to make decision for him, he then proceeds to begin making a massive, torturous decision for the rest of the society.  It's blatant hypocrisy that weakens the character.

I'm not sure if it weakens his character, but I AM pretty sure it makes me like him less.

The The USA Today solicited some questions for Matt the other day; I didn't get around to putting one in but I wanted to throw something in along the lines of "So, your Doctor seems to lie a lot, and is very charming and cavalier about it.  Without giving anything away, is he just not thinking, or is there something more sinister going on there?"

But that's only part of the problem.  While he's doing this, the Doctor shoots off a quick line about how after he's done, he'll have to pick a new name because, "I sure as hell won't be the Doctor anymore."  This implies that he knows full well the horrors of what he's about to do, and is willing to go through with it.  In effect, the Doctor openly admits that what he is doing violates his own moral code, but still considers himself to be the only one who can make that decision.

So we've got lies, hypocrisy, AND arrogance.

Then after that, nothing.

That remains to be seen.  As I've said, I'm pretty well convinced this is significant in the season arc.  The Doctor's own lies, secrecy, and (near) abuse of power mirror those of Britain itself in the episode.  That's not trivial.  That's going to come back.

I dislike the episodes that imply that deep down, the Doctor is a controlling murderer who is only kept in check because other people have the foresight and determination to stop him.  This takes the character from being a thoughtful, morally ambiguous yet ultimately benevolent being to just being an irrational psychopath who follows his base urges.

But it's gone both ways.  In The Waters of Mars, a companion prevents him from doing something GOOD because she feels it's an abuse of his power.  It's not that he's a psychopath so much as the most powerful being in the universe -- with a corresponding loss in perspective.  Yes, in this case Amy has to physically stop him -- but her larger role, like Donna's, is to keep him grounded, to keep his own judgement from getting too skewed.

As for "controlling" -- that's been an aspect of the Doctor's character from the beginning, but it's been played to different effects at different times.

As for "murderer" -- a little strong, but he HAS certainly killed in cold blood on some occasions.  On others -- like this one -- he's agonized over it.

I think all of these contradictions and flaws make him a richer character, not a poorer one.  But I DO find them unsettling, especially in contrast to his sunny disposition.

I expect to see all this play out over the course of the next 11 episodes -- and then hopefully he'll have his shit together by next season.



MEANWHILE: Nrama (http://www.newsarama.com/tv/Doctor-Who-Paley-Center-100415.html) covers the US premiere.  Highlights:

Quote
A very important aspect of the Doctor’s own past will finally be dealt with this season as Newsarama learned exclusively – The Doctor’s regeneration limit. “It’s been addressed in a very, very cheeky way by an old friend of mine and I’m not going to tell you any more about that,” said Moffat, telling us to “wait and see.”

Something you don’t have to wait for is discovering who the Eleventh Doctor’s Big Bad will be. Smith told the crowd it’s seen in the very first episode. “Albeit, not in the most conventional form. You’re going to have to think about it and find out what it is, but it’s in there,” he said. “And that’s the one, that’s what takes us through the whole series and my god, it’s bad.”

I'm going to reiterate that I think the shot where the Doctor lies and the equipment behind him spikes to look just like one of those space-time cracks is KEY.

Is the Doctor his own big bad?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 15, 2010, 05:20:49 PM
I guess I find it a little unearned this early in the season.  This is taking place literally only hours after he regenerated, so not even he has a full idea of the extent of his character.

I don't mind his making tough - even wrong - decisions, being powered mad or anything like that.  I think the flaws do make him richer.  What I found weakened the whole thing was how it was kind of portrayed as a fluke.  Amy gleefully re-accepted him, they hugged and off to the next adventure.  It seemed like little reflection on the events had taken place.

"The Parting of the Ways" did this a little bit better.  The Doctor was planning on using technology that would wipe out Earth just to because he felt the Dalek's were too big a threat to the universe.  In the end, though, I think he determines that it's simply too big a responsibility for him to make a decision on, so he simply relents and plans to deal with the consequences of the Daleks.  It was a great moment that showed that he wasn't capable of genocide, even he felt the situation demanded it (so to speak).  Of course, the episode ends by Spider-maning the whole thing, but the character development was still earned.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on April 16, 2010, 10:30:05 PM
So Moffat claims it's a mistake, but apparantly freeze framing the nurse badge in Eleventh Hour reveals that Rory became a nurse in 1990, which along with the other timeless quirks of how Amy's house is difficult to actually date, is leading some people (http://www.flickfilosopher.com/blog/2010/04/041610the_problem_of_amy_pond.html) to speculate that she's got something to do with the cracks.  I think it'll be interesting to see, if nothing else, if it genuinely was just a production flub or if Moffat's intentionally misleading people.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 17, 2010, 07:45:18 PM
Enjoyed the new episode, even if the ending was kind of eh.  If there's one thing I absolutely adore about this new episode, it's how it manages to capture the pulp aesthetic of the old Doctor Who episodes while still feeling like a show that's made in 2010.  The scene where [spoiler]the Daleks turn on all the lights in Britain[/spoiler] looked both modern and retro at the same time.  The series as a whole seems to have been given a major visual upgrade, on pair from when production went up from Eccleston to Tenant.

You know, as much as I ragged on "The Beast Below", one thing I really loved was how much it wore its inspirations on its sleeve.  The entire episode seem to pull inspiration from a variety of sources, such as Terry Gilliam films, Half-Life, and maybe even Bioshock.  There's no denying that the voting machine, with it's analogue televisions and big "Protest" and "Forget" buttons doesn't look like an unused prop from Brazil.  I'm really liking the art direction this season, and so far it doesn't seem like a fluke.

Also, in the preview for next week, the Doctor greets the blonde lady seen in the previous previews with [spoiler]"River?"[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 17, 2010, 08:16:44 PM
...so...next week's episode looks pretty good, huh?

River?  The Weeping Angels?

Good times.




Also, in the preview for next week, the Doctor greets the blonde lady seen in the previous previews with [spoiler]"River?"[/spoiler]

Um, yeah.  That's because she's Alex Kingston.  She just has blond hair.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 17, 2010, 08:25:09 PM
I'm just saying.  It's not the first time one actress has played multiple characters.  What's more significant is his calling her that.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on April 18, 2010, 02:13:51 AM
Well, that was the obvious worst episode so far. I don't think it was all bad; there was a sense of "let's just get this out of the way" that seemed to open the door for some fun fanservice. You know, like [spoiler]Daleks bringing people cups of tea[/spoiler].

I like that the setting riffed on the fact that the Daleks are often compared to Nazis by the (WW2 obsessed) British press. It's such a perfect match that I was sure Daleks and World War 2 must've already been done together, but now I come to think of it I don't think they have. I'm sure someone whose interest in Old Who extends beyond "I sometimes watched it as a child" will be able to confirm either way.

Anyway, let's hope those cracks have nothing to do with there being any more fucking Daleks for the rest of the season. Bring on River Song and weeping angels!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 18, 2010, 08:06:16 AM
The cracks are obviously the result of Davros and the Time Lord High Council working together in an effort to break the time lock and free both the Time Lords and the Daleks so they can gleefully destroy everything again.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 18, 2010, 08:27:11 AM
Also, the theory that Amy is a result of the cracks is reinforced in this episode.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 18, 2010, 09:00:12 AM
Or the theory that she's from a time before the Earth was stolen.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 18, 2010, 09:24:03 AM
Again, the Millennial Dome would seem to rule that out.

Given the huge emphasis on Amy not knowing something she should know, I don't think the solution is going to turn out to be "the Doctor doesn't know what year it was when he grabbed her."

Although that WOULD be kind of hilarious.


Trailer for the adventure game:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wQXgNXOxKA&feature=player_embedded

...so okay, we'll be seeing more damn Daleks.  But hopefully only in the game.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 18, 2010, 10:28:24 AM
I'm as tired of Daleks as the next man, but I think it's pretty clear that the primary color crew will be returning within the season.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on April 18, 2010, 10:33:37 AM
[spoiler]technicolor daleks[/spoiler] ::(:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on April 18, 2010, 03:13:13 PM
I _liked_ the technicolor Daleks, personally. Kind of goes along with the very mid-century vibe the art direction has been trying very, very hard to capture.

But before we get on to tearing this one apart, I couldn't help pointing out that, much as it had its problems, I'm really impressed with the Beast Below. Mostly on account of it serving as a handy, prime time-friendly retelling of The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ones_Who_Walk_Away_from_Omelas). Don't often get to see that kind of solid morality play stuff dealt out to an audience of children over the course of an hour. Deserves a serious slap on the back, I think.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 18, 2010, 04:19:37 PM
I don't know if I'm sold on the BRAND! NEW! SUMMER LINEUP! DALEKS just yet, but I like the voices (just unsettling enough without getting corny) and the general way they came about. I think the bronze, chrome, and army daleks looked cooler, but that was largely because it really drove home a sense of weight and implied strength which was also the reason I liked the new Cybermen design.

This was a fun episode, I thought. Probably technically the worst so far but still enjoyable for the most part.

The bomb-in-chest thing was kind of eehhh though, but I'd have to agree with Constantine that beyond the occasional bad call on CG, the look of this season's pretty rad. I like that his viewscreen is actually a portion of the wall he leans over a rail to talk to.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 18, 2010, 06:32:45 PM
OH GOD I FORGOT THE GIANT VIEW SCREEN.

If there is anything that is the single best element of this season, it's that the new TARDIS has a giant fucking views creen in it.  The Doctor could start eating babies and sell all the space whales to the Nazis, but as long as he has that view screen all is forgiven.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 19, 2010, 08:36:37 PM
Rusty gets his mitts on #11 (http://io9.com/5520312/russell-t-davies-returns-to-doctor-who--and-hes-bringing-an-old-friend), in a Sarah Jane two-parter.  And Jo's going to be in it.

Now, Jo jibes with Rusty's "let's bring back everything, ever" approach, but not his established "All the Doctor's companions wind up twisted and sad" narrative.  Because Jo fell in love with a hippie scientist and ran off with him.  It would be nice to see her have a quick back-and-forth with Sarah Jane to the effect that no you don't have to be lonely your whole life just because you ran around with the Doctor, but given that this is the younger-audiences show he'll probably just ignore all that.  Or maybe he'll retcon in some horrifying fate for Jo's husband.

It IS, of course, interesting that Jo was SJ's immediate predecessor.

BleedingCool (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2010/04/19/russell-t-davies-to-write-matt-smith-doctor-who-and-jo-grant-too/) says the Brigadier's in there somewhere too, but keep in mind it's a tabloid site.  (Also note that "one photo" link is NSFW.)  Would be nice to see ol' Brig again, and I LOVED his last appearance on Sarah Jane, but he's like ninety or something and doesn't always appear as scheduled.  He was supposed to be in the Tom Baker audio drama last fall but wasn't in good enough health so they used somebody else from the UNIT era instead.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 20, 2010, 09:36:51 AM
World War II Dalek Poster: TO VICTORY (http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/d11s01/d11s01e01_to_victory.pdf)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 20, 2010, 10:12:16 PM
...on the SJ ep: I think it bears noting once again how much I liked her reaction when #10 showed up on his Farewell Tour: everyone else seemed pretty bummed out (except Jack, who got lucky), but she smiled; she's already known three incarnations of the Doctor and she'll be excited to meet another.

Jo hasn't witnessed a regeneration like Sarah Jane has, but she was in The Three Doctors, so it's not a foreign concept to her.  #11 is a whole lot different from #3, though.

(Also, I looked Nicholas Courtney up and he's "only" 80, not 90.  My grandma's age.  Hoping he can make it aboard.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 21, 2010, 10:28:04 AM
I kind of want to watch this thing, but on the other hand SJ is a boring show.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on April 22, 2010, 03:58:45 AM
I'm probably the last person in the world to hear about this, but the adventure games are made by Sumo Digital and sound like they might not be terrible (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/gamesblog/2010/apr/22/doctor-who-adventures-city-of-daleks) (Guardian article).
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on April 24, 2010, 01:35:57 PM
Okay. That was awesome. How could the weeping angels be scarier? [spoiler]Put them in pitch black and have any statue at all possibly be one.[/spoiler] [spoiler]And then EVERY statue.[/spoiler] Yeah.

Can't wait for next week. Until then I am obsessively watching episodes of old Doctor Who because SHIT GOD WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 24, 2010, 01:41:28 PM
oh god it's happening

verde this is a dark path down which you venture
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on April 24, 2010, 04:26:18 PM
my womb

it's full of moffat's festering young
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 24, 2010, 04:48:56 PM
Oh wow, best episode of the season so far.  The energy between River Song and the Doctor is excellent, and his wordplay is masterful.  Makes callbacks to Blink and the Library episodes, as well as [spoiler]The Ring[/spoiler].
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 24, 2010, 04:55:41 PM
This was very very good

Also whoa, guess River's from two or three regenerations down the line then, huh?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 24, 2010, 06:05:36 PM
I pooped a little.

Keen observers will notice that her diary is quite a bit slimmer in this episode.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on April 24, 2010, 06:57:57 PM
Keen observers will notice that her diary is quite a bit slimmer in this episode.

:jizz:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 25, 2010, 02:37:11 AM
This was very very good

Also whoa, guess River's from two or three regenerations down the line then, huh?

She clearly knows many regenerations personally, but which one is the one who earns his complete trust (and probably marries him) is unclear. I like the idea of a cheat sheet to keep them all in order.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 25, 2010, 04:43:27 PM
Also whoa, guess River's from two or three regenerations down the line then, huh?

Maybe.  Suggestion seems to be that she's known at least one more version of the Doctor.  (The reference to having pictures of all his regenerations could include earlier versions who she's never met.)  It DOES seem clear that she doesn't know the ORDER of the regenerations -- which explains why she asked #10 if they'd done the crash of the Byzantium yet even though it's #11 she's doing it with.

At any rate, she doesn't know how much the Doctor knows about her.  There's the exchange where they suggest he doesn't know who she is -- maybe he does and she doesn't know it, or maybe whatever knowing his name suggests is only part of the story.

...also, the Doctor's reference to facing the Angels a long time ago supports the theory that a whole lot of time passes between season 4 and the specials.  It's almost certain that he's run into River offscreen at some point in there.

Anyway, very good; everybody really firing on all cylinders on this one.  Fucking wonderful banter, the Angels as scary as ever (and with new powers that are a surprise but never feel like a cheat), and the mystery of River deepens.  This is exactly the kind of thing I was looking forward to seeing in this season.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 25, 2010, 07:23:00 PM
I like the new twist on the dead speaking from beyond the grave in this one with Angel Bob. Sort of a callback to the Library two-parter, and creepy as shit. The way he glibly states that he didn't get away, and the way the angel communicates through his personality is just bone chilling.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 29, 2010, 05:49:20 PM
Okay. That was awesome. How could the weeping angels be scarier? Can't wait for next week. Until then I am obsessively watching episodes of old Doctor Who because SHIT GOD WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME.

If you have any favorites we haven't talked about in the Old Who thread yet, post 'em up there.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 30, 2010, 06:09:07 AM
CRACKPOT THEORY TIME

What if River knows the Doctor's name...because he died and she was in his will?

It fits the dialogue.  "The only time I would tell anybody...the only time I COULD is if I..." -- "Shh.  Spoilers."

Now yes, she has an account of their last meeting together that doesn't say anything about him dying afterward, but...what if he died BEFORE?  Seeing as they keep running into each other out of sequence, she could be there when he died and then still see him many times afterward.

Biggest flaw in my theory, of course, is that the Doctor isn't going to die.  Even hinting at it happening at some point in the future, hinting that the Doctor's story has an end, is counter to the spirit Moffat's going for.  (He mentioned in one of the interviews I linked that he's got a solution for the regeneration limit -- doesn't seem like something you do if you've got a death penciled in.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 01, 2010, 08:28:10 PM
Oh-HO.

I was close, wasn't I?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 01, 2010, 08:50:47 PM
Curiouser and curiouser. Oh Moffat, you card.

Liked the twist of threat in the middle there. There was really not reasonable way for them to get away from that many Angels until that happened.

Also, in the season preview trailer, we see the Doctor running from Angels using a mirror to see in front and behind himself at the same time. This did not happen. Will there be more Angels in our future?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on May 02, 2010, 09:51:40 AM
I think I liked the angels A LOT more when they were a one-shot. This 2 parter is sweet but all the angel inconsistencies are bothering me a lot.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 02, 2010, 03:01:26 PM
See, I don't think it was inconsistent.  Yeah, we see more Angel powers in the new two-parter, but none of them really contradict what we saw in the first one.  I don't really think there's a "Well why didn't they do that before?" moment.  We didn't see them leap out of a TV screen or photo before because nobody filmed or photographed them before; likewise, there were perfectly good explanations for the changes in their appearance (cut off from their power source and slowly dying) and behavior (manipulating emotions, either to make their prey more prone to making mistakes or simply out of sadism).  I guess maybe "nobody looked them in the eye before" is a bit of a stretch.

Also, in the season preview trailer, we see the Doctor running from Angels using a mirror to see in front and behind himself at the same time. This did not happen. Will there be more Angels in our future?

It would also turn his mirror into an Angel.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 02, 2010, 03:25:31 PM
Only until he broke it, and he's careful enough not to look it in the eye.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 02, 2010, 08:33:31 PM
Breaking a mirror doesn't actually prevent it from showing an image.

In fact, it makes it show the image several more times.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 02, 2010, 08:49:33 PM
I'm not sure that a reflected image of an angel would be the same as a stored image of an angel, such as with a picture or a film clip, or even the imprint that was put into Amy. A mirror just reflects light, it doesn't record it, or save it in any way, so I don't think the angel would be able to impart its essence upon it in the same way that it would in those other cases. The only danger would be looking into its eyes, which is a danger no matter what you do.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on May 02, 2010, 08:59:23 PM
those things didn't bother me so much as the angels sending people back into time thing just going away entirely and now they absorb generic "energy".

Also there were definitely security cameras and such in that parking lot that would've captured images of the first angels etc.

Finally, it seems like this swarm of angels is constantly in positions where they are seeing one another which you'd think would be really messing them up, since even a glance mid-step would presumably cause one to fall right over unbalanced.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 02, 2010, 09:31:46 PM
Yeah, the angels seeing one another was definitely over looked.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 02, 2010, 09:32:55 PM
those things didn't bother me so much as the angels sending people back into time thing just going away entirely and now they absorb generic "energy".

They send people back in time TO absorb their energy.  You live your complete life and they steal that energy from you when you die.  Actually jibes quite nicely with the energy source of the crack, which itself destroys people's history so that they never existed.

The fact that they don't send anybody back in time in THIS version is explained in dialogue: they're weakened and desperate.

Also there were definitely security cameras and such in that parking lot that would've captured images of the first angels etc.

Meaning in Blink?  Maybe.  I'd have to watch it again.

Blink never really suggested the Angels had been defeated anyway -- other than the four who surrounded the TARDIS.  In fact it ended with a pretty clear foreboding that there could still be any number of them, anywhere.

Finally, it seems like this swarm of angels is constantly in positions where they are seeing one another which you'd think would be really messing them up, since even a glance mid-step would presumably cause one to fall right over unbalanced.

I'd have to freeze-frame, but I'd bet they were very carefully posed so that they're never actually looking at one another.  As for how they can move around each other without looking, that'd be a pretty simple explanation; they have some other way of sensing each other's presence.  They would have to, if they were going to function as a group.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on May 03, 2010, 12:17:19 AM
Also, the whole angel headlock thing was kind of cool if not for the fact that, hell, nobody in that situation should be blinking. They do. A bunch.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 03, 2010, 01:12:15 AM
One thing I've wondered since Blink is that, if they're completely defenseless in their statue form, why doesn't someone just take a sledge to them while they're stuck that way? The Doctor says being made of stone renders them impervious, but when they change back and you've knocked them to rubble with a hammer, I imagine this would be inconvenient.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 04, 2010, 09:44:09 PM
...so the bit where he comforts Amy, right after escaping the Angels?  He's wearing his coat.  Even though he just lost it.  It's missing again a minute later.

My girlfriend noticed and assumed it was a continuity error, but the fan sites are buzzing with speculation that the Doctor popped back in from the future.

How could he have snuck up on everybody without the TARDIS noise?  Well, it only makes that sound because he leaves the brakes on, you see.

...or it's just a continuity error.  But the idea that the Doctor starts working his way backwards through the season (and maybe catches Amy more than those first two times in 16 years) is much more interesting.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 05, 2010, 06:39:51 PM
I'd say almost certainly a continuity error, but yeah, that would be pretty cool.

He can't travel into his own timeline though, right?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on May 05, 2010, 06:55:02 PM
He, uh, did in Father's Day.  Which is the most canon fucking up episode.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 05, 2010, 07:15:16 PM
Wh- th-

He could've fixed so many problems with this thing then! There's no way that's cannon.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 05, 2010, 08:55:35 PM
It's not that it's physically impossible, it's that it's Against the Rules.  All the shit that went wrong in Father's Day was a result of Rose crossing HER own timeline.

The Doctor's crossed his own timeline multiple times, most notably in the The N Doctors stories, which were framed by the Time Lords saying "It's forbidden to cross your own timeline, but we're going to make you do it just this once because all of time is at risk."

So you know, if there were maybe some sort of giant crack in the fabric of time itself trying to gobble up the universe, that might provide justification.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 08, 2010, 10:18:05 PM
Well, that was fun, if inconsequential.  Some pretty good banter, and I'm finding that I quite like Rory and hope he sticks around for awhile.

It bugs me that nobody, at any time, notes that the vampires' fangs resemble Prisoner Zero's.  Maybe that's significant (people forgetting things, again) or maybe it's just a rather large plot hole.  Francesco DOES throw down a Chekov's Gun when he says Amy looks familiar, but OTOH these particular monsters don't bear any resemblance to Prisoner Zero other than the teeth.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 09, 2010, 04:31:31 AM
I really love this Doctor's ability to cram his foot in his mouth over and over.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on May 09, 2010, 06:00:30 AM
Kind of a goofy episode.  Also doesn't have the urgency that the preceding episode implied it would have?  In Flesh and Stone, the Doctor has an epiphany about the cracks and how Amy might tie into it, which leads into... relationship counselor Doctor?

Really reminded me of the episode Tooth and Claw, with the scene where the Doctor and Amy are excited about running into a mythological monster.  And the scene where [spoiler]Amy beams the sun down on the monster to destroy it[/spoiler]

Dumb ending though, with some terrible CGI thrown in to boot.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 09, 2010, 08:57:52 PM
Really reminded me of the episode Tooth and Claw

Except without any real commentary made about the characters' non-period clothing.  Yeah, they at least change at one point to be less conspicuous, but...Rory's shirt has a photo on it.  A PHOTO.  And nobody in sixteenth-century Venice has anything to say about it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 09, 2010, 10:31:23 PM
Wasn't that long ago explained away as an extension of the chameleon circuit or something? No matter what they're actually wearing, people see them as being appropriately clothed for wherever and whenever they happen to be.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 10, 2010, 04:49:41 PM
But that would remove the rationale for every piece of period clothing any character has ever worn on the show.

Plus, throughout Tooth and Claw people keep acting scandalized at Rose's attire and referring to her as "the naked girl".

(Anyway, the chameleon circuit's never worked quite right anyway, has it?)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 10, 2010, 05:15:48 PM
I guess they're just wildly inconsistent on the subject, also Tooth and Claw sucked.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 15, 2010, 03:15:29 PM
Amy's Choice is my favorite of the season, possibly of the show so far. Great villain, get setup, great dialogue, great everything.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 15, 2010, 09:22:36 PM
No one in the universe hates me as much as you do, eh? Fucking awesome.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: JDigital on May 15, 2010, 09:48:38 PM
i like the one with the daleks

i like dakels
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: jsnlxndrlv on May 15, 2010, 10:49:17 PM
Some friends of ours just had us watch The Girl in the Fireplace, which is the first episode of Dr. Who I've watched start-to-finish. Previously I'd only ever come across random episodes from older seasons that were already half-finished, and I didn't have enough investment to finish the episode.

Having now actually watched a full episode, I really don't know what to think about the franchise. I can't actually tell if I like it...? I feel very ambivalent.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on May 16, 2010, 05:23:02 AM
Which is odd as Girl in the Fireplace is awesome.  Going in cold probably doesn't make a lot of sense, though.  Start with Rose, then work your way up.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 16, 2010, 07:18:09 AM
I dunno if you don't like Girl in the Fireplace then you might want to peace out of this thing. It's about as close to the perfect Doctor Who episode as it gets.

Try out Human Nature and maybe that Silence in the Library two-parter and then MAKE THE CALL
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 17, 2010, 12:10:20 PM
Amy's Choice: not a bad episode.  A little too reminscent of Turn Left (and VERY reminiscent of The Forgotten, a comic miniseries, but I assume that's coincidence as from what I gather most people who work on the show don't even know there's an American comic series).  The twists were a little obvious, but well-executed.

Possibly most interesting was the "What's his name?" callback.  First of all, this is [spoiler]the Doctor himself[/spoiler] hammering on the Doctor's "Trust me" double-standard with Amy, something I've noted before as significant.  And secondly, of course, it's another allusion to the Doctor's name.

His line to River in Forest of the Dead was something like "The only way I would ever tell anybody...the only way I COULD..."  Now, I've been figuring the rest of that sentence is "...is if I were dying."  But the Dream Lord is indicating that that's not the case (or perhaps that the Doctor doesn't mean "could" in a literal, physical sense; he could simply mean "the only way I could bring myself to do it").  Don't know, but I'm sure this isn't the last time we'll hear about it.

(Have I floated my theory yet that the Doctor has to "die" to break the 12-regeneration barrier?)

Anyway, it all worked out pretty well, and seemingly resolved the love triangle AND elevated Rory to a higher status than Mickey's perpetual sad-sack also-ran.  I'm hoping he hangs around for awhile.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 17, 2010, 12:59:59 PM
What? You really didn't like this one?

Comparing this to Turn fucking Left is a crime, Thad.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 17, 2010, 01:23:43 PM
I liked it all right.  Not my favorite of the season but perfectly decent.

You really don't see any similarities to Turn Left?  Companion forced to choose between a life on the TARDIS and a life on Earth, all of which turns out to be caused by [spoiler]a psychic parasite[/spoiler]?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 17, 2010, 01:39:58 PM
I dunno, Turn Left was ALL JUST A DREAM whereas Amy's Choice was a shared experience based on and around elements of all characters, with the Doctor himself as the antagonist. I see one as fairly significant and interesting character development, and the other as a throwaway one-off filler episode.

Donna just dreamed all that because of SPACE BEETLE, here, it was something they, or even just the Doctor, was actively doing. Like this is their subconscious made manifest, rather than a bullshit Voyager episode revolving entirely around showing off Martha as some kind of future badass and not, you know, the character we actually know up until that point.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 17, 2010, 09:12:53 PM
I dunno, Turn Left was ALL JUST A DREAM whereas Amy's Choice was a shared experience based on and around elements of all characters, with the Doctor himself as the antagonist. I see one as fairly significant and interesting character development, and the other as a throwaway one-off filler episode.

Hardly throwaway filler.  It was pretty essential in developing the "why the Doctor needs companions" meme.

Donna just dreamed all that because of SPACE BEETLE

Which is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from space ROCKS.  I mean, duh.  One's a beetle, the other is rocks.

here, it was something they, or even just the Doctor, was actively doing.

"Actively doing" mostly means running and arguing.

Like this is their subconscious made manifest, rather than a bullshit Voyager episode revolving entirely around showing off Martha as some kind of future badass and not, you know, the character we actually know up until that point.

I wouldn't say that was the thrust of Turn Left at all.  Turn Left was "What if the Doctor didn't have somebody to tell him to calm the fuck down?"  And was much more a Donna episode than a Martha episode.

But yeah, certainly this one was better, and got into the characters' psyches more.  I mean, we don't really learn anything we didn't already know about Rory, but Amy's fire and the Doctor's self-doubt and self-loathing were front-and-center.


Other thoughts: is the title of every episode mentioned in the episode dialogue?  That's why I'm going to have to become Superman IV: The Quest for Peace.

It also seems like the opening titles change very slightly too (both the visuals and the sound levels), but I could be full of shit on that.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 18, 2010, 07:02:57 AM
Actively doing in the sense that the Doctor's subconscious was actively trying to kill himself and Rory, whom he wanted out of the picture. The Doctor himself was the actual antagonist this time around, which made the Dream Master hugely interesting (at least to me). I like that someone as intelligent and observant as him could be villainishly manipulative if he was just slightly more selfish. As if for the Doctor to be as good as he is, he has to carry just as much potential to be a petty dominating fucker - it's just a matter of how he uses the power he has.

The Dream Master is actually what I wished the Master was - an selfish Doctor motivated by petty self-interest and jealousy rather than some cartoonishly evil cosmic dominance plan. This villain uses all that he knows and learns to manipulate where the Doctor uses it to selflessly aid others.

Donna just dreamed all that because of SPACE BEETLE

Which is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from space ROCKS.  I mean, duh.  One's a beetle, the other is rocks.

I suppose it would be better to say one is a WHAT IF THE DOCTOR DIED one-shot whereas the other is what is actually happening in the Doctor's head right now. One carries some kind of lasting implications for the future while the other is tidily resolved and disregarded by prying a beetle off her back.

Also I'm still not convinced that the space rocks were actually the cause of it all. When he brought those out, my first thought was that he's lying to the two of them to cover up something he's ashamed of. It did seem mighty convenient of him to just wake up and find the cause of the problem immediately, whisking it out the door along with everything else that had happened. Could just be over thinking it, though.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 20, 2010, 08:58:19 PM
The Dream Master is actually what I wished the Master was - an selfish Doctor motivated by petty self-interest and jealousy rather than some cartoonishly evil cosmic dominance plan.

So, the Rani.

Mind, I've only seen one Rani serial, and it sucked.  But that's still pretty much the basis of her character.

Actually, damn near every evil Time Lord.

Not a bad thing to have the Doctor fill that role, necessarily, especially given that no OTHER evil Time Lords are likely to show up in the immediate future.

Incidentally, a bit of elaboration on The Forgotten, since I appear to be the only one who's read it: the Doctor loses his memory of his previous regenerations but finds himself in a museum full of their artifacts; as he slowly goes through them he recovers his memories (and tells a neat little eight-page story for each version of himself that involves the artifact and some sort of theme).

There's some sort of evil shadowy figure with a goatee manipulating him; obvious red herring is that it's the Master, but when he finally shows himself, he's actually the Doctor himself, WITH AN EVIL GOATEE!  CLIFFHANGER ENDING!  Except no, it's actually another bug, and the whole thing's happening in the Doctor's head.  And he manifests his previous companions and, finally, all ten versions of himself in a big two-page spread that would have been more awesome if Pia Guerra hadn't had to leave halfway through the series and leave it to a less talented artist.

Anyway, again, I don't think the guy who wrote this ep is even aware of the comic, and it's most likely a big coincidence, but the "Whole thing is happening in his head and is a reflection of his subconscious" thing was used to pretty great effect there.

I suppose it would be better to say one is a WHAT IF THE DOCTOR DIED one-shot whereas the other is what is actually happening in the Doctor's head right now. One carries some kind of lasting implications for the future while the other is tidily resolved and disregarded by prying a beetle off her back.

Well, but I think both resolve around the dark side of the Doctor, too.  In Turn Left, the Doctor's dark side leads to his own doom because nobody's there to pull him back from the brink.  This one's different in that it's the Doctor himself who figures everything out at the last second (which seems to be #11's trademark, even moreso than the previous versions'), but I think it's safe to say Amy's selflessness affects his realization -- it's her name in the title, after all.

I think it's all part of the same "the Doctor needs his companions to help keep his darkness at bay" thing.

Except this time, they seem to be feeding his darkness, at well.  Or at least his guilt for how he treats them is.

Also I'm still not convinced that the space rocks were actually the cause of it all. When he brought those out, my first thought was that he's lying to the two of them to cover up something he's ashamed of. It did seem mighty convenient of him to just wake up and find the cause of the problem immediately, whisking it out the door along with everything else that had happened. Could just be over thinking it, though.

Hm, I like that theory a whole lot better.  But any way you slice it, it's a pretty great picture of the Doctor's doubt and self-loathing, and we're going to see that develop a good bit over the remainder of the season.  Smith said in an interview that he thinks the Doctor is running to get away from the darkness and the blood on his hands; I think that's certainly been true of all three versions in the new series.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 22, 2010, 10:54:03 PM
This one is fun, but I admit I raged when I realized it was a two-parter. I need instant gratification, god damn it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on May 23, 2010, 07:11:27 AM
I'm not looking forward to intrigued geologist woman dying a horrible death.  :(
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 23, 2010, 09:49:01 PM
What are YOU doing here?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 24, 2010, 04:13:28 AM
You know, I was thoroughly uninterested in the mystery they've got going on here, but I'm somehow still enjoying the hell out of this. I think it speak a lot to the strength of the cast right now.

I love all of these characters.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 24, 2010, 06:10:14 AM
It's not really a mystery anyway. Like, the Beast Below was kind of a mystery, but this one gets more or less solved in the first half hour of a two part episode.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 24, 2010, 05:39:42 PM
But it's still dropping hints in the overarching narrative.

I'm about 99% sure that Amy and Rory's future selves are going to be important later.

I think the Doctor's observation that time can be rewritten is at the core of what's going on here, and I suspect that Moffat's setting up a Prisoner-of-Azkaban-the-Movie-style story where we're seeing events from one perspective and will see them from another perspective later on.

Sort of like Bad Wolf, except less stupid.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 24, 2010, 06:33:11 PM
But it's still dropping hints in the overarching narrative.

I'm about 99% sure that Amy and Rory's future selves are going to be important later.

I think the Doctor's observation that time can be rewritten is at the core of what's going on here, and I suspect that Moffat's setting up a Prisoner-of-Azkaban-the-Movie-style story where we're seeing events from one perspective and will see them from another perspective later on.

Sort of like Bad Wolf, except less stupid.

God, I hope so. I would fucking love a solid time travel plot in the season finale.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on May 24, 2010, 07:12:10 PM
Woah woah woah, time travel in Doctor Who?  Ludicrous.  Next you'll hope for more outer space or strange world adventures, rather than 5 out of 7 stories taking place on Earth.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 24, 2010, 08:46:10 PM
And where the fuck is Amy's mom?  I want several hours of each season to be devoted to the companion's mom, god dammit!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 24, 2010, 10:29:00 PM
If they actually did that it WOULD be pretty fantastic.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on May 30, 2010, 02:16:28 PM
 :sadpanda:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 30, 2010, 04:58:31 PM
Decent enough episode, fantastic ending.

TWEEEST
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on May 30, 2010, 07:52:38 PM
[spoiler]lulling us into a false sense of security with such an old fashioned set of episodes was a dick move.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on June 01, 2010, 08:12:29 AM
Space fish and lizard men, woo, this is some good, safe Doctor-HOLY SHIT
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 05, 2010, 11:35:02 AM
The first adventure game is available, but, like the streaming episodes, the download page is region-locked.  So if you want the game, pretty much get it however you get the episodes.

(Hell, given that the game's a free download, you're doing the Beeb's servers a favor if you torrent it even if you're in the UK.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on June 06, 2010, 09:50:51 AM
Generally speaking, my least favorite episodes of Doctor Who are those where The Doctor and his current companion have an adventure with some historical figure. They're usually corny and terrible. That said, I really enjoyed this latest episode. There aren't any earth-shattering spoilers in this one, I didn't even see any cracks, but it still manages to be very good. There are a few good callbacks to recent events, but other than that it's more or less stand alone in nature.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on June 06, 2010, 10:46:33 AM
I liked how I thought the ending was a little too overdone until I realized it was the director of Love, Actually and then it all made sense.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Kayma on June 07, 2010, 01:29:48 PM
The first adventure game is available, but, like the streaming episodes, the download page is region-locked.  So if you want the game, pretty much get it however you get the episodes.

Even if you net the installer, it checks your IP there as well. Looks like I need a pair of proxy pants.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 07, 2010, 04:13:05 PM
Oh uh and be careful, guys, as apparently a bunch of people are bundling malware (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/07/doctor_who_game_pirates/) with it (or pretending to be it).
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 10, 2010, 09:53:05 PM
Morning Spoilers (http://io9.com/5559711/the-marvel-movies-get-their-logos-but-dont-get-too-attached-to-those-indiana-jones-5-rumors) posts hints on The Lodger, quoting SFX (http://www.sfx.co.uk/2010/06/09/the-lodger-preview/).

Quote
A certain face shows up for the fourth time this series; another for a third; and others for a second time

As the io9 writer comments, that's almost certainly the preceding 10 Doctors; we've seen Hartnell three times, Troughton twice, and the rest once.

While I think the io9 guy's theory that it's building toward a Four Doctors crossover is farfetched (and, in fairness, he seems to think so too), it DOES seem like the previous incarnations bit has been repeated often enough that it's gone from being a fun bit of fan service to Probably Important.  Plus, we've got River Song knowing all the Doctor's past selves, the Doctor fighting himself, a piece of the TARDIS on the other side of the crack, and River being all set to kill him -- yeah, I think regeneration/legacy/identity/self are going to be very important themes in the finale.

(And while I think it's still too early in Smith's run for a Big Doctor Team-Up Story -- ESPECIALLY one with Tennant, who hasn't been out of the role for SIX MONTHS yet -- this COULD all potentially lay groundwork for one a few years down the road.  Fiftieth anniversary is in 2013...)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on June 12, 2010, 04:44:58 PM
Sir Patrick Stewart Vs James Corden in awkward fight at awards ceremony! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyNvyn0mBXY#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mongrel on June 12, 2010, 04:47:37 PM
Stewart's expression at 1:20 is made of SOLID GOLD TESTICLES.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on June 13, 2010, 08:36:48 PM
Holy shit, were those [spoiler]OG Cybermen in the teaser for next week?[/spoiler].

As for this episode, solid, but clearly filler.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 13, 2010, 09:44:16 PM
As for this episode, solid, but clearly filler.

Which describes most anything with Gareth Roberts's name on it, really.  He puts out solid, dependable work that's consistent but not stellar.

That said, this might be the single best season in the history of Doctor Who.  I'd rank Smith, at this point, as good but not as good as his predecessors (that could change; Tennant had 4 years to perfect the role) -- somewhere in the middle -- but this season has been consistently good.  I mean, the low points are, what, Daleks and Wind Fish?  Which were still perfectly decent.  There hasn't been a bad episode in the bunch.

Of course, Moffat could pull a Davies and crash and burn in the finale.  But somehow I doubt it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on June 14, 2010, 12:16:44 AM
This was probably the funniest episode in a long while. The scenes of the Doctor trying to be normal and just failing miserably are fantastic, and occasionally laugh out loud funny. I think Smith is being elevated by good writing, whereas Tennant elevated mostly mediocre writing.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 14, 2010, 07:33:22 PM
I WAS NOT EXPECTING THIS
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on June 14, 2010, 09:02:46 PM
Oh god, loved this episode. One of my favorites!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Kayma on June 14, 2010, 09:45:42 PM
Well, I'm finally caught up. I absolutely adored Tennant as the doctor, but Smith has grown on me faster than I could've imagined. I agree with Thad: Smith's not my favorite Doctor yet, but this series has such a high quality level it's kind of incredible.

It's... hard not being able to binge anymore. :(
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 15, 2010, 09:19:51 PM
That's what Netflix is for.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on June 15, 2010, 09:57:47 PM
One of you briefly increase the rate of linear time so we can get the next episode. Fuck.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on June 15, 2010, 11:32:04 PM
Is this how time usually passes?  Really, really slowly?  In the right order?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 19, 2010, 10:35:41 PM
I would have sex with Steven Moffat.  It wouldn't even be gay.  It would just be, you know, respect.



A fairly non-spoilery observation: It is now clear that, when Moffat said he was going to focus on new monsters instead of bringing back old ones, he was telling a half-truth at best.  We should probably take all his "I'm not going to do any multi-Doctor episodes (probably)" protestations with a similar grain of salt.

Fiftieth anniversary is in 3 years.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on June 20, 2010, 01:09:07 AM
So, was that a two parter, or a season ending cliffhanger, because that is some "I am Locutus of Borg" shit right there if it's the latter.

Steven Moffat showing how a finale ought to be done in either case. [spoiler]Everything and everyone in the worst possible position but you don't know it until the very end and the suspense just builds and builds over the course of the episode until it all comes together and your head blows off.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 20, 2010, 12:50:20 PM
There's one more.

Yeah, very good job of getting all the pieces in place -- not just in this episode but doing a tour of the entire season to show how it all fits together.  I DO think it was a bit of Idiot Ball that the Doctor didn't realize [spoiler]he was the most dangerous thing in the universe, especially after Amy's Choice[/spoiler].  Also, I don't think we'll be seeing the payoff of [spoiler]River killing the Doctor[/spoiler], as [spoiler]she was already in prison at the beginning of the episode[/spoiler].  So that's one major piece of foreshadowing that I think will move into the next season.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on June 20, 2010, 01:34:28 PM
[spoiler]I saw the Doctor being the most dangerous thing in the universe almost from the first mention of the supposed purpose of the Pandorica, but that it was a trap rather than an already occupied prison did manage to catch me by surprise.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 20, 2010, 02:33:45 PM
Right, same here.  Expected they'd open it up to find [spoiler]the Doctor already inside.  Or possibly the Dream Lord.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Kayma on June 20, 2010, 02:40:09 PM
Stray thought after watching this last episode about what happens next: [spoiler]Maybe these guys just accidentally saved the doctor by stuffing him inside Space Fort Knox while the Universe explodes?[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on June 20, 2010, 03:07:53 PM
[spoiler]That's about the only thing I can figure to get the Duke Boys out of this one. I wonder if this is another case of this Doctor having figured out what's going on (ie His question to Amy about whether or not it ever bothers her that her life makes no sense) and that locking him away prevented him from saving the Universe, and he'll have to find some way to do that after escaping the Pandorica because really, "confirmed the extent of his capabilities"? I think not. I really wonder what this means for Amy. Is she even real? Will this be the one Companion per season thing again, and this is her exit point? All very fascinating, and for once not just two hours of unmitigated fan-wank[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 21, 2010, 05:16:19 PM
Among other things Johnston points out on his weekly Doctor Who spoilers (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2010/06/20/ten-thoughts-about-doctor-who-the-pandorica-opens/): the Doctor's line, in Flesh and Stone, "There's one thing you don't put into a trap -- and that’s ME."
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on June 22, 2010, 06:15:41 PM
Okay, THAT is how you do a part 1.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on June 26, 2010, 03:45:24 PM
Okay, THAT is how you do a part 1.

Also, probably, a part 2.

Way to fold in some silly shit we already knew damn well weren't continuity errors. Also, the whole "Man, Rory's kind of a pathetic ass" thing is well undermined by the "yeah, but he's a pathetic ass who waits around being heroic for a couple thousand years while dressed like a Roman" thing. Big fun all around, and a whole hell of a lot less of the kind of not really very good stuff I was starting to take for granted with this thing. But still a little of that. At least the Doc isn't a complete and total self-insertion aspie fantasy this time around. Just mostly.

Hell, the girlfriend has been watching these things of her own accord after I exposed her to the better bits, and now I get to be all "I told you so! You know, about that thing with the giant cyberman stomping Victorian shitsville! Will you listen to me now?"

Also liking that the cause of all this nonsense wasn't completely wrapped up. You know you're getting another season. Go ahead and drag a few things. I'll wait.

Probably should have thrown in some spoiler tags, but I guess I'll leave it to Thad. That's whatchacall delegating, I think.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on June 26, 2010, 04:56:56 PM
A week is the statute of limitations on Doctor Who spoilers anyway. Also, downloading part 2 right now.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on June 26, 2010, 05:55:25 PM
This was fantastic.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on June 26, 2010, 06:08:51 PM
[spoiler]So apparently Sharkey's spoilers were so ambiguous I thought he was talking about the previous episode. Anyway, holy fucking shit, awesome episode. The only problem is that, instead of leaving me sort of worn out on the whole Doctor Who thing for awhile, long enough for a new season to roll around anyway, right now I have a huge Doctor Who boner that won't be satisfied in the least until December[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Kayma on June 26, 2010, 08:41:52 PM
I, too, am experiencing a[spoiler] continuing Doctor Who erection[/spoiler] not unlike, I assume, Bal's.

Fezes are cool.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on June 26, 2010, 08:50:32 PM
I'll have to get a new Fez...
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 27, 2010, 10:34:25 AM
The only problem is that, instead of leaving me sort of worn out on the whole Doctor Who thing for awhile, long enough for a new season to roll around anyway, right now I have a huge Doctor Who boner that won't be satisfied in the least until December

We're getting 4 games and a 2-part Sarah Jane episode.

(Well, 3 more games.  But I still haven't set up the first one.)

(EDIT: Make that 2 more; the second episode has posted.  The PC version, anyway; the Mac version's due out Wednesday.)

Anyway: yeah, I'm standing by the "best season out of all 31 of them" evaluation.  Just great shit.  A little slow on the whole "I'm dying" bit, but the payoff, and the importance of Amy's wedding, were quite good indeed.

And plenty to whet our appetites for the coming year.  Sounds like River's going to be front-and-center again soon, and if I had to guess I'd say that's Liz X we'll be seeing again come December.

(I still think the "Nobody remembers the Cyberman" wasn't deliberate on Rusty's part so much as Moffat using the cracks to retroactively explain every single plothole in the history of the series.  Which I kinda love.)

But on the whole?  Sure, it was clearly the conclusion of a 13-episode story arc, but it didn't trip all over itself trying to be an ENDING like Rusty's finales always did.  If there were a new episode next week, it would fit right in.

So!  Anybody got City of the Daleks running?  I've got it downloaded but since I need to set up a proxy to install it, and since I'm wary of the torrent I grabbed because apparently some of them have trojans, I might re-download.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on June 27, 2010, 03:20:09 PM
Well, that was awesome. Loved part one too, but part two was less RTD-style excess and more just plain exactly what I want to see from Doctor Who. Fezzes ARE cool.
Anybody got City of the Daleks running?  I've got it downloaded but since I need to set up a proxy to install it, and since I'm wary of the torrent I grabbed because apparently some of them have trojans, I might re-download.
Might be able to set you up on our VPN for this purpose. But I won't even be on the same continent as the server for another two weeks, so if you've got aspirations of playing that thing any time soon then some proxy fiddling seems to be the way to go.

I've not tried the games yet and don't really know all that much about them apart from the blocky graphics somehow seem to be able to render Matt Smith's horse face perfectly. Could be good for a Who fix now the series is over. Are they canon?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on June 27, 2010, 03:38:49 PM
Thad I'm kind of horrified that you are apparently following Sarah Jane Adventures. This is like Doctor Who Extreme all over again!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 27, 2010, 09:56:37 PM
Might be able to set you up on our VPN for this purpose. But I won't even be on the same continent as the server for another two weeks, so if you've got aspirations of playing that thing any time soon then some proxy fiddling seems to be the way to go.

Will keep it in mind, but I think they're supposed to start getting US releases within the next few weeks.

Are they canon?

I'm solidly in the "who gives a fuck" camp, but they've played them up like they are.  My guess is the most we'll ever see them referred to on the show are wink-and-nod one-liners, though.

Thad I'm kind of horrified that you are apparently following Sarah Jane Adventures. This is like Doctor Who Extreme all over again!

Not following it, no.  I've only seen the two-parter with the Brigadier and the two-parter with the Tenth Doctor.

[spoiler]The best parts were the Brigadier and the Tenth Doctor.[/spoiler]

...Oh hey, 5000th post.  How 'bout that.  Wonder when people will stop talking about how I'm never here?  Probably about the same time they stop talking about how I'm constantly banning people and locking threads.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on June 28, 2010, 06:28:24 AM
As an aside Thad this overmoderation kick of yours simply must stop.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mongrel on June 28, 2010, 06:53:47 AM
Your words are wasted Mothra, Thad is clearly MAD WITH POWER.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 28, 2010, 09:13:10 PM
Couldn't get the game to install under Windows even with proxy set up for some reason.  I've seen reports that it works in Wine, but for me it just hung with an empty progress bar.

Mac version works.  Authentication was one-time; game works fine without a proxy after installation.  So, assuming the Windows version is the same way, the comparisons to Ubisoft DRM I've seen are grossly exaggerated.

Not a bad little game for its budget.  Stealth's not my favorite genre but it's really the one that makes the most sense given that Daleks are unstoppable killing machines with a very narrow field of vision.  (Would be nice if the subsequent episodes took on different styles of play depending on the enemy, but I'm guessing they won't.)

Got through the first act, which had some neat opening visuals but then took place mostly in a subway.  Made it to Skaro; the room you materialize in reminds me pleasantly of the cell where the Doctor and his companions were held in the first Dalek serial.

There's a line in there about how they've fixed the place up since he was there last.  Wonder if he's referring to a specific serial or if it's some as-yet-untold story in the Time War.

I don't think they've revealed the monsters for the remaining two eps yet.  Silurians are a safe bet given their prominence in this past season.  I'd guess either Sontarans or Autons for the remaining episode, flesh out what they're doing prior to the finale a bit.

Also: How many fucking Doctors are running around 1963 London, anyway?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 03, 2010, 07:53:23 PM
Finished ep 1.  Decent enough; not great, not too bad.  Not an important entry into canon or anything (the plot can probably be summed up in 3-4 sentences), and it's best not to try to think about things like why a Dalek who just saw the Doctor would remain stationary and eventually go off alert if he walked away for a minute.

Best thing about it is the atmosphere of the environments; unfortunately, in fine Doctor Who tradition, it takes some very cool locales and turns them into running along identical corridors.  Yeah, I know this isn't big-budget, but I was hoping to actually get to EXPLORE the Dalek city, not just see it out a window.

On the plus side, they have a bit of fun with the time travel aspect; you visit the Dalek city after it's been rebuilt, and then go back in time to when it's still in ruins.

Also, Amy starts fading out due to the Daleks changing history, and this actually becomes a kind of neat gameplay mechanic.

Again, nothing spectacular, but you can kill an hour or two with it.

And Ep 2's out now; haven't tried it yet but I read a review that said it's better.  Apparently not as many bad Mass Effect-style minigames.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on July 03, 2010, 09:24:45 PM
What was the plot? I'm curious if this was a RTD Doctor Who formula to the letter or something slightly more interesting.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 05, 2010, 03:01:34 PM
Doctor and Amy go to 1963 London to see the Beatles; find it turned into a charred wasteland and humanity wiped out.  The Daleks aren't supposed to be able to change history on such a scale; the Doctor goes to Skaro to investigate and finds that they've gotten their hands on some kind of Time Lord MacGuffin.  He travels back in time and destroys it before they can use it.

It IS all a bit RTD (complete with sky full of Daleks in orderly lines), but it doesn't have his air of trying too hard and taking himself way too seriously.

As far as timeline: no Rory, so it's probably between Victory of the Daleks and Time of Angels.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 12, 2010, 07:52:22 PM
Episode 2 is better than Episode 1.  Pretty standard "excavation digs up Cybermen in the Arctic" story.  Not much to it; easy to breeze right through.  You wouldn't think Arctic caves and bases would be a more interesting environment than a Dalek city, but they are.

Hits a bit of a sour note in the last act.  I know any video game requires a certain amount of suspension of disbelief, but...who the fuck builds a lift that requires one person to operate it while the other rides it?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on July 20, 2010, 11:49:18 PM
It's okay if you just call it an elevator.

Also, I'm almost thinking of playing these damn things because none of the other major sites are bothering to review them. Probably not even on account of they're not out over here, but man, it'd be fun if someone yelled at me for stealing from the BBC and jumping release date with a writeup.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on July 21, 2010, 05:52:29 AM
You could always claim time travel.  That would be cheeky and meta or something.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 23, 2010, 10:11:17 PM
In addition to the basic :hurr:-ness of the lifts, there are certain universe rules you shouldn't break just so you can resort to lazy genre tropes.  To wit: the Doctor should never, ever have to look for a fucking keycard.

MEANWHILE, IN RADIOLAND:

An Earthly Child has some good character moments and a whole lot bubbling under the surface but it's largely a wasted opportunity.

It's an Eighth Doctor story, and goddamned if I have any more of a bead on him after listening to it than I did before.  He's a perfectly decent line reader, and when there's good dialogue he delivers it well.  That's pretty much all I can say about him at this point.

The story, as you can probably infer from the title (leastways if you've spent a bit of time on the original series), features the return of Susan -- and the introduction of her son Alex (played by McGann's son).

The story picks up 30 years after The Dalek Invasion of Earth.  Human civilization has still not recovered; technology is stranded somewhere back in the mid-twentieth century (which I suppose is a decent enough retroactive explanation for why they didn't have cell phones in 2050).

A lot of the plot beats show promise.  Alex as a young member of an anti-alien extremist group is a nice touch, but it forces some serious suspension of disbelief -- Susan never told him she was an alien?  Really?  The Doctor's great-grandson doesn't know what a TARDIS is?

Susan's arc fares a bit better: she's an eloquent voice arguing that the Earth should solicit help from aliens, that they're not all evil -- and then she proceeds to beg for help from the first aliens she can contact, who of course turn out to be monsters intent on conquering the Earth.

From there, though, it's kinda lame.  The monsters are lame, the plot is predictable and often contrived, and really the whole thing feels pretty rote.

On the plus side, the reunion between Susan and the Doctor is quite satisfying.  There's a brief acknowledgement of The Five Doctors, and a good bit of banter about how that was already three regenerations ago now.  The show raises the question of how Susan had a baby by a human, and never actually answers it, and the fan-wanky question of "Is Susan a Time Lady, or are there Gallifreyans who aren't Time Lords?" is skirted.  (That said, the TV series has hinted pretty strongly that she was killed in the Time War along with the rest of them -- a subject never broached in this story but which pretty much has to be implicit in any post-2005 Eighth Doctor story.)

The ending's pretty satisfying too -- predictable as hell, sure, but the subtext plays out nicely.  The Doctor doesn't come off so well here; he's plenty needy in begging his family to travel the universe with him, but you know as well as Susan does that as soon as he's gone he's going to forget about her for another 25 years.  That much is overt in the dialogue, but really the whole story plays out as something of an indictment of the Doctor's wanderlust and distractibility -- he leaves his granddaughter in a postwar wasteland and then just takes off and leaves the survivors to fend for themselves, not popping back in until 30 years later when he's in the neighborhood and gets a distress call reminding him that, oh yeah, things are still pretty shitty here.

Anyhow, real potential in this one, but most of it's left unrealized.  A sequel could be neat but it's probably not a good idea to hold your breath.

Don't think it's actually available for purchase on this continent, so I can't really give a recommendation; I'd definitely say it's not worth the import price.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 20, 2010, 04:26:56 PM
So apparently the first two Adventure Games got an international release a few weeks back and are available at Direct2Drive (http://www.direct2drive.com/2/9642/product/Buy-Doctor-Who:-The-Adventure-Games---Episode-1-and-2-Download) for $5 (for both of them).  Not a bad price at all; I feel like I should probably pay for them since I played them.  Haven't been able to find any info on DRM as yet.

Third game, TARDIS, is due out next week; should have simultaneous international release but not simultaneous Mac release.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: JDigital on August 21, 2010, 08:01:22 AM
Neil Gaiman posts a scene cut from an upcoming Doctor Who episode (http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2010/08/turned-up-to-eleven.html).
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 01, 2010, 08:20:41 PM
Next season will do what current season of Venture Bros is doing and be two mini-seasons (http://io9.com/5624739/the-next-season-of-doctor-who-will-be-split-into-two-parts).

Moffat's still hammering away at the importance of all the Doctors being the same person; I'm sure it's going to be an important plot point coming up.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on September 02, 2010, 08:29:42 PM
Apparently artist Rob Davis and writer Dan McDaid had made a Will Eisner-esque Tenth Doctor story for a collection that doesn't seem like it'll hit the light of day anytime soon, but it's popped up online: The Deep Hearafter (http://dinlos.blogspot.com/2010/09/heres-deep-hereafter.html)

I have no idea who that companion is, though.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 10, 2010, 08:28:28 PM
Via io9:

Season 6/7 teases (http://lifetheuniverseandcombom.blogspot.com/2010/09/doctor-who-season-67-spoilers-from.html) from something called the Doctor Who Brilliant Book 2011.  Highlights:

Quote
Scared of the eye in space? You should be.

Sounds like the guys from ep 1.  They DID kinda leave that whole Prisoner Zero thing hanging.

Quote
Bow Street Runners are cool.
Some lies are too much for the psychic paper.
What awaits the TARDIS at the zero point.
"How could a fellow Gallifreyan stoop so low?"
The Doctor will get married - twice.
Pay attention - its not really her.
The bones of the TARDIS.

There's more at the link.

Meanwhile, the next we'll be seeing of #11 is in an episode of Sarah Jane next month.

io9 (http://io9.com/5658727/dan-aykroyd-promises-ghostbusters-3-will-happen-plus-the-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo-could-be-the-new-ripley) has a synopsis and some conjecture on what it means:

Quote
Quote
As [Sarah and Jo] reminisce, viewers of the show will watch video flashbacks of previous Time Lords William Hartnell, Patrick Troughton, Jon Pertwee and Tom Baker, whilst their iconic nemeses The Daleks, Sea Devils, Sontarans and Davros also make a return.

In case anyone is wondering how Jo and Sarah Jane are going to reminisce about two Doctors they never met, I'd guess we'll be seeing clips from the Third Doctor and Jo adventure "The Three Doctors," which was William Hartnell's one brief return to the show.

I've pointed out before that Moffat's gone back to the "showing previous Doctors" well so many times that it has to be more than fanwank, he has to be building to something with it.  Especially given his repeated emphasis in interviews of how important it is to remember there's only one Doctor; they're all the same person.  And I think it all ties in to a hint he dropped in an interview I read that he'd resolve the regeneration cap sometime during his run on the show.

To wit, there are some teases on the ep in question (http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/s47/sarah-jane-adventures/tubetalk/a280005/ten-teasers-about-death-of-the-doctor.html), including:

Quote
1. Doctors 1, 2, 3, 4, 10 and 11 all make an appearance.
[...]
6. The Doctor doesn't have to be white. And he can regenerate more than 12 times - a lot more!

So while this is a Rusty episode, and a spinoff at that, it definitely sounds like it fits in with Moffat's grand plan.

Course, the biggest thing hanging at the end of last season was...who blew up the TARDIS?  We heard repeated mentions of "the Silence" in the last season; that's certainly got something to do with it.  As for what it is, I'm guessing an alien race with a childhood-fear theme, along the lines of the Vashta Nerada.

And then of course there's River.  I read an interview where Moff said this season is it, we'll find out who she really is.

Months to go before any of that, of course.  But the Sarah Jane ep sounds like fun.

Oh, also:

Quote
8. Jo Jones (née Grant) has 7 children and (almost) 13 grandchildren.

So RTD DID manage to restrain himself and let Jo keep her happy ending instead of shoehorning her into his "every companion ends up sad and broken" narrative.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on October 12, 2010, 10:52:15 AM
Any word on the Christmas special?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on October 12, 2010, 07:19:40 PM
And I think it all ties in to a hint he dropped in an interview I read that he'd resolve the regeneration cap sometime during his run on the show.

Yeah, apparently by just ignoring it (http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2010/oct/12/doctor-who-immortal-reveals-bbc?CMP=twt_gu)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on October 14, 2010, 03:08:38 AM
Look what I bumped in to on my travels

(http://image.cdnl3.xosnetwork.com/pics31/0/WZ/WZUAHQWULKRPVRZ.20101011135151.png)

Thought I'd stumbled across some filming, but it turned out the real story is that the Metropolitan Police decided to bring back police boxes fifteen years ago, built this one and dumped it in Earl's Court, then realised the whole thing was a dumb idea.

Also turns out I have brain problems or something, because I swear I've never seen it before despite living here for years.

...sorry that this is barely relevant to anything.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 14, 2010, 06:36:32 AM
Yeah, apparently by just ignoring it (http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2010/oct/12/doctor-who-immortal-reveals-bbc?CMP=twt_gu)

See, I find it weird that everybody's responding to that article by assuming that just because it's a throwaway line in a spinoff means it won't be explained in the main series.  It's a pretty big deal (for the older fans, anyway -- and, lest we forget, the show is now run by one), AND Moffat can't go three episodes without showing us a picture of William Hartnell.

I see the Sarah Jane reveal (and that article, for that matter) as all part of a slow build.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 25, 2010, 07:00:58 PM
The Sarah Jane Adventures: Death of the Doctor, Part 1

This one was a lot of fun.  There's rather a good bit at the beginning where Rani's dad talks about the nature of grieving -- one of the quieter, more sensitive pieces of dialogue I've seen RTD produce -- but the fun really starts when Jo shows up.  She rattles off a bunch of details of her life that are perfectly in keeping with where we last saw her in The Green Death; she's got a big happy family of globetrotting environmental activists.  Points off for a maudlin moment where she's sad when she finds out the Doctor came to see Sarah Jane but not her, but aside from that their interaction is positively lovely; they reminisce about the old days and talk like old friends because they know each other so well by reputation and common experience even though they've never met.  And both of them immediately suspect they're being played and the Doctor is still alive.

And of course they are and of course he is, as revealed by the alien vulture people who have rather a neat design but very cheap-looking costumes even by Doctor Who standards (BBC budget cuts at work).  And the vulture people are evil, despite Rani's earlier admonition not to judge a book by its cover -- so remember kids, the moral of the story is, you SHOULD judge people by their appearance.

Smith doesn't show up until the last few minutes but makes a great entrance and gives some great delivery to some fun dialogue.  And then, hey, cliffhanger, see you tomorrow.  But I quite liked this one!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on October 25, 2010, 09:05:00 PM
That's a damn fine matte painting of the UNIT base.

EDIT: [spoiler]Next time on the Sarah Jane Smith adventures, UNIT agent goes rogue. My god it's like I'm really watching a Jo era episode. What we need now is for the TARDIS to materialize in that special quarry that's on every planet[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 25, 2010, 09:34:35 PM
That's a damn fine matte painting of the UNIT base.

I predict that in next week's episode, the facade will come off to reveal a giant skull and we will discover that Dr. Wily was behind everything the whole time!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on October 25, 2010, 11:28:14 PM
Luckily The Doctor already has the perfect weapon to use against Doorman.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on November 06, 2010, 07:14:02 AM
Second part is out. This may be old news, but I just remembered I was waiting for it. Matt Smith is good, and there's a great bit of him talking to Jo about his never showing up again, and we get an exact, probably false, number of times The Doctor can regenerate.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 06, 2010, 01:01:52 PM
Yeah, it actually aired the day after the first part.

Anyhow, yeah, I think he's bullshitting on the number of regenerations, but I still don't think we've heard the last of it.

The Jo scene was a highlight; I love the indication that he visited all his old companions, not just the ones we saw.  Also loved Sarah's ending list of what happened to all the rest who are still on Earth.

The reunion eps have been pretty fun so far.  I'd love to see Brig come back, though of course he's 80 and not in consistently good health (which is why they subbed Yates in for him on the new Fourth Doctor radio series last year).  And of course I maintain hope for a big 50th anniversary teamup with all the surviving Doctors, but can't say I actually expect it to happen.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on November 06, 2010, 01:08:47 PM
I probably should have known it had aired awhile ago, but every aspect of the show that isn't The Doctor is tragically The Sarah Jane Smith Adventures, which is unremittingly dull, so I kind of forgot for awhile that there was a second part that I should probably watch because it was guaranteed to have much more Doctor.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on December 01, 2010, 05:21:14 PM
So I've been seeing ads for The Doctor Who Christmas Carol on BBC America recently. Rather confusing glimpses of various things, including what appeared to be Rory in his Legionnaire garb. They seem to be indicating that they're not going to give us the chance to get it off the internet before it airs here, which would be nice, but I suspect the internet won't let me down.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on December 01, 2010, 05:36:05 PM
Not sure how possible that will be, since it's going to air on the same day.


Craig Ferguson - The lost "Dr. Who" cold open. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9P4SxtphJ4#)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on December 01, 2010, 06:11:10 PM
Yeah, about eight hours earlier.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on December 01, 2010, 06:23:16 PM
Can't wait eight hours?

I can do that in my sleep.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 01, 2010, 09:24:17 PM
Yeah, about eight hours earlier.

Because if it were simulcast then BBC America would be showing the premier of its most popular show at NOON ON CHRISTMAS.

I would just like to note that the Sci-Fi Channel once premiered a Christmas episode THE FOLLOWING JULY.  I'm willing to cut the Beeb some slack for waiting until prime time.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on December 01, 2010, 10:15:27 PM
I'm just saying, I have the internet right here, and if I can find a good torrent earlier in the day, especially considering I'm likely to download a copy just to have anyway, I'm going to grab it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 02, 2010, 08:46:20 AM
Dude, I don't even have cable TV; I'm going to torrent the fucker too.  I'm just saying that the BBC really should be lauded for reducing the gap between airtimes from seven months to seven hours.

As I understand it, they're going to offer iPlayer videos to foreigners, too; it'll cost money, but if they make the fees reasonable then that'll be a great move for them.

Point being, where American media networks are fighting new methods of viewing tooth-and-nail (to the point of fucking blocking Google TV from their streaming sites -- which is a great strategy because no programmer could ever figure out a way to make a browser pretend to be a different browser), the Beeb has been doing a pretty decent job of trying to provide attractive alternatives to piracy.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on December 02, 2010, 10:26:05 AM
And really, it's not like it makes sense to air it several months, weeks or days down the line.  This is supposed to be The Future, surely we can get Doctor Who to air anywhere in the world at anytime we like.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on December 25, 2010, 05:59:11 PM
Greatest Christmas Carol ever.

"It's either this or go into a room and invent a new kind of screwdriver. Don't make my mistakes."
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Ted Belmont on December 25, 2010, 06:28:31 PM
Face spiders!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on December 25, 2010, 10:30:07 PM
omg
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on December 26, 2010, 12:09:40 AM
This was perfect

When I'm old and infirm and the grandkids are stuck at my place for the holiday weekend and the heat is just cranked way too high all the time and all my furniture feels like a sitting on a sack of yams, they will be finding a dusty DVD copy of this episode sandwiched amongst a sparse scattering of home movies and unwatchable copies of the Mr. Bill Show
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 26, 2010, 08:49:26 AM
Yes, really quite lovely.  Not as strong a time-travel plot as I'm used to from Moff, but it made up for it with pure joy and whimsy with just a dash of melancholy.  [spoiler]Flying shark sleigh[/spoiler] pretty much captures his approach to Doctor Who in a nutshell: something scary turns into something awesome by the end of the act.  And of course I don't even need to add that Gambon really acted the hell out of his parts.

Looking forward to the season -- doesn't appear to have a date attached to it yet, does it?

And I'm sure I'm not the only one to notice that all the songs everybody kept singing in this one were about silence.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on December 26, 2010, 09:13:49 AM
And loneliness, Moffat's main Doctor motif
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Ted Belmont on December 26, 2010, 10:48:04 AM
Was that Dumbledore?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on December 26, 2010, 11:33:49 AM
No, it was Michael Gambon, who is a marvelous actor who happens to play Dumbledore from time to time.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 26, 2010, 01:08:17 PM
And loneliness, Moffat's main Doctor motif

Hm.  I wouldn't say his main motif is loneliness so much as the closely-associated theme of love and loss.  Every one of his scripts involves at least a threat of somebody losing someone they love -- be that love between mother and child, two best friends, a little girl and her imaginary friend, or, if I'm to stretch it a bit, the love of the Doctor for a giant alien whale.  But most often it's a story of two people who meet, fall instantly in love, and then just as instantly lose each other, or almost do -- Rose and Jack, the Doctor and Madame de Pompadour, Sally and Billy, the Doctor and River, Donna and her husband, Amy and Rory, and of course this episode.

It's the old juxtaposition of an old man with all the time in the world being used to show that life and time are very short.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on December 26, 2010, 05:10:30 PM
Yes, but as a motif for the character it generally serves to highlight his own loneliness. Who is he to spend the eons sharing the wonders of the universe with other than these transient beings that both connect to and isolate him from mortal existence. As he said to Rose "You can spend your whole life with my, but I can't spend mine with you". Also, in the pseudo-season of tv movies it's shown that when he's truly alone it gets the better of him quite rapidly. So he needs his companions, but each one wounds him in a way as well. The main thing though, is that he's all alone in his uniqueness. That's why he was always so desperate to bring The Master around, because he's one of the few people who could really understand.

The only thing worse than being alone by yourself is being alone in a crowd, but nevertheless he craves and some might say requires the company.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 26, 2010, 07:30:51 PM
Well, certainly, but I'd say all that was more the hallmark of RTD Who than Moffat.  Not to say it's been absent under Moff, but I don't think he's emphasized it the way Davies did.  #11 isn't as sad as the last two.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on December 26, 2010, 07:39:32 PM
No, he just goes out of his way to remain distant so he doesn't get hurt the same as last time.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 26, 2010, 10:12:40 PM
But he's doing a worse job of it than ever.  He's managed to hang on to a companion for more than one season, he's invited her husband onboard and into the opening credits, and he runs into River every three weeks.  Sure, he occasionally manifests an evil alterego who tries to kill everybody, but he also plays soccer with the neighborhood children.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on December 27, 2010, 02:29:40 PM
That'll do pig. Can't wait for the new season.

BTW:

Quote
There's a little bit of gender politics at work here. Stripped of Who's derring-do and down to brass tacks, this is a story about an old man who keeps a woman in a box in his basement.
I agree 100% with this blog post about the gender politics in the Christmas special (http://averypublicsociologist.blogspot.com/2010/12/doctor-whos-christmas-carol.html), but it didn't affect my enjoyment of the episode one single bit.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 27, 2010, 02:56:13 PM
In, not to put too fine a point on it, a refrigerator.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on December 27, 2010, 07:59:08 PM
They don't force her to do anything, and it's implied that she has input on several if not all of their adventures. She's got eight days left, and she has an amazing opportunity to live them more fully than just about anyone else. So my reply to this is is a solid "Hrumph".
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Ted Belmont on December 28, 2010, 02:17:38 AM
So I've finally binged my way through season 5! Did anyone else notice that Amy's house and the nonexistent second floor from The Lodger have the same stairs?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 28, 2010, 07:23:03 AM
They don't force her to do anything, and it's implied that she has input on several if not all of their adventures. She's got eight days left, and she has an amazing opportunity to live them more fully than just about anyone else. So my reply to this is is a solid "Hrumph".

I think it's something more fundamental than that -- she's not a realistic character, she's just an absolute saint.  She has the voice and disposition of an angel, and to that end, nothing anybody does can hurt her, even a few decades of imprisonment.

Viewed from that angle, the leading lady in the story IS just there as a somewhat insubstantial character whose purpose is to motivate the protagonist.

Which would probably be a problem if it were a pattern, but in point of fact Moffat's given us plenty of strong female characters: Madame de Pompadour, Sally, River, and Amy, off the top of my head.

Did anyone else notice that Amy's house and the nonexistent second floor from The Lodger have the same stairs?

Had not!  But the homemade TARDIS from The Lodger is in the trailer for season 6.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Ted Belmont on December 28, 2010, 02:47:05 PM
Doctor Who - Season 32 - BBC America Promo_cz (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3646MAhFXE#ws)

Stetsons are cool.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 20, 2011, 10:49:15 AM
Doctor Who #1 is one of those comics that makes a bunch of jokes about computers and technology, but surprisingly, it actually works and I enjoyed it.

Rory uses his magic cell phone to access his E-Mail, and for reasons Lee has the good sense not to actually try to explain this results in every piece of spam he will ever get phyiscally manifesting aboard the TARDIS.

Some of the jokes are a little dated (Clippy?  Wasn't he removed from Office in 2003?) but on the whole it was a suitably fun and nonsensical first outing for #11 and his companions.

It's still likely to be the last one I pick up until I get a job, but them's the breaks.



EDIT TO ADD: Oh, also, Michael Moorcock wrote a fucking Doctor Who novel (http://www.amazon.com/Doctor-Who-Coming-Terraphiles-HC/dp/1846079837) and it's out now.  It's about parallel universes, because of course it is.  (EDIT 2 to add: And according to the synopsis, there is a character named Captain Cornelius.)

I've never picked up a Doctor Who book before, but I don't think I'll be able to pass this one up.

...once it's out in paperback.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 13, 2011, 04:02:57 AM
Bleeding Cool (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2011/03/13/that-comic-relief-doctor-who-teaser-and-three-deleted-scenes-from-series-five/) has a teaser for the upcoming Comic Relief shorts, and some deleted scenes from the DVD of last season.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 28, 2011, 11:26:32 PM
The title of Neil Gaiman's upcoming episode is "The Doctor's Wife".
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mongrel on March 29, 2011, 02:42:46 AM
Some of the jokes are a little dated (Clippy?  Wasn't he removed from Office in 2003?)

This just made me laugh because I saw slippy only yesterday on someone's computer at work. Our IT department is HIP AND WITH IT.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 30, 2011, 03:23:56 PM
Doctor Who - Full Length Trailer for New Series 2011 - BBC One (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vIsQ25Krq8#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on March 31, 2011, 03:47:19 AM
There also a "prequel to" (read: trailer for) the first episode on the BBC Doctor Who site. I figure it's geoblocked, so here's a real crappy version on YouTube.

Doctor Who Prequel 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AICKM9nM74c#)

Looks like typical Moffat stuff. Monsters are hiding in the black space behind your head. Sleep tight, kids!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 02, 2011, 10:46:56 PM
Full HD Doctor Who BBC America Full Length Trailer for Series 6 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dhe_ywL1BkQ#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on April 22, 2011, 03:34:46 AM
After spoilering the crap out of myself last season, I've vowed to avoid reading too much this time around. Thankfully, there's a spoiler-free article on the Guardian (patronisingly) called Doctor Who: are you looking forward to the dark first episode? (http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/tvandradioblog/2011/apr/21/doctor-who-back-darker) that's had me pretty stoked for tomorrow's season opener.

Quote
Since the revival, as fans there's always been a tiny little bit of nervous apprehension about revealing to people quite how deeply you are into Doctor Who. With this, it looks like those days are over. Doctor Who might now be one of the coolest, sexiest, smartest most stylish things on television.
Doubt it, but I'm all for Doctor Who being a little more adult and a lot less fucking twee.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 22, 2011, 06:20:38 AM
Well at this point in Davis' run we had the fucking farting fat aliens, so we're definitely on the right track.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on April 22, 2011, 11:15:16 AM
So true. RTD deserves some praise for raising the series from its grave, but he was responsible for all sorts of horrible. The sad thing is that his other shows have demonstrated there's so much more to his writing than just fart jokes and twenty minute goodbye sequences with Billie Piper.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 23, 2011, 12:07:10 PM
Well!  That was a lot of timey-wimey right off the bat.

So okay.  As we know, River was in prison for killing a man.  And we're clearly meant to assume it's the Doctor.

[spoiler]Given this, I initially assumed it was her in the spacesuit.  Given that she seemed pretty surprised by the whole thing, I assumed that the "her" in the spacesuit was from her future.  And given that we'd already seen her in prison earlier in the episode, this introduced the possibility that she was actually convicted and sentenced BEFORE committing the murder -- which sounds like a Moffat plot, doesn't it?

That's still a possibility -- after all, it doesn't have to be the same person in the spacesuit both times, does it? -- but for now we're left to assume that it is in fact the little girl, both times.  And that she's probably Amy and Rory's daughter.

Plus, while the "I have a darker day coming" foreshadowing initially seemed to support my theory that River knew that was going to be her in the suit, it's much more compelling if what she told Rory is the truth: the day she dreads is Silence in the Library, an event that's already three years in our past.  And it juxtaposes the (seeming) inevitability of the Doctor's death with the inevitability of her (sort of) death.[/spoiler]

The new monsters: Internet speculation, up to this point, has been that they are the Silence, or Silents, alluded to last season.  [spoiler]One of them talks, which tends to undercut this theory, but[/spoiler] I'm still inclined to agree.  [spoiler]Indeed I can totally foresee the Doctor or Amy asking them how they can be called the Silence if they talk.[/spoiler]

Anyhow.  What can I say that's not Big Block of Spoilers?  Great episode, great way to start the season off with a sense of urgency, a whole lot of weird and a whole lot of fun.  Banter among all the players was great, and really you can't go wrong with Richard Milhous Nixon.

If I were to nitpick one little thing, it's that Washington, DC is hardly the only place in the country where you're going to see streets named Jefferson, Adams, and Hamilton.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 23, 2011, 04:14:31 PM
fffffff cliffhangerss

Loving this so far. Hoping Mark Sheppard gets to do more than be confused in the second part, because I loved that guy in pretty much every property I've seen him in (BSG/Dollhouse/Firefly).

Apparently that was the Sheppard's dad playing the older version of himself at the beginning.

Also: These aliens rule
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Fortinbras on April 23, 2011, 06:08:27 PM
River Song is [spoiler]Amy Pond's daughter[/spoiler] or the idea of [spoiler]Amy Pond having a kid[/spoiler] is being juxtaposed with an episode full of who-is-River-Songiness intentionally to provide theorist fodder.

Very good episode, the very last few seconds made everyone I was watching with laugh.  Too much time to parse each shot, should not have been in slow motion.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 23, 2011, 06:16:59 PM
Fuck you, Moffat. How the hell are the duke boys going to get out of this one?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 23, 2011, 10:43:08 PM
River Song is [spoiler]Amy Pond's daughter[/spoiler] or the idea of [spoiler]Amy Pond having a kid[/spoiler] is being juxtaposed with an episode full of who-is-River-Songiness intentionally to provide theorist fodder.

Well, yes, it's possible that [spoiler]River and the little girl are the same person[/spoiler].  Seems a little cute, though.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 24, 2011, 11:29:09 PM
[spoiler]Given this, I initially assumed it was her in the spacesuit.  Given that she seemed pretty surprised by the whole thing, I assumed that the "her" in the spacesuit was from her future.  And given that we'd already seen her in prison earlier in the episode, this introduced the possibility that she was actually convicted and sentenced BEFORE committing the murder -- which sounds like a Moffat plot, doesn't it?[/spoiler]

Another thought: It's entirely possible that [spoiler]the River we see at the beginning of the episode is a "later" River than the one we see throughout the rest of the episode[/spoiler].  But I don't think that would be nearly as cool.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 30, 2011, 02:23:32 PM
Well!

I particularly liked the blackouts; they're probably the best timey-wimey trick Moff's pulled off since Blink.

There's also something charming about leaving a million dangling threads and saying "Fuck it, let's go see pirates; we'll get back to this stuff in a few weeks."

Ending: well THAT was unexpected.  The "Who is the little girl?" plot thickens.  [spoiler]River and the Doctor's daughter?  Amy and Rory's, somehow affected by the TARDIS and given a time head?  It's probably safe to say the Doctor isn't the father of Amy's child.  Could still be River herself, though hasn't it been clearly established that she's human?[/spoiler]

Another question that occurred to me after last week's episode: where's the future Doctor's TARDIS?  Destroying his body so nobody can get their hands on it is fine and dandy, but leaving the TARDIS lying around doesn't seem like a good way of keeping Time Lord secrets safe.

Since he pulled up in a car, of course, it could be anywhere.  Somebody else could already have it, he could have left it in 1960's England where it still looked innocuous, or he could have fixed the chameleon circuit and turned it into any object at all.  Given the 200-year gap, it may not even be on Earth; he could have parked it somewhere else entirely and hitched a lift.

And of course it bears noting that the 200-year gap explains River's references back in Silence/Forest to a much older Doctor.

EDIT: Oh, and of course, how slow of me -- the very first time we ever SAW River, she was wearing a spacesuit.  Not 1960's vintage, of course, but still, spacesuit.  With her face covered and everything.

EDIT 2: Also, I was remiss in not mentioning the crazy guy's performance.  It really was the best thing about the episode.

Also also: I doubt we'll see Nixon again, but I'm sure we're meant to believe there aren't actually 18 minutes missing from his tapes, just 18 minutes that nobody can remember immediately after listening to them.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 01, 2011, 12:12:02 AM
I like Moffat's plan of kicking off the season with a two-parter worthy of a finale, and then having some pirates or whatever. This is going to be a six episode series followed by another six after summer, right? So we might get two adventures, and then another double feature finale, or, more horrifyingly, 3 adventures and then part 1 of a cliffhanger to be picked up after the break. I think I'll go into fucking stasis if the latter is the case.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 01, 2011, 10:58:10 AM
According to tvdb (http://thetvdb.com/?tab=season&seriesid=78804&seasonid=372611&lid=7), it is in fact going to drop us straight into the middle of a cliffhanger, with a "Part 1" as the last episode before the break.

Next week we've got The Curse of the Black Spot, followed by Gaiman's The Doctor's Wife.  Then we've got a two-parter, The Rebel Flesh/The Almost People, and then A Good Man Goes to War, the first of a two-parter.  And then the break.

Part 2's title is unrevealed as yet; the other titles we've got so far are What are Little Boys Made Of? and The God Complex.

Anyhow, the "A Good Man Goes to War" recalls the Doctor's reference to starting a revolution, as well as River's statement that she killed the best man she ever knew.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on May 01, 2011, 11:09:23 AM
I think my favorite thing about this episode was [spoiler]that humanity is implied to have wiped out the entire silence WITH THEIR BARE HANDS if necessary. We're not a nice species.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 01, 2011, 07:56:52 PM
According to tvdb (http://thetvdb.com/?tab=season&seriesid=78804&seasonid=372611&lid=7), it is in fact going to drop us straight into the middle of a cliffhanger, with a "Part 1" as the last episode before the break.

Next week we've got The Curse of the Black Spot, followed by Gaiman's The Doctor's Wife.  Then we've got a two-parter, The Rebel Flesh/The Almost People, and then A Good Man Goes to War, the first of a two-parter.  And then the break.

Part 2's title is unrevealed as yet; the other titles we've got so far are What are Little Boys Made Of? and The God Complex.

Anyhow, the "A Good Man Goes to War" recalls the Doctor's reference to starting a revolution, as well as River's statement that she killed the best man she ever knew.
:endit:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 01, 2011, 08:45:48 PM
Hey, I didn't quite catch what River said after Amy asked what kind of doctor she was, but my girlfriend thought she said "Level Two."

So here's a new crackpot theory: what if she's the Doctor's successor?  What if, somewhere down the line, he decides to pass the torch?  That could explain why she knows his name -- because by the end, he's not the Doctor anymore, he's just a guy named Joe again.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 01, 2011, 09:32:26 PM
She says "Archeologist" while shooting one of the Silence. I think it's an Indiana Jones joke. In addition to making sense.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on May 02, 2011, 07:03:44 AM
What she says after that is "Love a tomb", which is what she might have heard as "Level 2"


Other things to note about the episode:

We still don't know what exactly caused the events of last season's finale. Who built the Pandorica? Who blew up the TARDIS? So there's still more to go on.

Pregnancy also played a really, really big role in this one. There was [spoiler]Amy's maybe-pregnancy, the orphanage, Nixon points out that one of the security heads is about to have a child, and the entire time-span of the episode was 9 months. Also was anyone else reminded of a womb and birth when they saw they were explaining the exosuit?[/spoiler] And I can't help but think the scene in the Orphanage was a ton of clues being dropped [spoiler]multiple memory wipes can affect the mind, the man losing over 2 years of his life, the repeated GET OUTS on the wall[/spoiler]

Obviously there's a lot left to answer, this being the beginning of the season, but it'll be interesting to see where it goes.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 02, 2011, 10:39:32 AM
We still don't know what exactly caused the events of last season's finale. Who built the Pandorica? Who blew up the TARDIS? So there's still more to go on.

And who whispered "The Silents will fall"?

It was a female voice, wasn't it?  Could it be [spoiler]Eyepatch Lady[/spoiler]?

Pregnancy also played a really, really big role in this one. There was [spoiler]Amy's maybe-pregnancy, the orphanage, Nixon points out that one of the security heads is about to have a child, and the entire time-span of the episode was 9 months. Also was anyone else reminded of a womb and birth when they saw they were explaining the exosuit?[/spoiler]

A theory I've seen that makes sense: [spoiler]the Silents need the child to operate their TARDIS.  She's clearly got the regeneration thing going on; it's already been hinted that Amy's baby's been affected by gestating on the TARDIS.  Or the child could be the Doctor's and River's, but in that case why are we making such a fuss about Amy's baby?[/spoiler]

And I can't help but think the scene in the Orphanage was a ton of clues being dropped [spoiler]multiple memory wipes can affect the mind, the man losing over 2 years of his life, the repeated GET OUTS on the wall[/spoiler]

I read it more as [spoiler]his memory is constantly being wiped, so it's just as if those two years haven't happened because that's how much time he's spent looking at Silents.[/spoiler]

There's also [spoiler]the post-hypnotic suggestion thing.  We already saw a Silent tell Amy to tell the Doctor two things; so far she's only told him one.  We're meant to assume that the other thing is "You are going to get shot in the face by someone in that spacesuit 200 years in your future" but of course it could be something else.  And how long did they have her prisoner?  They could have stuck any number of nasty things in there.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on May 08, 2011, 10:55:47 AM
Bleh. This episode felt super derivative and fairly nonsensical at the same time. [spoiler]"Explosions" that are really teleports, a super powerful alien medical system that doesn't know how to deal with humans, where's Christopher eccleston when you need him? We didn't need another scene of the doctor staring at quantum baby either.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Fortinbras on May 08, 2011, 01:18:21 PM
It did sort of feel like it should be an Eccleston episode toward the end.  Well put.

[spoiler]Friend points out: what the woman in the wall said sounded like labor coach talk.[/spoiler]

Broader, rambling speculation: I get the feeling the Moff likes weirdness too much to let the Doctor and River Song's relationship play out with its slated tragic linearity (or... bi-linearity or something, i don't know what to call it.)  Eventually a wrench is going to get thrown in, possibly related to the whole [spoiler]"you gonna get murdered by a spaceman"[/spoiler] thing, or the Doctor's going to get proactive as he starts to experience what characterized all River's early appearances, that feeling of "oh god, you're so young."  Latter would be interesting, as since late period Tennant/first season Smith the doctor's been giving less of a shit about messing with timelines he's already a part of and generally breaking the rules.

Anyway, Matt Smith is so good.  He's really grown into the roll.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 08, 2011, 01:52:00 PM
[spoiler]Friend points out: what the woman in the wall said sounded like labor coach talk.[/spoiler]

And let's not forget the "there/not there" thing that's happened both times she's shown up.

Broader, rambling speculation: I get the feeling the Moff likes weirdness too much to let the Doctor and River Song's relationship play out with its slated tragic linearity (or... bi-linearity or something, i don't know what to call it.)

Well, the idea that they're going in straight lines in opposite directions is pretty new, isn't it?  I mean, she wouldn't NEED a "Have we done that yet?" checklist if it were a straight line.  And didn't the Doctor say something along the lines of "We keep meeting each other out of sequence" when she showed up in Time of Angels?  Which would imply she'd met #10 offscreen at least once.

Eventually a wrench is going to get thrown in, possibly related to the whole [spoiler]"you gonna get murdered by a spaceman"[/spoiler] thing, or the Doctor's going to get proactive as he starts to experience what characterized all River's early appearances, that feeling of "oh god, you're so young."  Latter would be interesting, as since late period Tennant/first season Smith the doctor's been giving less of a shit about messing with timelines he's already a part of and generally breaking the rules.

I think her tragic trajectory toward Silence in the Library is really key, though, and even if the Doctor breaks the rules I think that end has to remain intact.  He could hypothetically find a way to bring her back out of the computer there, but I don't see much reason to do that, either.

There's bound to be SOME fiddling with the timeline at some point here -- because they can't very well leave the Eleventh Doctor dead with no shot at regeneration -- but I don't see Forest of the Dead being superseded.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on May 09, 2011, 02:54:15 AM
the "there/not there" thing
I get the feeling the "two cars parked in the same space" theme from this episode may end up being important further on in the series.

Anyway, I didn't hate this episode. It was entertaining enough, but just felt like fluff after the past two weeks. Actually ended up watching it twice because I was drunk enough the first time to completely miss [spoiler] the midwife eyepatch woman[/spoiler]. Yeah, really didn't need to watch it twice.

There were a couple of weird plot holes: [spoiler]why were the Doctor, Amy, and pirate put in a completely different position to the rest of the crew when they were transported to the sickbay? And what happened to the pirate who was barricaded in with Amy, Rory, and the little boy who looked like a girl? He turned up at the end, but there was no logical point when the AI doctor could've taken him. He just vanished.[/spoiler]

I'm sure at least the latter point of the above will be explained away in the finale, but that's not going to fix the fact that it just looks like sloppy writing the first time around.

And [spoiler]Rory not-quite-dying again? At this point it's become nothing more than a handy toilet break for me. Just kill the guy.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 09, 2011, 05:48:28 AM
Yeah, Rory has stone-cold died like eight times already... they might want to hang back on that one a bit.

I rewatched Day of the Moon a second time with my roommates, and I still had a hard time enjoying it. There's a lot of great ideas going on, and I'm sure this will all come together by the end, but as it was, there was just far too much packed into far too little time.

They could have cut the whole recording hand bit out for how little it was used, maybe the "Doctor being freed from NASA" scene as well, couple of the River-being-smug sequences, and really, they should have concentrated on the astronaut far less and the Silents far more, or vice versa. Cramming both into one hour was meandering and exhausting.

That's essentially how these two felt: exhausting, rather than entertaining.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on May 14, 2011, 11:27:59 AM
Yeah. I'd be very surprised if that's not the best episode of the whole season.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on May 14, 2011, 11:32:44 AM
I don't even care that [spoiler]Rory died again[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 14, 2011, 12:38:49 PM
RE: River and The Doctor's timelines. Generally speaking it seems like they run at direct odds to one another when we're seeing them featured in an episode, but it's pretty well established before, and confirmed with the beginning of The Impossible Astronaut, that they occasionally meet out of sequence, and that eventually the doctor starts filling in his own TARDIS diary to compare notes. Who wants to bet that, when they met, his was as huge as hers in Silence in the Library and that she got the idea for her diary from his?

EDIT: Rather, when she met him, but you get the idea.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 14, 2011, 12:49:17 PM
I will say that I loved the hell of out River's last kiss. It's the first time she's gotten any sense of how little time they have before the end (well, beginning. Well! End I guess), and it sure as hell wasn't first kiss material either.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 14, 2011, 08:12:14 PM
Neil Gaiman is a wonderful man. I basically have nothing bad to say about this episode except that it ended.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 15, 2011, 01:38:21 PM
I love all the shout-outs to the old series, too; just a lovely summation of the history of the whole show.  And the identity of the Doctor's eponymous Wife was so obvious in hindsight.

Plus, building to the punchline that the villain was [spoiler]giant on the outside and tiny on the inside[/spoiler] -- wonderful.

Oh, and nice Jekyll reference, too.

So, okay.  "The only water in the forest is the river."

Well, I think that must certainly mean River as opposed to Pond.

As for the Forest, well, River's first appearance was the Forest of the Dead, though as I've said before I don't really like the idea of the Doctor going back and saving her from the matrix.  Could be it's another forest as there are certainly a hell of a lot of them.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 15, 2011, 08:02:14 PM
God, what a great episode.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 15, 2011, 10:11:47 PM
There's really not much conversation to have about this one. Fantastic from beginning to end, with almost no arc significance to debate over. That line about the forest and the river is obviously something, but it's too cryptic to be useful until we know more.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 15, 2011, 10:47:05 PM
...did he ever actually get around to mentioning fish fingers, or did she spend half the episode alluding to him eventually saying something about them only for it never to happen?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 15, 2011, 10:50:57 PM
It does get mentioned, but it's kind of meta, because he only talks about it because she keeps going on about it.

EDIT: Actually, thinking back on it, I think she's just talking about when Amy swore on fish fingers and custard, and she doesn't get it, because fish don't have fingers. He makes some exasperated comment with regards to it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on May 16, 2011, 05:03:01 AM
Nah, it's just a self-fulfilling prophesy. She questions what fish-fingers are, he rambles before finally going "and fish fingers. mmmm"
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on May 20, 2011, 01:42:18 AM
Doctor Who now has an official Twitter (http://twitter.com/#!/DoctorWho_BBC), if you're that way inclined.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on May 20, 2011, 01:47:25 AM
Also I really hope that the only reason this week's episode takes place in a doppelgänger factory is to make fans speculate about the Doctor's death in Episode 1.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on May 23, 2011, 11:33:15 AM
I really liked this episode. I really did not like the teaser at the end showing [spoiler]the doctors fighting. Fuck that. [/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 23, 2011, 11:39:56 AM
I definitely liked it a lot more than I usually like these things. Clone vs Original plots are hard to enjoy because you sympathize with each side equally, so you just sorta want them to stop fighting all the damn time.

I have this problem every time a sci-fi show tries to pull these off.

Still! Some great Rory so far, and I like most of the supporting cast.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 23, 2011, 01:42:50 PM
I like these clones because, as much as they want to believe that they are the people that they remember being, they know they're not, so they're pretty obviously going insane. They also have memories, but almost no genuine experience, so they seem to be overreacting pretty consistently to everything.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Norondor on May 23, 2011, 02:05:11 PM
just like sephiroth...!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 23, 2011, 03:09:27 PM
Dude this is just like Sephiroth gat dang
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 23, 2011, 07:22:50 PM
...so they're going to turn into the Nestenes, right?

And wouldn't it be neat if the reason Rory was resurrected as an Auton is that he was kind to the original Autons?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 23, 2011, 07:41:38 PM
The Doctor clearly knows something about their future. He as much as said so.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 24, 2011, 06:03:43 AM
...so they're going to turn into the Nestenes, right?

And wouldn't it be neat if the reason Rory was resurrected as an Auton is that he was kind to the original Autons?

That would be quite cool, actually
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on May 25, 2011, 03:24:12 AM
My only real gripe is that the episode was written by the guy who wrote Life on Mars, but it lacked the humour that made that show so great. I mean, they used Marshall Lancaster to basically reprise his role from Life on Mars and Ashes to Ashes, so it would've been nice to give one of the characters some of the blunt wordplay we know the writer does so well.

Anyway, it was pretty great and I'm glad they were bold enough to let it be a slow-burner. The pacing was spot on, and the doppelgänger plot actually worked really well for the reasons Mothra said up there. This season is such an improvement on last season it's kind of ridiculous.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Verde on May 25, 2011, 06:20:51 AM
The Cybermen are back (http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/dw/news/bulletin_110525_02/On_4_June_A_Good_Man_Goes_to_War)

I'm burned out on Cybermen and Daleks, but okay whatever
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 25, 2011, 03:55:33 PM
Technically I do believe this is the first time we've seen the OG Cybermen on the new series.

That's probably a trivial distinction, but maybe it's not.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on May 27, 2011, 04:54:39 AM
noooooooooooooooooooooo
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on May 27, 2011, 05:25:43 AM
An episode with Cybermen AND those dumb lizard people? And here I thought Rebel Flesh was going to be the worst episode of the season.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 27, 2011, 11:44:32 PM
Rebel Flesh was WAY better than Curse of the Black Spot.

Anyway.  On the Auton theory: the people working with the Flesh (that's what it was called, right?) are humans, right?  So that would mean this is the future.  But given that we've seen the Autons as far back as the Roman Empire, could their origin occur in the future?  Do they have access to time travel?

I'm sure there's a wiki somewhere that's got a list of the Doctor Who races who have time travel technology, but off the top of my head:

Time Lords are the only ones who can really use it effectively.  They're the only ones who have TARDISes.  Given that there's now only one Time Lord and one TARDIS -- and it's not particularly reliable -- it is probably safe to say that nobody really has the ability to travel anywhere they want in space and time anymore.

Daleks have access to time travel to, but as far as we've seen it's far more limited and unreliable than the Time Lord version.  We've seen them take emergency hops through time, and also whatever the fuck happened in The Stolen Earth, but the specifics of the Time War are still unclear.

And Jack's from the future.  I forget whether he was an actual time cop or was just impersonating one, but either way that implies that at some point in the future there are human time cops, though if I had to guess I'd say the time cops are probably a coalition consisting of a number of different galactic races.

The Weeping Angels can send people back in time but can't travel through time themselves, or they wouldn't have wanted the TARDIS.

The Cybermen have been sent back in time on more than one occasion (and the ones we've seen on the series to date traveled here from a parallel universe) but so far as I know they don't have time-travel technology themselves.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 28, 2011, 07:10:20 PM
...well, that was a bunch of really predictable twists topped off with one I definitely did NOT see coming.  Which is not to say it was good, necessarily, but it was definitely unexpected.

I still like my ending much better.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 29, 2011, 09:14:15 AM
The time cops use the rift generator arm thingamajig that the doctor reviles and primitive and dangerous, and that River uses pretty consistently to catch up to wherever the Doctor happens to be. Apparently it exposes you to raw rift energy, and the Time Lords are a bit hoity toity about any time travel tech that isn't TARDIS perfect.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 04, 2011, 05:35:05 PM
Welp.

That felt a lot like a Rusty episode, really, with the Kitchen Sink-ness and the Doctor-as-Vengeful-God-ness.  But it felt like a GOOD Rusty episode, where it was written entirely around satisfying little character arcs.

As for the money shot...well, I don't think anybody was surprised by it at this point (it's been telegraphed all year and they telegraphed the HELL out of it here), but it felt plenty satisfying.

Also made for a surprisingly tidy break.  There'd been the "Part 1" implications, but this was definitely an end to an arc and not a major cliffhanger.

Speculation fuel: the Omega iconography.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on June 05, 2011, 03:34:38 AM
I did not expect the very last twist to be exactly what it was, but I wasn't "surprised" by it either.

Rory gets to be a god damned action hero now though, which is worth the price of admission all on its own.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on June 05, 2011, 05:29:57 AM
It was super telegraphed like Thad said, so not a surprise, but [spoiler]I'm still kicking myself for not immediately going Melody Pond = River Song at the beginning of the episode.[/spoiler]

Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on June 05, 2011, 06:28:31 AM
No way
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 05, 2011, 09:22:24 AM
It was super telegraphed like Thad said, so not a surprise, but [spoiler]I'm still kicking myself for not immediately going Melody Pond = River Song at the beginning of the episode.[/spoiler]

Yeah, I made the "River as opposed to Pond" connection weeks ago (http://brontoforum.us/index.php?topic=871.msg190799#msg190799) so it jumped out.  And the linguist in me loves shit like this.  (My favorite Green Lantern story is the one with the F-Sharp Bell (so named because he comes from a blind species that has no translation for "Green" or "Lantern" and Katma Tui has to explain it to him through a sound metaphor instead of a visual one) -- even used it in a linguistics assignment in college.)

Anyhow.  While we know who River is now, there are still plenty of unanswered questions about her relationship to the Doctor, and I look forward to the mystery continuing to unravel.

Conjecture: the untranslated Gallifreyan text on his crib could be his name.  Since it's his crib and all.  (And nice touch that the TARDIS doesn't translate its creators' native language, because of course, why would it?)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on June 12, 2011, 03:44:45 PM
So apparently I've been a week behind this whole time, because I got lazy and just started watching the BBC America broadcasts. I guess all the things you guys said in these posts make a lot more sense when you're talking about A Good Man Goes to War and not the second half of the Flesh two parter like I thought you were. That'll teach me for skiving off downloading HD BBC1 versions of every episode.

Yeah, the final twist WAS totally telegraphed, and awesome. Additionally, the Doctor and River hook up, obviously, which has GOT to be weird for Amy, but on the other hand could she pick a better man? Entering stasis pod until the new episodes come, or it malfunctions and I end up on the planet of the apes.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on June 14, 2011, 02:38:55 AM
"Friendship dies and true love lies."

I kinda liked bits of this one, but just... Jesus wept, that's some shitty doggerel. Between that and the bit in Beast Below I think Moffat needs an intervention re: fucking godawful poetry.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Norondor on June 14, 2011, 02:48:59 AM
I didn't know John Darnielle was writing for the BBC!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Norondor on June 14, 2011, 02:49:14 AM
FUCKING ICE SLAM
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on June 14, 2011, 03:01:39 AM
(https://kidston-biomes.wikispaces.com/file/view/mountain_goat_1_5609_travel_alberta.jpg/70872729/mountain_goat_1_5609_travel_alberta.jpg)

Hey.   Fuck you.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 14, 2011, 02:48:18 PM
...wow, Sharkey's posting.

We need to get inundated by spambots more often.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 24, 2011, 09:31:26 PM
Doctor Who - Comic Con 2011 Trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJMrMO4NB5E#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Burrito Al Pastor on July 27, 2011, 04:30:38 PM
So apparently Matt Smith and Karen Gillan handed out (http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_loui1jbur21qijoeyo2_500.jpg) official TARDIS burritos (http://yfrog.com/z/kf4odrkj) to some folks who were in a line.

The event seems to be virtually apocryphal, and I doubt I'll be able to buy one on ebay; it's a shame, because inquiring minds want to know what kind of burritos they were! and if they were good!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 09, 2011, 09:42:46 PM
...poking through old posts in the thread; found this:

As it happens, I've only just watched "Silence in the Library" and "Forest of the Dead", and I couldn't help but noticing something...

The new companion is ginger. You know who else is ginger? River Song.

Steven Moffat wrote those two episodes. He's also the new lead writer.

I wonder.

Burrito wins.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Kayma on August 09, 2011, 09:51:17 PM
Wow. Way to go, Burrito. Or should I say, TARDIS Burrito? It's all adding up.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on August 27, 2011, 04:11:53 PM
Really controversial episode, apparently. Well, there's a lot of people saying best of Season 6 and a lot of people saying Worst Doctor Who Episode.

All I know is once again, Rory is my favourite bit the show.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on August 27, 2011, 05:49:53 PM
Well that answered A LOT. I really enjoyed every reveal. Mels' being probably my favorite.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on August 27, 2011, 06:34:26 PM
I only liked her reveal because [spoiler]I thought introducing her character as a childhood friend and acting like she was important at the get go was extremely forced. Then she was River and it only felt kind of forced.![/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on August 27, 2011, 06:59:15 PM
[spoiler]I think it's pretty obvious that you're supposed to be like "Who the fuck is this person, and why should I care?" for her entire time on screen. That Rory and Amy have a childhood friend he doesn't know about isn't unbelievable, and a female friend with which a little girl shares everything isn't unbelievable either, but you still don't really know why you should care until she starts to regenerate. I think that feeling is entirely intentional to make the reveal more impactful, because the implications become immediately apparent. Where did little Melody go after her first regeneration in New York? To grow up with her Mom and Dad of course. Took her about 30 years, but she did it. I think an interesting question is whether she did it to meet her parents, to put herself in a position to inevitably meet the Doctor, her target, or both. I'm guessing both.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on August 27, 2011, 07:18:17 PM
My biggest problem is [spoiler]she was a little girl! A wee thing. She either had to have fake parents or she was a little child that lived by herself. The former is a bit weird because that means she had to either manipulate a couple who wanted to adopt a child into moving here and there so she could be friends with Amy and Rory. The latter could make sense since she had to have had her entire knowledge of the Doctor and programming the entire time growing up so she was an adult in the body of a child. But that makes it complicated because people never met parents or needed papers signed or anything? This is why time travelers are adults!
Also, growing up along side your parents knowing they will be your parents in thirty years all the while being programmed to kill a man they both love? That's gotta fuck you up something fierce.[/spoiler]


But this I don't think is so much a problem with the writing as it is a personal problem of mine. If they would have answered my question, I'd've been blown away that they even thought of it. It's entirely unreasonable for them to put a solution to that problem considering time constraints and really who else cares?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on August 27, 2011, 10:25:06 PM
[spoiler]Here's a noodler that I've been struggling with. The time-cops recognized River by profiling the TARDIS. This seems to imply that she will be the sole owner and pilot of the TARDIS during the time she kills the Doctor, since that's when she became the kind of criminal they track. Also like that killing the Doctor alone puts you on the level of Hitler, because of his potential to save lives.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 28, 2011, 07:41:54 PM
I thought it was pretty much perfect.

[spoiler]Here's a noodler that I've been struggling with. The time-cops recognized River by profiling the TARDIS. This seems to imply that she will be the sole owner and pilot of the TARDIS during the time she kills the Doctor, since that's when she became the kind of criminal they track.[/spoiler]

Which brings us back to the question of where the TARDIS is when the Doctor shows up to get shot.

Also notable: [spoiler]seeing as she just leaves the Doctor there on the floor, we have absolutely no indication of how long she's in the TARDIS before she picks up Rory and Amy.  It could have been minutes, or it could have been years.[/spoiler]

[spoiler]Also like that killing the Doctor alone puts you on the level of Hitler, because of his potential to save lives.[/spoiler]

Also neat that until [spoiler]they said "she"[/spoiler] I thought it would have gone the other way -- that [spoiler]the Doctor HIMSELF is history's biggest war criminal[/spoiler].  I mean, he kinda is.


ADDING: I really quite like the villains in the piece, too; there's something wonderfully base and horribly relatable about the notion that [spoiler]it's not enough simply to stop bad people from doing bad things, not even enough that they DIE, but that justice requires that they also be made to suffer[/spoiler].

Which brings up the question, what exactly does it mean to [spoiler]put somebody through Hell?

At a guess: preserving the deceased's consciousness forever, in a virtual realm of eternal suffering.[/spoiler]

Going to assume everybody can see where I'm going with this.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on August 29, 2011, 09:22:48 AM
The way this show is shot and the sheer scatterbrained, frantic pace of it all still gets to me sometimes. Wish they could do something with the music too.

THAT SAID, loved the story on this one. Pretty big fan of the Time Cops coming back, too - weren't these the guys Jack was pretending to be when he first showed up?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on August 30, 2011, 02:51:00 PM
I couldn't help liking that the whole Hitler thing was a complete red herring and after the first few minutes he spent the rest of the episode locked in a closet. Also, the villains took the whole killing Hitler thing to its logical extreme. Almost rational horribleness makes for great bad guys, and it even put the indolent, coprolitic Time Lords into a little bit of perspective. Inaction almost seems like the least of the evils when this sort of self righteous fuckassery is the alternative.

The only thing that's really bugging me about this one is that I've long since lost track of how many times each of the central characters has died and been brought back to life over the last season or so, and not just fucking Rory. I think Amy is at the bottom of the scoreboard with one death and resurrection, but at this point I'm grateful for any episode that doesn't have one of the usual four kicking off and coming back to life.

I'm also a little disappointed that in locking River down to those three incarnations and establishing this as their first meeting it kind of precludes the possibility of using her as a recurring antagonist through multiple regenerations. Oh well. I can also see how it could have gotten tired fast, but I think there might have been potential there.

And I'm not using spoiler tags on this shit. This whole topic has become a mass of black text and really, nobody should be clicking on the thing until they're caught up. Suck it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on August 30, 2011, 05:23:08 PM
Well, she has to die in that form, because she's already going to have done so.

I only use spoiler tags for the weekend it airs. After that it's on you that you aren't caught up yet.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 30, 2011, 05:35:33 PM
I couldn't help liking that the whole Hitler thing was a complete red herring and after the first few minutes he spent the rest of the episode locked in a closet. Also, the villains took the whole killing Hitler thing to its logical extreme. Almost rational horribleness makes for great bad guys, and it even put the indolent, coprolitic Time Lords into a little bit of perspective. Inaction almost seems like the least of the evils when this sort of self righteous fuckassery is the alternative.

Yes to all of this.

I'm also a little disappointed that in locking River down to those three incarnations and establishing this as their first meeting it kind of precludes the possibility of using her as a recurring antagonist through multiple regenerations. Oh well. I can also see how it could have gotten tired fast, but I think there might have been potential there.

We don't know that she went straight from Little Girl to Mels.  Or indeed that she went straight from Baby to Little Girl.  Or, indeed, that it took her 30 years' linear time to catch up with Amy and Rory and that there was no time travel in-between.

I think it IS probably safe to assume that this is her first attempt to kill the Doctor, meaning it's the first time she's met him since her conditioning and known who he was.  So you're right that that eliminates her as a recurring antagonist.

(Assuming a standard 12-regeneration cap, and that the phrase "all her remaining regenerations" means she had to have at least 3 left, she could still have up to seven more forms.  But, more reasonably, given her line about being able to adjust her aging back and forth, Alex Kingston can just play the role forever, while leaving her "death" in Forest of the Dead intact.  Or for that matter the other two actresses can.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 02, 2011, 03:42:37 PM
Doctor Who Theme (With Lyrics!), A Capella (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2rfTR1PJkk#)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 03, 2011, 09:52:21 PM
Well, that was...a better version of Fear Her, I guess.

Always a little frustrating when you know the season's ticking down and there are inconsequential, not-great eps like this one.  Written by Mark Gatiss, who is also responsible for not-great eps The Unquiet Dead, The Idiot's Lantern, and Victory of the Daleks.  (And also, in his defense, the pretty-great finale of Sherlock.)

Had some great direction, though; some really neat lighting and camera angles.  (Love the reflection of the TARDIS in a puddle in the beginning.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on September 05, 2011, 04:36:09 AM
Do not like the doll people one bit. I will tell you that right now.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on September 05, 2011, 06:14:52 AM
Well, that was...a better version of Fear Her, I guess.

Was it really?

The writing in this one was almost unforgivably sloppy.  I'll take the Paper House homage any day when the alternative is the Doctor spending ten minutes talking about how MONSTERS ARE REAL HOLY SHIT THIS IS SOME SERIOUS FUCKING SH oh hey the kid's just an alien okay peace.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 05, 2011, 06:21:53 AM
Well, he's seen this thing before with his old, old eyes. Look at how old his eyes are!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on September 05, 2011, 06:25:09 AM
Yeah, that said, I forgive a lot for the current cast, because they just about always work well with whatever material they're given.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 05, 2011, 09:00:56 AM
The writing in this one was almost unforgivably sloppy.  I'll take the Paper House homage any day when the alternative is the Doctor spending ten minutes talking about how MONSTERS ARE REAL HOLY SHIT THIS IS SOME SERIOUS FUCKING SH oh hey the kid's just an alien okay peace.

Yes, but...Fear Her.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on September 05, 2011, 10:47:48 AM
Yes, but...

The Unquiet Dead, The Idiot's Lantern, and Victory of the Daleks...

we're all pretty terrible episodes. Hell, Idiot's Lantern held the mantel of Worst of the New Doctor Who until Rebel Flesh in this season.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 05, 2011, 12:20:53 PM
Nah, I'd say Idiot's Lantern was better than Fear Her, Unquiet Dead, Runaway Bride, Gridlock...and probably most of the Davies season finales.

And I didn't think Rebel Flesh was so bad.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on September 05, 2011, 03:26:58 PM
I still say Daleks in Manhattan was by far the worst the show's done. The fact that it was a two-parter was just plain brutal.

I kinda liked the Cult of Skaaro too.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 10, 2011, 08:29:06 PM
Quote
[spoiler] "You're turning me into you!" Rory has studied enough and has seen enough to know how "bigger on the inside" works. Since Last Centurion time, he's lived as long as the Doctor. He's not as well-traveled, but he knows 2000 years of being completely alone. And Rory really is about 5 tough decisions/tragedies away from being another Doctor.
I'm not saying they're actually doing that obviously, but he's definitely been groomed for the position at this point.
[/spoiler]

You know, Roranicus, Centurion of Time would be a pretty great show. I'd watch it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on September 11, 2011, 03:39:42 AM
So this episode, The Rory and Amy Show: Guest starring Matt Smith as The Doctor.

Let me stress that I am OK with this.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on September 11, 2011, 10:56:52 PM
Quote
[spoiler] "You're turning me into you!" Rory has studied enough and has seen enough to know how "bigger on the inside" works. Since Last Centurion time, he's lived as long as the Doctor. He's not as well-traveled, but he knows 2000 years of being completely alone. And Rory really is about 5 tough decisions/tragedies away from being another Doctor.
I'm not saying they're actually doing that obviously, but he's definitely been groomed for the position at this point.
[/spoiler]

You know, Roranicus, Centurion of Time would be a pretty great show. I'd watch it.

I actually was really excited for a few minutes[spoiler] when badass amy appeared, Because I was hoping that rory being the centurion would still be a thing. "I waited 36 years for you" vs "I waited 2000 years for you", and then badass amy and centurion rory ride off into the sunset to be badass together [/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on September 12, 2011, 04:21:34 AM
That was actually a really good episode, probably one of the best of the season. Solid sci-fi premise, doesn't take place on Earth, and decides to do some interesting visuals and effective (not-quite) monsters to boot. Plus Karen Gillan really gets to show off her acting chops.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 14, 2011, 09:04:09 PM
Dispensing with spoiler tags because we're four days past now.

I was hoping that rory being the centurion would still be a thing. "I waited 36 years for you" vs "I waited 2000 years for you"

It was implied, though.  I like that they can let backstory be backstory and not have to spell it out in dialogue.

and then badass amy and centurion rory ride off into the sunset to be badass together

I really was hoping they'd give her an out at the end of the episode.  Just in case Gillan wants to do a Sarah Jane-style spinoff 35 years down the line.

Anyhow.  Wonderful stuff even if there were no real surprises.

And I quite like the preview for next week.  And hell, if the central premise of Moff's run as showrunner is Doctor Who as a thing for children that is also terrifying, well, Oranges and Lemons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oranges_and_Lemons) pretty much epitomizes that.

I mean, Ring Around the Rosie is a pretty good example of a horrifying nursery rhyme, but kids can hear it and not know what it's about.  "Here comes a chopper to chop off your head" is a lot less ambiguous.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 17, 2011, 12:02:54 PM
That was an... interesting episode. The entire time it felt like it was just one scene away from being a great episode and then it ended.
It wasn't a bad episode, I don't think. A bit forgettable really. Which is a shame [spoiler]due to the Amy/Rory parting at the end. Of course, I'm not entirely sure how long this parting will be. I mean, obviously they were on their way out of the series but I honestly figured it'd take them a bit longer.[/spoiler]


EDIT: Everyone on the internet is all in a fuss about [spoiler]Rory talking about traveling with the Doctor in a past tense. I took it to mean he mentally moved on and that was supported by him immediately running in the house at the end and choosing to live on earth. The internet, however, apparently thinks there's some wibbly wobbly time travel stuff going one. With theories ranging from Rory being the Master to this happening before Impossible Astronaut. (Rory and Amy were living in a house and they hadn't seen the Doctor in a while). All stupid but it just goes to show how much thought people put into this. Take that as you will.[/spoiler]




EDIT 2: EDIT BOOGALOO: Next episode:
Quote
[spoiler]“It’s [set] 200 years after The God Complex – for the Doctor, anyway. All the stuff you saw at the very beginning of The Impossible Astronaut, with him waving to Amy through all time and space, he’s been doing that. [/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 17, 2011, 09:01:13 PM
I liked it.  It riffed on [spoiler]Curse of Fenric[/spoiler] quite a bit in the climax, but I quite like that one, and I also like the contrast: [spoiler]#7 acted like a raging prick in that one to shake Ace's faith in him, while here #11 was, I think, being totally honest.[/spoiler]

(Also did the clown remind anyone else of Colin Baker?)

[spoiler]Pretty sure I read Gillan had renewed her contract.  I don't think this is a real goodbye; I think it's just necessary to establish what we already know: the Doctor's going to ramble about the galaxy for 200 years before he comes back.  Though if the guy from The Lodger became the new full-time companion I wouldn't complain.[/spoiler]

Themes we're seeing over and over again: prison and Hell.  River's in prison, and the people who were after her wanted to send her to Hell.  And of course we know she eventually goes to Heaven.

Is the prison itself a kind of hell?  Would that explain why they keep letting her out and why she keeps coming back?  Perhaps the ultimate punishment for killing the Doctor is to allow her to know and love him.

We've also got fear and duality.  We're clearly meant to believe that the Doctor is his own worst fear.  (And, presumably, the thing he holds the most faith in.  Or would that be the TARDIS?)  He confronted himself as the Dream Lord last season, and we've had at least two episodes this season which featured duplicate Doctors.  (And one that featured a duplicate Amy, of course.)

Where's it all going?  Dunno.  But two weeks doesn't seem like much time to tie up the loose ends, and I'm beginning to fear we'll be left with more questions than answers.

Purportedly next season's going to be short -- the better to prepare for a big 50th anniversary event in '13.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 17, 2011, 10:09:54 PM
It is entirely possible [spoiler]that Gillan won't be a main character next season. Be like Rose was. Walk on bits here and there after she left, an echo of a companion. Flashbacks maybe?[/spoiler]
I remember reading somewhere that soon the Doctor will be gaining a room where he can talk to holograms/simulations/whatevers of his past selves for advice. Tennant signed on for it and rumor had it that Eccelston was actually interested in doing that going against his double-dipping dislike. [spoiler]Maybe Gillan will be in that?[/spoiler] Again though, I don't have a source for this and it's been a month or so since I've read it so I have no idea where to find it again much less see if it's true. It's a neat idea, I think. Not sure it's necessary but I could see the Doctor thinking himself the best person in the galaxy to ask for advice.
What I find interesting about these talks is [spoiler]I haven't heard one word about Arthur Darvil renewing HIS contract. Either that means people don't care about him as much as Gillan (which I find silly. As much as the internet froths at cute red heads, everyone seems to dig Rory as a character.) or he's not in the show. Which either means he dies (again) or they leave him on Earth while they travel the galaxy (again).
I suppose it could mean he can keep his mouth shut or I just because I haven't heard anything doesn't mean he didn't say anything but those ideas are far less interesting. [/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 18, 2011, 09:36:55 PM
Someone on the AV Club (http://www.avclub.com/articles/the-god-complex,61730/) comments thread says that you can hear the Cloister Bell when the Doctor opens his door.  Cloister Bell often implies paradox, as when the Doctor encounters himself.  Or just some emergency that threatens to devour the fabric of spacetime -- we still don't have our answer on who said "Silence will fall" and exploded the TARDIS.

Another point: as I'm sure everybody noticed, the Doctor's door is #11.  Obvious reference.

Amy's door is #7.  The obvious inference is that [spoiler]it's got a seven-year-old Amy behind it.[/spoiler]

I prefer to think it's something more self-referential: as I noted, the climax was cribbed from a Seventh Doctor serial.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mongrel on September 23, 2011, 01:51:09 PM
(http://verydemotivational.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/demotivational-posters-twelfth-doctor.jpg)

I know this is one of those "cheap internets gags", but I just keep laughing at it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on September 24, 2011, 06:08:41 PM
So the bulk of the episode was take it or leave it, and then the last ten minutes are crucial and adorable.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on September 24, 2011, 06:39:13 PM
Yeah, wasn't big on most of The God Complex. Just sort of... unenjoyable, if kind of conceptually interesting.

Did quite like the last ten minutes though.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on September 24, 2011, 06:54:59 PM
I was talking about this week's episode, but I might as well have been talking about both. Though if I had to choose, I like the main plot in The God Complex better.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 24, 2011, 08:21:34 PM
Closing Time was simple enough but the dialogue was really top-notch, I thought.  And Craig is great; like I said, I'd be thrilled to see him as the regular companion (though they seem to have rather written that possibility out at this point).  Climax was cute but fits the fairy-tale theme nicely.

...so did the Doctor closing all the cracks in time cause people to forget all the damn Cybermen that materialized smack-dab in the middle of London 5 years ago, or was that Craig just being a serious doofus?

Once again, it's going to be damn tough to answer all the lingering questions in the remaining one episode.  Wonder if it'll have an extra 15 minutes on it or suchlike.

And then nothing new 'til Christmas, and then season 7 doesn't start until next fall.  They might put an Easter special or another fundraiser somewhere in the middle there.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 24, 2011, 08:33:10 PM
Well, since it's a new universe, I think they are using that to rewrite the history a bit. They've done it already a bit (or at least hinted they did) and if that's the case, they'll probably come right out and state it in an episode.

And there's that Einstein episode coming before Christmas, right?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on September 24, 2011, 09:53:17 PM
Remember last season when Amy had no idea what a Dalek was despite The Stolen Earth. I think it's an extension of that. Those parts of history seem to have been eaten by the cracks, and it doesn't seem to have been restored. Whether it's the events that were erased, or just the memory of the events is hard to say. She also had no idea about the 100 foot tall Cyberman in Victorian London.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 24, 2011, 10:03:25 PM
Well, the Iron Giant Cyberman was a plothole that kinda had to be dealt with.  And yes, I remember her not knowing what a Dalek was, but I thought that got fixed when the Doctor closed the holes.

Dunno -- clearly we haven't seen the last of that storyline, as "the Silence will fall" is the line that preceded the destruction of the TARDIS.

Now we know "the question will be asked and the Silence will fall".

What's the question?  "Doctor Who?" would be a little too cute I think, but it WOULD of course tie back to the original mystery that kicked all this off: how River knows the answer to that very question.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 24, 2011, 10:18:01 PM
Well, it's been said for years by the Doctor himself, he'll reveal his name right before his death and only to someone he loves. I assume that means next episode we'll learn his name?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 24, 2011, 10:53:44 PM
...huh?  I don't remember him saying that at all.  Seems like something I'd remember given the emphasis it got in Silence in the Library (oh yeah, there's that "Silence" again), where he clearly knew the implication of River knowing his name but didn't say what it was.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on September 26, 2011, 08:15:02 PM
Doctor Who The Prequel to Episode 13 The Wedding of River Song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5jfLakwuls#ws)

Wondering if the "Doctor turned away from violence" law is significant, considering how bloodthirsty the Doctor has been this season.

One of the themes you didn't discuss, Thad, is the idea of altering the unalterable, of the Doctor interfering with points of time that are referred to as fixed points, and River Song succumbing to her fate of killing the Doctor. Like how Pompeii had to explode. Hence the significance of "Let's Kill Hitler", an episode that references a time-travel paradox (If it existed, why did Hitler exist?) while also setting in motion the events the Doctor has to avoid.

At the very least, the next episode looks like it'll be a fun one that's about time travel.

Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 01, 2011, 02:46:04 PM
Once again, it's going to be damn tough to answer all the lingering questions in the remaining one episode.  Wonder if it'll have an extra 15 minutes on it or suchlike.

OR, manage to answer enough to leave the audience satisfied for a whole year while still leaving the big ones dangling.  Nice trick if you can pull it off.

Loose ends:

[spoiler]The Question has still not been asked, and the Silence has still not fallen.
River as much as told us Madam Kovarian's death was undone when they fixed the timeline.  Question is, does she remember what happened there, like the Doctor and the Companions?  Does she remember her masters turning on her?
Still no payoff on all those Omega symbols -- which, yes, we just saw again, with River coming straight from the middle of last season.
What did the Doctor see behind Door #11 two weeks ago?
What of the removal of the regeneration cap?
And of course, the very first question from when we first met River: how does she learn the Doctor's name, and why is it important?[/spoiler]

I think Moffat managed to use the best of RTD's kitchen-sink finale approach -- striking visuals, returning characters, classic monsters, old continuity (and what a sweet [spoiler]sendoff to the Brigadier[/spoiler]) -- while still keeping a laser focus on the main plot thread of the last two seasons.  I really enjoyed it.  (That said, fuck that guy; give the Hugo to Gaiman.)

I suspect next season will give us more but still won't wrap the major arc; the big climax will be in fall '13, for the fiftieth anniversary.  Moffat is playing a very long game here.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on October 01, 2011, 05:00:39 PM
Amazing, but a whole fucking year's wait? Get some fucking work ethic, British TV.

Also, [spoiler]The Silent calling out the fact the Rory has died like fifty times was fantastic[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on October 01, 2011, 06:26:19 PM
(http://sharkey.gamespite.net/jambi.jpg)

Mekka Lekka Hi Mekka Hiney Ho!


Also, all I can think of whenever Matt Smith has that ridiculous beard on:

(http://i.imgur.com/q1AiM.jpg)

I wear pubes on my face now. Pubeface is cool.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 01, 2011, 10:09:04 PM
Amazing, but a whole fucking year's wait? Get some fucking work ethic, British TV.

Moff's implied on his Twitter that it's so he can focus on the big anniversary blowout.

Mekka Lekka Hi Mekka Hiney Ho!

Ha, yes, I was thinking the very same.

(http://i.imgur.com/q1AiM.jpg)

The funny thing is that that's not really far removed from the original dialogue.  In the actual scene, Joker tells Batman he peeked at his batwang while he was changing.

Fucking Kevin Smith.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on October 01, 2011, 10:33:50 PM
Loose ends:
[spoiler]The Question has still not been asked, and the Silence has still not fallen.[/spoiler]
[spoiler]Sure it was. The last minute of the show was them asking the question. He just didn't answer. I guess when Smith dies, he'll answer the Question. Fall of the Eleventh and all that.[/spoiler]

Quote
[spoiler]
And of course, the very first question from when we first met River: how does she learn the Doctor's name, and why is it important?[/spoiler]
Well, we know the second bit. And the first bit? [spoiler]I assume she was there. Which means we have to deal with River until Matt's dead if I'm right, the poor bastard.[/spoiler]

But yeah. Of course [spoiler]that was the question. It would have been retarded for it to be anything else. And of course it was the tessaract. I didn't see the Doctor riding inside of it coming, but that makes sense.[/spoiler]

Rest of the episode was pretty neat and I enjoyed it. I just kind of wish we could get away from River and The Silence for a while. Maybe one or two episodes next season with one or two mentions before there. Light foreshadowing.  I like the ideas of both River and The Silence, but they've taken over the show and I'm not entirely tickled by how they turned out.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 02, 2011, 09:46:16 AM
Well, we know the second bit.

Not really.  I mean, we know it's going to mean the end of the Silence, and that it's only going to be revealed in a place where all questions must be answered, but that still doesn't answer the "Why?"

"Fall of the Eleventh" has a certain pretty clear implication, but again, doesn't tell us much.

And the first bit? [spoiler]I assume she was there. Which means we have to deal with River until Matt's dead if I'm right, the poor bastard.[/spoiler]

Oh, I'll go one farther: not only is [spoiler]she there, she's the one asking the question[/spoiler].  Still doesn't tell us shit.  That's the thing about prophecies; they wouldn't be very interesting if they were specific.

But yeah. Of course [spoiler]that was the question. It would have been retarded for it to be anything else. And of course it was the tessaract. I didn't see the Doctor riding inside of it coming, but that makes sense.[/spoiler]

What's funny is that you could see all the duplicates as Moff going "Yes, of course it's a duplicate that died.  But can you guess which ONE?"

Rest of the episode was pretty neat and I enjoyed it. I just kind of wish we could get away from River and The Silence for a while. Maybe one or two episodes next season with one or two mentions before there. Light foreshadowing.  I like the ideas of both River and The Silence, but they've taken over the show and I'm not entirely tickled by how they turned out.

I'll agree on the whole that I'd be happy if next season was mostly disconnected and he saved wrapping up the arc for the season after.

But while it seemed like River and the Silence overwhelmed this season, they weren't actually in that many episodes.  I'd say the season was largely disconnected episodes with big arc stuff introduced in the last five minutes.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on October 03, 2011, 07:59:46 AM
Liked the last two episodes quite a bit. Love that The Doctor still thinks it's Earth custom to kiss each cheek in greeting, no matter the relation.

Season finale was fun, not overly complicated, really imaginative, and overall pretty satisfying. I don't necessarily know if The Doctor's impending death was worth building an entire season around, but ┐('~`;)┌ w/e it came out quite well in the end.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 03, 2011, 12:21:20 PM
So, okay.  Doctor Who?

Between The Big Bang and The Doctor's Wife, we've been working from the template of a guy who just stole his TARDIS because he wanted to go exploring.  (One of my favorite moments in series history is in The War Games when the Doctor admits to Jamie and Zoe that he stole it, and when they incredulously ask why, he responds, "I was BORED!")  But the McCoy era played up the idea that the Doctor was lying (hm, sounds like a phrase we've heard recently) and had a much less whimsical agenda.  Remembrance of the Daleks throws in the retcon that the reason he was on Earth in the first place, back in the very beginning of the series, was to hide Time Lord artifact the Hand of Omega.  (Oh hey, we've been seeing some omegas on the show, too!)  He even hints in dialogue that he was there when it was made -- which would suggest he was actually far older and more important than had previously been implied, and indeed probably a founding Time Lord along with Omega and Rassilon.

io9's review (http://io9.com/5844553/why-this-years-doctor-who-finale-was-mostly-better-than-last-years) of the finale links the TARDIS Wiki entry for Cartmel Masterplan (http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Cartmel_Masterplan):
Quote
The overall plan for Cartmel was to reveal that the Doctor was some form of a reincarnation of The Other (http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/The_Other), a mysterious figure from Gallifrey's past who helped form the Time Lord society and perfect the time travel technology of the Time Lords.

So yeah, pretty much what I just said.

I suspect that's got something to do with where all this is going, the idea that the Doctor's very identity is some sort of horrible, universe-shattering secret, and, yes, all the damn omegas that keep popping up.  (And, of course, omega as a reference to endings, and often cataclysmic ones.)

And I'm pretty well torn on that.  On the one hand, it fits that there's some kind of big mystery and subterfuge behind the character that's been heavily implied since the late 1980's.  It also adds retroactive drama to his confrontation with Rassilon in The End of Time -- or, for that matter, his confrontations with Omega in the original series.

But on the other hand, I love the idea that he's just an intergalactic vagabond who stole a ship to go see the universe, and that he only got caught up in being a heroic and, eventually, godlike figure because he kept ending up in the right place at the right time and doing the right thing.

They're not mutually exclusive, of course -- wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey.  He could have been present at the point when Rassilon and Omega perfected time travel AFTER traveling back in time himself.

Or, per the link above, some nonsense about the Other throwing himself into some damn cloning device (http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Loom) and reappearing as the Doctor ten million years later.  But that's lame.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on October 06, 2011, 06:25:59 PM
You know what I like about God Complex? That the planetary collision part of nerd kid's conspiracy theory actually describes the plot of the first doctor serial The Tenth Planet, which took place in the far flung future of the mid 80s. Which also happens to be the time period the holodeck space hotel is miming.

Nice touch.

Actually, come to think of it, the psychic email cube things in The Doctor's Wife were a throwback to The War Games (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5p9UdfQuSa8#). Hell if this season hasn't been full of this sort of thing.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 07, 2011, 12:15:50 PM
Nice.  I caught the War Games ref (mostly because Gaiman teased it before the ep aired), but I haven't seen (what's left of) Tenth Planet.

There've also been little one-line bits of dialogue that explain away original-series inconsistencies as just the Doctor lying to people (Let's Kill Hitler describes the Temporal Grace as "a clever lie"; the Christmas special dismissed the DNA lock the Doctor alluded to in Pyramids of Mars with "There's no such thing"; and over in the comics, there was a line about "You know, I once convinced my greatest enemy I was half-human, with a clever bluff and a half-open Chameleon Arch.").
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on October 12, 2011, 09:13:40 PM
SNES 16-Bit Doctor Who Intro (2010) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDuORTbSRXM#)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Zaratustra on October 14, 2011, 04:26:03 AM
I'm watching series 5 now. It's kind of cool, except the constant reliance on memory-wiping as a plot device and the part they defused a bomb with the power of love.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on October 14, 2011, 04:04:56 PM
Minecraft - Weeping Angels Mod Spotlight (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xj446LPEy7E#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on October 14, 2011, 05:02:55 PM
REQUIRED
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 03, 2011, 07:21:47 PM
Doctor Who - Cast & Crew Special (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3s4Czla6tXc#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on November 03, 2011, 07:26:14 PM
And the other one:
Doctor Who - "The Ballad of Russell and Julie" Wrap Party Special (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giaMRyn47Xg#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on November 24, 2011, 07:54:39 PM
The Doctor does Narnia

The Doctor The Widow and The Wardrobe - Christmas 2011 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSiULL4wCKg#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mongrel on December 04, 2011, 07:21:40 PM
(http://i2.listal.com/image/252141/936full-david-tennant.jpg)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 14, 2011, 09:29:25 AM
No two-parters next year (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2011/12/14/moffat-who-quots/), at least none planned as yet.

I hope that means a trend toward more self-contained episodes, but of course there's a difference between not having two-parters and having self-contained episodes.

I'd like a one-year moratorium on Big Season Arc.  You can have one for the fiftieth anniversary in '13, but I'd like a whole season of just standalone episodes.  Stuff like Blink, Girl in the Fireplace, Midnight, Vincent and the Doctor, The Doctor's Wife.

Hell, I'd even welcome more episodes like The Beast Below and Victory of the Daleks at this point.  (NOTE: I am not actually saying I want to see more Daleks.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 29, 2011, 09:36:47 AM
soooo the reason nobody's posted about the Christmas episode is because it wasn't really very good, right?

I mean, it was okay.  But well below Moffat's usual standards.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on December 29, 2011, 10:03:09 AM
I'm waiting for a friend to return from vacation so we can watch it together.  But that's disheartening.  :(
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on December 29, 2011, 12:13:34 PM
It wasn't terrible. Not as good as the last one but it was watchable.

I was hoping for more of a Lion, Witch, and a Wardrobe feel.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on December 29, 2011, 12:32:19 PM
Yeah, it wasn't really very narnia-ish. My biggest problem was how [spoiler]the doctor somehow had zero problem with repeated sentient tree genocide? Sure this group of trees somehow got lucky and saved, but they're just gonna grow a new batch next year, and then fucking acid rain melt them. But no the doctor needs to go have christmas dinner.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on December 31, 2011, 09:19:30 PM
Yeah, it was pretty treacley and daft, but that's exactly the same as saying "it was a Doctor Who Christmas special."
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on January 01, 2012, 12:51:20 AM
I enjoyed it for what it was, which is what you said there. I enjoyed that it had fewer plot holes that the Christmas Carol from last year (Why can't the doctor just evacuate everyone on on the Tardis, or tow it to safety like he did the ENTIRE PLANET EARTH). I ate warm pumpkin pie and watched The Doctor try to make kids happy. Mission accomplished.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on January 03, 2012, 07:29:10 AM
I thought last year's hung together better.  And also, flying shark.

So no, not bad, but...yeah, "treacley and daft" is about right.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on February 10, 2012, 06:58:39 AM
IDW to publish Doctor Who/ST:TNG crossover comic. (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/02/10/scoop-doctor-who-star-trek-official-crossover/)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Ted Belmont on March 11, 2012, 05:23:32 PM
Season Six is finally on Netflix (or maybe it's been there for a while and I just now noticed) so I finally watched it!

Couple of thoughts:

They still haven't addressed why the Silence want to build a TARDIS. They say they just want to kill The Doctor because he's dangerous, but if someone were trying to make their own TARDIS, bumping off the last of the Time Lords would probably be a smart move.

Speaking of the Silence, I don't believe anyone's mentioned this in this thread, but it's pretty clear that they're supposed to be the basis for the Men in Black stories, right?

Also, in The God Complex, the gambler dude was wearing a horseshoe tie-pin, and a horseshoe is basically just an upside-down Omega symbol.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 12, 2012, 09:19:54 AM
They still haven't addressed why the Silence want to build a TARDIS. They say they just want to kill The Doctor because he's dangerous, but if someone were trying to make their own TARDIS, bumping off the last of the Time Lords would probably be a smart move.

Or vice-versa.  Do they want to take out the Doctor so no one will interfere with their getting a TARDIS, or do they want to build a TARDIS so they can more easily take out the Doctor?

I imagine both goals are somewhat complementary.  They want the Doctor dead not just because he's generally dangerous but because he's dangerous to them in particular -- if he survives, Silence Will Fall.  And they want a TARDIS because -- well, we don't know for sure, but c'mon, EVERYBODY wants a TARDIS.  You don't really need a reason.

Speaking of the Silence, I don't believe anyone's mentioned this in this thread, but it's pretty clear that they're supposed to be the basis for the Men in Black stories, right?

Well, the entire history of Doctor Who is full of aliens and government coverups, at least on back to Troughton.  The Silence are just one more entry in a long tradition.  (I still love the idea that those 17 missing minutes in the Nixon tapes aren't actually missing, though.)

Also, in The God Complex, the gambler dude was wearing a horseshoe tie-pin, and a horseshoe is basically just an upside-down Omega symbol.

Ha -- nice catch.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Ted Belmont on March 12, 2012, 12:18:25 PM
They still haven't addressed why the Silence want to build a TARDIS. They say they just want to kill The Doctor because he's dangerous, but if someone were trying to make their own TARDIS, bumping off the last of the Time Lords would probably be a smart move.

Or vice-versa.  Do they want to take out the Doctor so no one will interfere with their getting a TARDIS, or do they want to build a TARDIS so they can more easily take out the Doctor?

I imagine both goals are somewhat complementary.  They want the Doctor dead not just because he's generally dangerous but because he's dangerous to them in particular -- if he survives, Silence Will Fall.  And they want a TARDIS because -- well, we don't know for sure, but c'mon, EVERYBODY wants a TARDIS.  You don't really need a reason.


The question then is, if they're going to kill The Doctor, why not just take his TARDIS? This could have something to do with the TARDIS blowing up last season; perhaps the Silence tried to steal the TARDIS, but something went awry and it blew up, so they decided trying to make their own would be a safer option.

Speaking of the Silence, I don't believe anyone's mentioned this in this thread, but it's pretty clear that they're supposed to be the basis for the Men in Black stories, right?

Well, the entire history of Doctor Who is full of aliens and government coverups, at least on back to Troughton.  The Silence are just one more entry in a long tradition.  (I still love the idea that those 17 missing minutes in the Nixon tapes aren't actually missing, though.)

Well, the reason I went with MIBs is because, aside from the obvious(the fact that they all "dress" like MIBs), there's also the whole memory filter thing, which fits in pretty well with the MIB mythos: anyone who's ever seen them doesn't remember the experience, not because of red light flashy thingies, but because of whatever the Silence do to edit themselves out of their memory. It might not be perfect, though, and over time, perhaps enough invididuals had vague recollections of identical, shadowy figures in black suits that the MIB myth sprang from there.

I suppose it is possible that The Silence patterned themselves after the MIB myth, in order to insure themselves against failure of the memory editing thing. If someone DID manage to recall an encounter with them, and all they could say was that they saw a dude in a black suit, they'd just be dismissed as another crackpot conspiracy theorist.

Or it could be both, timey-wimey stuff and all that.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on March 12, 2012, 01:11:34 PM
Which is why in the year five billion or whenever people are often still wearing pretty typical 19th-20th century suits. They're just picking up the idea from impossible-to-remember aliens without realizing it. Man, I wish they'd use that as a throwaway line at some point.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on March 12, 2012, 01:18:05 PM
Moffat mentioned that he modeled the Silents after the Thin Men alien myth. Basically, aliens that disguise themselves as G-men and abduct people under the guise of being from the government.

It's a cool idea to use as a launching point.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Ted Belmont on March 12, 2012, 01:47:31 PM
Which is why in the year five billion or whenever people are often still wearing pretty typical 19th-20th century suits. They're just picking up the idea from impossible-to-remember aliens without realizing it. Man, I wish they'd use that as a throwaway line at some point.

That's what I was thinking too, although more along the lines of, what if that's where the three-piece-suit originated? Some tailor who had encountered The Silence and was inspired/driven by his vague non-memories to create clothing like that.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on March 12, 2012, 02:28:52 PM
Moffat mentioned that he modeled the Silents after the Thin Men alien myth. Basically, aliens that disguise themselves as G-men and abduct people under the guise of being from the government.

It's a cool idea to use as a launching point.

Nah. He needs to flip that around. The G-men and anyone who ever wore or tailored a suit are the ones dressing up like the aliens without even realizing it. We're all doing so because we unconsciously associate authority with the appearance of these aliens that nobody actually remembers ever seeing. Works even better if the Silence/Silents are naked and their skin just happened to evolve to look like that. Actually, that's kind of like the Overlords in Childhood's End, though inspiring imitation instead of fear and revulsion. If they actually give a shit I bet it's amusing/flattering. Like domestic animals when they act like people.

Yeah. If the show never actually goes that way I think I'm going to have to add it to the pile of throwaway background ideas that could add flavor to a story if I ever got off my ass and wrote fiction.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on March 12, 2012, 02:57:44 PM
I think you guys are missing the point that The Silence as an organization are, more than anything, devoted to preventing The Doctor from answering the question, and even The Doctor himself seems to recognize that the secret that goes along with that answer is far too dangerous to ever be revealed, though being The Doctor he's willing to risk it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on March 12, 2012, 05:10:47 PM
... no, I got all that when Jambi explained it repeatedly. We're talking about something else.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mongrel on March 16, 2012, 07:10:17 AM
I don't read this thread much at all, so I dunno if this has been posted or not, but ANIME DR. WHO

Doctor who anime Full (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kt3qZYUPi2Y#)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on March 21, 2012, 02:30:40 AM
The announced the Doctor's new companion. I'll link to a picture (http://withfriendship.com/images/i/40020/Jenna-Louise-Coleman-pic.jpg) just in case someone doesn't want to see.

A lot of news this morning. Six episodes this year and a Christmas special.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 21, 2012, 08:14:21 AM
BC (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/03/21/everything-else-we-learned-about-doctor-who-today/) says it's six episodes INCLUDING the Christmas special.  The first 5 conclude the Amy and Rory arc, and the sixth introduces the new companion, with the season continuing for 8 more episodes into next year.  That doesn't include the season starting in fall of '13.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Kayma on March 21, 2012, 02:21:53 PM
Quote
Interviewer: “What was your reaction when they first told you that you had the part, and where were you?”

New Companion Actress: “I was in Marks and Spencers holding an avocado, having a debate about what goes best in a salmon salad.”

I think I'm going to like this one.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Syl on March 24, 2012, 10:12:37 PM
Doctor Who series seven trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mrb20e841-c#ws)
Here is a link to an awful shakey-cam footage of the Season 7 premier that happened somewhere at someplace.

Awesome. 
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 26, 2012, 07:07:15 AM
Official BBC version (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/03/26/doctor-who-the-new-series-seven-trailer-in-great-quality/)

(link is to BleedingCool because the embed URL is kind of a mess -- hey guys it's okay to have dots in your URL; you don't have to replace them with unicode)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on March 26, 2012, 07:35:35 AM
I thought Amy and Rory were done? I guess after these few episodes they are. I wonder when the new companion will enter the picture. Anyway, rock hard for new Who as always.

"Anachronistic electricity, keep out signs, angry stares... has someone been peaking at my Christmas list?" I swear, Matt Smith just keeps getting better at being his version of the Doctor.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 30, 2012, 06:59:36 AM
Rumor (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/03/30/which-daleks-will-be-back-for-the-next-series-of-doctor-who-all-of-them/): the Doctor's going to the ruins of Skaro, where we'll see Daleks of every flavor.

Okay, that's a Dalek story I can get behind.

(So I've got 'til November to get the fiancee to watch Revelation and Remembrance -- which fortunately are cheap on Amazon, and indeed it looks like the former has free streaming on Prime.  Hell, might throw the original Dalek serial in there too to get a little more Skaro.  She's already seen Genesis; I had her watch it before the end of season 4 so she'd know who Davros was and why she should give a fuck.)

(Or I could just tell her "The Doctor tricked the Daleks into blowing up their own planet."  But honestly they're two very good serials in the middle of some very hit-or-miss Who.)

...anyway.  There's Remembrance of the Daleks again.  Wonder if that's significant to the Big Plan or if it's just a logical jumping-on point for a Dalek story.  I still think Remembrance is likely to be a good big chunk of Moff's Big Plan, specifically the retcon about the Doctor originally going on Earth to hide the Hand of Omega and the implication that he was there for its creation.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Ted Belmont on March 30, 2012, 09:04:45 AM
What's the difference between the regular and special editions of Remembrance, aside from about 6 bucks in price?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 30, 2012, 09:12:03 AM
I linked an io9 article (http://io9.com/5893408/your-chance-to-discover-the-best-of-classic-doctor-who) in the Old Doctor Who thread.  It doesn't mention the extras on Remembrance specifically, but it sounds like in general the new Special Editions are cleaned-up better than the previous versions and have more special features.

Per Amazon, the Special Edition has:
Quote
Commentary by actors Sylvester McCoy and Sophie Aldred

Back to School making-of documentary featuring Simon Williams, Karen Gledhill, Ben Aaronovitch, Andrew Cartmel, and Andrew Morgan (32 mins)

Remembrances Influences and references to earlier Doctor Who adventures (15 mins)

Extended and Deleted Scenes introduced by Sylvester McCoy and Sophie Aldred (12 mins)

Outtakes (4 mins)

Multi-Angle Sequences (2 mins)

Isolated Music Option

New Dolby 5.1 Surround Mix exclusive to this DVD

Trails and Continuities (5 mins)

Photo Gallery (8 mins)

Easter egg

DVD-ROM material: Radio Times listings

Production Notes Subtitle Option

Digitally remastered picture and sound quality

Disc 2:

Davros Connections In-depth look at the history of the Daleks' creator (43 mins)

while the standard has:
Quote
    Extended and deleted scenes
    Alternate angles: Chemistry Lab, Gate Explosion
    Outtakes compilation
    Optional subtitled production notes
    Who's who
    Photo gallery
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Ted Belmont on March 30, 2012, 09:23:59 AM
Also, I can get free shipping if I buy Revelation and the special edition of Remembrance. ::3:

Are there any other old Doctor Who serials you would recommend watching in preparation for November? Apologies if you've already covered this in the Old Doctor Who thread as well, I tend to skim that one. :nyoro~n:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 30, 2012, 10:57:03 AM
I dunno about specifically in preparation for November.  There are rumors that the Yeti or the Ice Warriors might be back; I haven't actually seen any of those old serials (indeed the Yeti ones are Troughton-era and mostly lost; the surviving episodes are on the Lost in Time set but I don't know if that's exactly casual viewing).

Seeing as the Silurians recently made a comeback, it might be worth checking out their original appearance; it's a perfectly good serial in its own right and does a great job setting up the tension between the Third Doctor and the Brigadier, though it suffers from the usual Third Doctor problem of being two or three episodes longer than it needs to.

As far as Daleks, definitely check out Genesis of the Daleks if you haven't already.  I like the original Dalek serial too, though I find The Dalek Invasion of Earth to be terribly overrated and was nonplussed by Destiny and Resurrection (though all of them had their moments).

For stuff that functions as general Moffat inspiration, he's cited his favorite serials as Kinda and Snakedance, and he definitely used The Curse of Fenric as inspiration a few episodes ago.

Since the Sontarans keep cropping up, I'll also mention that they first appeared in The Time Warrior, which is a so-so serial (and doesn't tell you anything you don't already know from watching their appearances in the current series) but notable for the first appearance of Sarah Jane Smith.

And since the Omega symbol keeps appearing and it's generally assumed that he's going to be the Big Bad, I'll mention that his first appearance is in The Three Doctors, which is a fun enough serial but pretty silly really; all you need to know is that he's one of the original Time Lords and he was trapped in the Antimatter Universe and went insane; general Evil Time Lord villain.  He shows back up in The Arc of Infinity, which is probably important but I haven't seen it (not much of a fan of the Fifth Doctor).

As far as episodes I just generally like:

City of Death is my favorite serial; it's Fourth Doctor and Romana, co-written by Douglas Adams, and good big bits of it were reused in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency.

Green Death is a great Third Doctor serial; a bit preachy but really well-put-together.

Inferno is another great Third Doctor serial; it's the Who version of Mirror, Mirror (instead of Spock with a goatee it's got the Brigadier with an eyepatch).  Best to watch a few #3/Brigadier/Liz eps first; you'll enjoy the Evil Parallel Universe stuff more if you have a good grasp on how they are in the Regular Universe.  (You could do worse than starting with Spearhead from Space, #3 and Liz's first appearance, as well as the Autons'; I don't think it's the classic some people regard it as, but it's not bad.)

Speaking of Spearhead, its predecessor, The War Games, is pretty great and Important (introduces the Time Lords, Gallifrey, and just what the hell the Doctor's doing bouncing around space and time on his own).  It's long and rumor has it there's more than one spot where episodes were running short and they just added extra scenes of the Doctor getting captured and escaping, but it's still good stuff.

More Second Doctor: Tomb of the Cybermen is the definitive Cybermen episode.  I don't know why; I think it's pretty damn goofy and horribly-paced.  But it's got its moments.

And while I've grumbled a bit about the Fifth Doctor, my favorite of his is Mawdryn Undead.  It has Turlough and TWO Brigadiers.  (Also it sets up the Turlough/Black Guardian arc, and may trick you into watching the other two serials in the trilogy.  They're not very good.)

And if you're watching Curse of Fenric, you may want to watch Ghost Light first; it's not essential but the one does lead right into the other.

That's off the top of my head; there's more in the Old Who thread, and anybody else who wants to chime in is welcome to.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Ted Belmont on March 30, 2012, 11:48:53 AM
Whoa, that's way more than I was expecting. Thanks! This should keep me busy for a while.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 03, 2012, 09:32:53 AM
io9: 10 Times the Doctor Acted Like a Total Bastard (http://io9.com/5898445/10-times-the-doctor-acted-like-a-total-bastard-on-doctor-who)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 04, 2012, 09:11:50 PM
Doctor Who: The 16-Bit RPG (http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6749695/dr-who-rpg)
(For those of you who aren't caught up: SPOI-lers...]

and via io9 (http://io9.com/5899223/the-music-of-game-of-thrones-and-doctor-who-a-la-nintendo), you can get the soundtrack for this and all the other Doctor Octoroc "[blank]: The [blank]-Bit RPG" vids.

Nice use of the bridge as the victory fanfare.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 20, 2012, 08:46:17 AM
Quote from: http://io9.com/5903513/the-doctors-sonic-screwdriver-is-now-a-real-thing
A team from the University of Dundee has invented the first device capable of turning objects using ultrasound waves.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 28, 2012, 09:32:18 AM
Ra's al Ghul and Davos Seaworth to appear in the new season. (http://www.doctorwhonews.net/2012/06/dwn270612211512-david-warner-to-star-in.html)  Oh I am looking forward to hearing "...Doctor" in the "...Detective" voice.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 16, 2012, 07:12:44 AM
Summary of Doctor Who panel at Comic-Con. (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/07/15/doctor-who-at-comic-con-new-footage-multiple-doctor-tease-and-more/)

I think "Dinosaurs on a Spaceship" is an even better episode title than "Let's Kill Hitler".
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on July 16, 2012, 08:14:49 AM
I feel like any reference to dinosaurs that are in space are not giving me credit where it is due.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on August 02, 2012, 04:41:54 AM
Doctor Who: Full Length New Series Trailer Autumn 2012 - Series 7 - BBC One (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrEUBl2pacU#ws)

I still feel like I'm owned some kind of royalties for dinosaurs in space.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 05, 2012, 09:30:40 PM
Richard E Grant to play the villain in the Christmas show. (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/08/05/richard-e-grant-is-the-villain-of-this-years-doctor-who-christmas-special/)

Grant played the Doctor in the non-canon Scream of the Shalka (http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/classic/webcasts/shalka/) (which was originally intended as a Doctor Who relaunch but was never followed up since the new live-action series happened instead), and the even-less-canon Doctor Who and the Curse of Fatal Death:

Rowan Atkinson is Doctor Who - Classic Comic Relief (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do-wDPoC6GM#ws)

Hope they at least throw in a nod to it somewhere.  Like when the cast Derek Jacobi as the Master.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Büge on August 06, 2012, 07:04:36 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/y82hQ.jpg)

welp (http://doctorwhotv.co.uk/guess-whats-a-weeping-angel-in-series-7-36736.htm)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on August 27, 2012, 03:51:25 AM
Doctor Who Prequel: Pond Life part 1 - Series 7 Autumn 2012 - BBC One (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMdBsc5pQ1k#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 27, 2012, 11:44:09 AM
Quick little typo-riddled io9 interview with Smith and Gillan. (http://io9.com/5938254/matt-smith-and-karen-gillan-explain-how-doctor-who-will-make-the-daleks-scary-again)  A couple interesting teases, mostly for this Saturday's episode.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on August 27, 2012, 03:29:57 PM
(http://www.bbcamerica.com/anglophenia/files/2012/08/dw_premiere_1203_watermarked1.jpg?e116a5)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mongrel on August 27, 2012, 04:50:24 PM
In a fucking DeLorean, no less.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on August 28, 2012, 03:32:20 AM
 :joke:
McBain - Let's Get Silly! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDEuLXLNGBo#)
That's The Joke (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSRildGCw64#)
That's the Joke (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xECUrlnXCqk#)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on August 28, 2012, 06:02:03 AM
:joke:
McBain - Let's Get Silly! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDEuLXLNGBo#)
That's The Joke (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSRildGCw64#)
That's the Joke (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xECUrlnXCqk#)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 30, 2012, 07:43:36 AM
Episode posters! (http://www.combom.co.uk/2012/08/doctor-who-series-7-episodes-1-5-film.html)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 01, 2012, 11:10:33 AM
WELL!
I'm going to give myself a break and then rewatch it before I say anything other than it  seems the budget is bigger!



Well that and [spoiler]finally an episode not about River[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on September 01, 2012, 06:48:21 PM
[spoiler]"DOCTOR WHO?! DOCTOR WHO?!" Seems like the list of people asking that question is getting bigger[/SPOILER]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on September 01, 2012, 07:36:16 PM
Just assume this is all spoiler tagged.

Kind of annoyed they apparently went to the trouble of getting a bunch of old dalek models and only used them as blink-and-you'll-miss-it background elements. Especially where they just went and used time war daleks in the ward that was supposedly full of the guys from classic episodes. You know, where using those old models would have made perfect sense.

But really nothing compared to how much the rest of it annoyed me, from what seemed like it should have been a big deal breakup having such a trite and soap opera-y wrapup, to the fucking idiocy of locking a bunch of crazy assholes inside a prison where the lock can only be worked from the inside (and it even has a working teleport in there, just in case the entire premise wasn't already fuckoff stupid.)

I did, however, like the creepy dance scene. Especially where the ballerina recalled the music box dancer from Oswin's room and effectively, if kind of obviously foreshadowed the big twist at the end. Which I was enjoying right up until nobody said "come with me anyway." What, can't she run fast enough? Am I supposed to think the Doctor is a kind of stupid asshole here? Mission fucking accomplished.

Man, if it had gone that way it'd be the best thing ever. Not just trading out the usual hot chick peril monkey for a monstrous blob in a can, but the blob still thinks it's a hot chick, so hey, no need to sacrifice the apparently necessary eye candy. Might be a little too Julia Roberts in Hook in terms of the actress never actually getting to be on on the same set or directly interacting with rest of the cast, but that could be brilliant, too. "Surrounded by friends and still isolated" has an awful damn lot of narrative potential.

Nah, fuck it. She's a Dalek. Go die in an explosion.

Also, who the hell has been going around chaining these things up when it's demonstrated that it's about as effective as restraining someone with construction paper christmas tree decorations? It worked in Dalek because nobody actually knew better. Here it's just asinine.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on September 01, 2012, 07:42:13 PM
I think the problem was that she was, through a great deal of willpower in that moment, resisting her essential Dalek programming, and wouldn't have been able to keep it up forever. I mean, as soon as she realized what she was she was nearly overcome by it. Additionally, every single person in the universe hates and is terrified of the Daleks, and no amount of perception filtering by the TARDIS is likely to solve that one.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on September 01, 2012, 07:50:07 PM
Sure, but none of that was said or even really implied. Hell, she'd been keeping it up for a year, and really, she seemed pretty much okay with it after a little bit of waffling for the sake of dramatic tension. And traveling with someone who scares the shit out of everyone could also be interesting. Hell, I liked dragging Legion everywhere in Mass Effect just to get the reactions. That's not a problem so much as serious potential. If that got too hard to deal with, fuck it, do some hand waving with holograms after a couple episodes. Maybe finally clone her a body and get her out of the can, everybody cries a bunch. Hurrah.

Again, for a show that really loves to stave your head in with it when it feels like imparting a moral, the only one I got here was that people who look like monsters are just monsters. Screw them.




Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 01, 2012, 07:55:44 PM
Pretty much with Shark on all points -- though Jenna-Louise Coleman is the new companion, so maybe she gets better.  Which is a lot less interesting than having her stay as a Dalek, but still looks like it'll give the Doctor a shot at not being a stupid asshole after all.  (Alternately -- and the point that her character's name is Clara, not Oswin, would seem to support this -- it could just be that they're double-dipping like they did with Martha and Amy.)

On the plus side, I liked the atmosphere; at least they managed to make the Daleks seem creepy again.  And, trite resolution aside, the Amy/Rory stuff was solid; it was damned interesting to come back to them a little sadder and more broken.  I don't think we've seen the last of that.  (Of course, the subtext is a little bit of a downer, too -- it's one more example of how Moffat's run has defined every single supporting character in terms of their relationship to the Doctor, to the point that their lives go to shit when he doesn't show up for a few months.)

Also, showing just one quick shot of Skaro was a bit of a disappointment.  Then again, it's not like there's much more to say about Skaro; you can't really top "the Doctor tricks Davros into blowing it up" from Remembrance of the Daleks.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on September 01, 2012, 08:20:03 PM
Oh, and "I can't have babies therefore I'm no good to you" actually manages to push the envelope of misogynistic horseshit for a show that's been doing a spectacular job of that already. It's just shy of Twilight at this point. I probably shouldn't be amazed that so many teenage girls are in love with it now.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on September 01, 2012, 08:40:14 PM
RE: Dalek girl. Either that was a fleeting moment of sanity, or she gets to spend the rest of her life as a dalek that knows it used to be a person. In either case, I think she'd want to die.

As for Amy and Rory, it wasn't that she "was no good to him" it was that she could never have children with him, which for a lot of women is very important, particularly since she knew it was a dream of his. What she failed to grasp was that he didn't want kids, he wanted kids with her. It's not like she was proposing some kind of breeding stock purpose for her life, she was just devastated by the aftermath of Demon's Run. First she has a child, then loses it, then finds out she's alive, but has like 50 years on her now, then she finds out she fucking grew up with her own daughter, and then to top it all off they can never try again as it were. That this caused friction in their marriage is unsurprising.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on September 01, 2012, 08:48:06 PM
Yeah, if you say so. Nobody writing the show bothered to, though. It's still a really uncomfortable implication in both cases. At least, without going in and filling in explanations and excuses that weren't actually part of the story. I love this thing enough to want to do that, but taken on its own terms this one had a lot of ugly stuff going on.

Also, I love how the Doctor has to pull out his screwdriver and scan the crew jerky. "Yup, they're dead."

You fucking think?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on September 01, 2012, 08:49:49 PM
It's not like I'm grasping at straws here. That's how I read the scenes when I saw them.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on September 01, 2012, 09:02:19 PM
Maybe we're just coming at this thing from different perspectives, then. Still, this sentient, speaking Occam's razor keeps telling me it was probably just kind of crap. It's all Elric up in this shit, except I have melanin and the magic sword is less with the killing and more keen on bitching about children's television.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 01, 2012, 09:09:12 PM
It's not like I'm grasping at straws here. That's how I read the scenes when I saw them.

Me too, but at this point I kinda DO feel like I'm filling in blanks and making excuses.

I'm sure we haven't heard the last of this -- I don't see this ending any other way but "Amy and Rory get to have a kid after all."  (And no, I can't say I find Moffat's "One of them is going to die, no, for realsies this time" protestations convincing.)

That io9 interview (http://io9.com/5938254/matt-smith-and-karen-gillan-explain-how-doctor-who-will-make-the-daleks-scary-again) I linked ended thusly:

Quote
I know Amy addressed it a little last season, but how is Amy's emotional state since she was never allowed to physically raise Melody from a baby? Even though she and Rory grew up with Melody she never actually raised her as a baby. How are you going to deal with that this season?

Karen Gillan: Well actually, what's really interesting is there's a pretty huge revelation along those lines. I can't tell you anything about it. But yea, we are going to learn something very, very vital to that story line. And it's going to be dealt with through that. We're going to see a whole new side of Amy and Rory and their relationship, in the first episode.

Could be she's just referring to what we've already seen, but I'm guessing there's plenty more to come.

I suppose another way of looking at this is that he's finally picking up the threads he left dangling last season -- it really was kinda bullshit how he resolved the "Amy doesn't get her daughter back" plot by having Melody be their childhood friend we've never heard of when she's actually got to be in her thirties or something if she's been wandering around since the Nixon Administration.  So, you know, actually showing that Amy's still got some serious fucking mental trauma from the whole experience that she needs to work through is actually a potentially positive development both in her character and Moffat's storytelling, but...it's going to need more.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on September 01, 2012, 09:21:39 PM
I felt like this was the first act of Amy's reconciling the events of last season, given how fucked up she ought to be, and apparently is.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 01, 2012, 09:31:19 PM
I sure hope so.

But I think Moffat's got a history of introducing compelling character moments and then getting distracted by shiny things -- like the Doctor himself.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Misha on September 01, 2012, 09:36:57 PM
My biggest problem is all the shit this episode just made up about daleks. They now have a hivemind thing, they now put their "wounded" in an asylum, for some reason they have fucking nanogenes that turn humans into Daleks.  Forehead-glow human/daleks were also dumb. I understand Doctor Who is all about inventing crazy new stuff for each episode, and bringing back Daleks over and over again, but they don't necessarily have to be in the same episode.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on September 01, 2012, 09:43:36 PM
I liked the puppets, and the kind-of-hivemind explained more things than it asspulled, but there was some ass pulling. I kind of miss the days when Doctor Who was about crazy shit happening, and not really caring about making sense.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 02, 2012, 07:32:04 AM
for some reason they have fucking nanogenes that turn humans into Daleks.  Forehead-glow human/daleks were also dumb.

While I definitely agree that the humans with the Dalek eyes were the hokiest thing about the episode, they're also the one that makes the most sense building on Dalek history.  We've seen humans being turned into Daleks since, what, Revelation of the Daleks in 1985?  And humans turning into Daleks/Daleks turning into humans has been present in pretty much every Dalek episode of this series.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on September 02, 2012, 12:45:52 PM
All I could think of when the eyestalk came out was "this is so, so, so much better than the fucking Human Dalek in New York", so sliding scale.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Beat Bandit on September 03, 2012, 02:54:48 AM
Dalek Sec died for our sins ):
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 03, 2012, 09:14:45 AM
I dunno, I thought the "Dalek head on a human body" was some good creature work, even if the rest of the story really wasn't up to snuff.

Obviously there's a downside to actually SHOWING Daleks more than occasionally; do it too often and they lose their impact.  The original Dalek serial showed a claw creeping out as a cliffhanger ending; one of the (much) later ones (Resurrection?) had one do a face-hugger thing and leap out of its destroyed armor to attack somebody, but you didn't get a good look at it then either.  I think Dalek was the first time we actually got a good look at one, and it was just fantastically done in that one.  While I think the creature effect was neat in Daleks in Manhattan, I definitely agree that having some dude with a Dalek face just walking around lessens the impact of seeing a Dalek face.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 04, 2012, 07:09:28 AM
(Alternately -- and the point that her character's name is Clara, not Oswin, would seem to support this -- it could just be that they're double-dipping like they did with Martha and Amy.)

The more I think about it the harder that is to believe, even if it is the simplest explanation.

Because they kept it under wraps that she was going to be in this episode.  And they're smart enough to know that's going to fuel fan speculation, and, while Moffat's track record isn't as unassailable as it was before he had to do this shit full-time, I still think he's way too good a showman to let that kind of buzz go on for three months and then go "Nah, guys, just fuckin' with you; she's just playing a different character."

Even if Oswin and Clara were originally conceived as different characters and the dual-casting decision came later, I'm willing to bet there were rewrites to accomodate it.  And something more substantial than "she was Martha's cousin" or "Romana decided to regenerate herself to look like Princess Astra".

It would be better still, of course, to think that it WASN'T a plan that came later and Moffat always intended for there to be some out to save Oswin after all.  It does seem to fit his MO.

Hoping, too, that he's not rehashing River's origin and having the Doctor meet her for the first time when she's about to die and then meet her earlier self in a later episode.  Though, regardless of the circumstances of their eventual meeting, it's quite possible he won't recognize her -- he never did get to actually SEE what she'd looked like as a human, after all.  (Heard her voice, though -- and given that *I* knew I recognized her voice from somewhere, it would be a bit disappointing for the Doctor to once again be less observant than I am.)

MEANWHILE: Gaiman (http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2012/09/hugo-is-doctors-wife.html) accepts Hugo for The Doctr's Wife, and

Quote
And I did mention during my awards speech that only a madman or a fool would tempt fate by doing it again, having won. And that I am now on my third draft...

Bleeding Cool (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/09/03/neil-gaiman-writing-another-doctor-who/) suggests that the episode may be intended for the second half of the just-started series...are they really planning to broadcast episodes early next year that haven't even started filming yet?

If so, that would certainly support my supposition that, even if Clara hadn't originally been planned to be connected to Oswin, there was plenty of time for rewrites to make that connection.

EDIT: Fellow Hugo winner Charlie Jane Anders (http://io9.com/5940031/more-details-about-neil-gaimans-new-doctor-who-episode) confirms that Gaiman says his episode is slated for the second half of season 7.  So, while that doesn't mean it WILL be part of the second half of season 7, it would certainly suggest that yes, the current season, and specifically Clara's arc, is still being written.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on September 08, 2012, 08:59:55 PM
So... "Solomon" is a greedy, covetous old bastard who looks like Gargamel. Didn't catch him eating babies or poisoning wells, but he did shoot a puppy. Also, crippled, so he's in the same club as Davros and Lumic. And of course strong women are still bargaining chips who just need a man who confuses his dick with a gun, and in this context Amy presumes to lecture about gender politics.

I'd like to get wound up about all of that, but it was mostly fun. Can't help feeling like Mitchell and Webb could have been better used, and that "balls" line was just cringe inducing, but eh, fuckit. This one does what it says on the tin and I had a good time with it. It's just... Jesus wept, guys. Try to be at least a tiny bit self aware about this stuff. It's like a racist, sexist, colonialist friend describing this weird dream he had. But you listen anyway because you might be in it and there were dinosaurs.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 08, 2012, 09:57:47 PM
These last two episodes feel very RTD-y to anyone else?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 10, 2012, 06:31:49 AM
Now that you mention it, yes, exactly!

Yeah, I did think it was a fun, somewhat problematic, largely forgettable episode.  The new characters were all cliches but the actors had enough fun with those cliches that I enjoyed them.  If I were to pick the biggest flaw of the episode it's that it kept implying there were much better episodes happening around the edges that don't actually exist.  (Seriously, I could watch an entire season of The Doctor and Mr. Weasley Tour the Universe.)

The Doctor's increasing brutality is building toward something, right?  I mean, it's gotta be.

I like the idea of longer and longer gaps between his visits, too.  It just hit me that that's a riff on the ending of Peter Pan.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 10, 2012, 10:59:50 AM
Honestly, I kind of preferred these styles of episodes. Nothing looming overhead, no long pauses while the Doctor thinks about the season finale. The constant tension and build up is nice every now and then, but I'm hoping this season is more... I want to say airy.

If that means Moffat channels a bit of RTD, that's fine with me.

Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 10, 2012, 11:13:12 AM
Oh, I'm all for a more episodic format that doesn't keep upping stakes or building a big arc.  I prefer it, in fact.  But I still think these episodes are less-than-ideal examples of same.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 11, 2012, 01:04:18 PM
io9: Do we already know the theme of this season of Doctor Who? (http://io9.com/5941665/do-we-already-know-the-theme-of-this-season-of-doctor-who)

Charlie Jane Anders points out major recurring bits we've already acknowledged here: an increasing distance from the Ponds, and people forgetting who the Doctor is.

A commenter named Blue Hinter takes it farther in a couple of posts:

Quote from: Blue Hinter
As of right now, you could blame it all on somebody's superhuman hacking ability, though I'm hopeful in the next episode, we'll see more direct evidence of the effect spreading to human memories. (possibly with a "who was that bowtied man?" variant, where the population of Mercy forget the Doctor the moment he leaves town)

Personally, my suspicions point straight back to The Silence.
We already know they can make themselves memory-proof. What if they've found a way to do the same to The Doctor, and it's all part of the plan to make sure the first question never gets answered? (first remove the man, then remove the myth?) It would be a clever cheat on Moffat's part if "Doctor Who?" came to be less about knowing the Doctor's real name, and more about the man the entire universe has forgotten trying to reassert his identity.

Also, if you were wondering how Clara and Oswin could be the same person and not know the Doctor... there you go. Problem solved.

Quote from: Blue Hinter
I've been having the same discussion over on OG, and somebody pointed out the brilliant idea that "The Question" asked will be by The Doctor, for The Doctor -- that the forgetting effect will finally end up spreading to him as well, and he will end up forgetting who he is (The "fall of the 11th" mentioned by Dorian)

If so, the Doctor's oddly undoctorly behavior in both this episode and the next, plus all those "remember" and "Doctor Who" lines Moffat has been scattering across the last three seasons will finally pay off in a way none of us expected.

Hm -- that WOULD be much more interesting than River or the Daleks asking it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on September 12, 2012, 06:29:28 PM
Personally, I'd like it if The Question turned out to have a comma in the middle.

... hm. We don't have a "what a twist" emoticon.

:disapprove:

That'll do.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 12, 2012, 07:59:56 PM
I laughed so hard I shot two ice cubes out of my nose.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on September 15, 2012, 03:01:53 PM
From the trailers I figured this'd be the most horseshit of the lot. Figures it'd end up being my favorite out of the last couple seasons. Not so much riddled with cliches as reveling in them, and the pacing actually worked when they weren't trying to cram in a dinosaur chase or whatever every five minutes. Made time for actual, you know, character development and shit. And I love the almost cartoonish portrayal of Americans. Good times.

Then again, the batwing doors on all the bars around here might be coloring my judgment a bit.

Oh, and of course it's Toby Whitehouse. I'd only just started on Being Human last night. Had to skip back and check the opening credits when I was about halfway through. Hell if the guy doesn't have a noticeable style with the dialogue.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on September 15, 2012, 03:48:30 PM
Didn't even notice that was Ben Browder as Isaac there.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 16, 2012, 11:24:15 AM
From the trailers I figured this'd be the most horseshit of the lot. Figures it'd end up being my favorite out of the last couple seasons.

Right?  Way to defy expectations.

I wouldn't go so far as to say it's my favorite of the last couple seasons (that's still The Doctor's Wife), but definitely the meatiest of the new season.

Not so much riddled with cliches as reveling in them, and the pacing actually worked when they weren't trying to cram in a dinosaur chase or whatever every five minutes. Made time for actual, you know, character development and shit. And I love the almost cartoonish portrayal of Americans. Good times.

And it's nice that we got such a quick payoff on the "You know, the Doctor's really been kind of a huge prick these last couple episodes" observation instead of dragging it out.

I mean, obviously we haven't seen the last of it, but it's been acknowledged and will continue to shape things going forward.

And that he managed to keep the monologuing about everything he's seen and done to a minimum (which, in addition to the point that we've heard it all so many times, doesn't really fit his newfound attempts to keep a low profile).  He did the "every time I don't kill the Joker he just escapes and kills more people" bit with Rory and Amy, but he lets Kahler Jex's "you're just like me but imprisoned by your morality" speech go by without mentioning he's got at least three genocides under his belt.

And of course there's no simple solution to the question of the Doctor's morality, because the Doctor's morality is whatever the showrunner says it is.  But if we wanted to take a somewhat cynical but nonetheless interesting in-universe explanation, well, if you're 1200 years old you're bound to redefine your moral parameters a few times.  Sometimes you're in an optimistic mood and sometimes you're not; the guy who agonizes over whether or not he can bring himself to kill Davros might just straight-up trick him into blowing up his own planet a couple regenerations later because seriously, fuck that guy.

And it's not just the Doctor who's committed genocide.  Some of his best friends have committed genocide.  Even going back to #3, he was pretty pissed when the Brigadier wiped out the Silurians, but they were still friends the next week.

Oh, and of course it's Toby Whitehouse. I'd only just started on Being Human last night. Had to skip back and check the opening credits when I was about halfway through. Hell if the guy doesn't have a noticeable style with the dialogue.

Haven't checked it out yet.  Worth it?



ALSO: This is the second time in as many weeks the Doctor has mentioned his Christmas list.  I like to think the Doctor's Christmas List will play a major role in this year's Christmas episode.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on September 16, 2012, 05:37:32 PM
Yeah, and he also mentioned Christmas in the Dalek ep, so that's the buzzword for the half-season.

And I just finished the first season of Being Human and I like it alright. It goes pretty heavy on the cliches and doesn't subvert them nearly enough, but entertaining nonetheless. Like a particularly thoughtful World of Darkness GM got ahold of a TV series. Definitely appreciate the writing more than the direction and editing, which implements so many contemporary pop songs and montages that I'm put in mind of a shitty 90s MTV series. Of course, that's almost nostalgic, so whatevs. I hear it goes to shit in the last season, but we'll see. Also, as usual, the American take on it is complete and utter dogshit.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 16, 2012, 09:18:13 PM
Yeah, and he also mentioned Christmas in the Dalek ep, so that's the buzzword for the half-season.

Guys over on the Bleeding Cool comments section (http://www.bleedingcool.com/forums/front-page-comic-news/62489-ten-thoughts-about-doctor-who-town-called-mercy.html) have noted that eggs keep showing up, too -- "Where are the eggs?", dinosaur eggs, and an egg-shaped spacecraft.

And flickering lightbulbs.  An image probably best remembered from Blink.

They've also suggested that we may not be seeing episodes in chronological order (at least, not from the Doctor's perspective), which is a tempting possibility and could certainly go a long way to explaining his overall dickishness and his increasing distance from the Ponds.  Could be that whatever Something Bad is forthcoming, he's already seen it.

And I just finished the first season of Being Human and I like it alright. It goes pretty heavy on the cliches and doesn't subvert them nearly enough, but entertaining nonetheless. Like a particularly thoughtful World of Darkness GM got ahold of a TV series. Definitely appreciate the writing more than the direction and editing, which implements so many contemporary pop songs and montages that I'm put in mind of a shitty 90s MTV series. Of course, that's almost nostalgic, so whatevs. I hear it goes to shit in the last season, but we'll see. Also, as usual, the American take on it is complete and utter dogshit.

Cool, maybe I'll put it on my list.  Still have Life on Mars to watch on my "British dramas people have recommended to me" list first though, I think.  (Actually thought the American adaptation of that was solid, if largely because nobody really seemed to give a fuck whether it actually made any logical sense.  But that's without seeing the original.)

Hm -- British shows that have had good American adaptations?  Till Death Us Do Part, Steptoe and Son, and The Office, off the top of my head.  I'm sure there are more but damned if I can think of any.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Classic on September 16, 2012, 09:52:01 PM
Of course, the Britons hate American adaptations as a matter of national pride?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 17, 2012, 10:40:33 AM
io9 (http://io9.com/5943655/doctor-who-and-the-downside-of-turning-people-into-weapons) adds another recurring point over the past couple episodes: people not only not knowing who the Doctor is, but the scripts using that to actively subvert the audience's expectations.  Not only do we naturally assume that the alien doctor the Gunslinger is looking for is the Doctor, but in Dinosaurs, we assume Solomon recognizes the Doctor's name but actually he's just reacting to the presence of a doctor onboard.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 17, 2012, 11:15:33 AM
In your egg mention list,  there was also Rory yelling about Dalek eggs.
But you caught the important one. New girl needed eggs.  She comes back at Christmas.  Lots of eggs and Christmas mentions. Probably all just misdirects but whatever.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 17, 2012, 11:29:58 AM
In your egg mention list,  there was also Rory yelling about Dalek eggs.

Well right, but it's the same thing.  Where did she get the eggs?  Eggs-terminate.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on September 17, 2012, 12:10:32 PM
I wonder what would happen if they killed River in the "not everyone is getting out this time I mean it for real" scenario. Her original death isn't a fixed point, it wouldn't necessarily stop her from appearing, as they're both time travelers, and perhaps hint that The Doctor's timeline has been seriously altered. It would also be a good time/reason for Amy and Rory to step out of the TARDIS for good.

I don't think that's what's going to happen, but it would be interesting.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on September 22, 2012, 03:03:59 PM
Amazing how an ending can turn an actually interesting premise into complete rubbish in the course of seven minutes. Reminded of I am Legend right up until after the dog died. Really neat mystery there right up until nope, it was just some guy in creepy makeup we've never heard of, who fucked off with his creepy buddies for no reason so the Doc could fuck up his entire plan by waving his screwdriver at a thing. What were the guys with the things in their mouth even doing? Why was there creepy robot stuff in their mouths? What was up with the patients? Did they wheel them all onto the Tardis before shit blowed up and everybody got magically better? Who gives a fuck. Everybody lives and the Doctor is great because he figured out exactly fuckall until the badguy explained it to him and then for some reason let him screwdriver the thing that makes everybody come back to life and the bad guys blow up. The end.

Seriously, it's like the writers are part of some alien plot to slowly transform me into Plinkett with this horseshit.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 22, 2012, 09:10:44 PM
I liked it well enough but that's because right from the opening I realized the cubes and the invasion were completely inconsequential and this episode was about Amy and Rory trying to grow up.

(Me, I hoped the reason there was nothing in the cubes was that they were just a giant distraction, like that Philip K Dick story where everybody at customs is watching this really elaborate children's toy from Russia to figure out what kind of insidious plot it could represent, and it keeps doing increasingly bizarre things, until finally they realize it was all just to distract them while something else slipped right under their noses.  That's another story with a really promising setup and a completely fucking lame ending.)

Anyhow, I thought the character bits were largely pretty good; I'm quite liking Rory's Dad, and Brig's Daughter is a promising character too.  (A little young to be Brig's daughter given that he was like 90 when he died, but let's leave that alone for a minute.)

We're still very much on the Peter Pan thing and I think the resolution, rather than Amy dying as they keep hinting, is that she's going to tell the Doctor to fuck right off and stop coming 'round here.

But you're right: really, really dumb ending.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 23, 2012, 09:23:00 AM
...you know, this is inconsequential canon nitpicking, but something else: he referred to his companions and said "Some die."

Some, as in plural.

Who's died besides Adric?

Peri's death was a fakeout; Romana and Rose wound up in alternate dimensions but survived; River's body died but the script was very clear that preserving her consciousness counted as Everybody Lives.

The Brigadier died of old age decades after the last time he saw the Doctor; I don't think that counts.  Sarah Jane's death hasn't been handled on the show but Lis Sladen died of cancer.  I GUESS there's Jack's death as the Face of Boe, but that's really stretching things.

Have any other companions actually died on the TV show?  I know some have in the comics and whatever other extraneous media, but that stuff's typically not considered canon.  Could the script just be alluding to adventures we haven't seen?  There are supposed to be over a thousand years' worth of those, after all.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Kayma on September 23, 2012, 09:44:37 AM
I GUESS there's Jack's death as the Face of Boe, but that's really stretching things.

hehehehe

Could the script just be alluding to adventures we haven't seen?  There are supposed to be over a thousand years' worth of those, after all.

This is kind of how I took it. Also, it might include people he liked, but that got offed before / instead of becoming companions, like the woman from that faith eating minotaur hotel.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 23, 2012, 12:00:37 PM
The shortest lived companion of all,  the waitress from the Titanic.  Died 15 minutes after agreeing to be a companion. And he took her death pretty hard.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on September 23, 2012, 12:00:56 PM
...you know, this is inconsequential canon nitpicking, but something else: he referred to his companions and said "Some die."

Some, as in plural.

Who's died besides Adric?


Katarina blew her self out an airlock way back when, though she didn't travel with him for long. Still, she was there for more than a single serial and that's enough for deathplural if you're only counting stuff that happened on TV. Actually, in retrospect, that was pretty fucking brutal. Especially given that they were mostly just trying to get her out quickly because writing for a primitive who doesn't understand that light bulbs aren't magic was apparently hard. Then that turned out to be most of Leela's character arc ten years later.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 24, 2012, 07:03:05 AM
Ah-har -- yeah, I can see how I missed that one, what with there only being 3 surviving episodes out of 12.  Worth checking out the Lost in Time sets?  I've been meaning to give them a look but they're not exactly high-priority on my Old Who To-Watch list.

Wikipedia's got a whole Death of a Companion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Who_companions#Death_of_a_companion) section.  Which has the ones we've mentioned plus Kamelion.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on September 24, 2012, 07:07:19 AM
Throughout the new series there have been several episodes of "I want this person to travel with me oh they died." Adelaide Brooke in "Waters of Mars" killed herself after the Doctor's actions, Astrid Peth in "Voyage of the Damned" turned into stardust, and for all intents and purposes the Donna Noble who traveled with the Doctor is dead, replaced by the shallow one that had never met him.

Those are all a bit of stretch, but the Doctor has left a string of dead people behind him implicitly trusted him like Amy and Rory do. If you want to be really charitable, you could also include the Madame Du Pompadour, who the Doctor was clearing out room for on the TARDIS when the time dilation of the episode ended up making him come back too late to bring her. While she didn't die under the Doctor's watch, she did die thinking the Doctor had abandoned her.

 And the list Thad links to specifically points out that both of them have died under his watch.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 24, 2012, 07:11:57 AM
...man, Lucie Miller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucie_Miller_%28audio_drama%29)/To the Death (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_the_Death_%28Doctor_Who_audio%29) sounds grim.

Those Wiki articles don't mention what happens to Susan and Alex so I assume they survive.  Which I guess makes sense in case they want to bring them back, but it would have been a convenient way to tie up that particular loose end and straight-up confirm that Susan died in the Time War.

Then again, I DO think that actually trying to explain what happened in the Time War is probably an inherently bad idea.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on September 25, 2012, 08:34:09 PM
Ah-har -- yeah, I can see how I missed that one, what with there only being 3 surviving episodes out of 12.  Worth checking out the Lost in Time sets?  I've been meaning to give them a look but they're not exactly high-priority on my Old Who To-Watch list.

Meh. Maybe if you have a long drive/train ride/whatever, but even then I only watched/listened to a few where something interesting was supposed to have happened but mostly didn't. But hey, I apparently hate everything so YMMV.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 25, 2012, 09:33:23 PM
something interesting was supposed to have happened but mostly didn't.

So typical Doctor Who?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 26, 2012, 01:40:07 PM
Neil Cameron: Daleks trying to figure out what happened all those times they tried to take over the universe and it didn't work out. (http://neillcameron.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/another-one-for-asylum.html)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 27, 2012, 08:39:08 AM
Theories at Bleeding Cool. (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/09/27/so-whats-happening-in-next-weeks-doctor-who-then/)

Johnston suggests that Amy and Rory will get sent back in time by the Angels and wind up raising their daughter after all.  I think that's a very, very tempting resolution.

Connolly notes that Amy commented in last week's episode that she and Rory have aged ten years and that the Amy and Rory waving to them across the way in Hungry Earth were ten years later.  It's tempting to see that as significant but I'm going to have to call bullshit -- Hungry Earth was ten years in the future, not ten years later in Amy and Rory's personal timeline.

Other possibilities raised: River gets sent back in time to raise herself; the typo on Rory's badge turns out to mean something after all; this finally loops River's arc and sends her off to the library.  But I like Rich's guess best.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 28, 2012, 12:04:27 PM
So does the BBC hate quality or just the DVD format? Because wow.
Sure glad I didn't pay full price for these.
Bad images printed on the disc,  typos,  shoddy packaging, and the video quality isn't fantastic either.

So,  uh,  just a warning, I guess.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 28, 2012, 01:30:07 PM
Current series?  Huh.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on September 28, 2012, 03:15:56 PM
Are you sure you didn't just buy a bootleg?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 28, 2012, 03:25:41 PM
Factory sealed and looks like photos of my friend's but the thought did cross my mind when I saw the typo disc.


(I know it's fairly easy to fake factory sealing but hrm)

Unless my buddy bought bootleg a year ago...
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on September 28, 2012, 03:26:53 PM
Well, they're in the mail for return anyway as the post office smashed every case into plastic splinters and folded cardboard.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on September 29, 2012, 03:38:14 PM
Well shit. That's kind of what I expected to happen, though they tied it off rather better than I thought they would. I actually almost felt sorry for the Angels at one point toward the beginning, but them being total sociopaths won out in the end. The false finale wasn't really that false, if you were paying attention, but it was well done.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 30, 2012, 08:05:29 PM
Yeah, I liked it.

I mean, it was pretty damn close to what happened with Rose (and has an even easier Undo button if they decide to bring them back for the fiftieth anniversary) but I think he sold it a lot better.

I like that the arc of this half-season was thematic rather than plot-based, and I also think River was well-used in this episode and most of her various awkward problems did not crop up.  (Especially now that we know she's no longer in prison -- and is a professor now.  Which means this episode occurs later in her timeline than any of the rest except Silence/Forest.  Though there's still room to squeeze more in between now and then.)

I also think it makes for an interesting compare-and-contrast to last week's -- it's another example of the monster taking a backseat to Amy and Rory's story, but instead of being a monster that we've never seen before and the Doctor magically fixing everything, it's a monster we HAVE seen before and things going down pretty much exactly as they did in the beginning of Blink.

Not much new, but new wasn't the point.  All in all, pretty good I thought.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 30, 2012, 08:41:42 PM
Oh, one more recurring thing that keeps popping up this season: the number seven.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 17, 2012, 07:09:58 PM
Doctor Who: P.S. - Series 7 2012 - BBC One (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWU6XL9xI4k#ws)

On the one hand, I like it.  On the other, I'm kinda glad it wasn't shot.

I like that it ties up two of the biggest loose ends of the season so far.  But I hate long goodbyes.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on October 17, 2012, 08:43:41 PM
I agree on both counts. I like it, but this kind of thing is a bit of a rabbit hole. Presumably he's got letters for other people as well, and when you start getting into all that noise, it just goes on and on.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 17, 2012, 09:17:12 PM
Yeah.  I've said before that Rose's goodbye episode would have been much better if it had ended 15 minutes sooner -- no driving across the country for one last message and explaining everything that had happened, no Doctor collapsing a star to talk to her one last time; just end with the scene where he's on one side of the wall and she's on the other.

This managed to strike something of a happy medium.  Amy gets to say goodbye but doesn't take her sweet time doing it.

On the other hand, Rory doesn't get to say goodbye and that kinda sucks; this clip gives him a chance to do it, and there's a reason Darvill's the only actor in it.

Seriously, I love Rory.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Beat Bandit on October 27, 2012, 06:47:25 AM
I've finally managed the strength to say goodbye to the tenth doctor. As far as I can tell through netflix, his last stand is season 4 - planet of the dead - waters of mars - the end of time 2-parter. Am I missing anything?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on October 27, 2012, 09:11:52 AM
That's the full run. Although I think the Next Doctor is the episode before Planet of the Dead.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on November 05, 2012, 01:35:09 PM
Eccelston season is on sale in new packaging for $20.
Found mine at Wal-Mart.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on November 05, 2012, 05:03:19 PM
Eccelston season is on sale in new packaging for $20.
Found mine at Wal-Mart.

I realize this thing started getting popular a while ago, but god damn that just seems weird. I'm still thinking it's like 1996 where there'd be like one videostore in town that'd have three or four random 80s episodes just because they had that one strange employee who was kind of into it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on November 16, 2012, 04:37:39 PM
Doctor Who: The Great Detective (Christmas Special Prequel) - Children in Need 2012 - BBC One (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G17_B4uACgg#ws)

Doctor Who: Christmas Special Trailer - Children in Need 2012 - BBC One (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3KVpvEUTns#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 28, 2012, 09:58:25 PM
Gaiman (http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2012/11/author-meets-world.html) says a few things about his episode, including that it will have Warwick Davis in it and that Smith's lines are very hard to say.

There's also some stuff about the upcoming radio adaptation of Neverwhere (Benedict Cumberbatch!  Anthony Head!  Christopher Lee!), and he notes that he's working on the American Gods pilot for HBO.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 18, 2012, 05:11:44 PM
Doctor Who: The Snowmen Prequel: Vastra Investigates - Christmas Special 2012 - BBC One (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rirju6is4Sw#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 24, 2012, 10:23:07 PM
Some teases from producer Caroline Skinner. (http://io9.com/5971019/producer-caroline-skinner-explains-why-doctor-who-is-getting-a-new-companion-for-christmas)

We'll be seeing more of Vastra, Jenny, and Strax throughout the coming season, the Clara/Oswin mystery will be addressed right off the bat (but will probably carry on through the rest of the season), and Neil Gaiman's episode has the Cybermen in it.

Twelve or thirteen hours to go, right?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on December 25, 2012, 01:53:04 PM
RE: Christmas special

[spoiler]The monsters are pretty much the B plot here, with most of the episode focusing on the new companion, Clara. Except she dies, but not before uttering the same last words as Oswin (Run you clever boy) in Asylum of the Daleks, and then at her funeral it's revealed that her full name is Clara Oswin Oswald, and we're shown a third version of her, apparently contemporary, standing next to the Victorian Clara's grave. The Doctor ends the episode looking for another Clara, because she's lived and died at least twice now, and that's the sort of thing to turn his head. After the credits we're treated to a preview of next season, where the main mystery seems to be who or what the girl who lives again and again really is. Also, there is no sign of River in the season preview, and no indication that the Doctor is married, as things get pretty steamy between him and Clara. We don't know how long he's been sulking, but it's possible River has gone to the Library.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 26, 2012, 02:12:25 PM
Well, if you're going to go back to the "mopey antisocial Doctor has to learn to love again" well, you could do worse than literalizing it by making Richard E Grant (http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/classic/webcasts/shalka/) the villain.

I wouldn't mind a whole season (half-season?) of [spoiler]the Doctor chasing down Clara somewhere else in the time and her dying by the end of the episode[/spoiler].

Re: River: Caroline Skinner makes a comment in the interview I just linked -- doesn't reveal much but she does strongly imply that [spoiler]River and Clara will meet[/spoiler].

Perhaps the most interesting thing she addresses is that this is a role reversal for the Doctor -- this time it's the new companion who has HIM mystified.

Anyhow, I think it's a damn fine hook, but River had an even better one and sorta belly-flopped the big reveal(s).  We'll see.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 28, 2012, 11:11:21 AM
Huge grain of salt with this one, but Eccleston plays coy about returning for the 50th anniversary (http://www.tor.com/blogs/2012/11/did-christopher-eccleston-just-reveal-hes-returning-to-doctor-who) instead of just giving a flat "No."

Tor (http://www.tor.com/blogs/2012/11/is-qthe-eleven-doctorsq-really-the-50th-anniversary) also says that Blogtor Who had a post up about an ostensible script for The Eleven Doctors but took it down.  Again, grain of salt, but it's not TOO farfetched.

(Keeping in mind that there's precedent for recasting deceased Doctors for anniversary shows (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Five_Doctors), I'd quite like to see Sean Pertwee play his father's role.  He really does look just like him.  That said, boy 11 sure is a lot and it might be easier to manage just the 8 who are still alive.  On the other hand, well, 50th anniversary; why not make it as big as possible?)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on February 28, 2013, 07:15:34 PM
Poster for upcoming episodes (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/02/28/doctor-who-promo-pic-for-the-next-episode-the-bells-of-st-johns-stuffed-with-monsters/) shows original-universe Cyberman and Ice Warrior.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 25, 2013, 08:23:42 PM
The Bells of Saint John: A Prequel - Doctor Who - Series 7 2013 - BBC One (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IROtC6cAT4#ws)

Points off for misuse of "prequel", but aside from that it's quite good.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on March 30, 2013, 05:58:12 AM
Tennant and Piper confirmed for the 50th anniversary (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-21980892)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 30, 2013, 11:39:10 AM
Welp, that's confirmation of multiple Doctors.  (I mean, we can nitpick and say "maybe it's the human clone of the Tenth Doctor", but that's not exactly relevant even if it's the case; the point is it's David Tennant.)  Frankly I would be surprised at this point if it's ONLY Tennant and Piper.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 30, 2013, 01:40:22 PM
Perfectly decent re-reintroduction of Clara.

Highlights:

Man the Client sure left the other bad guys twisting in the wind, didn't he?  "Oh yeah, this guy's probably gonna show up sooner or later.  It would be a great idea if you fucked with someone he warned you not to fuck with and then taunted him for awhile.  Let me know how that goes for you; laterz."

Also: while Moffat certainly takes liberties with technology at times (ACID CELL PHONE HARD DRIVE), I love that he understands the single fundamental issue of computer security: that the most secure system is as strong as the stupidest (or most corrupt) person with access to it.  [spoiler]Every single employee sharing their workplace on Facebok[/spoiler] FTW.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on March 30, 2013, 06:13:40 PM
(Okay. About TIME I can load this dumb page.)

Anyone else get a weird Deja Vu of Silence in the Library?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on March 31, 2013, 12:08:32 AM
I quite enjoy the Doctor's inevitable "You fucked with the wrong guy" moment toward the end. I'm also not sure the GI didn't think they could win. It's only met the Doctor twice we know of, and might not know how much of a bad idea it is to mess with him.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 31, 2013, 01:43:08 PM
Anyone else get a weird Deja Vu of Silence in the Library?

That and Idiot's Lantern.

I quite enjoy the Doctor's inevitable "You fucked with the wrong guy" moment toward the end. I'm also not sure the GI didn't think they could win. It's only met the Doctor twice we know of, and might not know how much of a bad idea it is to mess with him.

They've quite clearly set up GI as Big Bad for this half of the season, though, and quite probably involved in some way in Clara's origin story.  (Er, I mean, beyond the ways we already KNOW he's involved in her origin story.)  I like to think of this as one step in a long game -- he knew the Doctor would show up and shut him down eventually and he'd get away while his henchmen distracted him.  (Note that the Doctor, so far as we know, never finds out that the GI was responsible for the whole thing -- though he DOES know there's a "client".)

I mean, it COULD be that the GI's just been hanging out for fifty years not paying any fucking attention whatsoever to what the Doctor's gotten up to, which more than anything would just make his name hilariously ironic.  But my read is that he deliberately threw his meat puppets under a bus.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on March 31, 2013, 02:03:36 PM
Well, it definitely knows enough about the Doctor to know he's associated with UNIT, so it tracks that he's been keeping track, but given the state it was in when we last saw it I suspect it didn't have very much, lets say, influence until more recently. Took a long time to recover and all of that. So it's been observing, but too weak until now. I can't recall, was their any mention of the GI or similar in Asylum of the Daleks? I don't think there was, but it woulddefinitely tie Clara in pretty solidly.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on March 31, 2013, 06:38:18 PM
Well, it definitely knows enough about the Doctor to know he's associated with UNIT, so it tracks that he's been keeping track

Actually the Great Intelligence has fought the Doctor and UNIT before, in The Web of Fear (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Web_of_Fear) (UNIT's first appearance).  I haven't seen it either (and indeed hadn't heard of the Great Intelligence prior to Christmas -- I haven't watched many of the partly-missing serials).

I can't recall, was their any mention of the GI or similar in Asylum of the Daleks? I don't think there was, but it woulddefinitely tie Clara in pretty solidly.

Well, Clara's certainly going by the name of Oswin and has become a computer expert in Asylum, so she could potentially be the future version of this Clara.  But of course that's not necessarily the case given what we've seen.

Aside from Idiot's Lantern and Silence in the Library, I'm sure the "I don't know where I am" sequence was meant to evoke Oswin's "room" in Asylum.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on March 31, 2013, 06:59:42 PM
Might be significant that Oswin means "God's Friend" and Oswald means "God's power."

Also, thing I didn't notice: [spoiler]The book that Clara's young charge is reading is by Amelia Williams, which is Amy Pond's pen name.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on March 31, 2013, 08:21:16 PM
I think the "Oswin" screen name thing is just this version of Clara's tie in to the name. Oswin was I think just her actual first name (no Clara) she had in the Asylum, it was her middle name as a Victorian, and now it's a handle she came up with.

There does seem to be some kind of inheritance from each incarnation in terms of knowledge and habits. Victorian Clara becomes a governess to improve her station, modern Clara wants to travel to improve herself in a different way, but becomes a nanny instead. She gains computer knowledge which future Clara, who was in the midst of beginning her long desired travels, also possesses.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 01, 2013, 07:04:28 AM
Yeah, it could just be a "ripples" thing where each incarnation shares aspects of the others and there are still three of them.  In fact, I prefer that possibility; Oswin turning out to be a future version of Clara is way too much like River's story.

(Speaking of River and the whole meeting-each-other-out-of-order thing, I've heard there's a companion on the radio series who starts out with the Eighth Doctor and then teams up with the Sixth.  I think that's a pretty neat idea and exactly the sort of thing you can only do on the radio series.)

Still plenty of questions to ask if that's the case, though.  Like, is there a progression/evolution at work here?  Is it merely echoes?  Was Victorian Clara the original and are the others somehow the result of meddling by the GI?

And how much will be resolved by the end of the season?



Meanwhile, Smith says he'll still be the Doctor next year.  It could be misdirection (rule one: the Doctor lies) but it's probably not; the fan speculation that the Fall of the Eleventh will occur on the fiftieth anniversary special and he'll regenerate is most likely not going to happen.  Meaning that either the Fall of the Eleventh isn't actually what it sounds like, or it's not happening on the Fiftieth Anniversary.  (Or both.)

Depending on how long the Fiftieth Anniversary Special is and whether its plot continues in the coming season, I'm thinking it's probably not going to be the big climactic Fields of Trenzalore story Moffat's been building to.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 01, 2013, 02:00:11 PM
The Fall of the Eleventh being exactly what it says on the tin pretty much goes against Moffat's whole storytelling philosophy, so I'm sure there's something else going on there, though still extremely dire. As for the fiftieth, Matt Smith seemed quite excited about it in an interview on The Nerdist that aired the same night as the premier, and seemed to indicate it tied in to the Clara storyline, though that point was slightly vague. Whatever's going to happen with the rest of this season and the anniversary, I suspect two things. First, we're not going to see the Fall of the Eleventh play out this season, though we may find what is happening with all these Claras, and even when the Fall does happen Matt Smith will still be The Doctor.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 01, 2013, 07:21:39 PM
Yeah, I'm inclined to agree on all points.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on April 02, 2013, 11:38:18 AM
Tons and tons of little details in this. Amy's book is one, along with the characters on the cover, and the chapter numbers in the following conversation. Still loving the visual nods to every previous tunnel effect in the opening credits. Hell, Tom Baker's scarf is hanging out in the background of a shot or two. And yeah, I'm pretty sure it's no coincidence that the easter premiere was full of easter eggs.

Also, I'd love it if they at least teased the possibility of Clara being River's daughter, though I'm not holding my breath.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 03, 2013, 07:45:29 PM
Nice Things We Can't Have: Animated Doctor Who (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/04/03/the-doctor-who-animated-series-that-never-was/), featuring all eleven Doctors, with designs by Dan Norton (http://dannortonart.deviantart.com/) of Thundercats (2011).  (And speaking of nice things we can't have, if you look through the other stuff on his page you'll see a Safari Joe design and a reference to Hachiman.)

ALSO: Preemptive continuity nitpick: I guess it's okay for #10 to meet #11, but he can't KNOW that he's #11.  Because that would contradict his later-in-his-timeline acceptance that he is going to regenerate into the Governor.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on April 04, 2013, 02:32:54 PM
Nah, they'd just handwave it. Which is more than anyone bothered to do with all those The N Doctors episodes. It wouldn't be hard, considering that it's one of the things that was already in-universe retconned out of existence once.

Also, now I want a Walking Dead crossover. Everybody lives. Didn't see that coming.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 06, 2013, 07:34:59 PM
So we know how this works by now: Doctor meets new companion, fights relatively trivial adversary, shows off his godlike powers; in the next episode he faces a seemingly insurmountable challenge and she has to turn around and save him.

Given the constraints of the formula this was a pretty good episode -- better than Beast Below or Shakespeare Code, anyway.  Too heavy on the speechifyin' but satisfying in the Star Wars Cantina-style variety of wacky rubbersuited aliens.

And hey, Neil Cross.  One more Who/Luther connection.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 06, 2013, 07:38:17 PM
Honestly, I'm willing to forgive any Doctor Who episode, no matter how schmaltzy the ending, if it devotes so much of its screen-time to this many physical, alien-sets and costumes. For the first time in a world, I felt like Doctor Who made good on the promise of traveling space and time, not just across Earth.

Also, and this is just bugging me, but [spoiler]does anyone else think there is supposed to be some significance to the ring? Is it supposed to be Victorian Clara's ring? Because "Oh yeah, the aliens all gave me this off screen" just seems so out of place for some reason. I'm probably just grasping at straws here, but that scene felt like it was supposed to have some other meeting.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 06, 2013, 09:02:37 PM
Great, if somewhat standard Who episode, well fucked up by BBC America's commercials every five fucking minutes. I mean jesus. I'm going back to torrenting the BBCOne version.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 07, 2013, 05:07:12 AM
Yeah, was about to say. I'd forgotten how jarringly loud and frequent the BBC's commercial breaks are.

This one was really good - loved the setting, loved the cast, loved the bad guy. I actually can't remember the last time they'd visited a world and just explored for a while. It was really quite nice. They don't get around to establishing a villain until a little after the halfway point, and it was much the better for it. The slow burn kind of reminded me of old Doctor Who, in that way.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Kayma on April 07, 2013, 08:19:14 AM
Also, and this is just bugging me, but [spoiler]does anyone else think there is supposed to be some significance to the ring? Is it supposed to be Victorian Clara's ring? Because "Oh yeah, the aliens all gave me this off screen" just seems so out of place for some reason. I'm probably just grasping at straws here, but that scene felt like it was supposed to have some other meeting.[/spoiler]

Wasn't that just [spoiler] her speederbike fare?[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on April 07, 2013, 10:45:20 AM
Also, and this is just bugging me, but [spoiler]does anyone else think there is supposed to be some significance to the ring? Is it supposed to be Victorian Clara's ring? Because "Oh yeah, the aliens all gave me this off screen" just seems so out of place for some reason. I'm probably just grasping at straws here, but that scene felt like it was supposed to have some other meeting.[/spoiler]

Wasn't that just [spoiler] her speederbike fare?[/spoiler]

[spoiler]Well, yeah, but the whole thing about him just getting it back offscreen and making a point of giving it to her made it feel like there was something more than just returning her ring to her. Plus, the episode is titled "Rings of Akhaten", so it feels like rings have more importance[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 07, 2013, 11:39:43 AM
I attached less significance to the ring than the series of events that led to her parents' meeting.  Her mother's opening monologue really does spend a lot of time pointing out just how improbable their meet-cute was, to the point where I wondered if it was arranged -- the Great Intelligence manipulating events to an end (in much the same way the Evil Guide does in Mostly Harmless).  Did the GI become interested in Victorian Clara and spend the next few decades conspiring toward a series of events to recreate her as closely as possible?

Seems a little less likely given the climax of the episode, though -- the message seemed to be more a Dr. Manhattan-style "EVERYONE is highly improbable" than pointing out specifically how strange Clara's existence is.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on April 07, 2013, 01:27:45 PM
the Great Intelligence manipulating events to an end (in much the same way the Evil Guide does in Mostly Harmless).

Well, there was a Hooloovoo mentioned... though now that I think about it he might have said "Hoovaloo," which sounds more like a portajohn with a vacuum attachment. I don't care enough to go back and listen. Also, that guy wasn't even blue, unless he's just a lot of blue under the spacesuit.

Come to think of it, "hyper-intelligent shade of the color blue" also applies to Dr. Manhattan. But madness is seeing patterns everywhere.

Speaking of patterns, this one is the second time in a row that the introduction of a new companion has been followed by a variant of The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ones_Who_Walk_Away_from_Omelas#Plot_summary). I don't know if I'd call twice a pattern, and really, I can't fault it, regardless. That's a very quintessentially Doctor Who-ish sort of story, and assuming that we're talking about a new viewer probably the most important thing to establish right after the two-hearts-timetraveler-blue-box stuff, which is actually called out explicitly in the dialogue. My only complaint is "yup, we have to do one of these" and "planet-sized Jack O'Lantern" really doesn't fill one with awe or fear like they apparently expected.

So whatever happened with gandpa mummy, or the little girl, for that matter? Who gives a fuck. Submarine story next week. Do you think they'll have a bit where everyone has to talk really quiet aboard a sneaky ship? Because it'd actually be justified for once there.

Also, there needs to be one throwaway along the lines of "Shit, where did I leave that swank leather jacket I wore two hundred years ago? That'd be really appropriate at this moment."
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 07, 2013, 02:49:33 PM
I dunno, but the important thing is that the submarine is apparently captained by Davos Seaworth.

(And Grand Maester Pycelle was the villain in City of Death!)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on April 07, 2013, 02:58:47 PM
Wait, they got Julian Glover for this shit? Dude still gets around. Someday I'll stop being surprised by every living member of the Royal Shakespeare Company showing up in every BBC production ever.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 07, 2013, 03:33:45 PM
Nah, City of Death is old Who.  1979.

But yeah he's one more Doctor Who/Game of Thrones link.  Not quite as many as Who/Luther or Who/Potter, but definitely some overlap.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on April 07, 2013, 04:24:43 PM
Yeah, Julian Glover played the shit out of Scaroth. Liam Cunningham would have been pretty young for any old Who.

Sorry, I didn't follow your connection. I guess Glover isn't in the next one. Now I'm disappointed.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 13, 2013, 07:52:44 AM
Pretty good high concept -- Cold War sub movie with a dash of Alien.  Also the most Third Doctor-y episode since the one with the Silurians a couple years back.

I'm glad [spoiler]the old professor didn't die[/spoiler].
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on April 13, 2013, 08:21:30 AM
Yup. Pretty boss. Also pretty formula, but it got the Pertwee formula damn near perfect, so I'll take it.

Also, fuck yeah, David Warner. My only disappointment there is that he didn't turn out to be a Time Lord. That would have been the best thing. Seriously, just picture that shit. "Oh, yay. Way to save the world. Turns out I've been doing the Columbo thing this whole time, like we all do. Also I've got another one of those silly titles we insist on using and I made your Tardis fuck off earlier. I guess I bubbled out of the time lock like Hawking radiation or some such shit. Expect more of us, probably! Ta." And then he ducks into a washing machine or whatever, which disappears in the usual way. Bonus points it you read all that in David Warner's voice.

That'd make for an interesting rest of the season.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 13, 2013, 09:14:23 AM
Oh shit, I didn't even recognize that was David Warner, I just knew I loved him immediately...Detective.

And Time Lord or not I hope they contrive a reason to bring him back.  I haven't taken this immediate shine to a supporting character since Wilf.  (Though Mark Sheppard comes close.)



EDIT TO ADD: And yeah the TARDIS's disappearance feels like an unfired Chekov's Gun.  The Doctor's explanation at the end is inadequate.  The fact that everybody could still understand each other could be dismissed as a plothole, except they hung a lampshade directly on it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Ted Belmont on April 19, 2013, 03:49:58 AM
So uhh

(http://i.imgur.com/8uMa0aH.jpg)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Büge on April 19, 2013, 04:07:07 AM
omg
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 19, 2013, 04:07:54 AM
HMMMMM
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on April 19, 2013, 07:44:40 AM
Duh?
I mean, all of season six was building up that the big thing in the next season would be his name.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 19, 2013, 02:54:22 PM
Moffat's been building toward it since season four, actually.

Yes, we knew it was coming.  But we didn't know when.  Indeed, I'd have assumed next season.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 20, 2013, 03:43:18 AM
Same here, as we discussed earlier in the thread, I thought this season would be entirely about the "Who Is Clara?" arc that is currently going.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 22, 2013, 01:28:47 AM
Although in hindsight I can see how the two questions might dovetail nicely together.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 23, 2013, 02:12:48 AM
Loved everything about Hide. Great, great episode.

Next week's looks awesome, too.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on April 23, 2013, 05:25:28 AM
Liked just about everything about it save for [spoiler]the lingering shot of the monster near the end. I realize they were changing the tone from "creepy" to "sympathetic," but its head looks like a toe.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 24, 2013, 04:29:14 PM
Speculation on the Doctor's name. (http://www.corporate-sellout.com/index.php/2013/04/24/doctor-who/)  I don't really go out on any limbs.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on April 24, 2013, 05:15:11 PM
We haven't seen any Omega clue this season, have we?


(on phone. spoiler if you think it should be but commentary on speculation we had pages ago doesn't seem to dangerous)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 24, 2013, 11:52:02 PM
Liked just about everything about it save for [spoiler]the lingering shot of the monster near the end. I realize they were changing the tone from "creepy" to "sympathetic," but its head looks like a toe.[/spoiler]

It was definitely seeing too much on the monster, yeah. Seemed magnitudes less creepy when we got that good look at it.

They should have just shown The Doctor looking at it, with that shot of the camera over its shoulder, then had him deliver his "Romeo" line. Really, if there's a weakness to Hide, it's the thrown-in monster subplot. There probably could've been a way to do it without the monster at all, using instead the ghost for scares.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 25, 2013, 02:31:19 AM
We haven't seen any Omega clue this season, have we?

I don't think so, but we haven't seen the Clerics or the Silence either.

Yeah, I think my post DOES kinda cut off abruptly there and I probably meant to point out that they sure keep alluding to Omega and if the Doctor DOES turn out to be one of the three founding Time Lords it only makes sense that another of the three be present in the story.

Hell, even if he's NOT one of the three founders, we know his original purpose for being on Earth in 1963 was to hide an artifact called the Hand of Omega.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 25, 2013, 03:38:35 PM
In part 2 (http://www.corporate-sellout.com/index.php/2013/04/25/time-lord-names/), I fumble around Wikipedia and discover something that is either a major clue or a coincidence that is so awesome that the ultimate resolution will probably be a disappointment by comparison.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 26, 2013, 02:04:24 PM
In part 3 (http://www.corporate-sellout.com/index.php/2013/04/26/history-of-the-doctor/) I form a theory that the Doctor's name has the secrets of time travel somehow encoded in it and that's why nobody's supposed to know it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on April 26, 2013, 03:42:23 PM
I watched the first episode today and I forgot that the first new doctor looks like jason statham.

Edit: Okay nevermind started the second episode he doesn't look like jason statham.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 26, 2013, 04:50:05 PM
Well, maybe a little.  Shaved head, thick jaw, footballer's build, leather jacket optional.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 27, 2013, 08:00:56 AM
We haven't seen any Omega clue this season, have we?

I don't think so

And then BAM, exploding star right up in our faces.

Also: can't help but noticing the words "silence" and "library" keep cropping up.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on April 27, 2013, 06:44:06 PM
Loved this last one, but mostly for the incidentals. You know, the "holy shit swimming pool for three seconds finally" and a bunch of other pretty cool stuff as compared to the last few decades worth of rare Tardis-interior shows. We actually get to see a bit of of the thing's innards for once, beyond running through the exact same barren corridor set over and over. Though there was still a fair share of that, with the obligatory lampshade. Bonus points for the weeping willow full of what I'm going to have to call Tardfruit (DO NOT PICK THE TARDFRUIT*.) Really, this is the most we've seen of the thing since a little bit of "hey, they added some clothes racks to the console room and called it a wardrobe," or Baker's cloister and aux. console room.

*Meme just waiting to happen for srsly.

Nice little side plot... but really, they could have done anything to flesh out the supporting characters. Maybe just a throwaway line about how that eye-and-brain wrecking accident had something to do with the Androzani or the Blorgons or whateverthefuck. Flashback to dad and relevant sibling rivalry? I'd take anything to tie them into the universe here, or even establish some new mythology. They exist in a vacuum otherwise. Guys in jumpsuits who I utterly fail to give half a fuck about. Other than the fact that this shit's obviously going to be the brother rule 3X Combo.

And hey, did that Tardisfucker bomb that got thrown through a crack in time resolve that huge "why did the Tardis blow up for no adequately explored reason" thing from a couble seasons ago? Because I really thought it might have gone there, what with the pretty familiar crack and all... but... nope. Unless you want to pretend some shit happened where it didn't. It'd be so damn neat and pat I really want to believe it, but apparently it just wiped out everything significant and revelatory that happened today. Straight up Voyager shit here, yo.

Just joshing. Nothing significant or revelatory ever happened on Voyager.

... and on the list of inane disappointments, I kept reading Clara's handbrand as "816 FR13NDLY 80770M" and expected River to show up.

Also, rewatched last week's and I'm still pretty annoyed that the Tardis has a bunch of cables running out of it to power the psychic hat thing and its weirdly mispronounced crystal. Maybe the emphasis in the middle of Metebelis is the Time Lord equivalent of "your anus" and he just wants to gloss over that now. But they just say fuckit about the lady's psychic pain hat being attached by cables and the Tardis flying around somewhere else for a while. Eat shit, continuity.

Anyway, I think I might rewatch Warrior's Gate after this one. Not sure why. Don't think I've seen it since I was a wee sharkling catching this shit beside my obliviously stoned father, but there's defenitely a thematic similarity.

So... silver medal on this one, but much as I like "The monsters were you all along," it's not like it's hard to guess when there're a grand total of two characters with tits, one of whom isn't an actual character and there are well established time shenanigans happening. And there's a huge vacuum of explanation here. So... you guys turned into contagious red-eyed crackly-skinned corridor-scratching time zombies... fucking why? Who cares. We've gotta have a monster, and that shit'll do.

You can do an awful lot with a monster-of-the-week story, and that's pretty much the only way it's been. But holy hell, so much more could be done with this if it'd just shake off the formula once in a while. Yes, it's a kid's show, but really, "reverse Scooby Doo" wears thin even with children. Especially when it fails to make any damn sense most of the time.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 27, 2013, 08:12:50 PM
What if there was a secret so terrible that it must never be revealed, and what if that secret was known only to one man, and also was written down in a book about every single secret and terrible thing that happened during the worst war ever. Like seriously even one page of this thing in the wrong hands could end worlds. And what if that book was on a plinth in the same dude's library with a really ornate cover and obvious title?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on April 27, 2013, 08:16:36 PM
And what if that happened to be the relevant information that some chick just happened to flip the thing open to, out of however many hundred pages, while fleeing from her evil inexplicable timemonster self? Man, what are the odds? Shit, she could have at least done that "hold a book by its spine so it falls open to its most read page" thing. That would have been kind of smart and cool.

Also, there are unstoppered, easily spilled bottles of liquid encyclopedia that... do nothing? I'd like to think they'd come back to that, but given that there are still central plot points from years-old season finales that have never come close to resolution... It's like this show is actively trying to annoy my shit right out.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on April 27, 2013, 08:41:26 PM
Also, whatever happened to the ever-so-goddamn-important Tardfruit? Wait, did that fall down a hole? With those guys? Is that what made the time zombies? Oh, just fuck right off.

4/5 Delta and the Bannermens
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on April 27, 2013, 08:41:43 PM
Of course, it's entirely possible that all of that was generated in part or in whole by the TARDIS herself upon his request for a library, since the TARDIS knows all of that shit, and The Doctor, who has been demonstrably surprised by shit in his own TARDIS on numerous occasions, doesn't actually know about it.

I'm not too bothered by her flipping to hs name immediately, since he was one of the generals, sometimes implied to have been of even higher rank, during the Time War, and if the book records him by his true name, then it is probably on a lot of pages.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on April 27, 2013, 09:00:29 PM
Yeah, it just could have been done with way the hell more style. Though it all has zero consequence anyway, unless she gets to retain that shit because she spilled Adam all over herself a second later. Yeah, that's probably where that was going. If it was going anywhere, which it probably wasn't.

Also, fuck if I'm not annoyed that bastard is wearing vests and rolled sleeves now. Have to throw out half my wardrobe or look like a cosplayer. Again. Was bad enough being mistaken for Lupin at at that one con with Silver. First the fucking chucks and pinstripes, now this. Half tempted to stomp around in scuba gear and a feather boa just to see the bastard wearing that shit next year.

Maybe I'll just go back to houndstooth and turtlenecks. Goddammit. Stay the fuck away from motorcycle boots, you rat raped son of a bitch. Goddamn things are expensive.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on April 27, 2013, 10:10:24 PM
Read Thad's speculations and had to add some fun.

1) Probably safe to say any of the Cartmel season-that-never-happened-thank-fuck stuff is out, though they've been bringing back so many old references that some kind of Omega thing might go down. Unless that whole Omega-11 armpatch dealy was just referencing the obvious. Of course, they've been hammering the fuck out of the 11 throwaway comments lately, so that'll probably be relevant in some inobvious way.

2) Rani is indo-aryan, the feminine counterpart to Raja, so it does go along with the theme of the people who said fuck you to timelord society picking titles rather than names. You'd know this if you drank more gin and tonic. Curse this goddamn malarial fever. Fetch the mongoose.

3) I'm in love with the idea of throwing a comma into THE QUESTION. "Doctor, who?" would just be a fantastic sort of turnaround that could work in a lot of different ways. A sort of Sophie's Choice thing would be especially great. Or they rope Tennant's silly clone into the thing and hey, I guess he's also an 11? In fact, that'd be just so fucking cool that it's pretty much guaranteed that it won't actually happen.

4) What happens to the fetus when a pregnant Time Lady regenerates? And what if she changes sex in the process? Would it be like an ectopic Quato sort of thing? Fuckall to do with anything, but hey, great excuse to do a super-relevant episode about abortion! Maybe get RTD back on for that one. Yeah.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on April 28, 2013, 06:13:45 AM
Could still happen, I suppose, but it's a little late to be backing out of the business about the Doctor's name being really important.

Which I suppose would mean that in your hypothetical there are two questions.  Has there been confirmation that The Doctor's Name will actually resolve the Fields of Trenzalore/Question/etc. prophecy?  Because they could turn out to be separate stories.

Would suit the style of the Moffat era, really -- give a big reveal in the season finale, but leave a lot more shit dangling so that we know this thing's going to be dragged out at least another year.  "Now WE know the Doctor's name -- but it'll be another year before the question is asked on the Fields of Trenzalore!"

Kinda curious whether the anniversary show will be part of the big arc or more of a standalone thing.  Probably a little of both.  Which really is what this entire season has been, and I think it's been pretty successful.

All things considered I liked this episode because the TARDIS interior stuff was distracting enough that I wasn't overwhelmed by the gaping logical problems and underdeveloped supporting cast.  (The reviewer over at the AV Club made the same point you did about "Why didn't they throw a reference to Androzani or some other known location or alien race?", and followed it up by "You know, the Doctor's being all cheerful when he reveals he was lying to them, even though somebody's dead.")  I think it's also a good example of what a difference setting and tone can make -- this was the third consecutive haunted house episode, but they were all so different I hardly noticed.

All that Reset Button stuff is irritating, but we know Clara's going to know the Doctor's name again in three weeks anyway, one way or the other.

(Also: I kinda thought the library was a callback to the TV movie.)

(Also also: my first thought on seeing the bottles was that the Doctor had shrunken Gallifreyan cities in them.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on April 28, 2013, 07:38:13 AM
Yeah, I saw that Library and immediately thought of 7's library in 8's movie.

Best part of this episode no one mentioned yet?
"Don't cross time streams and stay away from time cracks. Oh, I'll just reach in and toss a thing to my past self while talking to me and giving us a hint to stop this future from happening."
And on top of that, forget the fact the magnetic doohickey was from the dudes on the ship they didn't actually bump into. And this one came from another timeline that failed to be stopped.

Yet no negative consequences? Doctor yelling through a time crack and altering a future while inside the Tardis I can kind of let slip due to him being all Timelordy and having ill-defined time powers. But thrice time removed magnotron tossed to his past self? Is it supposed to be okay because of the Tardis is blowing up in one timeline and it's crazy powerful when it comes to altering time so the exploding Tardis in the future is absorbing the paradox from the past before it's erased?

Or are we supposed to ignore this whole thing and focus on the fake touching moments?




EDIT: Okay. And time echo traveling through the past making the asshole brother remember to be nice to non-robo-bro sure. But the picture is altered to show the father? Again, foggy memory to be nice I can buy because of time-leaking Tardis fuckery but a new picture? Out of what? No.

No.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on April 28, 2013, 03:22:54 PM
Uhg, this was weirdly, unexpectedly awful. Amazing concept, awesome location, potentially great supporting cast, all squandered in a tedious, aimless mess. It felt like they had the concept for this episode laid out, then never got around to actually writing the story until it was far too late.

Damn shame.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 05, 2013, 06:49:31 AM
Welp, that felt more like a Gatiss episode.  And that's not a compliment.

Still probably one of his better ones, all things considered, largely on the strength of Madam Vastra, Jenny, and Strax.  Really the episode was going pretty well until the Doctor actually showed up.

Interesting curveball at the end there.  How long's it been since there've been [spoiler]kids on the TARDIS[/spoiler]?  I think it was around the time he was trying to get that gobby Australian to Heathrow.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on May 05, 2013, 07:04:22 AM
The episode nearly sank into a hole and destroyed the entire show with that Tom-Tom joke. In fact, I can't think of a reason, at present, why American shouldn't invade and take over the BBC for it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 05, 2013, 07:33:40 AM
But it DID come right on the heels of "Horse, you have failed in your mission."  That was gold.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on May 08, 2013, 05:12:16 AM
Well, that was rubbish.

Other than the ten seconds with potatohead and the horse, of course. Which loses some of its luster when immediately followed by a laborious and painfully obvious setup for a spectacularly shitty joke. Fully half of the scenes here were boring, redundant, or pointless asides that added exactly fuckall to the story. The main plot could have been ten minutes long.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 08, 2013, 06:08:47 AM
I feel like they're trying to be more episodic this season, which so far as I can tell absolutely no one wants. Particularly since there are so few episodes per series. Like, look, we love you guys, but until you're making 22 episodes of hour long sci-fi every single season like clockwork the way we do, could you maybe just not do more than one or two filler episodes?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on May 08, 2013, 01:04:00 PM
...I really prefer these episodic bits more.

The Tom Tom joke was total balls, though.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 09, 2013, 06:28:45 AM
Upon further reflection I must say that I wish they'd had Madam Vastra and company to spin off rather than Torchwood.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 09, 2013, 01:54:18 PM
Yeah, actually I've gotta say a season of one-off episodes was EXACTLY what I wanted after the last few Big Arc seasons, and on the whole I think this one's turned out pretty well.  I'll take a Crimson Horror and Dinosaurs on a Spaceship if that's the price we have to pay for Gunslinger and Cold War.  I mean, hell, even the bad ones haven't been THAT bad; not only does Crimson Horror not make my list of worst episodes, it doesn't even make my list of Top Five Worst Episodes Written By or Starring Mark Gatiss.



...anyway.  Here's where I'm slow: yes, I immediately made the connection that the last time the Doctor let a kid on the TARDIS he died.  But it only just occurred to me that the last time the Doctor let a kid on the TARDIS he was KILLED BY CYBERMEN.

While I'm generally against bringing up continuity-heavy angst like Adric, under the circumstances it seems like it'd be a missed opportunity not to at least mention it.  At any rate Gaiman's certainly proven to be one of the great modern authors who's actually willing to write children's books with children in real peril -- Coraline and Graveyard Book both spring to mind.

-- MEANWHILE --

Robot 6 has an article called Neil Gaiman, the Cybermen and ‘Doctor Who’s’ comics links (http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2013/05/neil-gaiman-the-cybermen-and-doctor-whos-comics-links/) and I learned a few things.  I did not know Bryan Hitch designed the Eccleston/Tennat-era console room but now that I've heard it it makes total sense.  And while I DID notice that Rose Tyler had similar dress sense to Jenny Sparks, I didn't realize that was intentional.

(Incidentally, Hitch's current comic for some reason involves David Tennant fighting Sarah Palin.  That guy sure does like drawing real people into comics.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 09, 2013, 06:58:48 PM
I think episodic is the wrong word. Smith's first season was episodic as hell, basically just making a point to show a crack  in every episode, and occasionally making them important. I think filler is a better word for the vibe I'm getting off of these episodes. It's doesn't feel like Clara and the Doctor are getting anything done, even in the context of monster of the week. They're just, you know, there. Doin' stuff and then the problem is solved. I don't need everything to be a hardcore arc episode, but I'd like some kind of hint or allusion be made to the Clara Question more often than not, even if it has no more importance to the episode itself than a crack on the wall.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 10, 2013, 02:33:07 AM
But it was foregrounded pretty hard in Journey to the Center of the TARDIS, and at least consistently backgrounded in the most recent episode.

I kinda get what you're talking about -- the sense that these episodes are inconsequential and low-stakes and not as easy to invest in emotionally -- but it's hard to quantify.

Especially since really they've mostly been good-to-great.  Cold War was top-notch; I'd say every episode since has been a step down from the one before it but even Crimson Horror had me thoroughly entertained for its first act.

You're right about that one, in particular, making the Doctor and Clara feel like they weren't doing much and Vastra and co had the situation well in-hand.  It's not exactly at the level it was with Colin Baker (Vengeance on Varos and whatever R-Word of the Daleks was the Colin Baker one are both pretty great examples of the Doctor showing up and not fucking doing anything while the situation resolved itself around him) but yeah it was another one of those episodes where I'm more interested in what these characters get up to when the Doctor's NOT around.  (Dinosaurs on a Spaceship had the same problem; it introduced a supporting cast with the implication that they were all having much more interesting adventures outside the episode we were watching.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 11, 2013, 04:36:35 PM
I'll start with the bits I didn't like:

1. The climax.  The big reveal is obvious, and the resolution is [spoiler]the Doctor cheats and then after an entire episode of "Don't destroy the planet!  Don't destroy the planet!" the just destroy the damn planet.[/spoiler]  I was hoping for something a lot more clever and less cheap and disappointing.

2. The kids.  Their inclusion was promising, and the first ten minutes of the show suggested they were at least going to be fun characters, and ideally actually be important to the plot.  And then they weren't.  They spend most of the episode not doing anything, the Doctor, despite repeatedly assuring Clara he's going to save them, does not seem the least bit emotionally invested in them, and ultimately the episode really doesn't need them at all.  I mean, there's a line in dialogue SAYING it did, but I was never really clear on why.

Which brings us to

3. the disconnect between the premise of the episode -- that the Cybermen are extinct -- and [spoiler]the later reveal that there are three million of the fuckers right under their feet[/spoiler].  None of what actually happens here seems to make any kind of logical sense.


Despite those complaints, though, I really DID quite enjoy it.  I think I can honestly say Smith has never been given better material to work with, and he absolutely KILLS it.  And I don't think Clara's been used this effectively since Bells of St. John.  It was full of fun little Gaiman-y bits like the abandoned amusement park and the mechanical Turk (and of all the references Gaiman could have pulled from his oeuvre, "children disappearing from an amusement park" is probably the most chilling he could have chosen), and Warwick Davis was great.

So yeah I thought it was pretty good, despite the narrative not hanging together very well.  I'm kinda curious how many revisions the script went through, because while I don't love everything Gaiman does I think he's usually much better at story mechanics.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on May 11, 2013, 04:47:26 PM
Yay! Loved it. Pretty much started off with successive sideways references to Adams, Lem, and Le Guin in the span of ten minutes. Maybe with a bit of Robinson's Free Lunch. That's not even counting "giant's cauldron" as a callout to Card (Which I can barely bring myself to acknowledge because, you know, fuck that guy.)

Maybe it's cynical of me to think this, but it was pretty much a symphony of scifi dog whistles. Shoot for that best dramatic presentation Hugo, motherfucker!

And man, that really, really looked like they were playing a variation of the Immortal Game with the colors swapped. Which would make sense, given that Anderssen historically played black and moved first, so you get a whole "son of man" thing thrown into an already messianic narrative (for the whole thing, I mean. Not necessarily this episode) with a bit of nerd trainspotting. Also, yes, there's a really obvious five move mate escape from that sacrifice... I didn't buy it taking the cognitive potential of millions of individuals to figure out that a three move mate was actually impossible. It's a very limited decision space, but eh. Fuckit.

Some of that might be wishful thinking, but I really wouldn't put anything past Gaiman. He's a fucking boss.

While we're at it, was Willow hitting the guy in the back of the knee a Return of the King reference, or just an incredible coincidence? And shit... didn't Gaiman write that comic where Augustus hangs out with a dwarf while they're pretending to be beggars? Easter egg or lazy recycling: You decide!

Also, Davis has aged incredibly well. You'd have thought all that Leprichaun crap would have weighed his face down more.

... and I will always feel like a shit for thinking "David Rappaport would have done this better." Especially when it's not actually true. Davis really does have the face of a Caesar when it's not covered in latex.

But even without all the incredibly dense "wait, was that a callback to whatever?" this was just a fucking tight narrative that really just picked its theme and stuck to it. Not even getting into the warm gallifreyan script vs. cold datastreams in the Inside My Head bits. Just fucking incredible all around. Have to give it a second watch. Hell if I don't wish they'd bring in more authors like Gaiman on this stuff, Brit or otherwise. Can you imagine what Stephenson would do with this? What I'm saying is we need more Neils.

My only complaint: This is not only the first time you brought kids aboard since Earthshock, but they get screwed up by Cybermen? Who, you know, killed that last kid? (Thank fucking Christ.) And this is an author who clearly had a handle on the background here, but nope... never mentioned. Not even a two second throwaway line. Though at least there wasn't an obvious, odious TomTom joke that I'd have cut off a nut to replace with anything else.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 12, 2013, 05:56:58 AM
Gaiman's a great novelist but I definitely think part of his skill here comes from his experience with visual media.  I'm all for seeing what Stephenson and any other SF author you can throw at the show can do with it (I'm sure Stross would find something fun and equally sure he won't go near Doctor Who because he's allergic to soft SF; the violation of lightspeed with the missing stars in this week's episode would drive him nuts), but I want to see more comic book guys have fun with it.  Per the link I posted a few places up, The Lodger was originally a comic strip, and Grant Morrison's expressed an interest in doing an episode too.  (I'd love to see them bring back Frazer Hines and adapt The World Shapers (http://brontoforum.us/index.php?topic=119.msg40531#msg40531), but I think Morrison's more interested in writing an original story and I think I'd rather see something new anyway.  But World Shapers is pretty great.)

As far as TV guys, Peter Lawrence (head writer of Thundercats, Silverhawks, Peter Pan and the Pirates) would do something fun.  Bill Overgard would have been ideal but sadly he's no longer with us.

And Peter Jackson said he wants to do an episode so badly they wouldn't even have to pay him.  While I'm sure that's an exaggeration, it still indicates that he's willing to work for way less than what he'd get anywhere else, and I'd be happy to see what he'd come up with.  He might have to retrain himself to do a script with tight budget constraints, but Lord knows he had plenty of experience doing that before he got hu...famous.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 12, 2013, 07:06:12 AM
According to BC (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/05/12/the-doctor-who-finale-has-escaped-into-the-wild-the-name-of-the-doctor-is-out/), BBC America has fucked up and shipped DVD/Blu-Ray preorders early and people have already seen next week's finale.  Beware of spoilers.

I haven't seen the episode online yet but I expect it'll be up by day's end.  If you want to avoid spoilers, your best shot is probably pirating it first chance you get and watching it immediately.

But if you do, well, obviously you should spoiler tag that shit if you talk about it in this thread.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on May 12, 2013, 10:32:44 AM
A few thoughts, mainly:

1) No torrents, downloads, screen caps or otherwise have shown up. There is a spoiler going around, being posted on things, but apparently it's older than the news of the DVD/Blu-Ray leak and comes from someone saying that he saw it in a theater (which turned out to be faked). I won't detail the spoiler, but it doesn't sound like a Moffat story, and [spoiler]it sounds a bit like Bad Wolf[/spoiler]

2)  The news is breaking today. On Sunday. If anyone actually got the DVDs, they would have gotten them yesterday, and yet the story didn't blow up until today. So this either means that the actual DVDs haven't reached anyone yet, or that it is a hoax that BBC America and Moffat have been suckered into.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 12, 2013, 11:52:45 AM
Yeah, the Sunday thing DID occur to me.  Has anyone seen any posts about it from yesterday?

Better safe than sorry, anyhow.

Apparently there was a big spoiler stuck up on Wikipedia for awhile.  So if it's not a hoax, the Internet's liable to be a minefield for a bit.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on May 12, 2013, 12:12:21 PM
A blogger named Untempered Schism, however, does have footage of the DVD box and it playing in his PS3 (http://untempered-schism-insta.tumblr.com/). Mind, that doesn't mean it's not fake, but does seem that very few people have actually gotten it. Now it seems that the DVDs might have been shipped, the company stayed quiet until this post popped up, and now the BBC is putting a lid on it before it hits on Monday.

That said, there are spoilers popping up on Wikipedia and other sites, but again, that particular spoiler seems to pre-date this news and is probably just people aping something they heard, rather than first hand experience.




Of course, then again, a Google search for "Name of the Doctor Torrent" produces a helluva lot of DMCA take down notices on the search page.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 12, 2013, 03:06:44 PM
Bleeding Cool's also warned that there are virus-filled fakes floating around.

I'd be careful of BitTorrent anyway.  BBC doesn't have a history of snooping leecher IP's and suing, but if they were going to start this would be the time to do it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 13, 2013, 01:57:15 PM
In actually BBC-sanctioned finale news:

She Said, He Said: A Prequel - The Name of the Doctor - Doctor Who Series 7 Part 2 (2013) - BBC One (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtaIpkjF6Ss#ws)

So yeah I'd say that counts as confirmation of Trenzalore.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on May 13, 2013, 02:34:03 PM
Yeah, I have seen some fun speculation out there.

From the trailer:
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/3a84437acf515318230f1bc00e36bcb3/tumblr_mmresnn2cI1qjeu2so1_500.gif)

The Third Doctor's car, Bessie:
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/da504043b3fff8ebad831daeaf4ef76c/tumblr_mmresnn2cI1qjeu2so2_500.jpg)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on May 18, 2013, 06:00:49 AM
Matt Smith and David Tennant clip. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Em8lmmTNkA)


Boards keep not letting me embed videos.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 18, 2013, 08:03:21 AM
Well ho-lee shit, THAT'S how you do a cliffhanger.  [spoiler]Without actually telling us the Doctor's name.

Bleeding Cool has had a theory since they first saw set photos of John Hurt in a leather jacket, and I think they're right: John Hurt's character is an incarnation that falls between the Eighth and Ninth Doctor.  And the title of the episode is an elegant way of allowing us to still call the Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Doctor the Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Doctor, even though they're actually his tenth, eleventh, and twelfth incarnation.  John Hurt is an incarnation who wasn't the Doctor, who was the General in the Time War who wiped out the Daleks and Time Lords.

Of course, it also means that "the fall of the eleventh" could refer to David Tennant instead of Matt Smith.  AND the Valeyard -- who gets explicitly namedropped in this episode -- was described as an amalgamation of the Doctor's twelfth and thirteenth incarnations, which now means Matt Smith and the next guy.

(I've never seen Trial of a Time Lord and I hear it's awful.  I'm not going to have to watch it, am I?)[/spoiler]

Also: why yes I DID notice the irony of Richard Grant trying to erase the Doctor from history.  Nice touch there.

Anyhow, yeah, that was pretty great.  Guess I'll bounce around the Internet looking at spoilers now.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 18, 2013, 08:11:51 AM
I downloaded the BBC broadcast. Spoiler free thoughts. It's quite good. It's a motherfucker of a cliffhanger for the next bit of Who we're going to get, which is apparently going to be late November. It's really very clever in the way it handles what could have been a canon demolishing premise.

Well ho-lee shit, THAT'S how you do a cliffhanger.  [spoiler]Without actually telling us the Doctor's name.

Bleeding Cool has had a theory since they first saw set photos of John Hurt in a leather jacket, and I think they're right: John Hurt's character is an incarnation that falls between the Eighth and Ninth Doctor.  And the title of the episode is an elegant way of allowing us to still call the Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Doctor the Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Doctor, even though they're actually his tenth, eleventh, and twelfth incarnation.  John Hurt is an incarnation who wasn't the Doctor, who was the General in the Time War who wiped out the Daleks and Time Lords.

Of course, it also means that "the fall of the eleventh" could refer to David Tennant instead of Matt Smith.  AND the Valeyard -- who gets explicitly namedropped in this episode -- was described as an amalgamation of the Doctor's twelfth and thirteenth incarnations, which now means Matt Smith and the next guy.

(I've never seen Trial of a Time Lord and I hear it's awful.  I'm not going to have to watch it, am I?)[/spoiler]

Also: why yes I DID notice the irony of Richard Grant trying to erase the Doctor from history.  Nice touch there.

Anyhow, yeah, that was pretty great.  Guess I'll bounce around the Internet looking at spoilers now.

Ditto, basically. Extremely impressed. [spoiler]Especially with the fun they had with the title. The name is used, though we don't hear it. The name also doesn't really matter, or at least not the name we thought. The secret IS a name, and probably anyone who COULD know it would be very upset indeed.[/spoiler] I can't fucking wait
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 18, 2013, 08:16:55 AM
Indeed.  [spoiler]The main thing I've been wondering about since seeing Bleeding Cool float the theory of an incarnation between McGann and Eccleston is, how does that work with the clearly-established nomenclature that Eccleston is the Ninth Doctor and so on?  And Moffat went and found an elegant solution.  "I didn't say he was the Doctor, I said he was ME."[/spoiler]

EDIT TO ADD: and "the first question" -- well, [spoiler]the first and biggest question from the 2005 series is "What happened in the Time War?"[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on May 18, 2013, 08:27:53 AM
Indeed.  [spoiler]The main thing I've been wondering about since seeing Bleeding Cool float the theory of an incarnation between McGann and Eccleston is, how does that work with the clearly-established nomenclature that Eccleston is the Ninth Doctor and so on?  And Moffat went and found an elegant solution.  "I didn't say he was the Doctor, I said he was ME."[/spoiler]

EDIT TO ADD: and "the first question" -- well, [spoiler]the first and biggest question from the 2005 series is "What happened in the Time War?"[/spoiler]


Yes, [spoiler]it also neatly dovetails with the self-loathing shown by The Doctor since the reboot, that has been becoming more pronounced over time. I also like how Clara's impossibility was solved. She's not a trap, she's just in the right place at the right time. All the time. Like the ultimate expression of what companions have always been.

Excellent "Exit" for River as well. She's a character that can always show up again, of course, but I had figured since the Christmas special that she'd been to the Library already, and that proved true.

One begins to wonder how long the "Dark Times" that Vastra mentioned really lasted. How old is Matt Smith's Doctor at this point? He spent almost three hundred years on his farewell tour before lake Silencia, and then who knows how long spent wallowing in the dark times. He may be the oldest incarnation to date. Though if John Hurt really was The General, given the scope of the Time War, he's probably the oldest

As for what happened during the Time War, even with this latest tease, I hope we never really find out. It could never meet the hype
[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 18, 2013, 09:15:15 AM
[spoiler]I don't think we've seen the last of River at all.  Yes, this is the far end of her timeline, but until today her first appearance was the far end of her timeline.

There are two pretty specific teases that we haven't seen the last of her: her question at the end of how she's still there if Clara's gone, and her earlier offhand remark that she made the Doctor tell her his name a long time ago.

Even if we take Moffat at his word and the Doctor's birth name is not important, he's spent FIVE YEARS hammering the importance of the moment the Doctor tells it to River.[/spoiler]

Anyway, let's go back to the prophecy:

Quote
DORIUM: "On the fields of Trenzalore, at the fall of the Eleventh, when no living creature may speak falsely or fail to give answer, a question will be asked. A question that must never, ever be answered."
THE DOCTOR: "Silence will fall when the question is asked..."
DORIUM: "Silence must fall" would be a better translation. The Silence are determined that the question must never be answered. The Doctor must never reach Trenzalore.
THE DOCTOR: I don't understand? What's it got do do with me?
DORIUM: The first question. The oldest question in the universe, hidden in plain sight. Would you like to know what it is?
THE DOCTOR: Yes.
DORIUM: "Doctor who?"

I think it's fair to say that [spoiler]GI shouting "Doctor Who?" wasn't the question any more than the Master's four knocks were what signaled the Tenth Doctor's doom.

Are we to reasonably assume that this was the Fall of the Eleventh?  He certainly did fall out of the sky, and later fell to the ground, and finally fell into the rift.  Metaphorically speaking, you could say this was the "fall of the Eleventh" in that we discovered he's not really the Eleventh at all.  Or, as I said, "fall of the Eleventh" could be something that's going to happen to Tennant in November, since he's the secret real eleventh incarnation.

It would certainly seem that Clara asked the question, if not verbatim -- she asked "Who's that?  Who is he?"

As for "on the fields of Trenzalore [...] when no living creature may speak falsely or fail to give answer", well, even if they were inside the Doctor's own head there it sure LOOKED like they were still on the fields of Trenzalore.  And if they were inside the Doctor's head -- or the nexus of his timelines, or whatever the hell that was -- maybe THAT'S the reason he couldn't speak falsely or fail to answer.

Or not.  We don't know if the question's been asked yet or not; we don't know if the Eleventh has fallen or not; we don't know if this was the point when no living creature could speak falsely or fail to give answer.  Maybe that's what we just watched, or maybe it's still to come.  As always, Moffat answers some questions but raises others.[/spoiler]

And then there are the cracks.  This episode certainly alluded to them again, and last week's had Mr. Clever noting that people could find the Doctor by looking for the holes he left.  I think all that stuff's definitely related to the secret.  And we still don't know what "Silence will fall" means.

[spoiler]As for what happened during the Time War, even with this latest tease, I hope we never really find out. It could never meet the hype[/spoiler]

[spoiler]I certainly agree that we should never learn the WHOLE story, but in general I think the dribs and drabs we've been given over the past 7 seasons/year of movies have been pretty satisfying.  First we learned there was a Time War.  Then we learned that the Time Lords and the Daleks were both wiped out.  And THEN we learned that the Doctor himself was the one who made the decision.  And then we learned that the Time Lords were planning to destroy the universe and left him no choice.  And now we learn -- or at least assume that we've learned -- that neither McGann nor Eccleston was the one who wiped them out, that the "Doctor" who killed the Time Lords is a secret, shameful incarnation who subsequently declares himself unworthy of the name.

I certainly think that, come November, Moffat can get some more mileage out of that premise without taking all the mystery out of the Time War.[/spoiler]

Welp, six months until the next one.

Meanwhile, Charlie Jane Anders has a post titled The Central Problem With Steven Moffat's Doctor Who (http://feeds.gawker.com/~r/io9/full/~3/yjqjCWlKEKQ/the-central-problem-with-steven-moffats-doctor-who-507670201).  It's spoiler-free, though she'd seen a preview copy of the episode before posting it.  Indeed, I'm damned curious where the preview cut off, because she says it didn't include the ending but it sure sounds like she knew how it ended.  Granted, as I've noted, there have been rumors floating for months.

Extra Bonus Thought: [spoiler]Rule One: The Doctor Lies.  That could be wordplay too -- as in "Here lies the Doctor."[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on May 18, 2013, 09:20:58 AM
Yeah, this was a killer finale. It may go towards explaining a lot of what has been happening in some of the previous Moffat serials. Though, the episode isn't with its share of Moffat Plot Holes - those tiny little tidbits which don't affect the overall episode, but feel like something is missing out - like who blew up the TARDIS or exactly what were the Silence up to. For this one, it's [spoiler]what exactly are the Whisper Men? We get the HOW of what they do for the Great Intelligence, but that didn't actually answer the question of what happened to it after it died or where they come from.[/spoiler]

I love how Moffat tied together [spoiler]All the visions of the different Doctors he's been showing. It's a motif that has been running through ever since the Eleventh Hour, and now it's easy to piece together what larger purpose Moffat was getting at. I read an article on i09 recently that talked about how Moffat was making the Doctor the center of the universe. But now it looks like Moffat plans to at least wrap up the loose-thread that was left him from Davies run. I'm guessing it's hard not to make the Doctor the center of the universe when he ends up being so important to something as big as the Time War.[/spoiler]

Also, I'm perfectly willing to call bullshit on the leak. Not one accurate spoiler ever cropped up, no torrent, and absolutely nothing about the ending was revealed, which was left out of screener episodes. The only evidence we have of the entire link is the videos I linked above, and if time has taught us anything it's that nothing you hear or see on the internet can be trusted at face value. Though, [spoiler]the role of John Hurt was leaked, but by Hurt himself in an interview.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 18, 2013, 09:35:05 AM
Eh, I dunno.  200 people who are big enough fans that they'd preorder the DVD being polite enough to keep their mouths shut is within the realm of possibility.  The BBC seems to believe it happened, and they'd presumably have the shipping records to prove or disprove it.  If it was a publicity stunt it wasn't a very good one.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on May 18, 2013, 01:37:30 PM
Anyway, let's go back to the prophecy:

Quote
DORIUM: "On the fields of Trenzalore, at the fall of the Eleventh, when no living creature may speak falsely or fail to give answer, a question will be asked. A question that must never, ever be answered."
THE DOCTOR: "Silence will fall when the question is asked..."
DORIUM: "Silence must fall" would be a better translation. The Silence are determined that the question must never be answered. The Doctor must never reach Trenzalore.
THE DOCTOR: I don't understand? What's it got do do with me?
DORIUM: The first question. The oldest question in the universe, hidden in plain sight. Would you like to know what it is?
THE DOCTOR: Yes.
DORIUM: "Doctor who?"

Well hell, here I am going through the whole thing line-by-line and I missed one of the most tantalizing bits.

Why is it "the oldest question in the universe"?  I mean, of course it's the show's oldest question because it's the show's title, but what makes it the oldest question in-universe?

This being a time travel show and all, I'm thinking it involves the Doctor traveling back to the beginning of time.  [spoiler]Quite possibly the Hurt Doctor, traveling back to the beginning of time as part of whatever he did to end the Time War.  Remember that Dalton said "the Doctor still has the moment", and Davies deliberately made it unclear whether "the moment" was some kind of physical artifact or a specific moment in time or just an expression like "carries the day" or "has the upper hand" or what it was.  But if it was a moment in time, it could be the Big Bang itself; if the Doctor was fucking around at the very beginning of time, then that would presumably make his identity -- and, more importantly to this story, whatever horrible thing that he did -- the first question in the universe.

And does the Hurt Doctor have a name?  If he's not the Doctor, then who or what IS he?  Richard Grant threw out "the Storm, the Beast, and the Valeyard"; the episode also refers to him as "the secret", but I don't think any of those are the name that he would call himself.

I'm thinking he's got a name, some descriptor of what he did.  Like Ender the Xenocide.  I think there IS still going to be a name revealed -- probably not the Doctor's true name, but his other name, this person he was who was not the Doctor.  (Remember way back in The Beast Below?  "And then I find a new name, because I won't be the Doctor anymore.")

Hm.  You know what would be a good name?  The Absence.  Certainly fits the theme both of a lost regeneration and the annihilation of (at least) two civilizations, as well as the Doctor's recent habit of erasing all records of himself from existence and Moffat's general recurring themes of forgetting and remembering things, monsters that gain power when you can't see them, and holes in the fabric of the universe.  Plus, again, last week's line about the Doctor being found by the hole he leaves.[/spoiler]

What that's got to do with the Silence falling, well, maybe we'll find out in November and maybe we won't.  He's already been dragging that question out for three years.

And of course, lest we forget, the title of the episode where the TARDIS explodes with a whispered "Silence will fall" is The Big Bang.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on May 20, 2013, 06:18:40 PM
[spoiler]If it turns out Hurt is The Silence (so called because he silenced two races, stopped a huge war, and then hid himself away inside himself) I will personally and violently rip out Moffat's throat.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Kayma on May 23, 2013, 06:56:31 AM
That exact thing will probably happen.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on June 01, 2013, 08:54:00 AM
Smith to leave after the Christmas special (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/doctorwho/articles/Matt-Smith-to-leave-Doctor-Who)

I'm hoping the twelfth is Idris Elba. He pretty much plays the Doctor in civilian clothes in Luther.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 01, 2013, 09:51:57 AM
I'd rather Luther keep on rolling.

Anyhow, given what happened in the end of the finale, [spoiler]if we're to assume that Hurt is indeed a lost regeneration between 8 and 9 -- which we're clearly meant to given that he's wearing 8's waistcoat with 9's leather jacket --, then this throws us straight into the "last regeneration" arc.  Obviously they're going to find a way to break the "only 12 regenerations" rule, but we're going to be finding out how a lot sooner than we expected.

The Valeyard also got namedropped in the finale.  The Valeyard was said to be some sort of hybrid of the Doctor's twelfth and thirteenth regeneration -- that means Smith and the next guy.  Course, it's just as possible that the namedrop was just an Easter Egg and Moffat has no intention of following up on it -- after all, we've already got a Dark Doctor plot going on as it is.

Course, Moffat could also throw out the "between the twelfth and thirteenth" stipulation and just make Hurt himself the Valeyard, but the GI's line did seem to imply the Valeyard is still in the Doctor's future.[/spoiler]

Bleeding Cool (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/06/01/huge-doctor-who-news-coming-tonight-and-heres-what-we-think-it-is/) adds, [spoiler]John Hurt is also expected to make a few more appearances after the 50th special.[/spoiler]  Which could be bullshit -- it IS Bleeding Cool -- but it would be interesting.

Much as I love Smith, this is pretty well-timed; the current arc really IS a great place to introduce the Twelfth Doctor.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 02, 2013, 11:42:46 AM
BC has a couple articles speculating on the next pick: Who Do The Bookmakers Tip As The Next Star Of Doctor Who? (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/06/02/who-do-the-bookmakers-tip-as-the-next-doctor-who/) and Who Will Be the Doctor? (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/06/02/who-will-be-the-thirteenth-doctor/)  That second one spoils the ending of the finale, FYI.  In fact, mousing over the link spoils the finale.

A lot of the same names we saw last time around.  And of course last time, Moffat wound up going with someone nobody expected.  But Paterson Joseph WAS apparently his second choice, and I certainly wouldn't mind seeing him in the role.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Büge on June 05, 2013, 06:14:22 AM
http://nerdapproved.com/misc-weirdness/maurice-moss-of-the-it-crowd-wants-to-be-your-next-doctor/ (http://nerdapproved.com/misc-weirdness/maurice-moss-of-the-it-crowd-wants-to-be-your-next-doctor/)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on June 05, 2013, 07:02:10 AM
No no no no no.
I'm not impressed with his acting And seeing him in interviews and the like has shown me he's bland and awkward there too.
Why do so many people like this guy for the Doctor?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Classic on June 05, 2013, 07:30:55 AM
You know what?
Fuck it.
Donald Glover for Doctor.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mongrel on June 05, 2013, 08:27:31 AM
I read that as "Danny Glover for Doctor"
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Classic on June 05, 2013, 08:33:10 AM
Well, if he can't be Spider-Man, he ought to at least get this billing.
Danny Pudi being the Doctor AND Inspector SpaceTime would be a little bit... I dunno.

Then again, I feel like the BNP would hate it more.

EDIT:
But what kind of cretin would let spiting someone they don't like sway them away from something they DO like.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Malikial on June 05, 2013, 08:46:52 AM
Richard Ayoade is fun, funny and generally a nice person, I have no idea what you are talking about.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Büge on June 05, 2013, 09:55:31 AM
I read that as "Danny Glover for Doctor"

I'm too old for this shit (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHhgllqSKro#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mongrel on June 05, 2013, 10:27:36 AM
I think an old, black Dr. Who would actually be a hoot. 

Hell, any sort of change from "really white guy" would be nice to see. Having never really watched (other than the very first doctor and a little of the fourth) has there ever been any explanation as to why the doctor never regenerates as someone with the appearence of a woman or another ethnicity?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Classic on June 05, 2013, 11:20:20 AM
It seems like Time Lords have some kind of dimorphism, so that might explain the male part, but...
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Beat Bandit on June 05, 2013, 12:53:40 PM
The running joke through most of the transformations is that The Doctor always fears he's become a woman this time, and there may also be hints that he has been before.

That said, the more I think about it the more I would love a Danny Pudi Doctor. He's just right for it.

However, that would make for an American Doctor, which I don't think the world is ready for yet. Even though it would never not be fantastic timing to make The Doctor Indian or of Middle-Eastern decent.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 05, 2013, 03:57:56 PM
I think Moss is great.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on June 11, 2013, 02:48:27 PM
If we could vote on this I'd be all about Paul McGann for the next season. He's damn near perfect for the role, and there are any number of compelling storyline justifications at this juncture.

It will, of course, never happen.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on June 11, 2013, 04:24:18 PM
Nah, but I'm still holding out hope he'll at least show up as a guest.  Either in a hush-hush appearance in the Fiftieth Anniversary (unlikely; just catching John Hurt on set in a leather jacket was enough to get the rumor sites to piece together the big twist ending) or later on in the season.  I don't see why all the fiftieth anniversary multiple-Doctors stuff has to be confined to one episode -- especially since it already isn't.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Ted Belmont on June 12, 2013, 03:46:53 AM
I'd love to see Elba as The Doctor, if only to see which parts of the Doctor Who fandom are crazy racists.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Joxam on June 12, 2013, 08:47:09 AM
Hint: All of them.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 02, 2013, 04:05:03 PM
Free ebooks (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006q2x0/features/stories) (PDF), including What I Did In My Christmas Holidays, By Sally Sparrow, which was of course later rewritten as Blink.  Worth the 15 minutes it'll take you to read it; I haven't read the rest.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Joxam on July 02, 2013, 05:06:04 PM
Man I just saw this joke I made and I have to admit, I think a LOT of the Dr. Who fandom wouldn't be racist. At least I think the British part of the fandom would already appreciate Elba as a hell of an actor.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 03, 2013, 01:36:25 AM
It's cool, man, I don't think anybody thought you actually seriously meant all Doctor Who fans are racist.

But Ted's right too that Elba's casting WOULD bring the racists out of the woodwork, like it did in Thor.

But it won't be Elba.  As Bleeding Cool pointed out, the reason BBC's not likely to go for an established name isn't just that they want us to be surprised, it's that the show's budget keeps getting slashed.  Paying Elba's rate for a half-dozen episodes of Luther every year or two is a pretty far cry from paying him for Doctor Who.

Which isn't to say they WON'T cast a black guy -- just not a black guy who's already famous.

We're not going to see a guy who's been in a Thor movie play the Doctor.  We're just going to have to settle for a guy who played the Doctor being in a Thor movie.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on July 03, 2013, 01:56:03 AM
Tyler Perry's Doctor Who.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Büge on July 05, 2013, 01:22:13 AM
http://www.blastr.com/2013-7-3/helen-mirrens-intriguing-suggestion-who-should-be-12th-doctor (http://www.blastr.com/2013-7-3/helen-mirrens-intriguing-suggestion-who-should-be-12th-doctor)

Her idea is something I want to see, just for all the frothing rage it would generate.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Ted Belmont on July 05, 2013, 03:23:09 AM
That would be amazing. It definitely won't happen, but it would be amazing.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on July 05, 2013, 03:55:27 AM
God, that would be good
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on July 24, 2013, 08:56:13 AM
So, I've been gushing over on Talking Time about me busting my Doctor Who cherry wide open.  I've already burned through 3 seasons in the last month.  I've been having a lot of fun with it.

Since I was a total Who newbie, I started at a logical starting point: Eccleston's run.  Rose and End of the World gave me a pretty good sense at what the show is all about.  Part of the show's versatility is that because of the premise of time travel and nonsense, each episode can be something new and unique.  I just gotta wonder: with all the Doctor's aimless wandering, does he really choose the places he goes, or is there some ulterior motive for his destinations to meddle?  "Oh hey, let's go hang out with the Face of Boh when the Earth blows up!  Oh hey, look, something bad is happening!"  Then, "Oh hey, let's go hang out with William Shakespeare!  Oh hey, look, something bad is happening!"

Some of my favorites:

Rose: Great introduction.  I must admit that Rose kinda accepting everything that is going on during the episode is kinda off.  Some strange man blows up my workplace, I'd be all over calling the police about the guy who CAME UP TO ME, SHOWED ME THE BOMB, AND THEN BLEW THE PLACE UP.

Dalek: While I get a sense that these things scare the shit out of The Doctor, I really don't get an idea why.  Eccleston's performance is great, though.  "No...maybe I am.  Exterminate!"  ZORRRRRT.

Bad Wolf/Parting of the Ways: Good finale. 

Still working my way through the Tennant years.  I love how the Christmas episodes eventually start making fun of all the bad shit that happens to London around Christmas time.

The Cybermen invasion was really good, and the whole situation with Rose felt really natural, and despite the regeneration, these characters were close.

I like Eccleston more than Tennant, but Tennant's grown on me, and I'll be sad to see him go after season 4.

I want to try and catch up to where we are now before the 50th anniversary.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on July 24, 2013, 09:55:41 AM
I think there's like eight conflicting explainations for why the Doctor goes where he does. My favorite is Neil Gaiman's idea that the Tardis is actually intelligent, and brings the Doctor to places she thinks might be fun.

Beyond that, I think they've said the he chooses places at random, or goes to places he thinks might be fun, or just accidently ends up somewhere because he can't drive his ship. That doesn't quite answer why he'd choose to go to, like, an empty sleeper ship floating in orbit infested by giant alien bugs, or worse, London.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on July 24, 2013, 09:58:52 AM
If the TARDIS is responsible, then holy shit, she must be a sadist, with all the nonsense she puts the Doctor and his companions through.

But yeah, I'm totally hooked on Who, and it's taking all my willpower to not go back through this thread and read the discussion from 5 years ago, because the discussion from 5 years ago starts about where I am right now in the series.  I just watched the Pompeii episode last night.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on July 24, 2013, 02:05:55 PM
The exact exchange was

Doctor: You didn't always take me where I wanted to go.
TARDIS: No, but I always took you where you needed to go.

The idea isn't that she's a sadist, it's that she knows where the Doctor is needed, even if it hurts him. It's not actually an entirely new concept, at least among fans, and I quite like it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on July 24, 2013, 02:40:15 PM
If the TARDIS is responsible, then holy shit, she must be a sadist, with all the nonsense she puts the Doctor and his companions through.

But yeah, I'm totally hooked on Who, and it's taking all my willpower to not go back through this thread and read the discussion from 5 years ago, because the discussion from 5 years ago starts about where I am right now in the series.  I just watched the Pompeii episode last night.

Mmmm... I loved Tennant, but Russel T. Davis is a bit out there, as a writer. I didn't really think his humor worked, for the most part, but he took chances, which I liked, and sometimes they paid off nicely.

Once you get to Girl in the Fireplace and Blink, you'll start seeing some real good Moffat episodes. He takes over the show after Tennant, and for the most part, I think it's been at its best since. So you have something to look forward to!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on July 24, 2013, 02:51:05 PM
I've already seen Girl in the Fireplace AND Blink, and while I got kinda bored with the former, I REALLY loved the latter.  Interesting way to do non-linear storytelling.  Plus I can't help but think that "wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey stuff" is actually an untranslatable Time Lord Time Science word for whatever temporal shenanigans is happening.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 24, 2013, 03:16:58 PM
Unfortunately I think "wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey" has kinda become a synonym for "handily-wavily magicky-wagicky" in Moffat's years as showrunner, but I still think he's doing damned clever work that's almost always better than what Davies did.  But he's never quite reached the quality of Blink since.

I think a lot of it's simply that when he was doing one episode a season he really made it count, whereas now that he's got writer credit on about a third of any given season and is shaping the direction of the rest, well, even the most talented writer doesn't always function at 100% of his potential.  And again, while his work hasn't been QUITE as consistent, I'd still say that in the aggregate the show right now really is the best it's ever been.

But hey, when you're caught up go watch City of Death from the original series on Netflix.  It's co-written by Douglas Adams, who reused good big swaths of it in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on July 24, 2013, 11:35:55 PM
No, I agree that "timey-wimey" has the chance to go the route of Star Trek technobabble.  I'm just kinda drinking the Kool-Aid of the show, and, you know, "it's just a show, so I should just relax".  Right now, it's TV comfort food.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 25, 2013, 01:45:11 AM
Nah, its first use was perfectly valid.  The Doctor was explaining that causality can be violated, which is kind of important to the premise of the show.  I'm not faulting its use in Blink, just its subsequent use as an occasionally hasty way of pretending plot holes aren't really plot holes.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 25, 2013, 03:21:41 PM
Latest unsourced rumor (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/07/25/looks-like-paul-mcgann-has-filmed-a-new-doctor-who-something-but-what/) is that McGann has filmed something or another.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on July 26, 2013, 05:11:48 AM
Alright, polished off the last of Season 4 this morning, save for "The Next Doctor".

It was kinda heartwarming to see all the Doctor's friends come back for this big ol' romp.  Wasn't crazy about all the spinoff crossovers from Torchwood and Sara Jane Chronicles, but they didn't feel TOO shoehorned in.  Still frumpy that Eccleston doesn't want to do any more Who stuff, because, even though I've only seen two Doctors, I like him more than Tennant.  That's not to say that Tennant's bad, on the contrary!  I just like Eccleston's range.  "Everybody lives, Rose!  This time, everybody lives!" gives me goosebumps, juxtaposed with "Dalek".

Glancing through the old pages of the thread, it looks like there's some more Tennant stuff before Smith takes over, but I can't seem to find it on Amazon.  I'm guessing it's gotta do with #10's death and regeneration in to #11.

I do like how they foreshadowed the way #10 was able to cheat his way out of burning a regeneration. But they're also foreshadowing his demise, and seem to pull it back in the 11th hour.

As for Professor Song, I'm kinda mystified by her.  What significance is she going to play?  I really want to see what's going to come of "The Next Doctor", and the Tennant stuff after Season 4.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on July 26, 2013, 05:20:27 AM
Yeah uh wow, it looks like amazon just straight up doesn't include the end of Tennant in season 4.

Check this out. (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003M8PN90/ref=dv_dp_ep1)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on July 26, 2013, 05:31:08 AM
Thanks, Smiler.  Totally gonna get on that gravy train tonight, after "The Next Doctor".  Kinda ruins the mystery of the episode, because I saw the teaser before leaving for work, and THAT'S NOT MATT SMITH.  YOU LYING LIARS.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on July 26, 2013, 10:19:57 AM
When you watch "Last of the Time Lords", make sure to watch this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szuP0oBZX4g#) right after. It's quite good, and only about 10 minutes.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 26, 2013, 12:48:24 PM
Thanks, Smiler.  Totally gonna get on that gravy train tonight, after "The Next Doctor".  Kinda ruins the mystery of the episode, because I saw the teaser before leaving for work, and THAT'S NOT MATT SMITH.  YOU LYING LIARS.

I don't think anyone here thought it was really going to be the Governor, though.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on July 26, 2013, 08:54:18 PM
It was the third  New Who episode I saw. I wasn't convinced it was the new Doctor but..

(He's still one of my favourite Doctors.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 27, 2013, 10:46:04 AM
Images from the trailer from Comic-Con: Daleks surrounded by flaming wreckage (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/07/26/doctor-who-50th-anniversary-special-images-of-the-daleks/); sure looks Gallifreyan.

While I still think the bulk of the Time War will and should be left up to the audience's imagination, I think it's pretty damn likely we're going to see at least a piece of it in the anniversary special.  Conjecture: they'll probably spend about as much time on the Time War in the anniversary special as they did on the previous Doctors in the finale.

The full trailer hasn't been posted publicly yet.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on July 28, 2013, 07:32:52 AM
Audition scripts for the Twelfth Doctor. (http://www.blastr.com/2013-7-24/read-official-scripts-people-are-using-audition-12th-doctor)  A regeneration scene, an encounter with a Cyberleader, and a boy with monsters in his bedroom.

Pretty generic stuff, and everybody's pointing out that it sounds exactly like the Eleventh Doctor.  Which, you know, is true, but that's kinda because the Twelfth hasn't been cast yet, isn't it?  He can't exactly write material to the new Doctor's strengths before he knows who the new Doctor IS and what those strengths ARE.

Moffat did a perfectly good job writing Eccleston and Tennant differently; while Matt Smith has been the only Doctor he's shaped as showrunner, he's distinct from both of them and I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume the next guy will make the role his own too and Moffat will welcome that.

Hell, he's even discussed how Eleventh Hour was originally conceived with Tennant in mind and rewritten to introduce Smith.  I don't see why the next regeneration episode should be any different.

Moffat's a fan -- he knows the importance of affirming that all the Doctors are the same man, but he also knows the importance of making every one of them different in his own way.

But hey, if you want a statement of purpose for what a lot of people think is wrong with Moffat's approach to the show, here's a freebie:

Quote
CYBERLEADER: Magic is not logical

THE DOCTOR: I know – isn’t it great?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 01, 2013, 04:37:16 PM
BBC has announced that they're going to make an announcement.

Which is stupid.

But here's Tom Baker!

Exclusive -- Tom Baker talks regeneration - Doctor Who - BBC (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H85hYqPeiCw#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on August 04, 2013, 07:51:49 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDGzzGRKukE&feature=youtu.be (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDGzzGRKukE#ws)

Glad he's not young, bored that he's still male and white.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 04, 2013, 07:55:37 AM
Much the same here.  Though I suppose if they want to go female/minority, the time for a major shakeup would be after whatever deus-ex-machina gives him his next regeneration.

I've never seen The Thick of It but I hear it's good and he's good.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on August 04, 2013, 08:12:54 AM
He was in Fires of Pompeii, and apparently he played a WHO Doctor in World War Z. COINCIDENCE? yes.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 04, 2013, 10:15:43 AM
Man they sure love recasting people from Fires of Pompeii.

EDIT: And Torchwood.  He was Frobisher, the weaselly government agent in Children of Earth who [spoiler]killed himself and his family[/spoiler] in a scene that was supposed to be dramatic but made me literally laugh out loud.

EDIT 2: For those of us in the Colonies, The Thick of It is on Hulu (http://www.hulu.com/the-thick-of-it).
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Malikial on August 04, 2013, 10:34:23 AM
I love Peter Cabaldi!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on August 04, 2013, 11:06:25 AM
Malcolm Tucker is a sci-fi fan. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5iRmPBve80#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Beat Bandit on August 04, 2013, 11:40:50 AM
As amazing as he is, this is how I'll always be imagining him.

Sid's Dad's Greatest Hits - Peter Capaldi in Skins (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P753ty9G62k#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on August 04, 2013, 12:49:38 PM
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/a552f8974eae65a23b3fccbc34141c9f/tumblr_mr0qdcMIrk1qc8qobo1_500.jpg)

Can you fucking imagine?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on August 04, 2013, 11:33:08 PM
The Master: Yes, it is I, your most-
Doctor: Oh for fuck's sake! I saw yeh die like three different ways the last time you fucking cockroach. You're like an old woman's period, just when you think it's finally gone for good! Fucking hell!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on August 05, 2013, 04:00:56 AM
Malcolm Tucker IS Dr Who! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Blf073f2Lc#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on August 05, 2013, 04:33:04 AM
The Master: Yes, it is I, your most-
Doctor: Oh for fuck's sake! I saw yeh die like three different ways the last time you fucking cockroach. You're like an old woman's period, just when you think it's finally gone for good! Fucking hell!

Now I'm just picturing Danny Devito waddling out of the Tardis and throwing a tarp over it to keep it hidden.

Adventures include The Doctor siphoning gas out of a starliner, The Doctor mercilessly hitting on the heart of the Tardis, and every episode beginning with The Doctor fleeing debtors with a suitcase of money in tow.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 10, 2013, 07:47:23 AM
A couple from io9 on the "another white guy" point:

Neil Gaiman says a black actor was offered Doctor Who but said no (http://io9.com/neil-gaiman-says-a-black-actor-was-offered-doctor-who-b-1044089066).  Gaiman doesn't say who or when (but seems to imply it's not Paterson Joseph, who purportedly almost got the role but was never offered it).

Gaiman adds that he wouldn't cast a female Doctor for the Twelfth but thinks the Thirteenth is the perfect time to do it.

Within the plot of the show, that makes sense -- we're coming up on the Doctor's final regeneration and they're going to have to deal with that in some way.

(There are people who say that's just fans grasping at straws and they're not even going to bring up the regeneration limit because it's not like the new series has up to this point.

I don't know what show those people have been watching, but the one I've been watching has never passed up an opportunity to have the Doctor face his own inevitable death and then find a way out of it.)

There's going to have to be some explanation for why this is a big deal, the Doctor getting more regenerations -- and it could easily tie into a major change like a female Doctor.

The second piece, A unified theory to explain the casting of every new Doctor Who (http://io9.com/a-unified-theory-to-explain-the-casting-of-every-new-do-1054287288), draws the same conclusion from a thematic perspective, arguing that each Doctor on the new series has served a specific casting purpose:

Eccleston showed the audience that the Doctor can be cool.
Tennant showed the audience that the Doctor can be human.  (I mean that metaphorically, as in feeling relatable emotions, but he also showed that the Doctor can literally turn into a human.)
Smith showed the audience that the Doctor can be weird.
And Capaldi shows the audience that the Doctor can be old.  He brings the series full circle -- where Eccleston was a deliberate departure from the Doctor's usual depiction in the original series, Capaldi would seem to be a deliberate reflection of it.

And, having reintroduced all these different interpretations of the Doctor, the audience should be well and truly comfortable with the idea that the Doctor can be anything and anyone.

So what the hell -- maybe next time.  In the meantime, I'm sure Capaldi will do a great job.  (I watched the first episode of The Thick of It.  I enjoyed it!)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on August 10, 2013, 09:12:52 AM
Smith wasn't just weird, he was a raw nerve. I think he showed the audience, much like Tom Baker did compared to Pertee, that the Doctor most definitely ISN'T human. He also pulled off old/tired very well in his weaker moments. I think Capaldi is going to represent the Doctor as he sees himself at what he assumes is going to be the end of his life. Smith was young, one could argue, because The Doctor didn't want to admit that he was on his second to last go, and was by far the oldest we've ever seen him. Capaldi, I think he's going to be less in denial, but no less railing against the inevitable.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 10, 2013, 03:28:09 PM
Sure -- you could see Smith's youth ITSELF as a sign of the Doctor in denial and Capaldi as a sign of the Doctor embracing his age.

Notably, Capaldi, at 55, is the same age Hartnell was when the show began.  Though I gotta say, Hartnell LOOKED a whole lot older than Capaldi does.  (Richard Hurndall played the First Doctor at the age of 72, and bore a pretty striking resemblance to Hartnell at 55.)

In fact, what the hell -- here's a rundown of the age each actor was during his run.  (I'm going by airdates; I realize that doesn't necessarily reflect the actual age the actor was when the episode was filmed, but it should be within a year, anyway, and that's close enough that I'm not going to go to the effort of looking up actual shooting dates.  Also, source is Wikipedia, so of course any of this information could actually be bullshit.)

Hartnell: Born January 1908; played the Doctor November 1963-October 1966 -> aged 55-58 (and appeared in The Three Doctors in December 1972/January 1973, aged 64)

Troughton: Born March 1920; played the Doctor October 1966-June 1969 -> aged 46-49 (52 in The Three Doctors, 63 in The Five Doctors in November '83, 64 in The Two Doctors in February '85)

Pertwee: Born July 1919; played the Doctor January 1970-June 1974 -> aged 50-54 (64 in The Five Doctors)

Tom Baker: Born January 1934; played the Doctor June 1974-March 1981 -> aged 40-47

Davison: Born April 1951; played the Doctor March 1981-March 1984 -> aged 29-32 (56 in Time Crash in November 2007)

Colin Baker: Born June 1943; played the Doctor March 1984-December 1986 -> aged 40-43

McCoy: Born August 1943; played the Doctor September 1987-December 1989 on series, May 1996 TV movie -> aged 44-46, 52

McGann: Born November 1959; played the Doctor in the movie -> aged 36.  To date we've never seen his regeneration; if the rumors are true and he's going to show up this year, he'll be 54.

Eccleston: Born February 1964; played the Doctor March-June 2005 -> aged 41.

Tennant: Born April 1971; played the Doctor June 2005-January 2010 -> aged 34-38; returning in November at age 42.

Smith: October 1982, represent!  Played the Doctor January 2010; concluding in December 2013 -> aged 27-31.

Capaldi: Born April 1958; begins playing the Doctor in December 2013, aged 55.

And, for the hell of it:

Richard Hurndall: Born November 1910; was 72 in The Five Doctors
Richard E Grant: Born May 1957; appeared in Scream of the Shalka in November-December 2003 -> aged 46
John Hurt: Born January 1940; age 73


SO:

Oldest by start date: (Hurt, Hurndall,) Hartnell/Capaldi, Pertwee, Troughton(/Grant), McCoy, Eccleston, the Bakers, McGann, Tennant, Davison, Smith.

Oldest by end date: (Hurt, Hurndall, Capaldi?,) Hartnell, (Capaldi?,) Pertwee(/McGann if he shows up in November and we count that), McCoy if reckoning by the movie, Troughton, Tom Baker, McCoy if reckoning by the last episode of the show(/Grant), Colin Baker, Eccleston, Tennant, McGann if only counting the TV movie, Davison, Smith.

So mostly the same list except, as you'd expect, Tom Baker's extra-long run, Eccleston's extra-short one, and the ambiguity of how to count the movie.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on August 11, 2013, 07:06:59 AM
I just want them to bring Bernard Cribbins back to kill Matt Smith.

Wilf: 2
Doctor: 0
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on August 11, 2013, 11:39:29 AM
Starting season 7.  Really liked the foreshadowing that happened throughout Season 6, but I haven't been as wowed by it as I have other seasons.

River Song is interesting, but I don't really know what to make of her.  So, somehow she's [spoiler]part Time Lord?  And she burned out all our regenerations to fix the doctor?  I do love the call-back to the 15-hour time window between one regeneration and the next, where a Time Lord has enhanced healing.[/spoiler]

I love how the episode titled "Let's Kill Hitler" [spoiler]just shoves Hitler in to a closet and ignores him for the remainder of the episode.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on August 11, 2013, 01:59:02 PM
Let's Kill Hitler is a pretty bad episode despite the title.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on August 13, 2013, 06:04:18 AM
Maybe they'll finally get a new intro theme next season. That other one is getting pretty old, you know?

Faith of the Heart (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wJQUkApwXE#)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on August 13, 2013, 06:57:15 AM
Man, you just reminded me of the Enterprise intro with Don't Stop Me Now over it.

Star Trek Enterprise Intro - Don't Stop Me Now (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEGxVtSLJjE#)

It's a shame that all of the Doctor Who videos with it suck.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on August 13, 2013, 07:09:44 AM
Thank you so much for getting the taste of that out of my mouth. I actually regret checking to see if someone had already done it without a shred of irony. I almost wish putting Faith of the Heart over popular TV intros became a thing, just so I wouldn't have to suffer alone. Meanwhile, Don't Stop Me Now is pretty much the perfect opposite of that. Kind of like sped-up video with Yackity Sax or slowed-down with Enya for adjusting anything on the comedy/tragedy scale.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 13, 2013, 12:38:12 PM
Or that Daily Show where they demonstrated the difference between liberals and conservatives by displaying the same military footage with Carmina Burana over it and then again with God Bless the USA.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on August 19, 2013, 11:26:56 PM
I'm caught up.  Holy shit.  What the fuck is John Hurt doing there?  I avoided clicking all the links for the discussion of The Name of the Doctor. 
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on August 20, 2013, 01:07:51 AM
The title of the episode is probably my favorite thing because it wasn't at all about the Doctor's name, so you had tons of dumb teenagers getting really confused when John Hurt's title card popped up.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on August 20, 2013, 02:58:30 AM
I can see where Moffett has a reputation for juking and misdirection, and that being one of the things that pisses off fans.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on August 20, 2013, 05:18:46 AM
It was weird of him to build up the Doctor's name, and then never reveal it. If he was doing something clever, clearly, I missed that.

I think the Moffat era's had some of the best running storylines the show has ever had, but their execution is, often, not done quite right. I guess part of it is trying to cram too much into too little time... it all feels rather frantic and rushed. Again, though, it's such a step up from the norm in terms of complexity, ambition, and charm, that I can't really fault it.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 21, 2013, 05:06:21 PM
I'm caught up.  Holy shit.  What the fuck is John Hurt doing there?  I avoided clicking all the links for the discussion of The Name of the Doctor.

Well, if you don't want to know, you'll probably want to drop out of the rest of this post.  But it's been pretty conclusively explained at this point, in advance of November's special.

John Hurt is a lost regeneration.  We never saw McGann turn into Eccleston -- and now we know that's because he didn't.  McGann turned into Hurt; Hurt turned into Eccleston.  So whatever it is the Doctor did in the Time War that he's been agonizing over for the past 8 years, John Hurt is the guy who did those things.

It was weird of him to build up the Doctor's name, and then never reveal it. If he was doing something clever, clearly, I missed that.

Well, what's clever is he's found a way to introduce a lost regeneration of the Doctor without actually bumping the count -- the Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, and Twelfth Doctors are still the Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, and Twelfth Doctors -- because Hurt forsook the name.

I'm pretty enamored with the elegance of the solution, to be honest; enough so that I got over my initial disappointment at it being pretty much a straight-up copout from something he's been teasing us with since Silence in the Library.

And for McDohl, if you've read this far: the original show's lore held that Time Lords only get 13 lives.  Sticking an extra incarnation in between 8 and 9 means that the Twelfth Doctor is actually the thirteenth incarnation, which is something the show's bound to deal with given how important a recurring theme "Doctor has to face his inevitable death and then find a way to cheat it" has been in Moffat's run to date.

Obviously the show is going to find a way around the Only 13 Lives rule -- hell, it already has, multiple times, with the Master, though presumably the Doctor's solution will be less evil than stealing someone else's body.  But it'll do just fine for continuing the current drama.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on August 22, 2013, 03:46:22 AM
Ahhh, that makes sense. That's a nice twist.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on August 22, 2013, 08:19:03 AM
I hate to be the "I don't like people I don't like liking things I like" guy, but I'm mostly just relieved that an older lead might chase off Teen Girl Squad.

Also, more quarries, styrofoam rocks, velvet jackets, and monsters made of bubble wrap and dryer hose. Hell, would it be too much to ask for subterranean space maggots realized as mud-filled condoms? Just as a callback? Because that'd be pretty fucking boss.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 22, 2013, 05:12:08 PM
Oh hey, apparently the Who comics are already having fun with the Hurt reveal.

Via Bleeding Cool, Doctor Who #12 (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/08/16/john-hurt-reference-in-new-doctor-who-comic/) depicts a scene from the Time War that explicitly references the Doctor rejecting his name, and a page from Cornell's upcoming The Girl Who Loved Doctor Who (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/08/22/more-idw-doctor-who-comic-evidence-for-the-hurt-insert/) shows a shadowy figure between McGann and Eccleston in a Warhol-style photo montage.

I haven't read the comic in a couple of years -- I dropped it around the time they switched to the Eleventh Doctor; it felt like it was treading water and I was unemployed.

But that bit of the Time War looks interesting, and I fully intend to pick up the Cornell comic because I love Cornell.  Though I have to admit I'd rather see him writing for the show again.  I think he'd do great with Capaldi.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on August 27, 2013, 04:01:59 PM
Also, doesn't John Hurt have costume elements between both McGann and Eccleston?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on August 28, 2013, 01:38:25 AM
Yeah, you're right; he's wearing McGann's waistcoat and Eccleston's leather jacket.  Pretty clear, and obviously intentional, visual cues.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on August 29, 2013, 05:20:21 PM
The show has always been keen on illustrating how fucked up the time lords are. From day one, pretty much. They're introduced as something the Doctor is scared shitless of back at the end of Troughton's run. They turn up as manipulative, coprolitic bureaucrat bastards for a while after that. Then the big season ender a couple years ago hinged on "the time lords are even more fucked up than that."

"Stand back, Wilf. I'mma take that gun and shoot those motherfuckers after I jump through a shitload of windows and fall a few thousand feet. That's how serious this shit just got."

Meanwhile, I love all the little "no, you look time lord" punchlines. Just once I'd like to see this put together.

There has to be a great reason for that, even if it's a tongue in cheek throwaway. But ideally I'd love some use of the idea that a very old race with unfettered access to the entirety of time and space did some fucked up things even they don't remember. Even their discovery of time travel is so subjectively long ago that it has become vague myth. They have symbols of office that actually possess incredible functionality they've long since forgotten about. Hell, as far as Gallifrey itself is concerned that could have happened in billions of years or an instant. Figures they'd have the most boring, indolent, stable society possible. They probably had several other boring, indolent societies which persisted for interminable millennia before this last one. And then billions upon billions of retconned pasts before that. They've simply been fucking with time for a long fucking time.

Meanwhile, every other sentient alien race in the universe happens to look exactly like them. And the few that aren't some puppet made of dryer hoses, bubble wrap and condoms are identical except for giant green eyebrows or some such shit. At this point someone has to confess that somewhere in their insane spaghetti of racial history, a bunch of time lords, either alone or as part of a movement, have fucked with the development of every other sentient life form in the universe so as to make them more Gallifreyan.

Which is, you know, super fucking crazy narcissistic, but I wouldn't put it past them.

I just like the idea.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on August 30, 2013, 05:47:59 AM
I always had the impression that upon mastering time travel Gallifreyan history became extremely fluid for what I guess you could term as "a long time", even though that's part of the problem, resulting in a culture that, essentially, has always had time travel, because linear history is for dorks.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on August 30, 2013, 09:43:32 AM
Gallifreyan History 101 - Chameleon Circuit (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQ5hEAowMek#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on August 30, 2013, 01:55:34 PM
Yeah, I knew about everything in that song, but that's the thing. Gallifreyan history basically goes. Rassalon and Omega master the technologies essential to time travel then there's a huge mass of timey-wimey stuff and then the present Time Lords, who, by the way, we never actually know when the Doctor is interacting with them. Not to mention that, during the Time War, Rassalon was their leader again, even though he'd been long dead. So apparently the Time Lords pulled their best and brightest from all through history for the occasion, indicating once more that their timeline, as a species, is fluid as fuck.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on September 12, 2013, 12:43:28 AM
(http://oyster.ignimgs.com/wordpress/stg.ign.com/2013/09/drwho_opt-610x907.jpg)

It's kinda odd.  Tennant has a baby face when put side by side with Smith's mega chin.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on September 12, 2013, 10:47:24 AM
And here I was holding out for Two and a Half Doctors.

The Christmas special had better be Dawn of the Dead Doctor.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on September 12, 2013, 09:32:18 PM
I dunno. Unless the story goes back to when before Nine met Rose in "Rose", it's going to mean Rose is coming back from the alternate dimension, which could mean that Tennant is the Meta-Crisis Doctor from the Season 4 finale.  It's unlikely, but holy crap.

I'm still bummed out that Eccleston isn't coming back for this.  Dude should realize that he started a legacy for this new era, and he should be a part of it.  He's honestly my favorite Doctor, though I haven't seen any of 1-8.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on September 14, 2013, 01:30:51 AM
I dunno. Unless the story goes back to when before Nine met Rose in "Rose", it's going to mean Rose is coming back from the alternate dimension, which could mean that Tennant is the Meta-Crisis Doctor from the Season 4 finale.  It's unlikely, but holy crap.

Possible, but it's likelier that, from her and Ten's perspective, it takes place somewhere between episodes in season 2.  That's how they usually do these things.

(Though The Five Doctors and The Two Doctors managed to introduce so many plotholes and inconsistencies vis-a-vis Troughton's timeline that fandom has invented an entire "season 6b (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Season_6B#Season_6B)" between the end of Troughton's run and the beginning of Pertwee's to explain them away.  Not canon, of course, but it's actually close enough that the licensees have published officially-sanctioned novels that take place during season 6b.

(EDIT TO ADD: I believe I said recently that McGann's regeneration into Eccleston is the only one we've never seen.  I misspoke; we never see Troughton regenerate into Pertwee, either, which is what makes the 6B theory possible.)

As I noted a few pages ago, the biggest inconsistency I can see the special introducing is if Tennant knows that Smith is his next incarnation before meeting the Governor.)

I'm still bummed out that Eccleston isn't coming back for this.  Dude should realize that he started a legacy for this new era, and he should be a part of it.  He's honestly my favorite Doctor, though I haven't seen any of 1-8.

I'm disappointed too.  But hey we're getting John Hurt out of the deal.

There are definitely some highlights of TOS that are worth checking out (I'm going to once again tip City of Death as my favorite) -- see other thread.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 01, 2013, 11:19:00 AM
BC (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/09/29/peter-capaldis-multiple-appearances-in-the-whoniverse-to-be-explained-by-an-old-russell-t-davies-idea/) links a Moffat interview and quotes this bit about reconciling Capaldi's previous appearances:

Quote
    We are aware that Peter Capaldi’s played a big old part in Doctor Who before and we’re not going to ignore the fact… and Torchwood. I’ll let you in on this. I remember Russell [T Davies] told me he had a big old plan as to why there were two Peter Capaldis in the Who universe, one in Pompei and one in Torchwood. When I cast Peter and [Russell] got in touch to say how pleased he was I said “Okay, what was your theory and does it still work?” and he said “Yes it does, here it is.” So I don’t know if we’ll get to it… we’ll play that one out over time. It’s actually quite neat.

    The big fun question is, we know that the Doctor when he regenerates, the faces… it’s not set from birth, it’s not that he was always going to be one day Peter Capaldi. We know that’s the case because in The War Games he has a choice of face and all that. We know it’s not set so where does he get those faces from? They can’t just be randomly generated because they’ve got lines and they’ve aged. When he turns into Peter he’ll actually have lines on his face – sorry Peter – so where did that face come from?

Neat.  (Also, Romana intentionally regenerated herself to look exactly like Princess Astra from the previous serial.  But Romana's regeneration so heavily contradicts all the other regenerations -- which contradict each other quite a lot, too -- that it's probably best to ignore it.)

And also the premier will play in US theaters, and a bunch of other theaters worldwide too, but no info yet on which specific theaters.  At an educated guess, I'd probably figure the US ones will be the same ones that do Fathom Events and the like, since they've got the equipment for it.  So if you've seen a Rifftrax at a local theater, there's hope.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on October 15, 2013, 10:45:28 PM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/1398917_738895782791118_1214759844_o.jpg)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 16, 2013, 01:34:48 AM
Is that a sonic screwdriver in your pocket, or are you something something?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on October 27, 2013, 01:10:48 AM
"Is that a sonic screwdriver in your pocket, and...does it work on wood?"  :suave:
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Kayma on October 27, 2013, 11:19:21 AM
You're right about that fathom thing.

http://www.fathomevents.com/#!doctor-who-the-day-of-the-doctor/more-info/details (http://www.fathomevents.com/#!doctor-who-the-day-of-the-doctor/more-info/details)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 27, 2013, 04:28:48 PM
7:30 PM?  That's weird.  I thought it was being simulcast.

I mean, don't get me wrong, it makes a lot more SENSE to go see a movie at 7:30 PM than noon, but still.



...wait, Monday?  The fuck?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on October 28, 2013, 02:27:35 AM
Yeah only about like 15 or so theaters in the US are showing it at the for-real time, mostly because the stuff theaters use to do this kind of stuff is notoriously janky.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on October 28, 2013, 03:53:17 AM
Also because you don't give up a screen for a special event for nerds on a Saturday night.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on October 28, 2013, 02:54:11 PM
Except that there's no place in the United States where 7:45 PM GMT is night.  Which brings us back to the point that noon on a Saturday isn't really the optimal moviegoing time either.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 06, 2013, 02:00:10 PM
Meant to post this a couple weeks back:

DOCTOR WHO 50th Anniversary Tribute: "The Day of The Doctor" NOV 23 BBC AMERICA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0AX8rgJ8f0#)

Wonder if there's any significance to 4 and 3 appearing out-of-sequence.

Meanwhile, Moffat addresses the regeneration limit (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/10/13/steven-moffat-says-doctor-can-only-have-twelve-regenerations-but-theres-something-youve-all-missed/) and teases,

Quote
He can only regenerate 12 times… I think you should go back to your DVDs and count correctly this time. There’s something you’ve all missed.

Bleeding Cool speculates he's talking about the Clone Doctor.  Me, I'm thinking it's a reference to Brain of Morbius and its implication that there were several incarnations of the Doctor prior to the First.  Fits right in with the ending of The Name of the Doctor and its statement that there are only eleven Doctors but that he's had more than eleven incarnations.

Could be it's all a diversion and the Doctor overcame the regeneration limit ages ago.  I kinda like that idea.  Especially as it would explain what the fuck the deal was with #4's regeneration into #5 and all that "Watcher" business.

But for all that Moffat loves the show's history, he's pretty studiously ignored delving into the more obscure bits of continuity.



And finally: it appears that the 50th anniversary special will explain Queen Elizabeth I's history with the Tenth Doctor (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/11/06/four-new-images-from-the-day-of-the-doctor-oswin-liz-one-two-doctors/).
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on November 11, 2013, 07:05:45 AM
There's another trailer out.
The Day of the Doctor: The Second TV Trailer - Doctor Who 50th Anniversary - BBC One (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7z6FMCqYrBo#ws)

Spoilers for Name of the Doctor and the like.  Looks damn cool.

Here's my speculation:

[spoiler]Timeline-wise, this has to fall somewhere in Series 2, because I think Rose might have some residual connection to the Time Vortex after getting it in her brain in "Parting of the Ways".  In that trailer above, Matt Smith says "I remember this...almost remember."  So, if we go by the logic introduced in that special with D5 and D10, then this had to have happened to the actual D10, not Pete's World D10.

There's a shot of D10, D11, and DHurt walking next to each other.  I really wish that could have been Eccleston.  His doctor has had the most to say about the Time War, so if we're going back to see the Last Great Time War, then he should be there in some form or fashion.  It's a pity he didn't come back, as he's my favorite of the relaunch Doctors, though I quite love Matt Smith, and am sad to see him go.

How much you want to bet that those Paul McGann rumors from way back when turn out to be him filming the regeneration from D8 to DHurt?[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 13, 2013, 04:47:10 PM
Timeline-wise, this has to fall somewhere in Series 2, because I think Rose might have some residual connection to the Time Vortex after getting it in her brain in "Parting of the Ways".  In that trailer above, Matt Smith says "I remember this...almost remember."  So, if we go by the logic introduced in that special with D5 and D10, then this had to have happened to the actual D10, not Pete's World D10.

Well, not necessarily, given that he could be remembering it from Hurt's perspective instead of Tennant's.  But then there's the bit with Tennant asking what's in his future, which pretty strongly implies he's the Real Doctor.

That and it would be totally lame if he were Parallel Universe Human Doctor.  The biggest indication that he's the real #10 is simply that that would make for way better TV.

Rose's one line is about the Moment coming; remember that's a Time War callback.  Dalton made a comment to the effect of "The Doctor still has the Moment" back in The End of Time, as one of the long string of cool-sounding nonsense phrases Davies left dangling on his departure.  Whether the Moment is some kind of artifact or just an actual crucial point in time, well, maybe we'll find out.

Meantime, I've just started reading The Coming of the Terraphiles; I'll have more to say later.  It is whimsical!
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on November 13, 2013, 10:24:30 PM
[spoiler]The screwdriver is my penis.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on November 14, 2013, 03:16:58 AM
The Night of the Doctor: A Mini Episode - Doctor Who: The Day of the Doctor Prequel - BBC (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U3jrS-uhuo#ws)

A mini-episode.

Get.  HYPE.

Thoughts on this: [spoiler]The Doctor says that he helps where he can in the war, but it's not his war.  Can he really say that, given what he did twice over against the Daleks, once in Genesis of the Daleks as D4, and later, in Bad Wolf/Parting of the Ways as D10.  Those are just the two examples I can call to mind, I'm sure there's more out there.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on November 14, 2013, 08:13:06 AM
He was ordered (forced really) into the events of Genesis, and D10 happens after all of this.

I thought I was MAX HYPE already, but McGann really knocked it out of the park.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on November 14, 2013, 11:29:56 AM
Way to canonize all the radio eps by calling out the companions.

Also: "Will it Hurt?"

lol

P.S.
I think "lol" looks like a tiny TIE fighter and read it as the sound they make.

P.P.S.
It's Paul McGann's birthday today, so good job there.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on November 14, 2013, 02:04:15 PM
That makes me wish they'd do a spin off series of Paul McGann episodes. They can pretty much do whatever they want at this point.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: DeusExMatilda on November 15, 2013, 04:16:02 AM
I had it spoiled that Paul McGann was in it without me being aware it was a spoiler; one of those "Check out the new Doctor Who vid starring Paul McGann" things. I really wish I hadn't known, because, "I'm a Doctor... but probably not the one you expected," really was an excellent introductory line.

Moffat has been more keen to embrace the original run than RTD was, and it feels like we've finally got the bridge between the two series. John Hurt regenerating into Christopher Ecclestone as the TARDIS lands in Rose Tyler's London would be my dream ending, though that's extremely unlikely.

The BBC's made a page listing the Doctor Who content they're broadcasting this week (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01l1z04/profiles/dw50). That's not all of it, but the unlisted stuff on the periphery gets a bit beyond what any reasonable fan needs to see -- I noticed they've even made an Antiques Roadshow special with Colin Baker and Peter Purves!

Hola unblocker seems to work perfectly well on the BBC website, and I watched The Science of Doctor Who yesterday afternoon (spoiler: it's an interesting but only tangentially related hour-long science lecture with brief cutaways to Matt Smith). How much more I'll watch depends on how excited I get in the run-up to the main event.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 16, 2013, 09:23:45 AM
He was ordered (forced really) into the events of Genesis, and D10 happens after all of this.

And in Remembrance of the Daleks, HE didn't blow up Skaro, he just set the Hand of Omega to do it.  It's not HIS fault that Davros stole it and then used it.

Still and all, perhaps just a tad disingenuous to suggest that this conflict has nothing to do with him.

I had it spoiled that Paul McGann was in it without me being aware it was a spoiler

Me too.  My thanks to McDohl for spoilertagging properly; the rest of you get a big frowny face.  Even though we've suspected this was going to happen for months.

Anyhow, really quite good; my favorite part was the inversion of the usual formula.  The Doctor swooping in to save somebody, giving the usual introductory "bigger on the inside" line, and [spoiler]having her respond with "Is that a TARDIS?  GET AWAY FROM ME!" really hammered home that the Time War is not the Doctor's usual fun time dashing about the universe saving humans and righting wrongs.  I also quite like that, while they twist the Doctor's arm to choose his regeneration and join the Time War, that's not what kills him; he dies trying to convince Cass to let him save her life, they just buy him a few extra minutes to make a decision about what happens next.[/spoiler]

Moffat's entire run has revolved around the premise that a good big bunch of the universe is terrified of the Doctor, sees him less as Doctor and more as Warrior, and has good reason to.  This was some just-about-perfect payoff on that long-running theme.

The Macbeth Witches were largely superficial and felt an awful lot like one of those lore-building things that Davies liked to throw out there and then forget about.  It could just as easily have been any group of mysterious figures.  But the bit about [spoiler]regenerations being nonrandom[/spoiler] may yet have a payoff -- see my post from last month about Moffat's thoughts on Capaldi's multiple appearances (http://brontoforum.us/index.php?topic=871.msg263917#msg263917).

All in all, fucking wonderful to see McGann.

Also: "Will it Hurt?"

lol

[spoiler]And so #8 leaves the world the same way he entered it: with hamhanded wordplay about his name.[/spoiler]

Adding: [spoiler]Hurt sure looked young in that brief look we got at his reflection.  I would have to say -- given that Smith has canonically been the Doctor for over 200 years and not aged visibly -- that this is intended to show that the Time War went on for a long fucking time.  Or possibly just took a huge physical and mental toll and aged him prematurely.[/spoiler]

Also adding: when I said that acknowledging the eight prior Doctors in Brain of Morbius makes #4 the last of the original regenerations and explains the Watcher, I goofed; it's 12 regenerations, not 12 incarnations.  Going by the Morbius Doctor theory, #5 would have been the last of the original 13 incarnations, not #4.

Though I suppose you could still use that to explain the Watcher, since he would then have appeared to shepherd the Doctor into his final incarnation.  Doesn't explain how he kept going after that, though.


FURTHER ADDING: Another recurring element of Moffat's run has been the Doctor running away from confrontations until he's finally cornered and has no other choice.  This isn't exactly a new idea for the series; it goes back at least as far as War Games and the first appearance of the Time Lords.

Which strikes me as significant.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Defenestration on November 16, 2013, 09:15:00 PM
I have a huge problem that John Barrowman mentioned he isn't in anything upcoming soon. :(
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 17, 2013, 05:00:02 PM
Also:

Moffat has been more keen to embrace the original run than RTD was

Bit tough to quantify, really.  On the one hand, Moffat just gave McGann the sendoff that Davies never did; on the other, Davies gave Sarah Jane Smith her own spinoff.

It often felt like Davies really was just going down the list of stuff from the classic series that needed to be included -- season 1: Daleks; season 2: Cybermen; season 3: the Master; season 4: Davros.  He also used the Sontarans, the Autons/Nestenes, and -- any other classic monsters I'm forgetting?

Moffat hasn't gone any great length of time without using the Daleks or Cybermen, but he's also gone in for more obscure monsters like the Ice Warriors and the Great Intelligence.  It's hard to say off the top of my head that he's spent more time crafting new monsters, though.  (And of course his use of more obscure ones is also partially based on the simple fact that the show had been back for years by the time he became showrunner, and all the biggest names had already been reintroduced.)

The most memorable new monsters out of the RTD run would have to be the Ood and the Weeping Angels, the latter of which were of course created by Moffat.  I'd also add the Judoon to the list; they've got a striking and memorable design and have shown up in a number of spinoff media.  And the Slitheen showed up more than once, which makes them recurring monsters, though I'd kind of rather they never come back.

During Moffat's time as showrunner, he's introduced the Silence, and I'm hard-pressed to think of anything else that's got the same kind of potential staying power (other than the Weeping Angels which, again, predate his becoming showrunner but which are perfectly fair to count in listing his accomplishments).  The Vashta Nerada have real potential as recurring monsters, and I think they technically qualify as recurring since I believe they were in one of the PC games that came out a couple of years ago, but those are also technically from before he was showrunner and we haven't seen them again on the show.

Course, it also bears noting that this IS the fiftieth anniversary, and acknowledging the show's history is kind of important even if your stated goal is to move it forward.  And given that Smith's on his way out, nostalgia's bound to be part of the focus, with fresh and new things held back for Capaldi.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: DeusExMatilda on November 19, 2013, 06:32:00 AM
I watched Fenric on Saturday and was reminded how 7's episodes generally wouldn't look out of place in the new era. Hell, even McCoy's Doctor wouldn't be out of place. Guy's almost a mirror of Matt Smith in a lot of ways; silly, old, awkward, and an outright sociopath when he needs to be.

Me too.  My thanks to McDohl for spoilertagging properly; the rest of you get a big frowny face.  Even though we've suspected this was going to happen for months.
Oh yeah, sorry about including the exact same spoiler I was complaining about in my post. Hell, even the BBC used [spoiler]Paul McGann[/spoiler] as its icon for the episode on the website. Apparently nobody was capable of keeping this thing a secret.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 19, 2013, 02:52:32 PM
Eh, cat was well out of the bag by the time you said anything about it.  It's not like I jumped straight to your post without reading the half-dozen before it.

But yeah, I said ages ago that McCoy really is the prototype for all the modern Doctors.  When you think of Human Nature, with its fucking biblical smackdown of an ending, being an adaptation of a Seventh Doctor story, it makes an awful lot of sense.

McCoy really was the Do Not Fuck with the Doctor Doctor, the one with the wheels-within-wheels schemes who had the wrath of a vengeful god beneath his buffoonish exterior and was playing absolutely everyone.

Fenric may be the greatest example of that -- and the show at its most morally complex, with its emphasis on atrocities committed by the British during the War.  And it's not an accident that Smith pulled the same trick of making Amy lose faith in him that McCoy pulled with Ace.

But as I mentioned a few posts ago, Remembrance was pretty fucking big too.  An opening shot like that?  The Time War was pretty much inevitable, if it wasn't already after Genesis.  Daleks don't back down and lick their wounds when they're dealt a crushing defeat; they escalate.  What did he think was going to happen? 

Not his war?  Well...maybe not McGann's.

(And as for Genesis, Constantine's right that the Time Lords pushed Four into it -- for about a minute.  He wanted nothing to do with it, right up until they told him it was about the Daleks, and then he started to prick up his ears.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on November 19, 2013, 03:22:26 PM
Reminded of the ending of Asylum of the Daleks.

"They hate you so much. Why do they hate you so much?"
"I fought them. Many, many times."
"We have grown stronger in fear of you"
"I know. I tried to stop."
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 19, 2013, 04:42:50 PM
So the ladies in the video weren't quite the one-offs I gathered; they're the Sisterhood of Karn from Brain of Morbius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Brain_of_Morbius).  Which is interesting given, again, that Moffat's teased that we're miscounting the Doctor's regenerations.

You know, I still haven't actually seen Brain of Morbius; I'm aware of a few of the plot beats and it comes highly recommended.  Now might be a good time to check it out...


(And per that article, the Sisterhood's origin is partially told in the novel Lungbarrow, which was also the one that established the Doctor as a reincarnation of one of the three founding Time Lords, along with Omega and Rassilon.  While, again, I don't expect we'll see that plot come to anything like its original intended conclusion, I DO still think all those omega symbols over the last few years were building toward something and we're likely to see Omega at some point.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on November 20, 2013, 08:09:48 AM
David Tennant introduces The Day of the Doctor - Doctor Who 50th Anniversary - BBC One (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEmm6UP5G88#ws)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 20, 2013, 04:51:52 PM
Apparently Moffat stated in a recent interview that the Crisis Doctor does indeed count as a regeneration.

That would certainly imply that Smith is indeed the thirteenth incarnation and I've been barking up the wrong tree with the Morbius theory -- though it could be that we've already seen the resolution of the Thirteen Lives plot point with the Sisterhood of Karn and Hurt is indeed the first of an entire new set of regenerations.

It still seems like the sort of thing Moffat would be more likely to draw out, given that "the Doctor has to face his own inevitable death" has been one of his favorite recurring plot points.

It does bear noting that the Impossible Astronaut shot him three times.  So the Silence was operating under the impression that the Eleventh Doctor really does only have two lives left.  So either we know something they don't, or they know something we don't.  (On the one hand, you'd think they'd know about the War Doctor given their obsession with Doctor as Warrior; on the other hand, there's a certain pleasing irony in a cult dedicated to wiping out the Doctor because he's a dangerous warlord not knowing the half of it.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on November 20, 2013, 06:20:08 PM
It does bear noting that the Impossible Astronaut shot him three times.  So the Silence was operating under the impression that the Eleventh Doctor really does only have two lives left.  So either we know something they don't, or they know something we don't.  (On the one hand, you'd think they'd know about the War Doctor given their obsession with Doctor as Warrior; on the other hand, there's a certain pleasing irony in a cult dedicated to wiping out the Doctor because he's a dangerous warlord not knowing the half of it.)

I'm pretty sure he got shot three times because you gotta kill a dude and what better way to do it than to shoot him a few times. Two to start the regeneration and then another in the middle so he's dead for good.

Also a lot of this stuff seems a lot like Moffat deciding he wants to make more marks on the Doctor Who canon rather than a very well thought out multi-season plan. I GOTTA BE THE ONE WHO HANDWAVES THIS OLD BIT OF CANON AND I'M GONNA DO SO BY INFLATING THE DOCTOR'S POWER LEVEL REGENERATIONS.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 21, 2013, 04:54:07 PM
I'm pretty sure he got shot three times because you gotta kill a dude and what better way to do it than to shoot him a few times. Two to start the regeneration and then another in the middle so he's dead for good.

IIRC the regeneration effect started each time.  But either way, I don't think the number three was coincidental.

Also a lot of this stuff seems a lot like Moffat deciding he wants to make more marks on the Doctor Who canon rather than a very well thought out multi-season plan. I GOTTA BE THE ONE WHO HANDWAVES THIS OLD BIT OF CANON AND I'M GONNA DO SO BY INFLATING THE DOCTOR'S POWER LEVEL REGENERATIONS.

I really don't think so.  I think handling the regeneration limit is the result of adding Hurt into the line, not the other way around.

Whereas Hurt's inclusion is probably a mix of Eccleston passing on the fiftieth and that it frankly makes for a pretty interesting twist.

I do think that it's quite clear that Moffat's had a seasons-long arc running that involves repeated use of the idea of the Doctor facing his own ultimate end.  I don't think the regeneration limit, or Hurt, were originally part of the plan, but I think they both fit nicely.

I also think he's got the good sense to understand that a regeneration is a jumping-on point for new viewers and he should relax the major arc stuff for awhile.  I don't think that means he'll try and cram a resolution to every dangling plot thread into the Christmas special, but I do think -- well, I do think that the next season is going to look an awful lot like the last one did, with an episodic bent and no real payoff toward the Silence Will Fall arc until the finale.

I'm fine with this.  Last season had the Gunslinger, Cold War, and Nightmare in Silver, none of which really built toward the major arc but all of which I thoroughly enjoyed.  Even the episodes that weren't great had enjoyable moments -- Rory's dad, Strax, Richard E Grant.

(And it bears noting that if Moffat were REALLY just doing the War Doctor arc to handle a bit of dangling trivia, Grant would be playing him, not Hurt.  Part of me still thinks that's a missed opportunity -- but having Hurt play the Doctor is pretty damn amazing.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on November 22, 2013, 01:17:40 AM
Google put up a Doctor Who doodle, but you need to check out Google.co.uk (http://www.google.co.uk)


THAD EDIT: Fixed link.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mongrel on November 22, 2013, 04:08:34 AM
We have it here by default. Huh. Fun little game. Having your choice of Doctor determine the difficulty level (i.e. number of lives) is a nice touch.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 22, 2013, 05:46:36 PM
Welp, almost that time.

A reminder that some of us are waiting to see it in the theater on Monday.  I'd appreciate it if you would all use appropriate spoiler tags until then.

But I don't actually trust you to do it, so I'm staying out of the thread until then.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on November 23, 2013, 08:26:23 AM
I saw it.

That was amazing.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on November 23, 2013, 08:28:02 AM
A++
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on November 23, 2013, 09:46:50 AM
I just caught a really clever nod to the TV movie in that short. One of the first things 8 does is raid a hospital locker for that Wild Bill costume, and in the course of that he picks up a gun belt, stares at it for a second, and then drops it. Meanwhile, the last thing he does/first thing Hurt does is pick up a gun belt and put it on. It's a really nice touch, and so specifically mirrored 8s first character moment that I don't think it was a coincidence.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on November 23, 2013, 10:28:42 AM
My only minor complaint about the 50th have to do with the fact [spoiler] Clara's in it. [/spoiler]
Other than that, wonderful in every way.

The fact I saw Adventure in Space and Time directly after probably didn't hurt though.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Niku on November 23, 2013, 11:38:01 AM
Honestly better than I could have anticipated.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on November 23, 2013, 11:47:30 AM
[spoiler]So, The Moment.  I think that Billie Piper knocked it out of the park with her performance, and what a big curveball as to her presence.  Everyone I talked to expected her to just do the same kind of thing that Rose and Sarah Jane did in School Reunion, but what happened?  Totally not that.  And here's a theory I posited on Talking Time: could The Moment actually contain a TARDIS core?  It seems like when she first talks to the War Doctor, she has a lot of the same tics that Idris/Sexy had in "The Doctor's Wife".  Mixing up the past and the future, and all.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on November 23, 2013, 03:47:17 PM
[spoiler]I love Ten's plan to expose a shapeshifter was to charm, date, and then propose to said shapeshifter.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on November 23, 2013, 04:07:23 PM
[spoiler]So, The Moment.  I think that Billie Piper knocked it out of the park with her performance, and what a big curveball as to her presence.  Everyone I talked to expected her to just do the same kind of thing that Rose and Sarah Jane did in School Reunion, but what happened?  Totally not that.  And here's a theory I posited on Talking Time: could The Moment actually contain a TARDIS core?  It seems like when she first talks to the War Doctor, she has a lot of the same tics that Idris/Sexy had in "The Doctor's Wife".  Mixing up the past and the future, and all.[/spoiler]

[spoiler]Given that all of that technology is based on the same principles put to different use, The Moment's personified form must be very similar to a TARDIS matrix, except that it is obviously not bound by it's non-linear nature to the point that it cannot communicate directly. The choice of Rose as a form that The Doctor would find familiar and comforting is exactly the kind of mistake you would expect, but her actual personality was completely different and definitely sourced from The Moment itself.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: DeusExMatilda on November 23, 2013, 04:33:54 PM
I've read a few valid criticisms, and I don't necessarily disagree with all of them, but I honestly can't remember the last time I enjoyed an episode more. A lot of what I've grown wary with in recent Moffat stories seems to have disappeared with the extra time he's had to work with (both on screen, and off screen). Pacing was solid and never descended into that regular sense that he'd had to pick between the cool set-pieces he'd come up with and the explanation that made them possible.

Plus, it was largely consistent to its own rules. [spoiler]Though there wasn't a good reason why every Doctor but 11 had to forget the whole thing ever happening, beyond convenience. And the Tom Baker bit was largely just pointing and saying "Look, it's Tom Baker," but that's cool.[/spoiler]

I especially liked [spoiler]8.5 being a better Doctor than 10 & 11, right down to sassing them over constantly waving their sonic screwdrivers at stuff. It only got better when Hurt sassed Smith about overacting too. Better Doctor, better at being the Doctor. Just good fun.

And I couldn't help but smile at the dig at Eccleston's appearance. Yeah, I know he made comments about his ears as the Doctor, but I found it weirdly scathing coming from somebody else in his absence. Tom Baker finally got over being typecast, so maybe 9 will show up for a 60th or 75th anniversary.[/spoiler]

I always felt like the Time War was RTD's way of (quite reasonably) handwaving away the residual clutter from the classic series. [spoiler]Moffat just retconned all that shit the fuck back in and I love him for it.[/spoiler]

The Five(ish) Doctors Reboot (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01m3kfy) is a pretty funny half-hour of Davison, McCoy, and Colin Baker trying to get into the anniversary special. It has a bunch of fun cameos, and Colin Baker still can't act.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on November 23, 2013, 05:02:36 PM
Yeah, I just watched the Five(ish) Doctors, and it was adorable.  I guess we know where those photos of Davison, Baker, and McCoy protesting outside the BBC came from. 
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on November 24, 2013, 02:36:09 AM
So I've been thinking about something that people keep glossing over while kvetching about the implications of the 50th.

[spoiler]People keep arguing about whether we should start bumping up doctors because the War Doctor is accepted again, but everyone is forgetting that the metacrisis doctor is supposed to count for a regeneration now so when they arguing that Capaldi is going to be the 13th, their also forgetting that he's technically going to be the 14th. Get ready for the next episode to cover both the end of the silence arc and bypassing the regeneration limit while still being a Christmas special (no look guys it's snowing on Trenzalor it's totally Christmas).[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 24, 2013, 11:47:11 AM
Okay, I watched it, because tickets are sold out everywhere in a 25-mile radius.  (So much for being too small to run on a Saturday night.  With this kind of turnout I wouldn't be surprised if they ran it again.)

Thoroughly enjoyed it.  Let out a total of three whoops at the climax -- [spoiler]Hartnell appears, Eccleston gets a line, Capaldi shows up[/spoiler].

[spoiler]So, The Moment.  I think that Billie Piper knocked it out of the park with her performance, and what a big curveball as to her presence.  Everyone I talked to expected her to just do the same kind of thing that Rose and Sarah Jane did in School Reunion, but what happened?  Totally not that.  And here's a theory I posited on Talking Time: could The Moment actually contain a TARDIS core?  It seems like when she first talks to the War Doctor, she has a lot of the same tics that Idris/Sexy had in "The Doctor's Wife".  Mixing up the past and the future, and all.[/spoiler]

I had the object in question pegged as a TARDIS console as soon as I saw it in that trailer.

[spoiler]Though there wasn't a good reason why every Doctor but 11 had to forget the whole thing ever happening, beyond convenience.[/spoiler]

Right, it was really the only way to avoid retconning out [spoiler]the entirety of the series to date.  If Nine and Ten had both known that they never actually wiped out the Time Lords, then we're into fucking DC levels of trying to figure out what counts and what doesn't of everything that's happened over the past 8 years.[/spoiler]

[spoiler]And the Tom Baker bit was largely just pointing and saying "Look, it's Tom Baker," but that's cool.[/spoiler]

But imagine how cool that would have been watching the audience reaction if you saw it in a theater.

Like the collective gasp when [spoiler]Leonard Nimoy appears in Star Trek[/spoiler].

Me, I was hoping for John Cleese.

The Five(ish) Doctors Reboot (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01m3kfy) is a pretty funny half-hour of Davison, McCoy, and Colin Baker trying to get into the anniversary special. It has a bunch of fun cameos, and Colin Baker still can't act.

You know what I love?

[spoiler]McCoy said flat-out, months ago, that neither he nor Davison nor Colin Baker had been asked to appear in the anniversary special in any capacity.

We probably should have noticed that he didn't mention Tom Baker or Paul McGann.[/spoiler]

[spoiler]People keep arguing about whether we should start bumping up doctors because the War Doctor is accepted again, but everyone is forgetting that the metacrisis doctor is supposed to count for a regeneration now so when they arguing that Capaldi is going to be the 13th, their also forgetting that he's technically going to be the 14th. Get ready for the next episode to cover both the end of the silence arc and bypassing the regeneration limit while still being a Christmas special (no look guys it's snowing on Trenzalor it's totally Christmas).[/spoiler]

Well, remember how they kept mentioning Christmas last season?  Mentioned it again this episode, too.  I know the regeneration was a recent decision, but I suspect he's had Christmas in mind for awhile.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Zaratustra on November 24, 2013, 02:55:02 PM
[spoiler]John Hurt was great as a homage to the old Doctors ("what, do I get to kiss girls in the future?") but I expected him to be a bit more... ruthless, I don't know.

Also, Doctors never grow old, they just turn into stock footage.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on November 24, 2013, 04:26:28 PM
Utterly re-goddamn-diculously wonderful.

I love that this came out on my birthday.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on November 25, 2013, 04:29:36 AM
Sometimes you've got to [spoiler]let Zygons be Zygons[/spoiler].
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mongrel on November 25, 2013, 06:21:36 AM
http://chainsawsuit.com/2013/11/24/saw-it-for-you-doctor-who-the-day-of-the-doctor-2013/ (http://chainsawsuit.com/2013/11/24/saw-it-for-you-doctor-who-the-day-of-the-doctor-2013/)

It was kind of weird seeing this linked elsewhere but then noticing Zara in the comments.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Zaratustra on November 25, 2013, 07:19:21 AM
i am everywhere
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 25, 2013, 04:13:25 PM
My only minor complaint about the 50th have to do with the fact [spoiler] Clara's in it. [/spoiler]
Other than that, wonderful in every way.

[spoiler]There were definitely good big chunks where she felt like a third wheel.  I think it was wise not to give Tennant a companion and to work Piper in in another capacity instead; this really is a story about the Doctor and what he does when he's on his own.

But that's precisely why Clara IS important.  The new series has been flogging the idea since Runaway Bride that the Doctor needs companions because they keep him in touch with his own humanity.  They keep him from going overboard and doing crazy shit.

Like, y'know, genocide.

There was a minute there where it really did seem like Tennant and Smith were going to go along with it, agree that Hurt had no choice after all.  But Clara points out that that's bullshit, and suddenly the spell is broken.

Because, really, the very idea of the Doctor wiping out his own people -- it's a fucking brilliant conceit, but it only works if it's a piece of exposition, if it's some other, intermediate Doctor who doesn't really count.  If we don't actually watch it happen, with one of the Doctors we know and love pushing the Big Red Button.

Because he wouldn't do that.  Not really.  Not any of them.  Wipe out the Daleks?  Sure.  Make the Daleks wipe themselves out?  Even likelier.  But the idea of one of the actual Eleven Doctors throwing the switch to blow up Gallifrey?  Nah.

That's what separates Doctor Who from Torchwood: in Torchwood, no-win situations are mandatory, even ridiculously contrived.  In Doctor Who, there's no such thing.  There's always another way.

It's true that Eleven's run has been characterized by running from his own inevitable death -- but it's also been characterized by facing it and finding another way.  Finding that there's no such thing as inevitability (unless you really need to write the Ponds out).  And Tennant pretty much gave us the mandate for the Christmas Special: now he's going to find his way out of his death at Trenzalore.

The Moment calls him "the one who forgets" -- but now he's the one who remembers.  He's the one who stops running.  After spending his life running away from Gallifrey, now he's running towards it.  He found another way -- because of course he did.  Because that's what he does.

It just took a little push from one of those stupid apes he's so fond of.

Now, we clearly haven't seen the last of Grim, Angry Doctor -- Capaldi's scowling eyes made that clear.  But there's been a change now.  The Doctor's done the impossible once again, and now he's found a way out of his greatest regret.

That's #11's legacy.  As surely as 9 and 10 are defined by the shadow of the Time War, 11 is the Doctor who got out from under it.

And left 12 with plenty on his to-do list.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on November 25, 2013, 04:46:06 PM
Seems like Thad's working on a Who blog post.

All really good points, Thad.

Just got back from the screening.  There was a cosplayer who was totally in character as Tom Baker.  Dude handed out Jelly Babies and was trying to Sonic Screwdriver his laptop in to picking up the local wi-fi.  I made sure to tell him to not pick the strange-looking one.

As for the screening itself, the biggest applause getter was [spoiler]No, sir.  ALL THIRTEEN.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on November 26, 2013, 04:17:36 PM
(So much for being too small to run on a Saturday night.  With this kind of turnout I wouldn't be surprised if they ran it again.)

Bleeding Cool (http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/11/26/doctor-who-is-a-box-office-smash-second-only-to-hunger-games-on-repeat-screenings/) reports it was the #2 movie on Monday night.  Meaning more people went to see Archival Footage Eccleston than Actual Eccleston.

I really would like another chance to see it in the theater and I'm sure I'm not the only one.  Listening, Fathom and BBC?

Well, remember how they kept mentioning Christmas last season?  Mentioned it again this episode, too.

Oh, and "Omega" came up too.

Not saying we'll see him at Christmas -- or even at all.  (Thought: the Doctor becomes the new Omega, or at least comes to be seen as such by the Silence and the various other groups that are terrified of him?  Or possibly Omega shows up when [spoiler]the Doctor finds Gallifrey -- pocket universe, don'tcha know[/spoiler].)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on November 27, 2013, 04:24:39 AM
There are some rumor-spoilers about the Christmas special floating around on the internet. It sounds pretty shitty and almost unbelievable until you see the promo picture BBC released for the special. Just a warning for you guys if you don't want to run into what may or may not be a plot synopsis.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on December 04, 2013, 02:17:20 PM
Quote from: Peter Davidson
A few years ago when Billie Piper was playing Rose, I was very worried because the next week’s episode was called something like The Day Rose Died. I can’t remember exactly what it was called. Well, my children were in love with Rose as a companion, and I was worried about her. So I sent an e-mail off to Russell T. Davies, who of course had grown up on the classic Doctor Who series, and I said “Could you just reassure me that Rose does not, in fact, die because my children shouldn’t watch it if that happens,” and he sent an e-mail back to me saying, “You killed Adric. What do you care?”
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Büge on December 04, 2013, 02:44:17 PM
I don't watch much Doctor Who, but wasn't Adric up there with Scrappy Doo as one of the most loathed characters in a long-running TV series?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on December 04, 2013, 02:49:02 PM
Yeah but he still got exploded good.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 04, 2013, 03:48:57 PM
It's a good story, but how old are Davison's kids?  His daughter is married to David Tennant.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on December 04, 2013, 04:00:42 PM
Who was, as you'll remember, the impossibly adorable Doctor's daughter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Moffett) in that one episode with the bubbly fish people with p90s.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 04, 2013, 04:19:58 PM
(There's also no episode with a title remotely like The Day Rose Died.  There's an episode that begins with Rose narrating that she died, but if you're to the point where you're already watching the cold open you probably don't need to ask the showrunner what happens, just somebody who's seen the episode the full way through.  I'm inclined to say Davison's just making shit up for the sake of a good joke, but it IS a pretty good joke.)

(Though, edit to add: according to Wikipedia, he DOES have two sons under the age of 10.  I guess it's possible Rose's "and that's how I died" monologue could have been in the preceding week's "Next week..." blurb.)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on December 05, 2013, 02:26:40 AM
Well he even says he doesn't remember the title of the episode, he didn't believe that the episode was actually called that.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on December 05, 2013, 02:56:00 AM
His sons were the two boys in The Five-ish Doctors, by the way.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on December 05, 2013, 03:15:10 AM
I think the "Next time on Doctor Who" teaser for the episode in question consisted of that Billie Piper narration.  That might be why Davison was so concerned.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 05, 2013, 12:29:41 PM
I wouldn't rule it out.  I was still watching them on the Sci-Fi Channel at that point.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 08, 2013, 04:30:05 AM
The Time of the Doctor: BBC1 Christmas 2013 Trailer Doctor Who (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e79HKx3a-o#ws)

Going back to May, with spoiler tags removed:

Anyway, let's go back to the prophecy:

Quote
DORIUM: "On the fields of Trenzalore, at the fall of the Eleventh, when no living creature may speak falsely or fail to give answer, a question will be asked. A question that must never, ever be answered."
THE DOCTOR: "Silence will fall when the question is asked..."
DORIUM: "Silence must fall" would be a better translation. The Silence are determined that the question must never be answered. The Doctor must never reach Trenzalore.
THE DOCTOR: I don't understand? What's it got do do with me?
DORIUM: The first question. The oldest question in the universe, hidden in plain sight. Would you like to know what it is?
THE DOCTOR: Yes.
DORIUM: "Doctor who?"

I think it's fair to say that GI shouting "Doctor Who?" wasn't the question any more than the Master's four knocks were what signaled the Tenth Doctor's doom.

Are we to reasonably assume that this was the Fall of the Eleventh?  He certainly did fall out of the sky, and later fell to the ground, and finally fell into the rift.  Metaphorically speaking, you could say this was the "fall of the Eleventh" in that we discovered he's not really the Eleventh at all.  Or, as I said, "fall of the Eleventh" could be something that's going to happen to Tennant in November, since he's the secret real eleventh incarnation.

It would certainly seem that Clara asked the question, if not verbatim -- she asked "Who's that?  Who is he?"

As for "on the fields of Trenzalore [...] when no living creature may speak falsely or fail to give answer", well, even if they were inside the Doctor's own head there it sure LOOKED like they were still on the fields of Trenzalore.  And if they were inside the Doctor's head -- or the nexus of his timelines, or whatever the hell that was -- maybe THAT'S the reason he couldn't speak falsely or fail to answer.

Or not.  We don't know if the question's been asked yet or not; we don't know if the Eleventh has fallen or not; we don't know if this was the point when no living creature could speak falsely or fail to give answer.  Maybe that's what we just watched, or maybe it's still to come.  As always, Moffat answers some questions but raises others.

And then there are the cracks.  This episode certainly alluded to them again, and last week's had Mr. Clever noting that people could find the Doctor by looking for the holes he left.  I think all that stuff's definitely related to the secret.  And we still don't know what "Silence will fall" means.

So yeah, sure looking like none of the things from the prophecy happened on their last trip to Trenzalore at the end of last season, and all that's still forthcoming.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on December 25, 2013, 10:00:29 AM
Well, that was really something. I'm pretty sure I liked it, but I'm still digesting everything that happened.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on December 25, 2013, 10:12:11 AM
Kinda bummed that I missed it.  Oh well, Amazon had a digital copy of Day of the Doctor up pretty shortly afterward, so that's something to look forward to. 
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on December 25, 2013, 02:57:50 PM
Ahahaha it happened the spoilers were true.

[spoiler]The doctor is Goku Clara summoned the time lord energy so he could use the spirit bomb[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 25, 2013, 04:32:57 PM
Well, that was really something. I'm pretty sure I liked it, but I'm still digesting everything that happened.

Pretty much this.  It wasn't as pitch-perfect as the last two, but it's a mostly-satisfying closer to Smith's arc.

He cheated a bit on the specifics of the prophecy (remember that whole bit about failing to answer?), and Smiler was on the money when he predicted that the conclusions to the Silence arc and the regeneration limit felt like they were tacked on.  I don't think Trenzalore was what any of us was expecting, but I see that as a positive TBH.  And Moffat's proven quite good at [spoiler]making you believe that a very long time has passed in the span of a single episode[/spoiler].  As the ending to a fairy tale, I think it all worked out quite nicely, and also left Capaldi with a pretty clean slate.

While still leaving him with his major objective -- the Gallifrey plot has been advanced but hasn't been resolved, which I think is a good call.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on December 25, 2013, 04:59:09 PM
So we're just gonna tiptoe around the Doctor being a sex offender now, right?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on December 25, 2013, 06:18:22 PM
The fuck are you talking about?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on December 25, 2013, 06:24:24 PM
For a split second after the fireworks I absolutely expected Capaldi to jump up and shout "Fuckity bye, ya cunts!"

"If you're an alien, how come you sound like you're from Scotland?"
"Lots of planets have a Scotland."
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on December 25, 2013, 11:24:19 PM
The fuck are you talking about?

I'm being flippant, but did you miss the first part of the episode where he greets Clara and her family completely naked.

Episode was surprisingly low-key for a regeneration episode. Tidied up some lingering mysteries throughout Smith's run , but for the most part it was about the Doctor in one town for the entire episode. No narrative fireworks, no time travel gimmicks, [spoiler]even the large Dalek invasion at the end felt more like a means to an end than the buildup of the plot[/spoiler]. Just a more quiet capper to the arc that started in Name of the Doctor.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on December 26, 2013, 02:58:03 AM
I'm really surprised that the worst thing in my opinion that happened in the episode is that [spoiler]we learned what was behind the Doctor's door from The God Complex.[/spoiler] I guess it's not the worst thing it could have been. I mean its a pretty nightmarish thing, especially when you think about how the Doctor had to deal with it originally, but it was really nice to have it be a mystery.

Oh I guess what I posted last night was pretty shit too, but I still enjoyed it because pftttrfpfpftpft.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on December 26, 2013, 04:04:29 AM
I'm glad there was onscreen confirmation of me winning the argument with my friends that Matt Smith was actually 13.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on December 26, 2013, 06:06:18 AM
Man you couldn't have just linked all of the times Moffat confirmed that?
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on December 26, 2013, 06:41:39 AM
Moffat interviews aren't canon.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on December 26, 2013, 11:12:43 AM
I gave it a rewatch and you know, I absolutely adored that one. Maybe a bit much to cram into a single episode, but hell, I was never bored, and most of the bits that seem out of place in the middle tie in thematically by the end. Though I am annoyed that they "resolved" what was in his hotel room. I thought that was a pretty artful blank the way it was.

And then of course I have to hit the internet for corroborating opinions and I'll be damned if it doesn't already seem universally despised. The distinct possibility exists that I just have fuckall in common with what this show's fanbase expects.

Though it was a little distracting knowing both Smith and Gillian were wearing wigs. Had to rewind that bit a couple times to put it out of my mind.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 26, 2013, 04:01:06 PM
Episode was surprisingly low-key for a regeneration episode. Tidied up some lingering mysteries throughout Smith's run , but for the most part it was about the Doctor in one town for the entire episode. No narrative fireworks, no time travel gimmicks, [spoiler]even the large Dalek invasion at the end felt more like a means to an end than the buildup of the plot[/spoiler]. Just a more quiet capper to the arc that started in Name of the Doctor.

Yes, that's it exactly, and I don't think that's what anyone expected.  I can see why people would be disappointed, but I think I feel good about it.  How do you top the spectacle of the last two?  You don't, so you take a hard 180 and go for a smaller, more personal episode.

And you can gripe about the pyew-pyew stuff at the end, but the rules of regeneration are inconsistent as fuck anyway.  Is it any less of a deus ex machina than Eccleston's regeneration?  (No.  No it is not.  Eccleston's regeneration involved a literal deus ex machina.)

Hell, I love the bit at the end where [spoiler]he mocks the Daleks about how he's finally dying of old age[/spoiler].  Really gives rather a different cast to the grave-filled fields we saw in Name.  [spoiler]It wasn't a glorious battle; it was a massacre.

Sure seems like a whole lot of graves, for all that, though.[/spoiler]

I don't expect we'll ever get an explanation for what happens to the timeline now that Trenzalore presumably no longer has a giant TARDIS with the Doctor's timeline sitting inside it in stasis.  But that's okay.  Sometimes it's better not to get bogged down in continuity.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on December 26, 2013, 04:17:56 PM
[spoiler]It wasn't a glorious battle; it was a massacre.

Sure seems like a whole lot of graves, for all that, though.[/spoiler]
[spoiler]
Well, the battles took place over, what, a thousand years? The first time skip was three hundred years and the next few had him aging even faster so we can assume it happened over a long time?[/spoiler]

And if you add that on to what was already there from the last few seasons' throwaway lines [spoiler]then the Doctor has been Matt Smith for, like, 2000+ years.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 26, 2013, 04:42:33 PM
I don't know that it's quite that long, but minimum 700.

Another thought on Moffat and the themes he plays with: Matt Smith's run has, consistently, been haunted by the image of a reluctant warrior who will one day die a violent death.  But the last two episodes have both used, at one point or another, the image of the Doctor living a peaceful, quiet, retired life.  Granted, occasionally punctuated by [spoiler]fucking hellfire raining down from the assembled armies of every monster race the show has ever produced[/spoiler], but you know, you've got to keep the show exciting.

The thematic significance of Night of the Doctor and Day of the Doctor isn't exactly subtle; it's right there in their titles.  The suggestion is that they're bookends, from the Doctor entering the Time War to the Doctor redeeming himself and rescuing his people.  The darkness and the guilt are lifted, and his future is bright again.  Not to say we won't see the Warrior Doctor persona again -- as I noted, the first time we saw Capaldi's face it was scowling -- but I think Moffat's really looking to shift the tone and the vibe here.

At least, insofar as we're looking at arcs at all.  The show's been mostly episodic through his entire run, really, and that's generally been a pretty good thing.  I think that's probably the thing people are cheesed-off about with this episode -- not only is it a regeneration episode, it's THE regeneration episode, resolving the limit; it's what Moffat's been building toward from day one and we get definitive answers on the cracks, who destroyed the TARDIS, the Silence falling when the question is asked -- all that stuff -- and ultimately it's all background noise in an episode that's another one of Moffat's quiet little fairy tales.  Didn't see that coming.  But the more I think about it, the more I like it.


ADDING: Smith also totally killed it playing [spoiler]an old man.  It's not old age makeup that sells a performance like that -- no disrespect to the makeup artists, who also did excellent work -- it's the physicality.  The stiff movements, the weakening voice.[/spoiler]  I was very impressed, and I hope he goes on to some good roles from here.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Bal on December 26, 2013, 06:31:11 PM
In a rare occurrence, I completely agree.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on December 27, 2013, 03:04:26 AM
Matt Smith had always managed to do a good job acting old. Just watch the end of The Big Bang again, he really sells being some guy who's 900 years old who's finally at his end even though he looks like he's in his 20s.

In regard to the other roles, I heard he was pretty good in American Psycho: The Musical.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on December 27, 2013, 08:41:35 AM
I have to bring up the idea that Tasha Lem is some much later iteration of River. It could just be that Moffat tends to write women the same way, but her characterization is damn near identical. Sure, she burned out all her regenerations and we already saw her die, but it's hard to imagine she just deleted herself after her appearance in Name. Forceful, flirty, bossy psychopath with a past with the Doc who happens to live in a giant computer? After a very, very long time in the library it may have just amounted to cp -r /CAL/Song_River/* /PapalMainframe/Lem_Tasha. Also, you know, Mel backwards. Hell knows she has plenty of experience with self-fulfilling predestination paradoxes at this point. Also goes along with the theme of being different people.

Or maybe the Doctor just has a type he happens to like. I can relate (and really need to stop going for domineering sexpot psychopaths. They're just so much fun.)

I'm fine with it either way, but the groundwork is there.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on December 27, 2013, 09:14:24 AM
I was less than pleased with the character. Mostly because she seemed like she never existed outside of being anything than a sexpot to fawn over the Doctor. It worked with River, but mostly because River got more characterization and a chance to press back against the Doctor, and given her own agency. Tasha Lem felt more like "Don't you like how the Doctor can seduce these women?"

Of course, that's nothing compared to Clara who's been in 10 episodes and I still can't think of a better description for than "The Doctor's Companion"
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on December 27, 2013, 09:23:05 AM
I'm really hoping Capaldi's episodes give her some personality beyond "blander Amy"

I'm also hoping they kind of forget about the whole "Impossible Girl" bit for a while. I hated her whole arc, really.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on December 27, 2013, 09:35:12 AM
Didn't mind the Impossible Girl bit, just that it was all plot, no character.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on December 27, 2013, 09:41:01 AM
Yeah, that's actually one part of the rampant Moffat bitchery that I agree with. He writes women absolutely terribly and interchangeably. They're either plucky, sarcastic bouncy-balls, or violent dominatrix types that for some reason fawn all over a bumbling, eccentric manchild. (Though to be fair, that does tend to happen. Shrug.) It's a legitimate complaint, and not just the province of the fun-hating feminist caricature the Internet is always so quick to dismissively invoke. This stuff gives Twilight a run for its money in terms of creepy sexist shit that appeals to teenage girls for some damn reason. I adored Girl in the Fireplace the first time around, but when it's the only fucking story you can tell, yes, I begin to suspect the writer might have a problem with women.

That aside, most of the rest of the criticism I'm seeing elsewhere just sounds like a lot of incoherent, infantile whining for the sake of it. It's like half the damn Internet is making that high pitched EEEEEEEE sound my dog does when she's frightened of a slightly larger than average rock.

Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Royal☭ on December 27, 2013, 10:10:59 AM
My guess is that anti-Moffat types dislike the show because he doesn't make episodes like Fear Her that end with the Doctor running the Olympic torch. :strawman:

In truth, the beginning of Time of the Doctor shows why it's best that Moffat avoids silly Doctor Who writing in the first place.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 27, 2013, 11:50:29 AM
Yeah, I think I liked it for all the same reasons The Internet hated it.  It's completely the opposite of what we were led to expect.

But really, we just came off TWO action-packed regenerations LAST MONTH.  As I said, trying to top that would have been foolish (and a total Davies thing to do -- he was the guy who always tried to top the last thing he did, and met with failure as often as success -- though in his defense, End of Time was a pretty high note to go out on, both for him and for Tennant).

Seeing more evidence that the Doctor ISN'T the battle-hardened general he's made out to be was just right.  All that shit's going down right outside his window, but it's not a battle, it's a siege.  And the Doctor abides.

I'll agree on the problematic characterizations of women.  (I have to say Amy is my second-favorite companion of the entire '05-present run -- though it probably says something in and of itself that #1 is her husband.)  Clara hasn't really distinguished herself from a character perspective; I liked her as much in this episode as I ever have, but she was really hitting the same plot beats Rose did in Parting of the Ways, with the ending swapped out for Martha in Last of the Time Lords.  (A lot better than the latter, obviously, and much more narratively coherent.  And while Bleeding Cool called it another Power of Love ending, there's an entirely more cynical interpretation -- [spoiler]the Time Lords just rescued the only person who can get them out of limbo.[/spoiler])

I think when the Time Lords do come back, though, we'll be spending a bit less time on showing them as evil or misguided all the time -- after all, wouldn't be much of a victory in rescuing them if they're all still assholes.

I'm thinking Moffat will either ignore the "trapped in a single moment" bit, or explain it away with a one-liner (the cracks in time did it).  Thousands of years have passed on Gallifrey, Rassilon's out of power and his successors have had time to look back on the Time War as a pretty bad idea and come to think of the Doctor sticking them in a pocket universe as the merciful act it was (though you have to figure they were probably pretty pissed off at first).
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Mothra on December 27, 2013, 06:12:50 PM
Really enjoyed this episode.

I think the only complaint I can think of was all the townspeople being murdered, right near the end. Besides that, yeah, they crammed a lot into an hour, but this was perfect.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on December 28, 2013, 12:15:41 AM
Also on the critical side, Clara really is such a fucking blank. Which is funny, given that the first couple Claras were actually kind of interesting. I still wish there were a Dalek Tinkerbell season instead of the Doctor being an enormous asshole space racist, but that's just a fanfic for someone else to write. And it really is obvious that Gaiman's cyberman ep was written with the Victorian governess in mind.

If Time did anything wrong it was that it assumed an emotional connection to a character that was never actually established. In fact, if they'd killed her off at the end of Name it would have added some actual gravity to the earlier season. Meanwhile, the best thing that could have been gained by keeping her around after that would have been a companion who knows the Doc better than he does himself, but in the last couple specials following that it hasn't been acknowledged beyond "I know you used to be a bunch of dudes and they were all rad." Like that doesn't take two minutes or a headbutt to explain. And he still has to deliver expository dialogue about that to the one person who already knows.

Really, if they're going to keep her around they have to get a second person on. Her to know everything, and the newb to explain shit to. You can't have both of those in one character, otherwise she's just this blob of pretty play-doh that just happens to be whatever the story needs at that particular moment, which is dull and bafflingly inconsistent at best. One week she's weeping in fear when the last week she was unflappable in the face of certain death. Or she's there to get exposition she doesn't actually need. Or she completely forgot to be sad and angry about her abducted newborn until she realized she was barren... wait, wrong one. Whatever. That's not a character, that's a macguffin multitool.

Theory: Clara is the sonic screwdriver.

That's all just sort of a subsection to "Moffat can't write women for shit," though.

Again, liked the thing, even though it would have worked better with River as the mainframe and Amy as the companion. The script would have been pretty much the same.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: McDohl on December 28, 2013, 03:18:16 AM
I think that, given all the Omega stuff we've seen over the past couple of years, Omega from The Three Doctors will come in to play at some point during Capaldi's run.

I totally wasn't ready to lose Matt Smith.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 28, 2013, 04:10:59 AM
Yeah, we've been figuring that for years; hasn't panned out yet but I still wouldn't be surprised.  Bringing another Time Lord villain in would be consistent with bringing the rest of them back.  (Wouldn't be terribly surprised to see the Rani at some point.  Or Romana; she's not a villain, just thinking out loud here.  Did she ever regenerate in the radio series, or could they still use Ward?  Her husband already had a cameo a few years back, and I guess she was in The Five(ish) Doctors Reboot?  I still haven't gotten around to watching it.)

The Moment came from the Omega Arsenal.  (They even pronounced it with the accent on the first syllable, though I always assumed that was just an accent thing.  Then again, the guy in the previous scene referred to a "Code Omega" with the accent on the second syllable.  Regional?)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Sharkey on December 28, 2013, 08:24:16 PM
Then again, the guy in the previous scene referred to a "Code Omega" with the accent on the second syllable.  Regional?)

I can't think of any brit regional accents that put the stress on the second syllable. Just a straight UK/US split in my experience. Like paprika. Or stalactite. Or an absolute shitload of nouns, actually.

Funny enough, there're more US exceptions in some northern New England dialects than the other way around. Maine and some parts of Mass and upstate New York contain some fascinating linguistic cul-de-sacs, particularly in isolated rural/coastal towns. Really fucks people trying to guess my accent when I've drank enough for it to peek through. Nevadans usually guess either Australian or "you talk like a fag and your shit's all retarded."

Apparently because long vowels and theya shit's ah retahded.

SKINHEADS FROM MAINE Dana Carvey (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPP5tmicbF0#)

Holy shit young Stephen Colbert out of nowhere.

Anyway, I can't remember the second syllable stress in the previous line, but I'd bet that it was delivered by a jarhead type. Whether by accident or design they tend to slip in a lot of American speech patterns even when they're not playing an American character, because if they are it has to be a straght up shitshow John Wayne impression. Give a brit actor a gun and I swear they start talking like an American just out of force of habit.

Speaking of accents and Who, I remember seeing a fair amount of misguided criticism of John Barrowman's "unconvincing" American accent way back. Always got a kick out of that. Still not as good as Hugh Laurie's though. That shit is black magic.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Lottel on December 29, 2013, 02:32:02 PM
The 50th Anniversary 3D blu-ray is pretty dang disappointing, valuewise.
Bonus features are The Last Day, The Night of the Doctor, a short "Doctor Who Explained" and the Behind the Scenes thing they showed after seeing it in theaters. This misses several of the shorts and doesn't have the pre-movie things they showed in theaters, which is disappointing because I thought those were great.

If you do get it, make sure you get it on sale. Post-Christmas sales have it between $12 and $20 while several places have nonsale prices at $30.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Thad on December 29, 2013, 03:19:03 PM
Anyway, I can't remember the second syllable stress in the previous line, but I'd bet that it was delivered by a jarhead type.

Sure enough.

I rewatched it the other night (and Name and Night), because my brother was in town and wasn't caught up.
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Zaratustra on December 29, 2013, 07:44:35 PM
Yeah, that's actually one part of the rampant Moffat bitchery that I agree with. He writes women absolutely terribly and interchangeably. They're either plucky, sarcastic bouncy-balls, or violent dominatrix types that for some reason fawn all over a bumbling, eccentric manchild.

CROSS-REF: Steven Moffat, Sherlock
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Smiler on December 30, 2013, 02:37:27 AM
stevenmoffathasunresolvedissues.avi (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xn920j)
Title: Re: New Doctor Who
Post by: Zaratustra on January 07, 2014, 04:20:38 AM
The episode was interesting, although it broke its own rules at the end (the Doctor just plain out lies about having a plan despite the whole 'truth field' stuff) and the fact the story is the Basic Hero Plot #3, which is even more prevalent than the so vaunted hero's journey:

1) The hero is given a choice between two negative consequences (Have all innocents in Trenzalore die, or reignite the Time War).
2) The hero finds a third alternative that avoids the negative consequences through personal sacrifice (Stay on Trenzalore and save ten generations of Trenzalorians by maintaining a stalemate; the Doctor knows it's his last regeneration and this planet will be his tomb and such dramatic very anxiety)
3) Because the hero has been so selfless in sacrificing themselves, they are miraculously given back what they sacrificed and more (thirteen new lifes oh boy)

(Basic Hero Plot #2 is a character coming back just in time to save the hero, basic hero plot #1 is the villain turning into a snake)

And all of it is done in a dramatic fashion enough that you forget to ask why, for example, ol' Doc just doesn't evacuate the rest of the population on his Tardis. Hell, arguing a Doctor Who episode is like trying to find a solution to the omnipotence/omniscience/omnibenevolence problem.